Harvey Weinstein: 'Beautiful Girls' Scribe Scott Rosenberg

Re: Harvey Weinstein: 'Beautiful Girls' Scribe Scott Rosenbe

Postby admin » Mon Jul 30, 2018 5:02 am

Les Moonves and CBS Face Allegations of Sexual Misconduct: Six women accuse the C.E.O. of harassment and intimidation, and dozens more describe abuse at his company.
by Ronan Farrow
August 6 & 13, 2018 Issue

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


Image
In the tumultuous field of network television, Moonves has enjoyed rare longevity as a leader. Illustration by Oliver Munday

For more than twenty years, Leslie Moonves has been one of the most powerful media executives in America. As the chairman and C.E.O. of CBS Corporation, he oversees shows ranging from “60 Minutes” to “The Big Bang Theory.” His portfolio includes the premium cable channel Showtime, the publishing house Simon & Schuster, and a streaming service, CBS All Access. Moonves, who is sixty-eight, has a reputation for canny hiring and project selection. The Wall Street Journal recently called him a “TV programming wizard”; the Hollywood Reporter dubbed him a “Wall Street Hero.” In the tumultuous field of network television, he has enjoyed rare longevity as a leader. Last year, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, he earned nearly seventy million dollars, making him one of the highest-paid corporate executives in the world.

In recent months, Moonves has become a prominent voice in Hollywood’s #MeToo movement. In December, he helped found the Commission on Eliminating Sexual Harassment and Advancing Equality in the Workplace, which is chaired by Anita Hill. “It’s a watershed moment,” Moonves said at a conference in November. “I think it’s important that a company’s culture will not allow for this. And that’s the thing that’s far-reaching. There’s a lot we’re learning. There’s a lot we didn’t know.”

But Moonves’s private actions belie his public statements. Six women who had professional dealings with him told me that, between the nineteen-eighties and the late aughts, Moonves sexually harassed them. Four described forcible touching or kissing during business meetings, in what they said appeared to be a practiced routine. Two told me that Moonves physically intimidated them or threatened to derail their careers. All said that he became cold or hostile after they rejected his advances, and that they believed their careers suffered as a result. “What happened to me was a sexual assault, and then I was fired for not participating,” the actress and writer Illeana Douglas told me. All the women said they still feared that speaking out would lead to retaliation from Moonves, who is known in the industry for his ability to make or break careers. “He has gotten away with it for decades,” the writer Janet Jones, who alleges that she had to shove Moonves off her after he forcibly kissed her at a work meeting, told me. “And it’s just not O.K.”

Thirty current and former employees of CBS told me that such behavior extended from Moonves to important parts of the corporation, including CBS News and “60 Minutes,” one of the network’s most esteemed programs. During Moonves’s tenure, men at CBS News who were accused of sexual misconduct were promoted, even as the company paid settlements to women with complaints.
It isn’t clear whether Moonves himself knew of the allegations, but he has a reputation for being closely involved in management decisions across the network. Some of the allegations, such as those against the former anchor Charlie Rose, as reported by the Washington Post, have already become public. Other claims are being reported here for the first time. Nineteen current and former employees told me that Jeff Fager, the former chairman of CBS News and the current executive producer of “60 Minutes,” allowed harassment in the division. “It’s top down, this culture of older men who have all this power and you are nothing,” one veteran producer told me. “The company is shielding lots of bad behavior.”

In a statement, Moonves said, “Throughout my time at CBS, we have promoted a culture of respect and opportunity for all employees, and have consistently found success elevating women to top executive positions across our company. I recognize that there were times decades ago when I may have made some women uncomfortable by making advances. Those were mistakes, and I regret them immensely. But I always understood and respected—and abided by the principle—that ‘no’ means ‘no,’ and I have never misused my position to harm or hinder anyone’s career. This is a time when we all are appropriately focused on how we help improve our society, and we at CBS are committed to being part of the solution.” According to CBS, there have been no misconduct claims and no settlements against Moonves during his twenty-four years at the network. A statement from the company said, “CBS is very mindful of all workplace issues and takes each report of misconduct very seriously. We do not believe, however, that the picture of our company created in The New Yorker represents a larger organization that does its best to treat its tens of thousands of employees with dignity and respect. We are seeing vigorous discourse in our country about equality, inclusion, and safety in the workplace, and CBS is committed to being part of the solution to those important issues.”

The allegations are surfacing at a time when CBS is engaged in an increasingly acrimonious fight with its former parent company, Viacom, which acquired CBS in 1999 and spun it off as a separate entity seven years later. A holding company founded by the mogul Sumner Redstone still owns a majority stake in both Viacom and CBS, and Redstone’s daughter and heir, Shari Redstone, has sought to reunite the businesses. Moonves has resisted the move, and in May Redstone’s holding company and CBS filed lawsuits against each other. All of the women making allegations against Moonves began speaking to me before the current lawsuits, in independent interviews carried out during the past eight months. All said that they were not motivated by any allegiance in the corporate battle. But several felt that this was an opportunity to examine a workplace culture that many of the women in this story described as toxic.

Illeana Douglas, who later received an Emmy nomination for her role in HBO’s “Six Feet Under,” was introduced to Moonves in 1996. At the time, she was meeting with networks, looking for a deal to write and perform for television. Moonves, who was then the president of CBS Entertainment, seemed to take a personal interest in her. He told Douglas that he was a fan of her performances in the Martin Scorsese films “Cape Fear” and “Goodfellas,” and urged her to work with CBS. “There was the big sell—he was telling me, ‘You’re gonna get a house with a pool, you’re gonna love it, it’s a great life,’ ” Douglas recalled. She agreed to sign a holding deal with CBS, which promised to pay her three hundred thousand dollars to appear exclusively in the network’s programs.

CBS ultimately didn’t proceed with a pilot that Douglas wrote, but the network cast her in a comedy called “Queens,” as an eccentric native of the New York borough. In March, 1997, shortly before production of the pilot episode began, Moonves called Douglas’s manager, Melissa Prophet, and told her that he was concerned about Douglas’s attitude during a reading with her co-star, Penelope Ann Miller. Prophet relayed the concern to Douglas, who was surprised and confused: the reading, in front of a group of CBS executives, had elicited uproarious laughter. Moonves, she said, had taken her by the shoulders and congratulated her. Moonves had told Prophet that he wanted to meet with Douglas, alone, to insure that they were creatively aligned. (Prophet told me that she did not recall the conversation or setting up the meeting.) By then, Douglas had worked closely with Moonves for months. “He seemed more than just my boss,” she told me. “He was very much like a father figure.”

When Douglas met with Moonves at his office, she began to raise concerns about the “Queens” script, but Moonves, she recalled, cut her off. “He interrupts me to ask me am I single,” she said. Douglas, whose nearly decade-long relationship with Scorsese was coming to an end, was caught off guard. “I didn’t know what to say at that point,” she told me. “I was, like, ‘I’m single, yes, no, maybe.’” She began talking about the script, but Moonves interjected, asking to kiss her. According to Douglas, he said that they didn’t have to tell her manager: “It’ll just be between you and me. Come on, you’re not some nubile virgin.”

As Douglas attempted to turn the focus back to work, Moonves, she said, grabbed her. “In a millisecond, he’s got one arm over me, pinning me,” she said. Moonves was “violently kissing” her, holding her down on the couch with her arms above her head. “What it feels like to have someone hold you down—you can’t breathe, you can’t move,” she said. “The physicality of it was horrendous.” She recalled lying limp and unresponsive beneath him. “You sort of black out,” she told me. “You think, How long is this going to go on? I was just looking at this nice picture of his family and his kids. I couldn’t get him off me.” She said it was only when Moonves, aroused, pulled up her skirt and began to thrust against her that her fear overcame her paralysis. She told herself that she had to do something to stop him. “At that point, you’re a trapped animal,” she told me. “Your life is flashing before your eyes.” Moonves, in what Douglas assumed was an effort to be seductive, paused and asked, “So, what do you think?” Douglas told me, “My decision was to get out of it by joking my way out, so he feels flattered.” Thinking that reminding Moonves that he was her boss might discourage him, she told him, “Yes, for the head of a network you’re some good kisser.” Moonves frowned and got up. She scrambled to find her briefcase. “Well, this has been great. Thanks,” she recalled saying, moving toward the door. “I’ve got to go now.”


Image
Illeana Douglas at the Streamy Awards, 2009


Moonves, she said, followed her to the door and blocked her path. He backed her up to the wall, pressing against her, with his face close to hers. “It was physically scary,” Douglas told me. “He says, ‘We’re going to keep this between you and me, right?’ ” Attempting to put him off with a joke, she replied, “No, sir, we won’t tell anyone that you’re a good kisser.” Moonves released her and, without looking at her, walked away. “It was so invasive,” she said of the threatening encounter. “It has stayed with me the rest of my life, that terror.”

Outside Moonves’s office, she began to cry. “My skirt is all twisted,” she recalled. “I’m standing in the hall and I thought of his family.” Moonves’s assistant, sitting nearby, asked whether her parking needed to be validated. Douglas told me, “I remember thinking, Does she know? Does this happen all the time?”

In her car, Douglas said, “I lost it. I felt sick.” Prophet, her manager, called and, as Douglas worked up the nerve to tell her what had happened, Prophet said that she had just got off the phone with Moonves. He’d said that he and Douglas had a great meeting and “had a lot of fun.” Douglas told me, “I thought, Oh, my God, he’s covered his tracks.” In that moment, she said, “I decided, just bury it.” Later that day, Douglas returned to the house she was renting and told a friend who was staying with her, the actor Craig Chester, about the incident. “She was trying not to cry, but her voice was shaking. I’ve never seen her that emotional before,” Chester recalled. “She said that he got on top of her and held her down and she couldn’t get away. If it was any other situation outside business, I would have said, ‘Let’s go to the cops.’” But, Chester said, “there was no talk about going to the police or anything like that, because it was obvious that it would be career suicide.”

The following week, Moonves showed up at the first day of rehearsals for “Queens.” “As soon as I saw him, I thought I was going to collapse. Everything came back to me. I was shaking,” Douglas told me. She felt that Moonves’s demeanor was intended to intimidate her. “He was eying me warily,” she said. Her distress was evident to her co-stars. “There was obviously something going on with her emotionally,” Penelope Ann Miller told me. “When she came in to test, everything was on. And then, after, on set, it was like she wasn’t there.” Last year, before the rise of #MeToo, Douglas told Miller what had happened. “Hearing her story, it all made sense,” Miller recalled.

After the second rehearsal, Moonves took Douglas aside. “‘What the fuck do you think you’re doing out there? You’re not even trying,’” Douglas recalled Moonves saying. She took it as a reference to her failure to comply with his advances and to maintain her composure afterward. Douglas told me that she had “played by all the rules, I didn’t say anything, and now he was berating me.” On set, she struggled to keep her comedic timing, and cried in front of other cast members.

Several days into rehearsals, Moonves called Douglas at home. “It was, you know, ‘You make me fucking sick. You are not funny,’” she recalled. Moonves told her that she wouldn’t “get a fucking dime” of the money she was owed, and that she would “never work at this network again.” (In a statement, CBS said that Moonves acknowledges trying to kiss Douglas, but that “he denies any characterization of ‘sexual assault,’ intimidation, or retaliatory action,” including berating her on set and personally firing her from “Queens.”)

Prophet told me that Moonves and CBS Business Affairs called her to say that Douglas would be replaced on the show and that her deal would be cancelled. According to Douglas, Prophet called her and “said I’d burned all my bridges at CBS, that she was firing me.” (Prophet recalled firing Douglas and said that the two had a heated exchange. She said that she didn’t know about Douglas’s allegation, and denied the comment about burning bridges. “There are no bridges at CBS,” she said. “There is just Les Moonves.”) Douglas said that her agent, Patrick Whitesell, who was then at Creative Artists Agency, later called to say that the agency wished her well in future endeavors of her own. “I love the way C.A.A. fired me,” Douglas said. “They never told me I was fired. They just kept wishing me the best of luck.” (Whitesell told me that he had not been aware of Douglas’s allegation and did not recall that her departure from C.A.A. was related to the dissolution of her CBS deal.)

Distraught, Douglas called Scorsese and told him the story, saying that she wanted to hire a lawyer and sue Moonves. Scorsese said that he remembers Douglas calling him about the allegation and being shocked by it. Scorsese urged her to be cautious about taking legal action against such a powerful person, but agreed to refer her to his law firm; there, Douglas began working with an attorney named Bill Sobel. Sobel confirmed that Douglas had described the encounter with Moonves at the time, and his contemporaneous notes back up her account. “I believed Illeana,” he told me. “What happened to her was reprehensible.”

Douglas told me that Sobel warned her that it was a matter of her word against Moonves’s. Sobel, who said that he had a frank conversation with Douglas about the risks of suing, ultimately called CBS to attempt to recoup some of her lost wages. (She had received a fifty-thousand-dollar advance payment for her appearance in the “Queens” pilot, but felt that she was owed the remaining two hundred and fifty thousand.) After a junior staff member at CBS Business Affairs told Sobel that Douglas had been fired because of her poor performance in rehearsals, and that the network intended to withhold her pay, Sobel suggested that he ask Moonves about the meeting he had had alone with Douglas. “My conversation was simply ‘Hey, ask Les what happened in the room, and he’ll probably want you to do the right thing here,’” Sobel told me. “I felt he knew what I was saying.”

According to communications and contracts reviewed by The New Yorker, the head of CBS Business Affairs, rather than the junior staffer, replied to Sobel with a new proposition. “When the head of the whole thing called me back,” Sobel said, “it was very clear to me that they took my comments about what happened in the room very seriously.” CBS proposed that the agreement be “settled out” for a hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars, and then agreed to pay Douglas an additional two hundred and fifty thousand to appear in a new miniseries.

Douglas and Sobel both saw the miniseries as cover for a settlement; she didn’t even know what the show was about. “I go from being sexually assaulted, fired for not having sex with Les Moonves, fired by everyone, to ‘We are going to pay you in full and we also want you to be on this miniseries,’” Douglas recalled. “My understanding is, this is what they were going to do in exchange for not suing.”


Shortly after the offer came, Douglas received a call from Moonves. “‘So, you’re gonna do the mini?’” she remembered him asking. Although she wanted accountability, she was still frightened, and said that she would do it. She recalled Moonves, sounding upbeat, remarking, “‘Tits and guns, baby. Tits and guns.’” (Douglas later learned that the miniseries, called “Bella Mafia,” focussed on the women of an Italian crime family and emphasized sex and violence.) Moonves asked Douglas if they were “O.K.,” and Douglas replied, “Yes, sir.”

