Aerial

Quote
From previous readings it rather makes it sound like he made it clear to play ball or be out, and that is abuse of his position.
How clear depop?  I think this is an important question.  People can threaten "if you don't do this then this will happen".  But will it ever happen if you don't do this in the first place?  Who knows.  Sometimes I believe you need to stand your ground, be assertive and while it may happen your career may not be as profitable if you had had sex or whatever with the boss, hey, you stood up for what was right in your mind.  Is it really that difficult?
"Canadian football does in fact have 4 downs, its just that as Canadians we are very polite and punt on the third down" -John Candy, SCTV

EastVanMark

Well somebody's credibility is about to go down the tubes:

Moon claims sexual harassment accuser demanded $3 million to remain quiet


“We got a demand letter that says they want $3 million and that all these different accusations that she made up, ‘We’re going public with this if you don’t pay us $3 million,’”

Moon says the letter, e-mailed Nov. 18, stated, “If you don’t pay $3 million by Dec. 5, we’re going to go public with these allegations.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/columnist/bell/2017/12/21/warren-moon-claims-sexual-harassment-accuser-demanded-3-million/975308001/
She was demoted after addressing inappropriate behavior.....she wants to be compensated for that....hate to break it to you, but that is exactly what a civil case is...going after cash as a repercussion to those actions.  So she basically said pay up now or we get it from you in court.  This is 100% normal in the process of Civil litigation and almost all situations are handled like this.  There is no "criminal" consequences directly from a Civil case, though a judge may lay charges through its course.

"all these different accusations that she made up" is a comment from Moon's party, NOT the letter.  

Why do people go after things like this in Civil cases...
1 - to get compensation, which also pays the huge legal fees
2 - it provides the perception of guilt to the public
3 - In a very simplistic way of looking at it, a Civil Law case only needs to prove damage, while a Common Law case needs to prove guilt.  Assuming she documented going to the CEO and being demoted (which would seem pretty cut and dry) this should be a pretty easy win.


The pre existing relationship may cause muddy waters....it doesnt change the fact that he was her boss and acting inappropriately.  If she went above him she clearly was not comfortable with the situation.  From previous readings it rather makes it sound like he made it clear to play ball or be out, and that is abuse of his position.
First off you have no idea that she was demoted simply because she came forward with this complaining about Moon. Hate to break it to you but That is 100 percent speculation on your part. She has claimed this. This has not been proven-anywhere, by anyone, at anytime. 

Second, I’m Well aware what is involved in civil cases thank you. Hate to break it to you but in my post I just said that somebody is going to lose credibility. That could mean either Moon or her. Please note that this has nothing, repeat nothing to do with a potential court case. (Be it civil or any other kind of arbitration). 
There are people with no credibility in court every single day. Some even manage to win. That doesn’t mean they’re actually telling the truth.  

And regarding what she’s “basically saying” Again hate to break it to you, but that is pure speculation on your behalf. You have no idea what was the exact wording of the letter. Your just guessing.  The fact that in one lime you point out how what was presented by moons camp was strictly coming from his side not the letter itself, yet you go on to do the exact same thing you are accussing his side of doing. 

And you also  State that because he was her boss he acted inappropriately. Again hate to break it to you, but that is your opinion, not fact. You have no inside information like anybody else as to the circumstances of their interactions what was the nature of their relationship and how things ended between them 

The fact is we have two people telling two different stories. Hence the comment that someone is about to lose credibility

brianjoxx

Well somebody's credibility is about to go down the tubes:

Moon claims sexual harassment accuser demanded $3 million to remain quiet


“We got a demand letter that says they want $3 million and that all these different accusations that she made up, ‘We’re going public with this if you don’t pay us $3 million,’”

Moon says the letter, e-mailed Nov. 18, stated, “If you don’t pay $3 million by Dec. 5, we’re going to go public with these allegations.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/columnist/bell/2017/12/21/warren-moon-claims-sexual-harassment-accuser-demanded-3-million/975308001/
She was demoted after addressing inappropriate behavior.....she wants to be compensated for that....hate to break it to you, but that is exactly what a civil case is...going after cash as a repercussion to those actions.  So she basically said pay up now or we get it from you in court.  This is 100% normal in the process of Civil litigation and almost all situations are handled like this.  There is no "criminal" consequences directly from a Civil case, though a judge may lay charges through its course.

