I figured I might as well comply with Radford’s lawyers’ demands, since there wasn’t much effort required. I throw out a lot of my redundant correspondence, so when I went looking for bits of any conversations with Karen Stollznow, I only have one left, and it’s a doozy. It included several files documenting her claims. Here’s her letter, and you’ll immediately see a major problem.
So to address their first demand for All communications, including email and voicemail communications, letters or memoranda, to or from Karen Stollznow from January 1, 2013 through the present including, without limitation, communications relating to Ben Radford by name or by implication,
here’s as much as I’m at liberty to share.
Hi P.Z.,
I wanted to send you some evidence for my claims of harassment by Radford. Here I’ve attached my email correspondence with him for the years 2009-2013 inclusive.
I’ve also included contact from other women who’ve been harassed by Radford, and a recording where he tacitly admits to having assaulted me at TAM 2010.
It’s probably best if this isn’t shared in public, just yet. In the meantime, feel free to address any questions from people based on this info.
Thanks for your continued support.
Karen.
I’m specifically asked not to share it. Hmmm. I suggest that Freedman Boyd Hollander Goldberg Urias and Ward P.A. go direct to Ms. Stollznow and get the information straight from her.
As for all the documentation she sent me, I can share just one piece, since it had been anonymized by Stollznow.
Women who have contacted me having had similar experiences of harassment by Benjamin Radford
“M.K.” wrote via Twitter:
Mar 26
Don’t know you. Knew him long ago. Sensed the minute I read your allegations that you were telling the truth. Best of Luck.
Via Direct Mail on Twitter:
KS: Thanks for getting in touch. You’re the fourth person to contact me with similar complaints. Can you can tell me about your experiences?
Mar 26
MK: Sure. I dated Ben about 14 years ago. Was always put off by his misogyny & twisting of facts to support his opinions on female self esteem.Mar 26
MK: And of course his insistence that sexual harassment is merely oversensitive prudes and unprofessional sluts that regret office relationshipsMar 26
MK: He pushed that men were the victim. In the end, I told him I didn’t have feelings for him, he took me to a shrink because I must be crazy.Mar 26
MK: The doctor told him that his high opinion of himself was overinflated and didn’t blame me for not sharing it. I got dirty postcards,etcMar 26
MK: HE did a film project inquiring about people’s opinions of him. I got cut because I told the filmmaker he had serious issues with women.Mar 26
MK: And his study on media not effecting self esteem? Alot of the women interviewed were friends/fellow bellydancers. He twisted all the answersMar 26
KS: This is all incredibly familiar. Sorry you had to go through this. Did you ever tell anyone else about his behavior? Anyone else complain?Mar 26
MK: I told everyone. My few close friends at the time did not care for him because of it. Never spoke to anyone else who dealt closely with him.
Mar 26
KS: Do you think he’s obsessive and has issues of dominance and control? I know that his ego is overinflated. Narcissistic personality disorder?
Mar 26
MK: Absolutely obsessive & controlling. exclusively couples with women he can dominate. Was too young to see it at the time, but yes, Narcissism
Mar 26
KS: Sorry for all of the questions, but did you see his behavior as sexual harassment?
Mar 26
MK: No prob. I saw his behavior as sexual bullying, but not being in the same field as him it was as simple as walking away and ignoring him.
Mar 26
KS: Ignoring him didn’t work for me! That was the reason I came forward. He started attacking my career when I ignored him.
Mar 26
MK: FWIW, there was a girl in the art department at SI back then that was really bothered by his behavior including the porn on his office walls
Mar 26
MK: Can you share her name? I understand if you can’t.
Mar 26
MK: Heavyset, pretty. Can’t recall her name. I got the feeling he antagonized her because she didn’t go for him.
Mar 26MK: But I do recall the formal complaints about the “art” made out of pornography he kept on his office wall.