In its statement, CBS said that the agreement with Douglas about “Bella Mafia” was intended to fulfill her over-all deal with the network, and was unrelated to her meeting with Moonves. “There were no funds added for settlement purposes,” CBS said. “The amount paid was half of what she was owed, which is not what one might do if concerned about a claim such as this.”

Jo An Kincaid, an executive producer on the “Queens” pilot and Penelope Ann Miller’s manager at the time, said that she was not consulted about Douglas’s dismissal. “One day she was just not there. Gone and replaced,” Kincaid said. “It was very unusual. I was an executive producer. There should have been an explanation.” In an e-mail, Judge Reinhold, one of Douglas’s co-stars, wrote, “Illeana was hilariously unique in her comedy and fun to work with.” He added, “We were all surprised and disappointed that she left.”

Douglas told numerous people about the incident over the years, and even published a lightly fictionalized version of it in a 2006 compilation, “Fired!” She also performed the story before audiences. “I didn’t exactly keep it a secret,” Douglas said. “People used to come up to me afterward and go, ‘I know who it is,’ and just laugh about it.”

Douglas appeared in “Bella Mafia,” and, afterward, C.A.A. resumed representing her. But she believes that the incident “derailed any future career I would have had at CBS.” In two instances, years later, personal connections helped her secure acting roles on shows that aired on the network, and a Web series of hers appeared on a CBS streaming service. But otherwise, in a career that has included extensive work with every other major network, she said, “I never auditioned or ever had any kind of television-show deal at CBS.” Like the other women I spoke to, she said that people around her discouraged her from publicly naming Moonves in this story. She told me that she was doing so because she wanted to protect other women, and that she wished she had been warned before her meeting. “In retrospect, of course, you say, ‘Oh, it’s all a crazy setup,’ ” she told me. “I was, I hate to say it, the perfect victim.”

More than a decade earlier, in the spring of 1985, Janet Jones was attempting to break into the industry as a writer. The producer Mike Marvin liked an idea that Jones had for a screenplay, and helped broker a meeting between her and Moonves, who at the time was a vice-president at Twentieth Century Fox. It was Jones’s first pitch meeting in Hollywood. Moonves’s assistant scheduled a late-afternoon appointment at his office.

When Jones arrived, many employees were leaving for the day, but Moonves’s assistant was there. “I had my briefcase and my pants suit,” Jones recalled. “I was really prepared.” Moonves surprised her by asking if she wanted a glass of wine. She declined, sat down on the couch, and began pitching her screenplay. Suddenly, Jones told me, “he came around the corner of the table and threw himself on top of me. It was very fast.” Moonves, she said, began trying to kiss her. Jones said that she struggled, and then shoved Moonves away hard, yelling, “What do you think you’re doing?” Moonves, appearing startled, got up. “‘Well, I was hitting on you. I wanted a kiss,’” she recalled him saying. Jones began to leave. “He said, ‘Oh, come on, it’s nothing,’” she said. “‘Calm down, don’t be so excited.’”

When Jones got to the door, it was locked. She was terrified. “If you don’t open this door,” she told him, “I am going to scream so loud and so long that everyone on the lot is going to come over.” She remembered Moonves walking to his desk or to a nearby bureau to unlock the door, rather than doing so directly. She fled, noticing on her way out that the assistant had left. “That’s when I got really upset,” she told me. “I just thought, Oh, my God. This wasn’t like a little momentary boo-boo. It was this well-thought-out thing.”

Jones drove to the house of a friend, the artist Linda Salzman Sagan. There, Jones told me, “I just completely melted down, just crying and shaking.” Sagan told me that she remembers the visit clearly, and that Jones described the incident in detail at the time. “She was very, very upset,” Sagan recalled. “I had never seen her like that. I was really astounded by what she told me. I knew how powerful he was in terms of a career.” Jones also told her boyfriend at the time, Larry Jackson, who said, “She came home one day scared and in tears because she said Les had jumped her at a business meeting.”

Mike Marvin told me that he remembers introducing Jones to Moonves, and that she was troubled by the meeting. He said that he confronted Moonves about it at a gathering, saying, “Whatever happened, that girl was upset.” Moonves, Marvin said, became furious. “We definitely had a screaming match over this,” Marvin told me.

Not long afterward, Jones received a call from Moonves’s assistant, who said that she had Moonves on the line. “My heart went into my feet,” Jones recalled. Moonves began shouting at her. “‘People’s reputations are important. Do you understand?’” she remembered him saying. “‘I’m warning you. I will ruin your career. You will never get a writing job. No one will hire you. Do you understand what I’m saying to you?’” Jones hung up the phone, then threw up. “I was just absolutely mortified. Does this mean he’ll be putting me on a list somewhere and I’ll never get a job?” she recalled thinking. “This person could stop me from doing this passion, this career I had spent my whole life putting together. It’s kind of hard to fathom that one person could do that, but he could.” (CBS said that Moonves has no recollection of the interactions with Jones.)

Jones told me that she found the threats more scarring than the original incident. She said, “The revenge behavior, the ‘I’ll get you for not kissing me, I’ll get you for not doing what the hell I want you to do’—it never quite leaves you.” Years later, she saw him at an industry event and, she said, “I almost fainted. I was still terrified.”


Two other women described Moonves forcibly touching or kissing them during business meetings. The producer Christine Peters was an industry veteran when she first encountered Moonves, in the early aughts. She had worked as a story analyst for the company behind “Rain Man” and “Gorillas in the Mist” before becoming a production head for Robert Evans, who had produced “The Godfather” and “Chinatown.” She became a close friend and confidante of Sumner Redstone, the owner of Viacom, to whom she was at times romantically linked in the press. (Peters, like the other women in this story, said that she had no interest in the battle over the future of Redstone’s empire.) After Viacom acquired CBS, Redstone enlisted Peters to help build a rapport with Moonves, who was the president and C.E.O. of CBS Television at the time. They had a series of dinners with Moonves and his wife in 2003 and 2004.

Peters produced the 2003 romantic comedy “How to Lose a Guy in Ten Days,” which was based on a book she had acquired, and which ultimately grossed more than a hundred and seventy-seven million dollars. “I was proud to be bringing females into the seats and really addressing them,” she told me. In 2006, Moonves, who had become the chairman of CBS, had dinner with Peters and Redstone to discuss his plans to launch a film studio, CBS Films, which was founded the next year. Moonves was considering executives to oversee the endeavor, and Redstone suggested Peters. Moonves seemed excited about the idea.

When Moonves and Peters met at his office to discuss the prospect, Peters told me, she came with a detailed presentation on her business model, which focussed on female audiences. “It was: this is the demographic, here are the underutilized release dates, here’s why female buyers predominate,” she said. “I remember him being very enthusiastic, saying it made a lot of sense.” She was sitting on a couch and, as she continued her pitch, he sat down uncomfortably close. “He said, ‘This is really great,’” she recalled. “Then he just put a hand up my skirt.” Moonves, she said, slid his hand up her thigh and touched her underwear.

“I was in a state of shock,” Peters recalled. Immediately, she worried about how Moonves would react to a rejection. She tried to get out of the situation by gathering her documents and saying, “Oh, wow, oh, my God, it’s late, I have to be at another meeting. Can we finish this tomorrow? I’m so excited! So excited!” Moonves, she recalled, suggested that he walk her to her car. Fearing further advances, Peters said that she had a driver outside. She had come to the meeting with a colleague, who was waiting in the lobby. The colleague told me that Peters emerged earlier than anticipated, appearing shaken, and said that they had to leave quickly. An acquaintance of Peters’s told me that she recounted the story to him several years ago, describing an advance from a top executive and a job that she didn’t get afterward, without naming Moonves. Last year, Peters told him that the executive was Moonves. (CBS said that Moonves categorically denies any alleged touching or inappropriate conduct during the meeting.)

Peters told me, “I remember sitting in the car and just crying. I worked my whole life to be here and I just lost my opportunity.” Because of her long tenure in the industry, Peters said, “I expected to be taken seriously. I never in a million years saw that coming.” She said that she was surprised in part because she thought her relationship with Redstone would have put Moonves on guard. “I couldn’t understand why he would do that in light of the situation with Sumner,” she told me. In the end, she decided not to tell Redstone, because she worried about what the fallout might be. Like Jones, Peters told me that Moonves “was smart enough to not have anyone there. It was a setup.”
(Twice in later years, Peters participated in group meetings that involved Moonves.)

A prominent actress who played a police officer on a long-running CBS program, who was too frightened of reprisals to use her name, said that she also attended a business meeting with Moonves that ended in unwanted advances. The actress had known Moonves for years. In the late eighties, at the height of her show’s popularity, Moonves, who was then at a production company called Lorimar, requested a lunch meeting at a restaurant. There, Moonves told the actress that he had long had a crush on her but had not said anything to her because she had been in a relationship with a mutual friend. She declined his advance but thanked him for lunch. “It wasn’t offensive,” she recalled. In 1995, when Moonves became president of CBS Entertainment, the actress called to congratulate him. “He said, ‘You should have fucked me when I asked you to,’ and I said, ‘No shit!’” the actress told me. They laughed.

Soon afterward, CBS Business Affairs informed the actress that her series deal with CBS was being terminated. She called Moonves and expressed shock. He requested a lunch meeting in his private dining room at the office. She told me, “I went in, I thought, to make a deal.” At the lunch, Moonves told her that he intended to focus on younger talent, and that she was too old. “Then he again said, ‘I’ve always been so attracted to you,’” she told me. “I was so upset. I said, ‘Jesus, Leslie, I’m gonna go.’” Moonves asked her to sit down. She did so, pushing food around her plate until she had to leave. Then, she told me, “I walked over and leaned to give him a kiss on the cheek.” Moonves, she said, grabbed her and forcibly kissed her: “He shoved his tongue down my throat. I mean shoved.”

Appalled, she pushed him away. “He had approached me to go to bed with him twice, but he did it politely,” she said. “But this time he just stuck his tongue down my throat.” As she left, she began to cry. “No one had ever done that to me before,” she said. “I found it sickening.”

Like Douglas, the actress said that she never worked for CBS again. Almost two decades later, an executive at CBS contacted her about coming back to the network. It turned out that the executive wanted her to sign a book deal with Simon & Schuster, which is owned by CBS. (CBS said that Moonves has no recollection of making unwelcome advances toward the actress, and that he made no efforts to block future business between her and CBS.)

The actress thought that the consequences would be too great if she told CBS about the incident. “I never reported it,” she told me. “I just thought, Gee, there goes my career.”
At an event not long afterward, she encountered a showrunner who has overseen multiple programs at CBS, and told her the story. The showrunner, who had also worked with Moonves, recalled that the actress was still hurt by the incident and told me that she was “not surprised” by the story. “I had already had to deal with misogynist bullying from him myself,” she told me.

Two women told me that they rebuffed unwanted advances from Moonves in professional settings, and that they believed career opportunities disappeared as a result. Dinah Kirgo, who won an Emmy as a writer for “The Tracey Ullman Show,” first encountered Moonves in the early eighties, when he was the vice-president of development at Saul Ilson Productions, a partnership with Columbia Pictures Television. She and her sister and producing partner, Julie Kirgo, met with Moonves and others about a television deal. “We left the meeting very confident we had an over-all deal with Leslie,” Kirgo told me. The sisters told their agent to expect an offer from Moonves.

Instead, shortly after Kirgo got home, Moonves called her directly. “He said, ‘That was a great meeting, now we have to go out to dinner,’” she recalled. Kirgo replied that she and Julie would be happy to have dinner with him. “He said, ‘No, just you and me.’ He said, ‘You’re very expensive, and I need to know you’re worth it,’” Kirgo told me. “I was sort of in shock and I said, ‘Well, Leslie, I don’t think your wife would appreciate us having that kind of dinner.’” Moonves coldly ended the conversation. (CBS said that Moonves has no recollection of the meeting or the phone call.)

Kirgo and her sister never heard from Moonves again. Afterward, Kirgo’s agents told her they had received reports that she had a reputation for being difficult to work with. Kirgo told me that she had never heard complaints before, and that she believed saying no to Moonves had hurt her career. “It’s very insidious, what he did,” she said.

Julie Kirgo confirmed the details of her sister’s story and said that Dinah had told her about the call at the time. “It’s just kind of awful to feel that you have energy and talent and that’s being appreciated, and then suddenly to find out that that’s not where somebody’s interests lie at all. You feel betrayed,” she said. “It pisses me off to this day.”

In 1992, a former child star who asked to be identified only by her first name, Kimberly, was introduced to Moonves by a friend, who was a member of Moonves’s staff and told her that Moonves could help her get back into television. At a dinner meeting that the three attended, Moonves began by asking questions about Kimberly’s acting career. But when the friend went to the bathroom Moonves turned to Kimberly and said, in a perfunctory way, “Let’s go. Let’s just get a hotel room. Let’s just do this.” She was shocked. “I said, ‘What are you talking about?’” When she explained that she had a husband and a child, Moonves became angry and left.
(The friend recalled making the introduction to Moonves, and said that her only motivation in doing so was to help Kimberly’s career. CBS said that Moonves has no memory or record of the meeting.)

“The power differential was so great,” Kimberly told me. “I was really scared, because I thought I was burning some sort of a bridge that was going to be great for me.” As a child star, she said, “I’d been taught that powerful people can hurt you, they can ruin you, they can ruin your career.” She said that the turn from business meeting to sexual overture seemed to be well practiced. “It was set up to be that way,” she said. “I thought, Wow, is this the way the world works and I just don’t get it?”

CBS is a multibillion-dollar corporation, with dozens of divisions, and Moonves is only indirectly involved with many of them. However, experts on sexual harassment told me that misconduct by a chief executive can reverberate across aspects of even the largest companies. “If you have a company with an abuser on the top, they typically surround themselves with people like them, who engage in similar behavior,” Debra Katz, a lawyer specializing in sexual harassment, told me. “It can put a set of enablers in place, who protect powerful people when they get challenged for misconduct, and who work to discredit and manage out women who come forward with allegations.”

Thirty current and former CBS employees described harassment, gender discrimination, or retaliation at the network. Many said that men accused of misconduct were promoted, even after the company was made aware of those allegations. Their stories match several that have already emerged in public reports. Earlier this year, Leslie Isaacs, a vice-president at Pop, the cable channel jointly operated by CBS and the film studio Lionsgate, filed a lawsuit alleging that CBS was aware of a hostile workplace at the channel. Her complaint described harassment and discrimination by male colleagues, including a vice-president who allegedly instructed female employees to “show your clients your tits.” Isaacs told me, “It wouldn’t be happening at Pop if it wasn’t covered up at CBS, and if CBS wasn’t complicit. They know, and it’s been tolerated.” (Isaacs has entered into a private mediation process with CBS. A Pop spokesperson said, “Pop engaged an independent investigator who conducted a complete investigation and found nothing to corroborate this alleged statement.” CBS said that it flatly denies any efforts to cover this up.)

