Posted on 11/10/2011 5:18:01 PM PST by Kurt Evans
... Cain's claim that all he did was point to his chin and tell Kraushaar she was as tall as his wife is nowhere in the complaint Kraushaar leveled against him, according to Bennett.
"I have read my client's written complaint," Bennett told the Daily News.
"The incidents were not about how tall she was or that she was wearing a nice dress or anything along those lines.
"It was sexual harassment, not something innocent or something that could have been misconstrued."
Nothing about the abuse Kraushaar claims to have suffered at the hands of Cain more than a decade ago is "minor," he said.
"My client is an intelligent, well-educated woman who knows the difference between a compliment and sexual harassment," Bennett added...
While Cain has spoken darkly of a "Democratic machine" being behind the accusations, both Bialek and Kraushaar are Republicans.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
999 beats duh and oops.
Cain Accuser Kraushaar Filed Another Complaint At Next Job (Supervisor: Charges ‘frivolous’)
Karen Kraushaar, who settled a sexual harassment complaint against Republican presidential frontrunner Herman Cain in 1999, filed a different complaint at her next job four years later, accusing a manager of sending out a sexually suggestive email and asking to be allowed to work at home after a car accident.
Kraushaar made the complaint, which did not involve a claim of sexual harassment, while working at the Immigration and Naturalization Service in 2003. Her lawyer was Joel Bennett, the same lawyer who had handled her harassment complaint against Herman Cain at the National Restaurant Association.
Kraushaar was injured in a car accident at an intersection in late 2002. After the accident, Kraushaar asked to be allowed to work from home. She filed the complaint when her repeated requests to work at home were denied, according to a former supervisor. The former supervisor told ABC News that Kraushaar wanted a “large payout” of tens of thousands of dollars, a year-long fellowship at Harvard, a raise and the reinstatement of sick leave.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2805039/posts
I take it you’ve never worked in an organization with dictatorial HR oversight. The are the protectors of corporate PR as relate to legal matters and resort to any means necessary to keep PR favorable, regardless of the validity of the charges.
A $46k pay out is peanuts and just adds to the bottom line to justify their next year’s expense budget and staff increases.
My closest last experience I’ve had with a mega corporate HR dept was my regional manager, a middle aged, unattractive, dingbat and highly incompetent woman who finally created a mess she couldn’t blame on anyone else.
She was put on LOA and promptly hired an attorney claiming harassment from her male superiors citing that they had hired a large breasted, good looking woman to groom as her replacement and other ridiculous claims. (yes she was a babe but had risen through the ranks)
It took a year but she held out and got full retirement 8 years early. That was HR’s price to not have it be filed in court despite the absurdity of the allegations.
Cain wasn’t even at the NRA when this was settled.
I don’t know you tell me? If the incident he is telling to anyone that will listen isn’t in the complaint. WHO is CAIN talking about?
Boy, they got some really dumb freepers, you being one of them.
That's my kind of Republican!
Charles Krauthammer also told the story about forgetting the name of a dinner hostess and how he improvised. But he isn't running for the POTUS. That Perry is too much of a liability for the GOP and that Obama would win reelection. That was too funny!p>
Too funny!
Penn State Mentality?
I believe you owe Mr. Cain’s supporters an apology.
Let’s not even get into the rumors floating around for years on Rick Perry.
You should be ashamed of yourself!
No I will not. Cover up and shut up any one that doesn’t drink the kool-aid.
Be sure to watch the video. Candidate won 8 years as President.
Thanks for your insightful comments. I think there is one more thing being overlooked: we don’t know what the $46,000 was for. Was it all to compensate for her “injury” or for lost wages? Was some of it a standard part of severance she would be due upon separation? Was any of it for accrued PTO (paid time off)? Did some of it go for her legal fees? In other words, in the right perspective, little or none of the money may have actually been paid for the alleged harassment, but as part of an overall separation agreement.
And why would that? If I had legitimate complaint I'd be shouting it from the rooftops.
The only reason that makes sense to me is that her reason for suing him is so frivolous she's hoping somebody has a substantial complaint that she can hide behind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.