Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lubbock City Employee Asked to Respond to Allegations of Sexual Harassment
KCBD News Channel 11 ^ | 26 October 2007 | Staff

Posted on 10/26/2007 9:26:52 PM PDT by Army Air Corps

A city employee accused of sexual harrassment has until Monday to defend himself.

Last month, NewsChannel 11 told you a City of Lubbock employee was put on paid administrative leave amid allegations of sexual harrassment. The man is accused of sexually harrassing a co-worker at least 20 times, and he is also accused of having sex in city buildings.

The city is giving the man until Monday to give reasons why he should not be fired.

However, in a letter written to the city last week, the man said "I am completely innocent of this accusation. You cannot prove that I did anything wrong because it is an utter lie."

NewsChannel 11 is not releasing the man's name, because he has not been charged with any crime.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Miscellaneous; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: cityemployee; sexualharrassment
One incident might be excused with mitigating circumstances, but 20 is a pattern.
1 posted on 10/26/2007 9:26:53 PM PDT by Army Air Corps
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: hispanarepublicana

Something for the Hub Ping List.


2 posted on 10/26/2007 9:27:25 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps

If he says that his partner was male, they’ll promote him and throw a party.


3 posted on 10/26/2007 9:29:14 PM PDT by Eagles6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6

You don’t know Lubbock very well, do you?


4 posted on 10/26/2007 9:34:42 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps
The city is giving the man until Monday to give reasons why he should not be fired.

If he is truly innocent he should say no more. Let his attorney fight this and then sue the city.

5 posted on 10/26/2007 9:36:33 PM PDT by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps
No, I don’t and I hope that you’re right. Just making a generalization about gubmint bureaucracies.
6 posted on 10/26/2007 9:37:43 PM PDT by Eagles6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6

No blood, no foul, FRiend.

Lubbock is still pretty conservative desoite the current crop of useless wankers in our city council. The current asshats passed Red Light Camera regs despite overwhelming public opposition (there is a bit of a scandal with that) and some pushed to rename a street for Cesar Chavez because he was “A civil rights leader.” Again, most people were opposed to that. Already, polls show that there will be a change at city hall in the next round of elections.


7 posted on 10/26/2007 9:41:57 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rudder

It would have to be pretty flagrant for it to go this far with the City government.


8 posted on 10/26/2007 9:43:31 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Squantos

SWAT team member?


9 posted on 10/26/2007 10:52:12 PM PDT by razorback-bert (Posted by Time's Man of the Year)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps

“The current asshats passed Red Light Camera regs despite overwhelming public opposition “

That is pretty standard now in most Texas cities. They start with by saying the cameras will only be used for traffic control and monitoring. But they leave out the fact that to take photos for traffic violations only requires a small upgrade. The upgrade can be done at will and doesn’t require voter approval since the cameras are already approved and installed.


10 posted on 10/27/2007 1:14:43 AM PDT by neb52
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps

No proof = lawsuit worth millions. I’d take that in a heartbeat - let ‘em fire me.


11 posted on 10/27/2007 2:24:16 AM PDT by txzman (Jer 23:29)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neb52

Oh, it was worse than that.

The City Council held a meeting in secret (a violation of the Open Meetings Act) wherein they made their decision.


12 posted on 10/27/2007 7:56:50 AM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: txzman

I imagine that there will be some kind of suit. At that point, I imagine that more information will be available to the public. It would be something if the City had video of the guy...


13 posted on 10/27/2007 8:01:04 AM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: neb52
This story points to the real reason for the cameras.
14 posted on 10/27/2007 8:57:52 AM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: neb52
This story is about the same company with which Lubbock signed a contract for Red Light Cameras.
15 posted on 10/27/2007 9:01:49 AM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson