Sexual harassment cases are certainly not new in the arena of sports. There have been several high profile cases related to big and famous athletes sexually harassing women, whether in the hotel after party or at the job. The media has always played a big role in how we perceive the accused verse accuser. Whether the athlete be portrayed as a big evil aggressive monster-beast the general public is repulsed by or the woman as a money hungry *fan* that just got too crazy and was lucky that she got any attention at all, and now she just wants his money! Gender-based and racial stereotypes usually come to the forefront of the popular imagination.
Either way, sexual harassment cases are bad press for all people involved. As we have found here before, trying a case on blogs is not always productive, when you don't know all the facts of a case. So, while I was reading about this case in yesterday's New York Times, thinking oh noes, here we go again. Although this story hasn't gotten a ton of press and mostly I think people are sad the Knicks are continually not in good favor in the media.
Former basketball player Isiah Thomas (I used to love him when I was a kid, I mean LOVE!) is being sued by the former Vice President of marketing and business operations for the Knicks, Anucha Browne Sanders. Shortly after she filed the complaint, she was fired and is suing and one of her complaints is that she was fired because she brought up potentially being sexually harassed by Thomas.
A jury indicated yesterday that it had decided that Madison Square Garden and Knicks Coach Isiah Thomas sexually harassed a former marketing executive, but that it had not yet reached a verdict on all nine points of the lawsuit.In a note to United States District Court Judge Gerard E. Lynch, who read it in open court late yesterday afternoon, jurors said that they had decided eight of the points but could not reach agreement on whether Thomas should pay damages to the former executive, Anucha Browne Sanders.
According to a legal scholar, there is a potential for there to be a mistrial if all nine points aren't decided in the case, or if the judge throws out one charge, he could potentially throw out all of them.
Harassment cases are so aggravating, between the difficulty of proving it in the 'he said, she said' wars and the burden of proof lying on the woman to always prove that she was harassed and worthy of trial and reparations. It is just not pleasant.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Anucha Browne Sanders suing Isiah Thomas for sexual harassment..
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/6097
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
There was another side to this case, and it was compelling. MSG alleges that she was already on her way out due to incompetence. There were many witnesses to a disastrous meeting with Dolan, the owner of MSG, in which she couldn’t answer basic questions from him or even decipher a simple P&L report. Testimony indicates that she went crying to her boss (literally), saying she couldn’t handle the workload and wanted to leave. They decided to keep her on while she looked for work, and she alleged harassment just a couple weeks later.
Also, the burden of proof in civil cases is not very difficult. One must only demonstrate that the accusation is more likely true than not in civil cases. Evidently, the jury found her story more credible than MSG’s.
I thought this case was getting a lot of press? At least they talk about it on ESPN.com alot, which is my other source of news besides feministing :-).
Also, they found Isaiah Thomas guilty.
He's has been found guilty, but doesn't have to pay punitive damages, MSG does have to though.
Via Yahoo News
He has been found guilty, but doesn't have to pay punitive damages, MSG does have to though.
Via Yahoo News
I think the real compelling part of this case was that while they said during the trial that she was on her way out for incompentence, her actual employee file showed that she had positive and solid reviews. That misappropriation of her work history is enough to call into question the plantiffs. Also Isiah tried to stick his tongue down her throat in public and was warned by HIS superiors to not touch her again. And don't even get me started on Kathleen Decker.
I think the real compelling part of this case was that while they said during the trial that she was on her way out for incompentence, her actual employee file showed that she had positive and solid reviews. That misappropriation of her work history is enough to call into question the plantiffs. Also Isiah tried to stick his tongue down her throat in public and was warned by HIS superiors to not touch her again. And don't even get me started on Kathleen Decker.
I could be remembering it wrong, but I believe that Isiah testified in this trial that is was acceptable for a black man to call a black woman a "bitch" but offensive for a white man to do so.
I don't understand why they would find him guilty but not want to make him pay. Anybody know the reason? Is that normal?
I posted something about this case on my new Google blog last night. Here it is:
http://aikenareaprogressive.blogspot.com/2007/10/isiah-thomas-gets-t-before-season-even.html