Monta Ellis accused of Sexual Harassment

[indeedproceed]

I like Ellis alot. He doesnt seem like a guy that would cheat on his wife..

He sent out many sexually graphic pictures to a woman in the Warriors organization.  She has proof, and a press conference will be held in which all that information will come to fruition.  Sad story as Ellis was a guy I've enjoyed watching play.  Apparently a basketball wasn't the only ball he played...

I hope he gets suspended for about a third of the season, so the Warriors can show they're better off without him and can trade his butt.

I bet they're not too happy about letting Reggie WIlliams walk now though.

I like Ellis alot. He doesnt seem like a guy that would cheat on his wife..

Lots of guys who "don't seem like the type" to cheat on their wife in fact do cheat on their wives.  It's very hard to judge somebody's character based upon their public facade.  

Star athletes like Ellis are used to being given (or at least being able to afford) just about everything they could possibly want from the time they're in highschool.

Even the most morally upstanding men in the world would have problems staying completely faithful IMO. Its a numbers thing. Money+Fame=Women.

That being said, I wonder what the % of athletes being accused of domestic abuse, rape, sexual harassment, etc is in relation to the total population.

[indeedproceed]

Have followed this story, using a lot of Twitter links provided at HoopsHype.  This will come across really bad for Ellis and Golden State.  It appears the front office knew of this and a cover-up might have taken place.  This lawyer is going to take this pretty far...  We don't know all the details, but those coming out will paint Ellis in a VERY bad light... A picture says a thousand words, and then some.

If they knew about it then following the WEEI precedent from the Paterno thing Ellis can never play again and the coach can never coach again

Not to compare degrees of bad acts, but I do think there's a difference in kind between sending somebody sexually explicit photos and raping a child.  Both are wrong and the perpetrators should be punished, but one is substantially more wrong.

Indeed one can be explained as part of an affair, rather than harassment depending on the facts of the case.

The other has no explanation other than a mental illness of some kind.

Yeah, not to pile on or anything, but..yeah. Raping kids and sending graphic, offensive texts to a grown woman are kind different offenses in the grand scheme of things.

[jgod213]

Boltuch also claims the Warriors have refused to resolve the matter previously.

I don't know which way to go with this story, but if Ellis had sent incriminating pictures and video to this woman you would think, given the tone of this woman's lawyer, that Ellis and the Warriors would of tried to keep this under wraps by nipping it in the bud a while ago via a settlement of some sort.

The language used by this laywer makes me think that perhaps he is still trying to get the Warriors to settle by posturing through the media.

msn link with a bit more info:

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/Former-Golden-State-Warriors-employee-sues-Monta-Ellis-team-for-sexual-harassment-122011

[Eddie20]

Buy low for the C's???

[fairweatherfan]

Have followed this story, using a lot of Twitter links provided at HoopsHype.  This will come across really bad for Ellis and Golden State.  It appears the front office knew of this and a cover-up might have taken place.  This lawyer is going to take this pretty far...  We don't know all the details, but those coming out will paint Ellis in a VERY bad light... A picture says a thousand words, and then some.

If they knew about it then following the WEEI precedent from the Paterno thing Ellis can never play again and the coach can never coach again

Not to compare degrees of bad acts, but I do think there's a difference in kind between sending somebody sexually explicit photos and raping a child.  Both are wrong and the perpetrators should be punished, but one is substantially more wrong.

Indeed one can be explained as part of an affair, rather than harassment depending on the facts of the case.

The other has no explanation other than a mental illness of some kind.

Yeah, not to pile on or anything, but..yeah. Raping kids and sending graphic, offensive texts to a grown woman are kind different offenses in the grand scheme of things.

And a professional, privately owned sports organization tends to have different pressures and priorities than a public university.  It's still wrong if it's true, but it's major apples-to-oranges to try and equate it to Penn State.

[Eja117]

Have followed this story, using a lot of Twitter links provided at HoopsHype.  This will come across really bad for Ellis and Golden State.  It appears the front office knew of this and a cover-up might have taken place.  This lawyer is going to take this pretty far...  We don't know all the details, but those coming out will paint Ellis in a VERY bad light... A picture says a thousand words, and then some.

If they knew about it then following the WEEI precedent from the Paterno thing Ellis can never play again and the coach can never coach again

Not to compare degrees of bad acts, but I do think there's a difference in kind between sending somebody sexually explicit photos and raping a child.  Both are wrong and the perpetrators should be punished, but one is substantially more wrong.

I agree. The similarity is that you have someone being victimized, and a cover up by people more powerful (if some of the comments in this thread are accurate).
Also I'm somewhat commenting on the rush to judgement and trial in the court of public opinion too.

[Eja117]

So leeeeettt me see if I understand this. The severity is worse in one case because it was children (and over a longer period of time), and perhaps because it was a public university, rather than a private business.

Soooooo.....you should get punished less for victimizing/harassing a grown woman and covering it up, than for hurting kids and covering it up. I'll go with harassment isn't as bad as hurting someone, but a cover up is a cover up right? I'm fine with Ellis getting in way less trouble than Sandusky. But why should the people that enabled/covered up get in less trouble than the other guy who looked the other way? Because he's covering up a less bad, but still bad thing?