In December, CBS confirmed that Brad Kern, the showrunner and executive producer of “NCIS: New Orleans,” had been the subject of sexual-harassment and gender-discrimination allegations. He had retained his position for more than a year after the company was made aware of the claims. (This season, Kern stepped down from his position as showrunner, but he remains a consulting producer. Last month, the company said that it was launching a new investigation—its third—into Kern’s behavior. CBS said that the allegations were investigated and resulted in disciplinary action but that the matter “merits further inquiry.”)

Other allegations have centered on CBS News. Last summer, Erin Gee, who worked at CBS for more than fifteen years, filed a lawsuit alleging that an executive director at “CBS Evening News” urged her to have sex with a co-worker with whom she was having difficulties in order to “break the ice,” and that she was demoted after complaining about gender discrimination. In May, a magistrate judge in New York criticized CBS for failing to save e-mails from the time of Gee’s allegation. “I find the conduct of CBS here to be shocking,” the judge, Sarah Netburn, reportedly said during a hearing. “It is hard to draw any other conclusion than that they were trying to avoid producing and saving those e-mails.” (The network has since reached a settlement with Gee, and her attorney declined to comment. CBS said that “the matter has been resolved.”) In 2015, a CBS reporter, Kenneth Lombardi, alleged in a lawsuit that a CBS News supervisor texted him links to pornography, and that a senior producer had grabbed his crotch. Lombardi claimed that when he complained to a manager she replied, “Never bring up gender discrimination again!” (An attorney for Lombardi said that he was not at liberty to discuss the suit. CBS said that the matter has been resolved.)

In November, Charlie Rose was suspended after the Washington Post reported that eight women had accused him of sexual harassment, including groping. According to the Post, Rose has now been accused of sexual harassment by at least thirty-five women, and managers at the network were made aware of the allegations on at least three occasions. (Rose apologized in response to the initial allegations, but called the paper’s subsequent reporting on additional complaints “unfair and inaccurate.”)

“60 Minutes,” the news division’s flagship program, for which Rose was a contributing correspondent, has been a focal point of allegations. Some of those allegations involve Jeff Fager, who is currently the executive producer of “60 Minutes,” and whom Moonves appointed chairman of CBS News in 2011, a position he held until 2015. Six former employees told me that Fager, while inebriated at company parties, would touch employees in ways that made them uncomfortable. One former “60 Minutes” producer told me, “It was always ‘Let’s go say hello to Jeff, ’cause you have to pay homage to him, but let’s do it early in the evening, before he starts getting really handsy.’” In one incident, at which several employees were present, Fager allegedly made drunken advances to an associate producer, commenting on her breasts and becoming belligerent when she rebuffed him. (Fager denied the allegations, saying that “they never happened.”)

Others said that Fager protected men accused of misconduct, including men who reported to him. According to several people who were told about the incident at the time, a senior producer named Vicki Gordon alleged that another senior producer, Michael Radutzky, threatened to throw furniture at her and twisted her arm behind her back, causing her to scream. (Radutzky categorically denied the allegations, saying that they were fabricated.) The sources told me that Fager said he would address the matter with Radutzky directly, and instructed Gordon not to inform the CBS office of human resources. Later, Fager asked her to apologize to Radutzky, to mitigate conflict in the office. (Fager said, “I have never discouraged anyone from going to H.R.”) Radutzky, who left the network earlier this year, remained in his job for several years after the alleged incident. “It was common knowledge at ‘60 Minutes’ that Michael Radutzky was an out-of-control guy, especially but not exclusively toward women. We all saw it, almost on a daily basis,” David Gelber, a former producer, told me. “And yet Fager not only tolerated him—he elevated him to a position of leadership, even after Fager knew perfectly well how abusive he was.” (Radutzky strongly denied Gelber’s characterization of his behavior.) Sophie Gayter, a “60 Minutes” employee who alleged to the Post that Charlie Rose had groped her, told me that Fager “enabled the other men on the floor to do whatever the heck they wanted.” Fager, one network executive said, “would let people know he communicated with Les directly,” adding that “people took that to mean Les supported him completely.”

CBS, one former associate producer said, “is an old network. Everything in there feels old: the people, the furniture, the culture, the mores.” Many of the women described the atmosphere at CBS News specifically as a “frat house.” One former employee said, “I had several producers and editors over the age of sixty who would greet me by kissing me on the mouth. I had people touch my butt a couple times.” She added, “Fager seemed to encourage that climate. It wasn’t even that he turned a blind eye toward it.” Katie Couric, who was an anchor at the network and a contributing correspondent for “60 Minutes” from 2006 to 2011, when Fager helped force her out, told me that it “felt like a boys’ club, where a number of talented women seemed to be marginalized and undervalued.”

In a statement, Fager said, “It is wrong that our culture can be falsely defined by a few people with an axe to grind who are using an important movement as a weapon to get even, and not by the hundreds of women and men that have thrived, both personally and professionally, at ‘60 Minutes.’” He added, “A majority of our senior staff are women. All of them worked their way up the ranks and are now managers of our broadcast. Half of our producers and a majority of our associate producers are women. It is a challenging place to do well and promotions are earned on merit and are not based on gender.” Lesley Stahl, who has been a “60 Minutes” correspondent since 1991, told me, “This notion that ‘60 Minutes’ is an unpleasant, unwelcoming place for women isn’t true.” She said, “In my own experience, Jeff is supportive of women and decent to women.” Anderson Cooper, who has been a correspondent for the show since 2006, told me, “I work there part time, but in all the years I’ve been there I’ve never seen Jeff engage in any inappropriate behavior.”

Gayter and another junior female employee told me that their bosses asked them to complete the company’s mandatory online sexual-harassment training programs for them. “Many assistants did it for their bosses,” Gayter said. “We’d book their travel, do their expenses, and then do their sexual-harassment training.” Former employees told me that there were few avenues for them to register confidential complaints about discrimination and misconduct. “People say, ‘You could call H.R.’ Honestly, I’ve never met a single person from H.R.,” one producer said. “There’s no oversight.” Some said that they had witnessed retaliation against those who did attempt to speak out. At CBS News, “there was no one to turn to,” one former producer told me, saying that she had reported Charlie Rose’s behavior, and that the complaint resulted in no repercussions for Rose. “If it’s just behavior from the top, tolerated at the top, and there’s no one to talk to, what do you do?” she said.

A former journalist at “60 Minutes” named Habiba Nosheen told me that she had complained to management that Ira Rosen, a producer on the program, had subjected her to numerous sexual comments and suggested that she flirt with sources. Two other women told me that they had experienced similar conduct from Rosen. (In a statement, Rosen said that “CBS extensively investigated these complaints and found them to be false, misleading, and unsubstantiated.” He said, “I have always and continue to deny these allegations.”)

When Nosheen filed a written complaint and met with Fager about the allegations against Rosen, she said, he told her not to worry about the possibility that other women might be harassed by Rosen. She told me that Fager is “an enabler of this ‘Mad Men’ culture at ‘60 Minutes.’” Afterward, there appeared to be no repercussions for Rosen, and she was frozen out of assignments. Days after she made her complaint to Fager, he and two of his deputies called Nosheen into a meeting to go over criticisms of her work performance which she found specious. One involved a tense exchange with a co-worker that had happened a year earlier. The format of the meeting, she said, was highly unusual. “It was so obvious to me that they began to implement a strategy of retaliation,” she told me.

In June, 2016, Nosheen filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. She resigned a month later. “As an investigative journalist, every day I try to hold people in power accountable. I look people in the eye and ask them why they turned their backs when they witnessed something unethical happening,” she told me. “I knew I couldn’t look myself in the mirror and hold others accountable if I wasn’t brave enough to do the same in my own place of work.” An e-mail from a CBS lawyer shows that, after Nosheen left the network, CBS threatened to enforce a non-compete clause in her contract, which would prevent her from seeking employment elsewhere, unless she withdrew her E.E.O.C. complaint and signed a nondisclosure agreement. The E.E.O.C. ultimately issued a Notice of Dismissal and Right to Sue letter, saying that it was unable to conclude whether or not a violation of federal law had occurred and that it would be up to Nosheen to pursue the matter in civil court.

Another woman told me that she had spoken to CBS’s legal department about Rosen’s and Fager’s behavior. “I was shocked by the lack of seriousness and regard that CBS legal showed my story,” she told me.
(In a statement, CBS’s chief compliance officer said, “It is the policy and practice of CBS to investigate all complaints and to promptly remediate any problems that are identified,” adding that “the policies against discrimination and harassment include anti-retaliation provisions, and anyone raising a complaint is assured that he or she will be protected from retaliation.”) The woman told me that she eventually left the network because of the atmosphere. “A lot of my memories of ‘60 Minutes’ are of other women coming into my office, closing the door, and just breaking down because of working as a woman at CBS,” she said. “Toward the end of my time there, I thought, God, I love the stories, I love the work, but this has to be easier somewhere else.”

The producer who talked about Fager’s behavior at parties told me that she, too, left the show because of “a very toxic culture toward women.” She said, “What makes me really upset was this was something I really loved doing, and I was good at, and won a lot of awards for. And I basically had to leave the business, because where else am I going to go? There were other places, but nothing of that stature.”

The New Yorker reviewed three six-figure settlements with “60 Minutes” employees who have filed complaints of sexual harassment or discrimination. The women who received those payments were required to sign nondisclosure agreements that prevented them from speaking about their experiences, with penalties for any breach. Several other women who have made allegations against CBS News declined to speak with me on the record, citing nondisclosure agreements. (The CBS chief compliance officer said, “On occasion, the resolution of allegations in the workplace has involved financial settlements,” adding that “settlements do not amount to admissions of guilt.”)

“The N.D.A.s are a silencer and a bully tactic,” Mo Cashin, who worked in several roles for CBS News, including as a broadcast manager, told me. “It’s unfortunate and hypocritical, particularly in the media, where it appears executives have more interest in protecting and oftentimes rewarding fellow senior employees who have a documented history of bad behavior than protecting their victims.”

Fager has tried to keep the allegations about the treatment of women at “60 Minutes” from surfacing publicly. According to the Times, in 2015 Fager took over the writing of a book about “60 Minutes” after the original author, Richard Zoglin, began asking people about the subject. In April, as two Washington Post reporters, Irin Carmon and Amy Brittain, were reporting an article about the allegations of harassment at CBS News, including complaints about Fager and Rosen, lawyers retained by Fager threatened to sue the Post, and presented testimonials about Fager’s good character. “There was this ham-handed effort to make women at the show say Jeff was a wonderful person,” one producer said. “It was so obvious we were doing it with a gun to our heads.” Fager’s lawyers also attacked the professionalism of the two reporters. In the end, the paper published a story that included complaints of harassment against Charlie Rose from dozens of women, but not allegations about Fager or Rosen. In a statement, the Post said, “The reporting throughout was vigorous and sustained and fully supported by Post editors. Nothing that met our longstanding standards for publication was left out. Nor did outside pressures, legal or otherwise, determine what was published.” CBS employees told me that they were alarmed by the attempts to kill the reporting. “The hypocrisy of an investigative news program shutting down an investigative print story is incredible,” one told me.

Fager said, “There’s a reason these awful allegations have not been published before—despite the efforts of a few former employees who did not succeed at ‘60 Minutes.’ It is because they are false, anonymous, and do not hold up to editorial scrutiny.”


The CBS chief compliance officer said, “CBS previously retained attorney Betsy Plevan of Proskauer Rose to conduct an independent investigation of alleged misconduct at CBS News. Ms. Plevan’s work is ongoing, and includes investigating allegations in this story. CBS has taken the allegations reported in the press seriously, and respects the role of the press in pursuing the truth, which is a role that is central to the mission of CBS News.”

In June, Carmon, in a speech accepting a Mirror Award for the Post’s reporting on Charlie Rose, warned that stories of abuse by powerful men in the news industry were still being suppressed. “The stories that we have been doing are actually about a system. The system has lawyers and a good reputation. It has publicists,” she said. “Indeed, the system is sitting in this room. Some more than others. The system is still powerful men getting stories killed that I believe will someday see the light of day.” Fager was seated in the audience, and later in the ceremony accepted an award on behalf of “60 Minutes.”

Habiba Nosheen, the employee who filed the E.E.O.C. complaint, said that she decided to report the harassment to the network after an e-mail appeared in her work in-box in March of 2016. It was a message to all CBS employees, from Moonves. “Simply put,” Moonves wrote, “CBS has a zero-tolerance policy towards discrimination or sexual harassment in our company or related businesses.” Nosheen told me, “I know it sounds ridiculous, but for a second I believed it.”

CBS is not the only network to face complaints of sexual harassment in recent years. In November, Matt Lauer, a co-host of “Today,” on NBC, was fired after being accused of sexual misconduct. Roger Ailes, the chairman and C.E.O. of Fox News, and the Fox anchor Bill O’Reilly both resigned after allegations were made against them. The actions of Ailes and O’Reilly have resulted in at least sixty-five million dollars in sexual-harassment settlements.

Experts told me that addressing patterns of harassment at a company as large as CBS generally depends on reform at the highest levels. “This sort of conduct is tied to over-all climate and oftentimes to how women are seen or valued within an entire organization,” Fatima Goss Graves, the president and C.E.O. of the National Women’s Law Center, said. “And there’s no question that the head of the organization sets the tone for the entire organization.”

For the women who have made claims against Les Moonves, his public stance as a supporter of the #MeToo movement and his role in the Commission on Eliminating Sexual Harassment and Advancing Equality in the Workplace have been unnerving. Janet Jones told me that, when she heard that he was on the commission, “I thought, Oh, for God’s sake, he has no shame.” The commission is made up of, and funded by, industry leaders, and its members are not vetted. Illeana Douglas knew people who were associated with the commission, and considered telling them her story, until she saw that Moonves was also a member. “I don’t think that the fox should be guarding the henhouse,” she said.


This article appears in the print edition of the August 6 & 13, 2018, issue, with the headline “Trouble at the Top.”

Ronan Farrow is a contributing writer to The New Yorker and a television anchor and investigative reporter whose work also appears on HBO. He is the author of the book “War on Peace: The End of Diplomacy and the Decline of American Influence.”
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Harvey Weinstein: 'Beautiful Girls' Scribe Scott Rosenbe

Postby admin » Thu Sep 27, 2018 9:21 pm

The Women Who Have Accused Brett Kavanaugh
by Christine Hauser
New York Times
September 26, 2018

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


There are multiple women who have accused Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct. Here are their allegations and his responses. Published On Sept. 26, 2018 Credit Credit Image by T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York Times


Three women have publicly accused Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, the Supreme Court nominee, of sexual assault or misconduct, with the latest allegation emerging on Wednesday.

