Share
7,243 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 2054
clock Created with Sketch.
01/03/21
15:46
Share
Originally posted by Johilo returned:
↑
I do not profess to know. Unlike the speculator/ (self labelled experts) here. One thing though I'd be interested to know why the speculators believe she should be sacked..... ? for being dragged? almost comatose? into the office That would certainly appear to be unfair. That is the inference that others on these threads are making .... that a person with ill-intent, breached security to have his way with a pissed woman. So addled, that she was not responsible for her actions... apparently only he was. I have mentioned that the woman herself made the case that she was sufficiently, compos mentis at the point of entering the building as she said that she thought it was "weird" that he was going in to the office on some pretext. It will be one or the other. She claims she was with it enough to make decisions yet appears to have a different ending to the story. If she felt she was raped and went part way to pressing charges and then decided not to go ahead with the charges would you have sacked her for being a victim at the time of her allegation? She asked for privacy in regard to the dealings.... maybe that is why others were not informed directly about the (non) case in the interests of her privacy that she requested. It is not on to speculate (after the fact) about what should have been done. What was done, was! Her privacy was respected in regard to the matter. Apparently a number of people are alleged to have known about the incident and that I can believe for anyone having worked in an office environment would testify of rumour mills. If she was a willing participant, yes, I would have recommended sacking her too. If the woman withdrew the police action (upon which she founded her allegation and subsequently withdrawn) that is not the responsibility of the PM to splash it all about the shop especially as he would not have been notified because of respect for the woman's privacy that she had initially requested. Who was to know that her claim was to be withdrawn...... Could this the cover up and maintain ones job?
Expand
Is there footage of her being dragged into the office? And the footage of them walking into Parliament, was she being dragged in? My point about not being sacked is really around two employees getting drunk and breaching rules at the workplace, yet only one losing thier job. Regardless of the rape allegation it seems both should have been sacked for going to work in that state, let alone a minister's office. If she claims she was coerced to go there, bad luck, people make decisions when drunk. If there is evidence she was physically put in that situation with force, thats completely different.