"all these different accusations that she made up" is a comment from Moon's party, NOT the letter.  

Why do people go after things like this in Civil cases...
1 - to get compensation, which also pays the huge legal fees
2 - it provides the perception of guilt to the public
3 - In a very simplistic way of looking at it, a Civil Law case only needs to prove damage, while a Common Law case needs to prove guilt.  Assuming she documented going to the CEO and being demoted (which would seem pretty cut and dry) this should be a pretty easy win.


The pre existing relationship may cause muddy waters....it doesnt change the fact that he was her boss and acting inappropriately.  If she went above him she clearly was not comfortable with the situation.  From previous readings it rather makes it sound like he made it clear to play ball or be out, and that is abuse of his position.
First off you have no idea that she was demoted simply because she came forward with this complaining about Moon. Hate to break it to you but That is 100 percent speculation on your part. She has claimed this. This has not been proven-anywhere, by anyone, at anytime.

Second, I’m Well aware what is involved in civil cases thank you. Hate to break it to you but in my post I just said that somebody is going to lose credibility. That could mean either Moon or her. Please note that this has nothing, repeat nothing to do with a potential court case. (Be it civil or any other kind of arbitration).
There are people with no credibility in court every single day. Some even manage to win. That doesn’t mean they’re actually telling the truth.  

And regarding what she’s “basically saying” Again hate to break it to you, but that is pure speculation on your behalf. You have no idea what was the exact wording of the letter. Your just guessing.  The fact that in one lime you point out how what was presented by moons camp was strictly coming from his side not the letter itself, yet you go on to do the exact same thing you are accussing his side of doing.

And you also  State that because he was her boss he acted inappropriately. Again hate to break it to you, but that is your opinion, not fact. You have no inside information like anybody else as to the circumstances of their interactions what was the nature of their relationship and how things ended between them

The fact is we have two people telling two different stories. Hence the comment that someone is about to lose credibility
VERY well said

Aerial

depopulationINC

Well somebody's credibility is about to go down the tubes:

Moon claims sexual harassment accuser demanded $3 million to remain quiet


“We got a demand letter that says they want $3 million and that all these different accusations that she made up, ‘We’re going public with this if you don’t pay us $3 million,’”

Moon says the letter, e-mailed Nov. 18, stated, “If you don’t pay $3 million by Dec. 5, we’re going to go public with these allegations.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/columnist/bell/2017/12/21/warren-moon-claims-sexual-harassment-accuser-demanded-3-million/975308001/
She was demoted after addressing inappropriate behavior.....she wants to be compensated for that....hate to break it to you, but that is exactly what a civil case is...going after cash as a repercussion to those actions.  So she basically said pay up now or we get it from you in court.  This is 100% normal in the process of Civil litigation and almost all situations are handled like this.  There is no "criminal" consequences directly from a Civil case, though a judge may lay charges through its course.

"all these different accusations that she made up" is a comment from Moon's party, NOT the letter.  

Why do people go after things like this in Civil cases...
1 - to get compensation, which also pays the huge legal fees
2 - it provides the perception of guilt to the public
3 - In a very simplistic way of looking at it, a Civil Law case only needs to prove damage, while a Common Law case needs to prove guilt.  Assuming she documented going to the CEO and being demoted (which would seem pretty cut and dry) this should be a pretty easy win.


The pre existing relationship may cause muddy waters....it doesnt change the fact that he was her boss and acting inappropriately.  If she went above him she clearly was not comfortable with the situation.  From previous readings it rather makes it sound like he made it clear to play ball or be out, and that is abuse of his position.
First off you have no idea that she was demoted simply because she came forward with this complaining about Moon. Hate to break it to you but That is 100 percent speculation on your part. She has claimed this. This has not been proven-anywhere, by anyone, at anytime.

Second, I’m Well aware what is involved in civil cases thank you. Hate to break it to you but in my post I just said that somebody is going to lose credibility. That could mean either Moon or her. Please note that this has nothing, repeat nothing to do with a potential court case. (Be it civil or any other kind of arbitration).
There are people with no credibility in court every single day. Some even manage to win. That doesn’t mean they’re actually telling the truth.  