The accusations against Judge Kavanaugh started to surface this month as he faced confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee. That panel is scheduled to vote on his nomination on Friday.

Judge Kavanaugh has denied the claims. On Monday, with his wife at his side, he said on Fox News that he had always “treated women with dignity and respect.”

Image
Christine Blasey Ford

Christine Blasey Ford: What she said

Dr. Blasey came forward in an interview published by The Washington Post on Sept. 16, saying that Judge Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her when she was about 15 at a party in suburban Maryland in the early 1980s.

She described a drunken Judge Kavanaugh pinning her on a bed, trying to take her clothing off and covering her mouth to keep her from screaming. “I thought he might inadvertently kill me,” the newspaper quoted her as saying. “He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing.”

Dr. Blasey said a friend of Judge Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, was in the room and participated in the assault. He has denied the allegations.


Her background

Dr. Blasey, 51, is a research psychologist at Palo Alto University in Northern California, who also goes by her married name, Ford.

At the time of the alleged assault, she was a student at Holton-Arms School, a private girls’ prep school in Bethesda, Md. He was a student at Georgetown Preparatory School, an elite Jesuit school in suburban Washington.

Image
The entrance to Georgetown Preparatory School in North Bethesda, Md.Credit Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA, via Shutterstock

Important details

Her account was also detailed in a confidential July 30 letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee.

The Post interview included quotations from Dr. Blasey’s husband and her lawyer, and it described a therapist’s notes from 2012 in which she spoke of the attack.

She also took a polygraph examination in August. The retired F.B.I. agent who conducted the examination, Jerry Hanafin, said the results showed “no deception indicated” — in effect, “she was being truthful.” Her lawyers released a copy of the polygraph report on Wednesday.


Judge Kavanaugh’s response

Judge Kavanaugh has denied the accusations, and the White House has said it stands by those denials.

What happened next

The report resulted in the delay of the Judiciary Committee’s vote on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination the week it was published.

Dr. Blasey’s lawyers, Debra Katz and Lisa Banks, have said that since she went public with her story, she has been subjected to death threats, had her email hacked and had to leave her home.

The committee’s Republican leadership has retained an Arizona prosecutor specializing in sex crimes to help question Dr. Blasey about the allegations in a hearing on Thursday.

Image
Deborah Ramirez
CreditSafehouse Progressive Alliance for Nonviolence, via Associated Press


Deborah Ramirez: What she said

Ms. Ramirez said in an interview published in The New Yorker on Sept. 23 that during the 1983-84 school year at Yale University, when she and Judge Kavanaugh were freshmen, he exposed himself to her during a drinking game in a dorm suite.

A small group of students sat in a circle and people selected who had to take a drink, she recalled, saying she was chosen frequently. She became drunk, she said.

Suddenly, Ms. Ramirez said, she saw a penis in front of her face. One man told her to “kiss it,” she told The New Yorker. As she moved to push it away, she said, she saw Judge Kavanaugh standing, laughing and pulling up his pants. Raised a Catholic, Ms. Ramirez was “embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated,” she said.


Her background

Ms. Ramirez, 53, was a student of sociology and psychology at the time. She arrived at Yale from Shelton, Conn., the daughter of a telephone company lineman and a medical technician. She attended a coed Catholic high school, St. Joseph, that was predominantly white but had a number of minority students, including Ms. Ramirez, whose father was Puerto Rican.

Image
Judge Kavanaugh attended Yale Law School after graduating from Yale University. Credit Jessica Hill for The New York Times

Ms. Ramirez is now a registered Democrat who lives in Boulder, Colo., with her husband, Vikram Shah, a technology consultant. She has worked with a domestic violence organization and joined its board in 2014. She also works for the Boulder County housing department.

Important details

Ms. Ramirez said she told few people about the episode at the time. She and Judge Kavanaugh were not close friends, but they crossed paths, including at Yale and at a wedding in 1997.

Judge Kavanaugh’s response

Judge Kavanaugh denied the allegation, saying in a statement to The New Yorker, “This is a smear, plain and simple.”

What happened next

More than 2,200 Yale women have signed a letter of support for Ms. Ramirez; a similar letter has been circulating among Yale men.

A lawyer for Ms. Ramirez has written to the Judiciary Committee saying that his client would be “willing to cooperate” and tell her story under certain terms.

Image
Julie Swetnick. Credit Michael Avenatti, via Associated Press

Julie Swetnick: What she said

On Wednesday, Ms. Swetnick accused Judge Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct at parties while he was a student at Georgetown Preparatory School in the 1980s. Her allegation was conveyed in a statement posted on Twitter by her lawyer, Michael Avenatti.

Ms. Swetnick said she observed Judge Kavanaugh at parties where women were verbally abused, inappropriately touched and “gang raped.”

She said she witnessed Judge Kavanaugh participating in some of the misconduct, including lining up outside a bedroom where “numerous boys” were “waiting for their ‘turn’ with a girl inside the room.” Ms. Swetnick said she was raped at one of the parties, and she believed she had been drugged.


Her background

Like Judge Kavanaugh, Ms. Swetnick, 55, is from the Washington suburbs. She grew up in Montgomery County, Md., graduating from Gaithersburg High School in 1980. She attended the University of Maryland, according to a résumé for her posted online, The Times reported.

She has held a variety of public and private sector jobs in Washington. Her résumé and her lawyer’s statement say she has held several government clearances, including with the State Department and the Justice Department.

Important details

Ms. Swetnick said in her statement that she had attended at least 10 house parties in the Washington area from 1981 to 1983 where Judge Kavanaugh and Mr. Judge, his friend, were present. (Mr. Judge has denied the allegations in her statement.)

Ms. Swetnick said she saw Judge Kavanaugh drinking “excessively” at parties and engaging in “abusive and physically aggressive behavior toward girls, including pressing girls against him without their consent, ‘grinding’ against girls, and attempting to remove or shift girls’ clothing to expose private body parts.”


Judge Kavanaugh’s response

In a statement issued by the White House, Judge Kavanaugh said there was no truth to the claim. “This is ridiculous and from the ‘Twilight Zone,’” he said. “I don’t know who this is and this never happened.”

What happened next

President Trump dismissed Ms. Swetnick’s lawyer, Mr. Avenatti, on Twitter as a “third rate lawyer who is good at making false accusations” and is seeking attention.

Judiciary Committee aides confirmed that they were examining Ms. Swetnick’s declaration. But the committee’s Republican chairman, Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, told reporters that he did not expect to find anything.

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, another Republican on the committee, said he would “not be a participant in wholesale character assassination that defies credibility.”

A fourth accusation surfaces

Judge Kavanaugh faced another accusation after an anonymous letter, dated Sept. 22, was sent to Senator Cory Gardner, Republican of Colorado.

In the letter, a woman said her daughter had witnessed Judge Kavanaugh drunkenly push her friend, a woman he was dating, up against a wall “very aggressively and sexually” after they left a bar one night in 1998.


On Tuesday, Judge Kavanaugh was questioned about the letter by staff lawyers for the Judiciary Committee about the accusation, which he denied, according to a transcript.

“It’s ridiculous,” he said. “Total ‘Twilight Zone.’ And no, I’ve never done anything like that.”

Melissa Gomez contributed reporting.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Harvey Weinstein: 'Beautiful Girls' Scribe Scott Rosenbe

Postby admin » Thu Sep 27, 2018 9:32 pm

For Christine Blasey Ford, a Drastic Turn From a Quiet Life in Academia
by Elizabeth Williamson, Rebecca R. Ruiz, Emily Steel, Grace Ashford and Steve Eder
New York Times
Sept. 19, 2018

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


Image
Christine Blasey Ford was reluctant to come forward with her allegation that Judge Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her.

The text message from Christine Blasey Ford this summer worried her college best friend, Catherine Piwowarski.

Over their years of friendship — as roommates, bridesmaids and parents on opposite coasts — Dr. Blasey wanted to know, had she ever confided that she had been sexually assaulted in high school?

No, Ms. Piwowarski said she texted back, she would have remembered that, and was everything O.K.? Dr. Blasey didn’t want to speak in detail quite yet, her friend recalled her responding. “I don’t know why she was asking that or what it ultimately meant or didn’t mean,” Ms. Piwowarski said in an interview, but she remembers thinking that the question betrayed deep turmoil.

That was about a month before Dr. Blasey, a research psychologist, came forward with her allegation that Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, sexually assaulted her more than three decades ago when they were high school students in the Washington suburbs.

Just days ago, both Dr. Blasey and Judge Kavanaugh — who has denied sexually assaulting her, or anyone — had been expected to testify on Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee about the allegation, setting up a contest of credibility reminiscent of 1991, when Anita Hill leveled accusations of sexual harassment against Clarence Thomas, then a Supreme Court nominee. But it is increasingly uncertain whether that will happen. Dr. Blasey’s lawyers on Tuesday called for an F.B.I. investigation of her allegation before she testifies, but the Senate Republican leadership has rejected the idea and said that a vote on the Kavanaugh nomination will go forward if she does not appear.

Image
Former classmates of Dr. Blasey’s from the Holton-Arms private girls’ prep school in Bethesda, Md., sent a letter to Congress calling for “due consideration” of her claims. Credit Justin T. Gellerson for The New York Times

Dr. Blasey’s allegation has divided not just the Senate and the country, but also the overlapping social circles of the judge and the researcher, as former classmates, colleagues, friends and others have written warring letters of support in recent days. Dr. Blasey’s lawyers, Debra Katz and Lisa Banks, say that since she went public with her story last weekend, she has been subjected to death threats, had her email hacked and had to leave her home. Speculation has arisen in the capital that Dr. Blasey, who had already been reluctant to come forward, may ultimately decline to testify, at least publicly.

Supporters of Dr. Blasey, 51, describe her as a precise, logical scientific thinker; a community leader; a woman of integrity; and a devoted mother of two boys.

“Her life’s work is about telling the truth with science,” said Kate Beebe DeVarney, a behavioral neuroscientist who has worked with Dr. Blasey in Silicon Valley. “Christine doesn’t get stuff wrong. She’s obsessive about making sure it’s right,” she added. “If Christine says something happened, I absolutely believe her.”


Backers of Judge Kavanaugh, 53, describe him as a precise, methodical legal thinker; a strong mentor; a pillar of the community where he and Dr. Blasey grew up; and a devoted father of two girls. Mr. Trump this week praised the judge as an “outstanding intellect,” who “never had even a little blemish on his record.”

Judge Kavanaugh, a Republican, is a staunch Catholic conservative who lives in the nation’s capital. Dr. Blasey, colleagues say, is a Democrat from California who wore a pink “brain hat” when she joined fellow academics in protesting the Trump administration’s proposed cuts to scientific research funding. Their histories coalesced, in Dr. Blasey’s telling, in the early 1980s, in the insular, moneyed world of Washington private college preparatory schools.

Intersecting Social Circles

She began attending Holton-Arms School, a private girls’ prep school in Bethesda, Md., in seventh grade, joining a tight-knit group of about 65 girls. High school friends and classmates described “Chrissy,” as Dr. Blasey was known then, as a popular girl equally comfortable in math class and at social gatherings.

Samantha Semerad Guerry said Dr. Blasey fit right in. Athletic and outdoorsy, she joined the soccer, softball and cheerleading teams. “She was universally well-liked — always cheerful, affable, funny, and super smart,” Ms. Guerry said.

Image
Dr. Blasey pictured in her junior year of high school.

“She was self-possessed,” recalls Cheryl Aviva Amitay, who graduated in 1985, the year after Dr. Blasey.

As a student at Holton-Arms, Dr. Blasey was part of an elite, suburban Washington community, where the families of members of Congress, white-shoe lawyers and lobbyists golfed, played tennis and swam together at a hierarchy of country clubs; Dr. Blasey’s father, a business executive, formerly served as president of the Burning Tree Country Club. Students at private schools socialized with one another and participated in cross-school events.

Children from Catholic schools, like Georgetown Preparatory School, which Mr. Kavanaugh and Justice Neil Gorsuch attended, and Stone Ridge School of the Sacred Heart, a girls’ school nearby, tended to hang around together, having often come from the same parishes and grade schools, though not exclusively. Ms. Guerry said that she knew Georgetown Prep boys through participating in school performances, and that Brett Kavanaugh was an acquaintance.

Drinking was commonplace among the private school teenagers, and the laws governing alcohol and minors were more lax than now. “Back then, pretty much there were parties every Friday and Saturday night, somewhere,” said Samu Qureshi, a friend of Dr. Blasey’s who attended Landon, the brother school to Holton Arms, two years ahead of her. “Generally, parents are out and the kids are getting a keg.”


Holton-Arms’s yearbook includes pages of photographs of girls with drinks. Boys would be invited from the surrounding schools — Landon, Georgetown Prep, and St. Albans — for dances. Things could get rowdy, especially at unsupervised parties before and after school functions, students from that era recalled.

A yearbook entry for Judge Kavanaugh, a varsity football and basketball player at Georgetown Prep, described him as “Keg City Club (Treasurer) — 100 Kegs or Bust.” Mark Judge, a classmate and close friend, describes his own blackout drinking during those years in “Wasted: Tales of a Gen X Drunk,” his 1997 memoir about his experiences as a teenage alcoholic. The book mentions a person named “Bart O’Kavanaugh” who had “puked in someone’s car” and “passed out on his way back from a party.” Mr. Judge did not respond to queries this week about whether that name refers to Judge Kavanaugh.

This was the environment in which Dr. Blasey, when she was about 15 years old, encountered Judge Kavanaugh at a gathering at another teenager’s house in Montgomery County, Md., she said. She knew him before the alleged incident, she has said, countering a theory of mistaken identity advanced by Judge Kavanaugh and his supporters in the Senate.


New Attention Given to Kavanaugh’s Remarks About Drinking, Following an accusation of sexual assault, Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh’s past comments about drinking in his youth are resurfacing. Published On Sept. 19, 2018 Credit CreditImage by Doug Mills/The New York Times


She had met him a couple of times, though they didn’t run in the same circles and weren’t friends, a person close to Dr. Blasey said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss a personal matter.

According to a letter sent to Senator Dianne Feinstein in July, Dr. Blasey claimed that Mr. Kavanaugh pushed her into a bedroom as she headed upstairs to a bathroom. He and someone she described as a “very drunken” friend — identified in later news reports as Mr. Judge — locked the door and played loud music, she wrote. Mr. Kavanaugh then pushed her on a bed, began grinding his body against hers and tried to undress her, she said. To stifle her screams, she asserted, he covered her mouth with his hand.

Mr. Judge, Dr. Blasey alleged, told his friend to alternately “go for it” and “stop.”

When Mr. Judge jumped on the bed, causing the three teenagers to tumble onto the floor, Dr. Blasey said she ran from the room, locked herself in the bathroom and escaped after hearing the two inebriated boys stumbling down the stairs.