Mar 26
MK: It wasn’t xxxx xxxxx?Mar 26
MK: If you could find an old issue of SI I know she was one of the few women listed in the art departmentMar 26
KS: Around which year?Mar 26
MK: That name doesn’t ring a bell. I’m sorry.Mar 26
KS: I’ll look into former staff and see if I can come up with other names.Mar 26
MK: It was around 1998 – 2000 that we dated.Mar 26
KS: If it comes down to it, would you write up a brief letter of testimony that I could use in court based on these comments? Wouldn’t be publicMar 26
MK: Of course. I know how he can be a bully and I see it happening here.Mar 26
KS: I can’t tell you how much I appreciate this. This has been a nightmare for years…Mar 26
MK: I completely understand. Any information or help I can provide is yours.Mar 26
KS: Thank you so much. I’ll leave you in peace now! But I’ll get in touch again. Thanks again for reaching out to me.“M.H.” wrote via Facebook:
8/6, 9:06am
Karen,
I just read your story and I am so sorry you have gone through this. I have been harassed be speakers and high powered men in the movement and told higher ups (although did not make an official complaints) and no one cared at all. I am almost sure I know who you are talking about in this story and I have complained about him too. No one gives a damn. Everyone wants to keep the status quo. Best,Yes, I have complained about him to Barry. I also had a friend harassed by him and told Barry, but she wants to remain anonymous. I told Barry what he did to her. It was disgusting. I don’t know if I can get her to come forward.
8/9, I told Leonard that Ben kept sending me unwanted IMs telling me how
sexy I was and he didn’t care. So no one seems to care or thinks that’s inappropriate behavior from a colleague. I also told him that I was 100% sure that Ben had harassed you, because Ben has a problem and cannot be around a woman for a length of time without being inappropriate. He just thanked me for my input. Basically, a brush off.“A.R.” wrote via Facebook:
8/6, 10:50am
I just read your article in SciAm am I just wanted to lend some support. I think I know who you are talking about. He tried to hook up with me at a TAM once by calling me a “tattooed slut.” It didn’t go over well with me as you might have guessed. And I was made to feel extremely uncomfortable by the TAM undercover security when I was being harassed at TAM the last time I attended. Anyway, I really appreciate you speaking out about this and if I can help you in any way, just ask.
Yep, that is who came up behind me whispered in my ear that I was a tattooed slut. I’d love to help spread the word.8/6, 1:58pm
This behavior has gone on for too long. He is a terrible person. I’m so sorry you have to deal with this. The underground has been notified and as you can see the word is out. I hope that this helps you in someway and helps prove that what we all have been saying about harassment has been true. Though I am not convinced that anything will change- only hopeful. If the slympit targets you and you need support, let me know.“S.J.” wrote via Facebook:
8/14, 7:28pm Hi Karen, I wanted to let you know that I also had problem with Ben, and I would be happy to testify to that if it would be helpful. It was not extremely aggressive — I recognized him as a creep right away and tried to avoid him, but he persisted in proposition my for about a year and a half, sexual explicit, slightly scary – mostly in his obsession with the micheal douglas vigilante film and his interest in S&M. Anyway, I asked him repeatedly to leave me alone, and ultimately complained to Barry Karr. He said they wouldn’t do anything with out documentation, but I suspect he did talk to Ben, because he backed off. I worked at CFI from 2003-2005. I suspect there are other people who have similar stories who will step up if that’s the way the wind is blowing. It’s astonishing to me that CFI can’t step up, even when called out. I emailed Rebecca about it, who of course suggested publishing on her blog, but I don’t think that’s the right way forward. Call me if you like, pacific time.
8/16, 3:54pm Hi Karen, An appeal sounds appropriate to me. I spoke to Austin the other day, and he suggested I write up something to give to the board in such a case. I believe they should fire BR as well, and hopefully figure out a better approach to these issues. There were rumors of other complaints when I was at CFI, and I suspect other people would come forward if it was safe environment to do so. It could be me that he described as batshit crazy, but I’d bet it’s someone else. I avoided him as much as possible, and my guess would be that he fixated more on single women he worked with more closely.
8/16, 4:00pm Whatever way you want to proceed is fine by me. I’d prefer that CFI take action and change their policies. I don’t really want to get into a free for all in the blogosphere, it’s messy and there’s the possibility of libel charges. I have some idea, but we can talk when you get back in the states. he would come all the way down the building to my desk to talk to me in person.
