From a legal standpoint, I always thought that this suggested that the defendant probably has something to hide, because otherwise there would be no need to settle.  I would especially think this would be the case here, given the personality involved.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=8&u=/ap/20041028/ap_on_en_tv/o_reilly_lawsuit

He made the calls (afetr hours), she taped them (without him knowing) and it wasn't a case of harassment.

She had tapes of him that were embarassing to his image and tried to get him to pay up. O'Reilly screamed extortion (which it was) and her attorney realized that it was a 50-50 chance at trial.

Fox was covered six ways from Sunday, O'Reilly is a contractor, so she couldn't tap Fox. O'Reilly knew that he couldn't gain anything more if he pressed the suit, and the probability was that he said even more embarassing stuff that he didn't want to go out into public record.

They settled (I'd guess she got less than 2 million, probably under 1 million) so it can all be glossed over and spun.

She never had a harassment suit that would stand up in court, just a foul mouthed employer who she never put in his place properly.