Dr. Blasey said she did not share a detailed account of the incident with anyone until 2012, when she and her husband, Russell Ford, an engineer, met with a couples therapist, according to a Washington Post interview. In her letter to Senator Feinstein, she described being traumatized from the high school episode, saying “I have received medical treatment regarding the assault.”
She declined to be interviewed for this article.

Mr. Judge, now an author, filmmaker and writer for conservative publications, wrote in a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee that he had no memory of the incident, adding that he “never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford described.”

Dr. Blasey’s allegation has ignited heated controversy in Washington’s private school circles, reflecting the same social divisions — by gender, alma mater, class and religion — that had riven alumni as teenagers more than three decades ago. Some Georgetown Prep classmates have cast aspersions on Dr. Blasey on social media, while her allies charge hypocrisy in their overlooking a pervasive culture of misogyny that existed then.

Twenty-three members of Dr. Blasey’s class at Holton-Arms signed a joint letter sent to Congress this week, calling for “due consideration” of her claims. Another letter is signed by more than 1,000 alumnae, dating back to the class of 1948.

Image
Students at Georgetown Preparatory School, which Brett Kavanaugh attended, often socialized with students from other nearby schools. Credit Justin T. Gellerson for The New York Times

When Ms. Guerry circulated the letter from the class of 1984, she found that Dr. Blasey’s story resonated deeply. “I was very much surprised by how many of my classmates wrote back to say to say they had traumatic experiences in high school,” she said. “When they heard Christine’s story, it struck a chord for them.”

Among them was Cheryl Amitay, a chief regulator at the Department of Veteran’s Affairs living in Washington. Ms. Amitay said she was leaving a house party during her sophomore year when two male teenagers who had been drinking pushed her up against a car and groped her. One reached under her skirt, she said, and tore off her underwear.

“I will never forget that,” she said. “When my mom picked me up she knew something was wrong, but I didn’t say anything.”

“You never say a thing,” she went on. “You feel like a jerk.”

After the alleged attack on Dr. Blasey, a male friend said, she “fell off the face of the earth socially,” failing to appear at parties and events she’d previously attended. “All I remember is after my junior year thinking, ‘Where’s Chrissy Blasey?’” he recalled.

“She was the sort of person a lot of people paid attention to — she was a leader, she was great. I was like, where did she go?”


A Researcher in Demand

Dr. Blasey said the experience “derailed” her for four or five years, and that she struggled academically and socially, according to The Washington Post. She went on to attend the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where she studied psychology. The school’s alumni directory and yearbook list her as having belonged to the Kappa Delta sorority, which had a reputation as the “cheerleading sorority” in the 1980s, though she was not a cheerleader at the school. She seems to have kept a low profile.

“I don’t remember her very well,” said Leigh Goodwyn, who was a member of the sorority at the time. “There are not many people in the house I can say that about.” Two other sorority sisters also had trouble remembering her.

Image
Judge Kavanaugh graduated in 1983 from Georgetown Prep.

But she became close with Ms. Piwowarski. They would watch new bands perform in bars on the town’s Franklin Street, hanging out with friends, and roomed together in an off-campus apartment their senior year.

After graduating from U.N.C. in 1988, Dr. Blasey moved to California, where she earned graduate degrees from Pepperdine, Stanford and the University of Southern California. When she married Mr. Ford in 2002 in Half Moon Bay, Calif., against a backdrop of redwood trees, Ms. Piwowarski was a bridesmaid.

Dr. Blasey developed a passion for surfing, which she shares with her husband and two sons. “She’s been chasing waves,” said Beth Stannard, a friend and former co-worker, who said Dr. Blasey’s decisions to teach at Pepperdine, in Malibu, Calif., and to complete an internship at the University of Hawaii were at least partly informed by the campuses’ seaside locations. She and her family live in Palo Alto — where she has volunteered for her sons’ schools and junior lifeguard training, has restored her midcentury modern home with an eye toward historical preservation, and has attended Stanford football and basketball games with her family. The family also has a house in Santa Cruz, famed for its beaches and breaks.

“She can be quite the academic — someone taken very seriously at a place like Stanford — and then go out and surf with the people of Santa Cruz,” Ms. Stannard said, recalling that Dr. Blasey had taken her and several colleagues surfing, followed by a lunch of fish and chips.

Fellow scientists described her as a collaborative researcher and statistician, in demand among graduate students and fellow researchers who sought her more refined writing skills for reports and papers. At the University of Southern California School of Education, she worked for several years in the laboratory, where she developed a test to assess how young children cope with trauma.

“She was very meticulous with data, looked carefully at developing children,” Dr. Gayla Margolin, who led the lab, said in an interview. “In doing good science, people have to take in information and reflect it and portray it in a very honest, straightforward way.”

Dr. Blasey was hired in 2012 by Palo Alto University to teach as part of its doctoral psychology program, a consortium with Stanford that emphasizes clinical training. She is a co-author of a guide to statistical power analysis called “How Many Subjects?” used by researchers to determine how large a sample size is required to accurately test a hypothesis.

Image
Dr. Blasey sent a letter in July to Dianne Feinstein, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, describing the assault. Credit Erin Schaff for The New York Times

Dr. Barr Taylor, a professor emeritus of psychiatry at Stanford who for a decade chaired dissertation committees in which Dr. Blasey was involved, described her as somewhat reserved. “The statistics fit her personality more than the statistics shaped her personality,” Dr. Taylor said.

Dr. DeVarney, the Silicon Valley neuroscientist, calls Dr. Blasey “a friendly but kind of geeky scientist,” who is “obsessive about making sure it’s right.” The two worked together at three companies over 10 years.

Dr. DeVarney said Dr. Blasey called her in August to say that she had sent a letter to Senator Feinstein about having been sexually assaulted in high school, “something that had haunted her for her entire adult life.” Dr. Blasey did not name the alleged attacker.

“She was clearly upset about it,” Dr. DeVarney recalled. “It was creating a lot of stress for her, and now it’s taken over her life.”

Preparing to Speak Out

After Dr. Blasey decided to come forward with her allegation and notify Senator Feinstein, she, and later her lawyers, took steps to prepare for the fight of her life. She submitted to a polygraph, gathered notes from her therapist and searched her memory.

“I’ve been trying to forget this all my life, and now I’m supposed to remember every little detail,” Dr. Blasey told a friend, Jim Gensheimer, in July, according to an account in The San Jose Mercury News.

Later in the summer, she texted Ms. Piwowarski, her college friend. The query was worrisome, and Ms. Piwowarski told Dr. Blasey that she was there for her. It wasn’t until Sunday night that Ms. Piwowarski learned the details of her friend’s account from news reports.

A resident of New Bern, N.C., which was devastated by Hurricane Florence, Ms. Piwowarski said she read the story when the power came back on at her house. She felt sickened by it, she said.

“Seeing what people say, I really, really understand why somebody wouldn’t want to be a part of this discussion,” she said. “I think it is brave. But it is a lot to take on.”


Kate Conger and Jennifer Medina contributed reporting. Kitty Bennett contributed research.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Harvey Weinstein: 'Beautiful Girls' Scribe Scott Rosenbe

Postby admin » Thu Sep 27, 2018 9:40 pm

The Yale Secret Society Brett Kavanaugh Joined Was Mostly About Drinking, Yale Alumni Say
No Skull and Bones.
by Molly Hensley-Clancy
Molly Hensley-Clancy
BuzzFeed News Reporter
July 11, 2018

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


Image
Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump's pick for Supreme Court justice, was in a secret society at Yale called Truth and Courage — a lofty name for what was, in reality, an all-male club that one former member said more closely resembled a fraternity.

The name was widely known to be a jab at Yale’s older, more formal secret societies, like the Bushes’ Skull and Bones, said Kristin Sherry, who attended in the early 1980s, a few years before Kavanaugh, and knew several members of Truth and Courage — all “nice party guys,” Sherry said. “It was a bit of a joke.”

The former Truth and Courage member, who graduated several years after Kavanaugh, said the group was young and loosely organized. It had no ancient tomb, and in his time, he said, it met mostly in members’ apartments or fraternity basements.

Yale’s network of secret societies, particularly in Kavanaugh’s time, was mostly decades-old, monied establishments that met in imposing stone buildings known as “tombs.” In Skull and Bones, for instance, members meet frequently to debate political and academic topics, dine on elaborate meals, and listen to distinguished speakers. The club is famously alcohol-free.

Not Truth and Courage, which was also known simply as TNC.

“It was nothing like Scroll and Key, nothing like Wolf’s Head,” said one woman who graduated a year after Kavanaugh and said she knew members of Truth and Courage. “They just drank a ton. They got drunk.” She paused. “All I remember is them drinking.”

Kavanaugh was a member of the fraternity Delta Kappa Epsilon, according to his Yale yearbook entry, where he also listed Truth and Courage — a rarity at Yale, where fraternity life is relatively subdued. He wrote about sports for the Yale Daily News.

In a private Facebook group composed of more than 20,000 Yale alumni this week, some members have noted Kavanaugh's stated membership of TNC; most people commenting on the group have described it as “informal” and “minor.”

“Other societies were looking for a prestigious family background, or your GPA. Each had their own personalities,” said Sherry. TNC, Sherry said, was unique: It was “organized around having sex with coeds.”

Several years before Kavanaugh was initiated into TNC, Sherry said, the people on campus called the group by an “alternate nickname”: “Tit and Clit.”

That was a name that wasn’t familiar to the woman who had graduated in 1988. The former member said he hadn’t heard of the “Tit and Clit” nickname in his time there, either, and that the group didn’t have get-togethers with women’s societies.

But, of the nickname Sherry described, he said, “I can see how people would say that. When it really comes down to it, it was basically a fraternity extension.”

Kavanaugh is a steady conservative and a devout Catholic who attended Georgetown Prep, a Jesuit school in North Bethesda, Maryland. He’s spent much of his career inside the Beltway, forging tight connections to the Washington Republican establishment. His confirmation has ignited ire on the left, who fear he will tilt the Supreme Court to the right and could help roll back abortion rights, among other issues.

Sherry took issue not with Kavanaugh’s membership in TNC — “Yale in the ’80s was very sexually liberal,” she said — but with the idea that someone who had “partied” so liberally might take part in overturning Roe v. Wade. “It’s the height of hypocrisy,” Sherry said.

TNC did follow some secret society traditions, the former member said. It sent masked members running around campus, often while singing, on the night known as “Tap Night,” and initiated new members with elaborate drinking games.

In one way, though, TNC distinguished itself from other Yale societies. In the 1980s and 1990s, most Yale societies became gender neutral; Skull and Bones famously began to admit women in 1991. In a 2012 list of all of Yale’s societies, TNC’s members were, still, all men — making it, by then, one of only a tiny fraction of all-male societies left on campus.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Harvey Weinstein: 'Beautiful Girls' Scribe Scott Rosenbe

Postby admin » Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:46 pm

Kavanaugh’s Yearbook Page Is ‘Horrible, Hurtful’ to a Woman It Named
by Kate Kelly and David Enrich
New York Times
Sept. 24, 2018

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


During a Fox News interview on Sunday, the Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh rebutted claims of sexual abuse. But some are questioning his characterization of his high school and college years. Published On Sept. 25, 2018 Credit CreditImage by Jacquelyn Martin/Associated Press


Brett Kavanaugh’s page in his high school yearbook offers a glimpse of the teenage years of the man who is now President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee: lots of football, plenty of drinking, parties at the beach. Among the reminiscences about sports and booze is a mysterious entry: “Renate Alumnius.”

The word “Renate” appears at least 14 times in Georgetown Preparatory School’s 1983 yearbook, on individuals’ pages and in a group photo of nine football players, including Judge Kavanaugh, who were described as the “Renate Alumni.” It is a reference to Renate Schroeder, then a student at a nearby Catholic girls’ school.

Two of Judge Kavanaugh’s classmates say the mentions of Renate were part of the football players’ unsubstantiated boasting about their conquests.

“They were very disrespectful, at least verbally, with Renate,” said Sean Hagan, a Georgetown Prep student at the time, referring to Judge Kavanaugh and his teammates. “I can’t express how disgusted I am with them, then and now.”


Judge Kavanaugh’s years at Georgetown Prep, in a Maryland suburb of Washington, are under intense scrutiny because of allegations by Christine Blasey Ford that he sexually assaulted her during high school. Judge Kavanaugh has denied the allegation. He and Dr. Blasey are scheduled to testify Thursday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Judge Kavanaugh’s peers have given different accounts of what he was like. But his yearbook provides a contemporaneous glimpse of the elite Catholic school’s hard-drinking atmosphere — Judge Kavanaugh’s personal page boasts, “100 kegs or bust” — and a culture that some describe as disrespectful to women.

This month, Renate Schroeder Dolphin joined 64 other women who, saying they knew Judge Kavanaugh during their high school years, signed a letter to the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is weighing Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination. The letter stated that “he has behaved honorably and treated women with respect.”

When Ms. Dolphin signed the Sept. 14 letter, she wasn’t aware of the “Renate” yearbook references on the pages of Judge Kavanaugh and his football teammates.

“I learned about these yearbook pages only a few days ago,” Ms. Dolphin said in a statement to The New York Times. “I don’t know what ‘Renate Alumnus’ actually means. I can’t begin to comprehend what goes through the minds of 17-year-old boys who write such things, but the insinuation is horrible, hurtful and simply untrue. I pray their daughters are never treated this way. I will have no further comment.”

Michael Walsh, another Georgetown Prep alumnus, also listed himself on his personal yearbook page as a “Renate Alumnus.” Alongside some song lyrics, he included a short poem: “You need a date / and it’s getting late / so don’t hesitate / to call Renate.”

-- Brett Kavanaugh: ‘Horrible, hurtful taunts’ towards schoolgirl in high school yearbook revealed, by Kate Kelly, David Enrich


Alexandra Walsh, a lawyer for Judge Kavanaugh, said in a statement: “Judge Kavanaugh was friends with Renate Dolphin in high school. He admired her very much then, and he admires her to this day.

Image
Brett Michael Kavanaugh
[DELETE]
Bethesda, Maryland 20816
Varsity Football 3, 4; J.V. Football 2; Freshman Football 1; Varsity Basketball 3, 4 (Captain); Frosh Basketball (Captain); J.V. Basketball (Captain); Varsity Spring Track 3; Little Hoya 3, 4*** Landon Rocks and Bowling Alley Assault -- What a Night; Georgetown vs. Louisville -- Who Won That Game Anyway?; Extinguisher; Summer of '82 -- Total Spints (Rehobeth 10, 9 ...); Orioles vs. Red Sox -- Who Won, Anyway?, Keg City Club (Treasurer) -- 100 Kegs or Bust; [DELETE] -- I survived the FFFFFFFourth of July; Renate Alumnius; Malibu Fan Club; Ow, Neatness 2, 3; Devil's Triangle; Down Geezer, Easy, Spike, "How ya' doing'. Errr Ah; Rehobeth Police Fan Club (with Shorty); St. Michael's ... This is a Whack; [DELETE] Fan Club; Judge -- Have you Boofed Yet?; Beach Week Ralph Club -- Biggest Contributor; [DELETE] -- Tainted Whack; [DELETE] Beach Week 3-107th Street; Those Prep Guys are the Biggest ...; BONZAGA YOU'RE LUCKY.


