A political scandal about nothing

Posted at Politico yesterday is the statement by attorney Joel Bennett on behalf of one of the women who accused Herman Cain of sexual “harassment”:

Cain accuser cites series of ‘advances’; NRA confirms harassment complaint

In 1999 I was retained by a female employee of the National Restaurant Association concerning several instances of sexual harassment by the then CEO.

She made a complaint in good faith about a series of inappropriate behaviors and unwanted advances from the CEO.

Those complaints were resolved in an agreement with her acceptance of a monetary settlement. She and her husband see no value in revisiting this matter now, nor in discussing this matter further, publicly or privately. In fact it would be extremely painful to do so….

My client stands by the complaint she made.

She “stands by” the complaint which she refuses to make public. All she tells us is abstractions about “several instances of sexual harassment,” which could mean anything or nothing. So there’s nothing there.

Following Bennett’s statement is a statement by the NRA saying that it it is willing to waive the confidentiality agreement if the woman wishes to speak out:

The agreement contains mutual confidentiality obligations. Notwithstanding the Association’s ongoing policy of maintaining the privacy of all personnel matters, we have advised Mr. Bennett that we are willing to waive the confidentiality of this matter and permit Mr. Bennett’s client to comment. As indicated in Mr. Bennett’s statement, his client prefers not to be further involved with this matter and we will respect her decision.

So there’s nothing there. Again.

- end of initial entry -

LA writes:

I should add that based on the entire statement by the Association (and also this reader’s comment), Cain himself was not a party to the confidentiality agreement, which was between the Association and the complainants. He was not involved in the investigation of the complaint or in the procedure leading to the resolution of the complaint. Meaning that he never directly heard the complaints against him. This underscores the fact that he has never been in a position to tell the world what happened, and it is absurd and unjust to expect him to.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at November 05, 2011 12:25 PM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):