And regarding what she’s “basically saying” Again hate to break it to you, but that is pure speculation on your behalf. You have no idea what was the exact wording of the letter. Your just guessing.  The fact that in one lime you point out how what was presented by moons camp was strictly coming from his side not the letter itself, yet you go on to do the exact same thing you are accussing his side of doing.

And you also  State that because he was her boss he acted inappropriately. Again hate to break it to you, but that is your opinion, not fact. You have no inside information like anybody else as to the circumstances of their interactions what was the nature of their relationship and how things ended between them

The fact is we have two people telling two different stories. Hence the comment that someone is about to lose credibility
Yes, I am sure that when she went to the CEO and he said they would handle it after the trip and she was immediately demoted upon return is a happy coincidence lol.  There is no way that she went to the CEO and followed all of this up with legal action without something to back that up.  If she did she is one of the dumber people to hold a doctorate degree.

It is not speculation.  She said pay or we go public and take it to court.  She did exactly that.  Moon's paraphrasing was pretty clear
“We got a demand letter that says they want $3 million and that all these different accusations that she made up, ‘We’re going public with this if you don’t pay us $3 million,’” Moon, 61, told USA TODAY Sports. “This was sent on my birthday, so I know this was personal.”
The bold is her (paraphrased), the Italic is him.  That is how quotes work.  He is stating that they asked for 3mil but insisting it is all made up (yet later confirms much is true, simply denying there was any job pressure on it...that is not how things work....that is abuse of power), then paraphrasing.  So no, I am not speculating...we know stuff happened and the burden will be on Moon to prove that there was consent.


Moon said this stuff happened.  That is inappropriate. In his eyes it is not.  My money says a judge will disagree. When you make requests/demands of an employee there is an automatic inference that not complying will have negative consequences.  If you are someone's boss you simply can't do stuff like this, and he admits to much of it, so again, not speculation.  He may not have intended for it to be job pressure if she didn't comply, but because he is her boss there automatically is.  Any court will see it that way.  

Moon may have felt that because it was a pre-existing relationship and it was the way things were before that it was fine.  Unfortunately that is not the way stuff works.  He messed up by hiring her and maintaining a relationship where all of the sudden he was the authority.

Also, based on your previous comments in this thread it is pretty clear where your view on it rests unless something has changed since:
Quote
2 questions: how do you end up in the same room on business trips?
                  why did you pack lingerie when you went on the "business" trip?

This reeks to high heaven of someone who made the choice to take part in certain activities, then when things didn't work out the way she liked, she came up with a trumped up accusation
if it has, my apologies, but one generally puts 2 and 2 together based on previous comments on a subject.


Tort does not require proving of guilt, only circumstantial/reasonable doubt and then that it adversely effected the person.  Assuming she can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she went to the CEO (again, I would be shocked if she couldn't...talking to friends/family about it at the time likely holds up as reasonable proof) about these issues, her position was lowered.  Therefore it is clear that damage occurred.  He has already stated that acts happened  
This is an Intentional Tort (Battery).  
His outs are:
- Proving she gave consent / never said no.  Because she may have in the past doesn't hold water.
- She contributed to the situation.  Because of their past, I highly doubt she would get full settlement, but she would still get something
- that she is lying....he can't really say that because he admitted stuff.  If they have a big file on her showing she was on the way out then that might hold up.  That seems unlikely...she was there 3.5 months, they would have just canned her.

in other words all she has to do is:
- show that she had losses from the situation...if she can prove she went to the CEO that is a slam dunk because she was demoted...perception is everything....doesn't matter why she was if she can prove that.
- Prove that the actions happened...Moon already did that.

The pre-existing relationship probably hurts her take-home, but extremely unlikely her case.

I feel bad for his situation, because it sounds like he gave her a shot in part because of their relationship...not the only reason, she was clearly building her career in the past, but perhaps giving a break to someone he cared about...he may have had some feelings mixed in there that it gave him some control over her, but that is speculation and doesn't matter, I am sure there was something more there.  Why she changed her mind on that relationship doesn't really matter.  She may have been using him and wanted out, she may have simply decided she didn't want that any more, she may have been uncomfortable with where it was leading...again, doesn't matter.  These are the consequences of mixing personal relationship and business and why you don't do it.  The moment he becomes her boss and has the ability to sway her career he is pooched if she says no and he pressures her in the slightest.