[Fafnir]

Because he's covering up a less bad, but still bad thing?

Yes pretty much, the underlying act is certainly a factor when you're looking at what sort of penalty sweeping a crime/transgression under the rug.

Also remember that this is a civil action, that makes things very different.

[Roy H.]

So leeeeettt me see if I understand this. The severity is worse in one case because it was children (and over a longer period of time), and perhaps because it was a public university, rather than a private business.

Soooooo.....you should get punished less for victimizing/harassing a grown woman and covering it up, than for hurting kids and covering it up. I'll go with harassment isn't as bad as hurting someone, but a cover up is a cover up right? I'm fine with Ellis getting in way less trouble than Sandusky. But why should the people that enabled/covered up get in less trouble than the other guy who looked the other way? Because he's covering up a less bad, but still bad thing?

A wide spread, systematic cover up of a heinous crime that took place over several years and denied the victims (in that case, children) a voice is worse than the cover up of the sexual harassment of a grown woman, yes.  Both are wrong, but one is more wrong.

Also, we don't know yet what the Warriors knew, or even if the allegations are true.  In the Penn State case, multiple powerful members of the administration knew what was going on, and we have every reason in the world to believe that something very, very inappropriate occurred.

[33_Larry Legend_33]

He would have been better off to be like Grady Sizemore and send them to someone he knows and loves, as opposed to an employee of the organization.  Though stupid, the first is a bit more forgivable.  I don't see anyone trading for him, and would imagine the iron first of David Stern would stop any transaction involving him right now.

But, I also believe that given time this can blow over.  He sent pictures...yeah, bad and stupid.  But if the evidence shows he didn't push this any further, he can deal with his punishment and then move on...lesson learned.

I'm not for one second advocating what Ellis did, but I also think this is different than a child rapist...

[moiso]

We don't know the relationship between Ellis and the employee.  So far with what we know, no big deal to me.

[33_Larry Legend_33]

We don't know the relationship between Ellis and the employee.  So far with what we know, no big deal to me.

I don't think she's gonna agree with you.

[Eja117]

Because he's covering up a less bad, but still bad thing?

Also remember that this is a civil action, that makes things very different.

good point

[Eja117]

So leeeeettt me see if I understand this. The severity is worse in one case because it was children (and over a longer period of time), and perhaps because it was a public university, rather than a private business.

Soooooo.....you should get punished less for victimizing/harassing a grown woman and covering it up, than for hurting kids and covering it up. I'll go with harassment isn't as bad as hurting someone, but a cover up is a cover up right? I'm fine with Ellis getting in way less trouble than Sandusky. But why should the people that enabled/covered up get in less trouble than the other guy who looked the other way? Because he's covering up a less bad, but still bad thing?

A wide spread, systematic cover up of a heinous crime that took place over several years and denied the victims (in that case, children) a voice is worse than the cover up of the sexual harassment of a grown woman, yes.  Both are wrong, but one is more wrong.

Also, we don't know yet what the Warriors knew, or even if the allegations are true.  In the Penn State case, multiple powerful members of the administration knew what was going on, and we have every reason in the world to believe that something very, very inappropriate occurred.

right but JoePa brought it to his supervisors the next day, which isn't exactly the act of a conspirator..and now then they said he can never coach ever again, without more evidence than the grand jury testimony. So who's a worse guy? A guy that reports something immediately or a guy actually accused of actually victimizing someone like...say...Monta Ellis? Who will get punished worse?

[Roy H.]

So leeeeettt me see if I understand this. The severity is worse in one case because it was children (and over a longer period of time), and perhaps because it was a public university, rather than a private business.

Soooooo.....you should get punished less for victimizing/harassing a grown woman and covering it up, than for hurting kids and covering it up. I'll go with harassment isn't as bad as hurting someone, but a cover up is a cover up right? I'm fine with Ellis getting in way less trouble than Sandusky. But why should the people that enabled/covered up get in less trouble than the other guy who looked the other way? Because he's covering up a less bad, but still bad thing?

A wide spread, systematic cover up of a heinous crime that took place over several years and denied the victims (in that case, children) a voice is worse than the cover up of the sexual harassment of a grown woman, yes.  Both are wrong, but one is more wrong.

Also, we don't know yet what the Warriors knew, or even if the allegations are true.  In the Penn State case, multiple powerful members of the administration knew what was going on, and we have every reason in the world to believe that something very, very inappropriate occurred.

right but JoePa brought it to his supervisors the next day, which isn't exactly the act of a conspirator..and now then they said he can never coach ever again, without more evidence than the grand jury testimony. So who's a worse guy? A guy that reports something immediately or a guy actually accused of actually victimizing someone like...say...Monta Ellis? Who will get punished worse?

Person A:  We don't know the allegations, but is presumed to have sent lewd photos to an adult woman that made her very uncomfortable; or

Person B:  Iconic and extremely power community leader who knew a close personal friend was raping children, but did little about it -- and nothing about it once it was clear a cover up was going on -- despite knowing that that friend was repeatedly in continued contact with young children?

Both are pretty sleazy, and frankly, both should lose their jobs and have their contracts voided, if true.  However, if I had to choose only one to get a greater punishment, it would be Person B.  In his position, he had a duty to protect the innocent, and he violated the public trust to preserve his meal ticket.