From what I can tell from the article, these are <i>allegations</i>. I don't see any mention of emails or text messages (I skimmed a bit, but not enough to miss something like that). Maybe records exist and can be used to prove harassment, but what's the point of publicizing this until the case has been decided?<p>The media loves to publish this stuff because it gets everyone riled up. But until anything is proven in court, it doesn't mean anything. What if nothing actually happened? Reputations can be ruined.<p>I'd love to have feedback from divergent perspectives or opinions. My current feeling is that we should keep these cases sealed until there is a verdict, but perhaps that's oppressive?<p>I wish we were all above this kind of behavior.
So the CEO was in a relationship with the head of HR, while the alleged victim herself had a brief relationship with (by all appearances) a subordinate in her own reporting chain. So many "not good ideas" happening in this company.
It's honestly shocking to me how people can continue to behave like this, especially in the aftermath of #metoo. I suspect there's just something about being in a position of ultimate privilege that conditions you to think you're invincible until you're not.