Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Krowbar who wrote (27565)	1/3/1999 1:35:00 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

The sexual harassment case was brought by Paula but his conduct with Monica was highly relevant since it shows a pattern of workplace sexual behavior. The Monica affair was also highly prejudicial to him and a judge must always weigh the probative value against the prejudicial nature of the evidence but as it was highly probative, and evidence in these cases is ALWAYS prejudicial and embarrassing, I would have allowed it. Further, as regards the foray into this area by Starr- I believe the extension of the probe was authorized by Janet Reno. She is the one who ought to be the lightening rod on this, imo, and NOT Mr. Starr- who I believe is a good and decent man who tried to do the best job he could at what he was authorized to do.