A music professor dies after allegation of sexual misconduct
NewsOur attention has been drawn to this incident in Texas, six months ago. It has been mentioned in a discussion on slippedisc.com concerning the dissemination of unchecked abuse allegations against named musicians. In this instance, the claim by social media activists appears to have cost a man his life. At least two of them continue to flaunt the claim on their sites.
The report below was ppublished on KETR.org, Public Radio for Northeast Texas. The internal link leads to the original allegation:
An alumna of Southwest Miami Senior High School, where Guzman worked from 2008-11, publicly accused him of sexually abusing her while she was a student.
A Texas A&M University-Commerce music professor has died. Friday afternoon (May 31), A&M-Commerce president Dr. Mark Rudin sent an email to the university community announcing the death of Assistant Director of Bands Michael Guzman. No details regarding the time, place, and manner of Guzman’s death were mentioned.
Guzman’s death apparently followed a social media post made Thursday (May 30) morning. A former high school student of Guzman’s posted allegations on Facebook that Guzman sexually abused her while Guzman was her band director in Florida. Guzman was band director at Southwest Miami Senior High School from 2008 to 2011. The student, Jackie Rodriguez, said the sexual abuse began when she was 15 years old and continued until she was 18 or 19. The post also detailed emotional and financial abuse.
The email from Dr. Rudin said “We understand this news and the allegations against Mr. Guzman are upsetting. We are committed to ensuring the safety, well-being, and integrity of everyone in our campus community . . . “
The message went on to say “We understand that recent events may also have caused distress . . . concerning instances of sexual abuse. Our hearts go out to anyone who has been affected by such reprehensible acts.” That from the announcement sent Friday. The email also said the university was investigating the matter.
There has been no further conclusion from the university. Police have not been involved. The alleged perpetrator was neither charged nor convicted. If he committed the alleged offences, he might have faced suspension and a jail term. None of the alleged offences carry capital punishment. Yet a man paid for this allegation with his life.
It is crazy that one can get his life ruined or even ended by false allegations by the radical-leftist-mob.
This is exactly why it should be illegal to spread information about “allegations” without solid proof.
I’m talking to you, MeToo-ers & co.
“…allegations by the radical-leftist-mob.” – please can you be more explicit about this allegation.
The young woman chose to make these allegations as a Facebook post, with a photo of her standing next to the man she accused. It could have been a yearbook photo – there is nothing lurid about the pic at all. She gives a heart-wrenching account of what she claims happened, but it’s not a police report, it’s a Facebook post.
The problem is that Baltimore Symphony oboist Katherine Needleman heads a large online mob of angry followers who scour social media for photos of anything which they find objectionable. They share these with her & then host Facebook auto-da-fes against the person accused based on these photos. No evidence, no research, no inquiry. They generally just go after FB posts – usually photos. Needleman’s minions brought Jackie Rodriguez’s FB accusation to her. It was shared it TWELVE TIMES on her page. Needleman responded, with no evidence, no facts, no research and publicly accused the late Mr. Guzman. He committed suicide the next day.
This is KN’s pattern. The auto-da-fes on her page get very ugly. This time, it ended with a man’s death. Men, often in remote countries who did nothing more than post a photo playing their instrument with a couple of male buddies in non-pro situations are accused. They come to the page bewildered, not able to defend themselves in English asking “What did I do wrong?” KN & her mob never explain. They mock, belittle, accuse. It is simply horrible to watch.
Family members come forward. Men who are actually champions of women have been falsely accused.
Other women will try to come forward to defend male colleagues, who’ve been attacked unfairly. They try to explain, from a female perspective how the accusations are wrong. KN & her mob will have none of it. They shut those women down. KN then blocks them from her page.
Once it becomes clearly out of control on her page, KN will step back, let her mob take over & distance herself from what’s going on. She instigates brutal online attacks & then once they’re underway, tries to place herself above it all by making haughty, condescending comments meant to show that she is not involved in the attacks. I’ve observed this over and over again.
This time she’s gone too far. This is online bullying. It resulted in a man’s death. Social media is not a court of law. Katherine Needleman should not be judge, jury and executioner.
I am a woman and I’m all for speaking out against professional inequity & abuse of women. I’ve survived it myself in the music profession. But to Katherine Needleman & her angry mob: this is NOT the way to do it.
Thanks for sharing.