EastVanMark

Well somebody's credibility is about to go down the tubes:

Moon claims sexual harassment accuser demanded $3 million to remain quiet


“We got a demand letter that says they want $3 million and that all these different accusations that she made up, ‘We’re going public with this if you don’t pay us $3 million,’”

Moon says the letter, e-mailed Nov. 18, stated, “If you don’t pay $3 million by Dec. 5, we’re going to go public with these allegations.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/columnist/bell/2017/12/21/warren-moon-claims-sexual-harassment-accuser-demanded-3-million/975308001/
She was demoted after addressing inappropriate behavior.....she wants to be compensated for that....hate to break it to you, but that is exactly what a civil case is...going after cash as a repercussion to those actions.  So she basically said pay up now or we get it from you in court.  This is 100% normal in the process of Civil litigation and almost all situations are handled like this.  There is no "criminal" consequences directly from a Civil case, though a judge may lay charges through its course.

"all these different accusations that she made up" is a comment from Moon's party, NOT the letter.  

Why do people go after things like this in Civil cases...
1 - to get compensation, which also pays the huge legal fees
2 - it provides the perception of guilt to the public
3 - In a very simplistic way of looking at it, a Civil Law case only needs to prove damage, while a Common Law case needs to prove guilt.  Assuming she documented going to the CEO and being demoted (which would seem pretty cut and dry) this should be a pretty easy win.


The pre existing relationship may cause muddy waters....it doesnt change the fact that he was her boss and acting inappropriately.  If she went above him she clearly was not comfortable with the situation.  From previous readings it rather makes it sound like he made it clear to play ball or be out, and that is abuse of his position.
First off you have no idea that she was demoted simply because she came forward with this complaining about Moon. Hate to break it to you but That is 100 percent speculation on your part. She has claimed this. This has not been proven-anywhere, by anyone, at anytime.

Second, I’m Well aware what is involved in civil cases thank you. Hate to break it to you but in my post I just said that somebody is going to lose credibility. That could mean either Moon or her. Please note that this has nothing, repeat nothing to do with a potential court case. (Be it civil or any other kind of arbitration).
There are people with no credibility in court every single day. Some even manage to win. That doesn’t mean they’re actually telling the truth.  

And regarding what she’s “basically saying” Again hate to break it to you, but that is pure speculation on your behalf. You have no idea what was the exact wording of the letter. Your just guessing.  The fact that in one lime you point out how what was presented by moons camp was strictly coming from his side not the letter itself, yet you go on to do the exact same thing you are accussing his side of doing.

And you also  State that because he was her boss he acted inappropriately. Again hate to break it to you, but that is your opinion, not fact. You have no inside information like anybody else as to the circumstances of their interactions what was the nature of their relationship and how things ended between them

The fact is we have two people telling two different stories. Hence the comment that someone is about to lose credibility
Yes, I am sure that when she went to the CEO and he said they would handle it after the trip and she was immediately demoted upon return is a happy coincidence lol.  There is no way that she went to the CEO and followed all of this up with legal action without something to back that up.  If she did she is one of the dumber people to hold a doctorate degree.

It is not speculation.  She said pay or we go public and take it to court.  She did exactly that.  Moon's paraphrasing was pretty clear
“We got a demand letter that says they want $3 million and that all these different accusations that she made up, ‘We’re going public with this if you don’t pay us $3 million,’” Moon, 61, told USA TODAY Sports. “This was sent on my birthday, so I know this was personal.”
The bold is her (paraphrased), the Italic is him.  That is how quotes work.  He is stating that they asked for 3mil but insisting it is all made up (yet later confirms much is true, simply denying there was any job pressure on it...that is not how things work....that is abuse of power), then paraphrasing.  So no, I am not speculating...we know stuff happened and the burden will be on Moon to prove that there was consent.


Moon said this stuff happened.  That is inappropriate. In his eyes it is not.  My money says a judge will disagree. When you make requests/demands of an employee there is an automatic inference that not complying will have negative consequences.  If you are someone's boss you simply can't do stuff like this, and he admits to much of it, so again, not speculation.  He may not have intended for it to be job pressure if she didn't comply, but because he is her boss there automatically is.  Any court will see it that way.  

