Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

observer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 484 posts

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#41

Post by tanderson92 »

iagreeentirely wrote: post #24
davidu wrote: post #22

This is disgusting, pathetic, and predatory. It also has a long-term chilling effect on women in technology and entrepreneurship. I am surprised by the lack of outrage over this behavior.

At the moment it's allegations. The outrage should come after evidence is uncovered. Not that it will matter in the end. Recent events have shown that you can flat out admit to drugging women in order to have sex with them and still be acquitted if you have adequate stature and fame. (Ok, I should be more fair. A mistrial is not an acquittal.)

Accusational testimony under oath is evidence, technically. (not the kind you mean, but still)

And as pointed out below, accusations are evidence in the court of public opinion.

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#42

Post by solotronics »

Serious question, does free speech apply in these situations? You have the unalienable right to speak your mind and some people may be offended but that is not illegal. I totally understand if you are employed by someone you can't easily get away if you are made uncomfortable but this is entirely a voluntary situation.

Also, if you really think about it making something that makes someone uncomfortable illegal is weird. So by the same logic I should be able to sue my employer if he farts too much or is annoying in general?

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#43

Post by niniane »

_m8fo wrote: post #15
philip1209 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article seems to indicate that multiple journalists were investigating these allegations, but couldn't go to press without sources: https://www.axios.com/pro-rata-2446752020.html One journalist got six sources, three on the record, and claims to have verified parts of the stories (such as reviewing message history on phones), which led him to have the confidence to go to press.

Right, I read that, but is it necessary to be publicly on the record? Couldn't the information be privately confirmed, protecting the women from retaliation and still allowing the case/accusation to move forward? It just seems like an unnecessary risk/vulnerability. Of course, there's also the fact that by going on the record you also encourage others to do the same, which is an immeasurable benefit.

I am one of the three women who went on the record with my name: Niniane Wang. I initially asked to be anonymous, but no reporter would publish unless they had named sources. I knew that Justin was continuing to harass women. Using my name was the only way to stop him. In other words, yes, it was necessary to be publicly on the record.

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#44

Post by abakker »

_m8fo wrote: post #15
philip1209 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article seems to indicate that multiple journalists were investigating these allegations, but couldn't go to press without sources: https://www.axios.com/pro-rata-2446752020.html One journalist got six sources, three on the record, and claims to have verified parts of the stories (such as reviewing message history on phones), which led him to have the confidence to go to press.

Right, I read that, but is it necessary to be publicly on the record? Couldn't the information be privately confirmed, protecting the women from retaliation and still allowing the case/accusation to move forward? It just seems like an unnecessary risk/vulnerability. Of course, there's also the fact that by going on the record you also encourage others to do the same, which is an immeasurable benefit.

I could see how being publicly on the record might also protect people from retaliation. If any retaliation occurs now, won't it be easy to point to this story?

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#45

Post by sillysaurus3 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #40
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I don't. But do you think it's reasonable to crucify him before any investigation happens? My comment was a bit too female-focused. It wasn't about she-said's or a female conspiracy, but rather the ease of getting people to smear someone that has enemies. It's hard not to notice that the claim of sexual harassment is as equally damaging now as being called a communist was in the 50's. It's obviously quite differe…

> But do you think it's reasonable to crucify him before any investigation happens? No, and if you see anyone hauling an actual, physical tree around to nail him to, you can tell them I said that. But commenting based on one's perception of the facts based on the published allegations and responses is not , even remotely, analogous to crucifixion.

Do you think it's reasonable to destroy his reputation before an investigation has occurred?

I'm genuinely curious, and the question is in good faith.

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#46

Post by dragonwriter »

sp332 wrote: post #39
urda wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am surprised by the lack of outrage over this behavior. How about we wait for due process first before we start tearing into it? There's a reason why "innocent until proven guilty" is an important part of our society and comments like these undermine that.

Due process is for criminal charges and sentencing. It doesn't apply anywhere else. [Edit: OK and other state stuff. Point stands.] Even if you sue someone, you only need a "preponderance of evidence" and not to prove beyond reasonable doubt. Outside of a courtroom, you can literally make up anything you want. For example, if you're a founder and you hear a rumor of a VC being a serial harasser, you might decide to s…

> Due process is for criminal charges and sentencing.

Due process is for any government action affecting life, liberty, or property, including civil proceedings.

But still not relevant to private reactions, though certainly one could argue that some of the principles which motivate due process protections have moral relevance in a private context as well.

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#47

Post by Anonymous888 »

Binary Capital is a sleazy VC, no ifs ands or buts about it.

The valley is really small, and I've heard horrific stories of what this firm has done to their employees and founders. This includes Jonathon Teo as well.

This really is just the tip of the iceberg for Binary Capital. I wouldn't take any investments from them ever.

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#48

Post by limeblack »

As someone who had 3 male teachers in middle and high school fired because of sexual commments I'm still not sure how to respond to stuff like this. I'm always concerned how someones carrier might be altered considering someone could be lying.

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#49

Post by Gabriel_Martin »

solotronics wrote: post #42

Serious question, does free speech apply in these situations? You have the unalienable right to speak your mind and some people may be offended but that is not illegal. I totally understand if you are employed by someone you can't easily get away if you are made uncomfortable but this is entirely a voluntary situation. Also, if you really think about it making something that makes someone uncomfortable illegal is wei…

see u/davidu's response

Re: 6 Women Accuse Tech VC Justin Caldbeck of Sexual Assault and Harassment

#50

Post by jmcgough »

solotronics wrote: post #42

Serious question, does free speech apply in these situations? You have the unalienable right to speak your mind and some people may be offended but that is not illegal. I totally understand if you are employed by someone you can't easily get away if you are made uncomfortable but this is entirely a voluntary situation. Also, if you really think about it making something that makes someone uncomfortable illegal is wei…

If you read the article, the allegations include him groping women without their consent. That's not just making someone uncomfortable, that's sexual assault.
Post reply on HN