“C.B.” wrote via email:
10/23/2013 FYI – You may (or may not) be a fan of my work… But Ben Radford is EXACTLY as you describe.
That’s as much as I will say on Radford as I am well-known & work in television.
“T.K.” wrote via Facebook:
8/6, Karen, Thank you for speaking out. I’m sure your inbox has been flooded with supportive messages. They are well deserved.
As a “chubby, shy, etc., etc.” woman who has had multiple interactions with this individual, let’s just say that I believe your story without hesitation. I am sad to hear it, but not in the least bit surprised.
3/28/2014 I’m so happy to see that you raised the funds you needed so quickly. It just goes to show you how much support you have. I hope justice prevails. In my opinion, Ben is a narcissistic manipulative ass, and his most recent actions only make that more obvious. Best of luck!
Freedman Boyd Hollander Goldberg Urias and Ward P.A. are also demanding that I send them all correspondence about Radford: All email and voicemail communications to or from any person, persons, groups or organizations relating to Ben Radford or Karen Stollznow or both of them.
There isn’t much, and what I do have is all wrapped up in requests that I not reveal their identities! Surprisingly, people don’t want their names mentioned to litigious cranks.
So here are just the few I’ve retained, with names removed.
To whom it may concern,
My wife and I have recently become millionaires, we are child-free and intend to remain so. We are still relatively young (we both turn 40 this year). One of the things we have tasked ourselves with is the creation of our wills. We had discussed giving 50% of our eventual estate away (given our current incomes, current net worth and our rate of saving/investment). We expect to have an estate of roughly $5-7M when we pass. We plan to divide the other half amongst our nieces and nephews. The Center of Inquiry had, until recently, been on our short list. We would likely have left them $1M upon our passing.
We were appalled by the opening address to the Women in Secularism conference. We were then dismayed by the non-apology apology that was issued. We were disgusted by the treatment that Dr. Stollznow was subjected to. We were angered by the tepid response that the Center For Inquiry made to her allegations. We were livid at the fact that the harasser remains at CFI. Finally, I am simply saddened by the fact that the president of the CFI sent a latter demanding such nit-picking, minor corrections to Dr. Stollznow’s article on what happened to her. In the end, the organization and its president appear to have no decency.
I can honestly say that the organization lost $1,000,000 of our money in the last few months. I’m quite sure that I am not alone. I sincerely hope that the board of directors for the CFI steps in and takes action.
Anonymous
For your edification Dr. Myers, please do NOT print my personal information.
Another character witness:
Hi PZ,
I don’t know who else to bring this up to, but it’s been weighing on me for a while. I’m a devoted reader of your blog, although I lurk mostly and haven’t commented since you were over at ScienceBlogs, and I’ve been following this Ben Radford story. I knew Ben in meatspace for several years in the early 2000s. We got to know each other after he came here to Syracuse for an event, Buffalo and CFI not being that far away (lucky CNY Skeptics!). He was a pretty normal person for most of that time, although he spoke really weirdly about the ladies he was banging. Some of his comments left me feeling icky and uncomfortable, but I was a baby feminist then and couldn’t really articulate what was creepy about them (now I know: it was dehumanization, not to mention inappropriately sexual conversation for someone you barely know!).Anyway, we didn’t see each other much, just when he was passing through town, but stayed friends on Facebook for a long time. Until 2009, when he started making some really egregious comments on FB about false rape accusations. It was fairly standard rape apology, really, and my feminism had developed quite a bit by that time, so I saw them for what they were. I attempted to point him towards the facts about false rape accusations, thinking he was simply ignorant of the information, and as a skeptic he would be interested in hearing the facts. The discussion devolved after that and he continued ignoring the evidence and coming up with the same convoluted justifications to disbelieve women as any other MRAsshole, at which point I defriended him.
This has really been weighing on me, because based on my own experiences and what I heard from him, I have zero problem believing that he is capable of assault, harassment, and intimidation. I just don’t know what to do with this knowledge. I can post supportive blog comments (difficult from work, but I can when I get home). I could write to Karen Stollznow and let her know I support her, and donate to her legal defense fund. I just….I feel like I should do more, somehow.
