Hardly. Matt Darby clearly describes a situation that there was ample time for her to walk away. AND I QUOTE (Darby's Account):
"At first it was a hug, or an arm around the shoulders; friendly, drunken comraderie that they both were engaged in. Friends.
Joe started to get a little more familiar and was running his hand down her back and patting at her butt (she was seated). I noticed, and I watched. It was getting creepy, but Justine didn't move, or slap him. She was laughing, I figured it was nothing huge.
This continued for a few moments, then Justine got up on the bar, laid down in front of him, and the bartender poured a shot into her navel area. Joe slurped it up, then kissed her up the stomach until he got to, and chomped down, on her shirt-covered left breast. I was standing two feet away. I don't know who's idea this was.
Justine sat down, and Joe picked up the pace. He was really rubbing on her, and it got to the point where I felt uncomfortable for both of them. This lasted for about two minutes. His hands were admittedly all over her.
I was talking with Zach and Mike Eaton, who had just come over to us, and I said "I'll be right back" and walked over to diffuse the situation."
There was plenty of time for her to make up any excuse to leave the situation.
Someone has already posted a comment on there about this situation. Why not contact Joe directly and ask him for his account before applying guilt by hearsay.
Exactly. All this guilt mobbing absurd. This is someones life we are talking about. If you really care about this situation you would want this to be handled properly and not through an internet website with a bunch of strangers that have no connection this is account other than it was posted here.
Can you point me to this please. I would like to read their corroboration of this event. It would help my opinion much more. This situation is so grey area that another perspective would help. Please link, thank you so much.
Factual, are we 100% certain? If you are going to attached these type of title to this person, we had better be damn certain. This is why we have a legal system and not mob rule based on emotions. If he is guilty then so be it but until we know for sure, we should hold judgement. Also she mentions at the beginning that she is just writing this to get it out there, sounds rushed.
She has pressed charges via the internet. Many of the people on here have accepted judgement and this will stick with Joe for ever. Yes Joe made a very bad choice and was he being malicious by moving forward in his advance KNOWING Justine did not want any part of it. The looks to be a hard argument to honestly make. I am not convinced by her own account. Intent matters and I doubt Joe intended to sexually assault one of his own employees in front of his other employees in a bar. That is the real question here.
How about a compromise, walk away. Pull away. Or clearly say Stop it or No. All those would of worked just fine. What I am saying is that a victim usually has no alternatives when they are victimized. From her own account, she had the ability to exercise any of the items listed above to remove herself from this situation.
Regardless of shock or not, it was her responsibility to pull away and not let it go any further. Maybe she was really drunk and it didn't hit her that this was happening. Yes unwanted sexual contact happened but to make her as a pure victim is passing judgement on Joe with even asking him his side or any of the witnesses. Yes bad things happened but it is not this clear cut and one-sided. Sorry to break it to you.
She should of just gotten up from the bar. From how the story reads, I don't think she was laying down at that point so she had the opportunity to walk away. 4 separate acts happened and by her account 3 were unwanted. How many does it take for someone to just remove themselves from the situation? How many?
Exactly, I does not look to be a vile act but still a bad decision on Joe's part. If someone said no by referencing wife and kids, that would "imply" they actual would do it but that have a moral objection to the person's relationship status. NO MEANS NO when you say NO or STOP. Many of you are being self-righteous by vilifying this person and then when anyone brings up reasonable doubt, you attack the person or worse then addressing reasonable questions like why didn't she just walk away or clearly say STOP or NO. Instead I see people absolving Justine from any PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for her ACTIONS or LACK THEREOF.
Can someone tell me how you put your hand down to grab someone's butt while they are laying on their back on a bar? That seems kind of difficult. I just tried it and it took me rolling someone on their side then doing it and then rolling them back to put my hand down their pants. I am just recounting the information presented to fairly run through this situation. We need to be fair to both parties if were are going to be passing judgement on people we don't know and were not at this event. We are only hearing one side of the story so that means we need to scrutinize it even more.
Why did she not pull away after the kiss and be done with it. It takes some time to kiss someone, reach around grab their butt then go down the pants which were likely tight fitting jeans. Just time it yourself and ask yourself if there is enough time for someone to pull away. I am not sure how you "jam" you tongue down someones throat and not have them pull away if they did not want that from you. Check your emotions for a second and read through and document all the facts and weigh them before you start making judgements.
Two words: Personal Responsibility. The fact she admit she froze up would in my mind maybe give the person the benefit of the doubt that he was not trying to be purposely malicious. That is the real issue here when we want to throw around terms like "sexual assault". What matters is the intent of the person when they commit these acts not that technical some sexual contact was made that was not invited when two adults in a bar that are drunk are engaging in personal contact. Nothing in this article tells us the Joe intended to assault her, only that he made a very bad decision in making a move like that before being invited to. Maybe he felt that was were it was leading from the fact that she never pulled away during 3 personal contacts that were progressive. Maybe she froze or maybe she was just too drunk to be fully aware. You have to evaluate both sides to see if the evidence points to specific motives. That is the real issue here.
Please read "After the shot" again. If im not mistaken kissing forheads and rubbing is commen place with your male friends. You mention multiple coworkers. He hand grabs your butt and you dont immediatly pull away????? Why not take responsibility for your actions as well. Ive been to bars and seen drunken mistakes but to vilify the person like this and not take any resposibilty for your actions is pathetic and immature. Yes he crossed the line but maybe we should hear that from you too.
What rights should be given just because people work in a corporation? Flawed argument. Personhood is quite important in our Republic. Only living and breathing humans that are American citizens should be allowed to take part in our politics. Giving corporations a seat at the table is just reinforcing a class-based system like you have in Britain but without hereditary titles. Wealth is power in a market based society. The other is influence and military might. Corporatons have two inhierently because there first use was to concentrate capital (wealth) and limit liability.
Corporations should be economic engines only. People can and should be forced to organize independently of a corporation. That preserves the balance in a democracy. I would also add that liability protection for the officers should be recinded. These two changes would have a profoundly postive effect on society.