Geno being sued

[HuskyNan]

Coach K is coaching NBA players and Geno is coach WNBA players. I am not sure that I see the difference since both are affiliated with the NBA. The chances of coach K going to the NBA are about the same as Geno going to the WNBA.

LOL, you aren't equating the multi-gazillion dollar cash cow NBA with the WNBA, are you?

 

[easttexastrash]

LOL, you aren't equating the multi-gazillion dollar cash cow NBA with the WNBA, are you?

I am saying that Geno would have as much influence with the security detail for his team as Coach K would with the security detail of his team. I suspect that if either said that they had an issue with the security detail that they would have a certain amount of influence.

 

[Icebear]

Was she on the detail to the World Games?

 

[easttexastrash]

Was she on the detail to the World Games?

That is my question. I would like to know how many times since the alleged incident has she been assigned to provide security for team USA while Geno was coaching. If she provided security multiple times I would find it very difficult to believe that Geno has suddenly developed a level of discomfort with her.

The real question is going to be if there is any evidence that Geno asked that she be removed from providing security. If there is not documentation of him making a request then he is home free. If there is evidence of him requesting that she be removed then there will need to be a really good reason behind his request since she apparently performed her security detail well enough in the 2004 and 2008 Olympics to continue to be assigned to Team USA up until March.

 

[Icebear]

That is my question. I would like to know how many times since the alleged incident has she been assigned to provide security for team USA while Geno was coaching. If she provided security multiple times I would find it very difficult to believe that Geno has suddenly developed a level of discomfort with her.

The real question is going to be if there is any evidence that Geno asked that she be removed from providing security. If there is not documentation of him making a request then he is home free.

Unless in those past events, such as, in 2010, there has been a pattern of issues impacting management of the team. If so, someone might want to minimize such distractions for the Olympics.

 

[meyers7]

OC's generalization is not true. It's completely untrue. A really really low percentage of sexual assault cases are false, like less than 3 percent.

..

Doesn't make what OC said untrue. You may need to read his post again.

 

[meyers7]

You've got a very very small sample size in a unique community with its own rules (eg, a college).

Making inferences based on such limited data to the broader population seems more than a stretch.

His experience is his experience. What do you propose he bases it on?

 

[5sidedlarry]

There's no such thing as innocent until proven guilty in public opinion anymore. Look at Duke, those guys were hung before they were even given a trial. Kobe Bryant as well. In the public's eye, an accusation means you're guilty.

that is my point,all you have to do is start a rumor or go thru the legal way and you are guilty

 

[easttexastrash]

His experience is his experience. What do you propose he bases it on?

Our experiences have much more influence on us than statistics that we read in reports.

 

[meyers7]

Our experiences have much more influence on us than statistics that we read in reports.

Agreed.

 

[Vowelguy]

His experience is his experience. What do you propose he bases it on?

So if I've met only one black person in my life and he was jerk, it's therefore ok for me to conclude that most black people are jerks?

 

[5sidedlarry]

Folks, I ask you please not to speculate on what might have happened in 2009. Let's not create false scenarios.

you don't have to do anything he has to prove himself innocent and i know that is wrong but that is the way the world is

 

[Replicant]

In the not to distant past I reported my Director for verbally abusing one of my employees while I was on vacation. I work in a "right to work" state and within two months I was fired for "job performance" issues in a job that I had been doing quite well for 5 years. I also "suspect" that I was fired as retaliation but I have no proof.

Sorry to hear that Tex. But you "suspect" and don't know for sure...correct? Did you sue for discrimination based on your suspicions? Was there a potential issue with your job performance? Be honest.

I'm sure you acknowledge there are countless frivolous and fraudulent harrassment and discrimination claims made all the time.

I'll share a quick story from the bleeding edge. I was an exec with a Fortune 1000 telecom in Manhattan during the dotcom boom (1995-2002). There were hundreds of telecoms and ISPs operating during that time and everybody knew everybody because folks were going from one company to the next in order to staff up quickly. Companies had sprung up overnight and SOPs and other operational procedures were developed on the fly. I came in at the end of this tale, as I had oversight responsibilty of the review and modifications of SOPs as a result.

A serial scammer had targeted companies in the sector. She'd come in for job interviews and would leave claiming to have been sexually harrassed during the interview process. Settlements were made in at least (6) companies that were identified - there may have been more. Settlements were made in the range of $40k to $125k. This was all discovered one night when a group of sales managers, friends from various former companies had gotten together for a brew after work. The subject of (and I paraphrase)..."did you hear what happened to Joe over at company ABC"? That immediately led to the discovery of the common theme. The discussion trickled up the executive chain, the scam got pieced together and the authorities were alerted. She'd stung the companies that could be accounted for, to the tune of approx. $350k+!

It's outrageous and distructive when frivolous and fraudulent cases are brought for profit, or worse, to exact revenge on a company or an individual's reputation and career. They also do a gross disservice to valid claims of abuse.

 

[meyers7]

So if I've met only one black person in my life and he was jerk, it's therefore ok for me to conclude that most black people are jerks?

Doesn't matter right or wrong (ok or not). Your experience is your experience. So yes if your experience is black people are jerks, then you would probably conclude most black people are jerks. If your experience is women are preyed upon by men, then you would probably conclude most men prey upon women.

Your experience is your experience. Pretty simple.

 

[justML]

There's no such thing as innocent until proven guilty in public opinion anymore. Look at Duke, those guys were hung before they were even given a trial. Kobe Bryant as well. In the public's eye, an accusation means you're guilty.

Which is why I refuse to jump on that bandwagon.

 

[Vowelguy]

Doesn't matter right or wrong (ok or not). Your experience is your experience. So yes if your experience is black people are jerks, then you would probably conclude most black people are jerks. If your experience is women are preyed upon by men, then you would probably conclude most men prey upon women.

Your experience is your experience. Pretty simple.

Leaving aside the definition of prejudice (which I'm sure the mods would prefer we avoid) ... there's a BIG difference from describing your experience to therefore concluding that most fall into a particular category. There's something to be said for (a) recognizing when your experience may be a small non-representative sample, and (b) learning about other people's experiences before drawing a final conclusion.

 

[Icebear]

So if I've met only one black person in my life and he was jerk, it's therefore ok for me to conclude that most black people are jerks?

Sadly, that is very often exactly what happens. Until one has a greater number of experiences one does tend to generalize to the broader population. It may not be rational but it is extremely normal. As OC notes the direct circumstances of the situation, also, impact the outcome. As much as I can sympathize with the desire to remain anonymous it prevents a defendent from exercising an essential right of confronting one's accuser. Ex. It was ruled last week that all of the accusers in the Sandusky trial would need to give testimony under their own name on the very basis.

 

[Replicant]

Agreed.

How ya doing? I get a big smile every time I see you posting!

The Cesspool needs you back brother...use it for rehab! Or defibrillator in case of emergency!

 

[easttexastrash]

Here is a story that was recently in the news in Denver.

A well known and respected, retired judge, who has a courthouse named after him, was recently arrested for trading meth and judicial "favors" to you men in exchange for sex. Not one person who knew him could believe that this judge could be guilty of such a thing. Unfortunately, it turned out to be true.

My point is that we must all wait to see the facts. Hopefully, there is no evidence of this woman reporting this incident back in 2009. If there is no evidence of this alleged incident being reporting 3 years ago then Geno is home free. If there is evidence of this being reported then the water becomes considerably murkier.

 

[ucdt3]

What I don't understand is why then would she have been part of the security detail at the 2010 Worlds in the Czech Republic (according to John Altavilla tweets) if he truly was using his power as a means to retaliate for her rejection?? So instead he uses it for the 2012 Olympics, something doesn't fit right for me. I will wait until (as close as possible to) the truth emerges before condemning either side.

 

[easttexastrash]

There's no such thing as innocent until proven guilty in public opinion anymore. Look at Duke, those guys were hung before they were even given a trial. Kobe Bryant as well. In the public's eye, an accusation means you're guilty.

Were they hanged or hung? That topic sounds familiar.

 

[easttexastrash]

What I don't understand is why then would she have been part of the security detail at the 2010 Worlds in the Czech Republic (according to John Altavilla tweets) if he truly was using his power as a means to retaliate for her rejection?? So instead he uses it for the 2012 Olympics, something doesn't fit right for me. I will wait until (as close as possible to) the truth emerges before condemning either side.

So, in the minds of BYers, which is the bigger question here? Is there more concern over claim about the incident or the claim of Geno using his influence to get her removed.

 

[alexrgct]

So, in the minds of BYers, which is the bigger question here? Is there more concern over claim about the incident or the claim of Geno using his influence to get her removed.

Both are bad, but the incident itself as alleged is what concerns me. Getting someone fired or reassigned for inappropriate reasons will get you nominated vice-president. No big deal. Being the most visible man in women's sports taking a physically entitled position towards women? That's seriously bad mojo.

Women's sports needs good coaches, including good male coaches. I can't imagine the kind of discussions this could spark. Right now, I'm just going to let this unfold as it may and come to my own conclusions once it has.

 

[speedoo]

Interesting that in the NY Times article 2 players on the team met with this woman the next day after the alleged incident took place and ratted out their coach for saying something deragatory about her? Are those players still on the team I wonder? That's gotta make for awkwardness going forward. Anyone want to bet the 2 players are not from UConn? This is a situation where Geno being Geno can backfire. Other players are not used to him and his style of humor.

Actually, in the complaint there is no mention of "2 players" saying anything. There is a completely different situation described in the complaint.. If the plaintiff has provided 2 different versions of what happened, it does not help their case.

 

[CL82]

if Tolbert confirms that Hardwick said something to him in 2009, then Geno could have a problem.

Meh, Tolbert might have a problem. Geno, less so.