Anyway, if you have any ideas, that would be amazing. If not, I know you are busy so I’ll keep on reading :) I enjoyed seeing you talk when you came to Syracuse, btw, and I wish I could’ve stuck around longer afterwards.
Thanks for listening.
Somebody else who has been pestered by Radford:
Oh man I hope I get a lawyer’s letter! Interesting to hear more about Ben’s “evidence,” since last week Bob Blaskiewitz (sp?) contacted Elyse and told her to back down off Ben because Ben had shown Bob some evidence that convinced him of Ben’s innocence. He wouldn’t go into details when Elyse asked for them, saying it would be traced back to him if they got leaked (ha ha, he thinks he’s CIA or something I suppose). So Elyse immediately turned to Karen and told her what he said. Karen said Ben had got a hold of a sealed record of hers.
Have you checked to be sure it’s a real lawyer and not just Ben using an alias? I can’t imagine any lawyer worth their salt would advise Ben to threaten to sue people who have quite obviously done nothing wrong by reporting something as they saw it, i.e., “Karen is accusing Ben of sexual harassment.”
A person who is not very happy with Radford:
Yeah, in retrospect I probably shouldn’t have written that post, not because it’s wrong but because I knew when I hit “publish” that it was going to cause me no end of grief. But I was pissed. Now I get prolonged screeds from Ben trying to convince me that he’s the wronged party as he completely misses the point of my post, perseverating on the part where I said it’s irrelevant to me as far as the COI goes whether he’s guilty or innocent and forgetting the part about my writing ONLY about the COI.
To be fair, I think that the powers that be at CFI are pissed with Radford. I know I would be. What I can’t figure out is why they don’t fire his ass over this. He was obviously using CFI resources (the blog) to grind a personal ax, so to speak. Oh, well…hopefully he’s just blowing hot air.
Surprisingly, as I searched my correspondence, I did find one individual who contacted me frequently about Ben Radford. I usually hit ‘delete’ as soon as I saw his messages, so there’s only a fraction of the total left, but I’ll let you have what I’ve got. Here they are:
I love you depeche mode you saved my life
And ben think about it
What are we fighting for?
FOR THE HYPOCRITES AT THE JREF:
LET ME SHOW YOU PSEUDOSCIENCE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMz90UsCglY
TAM 2013 APOSTASY
all brains no balls
homo = atheist?
http://www.amazingmeeting.com/
FIGHTING THE FAKERS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWLr5zGBC48
how we won the James Randi Million Dollar Paranormal Prize
http://storify.com/deltoidmachine/how-we-won-the-james-randi-dollar-1-000-000-parano
NEXT…
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/05/15-7
the end of effective social movements
http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/17/us/four-ways-to-beat-the-man/index.html?hpt=hp_c2
TAM 2013 APOSTASY
http://www.amazingmeeting.com/
FIGHTING THE FAKERS
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2013/08/16/james-randi-the-amazing-meeting-and-the-bullshit-police.html
OH, THE IRONY!
how we won the James Randi Million Dollar Paranormal Prize
http://storify.com/deltoidmachine/how-we-won-the-james-randi-dollar-1-000-000-parano
TAM 2013 APOSTASY
all brains no balls
homo = atheist?
http://www.amazingmeeting.com/
FIGHTING THE FAKERS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWLr5zGBC48
how we won the James Randi Million Dollar Paranormal Prize
http://storify.com/deltoidmachine/how-we-won-the-james-randi-dollar-1-000-000-parano
NEXT…
how we won the $1,000,000 James Randi Paranormal Challenge
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYuIJ9y4-yeQcPZl9aR0F0g
storify.com/deltoidmachine/how-we-won-the-james-randi-dollar-1-000-000-parano#publicize
how we won the $1,000,000 James Randi Paranormal Challenge
storify.com/deltoidmachine/how-we-won-the-james-randi-dollar-1-000-000-parano#publicize
how we won the $1,000,000 James Randi Paranormal Challenge
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYuIJ9y4-yeQcPZl9aR0F0g
storify.com/deltoidmachine/how-we-won-the-james-randi-dollar-1-000-000-parano#publicize
I know! It’s not very coherent. I’m just dumping it here for the lawyers to sort out.
