• stumble
  • youtube
  • linkedin

Archives for : Sexual harassment

Gwalior Woman judge raises objections over inquiry – Sexual Harassment

4 Aug 2014
The Deccan Herald

New Delhi, Aug 14, 2014, (PTI)

A woman judge in Gwalior, who has quit her job accusing a Madhya Pradesh High Court judge of sexually harassing her, has raised objections to the inclusion of a High Court judge in the committee set up to go into her complaint. DH illustrationA woman judge in Gwalior, who has quit her job accusing a Madhya Pradesh High Court judge of sexually harassing her, has raised objections to the inclusion of a High Court judge in the committee set up to go into her complaint.

She has also expressed her inability to attend an inquiry in Jabalpur if her travel expenses, boarding and lodging consistent with her status are not provided and safety and security not guaranteed.

In the alternative, she was willing to attend the inquiry in Delhi, she said in her letter to the Secretary of the Committee for preliminary enquiry set up by the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

She raised objections to the inclusion of Justice Ajit Singh of Gwalior Bench, who is heading the committee, as he was involved in a decision to transfer her to Sidhi “for not succumbing to the advances made by the accused judge”, she said in the letter.

The woman judicial officer, who was of the rank of Additional District and Sessions Judge and who had expressed her willingness to appear before any enquiry by impartial and unbiased persons, has also questioned the committee for asking her to appear on a working day and in public glare.

She said the judge, who had harassed her sexually, was still discharging judicial and administrative functions over the staff who were working with her and have witnessed her victimisation.

The victim judge,  however, objected to the summons being sent to her husband and daughter to be present at the enquiry.

The woman judge has been asked to appear before the committee on August 19 in the High Court in Jabalpur.  The RBI Board advised the RBI to operationalise the restructuring, while taking into account the need to continuously keep communication channels open with stakeholders as the process moves forward.

RBI said HR restructuring proposals essentially revolve around bringing functional synergies in operations by grouping departments into clusters.

It is also aimed leveraging human resources to bring about greater professionalism and specialisation so as to enhance the effectiveness of the Bank’s operations and policy making.

The proposals involve professionalisation of HR functions in the RBI, including a more effective performance management system and responsive and proactive skill and leadership development programmes, it added.


Read mor ehere- ttp://

Related posts

MP judge sexual harassment case: CJI’s bench to hear petition #Vaw

Last Updated: Tuesday, August 05, 2014,
Zee Media Bureau/Deepak NagpalNew Delhi/Gwalior: The Supreme Court on Tuesday did not take up a petition filed by advocate ML Sharma seeking dismissal of Madhya Pradesh High Court judge who has been accused of sexual harassment by a woman additional district and sessions judge in Gwalior.

Sharma today mentioned the matter before the SC bench headed by Justice TS Thakur, but the latter directed the advocate to mention it before Chief Justice of India RM Lodha’s bench which will be sitting on Friday.

CJI Lodha has described the matter as “very serious” which would be dealt with “appropriately”.

The woman judge has quit her job in the wake of alleged sexual harassment by a judge of the Gwalior bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

The High Court judge has rejected the charge and offered to face death penalty if allegations are found true.

In a letter to the Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the judge described the allegations as “totally false” and expressed his willingness to face probe by the CBI or any other agency.

The woman judge concerned has sent a nine-page representation to the CJI stating that the High Court judge had some months ago started showing “more than normal interest” in her work and had gradually started making “coloured remarks” about her.

Meanwhile, lawyers at the Gwalior district court today demanded that the judge in question be removed till an inquiry is conducted against him.

Read more here-

Related posts

Sexual Harassment in Judiciary – Gwalior additional judge complains and quits #Vaw #WTFnews

Gwalior additional judge says she was sexually harassed by HC judge, quits

Gwalior additional judge says she was sexually harassed by HC judge, quits
In her complaint to CJI R M Lodha, the judge said the administrative judge sent her a message through the district registrar to “perform dance on an item song” at a function.
NEW DELHI: An additional district and sessions judge in Gwalior, who was heading the Vishaka committee against sexual harassment, could not save herself from the prying eyes of a Madhya Pradesh high court judge and had to resign from judicial service to protect her “dignity, womanhood and self-esteem”.

After practicing law for 15 years in Delhi courts, she passed the MP Higher Judicial Service exam and was posted in Gwalior on August 1, 2011. After training under Justice D K Paliwal, she was posted as additional district and sessions judge in Gwalior in October 2012.

In April 2013, she was appointed chairperson of District Vishaka Committee. Her annual confidential report of January 2014 termed her work “excellent and outstanding”. But that was not enough. The administrative judge from Gwalior bench of Madhya Pradesh HC kept pestering her to visit him in his bungalow alone, she alleged.

In her complaint to Chief Justice of India R M Lodha and Supreme Court judges Justices H L Dattu, T S Thakur, Anil R Dave, Dipak Misra and Arun Misra, as well as the MP HC chief justice, she said the administrative judge sent her a message through the district registrar to “perform dance on an item song” at a function in his residence. She avoided the function on the pretext of her daughter’s birthday.

Responding to her complaint, Justice Lodha said, “This is the only profession where we refer to our colleagues as brothers and sisters. This is unfortunate. I will take appropriate action after the complaint is placed before me.”

The very next day of sending a message to dance in his residence, the administrative judge told her that “he missed the opportunity of viewing a sexy and beautiful figure dancing on the floor and that he is desperate to see the same”, she alleged.

The judge got angry when she did not pay heed to his “various advances and malicious aspirations”. She was subjected to intense scrutiny by the administrative judge. He got more agitated when no fault was found, she said.

“I started commencing court at 10.30 am instead of 11 am and extended the working hours in the evening by one hour to 6 pm,” she said but complained that this did not appease the administrative judge, who continued to harass her.

Tired of harassment, she along with her husband on June 22 went to meet the administrative judge, who was “irritated” to find her with her husband and asked her to meet him after 15 days. But even before 15 days could have elapsed, she was served with a transfer order.

In her complaint, she said, “The administrative judge, along with district judge and district judge (inspection), possibly made a false, frivolous, baseless and malicious reporting to the chief justice of MP and got me transferred on July 8, in the mid-academic session of my daughters to a remote place Sidhi by overruling the transfer policy of MP HC.”

Her representation for eight-month extension to allow her daughters complete the academic session was rejected. Left with no choice, she called on the administrative judge and pleaded against the abrupt transfer saying it would affect the studies of her child who was in Class 12.

In her complaint, she said, “Mockingly, he replied that I faced this mid-academic session transfer to Sidhi for not fulfilling his aspirations and for not visiting his bungalow alone even once and he also threatened me that now he will spoil my career completely and make sure that I face ruinous prospects all my life.”

She claimed the HC chief justice declined to meet her when she wanted to apprise him of the situation. “I was left with no option but to resign, so, I resigned on July 15 in compelling, humiliating and disgraceful circumstances to save my dignity, womanhood, self-esteem and career of my daughter.”

Seeking justice from the CJI, she said, “Only because the perpetrator is as powerful as an ‘administrative judge’ that he can cast an evil eye on me, and I do not even get a hearing. What system are we following and leading this democracy to? If this is how a mother, sister and wife can be treated, who is herself no less than a judicial officer duty-bound to protect society and law, what constitutional goals are we serving?”

Read mor where –



Related posts

Bihar legislative assembly raises Sexual Harassment Case of Rupashree Dasgupta #Vaw

sexual harassment

PATNA: Reprieve seems to be knocking on the doors of Rupashree Dasgupta, the Patna IGIMS’s associate professor who was dismissed on grounds that her appointment was illegal. “Injustice was done to Rupashree. The image of Bihar would be tarnished if she is not given justice,” said the Zero Hour Committee of Bihar legislative assembly in its probe report that was tabled in the house on Monday.Ruposhree was dismissed in June 2013 almost 20 months after she was appointed on the post of associate professor in the IGIMS’ nursing college. The post was advertised in 2010 with the eligibility criteria being Master’s in nursing and total seven years of experience with minimum of three years’ teaching experience.”Without any complaint, a high-level committee constituted under the chairmanship of the IGIMS director sought an explanation from Rupashree on August 24, 2012 and said she must be demoted to the post of assistant professor and the ‘extra salary’ that she had drawn (in her capacity as associate professor) till date must be adjusted in future salary,” the probe report said and added she was asked to reply to the show-cause notice within five days.Ruposhree replied, explaining the advertisement did not say the candidate should have done teaching for three years immediately after completing the Master’s. Five months on in January 2013, however, Rupashree was served another show-cause notice, asking why her appointment, which was “ex facie illegal in the view of institution”, should not be cancelled.Ruposhree replied, explaining afresh the details of the advertisement. “Three years’ teaching experience immediately after Master’s is not mandatory even according to the guidelines of Nursing Council of India,” she added in her reply.However, the IGIMS issued an office order (number 1512 dated June 21, 2013), saying Rupashree’s appointment was not given post facto approval by the Board of Governors (BoGs) through its resolution number 92/1398(1) at its meeting on May 25, 2013. The IGIMS the same day wrote a letter (number 1513) to Rupashree, informing her about the BoGs’ resolution and further that “your services, under probation, with the IGIMS are dispensed with and you are relieved from your post from the date of issue of this letter”.

But, according to the house committee’s probe report, the agenda of the BOGs’ May 25 meeting did not include Ruposhree’s case. This was confirmed by at least two members of the BoGs, including the then leader of opposition Abdul Bari Siddiqui, who told the house panel the matter was not even raised in the meeting.

Though the minutes of the meeting signed by the then IGIMS director said the matter was discussed under the category ‘Others’, the house committee rubbished the claim. “The category ‘Others’ has a definition under which only those issues are discussed under this category which come up suddenly. A matter related to approval of an appointment just cannot be sudden,” the probe report said and wondered why the BoGs’ for the appointment was not sought in 2012 when the appointment of Rupashree was made in 2011.

The proceedings of the BoGs’ meetings are not recorded, the house panel said and added had there been a register to record the proceedings and get the same signed by all the members of the BoGs, such an irregularity would not have taken place.

The house panel has put it on record it could have unravelled the motive behind the entire episode, but it chose not to because the subject would become vast. It is recommended the entire episode be probed and the culprits be punished, it said.

Incidentally, it was during the tenure of Dr Arun Kumar as the IGIMS director that Rupashree was appointed and removed. The entire procedure of her removal almost coincided with her repeated allegations that she was being sexually harassed by him. The director, who had then vehemently denied her allegation, has since completed his tenure and is currently a faculty member in the IGIMS’ anaesthesia department.

Read mor ehere-


Related posts

Press Release – Sexual harassment at workplace of Police Sub Inspector by DIG #Vaw #WTFnews

 Reference:  FIR No. 111/014 U/S 354, 354(A), 503 and 509 IPC registered at Mahila thana, Meerut.Subject – Changing investigation officer in the above mentioned FIR as she is working in connivance with the accused D.P.Srivastava, IPS, DIG.


I, Aruna Rai (SI/CP), am posted at PTS Meerut. On dated 23.04.2014 DIG PTS D.P.Srivastava called me in his office and committed offences against me under section 354,354(A),503,509 IPC. I have earlier submitted my written complaint under section 9 of The sexual harassment of women at workplace Act 2013 to DG Training as well DGP through my mail dated 03 May 2014. My complaint was referred to concerned complain committee. Before complain committee

I made a written request to forward my complaint to the police for filing FIR as it is the duty of employer under section 19(g) of ibid Act to provide assistance to the women if she chooses to file a complaint in relation to the offence under the Indian penal code or any other law for the time being in force. However the complaint committee, when I appeared before it on 28.05.2014 to record my statement, advised me to file a FIR at my own level as it is not there mandate to facilitate me in filing FIR. Thereafter immediately I file a FIR at police station Mahila Thana Meerut on dated 31.05.2014.

I was expecting justice by the Police. However to my utter surprise my belief tuned out to be wrong. Through news item published in Hindustan daily on dated 14.06.2014 I came to know that the accused was released on the bail on the ground that the IO submitted report to the magistrate that offences have been committed only under Sec. 354(A) and 509 of IPC which are bailable offence.  Investigation in my FIR was handed over to Srimati Sawarnjeet Kaur C.O office, Meerut. In her report submitted to the Magistrate she has dropped the charge under section 354 IPC in complete disregard to the facts mentioned by me in FIR.  In fact she, in sheer misuse of the power vested in her as IO of the matter, has turned  non bailable offence u/s 354 into a bailable offence u/s 354 (A) and thus facilitated the accused to secure his bail. I have strong apprehension that the I.O. is in influence of accused who is a senior IPS officer and she has dropped section 354 in connivance with the accused with intention to facilitate him. The reasons behind my this apprehension are enumerated below –

1.      I have mentioned in my FIR as well as in my statement before I.O that the accused left his chair in his office, approached me, caught my hand forcefully, kissed it and caressed my cheek.

2.      This act on the part of the accused falls well within the purview of offence punishable under section 354 IPC.

3.      For ready reference section 354 IPC is reproduced – “ 354- assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty – whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will there by outrage her modesty shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than one year but which may extent to five year and shall also be liable to fine.”


4.      The main ingredient of the offence punishable under section 354 IPC is use of criminal force with intention to outrage modesty of woman. When the accused left his seat, approached me and caught my hand against my will and kissed  it and further caressed my cheek, this was use of criminal force on his part.



5.      Criminal force is defined under section 350 IPC. For ready reference same is reproduced – “350. Criminal force- whoever intentionally force to any person, without that persons consent, in order to the committing of any offence, or intending by the use of such force to cause,  or knowing it to be likely that by the use of such force he will cause injury, fear or annoyance to the person to whom the force is used, is said to use criminal force to that another.”


6.      The above act of the accused mentioned at para 4 caused fear and annoyance to me and thus this was criminal force against me by the accused. Kissing hand of some lady and caressing her cheek are sufficient to outrage of the modesty of any woman and thus the accused has committed an offence under section 354 IPC.



However the investigating officer has ignored all these facts with intention to dilute the gravity of offences committed by the accused so that the non- bailable offence punished with minimum on year imprisonment with fine can be dropped against the accused and he may come out of criminal trial without any severe punishment. The I.O. has not considered the evidences submitted by me at all. I have also submitted a phone recording and a video recording to the I.O. but I.O. has chosen to ignore the facts mentioned in FIR as well in my statement before her for obvious reasons. I have no more faith on the I.O. in this matter.


For ready reference I m also attaching electronic copy of following documents-

1.      Statement before complaint committee.

2.      Information given by me in FIR.

3.      Phone recording.

In addition it is also submitted that when a FIR against a senior officer of police itself is filed a junior officer cannot carry out investigation in such FIR. This is a settled principle of law and had statutory force. To detail a CO ranking officer to investigate against DIG level officer is another attempt of district police authorities to create such a situation in future in which court will have no option but to quash charge sheet leading to the acquittal of the accused.


It is therefore submitted that the I.O. in this matter may be changed immediately and a senior officer lawfully competent may be detailed as I.O. in this matter. The conduct of present I.O. may also be looked into.



Applicant/ Victim



Aruna Rai


PTS, Meerutkk


Dated 15.06.2014


With request to look into the matter and issue necessary direction in the matter as if the accused enjoy such a favorable police investigation etc. leading to his acquittal it will demoralize all females in UPP in particular and of Uttar Pradesh in general and none of them will gather courage to raise voices against such heinous crimes by males at higher position. Ignorance on behalf of authorities in the matter will be nothing but providing license to the mentally sick males like the accused to commit offences and roam free.


Copy to :

1.      The Chief Minister, U.P.

2.      The Home Secretary, UP Government

3.      The Principal Secretary, UP Government

4.      The DGP, UP Police

5.      The DG Training, UP Police

6.      The IG Meerut Range

7.      The DIG Meerut Zone

8.      The State Commission of Women Uttar Pradesh

9.      The National Commission of Women

I have worked honestly and very hard in police deptt….i deserve respect and I’m not asking for too much. मेरे साथ एक सीनियर आईपीएस डीपी श्रीवास्तव द्वारा किये गए misbehave मामले में पुलिस ऐसे रियेक्ट कर रही है जैसे हाँ दुर्व्यवहार तो हुआ तो है लेकिन इसमें ऐसी कोई ख़ास बात नहीं ,….ख़ास बात तब होती जब रेप होता ,या आप बदनामी से डर के जान दे देती ,शर्म से मुह छुपाती चलती,किसी पेड़ से लटकी पाई जाती ,कही किसी कोने में पड़ी रहती,ऐसे में अगर आईपीएस को बेल मिल भी गई तो क्या ? आप दस साल इस बात के लिए कोर्ट में रोज़ सर मारिये कि आपके साथ सच में दुर्व्यवहार हुआ है,साबित तो कीजिये,मै तो उन सबको इसमें सह अभियुक्त मान रही हूँ जिन्होंने बेल दिलाने का लूडो खेला | सारे ठोस सबूतों के बाद भी पुलिस मानती है कि हुआ तो है कुछ…….. पर कुछ ख़ास नहीं ,ये वही कुछ है जिस पर यू,पी.पुलिस की कम्प्लेन कमेटी की रिपोर्ट के आधार पर आईपीएस निलंबित किया जा चूका है,जैसा कि “द हिन्दू” का कहना है | पुलिस मुझे बताती रही हम अभियुक्त को लखनऊ गिरफ्तार करने जा रहे हैं वो ये कहने से मुझ अदना सी लड़की से डर गए कि हम गिरफ्तार नही उसे भगाने जा रहे हैं ताकि वो अपनी जमानत मैनेज कर ले| सभी अपनी दाढ़ियो के तिनको को बचाने में लग गए| आज ससपेंड करेंगे ,कल पुरानी तारीख से बहाल करेंगे ,अच्छे से अच्छी पोस्टिंग देंगे …..और मान लेंगे कि हिंदुस्तान में कैंडल लाइट मार्च का तो फैशन है ,अगर एक और लड़की के लिए लोग पिल भी पड़े तो कैंडल बुझते ही वो अपने अपने घरो में वापस होंगे| i am not embarrassed
 email address is [email protected]

Related posts

Mumbai – ‘Pervert prof makes us demonstrate breast self-exam techniques’ #Vaw #WTFnews

By Lata Mishra & Divyesh Singh, Mumbai Mirror | Apr 26, 2014, 02.02 AM IST
‘Pervert prof makes us demonstrate breast self-exam techniques’
Kalwa hospital, where the prof has been working for 20 years, has launched an in-house probe
Female MBBS students from the Kalwa govt hospital accuse a senior professor of sexual harassment.

More than a dozen female MBBS students from the state-run Kalwa hospital (officially the Chhatrapati Shivaji Hospital) have accused a senior professor from the surgery department of sexual harassment.

The complaint, which was emailed to the dean, Dr Choity Maitra, and Thane Police Commissioner Vijay Kamble around a week ago, said the professor would order the female students to “demonstrate breast self-examination in front of the entire class, including male students”, and also touch their private parts in the guise of lecturing.

The complaint also said that on several occasions, during practicals, the professor would slip his hands inside the female patients’ shirts while claiming to be explaining the technicalities of dealing with ailments related to chest. The complaint said that the professor, while examining female patients during the out-patient department (OPD) hours, would summon the students for practicals.

“We have been going through hell for the past several months,” one of the complainants told this newspaper. “During practicals, the professor would order us to bend while keeping our hands apart. He would then touch us in the guise of lecturing the students. He has been harassing us for a long time but no-one dared to complain fearing his position in the institute.”

The professor denied having asked the students to demonstrate breast self-examination techniques. “I have been working for this institute for the past 20 years, and not once has anyone levelled such absurd allegations against me.” he told this newspaper.

The professor said that his female students were like his “daughters”, and such allegations could be a result of him insisting on “discipline in the classroom and regular attendance”.

The students, however, claimed the professor was a pervert who misused his authority every day. “On one occasion, he insisted that the female patients who came in for treatment in the OPD take off their shirts despite strong protests.

He said it was necessary as he needed to show us the diagnosis techniques of breast and chest-related ailments,” a final-year student said.

While Thane Police Commissioner Kamble confirmed receiving the email and said the complaint has been forwarded to the relevant police station, V D Walvi, the senior police inspector from Kalwa Police Station said, “We are aware of the complaint. We are investigating the charges.” Meanwhile, the medical college dean, Dr Maitra, said an inhouse probe has been launched to verify the allegations.

“The probe is being conducted by our inhouse committee dealing with sexual harassment at workplace. The report is likely to be submitted in another 10 days. If the professor is indeed guilty, he will be handed exemplary punishment,” Maitra said.

Read more here —


Enhanced by Zemanta

Related posts

Bombay HC – Only girl can decide nature of touch #Molestation #Vaw #Womenrights

,TNN | Feb 28, 2014, 01.53 AM IST

Only girl can decide nature of touch: HC
The intention of an accused in a molestation case could be gauged only after hearing the victim’s version, said the Bombay high court.
MUMBAI: The intention of an accused in amolestation case could be gauged only after hearing the victim’s version, said the Bombay high court, declining relief to the owner of a popular chain of coaching classes in the city.

A division bench of Justice Naresh Patil and Justice V L Achliya was on Thursday hearing a petition by Machindra Chate of Chate Coaching Classes, urging the court to quash an FIR lodged against him by a student. A chargesheet has also been filed under Section 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) of the IPC.

The incident took place on January 30, 2013, when HSC students and their parents met him at his Dadar office to complain about the teaching at his classes. According to the complaint, when a student asked him to take responsibility, he allegedly abused her and pushed her away in “such a way that made her feel ashamed”.

Chate’s advocate K Holambe-Patil argued that the parents had assaulted him following which, he lodged a complaint; it was at that time that Chate learnt that a student had also lodged a complaint against him.

“It was a scuffle, where was the intent to molest her?” Holambe-Patil demanded. But refusing to be convinced by the argument, the judges questioned how the HC could give a verdict that there was no intention to outrage the student’s modesty.

“Even if you keep your hand on the shoulder of a woman, it is for the lady to comment on the nature of the touch, whether it was friendly, brotherly or fatherly,” said Justice Patil.

The judges also referred to the Rupan Deol Bajaj vs KPS Gill case where the IPS officer was in trouble for his “pat on Bajaj’s back”. “To say there was no intention is not possible. Her deposition is required. If the girl says there was a misunderstanding, then the situation would be entirely different. Let the girl say why she felt shameful of the act,” said Justice Patil.

The judges pointed out that even with the law being amended there was a debate over the recording of a victim’s statements as minute details were asked. “That is the reason why victims in many incidents refuse to come forward,” said Justice Patil. Indicating that they would reject Chate’s plea, the judges said he could file an application for getting discharged in the case before the trial court.

Holambe-Patil said its hearing might take time and that since Chate would be “contesting the elections, his opponents would use this case for adverse campaigning”. But he agreed to withdraw the petition with the judges directing the lower court to expeditiously hear his discharge plea.

Read –
Enhanced by Zemanta

Related posts

UConn Professor and Ex-Dean Face Dismissal in Alleged Sex-Abuse Case #Vaw

The University of Connecticut said on Thursday that two faculty members are facing dismissal after an outside investigation found that the university for several years responded inadequately to sexual-abuse allegations against one of them, The Courant, a newspaper in Hartford, reported.

Robert Miller, David Woods

In a statement, UConn said it has “initiated disciplinary proceedings” against music Professor Robert Miller, left, and David Woods, former Dean of the School of Fine Arts. (UConn / February 27, 2014)

By KATHLEEN MEGAN, [email protected]The Hartford Courant8:15 p.m. EST, February 27, 2014

University of Connecticut dean is recommending dismissal of a music professor accused of sexual misconduct and of the former dean accused of ignoring complaints about him for a decade.

In separate letters sent Thursday to Professor Robert Miller and to former Dean David Woods, who is now a professor, Brid Grant, dean of UConn’s School of Fine Arts, said that the university was beginning “to take disciplinary action against you, up to and including termination.”

Grant said this action was “based on the serious findings” in an investigatory report released Wednesday by UConn.

That report, prepared by the Philadelphia law firm of Drinker Biddle & Reath, showed “strong, credible evidence” that Miller “engaged in serious misconduct before and during the time that he has been a professor at UConn.”

Attorney General George Jepsen hired the law firm in September to investigate Miller’s behavior and UConn’s response to it.

The report also singled out Woods, who served as dean of the School of Fine Arts from 2000 to 2012, for his failure to take any substantial action despite his knowledge of allegations and complaints about Miller’s alleged sexual misconduct with children and inappropriate behavior with UConn students.

A representative of Woods’ attorney, Stephen Bacon of Mansfield, said that Bacon would have no comment on UConn’s action. Miller’s attorney, Bethany Phillips of Butler, Norris & Gold in Hartford, did not respond to a phone call.

Miller, who has worked at UConn since 1982 and has a salary of $140,907, has been on administrative leave since June and is barred from campus, but he has not been charged with any crime.

Woods, who started at UConn in 2000, earns $237,547.

The letters inform Miller and Woods that they have seven days to request a hearing before Grant and notes that they are entitled to be accompanied by a representative from UConn’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors.

Asked whether the professors could retire with full benefits despite the proceedings, a spokeswoman for UConn referred the call to the attorney general’s office. Jaclyn Falkowski, a spokeswoman for Jepsen’s office, said: “It depends on the retirement plan and the individual circumstances. We can’t speculate on any specific situation.”

In her letter to Miller, Grant said that her action was based particularly on the report’s conclusion that there are “three credible allegations of sexual misconduct” involving Miller, as well improper interactions with UConn students.

According to the report, Miller sexually abused sick children at the Hole in the Wall Gang Camp — a summer camp in Ashford — where he worked in the early 1990s. The report also says he might have engaged in inappropriate conduct with at least one middle school student in 1969, when he was a music teacher at a Virginia public school.

The report also cites Miller for what Drinker Biddle & Reath attorney Scott Coffina said was “wildly inappropriate” behavior with UConn students.

Investigators said they believe that Miller “more likely than not” danced in his underwear in a UConn building with a student; showered naked with students at his health club; provided underage students with alcohol; and invited them to his vacation home in Vermont.

The report concludes that Woods “was the only person who had both knowledge of every allegation” against Miller since at least 2003 and had “the authority to address them. Dean Woods, however, repeatedly failed to address effectively the allegations of misconduct against Professor Miller.”

By 2003, the report says, Woods was aware of “numerous rumors” regarding Miller’s inappropriate conduct and relationships with students as well as his rumored sexual misconduct with campers at the Hole in the Wall Gang Camp.

“Professor Miller was like a ticking time bomb that Dean Woods, rather than disarm it, hoped would be a dud,” Coffina said Wednesday in a presentation to the UConn Board of Trustees.

The report also described the “collective failure” of various UConn employees to address the allegations as they heard about them. Besides Woods, the report singles out Catherine Jarjisian, the former music department head, and the University of Connecticut Police Department for particular criticism.

Thursday’s action did not include any mention of Jarjisian or the police department.

Read more here –,0,2184484.story



Enhanced by Zemanta

Related posts

Sexual Harassment in Comics: The Tipping Point #Vaw


LIn nOv 2013 , when artist Tess Fowler got on Twitter and breathed white-hot fury about sexual harassment in the comics industry, the thing that struck me most wasn’t her anger; the real shock, given the scope of the problem and the lack of consequences, should be that more women aren’t that publicly furious more of the time.

Of course, there are many, many reasons not to speak up. If you’re a comics professional, maybe you want to be known for your work, for your accomplishments, not for the fact that some jerk couldn’t keep his hands to himself. Maybe you don’t want the first thing that comes up when someone Googles your name to be a story of your victimization. Maybe you don’t want to be called a slut or a liar when you talk about the sh**ty thing that happened to you (which you will, inevitably), or for people to invent every possible nefarious motivation for your decision to speak up – except the idea that it might be true.

Naturally, I’ve seen numerous comments since referring to Fowler’s speech as some variation on a “hysterical meltdown,” as though a woman feeling anger about her mistreatment is necessarily pathological, a sign of absurdity and dysfunction rather than self-respect. When men get angry, we call it brave, kickass – we pump our fists in the air. When women get angry it somehow warps; it becomes threatening. We call it crazy, hysterical, unhinged.

It’s extremely telling to me that Tess Fowler only felt empowered to speak up after artist Brandon Graham spoke first, and that fans went looking to Greg Rucka – who is an extremely supportive ally to women in comics, but still a man – to confirm the truth about what was happening to women, instead of asking… women.

And it’s telling, too, that when I saw Greg’s response, I felt a depressing sense of relief – not only that he’d been so honest and on point, but on a deeper level that a man had acknowledged the problem, and thus the kneejerk reaction was less likely to be dismissal — people were more likely to believe him. Behind all of this lurks the subtle, pervasive sense that when women speak up, we treat their account with less veracity. We meet it, first, with doubt.

Since Fowler’s comments, and the wider-ranging debate that followed, I have seen conversation after conversation of men debating with other men whether or not the reality of women is real, men asking other men to confirm that what women were saying was true, men testifying that they’d never seen harassment – or else piping up that they knew there was harassment, yes, but it wasn’t as bad as people were saying. As though they, somehow, were some sort of authority on the experiences of women. When one of the primary criticisms about harassment in comics is that most men don’t understand the scope of it, saying it’s not such a big deal isn’t a useful or relevant observation – it’s a self-indictment.

It’s important to note that the vast majority of men in comics – pro and fan – aren’t predatory. The problem is that the small number who are predatory get insulated from the consequences of their actions by the passive behavior of other men (and sometimes women): those who dismiss or minimize the behavior, decline to support the person who has been attacked – or worse, attack her instead. These men don’t directly harm women; they just create the culture that allows it to happen.


Kate or Die
Kate Leth

Because most predators and harassers don’t behave the way they do because they can’t help themselves, because they somehow have to – they do it because they can. We know this because they are often very strategic and specific about the people they target. Most often, it is people with less institutional power, people who are more vulnerable. People who are less experienced, less sure of themselves. And harassers do it not because they are ineluctably compelled by some mystical or biological force to be assholes, but because they believe they can get away with it. And they are almost always right.

Several other women have stepped forward since Fowler’s comments to share their own accounts of harassment. And like them — like most women I know in comics — I have stories too. When I first started out in the industry, I had experiences that ranged from inappropriate behavior all the way up to sexual harassment. I was younger, then. I didn’t always know how to deal with it. I didn’t talk about it publicly, that’s for sure. If I had, I often wonder if I would have gotten anywhere. As I became more prominent, particularly as a member of the press who discussed gender issues publicly and often, this behavior decreased and then largely stopped.

It doesn’t strike me as a coincidence. The people who harassed me weren’t behaving that way because they thought it was an acceptable way to treat people, or because they didn’t know any better. They were doing it because they thought they could get away with it. They stopped when they didn’t think that was true anymore.

Of course, just because my position and the independence of my platform started to insulate me from harassment in professional spaces didn’t mean that the harassment stopped altogether, or that the rest of comics was somehow a safe space.

Several years ago when I was still running ComicsAlliance, I attended San Diego Comic-Con. At the time, the site had been nominated for an Eisner Award. I was proud. I felt like I’d come a long way since the days when I was slinging comics as a cashier, when I got asked on a near daily basis if I “actually read comics.” I’ll never forget how lucky I felt to be there, surrounded by a community of friends and professionals I respected and enjoyed.

The feeling lasted right up until the moment when a bunch of guys walked up and took an upskirt photo of me. I’d been distracted, and I hadn’t seen them come up behind me. In fact, the only reason I know it happened at all was that a nearby Good Samaritan – a woman who tapped me on the shoulder, told me what happened, and pointed out the guys who were gathered around the phone, pointing and laughing. “I would want to know,” she said.

I was running one of the biggest media outlets about comics in the country; I was nominated for the industry’s most prestigious award. I was surrounded, ostensibly, by friends and a community that should have had my back. None of this mattered. None of this protected me. I don’t know how many of the other people around me – mostly men — saw what happened. Maybe most of them didn’t. But what I will always remember is that the only person who stepped forward to help me was a woman I’d never met.

And worse, I remember the feeling that crept up inside me: that this was inescapable. That it would never matter who I was or what I accomplished. That within my community, someone still could do something like this to me at any time, expect to get away with it, and be right. Over and over, this is the message the industry sends women when they allow this behavior to persist, when they do not actively and relentlessly work to acknowledge it and tear it down: You are on on your own.

Because I am a woman, on that basis alone, many people will not believe what I am saying right now. Instead, they will believe that for some reason I have decided to use my deeply limited time and energy – which I would rather direct at a million other things that don’t make me feel like sh*t – to discuss something personally wrenching for some ill-defined form of personal gain. That, like the women of old with their wandering uteri, it is because I am emotional, opportunistic, crazy. (Or angry, as though anger in women is necessarily a thing without origin.)

Only men, somehow – those without direct experience – can be impartial, can be listened to. They will think this, and they will weigh the opinions of other men on this subject, and they will believe that they are being “objective.” They will not understand exactly how much a part of the problem this makes them.

The concept of the missing stair has always been a powerful one when talking about the minimization of abuse: the idea that instead of treating harmful people like a problem, we make women work around them, accommodate them. It’s no surprise to me that over the last week, as woman after woman has identified the problem, pointing at the missing stair, that one of the most frequent reactions is that women are the ones who need to change their behavior. That they are the ones who must accommodate, yet again. That the responsibility is on them for fixing a problem which isn’t truly theirs to fix.

Which one of these statements makes more sense to say: “These people need to find more ways to stop people from harming them.” OR: “These people should stop causing harm.” If you ever find yourself saying the former instead of the latter, take a moment and ask yourself why. The stairs in comics are broken, and if we all just keep silently walking over that missing stair – or failing to realize that it’s missing at all — it’s never going to get fixed, and women are going to keep getting hurt. The answer isn’t that women need to work harder to jump over the gap created by a system that protects harassers and silences victims. It’s that we need to f**king fix it.

Harassment makes the road to enjoying or making comics far harder for women, and for some women it sidelines them entirely. If you aren’t actively doing everything in your power to help, you don’t get to shrug your shoulders when people ask why women are so underrepresented in so many areas of comics. You don’t get to ask why more women don’t come forward, why they don’t name names, even though everyone knows there are “so many stories.” Because the answer is you.

Time to step up.

Read More: Sexual Harassment in Comics: The Tipping Point |


Enhanced by Zemanta

Related posts

SC sets up Sexual Harassment cell – Women can e-mail, post complaints #Vaw

Wednesday, February 19, 2014 – DNA

The committee set up in the Supreme Court to deal with instances of sexual harassment within its precincts has decided that aggrieved women can send their complaints to it by post or e-mail. “The aggrieved women as defined in clause 2(a) of the Gender Sensitisation and Sexual Harassment of Women at the Supreme Court of India (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Regulations, 2013 may make a complaint in writing of sexual harassment at Supreme Court of India precincts to the GSICC through its Member Secretary – Rachna Gupta, Registrar,” the circular reads, adding it has been done to sensitise the general public on gender issues.

It said the first meeting of the committee was held on December 9, 2013 to workout the modalities for the effective implementation of “The Gender Sensitisation and Sexual Harassment of Women at the Supreme Court of India (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Regulations, 2013” and to take decision on related issues. “The complaint shall be sent either by registered post, courier, speed post or e-mail. It can also be handed over personally at the above said address,” the circular said, adding the confidentiality of the inquiry proceedings shall be maintained.

The aggrieved women can send their complaint on the email ID of Rachna Gupta at [email protected]

In January this year, the committee in its annual report had said it had received two complaints from two women lawyers since its inception in November 2013 and the complaints were pending disposal.

Chief Justice of India P Sathasivam had formed GSICC which is headed by the Supreme Court’s woman judge, Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai, and has six other women members. There are two members who are outsiders and not connected with the apex court in any manner. The panel is in consonance with the guidelines laid down by the apex court in its judgement in Vishaka case for dealing with complaints of sexual harassment at workplace.

Under the guidelines, it is required that the panel has a majority of women members and two members of civil society nominated by the Chief Justice of India.

Read more here —

Enhanced by Zemanta

Related posts