A threesome with 1 woman and 2 men.

Image
William Hereford Lifestyle


-- Devils Triangle, by Urban Dictionary


I've been around the block several times including raising boys and grandsons and I'll tell you that at no time did the word bouf mean farting nor is a devil's triangle a drinking game like quarters. One means butt-f*cking and the other refers to two on one sex (2 men).

-- Gabby Gale @GayleDazzler!


Judge Kavanaugh mentioned Renate Dolphin on his yearbook page, his lawyer said, because of one high school event they attended together “and nothing else.” Address and some names have been obscured.[/i]

“Judge Kavanaugh and Ms. Dolphin attended one high school event together and shared a brief kiss good night following that event,” the statement continued. “They had no other such encounter. The language from Judge Kavanaugh’s high school yearbook refers to the fact that he and Ms. Dolphin attended that one high school event together and nothing else.”

Ms. Dolphin said she had never kissed Judge Kavanaugh. “I think Brett must have me confused with someone else, because I never kissed him,” she said through her lawyer.


In an interview on Fox News on Monday, Judge Kavanaugh defended his high school behavior in general terms. “People might have had too many beers on occasion and people generally in high school — I think all of us have probably done things we look back on in high school and regret or cringe a bit,” he said.

A White House spokesman, Raj Shah, declined to comment beyond the statement from Judge Kavanaugh’s lawyer.

Four of the men who were pictured with Judge Kavanaugh in a photo captioned “Renate Alumni” said it was simply a reference to their dating or going to dances with Ms. Dolphin.

An elite Catholic boys’ high school founded in 1789, Georgetown Prep has many alumni who have gone into public service. Justice Neil M. Gorsuch of the Supreme Court is a graduate, as is Jerome H. Powell, chairman of the Federal Reserve.

Judge Kavanaugh, a member of the football team and the captain of the basketball team, played a prominent role in Georgetown Prep’s firmament in the early 1980s. The school’s culture was one of heavy drinking and at times insensitivity.

The 1983 yearbook, for example, includes multiple apparent references to the Ku Klux Klan (but not on Judge Kavanaugh’s page). His page, in addition to the “Alumnius” entry, mentions his role as “treasurer” of the “Keg City Club.”

“The vast majority of the time I spent in high school was studying or focused on sports and being a good friend to the boys and the girls that I was friends with,” he told Fox News on Monday.

Some of Judge Kavanaugh’s high school peers said there was a widespread culture at the time of objectifying women.

“People claiming that they had sex with other people was not terribly unusual, and it was not terribly believable,” said William Fishburne, who was in Judge Kavanaugh’s graduating class and was a manager for the football team. “Not just Brett Kavanaugh and his particular group, but all the classmates in general. People would claim things they hadn’t done to sort of seem bigger than they were, older than they were.”

Bill Barbot, who was a freshman at Georgetown Prep when Judge Kavanaugh was a senior, said Judge Kavanaugh and his clique were part of the school’s “fratty” culture. “There was a lot of talk and presumably a lot of action about sexual conquest with girls,” Mr. Barbot said.

Image
Renate Alumni (missing: Pres. J.C. Del Real)
Judge Kavanaugh, far left, and eight football teammates in a yearbook photo. “I don’t know what ‘Renate Alumnus’ actually means,” Ms. Dolphin said. “I can’t begin to comprehend what goes through the minds of 17-year-old boys who write such things, but the insinuation is horrible, hurtful and simply untrue.”


Ms. Dolphin was a subject of that braggadocio, according to Mr. Hagan and another classmate, who requested anonymity because he fears retribution. They said Judge Kavanaugh and his friends were seeking to memorialize their supposed conquests with the “Renate” yearbook references.

“She should be offended,” Mr. Hagan said of Ms. Dolphin. “I was completely astounded when I saw she signed that letter” on Judge Kavanaugh’s behalf.

Some women who knew Judge Kavanaugh at the time defended his conduct.

“These guys weren’t any different than other boys high schools across the country,” said Suzanne Matan, a friend of Judge Kavanaugh’s from their high school days. “And I chose to hang out with those boys and many other girls did, too, because they were fun, and they were safe, and they were respectful.”


The Georgetown Prep yearbook’s personal pages were designed and written by the individual students, according to alumni. A faculty adviser reviewed the pages.

Judge Kavanaugh was one of 13 graduating seniors who referred to Ms. Dolphin in some way on their personal pages. Some gave themselves titles — DeLancey Davis, for example, listed himself as “chairman of the Bored” of the “Renate Club.” Another football player, Tom Kane, mentioned on his page “Renate’s Suicide Squad.”

The group photo, with Judge Kavanaugh and eight fellow football players in pads and uniform, grinning, was captioned “Renate Alumni.” Mark Judge, the commentator and author who has written about his alcohol-fueled years at Georgetown Prep, stands next to Judge Kavanaugh in the photo.

Barbara Van Gelder, a lawyer for Mr. Judge, declined to comment.

Four of the players in the “Renate Alumni” photo — Mr. Davis, Mr. Kane, Tim Gaudette and Don Urgo Jr. — said in a statement that they had “never bragged about” sexual contact or anything like that with Ms. Dolphin. The statement, issued by Jim McCarthy, a public-relations representative, said the yearbook’s “Renate” references “were intended to allude to innocent dates or dance partners and were generally known within the community of people involved for over 35 years.”

“These comments,” the statement continued, “were never controversial and did not impact ongoing relationships until The Times twisted and forced an untrue narrative. This shabby journalism is causing egregious harm to all involved, particularly our friend, and is simply beneath contempt.”

Michael Walsh, another Georgetown Prep alumnus, also listed himself on his personal yearbook page as a “Renate Alumnus.” Alongside some song lyrics, he included a short poem: “You need a date / and it’s getting late / so don’t hesitate / to call Renate.”

Mr. Walsh, a bank executive in Virginia, was one of scores of Georgetown Prep alumni who signed a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee leaders vouching for Judge Kavanaugh’s “sharp intellectual ability, affable nature, and a practical and fair approach devoid of partisan purpose.” He did not respond to requests for comment.

Ms. Dolphin was aware that members of Judge Kavanaugh’s clique were reciting that poem, according to a person familiar with her thinking. She told the football players that she found it offensive, believing it made her seem like a cheap date, and she asked them to stop.

Some of Judge Kavanaugh’s peers said they doubted that the yearbook notations were good-natured. “Those guys weren’t big on crushes,” Mr. Fishburne said. “I think they felt that if a girl didn’t want to date them, then they must be gay. I’m serious.”

A high school friend of Ms. Dolphin’s, who also signed the letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that while she stood by the letter’s contents, as a friend of Ms. Dolphin’s she was “sickened” by the yearbook’s “Renate” references. She and a second friend of Ms. Dolphin’s denied that there was any sexual contact between Ms. Dolphin and Judge Kavanaugh or anyone else in his circle.

Kitty Bennett contributed research.

A version of this article appears in print on Sept. 24, 2018, on Page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Yearbook ’83: Football, Kegs And Innuendo.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Harvey Weinstein: 'Beautiful Girls' Scribe Scott Rosenbe

Postby admin » Fri Sep 28, 2018 10:47 pm

Rule 413. Similar Crimes in Sexual-Assault Cases
Cornell Law School
Legal Information Institute
Accessed: 9/28/18

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


(a) Permitted Uses. In a criminal case in which a defendant is accused of a sexual assault, the court may admit evidence that the defendant committed any other sexual assault. The evidence may be considered on any matter to which it is relevant.

(b) Disclosure to the Defendant. If the prosecutor intends to offer this evidence, the prosecutor must disclose it to the defendant, including witnesses’ statements or a summary of the expected testimony. The prosecutor must do so at least 15 days before trial or at a later time that the court allows for good cause.

(c) Effect on Other Rules. This rule does not limit the admission or consideration of evidence under any other rule.

(d) Definition of “Sexual Assault.” In this rule and Rule 415, “sexual assault” means a crime under federal law or under state law (as “state” is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 513) involving:

(1) any conduct prohibited by 18 U.S.C. chapter 109A;

(2) contact, without consent, between any part of the defendant’s body — or an object — and another person’s genitals or anus;

(3) contact, without consent, between the defendant’s genitals or anus and any part of another person’s body;

(4) deriving sexual pleasure or gratification from inflicting death, bodily injury, or physical pain on another person; or

(5) an attempt or conspiracy to engage in conduct described in subparagraphs (1)–(4).

Notes
(Added Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXII, §320935(a), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2135; Apr. 26, 2011, eff. Dec. 1, 2011.)

Effective Date

Section 320935(b)–(e) of Pub. L. 103–322, as amended by Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title I, §101(a), [title I, §120], Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009, 3009–25, provided that:

“(b) Implementation.—The amendments made by subsection (a) [enacting this rule and rules 414 and 415 of these rules] shall become effective pursuant to subsection (d).

“(c) Recommendations by Judicial Conference.—Not later than 150 days after the date of enactment of this Act [Sept. 13, 1994], the Judicial Conference of the United States shall transmit to Congress a report containing recommendations for amending the Federal Rules of Evidence as they affect the admission of evidence of a defendant's prior sexual assault or child molestation crimes in cases involving sexual assault and child molestation. The Rules Enabling Act [ 28 U.S.C. 2072 ] shall not apply to the recommendations made by the Judicial Conference pursuant to this section.

“(d) Congressional Action.—

“(1) If the recommendations described in subsection (c) are the same as the amendment made by subsection (a), then the amendments made by subsection (a) shall become effective 30 days after the transmittal of the recommendations.

“(2) If the recommendations described in subsection (c) are different than the amendments made by subsection (a), the amendments made by subsection (a) shall become effective 150 days after the transmittal of the recommendations unless otherwise provided by law.

“(3) If the Judicial Conference fails to comply with subsection (c), the amendments made by subsection (a) shall become effective 150 days after the date the recommendations were due under subsection (c) unless otherwise provided by law.

“(e) Application.—The amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply to proceedings commenced on or after the effective date of such amendments [July 9, 1995], including all trials commenced on or after the effective date of such amendments.”

[The Judicial Conference transmitted to Congress on Feb. 9, 1995, a report containing recommendations described in subsec. (c) that were different than the amendments made by subsec. (a). The amendments made by subsec. (a) became effective July 9, 1995.]

Committee Notes on Rules—2011 Amendment

The language of Rule 413 has been amended as part of the restyling of the Evidence Rules to make them more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. These changes are intended to be stylistic only. There is no intent to change any result in any ruling on evidence admissibility.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Harvey Weinstein: 'Beautiful Girls' Scribe Scott Rosenbe

Postby admin » Mon Oct 08, 2018 10:37 pm

With Kavanaugh Confirmed, It’s Time to Burn It Down
by Jennifer Wright
Harpers Bazaar
Oct 6, 2018

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


"We will burn patriarchal institutions to the ground. And I pray that, for our daughters, the blaze will light the way forward."


Image
Design by Moira Gilligan

“I desire you would Remember the Ladies, and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the Husbands. Remember all Men would be tyrants if they could. If particular care and attention is not paid to the Ladies we are determined to foment a Rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any Laws in which we have no voice, or Representation”

Abigail Adams wrote that in 1776. Her words have never seemed more prescient than they do today.

Surely, this is a time where many ladies wish to foment a rebellion. So many of us, today, want to burn a system to the ground that could put a man like Brett Kavanaugh, a man accused of multiple accounts of sexual assault, on the Supreme Court. Especially when there is such a strong sense that justice has not been done. The FBI’s investigation was limited. Mark Judge, an alleged witness, was never subpoenaed and made to testify. Ford’s nuanced, precise testimony seemingly could not hold up to a man shouting about how much he enjoyed beer.

Some (male) people might be concerned that women will foment the rebellion. To them I can say with certainty that the rebellion is already underway.

Like Ford, women “are used to being collegial.” So the rebellion might look more polite and orderly than some people expected.

That does not mean we are not furious.

“Women are so angry,” Trump declared in a rather garbled press conference about Kavanaugh on Tuesday night: “Women are very angry.”

It may be the first time I’ve agreed with Trump. God, are we angry. If we had calendars, like Kavanaugh, for many of us, this week would just be represented by the word “fury” scrawled in all caps.

For years, women’s anger has been dismissed. We have been taught to subsume anything even resembling anger at all costs. Watch a woman speak in a tone that does not convey deference and watch her be called "strident". Watch a woman speaking firmly be accused of "yelling". If she is not smiling, she seems "angry". If woman are openly upset, they will be called "hysterical," a term which implies that the root of their anger is a form of madness.

"For the first time in a long time—perhaps the first time ever—women’s rage is being seen as valuable."


Mercifully, for the first time in a long time—perhaps the first time ever—women’s rage is being seen as valuable and useful. Soraya Chemaly’s book Rage Becomes Her and Rebecca Traister’s Good and Mad are both recent books delving into the way women’s fury have created a more just world. In Chemaly’s book, she remarks that, “Anger has a bad rap, but it’s actually one of the most hopeful and forward thinking of our emotions. It begets transformation, manifesting our passion and keeping us invested in the world. It is a rational and emotional response trespass, violation and moral disorder.”

And women’s anger does create change, even here, even in this age. In an excerpt from Good and Mad published in New York Magazine, Traister cites not only my personal favorite angry American woman, Abigail Adams, but the many times American women’s anger has been the impetus for social movements. Those range from the women at textile mills in Lowell Massachusetts staging walk-outs in the 19th century, in one of the first iterations of a labor movement, to Emmett Till’s mother cracking open her son’s coffin in order to reveal the damage done to him to the world. Doing so, in Traister’s words, “lit a match under a burgeoning social struggle that would help to partially remake the United States and lessen (though hardly obliterate) the legal and political obstacles to racial parity.”

We’ve been angry before. We’ve channeled our anger to remake society, before. We’re good at this.

“Why aren’t women out in the streets then?” Some people are wondering.

Those people are remarkably unobservant. We are. Seventy percent of the membership and almost all of the leadership of local resistance groups are women. We are outside The Hart Senate Office Building chanting “We Care” and “Abolish I.C.E.” We are organizing walk-outs to protest Kavanaugh. We have been out there, in the streets, numbering in the millions since Trump was elected.

And yet, each year, when we march, Republican men wonder why women are even marching.