The third demand from Freedman Boyd Hollander Goldberg Urias and Ward P.A. was for Copies of all blog posts or comments authored by you that relate to Karen Stollznow and/or Ben Radford.
Do they even realize that this is a public blog with a search function? OK, I can help the slow people. Here are links:
All posts that mention Stollznow.
All posts that mention Radford.
I’ll now send a link to this post to Freedman Boyd Hollander Goldberg Urias and Ward P.A. in order comply as fully as I can to their demands. I hope they advise their client that stirring the waters of his past behavior is probably not helpful to Radford’s reputation!
I think you probably should have taken the advice in the other thread to contact a lawyer first. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if they come back demand unredacted versions for the ones where you withheld names. You should probably look for a lawyer in advance. These clowns aren’t going away.
Anyone with good sense doesn’t ask for something they don’t really want…
Dr. Myers, please speak to an attorney. A link to this blog post will likely not suffice as a response to a subpoena duces tecum. I understand your reticence to share materials that you were asked to keep private, but that in itself does not create a privilege so as to defeat the subpoena’s request. There is no substitute for the advice of a litigation attorney who is fully conversant with both the law and facts at hand.
Interesting that Mabus made an apperance in this. Also, hope this isn’t sincerely what PZ is doing to comply. If it is, that’s dangerous. Even if this isn’t, and it is just to troll Radford and making the Streisand Effect of this all the more blatant, it was still a dangerous move.
Maybe not a smart move, but I love it nonetheless. Keep it up, Mr Myers!
You really like fucking with them, don’t you, PZ?
I hope this doesn’t bite you in the backside
It would definitely be wise to meet with a lawyer. I would guess (without any specific legal knowledge) that this doesn’t comply with the subpoena, if that was the intention. You might also want to alert the authors of the correspondence that you have been served and may be forced to disclose their identities to Radford’s lawyers. That at least gives them the opportunity to seek their own legal advice.
I don’t think anyone who makes this type of comment is giving PZ enough credit. Seriously, raise your hand if you think he’s foolish enough to think a link to a blog post satisfies the request? I don’t think he does. I see this as a farcical jab that is meant to bite Radford in the ass, the self-obsessed wanker.
Cheering the sentiment, but worried about possible consequences.
I hope that’s true, but a plaint reading of the last line of this post seems to suggest otherwise:
“Plain reading,” I meant. Although a plaint reading would also lead one to the same conclusion.
I really think Myers is punking us. There was that infamous Survivor thing where held a vote to vote out certain commenters, then went “PSYCH!! to everyone. He’s not beyond trolling his own Horde.
And I seem to remember a comment he made back when Shermer was threatening to sue (that was Myers’ second legal threat of three, IIRC) where he was bemused at everyone offering legal advice, as he’d long since retained an actual lawyer for such matters. And there’s a very robotic quality to this one; no mention of when the letter came, no request for help or advice just a straightforward “oh no I have been suppeana’d and they demand exactly this” tone.
To me, it smells less like a request or info dump, and instead very much like he-
…. he? ….
…
heshe has sprung a trap on an unsuspecting rat.Stop posting on the internet and contact a lawyer. Seriously.
I’m a licensed attorney. I just want to reiterate what other folks have said. You need to speak with an attorney operating in the proper jurisdiction.
Obviously, on one level you want to make certain you don’t run into trouble for non-compliance, but it’s also important to note that you may not need to send them much of anything. Relevance is a requirement, and you need someone properly licensed to tell you what that means with respect to this case.
This all looks like so much nonsense, but you don’t want a stupid situation to get stupider due to some legal technicality.
Relax, everyone. I have literally met all of their demands in private correspondence: they got a couple of megabytes of pdfs emailed to them.