Moon may have felt that because it was a pre-existing relationship and it was the way things were before that it was fine.  Unfortunately that is not the way stuff works.  He messed up by hiring her and maintaining a relationship where all of the sudden he was the authority.

Also, based on your previous comments in this thread it is pretty clear where your view on it rests unless something has changed since:
Quote
2 questions: how do you end up in the same room on business trips?
                  why did you pack lingerie when you went on the "business" trip?

This reeks to high heaven of someone who made the choice to take part in certain activities, then when things didn't work out the way she liked, she came up with a trumped up accusation
if it has, my apologies, but one generally puts 2 and 2 together based on previous comments on a subject.


Tort does not require proving of guilt, only circumstantial/reasonable doubt and then that it adversely effected the person.  Assuming she can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she went to the CEO (again, I would be shocked if she couldn't...talking to friends/family about it at the time likely holds up as reasonable proof) about these issues, her position was lowered.  Therefore it is clear that damage occurred.  He has already stated that acts happened  
This is an Intentional Tort (Battery).  
His outs are:
- Proving she gave consent / never said no.  Because she may have in the past doesn't hold water.
- She contributed to the situation.  Because of their past, I highly doubt she would get full settlement, but she would still get something
- that she is lying....he can't really say that because he admitted stuff.  If they have a big file on her showing she was on the way out then that might hold up.  That seems unlikely...she was there 3.5 months, they would have just canned her.

in other words all she has to do is:
- show that she had losses from the situation...if she can prove she went to the CEO that is a slam dunk because she was demoted...perception is everything....doesn't matter why she was if she can prove that.
- Prove that the actions happened...Moon already did that.

The pre-existing relationship probably hurts her take-home, but extremely unlikely her case.

I feel bad for his situation, because it sounds like he gave her a shot in part because of their relationship...not the only reason, she was clearly building her career in the past, but perhaps giving a break to someone he cared about...he may have had some feelings mixed in there that it gave him some control over her, but that is speculation and doesn't matter, I am sure there was something more there.  Why she changed her mind on that relationship doesn't really matter.  She may have been using him and wanted out, she may have simply decided she didn't want that any more, she may have been uncomfortable with where it was leading...again, doesn't matter.  These are the consequences of mixing personal relationship and business and why you don't do it.  The moment he becomes her boss and has the ability to sway her career he is pooched if she says no and he pressures her in the slightest.
Again, more speculation. What is your source that the CEO would "look into it" then promptly demoted her? From what the accuser said? Yup, no bias there or anything. ???  Also yes, yes, nobody EVER brings about flimsy lawsuits in hopes of getting a pay day. ::) Literally every lawsuit EVER brought forward is rooted in deep truth and honest intentions.  ;) Also, never realized someone with a doctorate can EVER do anything devious. Quick, someone release Ted Kaczynski. Afterall, he has a doctorate, so therefore he is incapable of wrongdoing.  

And yes it is speculation. Until you can provide a copy of the letter, it is 100% speculation. Actually, quotes work like this: its a quote if its directly what someone said at a any given time.

On the other hand, when someone takes a statement, and adds their own personal take on any given subject matter providing guesses as to motive, desired outcomes etc; that is a practice commonly known as: "Speculation."

Again, Moon did not admit that anything happened (so far). He simply confirmed they shared a bed. How, and why, and what happened while in bed is as of yet not known. Anybody guessing on these things is taking part in speculation. 


And it is not only Moons job to provide proof their was consent, it is also her job to prove that there wasn't consent.

Now, you can definitely suggest you think that Moon's behavior was inappropriate, and anyone is entitled to that, but you cannot state that is a fact because it is not been proven. Not even close as a matter of fact. Like I said before, we do not know what were the circumstances to how they ended up in bed together, what happened once they were there, and were those activities specifically linked to job status. Right now, we're a light year away from having the answers to those very important questions. 

Again, Moon never admitted to forcing her to sleep in the same bed with her. Neither has it been determined that it was specifically related to the accused's job status. He simply admitted they shared a bed. Perhaps they got a little too tipsy at the hotel bar and ended up sharing a bed together. So yes, to suggest that the bedroom sleeping arrangements was a factor in employment status, is the very definition of speculation.

