[deleted]
High Profile UK VC Faces Jail After Sexual Assault Conviction
11–20 of 22 posts
Re: High Profile UK VC Faces Jail After Sexual Assault Conviction
#12I don't know. I'd like to hear his side of the story. The news reports [1] are kinda vague: "Mr Glaenzer was standing unnecessarily close to one female, looking down at her back," said prosecutor He got off the train at Bond Street and travelled back to Oxford Circus, all the while standing behind women on the train and platforms. On a second trip to Bond Street, Glaenzer was seen by plain clothes officers standing c…
I don't really think you can dismiss what's presumably the key point as merely "problematic" ;)
Re: High Profile UK VC Faces Jail After Sexual Assault Conviction
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is such a thing as addiction to marijuana. He may or may not have it, and it may or may not have something to do with his actions here, but it does exist. Some people in the comments at that link are trying to make a distinction between "physically" and "psychologically" addictive. This is a common belief, but medically, there are no such distinctions. Addiction is defined as continued use despite consequences,…
That is not the definition of abuse. Per DSM-IV criteria for substance abuse addiciton: "One of the following must be present within a 12 month period: (1) recurrent use resulting in a failure to fulfill major obligations at work, school, or home; (2) recurrent use in situations which are physically hazardous (e.g., driving while intoxicated); (3) legal problems resulting from recurrent use; or (4) continued use desp…
I know that we technically-minded people like to be precise in our wording, but I think that "continued use despite consequences" is a reasonable summary of that exhaustive definition. :)
Re: High Profile UK VC Faces Jail After Sexual Assault Conviction
#14[deleted]
Would you be giggling if a grown man approached your wife/girlfriend/mother/sister/daughter on a train and thrusted his groin onto her backside?
The use of the term sexual assault is probably a bit neglectful here, but I doubt that's what he's charged with. And, I'm in agreement that the Registry is overused and ruins too many people's lives unnecessarily. However, to discount it as just a "giggle story" is ridiculous and lacks perspective.
Re: High Profile UK VC Faces Jail After Sexual Assault Conviction
#15Shocking. I know him because he was an investor in one of my previous companies. While I won't say he always comported himself in the most ethical manner in business matters and I would not let him take a board seat in the future for this reason, like everyone else I thought of him as a good person of high moral character. The chorus of people defending him in the article comments because he is otherwise so charming…
First you say he did not act "in the most ethical manner in business matters". Then you say "I thought of him as a good person of high moral character". Are those statements not at direct odds with one another? I don't think business ethics and morals are exactly orthogonal to one another.
Re: High Profile UK VC Faces Jail After Sexual Assault Conviction
#16[deleted]
> "How do these actions constitute sexual assault? They're creepy and weird at worst"
The law in England & Wales is pretty straightforward. Sexual assault is when:
1. You intentionally touch another person
2. That touching is sexual in nature
3. The other person doesn't consent and you don't reasonably believe consent has been given
Stefan Glaenzer's actions fulfil all those requirements - he approached a random woman, thrust his groin repeatedly against her backside (intentional touching, and pretty clearly sexual), and there's no consent here.
There are many degrees of sexual assault. Women (and men) should be able to take the train home without fear of a random stranger coming up and molesting them.
He hasn't actually been sentenced yet, so I couldn't really comment on whether it's appropriate or not. I will say that he's at the magistrate's court[1], so he's not going to be receiving lengthy jail time: the worst case would be six months, but it would be then halved because he pled guilty so he'll in reality he'd only serve three.
That's if he's sent to prison and given the maximum sentence, which hasn't happened yet. The TechCrunch article is a little sensationalistic: he could well be given a suspended sentence instead.
Re: High Profile UK VC Faces Jail After Sexual Assault Conviction
#17[deleted]
Would you be giggling if a grown man approached your wife/girlfriend/mother/sister/daughter on a train and thrusted his groin onto her backside? The use of the term sexual assault is probably a bit neglectful here, but I doubt that's what he's charged with. And, I'm in agreement that the Registry is overused and ruins too many people's lives unnecessarily. However, to discount it as just a "giggle story" is ridiculou…
[deleted]
Re: High Profile UK VC Faces Jail After Sexual Assault Conviction
#18I don't know. I'd like to hear his side of the story. The news reports [1] are kinda vague: "Mr Glaenzer was standing unnecessarily close to one female, looking down at her back," said prosecutor He got off the train at Bond Street and travelled back to Oxford Circus, all the while standing behind women on the train and platforms. On a second trip to Bond Street, Glaenzer was seen by plain clothes officers standing c…
No, standing close is not qualifying for sex offender. It's the "problematic" bit that makes him a sex offender. The fact that you suggest otherwise is rather disingenous.
And given that he pleaded guilty what else of his story do you need to hear?
Can we please stop making excuses for sexual assault?
Re: High Profile UK VC Faces Jail After Sexual Assault Conviction
#19Shocking. I know him because he was an investor in one of my previous companies. While I won't say he always comported himself in the most ethical manner in business matters and I would not let him take a board seat in the future for this reason, like everyone else I thought of him as a good person of high moral character. The chorus of people defending him in the article comments because he is otherwise so charming…
First you say he did not act "in the most ethical manner in business matters". Then you say "I thought of him as a good person of high moral character". Are those statements not at direct odds with one another? I don't think business ethics and morals are exactly orthogonal to one another.
Believe there's an extra or missing logical operator there.
Re: High Profile UK VC Faces Jail After Sexual Assault Conviction
#20From the article: debilitating addiction to cannabis Medically, this makes no sense.
i believe mike was fighting for any excuse of his action. knowing stefan (a small bit) i can only agree that he is one of the most charming, smart and helpful people in the london scene. that offense is super-far out of character for him
as a journalist... his job is the very OPPOSITE of "fighting for any excuse for his action." REALLY weak