What Radford also got is an anonymized release of the content of those emails to the general public. They’re going to have a tough time complaining that I gave them everything, and also gave them the additional thrill of taking much of that stuff and putting it on the internet for everyone to see.
Somehow I get the feeling this isn’t Professor Myers’ first trip to the rodeo with these clowns.
Ah. Well there you have it.
If this is real, I expect they’ve already searched the blog and the subpoena was served for (at least) two reasons: 1. To see if PZ does due diligence, i.e. gives them everything they expect from the blog. 2. To see if they can shake anything loose that they didn’t know about already or suspect.
Of course, there are more reasons like intimidation, but that might just be me being cynical. /sarc
Glad to hear it.
Don’t they find just the posts that mention the search terms, not the comments? To find the comments, they’ll have to use the arcane
site:freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/trick in Google.And frankly, if such links don’t satisfy the law, then the law is an ass.
@ PZ Myers, 15
Were the emails sent to the Radford lawyers anonymized (outside of the emails previously anonymized by Stollznow)? Your wording is vague on that subject.
I sincerely hope this doesn’t end up like the Team Harpy affair, but I have no faith in the US legal system. Or any other legal system for that matter.
I’m not sure if this is an example of the Streisand Effect as much as it is the Cosby Effect: viciously going after one accuser may backfire and spur your other victims to come forward.
Here’s hoping that CFI President Ron Lindsay can take time out of his busy scheduling of chastising Rebecca Watson’s blog posts to actually do his fucking job and supervise his staff.
Having supervision goes against Libertarian principles.
True, but so does losing potential million-dollar donors.
PZ you are an idiot. Anyone who represents himself has an idiot for a client and a fool for a lawyer. You constantly laugh at people who try to do science without qualifications and here you are trying to do law without qualifications.
According to those emails, at least four women have complained to CFI higher ups about Ben Radford (Dr. Stollznow complained to the board, I think; M.H. a coworker of M.H., and S.J. all complained to Barry Karr). Kind of puts a lie to Ron Lindsay’s “zero-tolerance” sexual harassment policy at CFI, doesn’t it? Seriously, is Radford blackmailing Lindsay?
About a year ago, I gave Dr. Stollznow several hundred dollars via her IndieGogo project for her legal defense. I’m in a position to give even more this year. (BTW, CFI will never see another cent of mine as long as they protect harassers who wage their campaigns, in part, using CFI resources.) Just say the word.
Wouldn’t “groups or organizations relating to Ben Radford” also mean any post or comment about CFI also? Oh, and TAM? Sounds like a couple of file boxes of paper to me.
Well, thank fuck tsig is here @26 to, erm, help. Because, y’know, this is of course the very first time some unhinged narcissistic little arseclown has pointed a loaded lawyer at PZ and, also, PZ doesn’t know any lawyers personally that might be able to advise him (except maybe that dude over at Popehat, but everyone knows he’s a complete hack), so such a sage and timely warning will of course be invaluable.
Where would PZ be without helpful commenters like tsig? In jail, or dead in a ditch, I’m quite sure.
[do I really need sarcasm tags?]
As someone who’s watched this unfold over the last few years, I feel like there are unfortunately (but not unsurprisingly) some familiar sets of initials up there. At least Radford’s pattern of behavior is becoming more and more clear, and less and less plausibly deniable. Whatever Radford (and his lawyers) thinks he’s doing with all this, he’s only succeeded in making himself look thoroughly awful to anyone with a working moral component to their brain.
And yet no organizations are loudly proclaiming their divestment of Radford. Odd, that.
Some of the identities are a bit easy to deduce if you’ve been keeping up with the state of affairs over the past few years.
Tsig, you seem to have a short attention span.
Scroll and try reading EVERYTHING PZ has said.
@32
Now, Jafafa, I suspect you know better than that. The I Hate PZ For All The Reasons™ Club only read his posts (or summaries thereof) for as long as it takes them to get sufficiently righteously enraged to ejacu-hate a couple of incoherent sentences, which they then rarely follow up. They’re just like creationist drive-by trolls in that way (although possibly stupid-er).