Just because people engage in certain bedroom activities and they happen to work together, it doesn't automatically mean there is an abuse of power. Otherwise, I'm sure there are a lot of staff who attended Christmas parties, got drunk and a little too friendly with co-workers over the holidays who are sitting on pins and needles hoping a lawsuit isn't coming their way.

Regarding my personal position, yes it appears to me that this whole situation seems to be premeditated by someone who freely took part in a carnal relationship with a famous, wealthy individual, and is now looking to cash in. However, if it comes out (i.e. actually proven) that Moon did in fact attach a threat to employment as a result of this interaction, I would quickly do a 180 on the subject. 

In a civil court action, yes the bar goes way down for burden of proof. In a highly litigious society (such as the United States is), yes, sadly public perception does go a long way.  However, this doesn't mean that actual damage occurred. What she said to friends and family is somewhat irrelevant. Why? Because it is still her version of events and the motivations behind them. However this changes if the company cannot provide reasonable grounds for her demotion. Deciding to go to bed with someone of your own free will is not grounds for damages. Again, all we known as of right now, is they shared a bed together at some point. The circumstances surrounding that is yet to be discovered. Where the truth lies remains to be seen. What gets settled on in a civil court might be something different all together.    
  

 

 



Paolo X

Well somebody's credibility is about to go down the tubes:

Moon claims sexual harassment accuser demanded $3 million to remain quiet


“We got a demand letter that says they want $3 million and that all these different accusations that she made up, ‘We’re going public with this if you don’t pay us $3 million,’”

Moon says the letter, e-mailed Nov. 18, stated, “If you don’t pay $3 million by Dec. 5, we’re going to go public with these allegations.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/columnist/bell/2017/12/21/warren-moon-claims-sexual-harassment-accuser-demanded-3-million/975308001/
There is a great discussion below already and who is to say who is lying or in my view more realistically when it comes to such disputes, who is lying more and who is lying less.

The hush money extortion proposition is quite common and also a reality that is deliberately overlooked in media reporting. Of course such a reality does not mitigate or reduce the seriousness of allegations including of common sexual harassment, but a great many women in fact do jump into the fray to try and get their piece of the action after having second-thoughts after consenting to sexual advances.

Why am I so confident in saying that? I figure many will find such a claim appalling and insensitive, but I am not going to bother with sugar-coating the reality for them as do the otherwise witting and largely complicit media for the sheeple like overwhelmingly most of them.

All I can say is that I happen to know as an example some of the local word on the antics of Bill Cosby in Montgomery County, PA in the Philadelphia area, to which I am returning to live (or across the county line by footsteps to Bucks County perhaps) just like when I joined this forum in 2010. Many and not just a few of those women, again not to diminish Cosby's misdeeds and the plight of his greatest and true victims, only popped up again once the hush or other sums of money from Cosby ran out.

Much of the same has happened to many other men, and who is to say one way or the other for Warren Moon. At minimum, Moon exhibited vastly poor judgement in getting involved with a subordinate along such lines as also I believe a married man. And it is usually wrong to muddy the waters with subordinates at work as well as did Moon. You don't (blank) where you eat and all that folks.

Proof that it is not always wrong to mingle at work are all those couples whom we all know who met where they work or during the ordinary course of their jobs or business operations. I met my lady at work for example, but she was not a subordinate but rather a co-worker for a different contractor and a contractor's employee like me. Love can and does happen anywhere.

And this business in the mainstream media, dominated by those fools in Manhattan in the US, about post-Weinstein is arrogantly dismissive and so laughable. All of this misconduct has been going on wrongly for such a long time folks, and overwhelmingly most in the media and entertainment industry have participated and known all along and have conspired in condescending fashion to keep the masses out of the loop.
Best Regards, Paolo
 


Users Online

80 Guests, 7 Users (13 Spiders, 2 Hidden)

Users active in past 15 minutes:
Hamilton2005, rshmglsky, Onemoredork, fireeater, bobo82, Google (AdSense) (3), Google (10)

Most Online Today: 114. Most Online Ever: 489 (Nov 26 2017, 08:38 PM)