I hadn’t heard of Katherine Needleman until Norman’s article earlier in the week and the serious allegations against her in the comments.
https://slippedisc.com/2024/11/berlin-phil-oboes-us-class-arouses-disquiet/
How can someone so nasty speak out against hate?
Wasn’t Katherine also the one who bullied a critic who made a negative comment about her playing in a record review?
Made racist anti-Asian comments against him, called him sexist and tried to get him fired?
The allocations were pushed by Katharine Needleman, who has a history of accusations as well as poor behaviour.
https://slippedisc.com/2018/09/baltimore-symphonys-two-metoo-inquiries-came-to-nothing/
From a last article:
We first remember this from her [Needleman’s] Wikipedia page:
In 2016, Needleman released a CD of duets for oboe and piano. Upon its receiving a review that contained some criticism of Needleman’s playing,[2] Needleman was caught harassing the reviewer, an oboe specialist. She broadcast the reviewer’s private information over Facebook pages and incited friends and colleagues to send threats and abuse.[3] The influential British journalist Norman Lebrecht describes Needleman’s organisation of an ‘online hate mob’ as ‘reprehensible conduct’, saying she should ‘learn to cope with bad reviews’.[4] The founder of BIS Records, Robert von Bahr, explained that he ‘couldn’t find any trace of Needleman trying to hold back her minions/lynch mob at any stage’, and that not speaking out against about the abuse, at the time or subsequently, ‘speaks volumes’.[5]
Then we remember that she was fired from Peabody for ‘getting into an altercation with a student’, as well as general ‘routine abuse’ towards multiple other students.
Now we see this. What is her main allegation? After turning Carney down for sex, he ‘stopped listening to me while we were tuning’, ‘made faces during rehearsals’ and ‘occasionally blocked my way in staircases’. Really: read it for yourself.
The BSO investigated the allegations against Carney twice, in 2006 and again this year with the help of outside law firms. Needleman’s claims were dismissed both times. Nineteen of Needleman’s colleagues were interviewed for the investigations and did not back her story. Still not content, Needleman now claims that both investigations are ‘biased’ and has taken her story to the media.
In the reviewer incident, Needleman was caught creating fake accounts to make posts attacking the reviewer. This week, similar posts have been found giving unanimous praise to Needleman’s story, including on this website. Comparing the language of the two, the evidence quite strongly suggests they were also written by her.
This came from Katharine Needleman. See her social media pages.
Her behaviour is very strange. She calls herself a social activist against men, but her own behaviour over the years shows multiple examples of bullying.
This is from a previous SlippedDisc page:
“I can’t speak to the BSO issue at all, nor will I try to. I can speak to Ms. Needleman’s overall behaviour at Peabody, however, which did follow a pattern of breaking other people down. She routinely left her own students in tears, and was hardly kinder to others’ students. I’m not sure what Peabody incident it was that apparently was referenced here before, as there were several, but one particularly egregious one involved her behaviour while acting as a sectional coach for a rehearsal of the school’s orchestra. One of the clarinettists, an adult MM candidate, had her legs crossed in front of her at the ankles, and Ms. Needleman called her out on it and gave her a dressing down in front of the whole group. The student had apparently never, at any time in her training, had an instructor admonish her for this, and is a very fine player nonetheless. Needleman’s tone, true to form, was caustic and insensitive, and caught the player very much by surprise. The student ended up fleeing the sectional, ashamed and in tears. Needleman subsequently tried to insist that the student be pulled from the concert and have her orchestra grade reduced. I don’t know how this last ended up playing out, other than the fact that it ultimately required the involvement of the music director, woodwind department chair, and senior administration. Ms. Needleman was a perennially difficult presence at Peabody, having thorny relationships with students, faculty, and administration alike. I’m not surprised to see her involved in yet another controversy.”
Another side-effect of drive-by Needleman.
She previously accused an orchestral musician of misconduct and then started lashing out at other men when her claims were investigated and concluded as having no merit.
Nineteen co-workers, two expensive investigations. There was absolutely nothing to support her story and then she cried about ‘bias’.
The common, recurring problem in all of this sorry saga is Katherine herself. Her other episodes show her to be a nasty piece of work.
Interesting that a person who has chosen the user name “Critical Thinker” seems to assume that allegations of sexual abuse have a political characteristic, and that the said characteristic must be “radical-leftist,” and that, even if the allegation is made by a single individual, that individual is nevertheless a “mob.”
It is true, however, that “false” allegations are contemptible (though also presumably actionable under laws of slander) and can “ruin a life.” And equally true that the truth or falsity of any allegation is almost never known to people who are complete strangers to the situation but reading accounts in news media.
Needleman’s accusations were investigated twice by the orchestra and both times were rejected as unfounded.
These kinds of situations are nearly always He Said/She Said. What kind of “solid proof” do you have in mind?
Okram, you speak as if “he” and “she” are equal parts in a he-says-she-says argument. They are not.
More likely than not, the female party is seen as a victim, with the male party being unable or incapable of providing opposing evidence. There can’t be “solid proof” on what was essentially a private matter. At night it may be consensual but in the morning she can claim it was rape – who are you going to believe?
This opens the doors for man-haters, jealous people and others just after their jobs to raise flair on the “allegations” and have a field day destroying lives.
The accusations here involve a high school teacher and a minor. There is no “at night” or “private matter” in this situation. And why everyone assumes the accuser is lying – where there many instances of such things happening – mystifies me.
What do you think of the “solid proof” where Katherine Needleman shared naked photographs of a colleague because she had a grievance against him?
https://slippedisc.com/2024/05/exclusive-a-case-of-revenge-porn/
Or is it one rule for you and another rule for all men in the world?
”People are dying, losing their livelihood, this is affecting men and women, and children too.
It is time we call it for what it is. Katherine Needleman is a criminal, and her blog is a Hate Group acting on several states, bypassing the US justice system and acting as judges, prosecutors and executioners.
This is not something that can be resolved in a court in Baltimore. This is a Federal issue now, and it is up to the FBI to declare Katherine Needleman’s group a “Hate Group”, and cart her to jail.
This is criminal behavior and Needleman needs to answer this in a criminal court. ”
The suicide was after allegations spread online by Katherine Needleman and Lara St John.
Needleman was the same woman who posted a video last week of a masterclass by Albrecht Mayer and tried to accuse him of misconduct too.
She has also made complaints about a colleague that were shown twice to be unfounded.
She herself has been described as a bully by multiple colleagues and students, and has been previously been suspended from teaching and orchestral roles for bullying and homophobia.
She recently had a grudge against a second colleague and spread ‘revenge porn’ of him over her social media.
See the comments here for much more depth:
https://slippedisc.com/2024/11/berlin-phil-oboes-us-class-arouses-disquiet/
Did it occur to you, Norman, that there might be some truth to the allegations? Nowhere in your post or in the linked article is there any discussion of its merits.
The accusation did not cause his death; Mr. Guzman’s decision to take his own life rather than face those accusations did.
Precisely. The assumption in the article, and many of these posts, appears to be that Mr Guzman was hounded to his death by unreasonable accusations. Yet only he and his accuser know the truth of what happened, and he has chosen to take his life – these are the only facts we have.
Facebook is not a court of law. Assuming the allegations are true, this young woman should have been encouraged to make her report to authorities or to a legitimate news source that would have researched and verified her claims and been in a position to act on them.
Anyone can post anything on FB. Needleman & her mob don’t verify anything. They just amplify anything they see on FB which supports their position. That’s why this is wrong. It’s why it’s libelous. If Needleman wants to use her social media and professional capital to help victims like Jackie Rodriguez she needs to do so responsibly. This was not a responsible act on her part and it resulted in a man’s death. She should be held accountable for that.
For readers: ‘Okram’ was shown in a previous discussion to be Katherine Needleman, who has been driving these allegations, as well as unfounded allegations against many other men.
https://slippedisc.com/2024/11/berlin-phil-oboes-us-class-arouses-disquiet/
The comments in this post go into detail, also describing Needleman’s behaviour, including when she shared revenge porn of someone she disliked.
https://slippedisc.com/2024/05/exclusive-a-case-of-revenge-porn/
In Norman’s words: “What is at issue here, therefore, is not a man sending inappropriate messages to an unwilling female recipient. It is, plain and simple, a matter of revenge porn, instigated by a jilted lover seven years after the event.”
I am NOT Katherine Needleman; Norman can verify that if he wants. She is smart enough to refrain from commenting on this site, or unlike most of us, has the courage to put her own name on her posts.
So stop lying, please.
This person is not KN.
Accusations should be given to the police to be dealt with properly. Not given to Needleman so she can share them as her Facebook status…
I believe NL is referring to the spread of allegations and the accused person having no way to defend himself in the court of public opinion. In America, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty: the charges are considered “alleged” until the accused has received due process in a court of law.
Not arguing the facts or evidence of wrongdoing.
It is really striking that after a young woman posts about being sexually abused from the ages of 15 to 19, your sympathy is all with the alleged perpetrator who killed himself after his behavior was exposed, and none for the young woman whose life was ruined by him. Your argument seems to be that even if he did it (and as I remember, the allegations were backed up with screenshots and photos) he should have just paid with jail time, and somehow it’s the fault of the victim that her speaking up would lead to his taking his own life. How was she supposed to know that would happen? And by your argument, child victims of sexual abuse should just keep quiet to avoid any harm to the men who took advantage. Given the general level of comments on this site, I’m sure the misogynists will have a field day with this post; but I think it’s shameful, Norman, that you’d take this tone to begin with.
Anne, I am taking this tone as a counterbalance to those who disseminate and give credence to every claim, regardless of whether or not it has been tested by the appropriate authorities. I have, as you kn ow, a long record of exposing and pursuing sexual violence in the classical music world. That said, I have always found it necessary to keep a sense of perspective. Not every alleged perpetrator is necessarily guilty. And not every cleared suspect is necessarily innocent. But nobody benefits from the Salem hysteria that is built up around some of these cases. And if a mano loses his life because of an allegation, proven or otherwise, it would be judicious of experienced people like you and me to step back and reflect.
I’m with Anne, I’m shocked at the tone of Norman’s words here. But maybe I shouldn’t be.
Norman, the victim in this case is not responsible for the “Salem hysteria” that may or may not have built around it. I would also argue that your site is responsible for fully as much “Salem hysteria” as any other site — notably the comments section from which you drew the information for this post, which is as much of a pitchfork-rattling witch hunt as anything I’ve seen on the internet. If you truly wanted to quell “Salem hysteria,” you would stress to your commenters that you will not stand for blatant misogyny and ad hominem attacks; instead, you fan the flames by using their comments to inform another post, and then stand back and disclaim responsibility for what might follow.
As for your implication that I am not stepping back and reflecting, while your posting this kind of thing somehow demonstrates your journalistic detachment, I have to chuckle. On this site, I do not find you generally modeling the kind of judicious restraint you are advising — not even in this very post. My impression is that you often shoot from the hip. An example is your coverage of the Cleveland Institute of Music, where for weeks you were branding the students a “woke mob” and said “the inmates are running the asylum” before you finally realized just how bad the administration actually is, and switched sides, so that now you are attacking (very rightly!) the idiocy of the leadership, but without ever having been held accountable for, or even admitted to, your change of heart.
I heartily agree that judicious reflection is a very important quality in a journalist, especially in #metoo cases. I have only told publicly a fraction of the #metoo stories that I have heard, because those are the ones I was able to verify through proper journalistic process, and I have kept my mouth shut about more stories than you may be able to imagine, precisely because I haven’t vetted them, despite knowing full well that they are true. (In any case I am no longer an active journalist.) On the day that you start vetting everything you publish on this site with that kind of journalistic rigor, then I will take more seriously your quasi-lecturing tone about how you and I, as journalists, need to be judicious. At the moment, it just makes me chuckle.
Anne, Enjoy your chuckle. I don’t think you and I are on the same page any more. Your use of the word ‘shameful’, to give one example, is indicative of the decline in your professional standards.
I was hardly speaking as a journalist when using the word “shameful,” Norman. I was using it as a human being, addressing a colleague who is using his platform to fan the flames of hatred and the very “Salem hysteria” he purports to abhor, rather than doing everything he can to quell it.
If my use of that single word is enough for you to dismiss my journalistic standards, you must not have held them in very high regard in the first place. My suspicion is that it’s easier for you to get on your high horse and dismiss me than actually to respond to any of the solid points I made. I believe you know at bottom that I’m not someone who goes off half-cocked. I also believe that there is a great irony in you choosing to call me out on a supposed weakness of journalistic standards, rather than taking a long hard look at your own.
Great reply Mr Lebrecht. Ms Midgette took it upon herself to damage or destroy careers sometimes based on spurious allegations. She was a key instigator against Daniel Gatti at the Concertgebowe. He should never have been forced to resign. Midgette was a terrible music critic for the Post often revealing a deficient knowledge of what she was reviewing. Her predecessor Tim Page and her successor Michael Bradoeur are so much better in both writing and in knowledge of classical music
Bravo, Norman. Thank you.
The problem is: Katherine Needleman drives these allegations online, where nothing needs to be proved.
Her own allegations about a colleague were dismissed.
Some allegations she shares might be true, many are not true. She should leave it to the experts to investigate, not push things herself until people kill themselves.
Are we going to discuss how she shared naked photographs of a man she had a disagreement with? Are you going to condone that?
Suicide is awful, and is also complex, there is very rarely a single factor that causes a person to toe their own life. You have not reported the findings from any inquest into Guzman’s death yet you report your own conclusion of a single cause, laying blame on a women who spoke about abuse and those who shared her story.
Also you don’t seem to have made any effort to report on the evidence to support what that woman has said.
Are you suggesting that women should not speak publicly about the abuse and sexual harm they suffer, for fear of the impact that will have on the men who did those things to them? Or is there a way in which you think it might be acceptable for some women, sometimes, to talk about such abuse? If so, can you share this so it is clear how slippedisc thinks we ought to behave?
For all the words you say, Kate, you can’t justify Needleman’s actions here or elsewhere.
What do you think of the nude photos she recently shared of a fellow musician?
Bullying is not a solution to bullying.
Anne, how was her life “ruined”?
We read about a loan co-sign, that she got a job in the same field of her studies with him.
Are you pushing the victimhood theory on her, who came up above ground? The victim here is Mr. Guzman, who was surrounded by unproven “allegations” and had no way out. And by far the greatest loser in all of this is his widow, left without his income and having to raise two young daughters. These are the real victims, while Jackie sails the oceans free.
If (“if”) her “allegations” have any merit – and we will now never know – they don’t appear to have jolted her out of her life’s dreams in the way they have affected other men and women, most notably Lara St. John with her experience at Curtis at a similar age, or men victims of sexual abuse from Catholic priests.
The answer to all this? Legal due process. Proof of evidence. A trustworthy and unbiased legal system. It seems you Americans don’t trust your laws, jump to conclusions based on each one’s particular bias and preferences, or because it happens to be the “issue of the day” on social media. In such a system, no one is safe, and no truth can be found.
Anne – vigilantism is dangerous for precisely this reason. There is a criminal system and process for this.
Katherine (who spread these allegations) has widely been accused of intimidating behaviour against her colleagues and her students, and apparently has been suspended by her employers at least twice because of her actions.
Anne, can you fathom the damage you do to women’s careers and the danger you bring to their lives by making such arguments? Are you able to see 5 feet in front of you?
By your words you support VIGILANTES. That is what Katherine Needleman’s group is. A Hate Mob of vigilantes acting on impulse and not on sound judgment or due process.
Now, if you will, shift that around, and read Newton’s 3rd law, basically, “what goes around, comes around”. By claiming that vigilantes armed by unchecked allegations can push a man to suicide, have you put any thought into your words being used as justification for men to destroy a woman’s life and push her to end her life based on unchecked allegations.
While crimes – against women AND against men – do occur and must be investigated, tried and punished for, it is wrong of you to assume that any accusation coming down the pike from a woman will have validity, because in doing so you empower the worst MEN out there to do the same.
Vigilantism is not the answer. You are wrong. Needleman is wrong. This line of thinking is criminal, short sighted and leads only to societal chaos.
Anne, I am one of your greatest admirers, but as a well respected journalist I know that you research and verify accusations that you make publicly. Katherine Needleman does not.
Yes, you and she are on the same side, but don’t confuse being on the same side with responsible reporting. Citing an online mob to provoke a man to suicide with only a FB post as evidence is not a responsible act.
We are all concerned about Ms. Rodriguez, make no mistake there. Her claims may likely be true. But Katherine Needleman, as a high profile figure in the music world and also an educator of young musicians (Curtis faculty) has no business interceding in this situation in the manner that she did.
If Needleman truly cared about this young woman, or wanted to help, she would have counseled her privately how to make a viable report to authorities who could help her.
But it’s a lot more self-satisfying for Needleman to take a bright shiny FB post with a nice photo of the accused and splat it all over social media with accusations without ever having spoken to the woman or researched the evidence. That’s libel.
From her actions, is it not clear to you, Anne, that Katherine Needleman has no concern for the women she claims to be defending? She doesn’t care a fig about Ms. Rodriguez. If she did, she would have handled this much differently. She is only in this for herself, to call attention to herself. She does this over and over again.
Our sympathies are very much with Ms. Rodriguez. She was twice a victim. Most likely once by Mr. Guzman and very clearly again by Katherine Needleman who has exploited her story for her own personal gain, and provoked a man’s death in the process.
Anne, you’re one of the worthy heroines defending women responsibly. You have integrity, and you behave prudently with the power you hold. Needleman is the exactly the opposite. She is toxic.
What wild choices of language in this article – first decrying “unchecked abuse allegations” appears to betray the author’s greater empathy toward the (mostly) men who do in fact victimize so many in our industry rather than to the people who are harmed by sexual abuse. Then, claiming Guzman has “paid for this allegation with his life.” Guzman was not executed by some vigilante mob. He made the choice to take his own life.
I want to give an illustration of how very challenging it can be for victims, particularly minor victims, to hold their abusers to account. A college classmate of mine went on to teach at a middle school level (students roughly ages 11 to 14). About five years into his teaching, he raped a 14 year old student on three occasions. He was arrested, charged, and convicted. I read through a lot of the court filings, including the judge’s remarks at his sentencing. While noting that the man was the adult in the situation and responsible for his crimes, the judge still saw fit to allude to supposed actions on the child’s part that might have served as temptation to the adult. This victim testified at sentencing about how her life was still impacted, three years after surviving this abuse, and yet had to hear some absurd claim that she might have provided some inciting behavior to draw this abuse toward her.
It’s not about the accusations are true or false, it’s the police and prosecutors job. It’s about Needleman and her hate group acting as judges, prosecutors and executioners by manipulating the public opinions. They think they are above the justice system that’s the problem here.
Does anyone think the allegations against Guzman weren’t true? Before the hate mob here gets all uppity, I hope they do a little research and realize that the accusations against Guzman were almost certainly true and a several more women came forward and cited similar stories after Ms. Rodriguez came forward. It’s certainly tragic that he killed himself, but there is little doubt that he was a terrible/criminal abuser of minors/students/women.
It could be the case that both Guzman and Needleman are truly horrible people.
Doesn’t America have due process? Is it still the “Wild West” where anything passes for justice? How can “allegations” be taken as true just because it is a woman who raised them, and how can a family be bombarded by attacks by a vicious hate mob before such allegations are verified?
Jackie’s story raises many questions about credibility and their relationship. While it is clear that any close relationship with any minor is not acceptable and intimacy qualifies as statutory rape, the fact that they co-signed a loan may indicate a partnership, consensus and a plan. That is not abuse, nor is it worth destroying his life.
Ultimately, Jackie’s life was not “ruined”. She got a job in the same field as her…assailant? or… the same field of the person who helped her get there, even if with odd channels worthy of questioning and even condemnation?
What we see is a young woman claiming both sides of the pie: she raises allegations of misconduct through clear exaggerations aimed at causing victimhood. This belittles women in music and presents a legislative problem for America which eventually will have to be solved by laws protecting men against false accusations, further reducing the scope of women’s well being in the industry.
https://www.facebook.com/KatherineNeedlemanOboist
This is the woman driving these allegations. I think it’s clear she is a bully with a serious mental health problem.
Katherine Needleman is a stain on our orchestra who is more focused on attacking men than making music.
We and many others sincerely hope she can be let go.
She didn’t get past the first round of her Baltimore audition and shouldn’t have been hired in the first place. It is ironic that two white men (her teachers) intervened and gave her the job.
Rest in peace.
Whatever the truth, Michael Guzman deserved to have this investigated properly and correctly, not have unverified allegations shared by Katherine Needleman because she wanted to humiliate him.
It should be added that Needleman’s own allegations were investigated multiple times and determined in each case to be unfounded. Blood is on her hands.
They were not determined to be unfounded; there was just not enough found to justify legal/disciplinary action. Jonathan Carney ultimately admitted his middle-of-the-night proposition. Whether he retaliated is of course going to be more a matter of interpretation.