As far as I can tell, the sole function of civil law, at least in the United States, is to serve as a club for bad people to beat good people with. (Every once in a while some good people manage to wrest it away and land a few good blows, but that doesn’t change the basic nature of it).
The law IS an ass. That’s the entire point.
PZ
I am highly amused that you have found such a good use for all those emails *tentacle bump * I’m sure they are less than thrilled that none of the information supports a defamation claim.
A perfectly just reward for his pathetic attempts at silencing the victims via the courts IMO.
Hank_Says: I wouldn’t be so sure that tsig would be part of that club. I know I have seen their nym in several threads (and just looked it up to confirm but didn’t bring back links) and they seem to just be your average semi-regular Pharyngulite. It’s genuine concern that PZ did something reckless (and probably done before reading the recent comments), and I doubt it is knee-jerk anti-PZ sentiment in play.
I have to admit that I got a little worried when I saw the twitter exchange betwen PZ and popehat, where popehat seems to express concern that PZ may not be acting in his own interests by blogging about the subpoena. However, I also have the impression that PZ is complying fully, with the full intent of making the process as transparent and public as he can.
Kudos.
I don’t get it. I don’t see the part where PZ says he hired an attorney. Is it there somewhere?
I am worried about the people who are expecting to remain anonymous. Were they at least warned beforehand, PZ, or, better yet, kept anonymous?
Also, confession: I have also been following this, in real time, but I don’t recognize those initials. I’m pretty sure that’s a good thing, so I’ll keep it that way. Best if others do, too.
You know, maybe people could trust an adult who’s had several of these things thrown at him efore to be able to make sensible decisions, right?
Incidentally, has a certain whining obsessive from Ireland denounced this? Or is abusing the legal system to harass fellow skeptics (if done civilly, of course) perfectly fine?
Of course not, hyperdeath (42). The real problem making atheists look bad are all these people alleging sexual abuse and misconduct within the movement. That’s pretty destructive. That and being rude. Inexcusable.
Reading between the lines of PZ’s posts, he has had a plan if a subpoena happened he drew up with a lawyer a while back, and had carefully trimmed his files to reveal no names, and the subpoena arriving triggered the plan. Now Radford looks like the arrogant bully he is to the world, while getting nothing but more evidence he is a serial harasser.
I’m sure that there are plenty out there who will think this is a conspiracy to create drama clicks for FTB.
polishsalami:
Eh, on this, not so much. Most people are fairly aware of the CFI / TAM / Radford the flaming doucheweasel saga. The Radford mess would have stayed happily forgotten except for one thing – Radford himself.
Caine
I think you’re mistaken here.
Your comment would make perfect sense if those in the opposition actually gave a damn about facts, numbers, reason, etc.
Gen, Uppity Ingrate and Ilk:
To be fair to Radford, he doesn’t damage the reputation of the skeptic movement by claiming it’s rife with sexual harassers. He just sexually harasses people.
@36 anteprepro
wouldn’t be so sure that tsig would be part of that club. I know I have seen their nym in several threads (and just looked it up to confirm but didn’t bring back links) and they seem to just be your average semi-regular Pharyngulite. It’s genuine concern that PZ did something reckless (and probably done before reading the recent comments), and I doubt it is knee-jerk anti-PZ sentiment in play.
Too much charity. TSIG is a regular wanker on this blog.
Barbra Streisand to the courtesy phone please…Ms. Streisand…courtesy phone.
@36 anteprepro
Ok. Well, I just judged the post by its content and it read like the usual shit – I, for one, tend to express my genuine concern for others with far less abuse. tsig’s regularity around here doesn’t disqualify them from being a regular PZ-hater either; there are plenty of people who loathe this network that nonetheless come here every single day.
I like the idea that Mr Radford’s legal team is billing him by the nano-second to read your email.
Meet with a lawyer anyway PZ. This isn’t about “legitimizing” them, it’s about protecting yourself. (Okay, actually it’s “about” whatever you want to make it about, just like absolutely everything everywhere, but I’m saying that’s what you SHOULD make it about.) Meeting with a lawyer doesn’t mean you have to sue, it just means getting legal advice.