Honest question: what exactly are these women marching for https://t.co/M1PnadkDiL

— Harrison Barron (@harrison_barron) January 21, 2017
What are these women marching for???
The “right to EXPOSE THEMSELVES”??? https://t.co/8mEP7o5hfP

— Dave Jones (@mdj17) January 21, 2018
I don't get what the fuck all these women are marching for all over the place. Like when did women loose all their rights??

— Dylan (@dylanobney42) January 21, 2017


That is easy to answer this week. When we march, we are marching against your blithe dismissal of the fact that women’s lives have value. We are marching to inform you that we are people, not objects for male pleasure. We are marching to show that our lived experiences of pain will no longer be something you can dismiss with a laugh and a shrug.

"We are marching against your blithe dismissal of the fact that women’s lives have value."


Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, when asked what she remembered most about her assault, replied, “Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter, the uproarious laughter between the two.”

It’s telling how little Republicans have evolved in 50 years that, during this trial, as a woman described her sexual assault, republicans like Kurt Schlichter were tweeting, “I’m laughing.”

Women are not.

Women aren’t going to keep politely laughing along with you. Even Republican women, who will tie themselves into knots trying to justify bad male behavior, have seemingly reached the end of their rope.

They are fleeing the Republican party in droves. In 2002, 36 percent of young women identified as Republican. In 2018, 23 percent do. Steve Bannon (has said “The Republican college-educated woman is done. They’re gone. They were going anyway at some point in time. Trump triggers them.” I would suggest that it’s the entire GOP’s dismissal and mockery of issues like the #MeToo movement that “triggers” them, but okay. This, all by itself should be a message to men on the Right to stop laughing, and start taking women seriously.

But they’re refusing to. If anything, they’re leaning in to misogyny.

In Kavanaugh’s confirmation they have revealed their true colors completely.

The GOP has made it clear that confirming a man accused by multiple people of sexual assault, who responded to accusations by bemoaning what a hard time he’d had as a result, was not only tolerable to them, it was desirable. Many onlookers saw Kavanaugh presenting as angry and entitled — he alternated between crying, yelling, lashing out at Senator Amy Klobuchar and expressing his fondness for beer.

Christina Cauterucci at Slate wrote an article called, “Brett Kavanaugh’s Testimony Made It Easier Than Ever to Picture Him as an Aggressive, Entitled Teen.” New York Times writer Mara Gay said on MSNBC “You hear a lot of entitlement coming from him.” Alexandra Petri of the Washington Post quipped on Twitter, “is this how people get to talk if they don't spend their entire lives being scrutinized for tone?”

is this how people get to talk if they don't spend their entire lives being scrutinized for tone

— Alexandra Petri (@petridishes) September 27, 2018


It’s fair to say that, among women, Kavanaugh’s speech did not go over too well.

But Donald Trump Jr. loved it. During the Trial, Trump Jr. tweeted, “I love Kavanaugh’s tone… others in the GOP should take notice!” Trump himself was similarly enthusiastic, tweeting, “Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him. His testimony was powerful, honest, and riveting.”

I love Kavanaugh’s tone. It’s nice to see a conservative man fight for his honor and his family against a 35 year old claim with ZERO evidence and lots of holes that amounts to nothing more than a political hit job by the Dems.

Others in the GOP should take notice!

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) September 27, 2018

Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him. His testimony was powerful, honest, and riveting. Democrats’ search and destroy strategy is disgraceful and this process has been a total sham and effort to delay, obstruct, and resist. The Senate must vote!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 27, 2018


The GOP has given women an incredibly good reason to vote against them during the midterms. They’ve presented us with the image of a man screaming about how he’s the real victim in sexual assault accusations to rebel against.

And women across the world are already rising to stand against the powerful men like him. And not just “perfect” women anymore. For a long time, our imperfection, the fact that we might be revealed not to have perfectly walked the tightrope of female respectability, has been an impetus for women to remain silent. Rise up and call out men and you’ll be told it’s because you’re a slut. Or ugly. Or dirty, in some way that means you deserved your poor treatment.

"For a long time, the fact we might be revealed not to have perfectly walked the tightrope of female respectability, has been an impetus for women to remain silent."


This still happens, but it seems as though this year women just stopped caring. Women like Stormy Daniels are coming forward to fight against Trump and the GOP. Jill Filipovic wrote of how Rudy Giuliani remarked “I don’t respect a porn star the way I respect a career woman, or a woman of substance, or a woman who has great respect for herself as a woman, and as a person. So, Stormy, you want to bring a case? Let me cross-examine you.” Seemingly, he did this with the intention of shaming her, as women have often been shamed in the past. Except—and this was unusual—it did not seem to bother her. She did not flinch. Stormy remained, as Filipovic wrote, “an imperfect, entirely self-possessed woman telling her story with clarity and without shame. And here we are, actually listening to her.”

The day is coming where, when men make statements intended to remind us of how imperfect we are, they will be met not with fear, but with an eye-roll. Our imperfections do not negate our truths. There is such great power in the fact that we will no longer be shamed.

"There is such great power in the fact that we will no longer be shamed."


And this rebellion, in its large and small manifestations, will go on. Women are not going anywhere. We are going to keep existing, and more and more, we are going to share our truths. “Bravery”, as Senator Leahy told Dr. Ford, “is contagious.” This week has been horrible, but it is one battle lost, not a war. Women are running for office in unprecedented numbers. We may suffer under the leadership of old white men who have little regard for women. It seems increasingly unlikely that the next generation will.

So, don’t let anyone tell you that the rebellion has yet to begin. The events of this week only mean that it must not yet end.

Our rage burns so brightly. I look out, and I see a nation of women incandescent with rage. We will burn patriarchal institutions to the ground. And I pray that, for our daughters, the blaze will light the way forward.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Harvey Weinstein: 'Beautiful Girls' Scribe Scott Rosenbe

Postby admin » Sat Nov 03, 2018 1:17 am

'Bro Culture’ Led to Repeated Sexual Harassment, Former Google Engineer's Lawsuit Says
by Kate Conger
2/28/18 2:58pm

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


Loretta Lee, a software engineer who worked at Google for seven years before being fired in February 2016, is suing Google for sexual harassment, discrimination, retaliation, and wrongful termination she says she experienced at the company. Lee says in her lawsuit that the company’s “bro-culture” led to continuous harassment and that Google did nothing to intervene.

Lee’s lawsuit follows more than six months of Google grappling with the fallout from a memo written by a former employee, James Damore, in which he argued that women were biologically less fit for careers in tech than men. Damore’s memo, which was published by Gizmodo in August, received both support and condemnation from other Google employees and spurred internal debate about sexism, racism, and diversity within the company.

Throughout her time at Google, Lee was routinely sexually harassed, according to her lawsuit. She says her male coworkers spiked her drinks with alcohol and shot nerf guns at her regularly, and she says one male coworker messaged her to ask for a “horizontal hug.” At a holiday party, Lee’s lawsuit says, a male coworker slapped her across the face while he was intoxicated.

In one particularly alarming incident detailed in Lee’s lawsuit, she says she found a male coworker hiding under her desk when she returned after a short break. He refused to say what he was doing, the lawsuit says. “The incident with the co-worker under her desk unnerved her. Plaintiff [Lee] had never spoken to that co-worker before. She was frightened by his comment and believed he may have installed some type of camera or similar device under her desk,” the lawsuit says.

Google’s human resources department pressured Lee during a series of meetings to make a formal complaint about the incident, she says. But she was frightened that a complaint would only generate retaliation from her coworkers, she says—and video had emerged of the incident, her lawsuit states, so she didn’t think that she should be required to make a complaint. When she refused, HR cited her for “failing to cooperate,” her lawsuit states. Lee says she finally relented and made a complaint, which Google then failed to investigate, the lawsuit states.

Lee’s male coworkers retaliated against her after the complaint, her lawsuit says. They refused to approve her code and stalled her projects, she says, making it more difficult for her to succeed at work.

“Not only did Google fail to prevent severe and pervasive sexual harassment in Plaintiff’s workplace, but the repeated and awkward meetings that Human Resources forced Plaintiff to attend led her group to retaliate against her in the very way she feared,” the lawsuit states. “Google’s failure to take appropriate remedial action is consistent with its pattern and practice of ignoring sexual harassment in the workplace, making no significant efforts to take corrective action, and punishing the victim.”

Lee received positive performance reviews throughout her career at Google and placed highly in two internal hackathons, the lawsuit states. However, when she was terminated in February 2016, she says, she was told she was being fired for poor performance.

Shortly before being fired, Lee was in a car accident and requested medical leave—but Google didn’t accommodate her requests, her lawsuit says.


“We have strong policies against harassment in the workplace and review every complaint we receive. We take action when we find violations—including termination of employment,” a Google spokesperson said in a statement. Google disputes Lee’s allegations about her coworkers’ behavior and about how HR handled the case, the spokesperson added, noting that Google promptly investigates and responds to allegations of workplace misconduct.

The allegations in Lee’s lawsuit are reminiscent of those raised last year by Susan Fowler, an engineer who blew the whistle about systemic sexual harassment at Uber. Fowler, like Lee, received sexually suggestive messages from her coworkers and experienced retaliation from HR after she made the problem known.

Damore sued Google last month for firing him, alleging that the company routinely discriminated against conservative white men. Since his termination last August, Google employees who advocate for diversity at the company say that Damore’s supporters have weaponized the company’s HR department, filing spurious complaints that claim diversity activists are discriminating against white men.

Tim Chevalier, a former Google engineer, sued the company this month for discrimination, harassment, and wrongful termination after he was fired for internal message board posts that advocated diversity at the company.

“An important part of our culture is lively debate. But like any workplace, that doesn’t mean anything goes. All employees acknowledge our code of conduct and other workplace policies, under which promoting harmful stereotypes based on race or gender is prohibited,” a Google spokesperson said in response to Chevalier’s lawsuit.

Googlers have also had screenshots of their internal conversations leaked to alt-right websites, according to Wired. In the immediate aftermath of Damore’s memo, Google CEO Sundar Pichai planned to hold a town hall meeting to address the situation. However, the town hall was canceled after leaks to alt-right sites led employees to fear for their safety. The town hall was never rescheduled, sources tell Gizmodo, although the threats that led to its cancellation seemed to compound the need for Google management to address the situation.

Google’s response to its cultural conflict stands in stark contrast to Uber’s reaction to its own sexual harassment crisis last year. After Fowler’s blog post went viral, Uber hired former US attorney general Eric Holder to lead an investigation into its workplace culture and retained the law firm Perkins Coie to investigate 215 complaints of sexual harassment. Based on Perkins Coie’s findings, Uber fired more than 20 employees. Holder’s investigation found that Uber did not have consistent procedures in place for responding to harassment, and made sweeping recommendations for how Uber could improve its culture.

Google, by comparison, seems to have done relatively little to address the recent swell in employee complaints of harassment and discrimination. The company does have procedures in place to address complaints of sexual harassment and assault—in 2015, Google instated a program called Respect@ to educate its employees about acceptable workplace behavior and collect reports of behavior that crosses lines. Employees can submit anonymous reports through an internal site, and Google reports the number, type, and outcome of complaints to its employees through an annual Internal Investigation Report. Google declined to share recent data from its Internal Investigation Report with Gizmodo.

Updated 3/1 at 7:00pm with additional comment with Google, including the company’s dispute of Lee’s claims and information about its Respect@ program.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Harvey Weinstein: 'Beautiful Girls' Scribe Scott Rosenbe

Postby admin » Sat Nov 03, 2018 1:25 am

Google Faces Internal Backlash Over Handling of Sexual Harassment
by Kate Conger, Daisuke Wakabayashi and Katie Benner
The New York Times
October 31, 2018

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.


SAN FRANCISCO — Google is struggling to contain a growing internal backlash over its handling of sexual harassment and its workplace culture.

Over the past week, Sundar Pichai, Google’s chief executive, and Larry Page, a co-founder of Google and the chief executive of its parent company, Alphabet, have taken multiple steps to calm its agitated 94,000-person work force. The anger arose after The New York Times revealed last week that Google had paid millions of dollars in exit packages to male executives accused of harassment and stayed silent about their transgressions.

Google later said it had fired 48 people for sexual harassment over the last two years; none received an exit package. Mr. Page and Mr. Pichai also issued apologies, with Mr. Pichai later saying his initial statement “wasn’t enough” and apologizing again. And one of the executives whom Alphabet continued employing after he was accused of harassment resigned on Tuesday and did not obtain an exit package.

But employees’ dissatisfaction has not subsided. On Thursday, more than 1,500 — most of them women — plan to walk out of almost two dozen company offices around the world to protest the treatment, organizers said.

“We don’t want to feel that we’re unequal or we’re not respected anymore,” said Claire Stapleton, 33, a product marketing manager at Google’s YouTube who helped call for the walkout. “Google’s famous for its culture. But in reality we’re not even meeting the basics of respect, justice and fairness for every single person here.”

The walkout is a culmination of simmering tensions at a time when Silicon Valley workers have become more activist. Tech employees once moved in lock step with their leaders to make products that they said would change the world, but the industry has come under the spotlight for causing harm rather than good. That has led engineers, data scientists and others to increasingly question how their work is being used.

Employees at Microsoft and Amazon recently protested the companies’ work with federal immigration authorities when migrant children were being separated from their families at the Mexican border. And some employees at Facebook have complained that the social network is intolerant of different political perspectives.

Nowhere has the tech employee activism been more evident than at Google. Workers have pushed back this year against the company’s artificial intelligence work with the Pentagon, saying their work shouldn’t be used for warfare. Google eventually decided not to renew its contract with the Pentagon. Employees also rebuked Mr. Pichai and other executives for developing a search engine for China that would censor results. Since then, Google has not moved forward on a search product for China.

Google declined to comment.

The treatment of female employees has been an especially charged topic at Google. Just 31 percent of its global work force and about 26 percent of its executives are women. Google has also been sued by former employees and the Department of Labor, which claim that it underpaid women; the company has said it does not have a wage gap between male and female employees.

Google workers said other incidents had raised questions about the company’s attitude toward women. Last year, one engineer, James Damore, argued in an internal document that women were biologically less adept at engineering and that “personality differences” explained the shortage of female leaders at the company. After an outcry, Google executives rejected the memo and fired Mr. Damore.

At a staff meeting last year, Google’s founders, Mr. Page and Sergey Brin, also struggled to answer a question about who their female role models were, said two employees who saw a video of the meeting.

Mr. Brin tried to recall the name of a woman he had recently met at a company event who had impressed him, the people said. Mr. Page eventually reminded Mr. Brin that the woman’s name was Gloria Steinem, the feminist writer. Mr. Page said his hero was Ruth Porat, the chief financial officer of Google and Alphabet, said the people, who were not authorized to speak publicly.

Last week, The Times reported that Google had paid Andy Rubin, the creator of the Android mobile software, a $90 million exit package even after the company concluded that a harassment claim against him was credible. (Mr. Rubin has denied any misconduct and has said the report of his compensation is a “wild exaggeration.”) Google also paid millions of dollars in an exit package to another executive who was accused of harassment, and continued employing a third despite a harassment claim.

Google’s workers were outraged. They immediately raised questions at a staff meeting with executives last Thursday about how the company approaches sexual harassment.

“I know this is really an exceptionally painful story for some of you, and I’m really sorry for that,” Mr. Page said at the time.

The meeting did little to quell the anger. On Friday, Ms. Stapleton said, she created an internal mailing list to organize a walkout. More than 200 employees joined over the weekend, she said, and the numbers have since grown to more than 1,500.

On Tuesday, Richard DeVaul, one of the Alphabet executives who The Times revealed was accused of harassment, resigned from the company. He did not receive an exit package, according to a company spokeswoman.

That same day, Mr. Pichai sent an apologetic email to employees saying he would support this week’s protest. He said that some workers had already raised constructive ideas of how to improve policies around harassment and that he hoped to “turn these ideas into action,” according to the email, which was obtained by The Times.

Employees organizing the walkout have called on Google to end the practice of private arbitration — which requires people to waive their right to sue and often includes confidentiality agreements — in cases of sexual assault and harassment. They also are demanding publication of a transparency report on instances of sexual harassment, more disclosure of salaries and compensation, an employee representative on the company’s board and a chief diversity officer who could make recommendations directly to the board.

Other employees said they were disappointed that senior executives such as David C. Drummond, Alphabet’s chief legal officer, who had a child with a female subordinate, and Mr. Brin, who had a public extramarital relationship with an employee, remained in influential positions. Some raised questions about whether it was appropriate for Eric Schmidt, the company’s former chief executive and chairman, to remain on Alphabet’s board after former and current employees said he had retained a mistress as a company consultant.


Thursday’s walkout is set to begin in Google’s Tokyo office and then circle the globe, with employees leaving work around 11 a.m. in their time zones, Ms. Stapleton said. People can choose whether or not to return to work, she said.

“While Google has championed the language of diversity and inclusion, substantive actions to address systemic racism, increase equity and stop sexual harassment have been few and far between. ENOUGH,” organizers of the walkout wrote on an internal website, which was viewed by The Times. “Time’s up at Google.”

Kate Conger and Daisuke Wakabayashi reported from San Francisco, and Katie Benner from Washington.

Follow Kate Conger, Daisuke Wakabayashi and Katie Benner on Twitter: @kateconger, @daiwaka and @ktbenner.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: Harvey Weinstein: 'Beautiful Girls' Scribe Scott Rosenbe

Postby admin » Sat Nov 03, 2018 1:37 am

A trip to Cabo, an allegation of sexual assault, and 'a culture of dishonesty': Inside the downfall of the founding CEO of $1.9 billion startup Apttus
by Becky Peterson
Business Insider
November 1, 2018

NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT

YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.



Kirk Krappe, the longtime CEO of $1.86 billion startup Apttus, left the company in July. Two months after Krappe’s abrupt departure, Apttus was acquired by Thoma Bravo, a Chicago private-equity firm.

Sexual harassment and inappropriate relationships were rampant at the highest levels of Apttus, according to documents and several former employees and insiders Business Insider spoke with.

Krappe left the company after the settlement of a claim of sexual assault at a February company retreat. The claim against Krappe was described to Business Insider by several people familiar with the matter.

In a recent letter to David Murphy, the Apttus executive chairman installed by Thoma Bravo, a former Apttus employee describes a place overrun by fear, bullying, and discrimination — and hints at more forthcoming legal claims.


When employees showed up to work at Apttus’ San Mateo headquarters on July 2, they were shocked to learn that the startup’s longtime CEO, Kirk Krappe, was no longer at the company.

Krappe, whose faint British accent and pocket-square outfits made him stand out in Silicon Valley’s landscape of fleece vests, cofounded Apttus in 2006 after a career spent at Bain & Co, Oracle, and several enterprise startups.

He was the face and voice of the company. Just a few weeks earlier, Krappe was onstage at the company’s annual user conference delivering one of his trademark “free-form” speeches. These often began with an abstract history lesson (topics included human evolution and Turkish archaeology) and eventually segued into Quote-to-Cash, a sales software, Apttus’ signature product.

It didn’t take long before rumors about Krappe’s disappearance were swirling through the company’s offices. There had been a booze-filled sales retreat in Cabo. There were allegations of sexual assault. Had Krappe been forced out, people wondered?

The story about Cabo was just one of many worrisome allegations involving Krappe that were coming to a head around the time, and which ultimately would suggest that the tech entrepreneur’s old-world charm and erudite air might be concealing a pattern of questionable behavior.

With promises of an eventual IPO, Krappe sold employees, customers, and investors on a Silicon Valley dream that in hindsight appeared to have been only loosely based in reality.

Instead of a hot IPO-bound startup, the company Krappe created was by a number of accounts a lawless place where sexual harassment and inappropriate relationships were rampant at the highest levels, according to several former employees and insiders Business Insider spoke with and according to legal documents.

Misdeeds such as padding expense reports and promising clients nonexistent products were encouraged, the people said, and any voices of dissent were swiftly silenced.

At a time when reports of inappropriate behavior among executives at high-profile tech companies from Google to Uber have come to light, the story of Apttus is more than just another disturbing example of alleged sexual misconduct in the male-dominated technology business.

The startup’s still unfolding drama, if the allegations are true, shows how pervasively a company can be infected by toxic behavior once it’s taken root at the top of the organization, and how easily it is allowed to happen in Silicon Valley.

Big-name backers from Salesforce Ventures to ICONiQ Capital to IBM’s venture arm invested in Apttus during Krappe’s tenure, even as his behavior — including having a child outside of his marriage with a manager at the company — raised eyebrows throughout the organization.

Apttus’ last venture round in September 2017 valued the company at $1.86 billion. Salesforce, whose founder, Marc Benioff, is an outspoken advocate for stamping out sexism in the workplace, declined to comment, as did IBM. ICONiQ Capital, which is closely associated with Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg, both prominent supporters of the #MeToo movement, did not return requests for comment. Zuckerberg and Sandberg declined to comment.

Two months after Krappe’s departure, Apttus sold a majority stake to Thoma Bravo, a Chicago private-equity firm with offices in San Francisco.

Multiple lawsuits

It’s unclear whether Thoma Bravo was aware of the allegations surrounding Krappe during the time of the acquisition. But while the problematic CEO was gone by the time Thoma Bravo announced the deal, some of the problems created during Krappe’s reign are likely to live on.

Several claims involving allegations of harassment or a hostile work environment are in various stages of negotiations, Business Insider has learned, and there are three lawsuits from former employees who claim that Krappe had misled them about the health and size of Apttus’ business.

And in a recent letter sent to David Murphy, the Apttus executive chairman installed by Thoma Bravo, in October, a former Apttus employee hinted at more forthcoming legal claims.

The private-equity firm has not disclosed how much it paid to acquire its majority stake in Apttus, which has raised about $400 million in funding over the years. In a news release announcing the deal, Thoma Bravo touted the “operational excellence” it would bring to Apttus, which makes software to helps businesses manage revenues and customer relationships.

Representatives from Apttus declined to comment. Thoma Bravo did not respond to a request for comment.

A night of heavy drinking at the hotel bar

The claim that preceded Krappe’s departure was made by a 26-year-old rising star on Apttus’ business-development team who, along with her aunt, attended a February retreat in Mexico that Apttus hosted for high-performing sales personnel.

The Presidents Club event, as Apttus called the company getaway, took place at the One&Only Palmilla resort near Cabo San Lucas, a coastal property that to many is the epitome of paradise. Located 30 minutes from downtown Cabo, the beachfront is lined with palm trees and beach chairs. Its bright-blue infinity pool is an Instagram influencer’s dream with its dramatic views of where the Gulf of California meets the Pacific Ocean.

It was there, after a night of heavy drinking at the hotel bar, that Krappe allegedly followed the business-development employee back to her hotel room and sexually assaulted her.

The claim against Krappe, which was described to Business Insider by multiple people familiar with the events, was settled outside of court in early June. A large sum of money changed hands, and both Krappe and the plaintiff left the company at the time of the settlement. Gloria Allred, who represented the plaintiffs on the case, declined to comment.

Krappe did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Bikinis, massages, and ‘sexulence’

For some employees, signs of dysfunction and unprofessional conduct were routine at Apttus.

In early 2015, people at the company noticed that one of their colleagues was pregnant. The late-20s blonde, who managed the global partnerships and business-development teams at Apttus, had started showing. Though she was tight-lipped about her relationship with Krappe, most people at the company thought it was his child, sources told Business Insider.

Krappe, who was in his mid-50s at the time, was still legally married to the mother of his four oldest children. But the newly minted couple got engaged and started raising their newborn daughter as a family.

People felt scandalized, but it wasn’t just because of the affair. Krappe’s fiancée moved up quickly at Apttus, and eventually managed a team called the Salesforce Excellence Team, known by some internally as the “sexulence team” because it was made up exclusively of “very pretty girls.”

It was that team’s job to fly around the country to host social events with salespeople at Salesforce, a crucial Apttus partner at the time and an investor in the startup.

That team, multiple sources said, was liberal with its expenses. Sources told Business Insider that manicures and massages would be documented as team-bonding expenses. Luxurious dinners between two Apttus employees would be documented as four-person client dinners with nonexistent Salesforce employees. In at least one instance, bikinis and beach chairs got expensed on a trip to Florida.

“We were encouraged to spend money on anything, and it would be approved,” one former team employee said.

Employees on other teams took note of the spending, and of the fiancée’s special status at the company. One employee on the fiancée’s team went to HR and blew the whistle about the spending. Not long after, that employee was asked to leave the company, according to people familiar with the matter. Krappe’s fiancée did not return requests for comment.

“It’s like a zoo, and you either bite or you’ll get bitten,” another former employee said. “I’ve never worked at a company like this ever. It’s strange.”

A meeting at the fish market


But the alleged misdeeds at Apttus went a lot deeper than just expense reports.

In mid-2017, Apttus was hit with two lawsuits from former employees who both alleged that executives at Apttus, including Krappe, lied about the company’s sales pipeline, product readiness, and command structure to get them to join the company. A third suit, on behalf of a former general manager and vice president William Veiga, is pending.

The first two suits were filed on behalf of Elizabeth Baker and Marco De La Cuesta, high flyers in the enterprise-sales world. Baker had previously worked for Oracle and both spent time at SAP. They took managerial roles on the sales team at Apttus in late 2015, and were terminated by the board in June 2016.

Both complaints allege that they were fired over their refusal “to engage in the requested illegal and unethical conduct, and otherwise engage in a culture of dishonesty and corruption.”


In her complaint, Baker describes meeting Krappe for lunch at the Fish Market in San Mateo before she took the job, and being told by Krappe that Apttus was experiencing “unprecedented growth in large enterprise companies.”

In their respective lawsuits, both Baker and De La Cuesta allege that Krappe sold them on Apttus as a company with a $400 million sales pipeline, but that pipeline didn’t exist. He also sold them on key customers, including Intel, Clorox, GE, HPE/HPI, and McKesson, and both allege that parts of the customer base were fictionalized or misrepresented.

In the case of Intel, the Silicon Valley chip giant, both suits allege that Apttus sought to sell a product that didn’t yet exist. Intel grew concerned that something was wrong “after extensive suspicious delays and excuses from Apttus,” according to the complaints.

It all came to a head in a meeting with the team, when Intel asked directly if the products it had “purchased had actually been developed, and if other Apttus customers were currently using the products today, in an actual production environment,” according to the complaints.

One team member deferred to another, who told Intel they had nothing to worry about. Later, the first team member said that he refused to answer their question because “his wife worked at Intel and ‘he did not want to lie,'” the complaint said.

Intel declined to comment.

‘Devalued, bullied, and treated like dirt’

Krappe’s credibility among some employees began to suffer as his long-promised IPO never materialized.

For two years, Krappe had told employees and the public that Apttus would IPO imminently. A $55 million funding round in late September 2017 meant Apttus was flush with cash, but employees were starting to lose hope that they would ever see a big payout on the equity that many were offered as part of their pay packages.

Krappe told TechCrunch that Apttus would IPO in 2016 if it didn’t get bought, and, later that year, he told MarketWatch that the company intended to go public in 2017. In October 2017, Bloomberg reported that Apttus hired Goldman Sachs to manage the offering.

With so much compensation wrapped up in equity, the IPO was highly personal to employees. But when staff members inquired into the delay, one person said, management would claim that the company just wasn’t ready, and would invoke the IPO quiet period as a reason they couldn’t explain the situation more in depth.

“We’d go to all-hands meetings where he’d speak and try to be inspirational,” one former employee said of Krappe. “He always talked about being a team and being on a rocket. When you hear something repetitively, you’re, like, ‘This is something I’ve heard over and over.'”

The poor employee morale has outlived Krappe within Apttus.

In a recent letter to David Murphy, the Apttus executive chairman installed by Thoma Bravo, a former Apttus employee describes a place overrun by fear, bullying, and discrimination, and hints at more forthcoming legal claims. The author of the letter, Kyle Bouchard, was employee 33 at the startup and had moved up to vice president of strategic accounts. He resigned from the company soon after its acquisition in September.

“As a human being, you only can take so much of this brutality and for me, I chose not to be a part of a company where employees are devalued, bullied, and treated like dirt,” Bouchard wrote in the letter obtained by Business Insider.

The letter singled out Krappe’s handpicked chief strategy officer, Raj Verma, who is now COO, for many of the ongoing problems. According to insiders, Verma and Krappe worked closely together until the spring, when things came to a head. Bouchard declined to comment.

Verma did not return a request for comment.

‘Never give up’

Whether Krappe will attempt to return to the business world is unclear. Business Insider is not aware of any criminal charges filed against him as a result of the alleged assault.

On the February night of the Presidents Club award ceremony in Cabo, just hours after the alleged sexual assault, Krappe and the rest of Apttus team headed to a farmhouse restaurant called Flora Farms, known for frequent celebrity guests such as Jennifer Aniston.

During the dinner, Krappe took the stage to pass out trophies to his star employees, according to people who were present. In the background, a video projected on the wall played Krappe’s biography, tracing his life from his roots in Africa to the founding of Apttus. The video ends with Krappe’s youngest daughter, now a toddler, running up and jumping into his arms during a staff photo in San Mateo.

In Swahili, and then English, words flash across the screen: “Never give up.”

As the video played, the audience could see Krappe well up with tears.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 36183
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

PreviousNext

Return to The First Sex (All Embryos are Girls)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests