4 ms·

Can we not post/comment on unproven allegations on this site? I get that this may be "exciting" and perhaps even "titillating" given who Rubin is, but come on -

Can we not post/comment on unproven allegations on this site? I get that this may be "exciting" and perhaps even "titillating" given who Rubin is, but come on -- the article itself says none of these allegations have been confirmed by the court. Let's keep this as Hacker News, not the Daily Mail.

gjsman-1000 7y ago
Unproven, but incredible high odds of proof. There are actual screenshots of his messages in court filings, according to Business Insider. Secondly, this is allowed by HN. Plus, he founded Android after all. Whenever a big-name programmer has a big-name incident, of course we can comment on it here. Elizabeth Holmes? Still technically Unproven, but we all know by now.
- gjsman-1000 7y ago
  Go here, and go to Slide 10. Pretty damning. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6180235/Rie-Andy-Rubin-complain7-2-19.pdf https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6180235/Rie-Andy-...
  - belorn 7y ago
    I might be missing a detail here, but how is page 10 relevant to the validity of the premarital contract? The key argument seems to be page 4, which says that the lawyer of the wife had worked for Rubin in the past and filed a restraining order against the Rubin previous wife. The claim is that because of this the contract should be nullified because the wife did not have proper legal representation when she signed it. Seems pretty dull and fairly common court case where a judge will make a decision to either uphold or nullify a contract based on circumstances. Page 10 seems like a distraction because the contract did not have a "cheating clause", and regardless, the argument in the case is that the contract is invalid. If the contract is invalid then that relevance of slide 10 is unimportant, and if the contract is valid then the relevance of slide is also unimportant.
- labster 7y ago
  > Still technically Unproven, but we all know by now. Your honor, I ask that juror 1000 be dismissed for cause.
amanzi 7y ago
Are there even any allegations of illegal behaviour? And what is a "sex ring" anyway? Is it like a swingers club, or something more sinister?
- gjsman-1000 7y ago
  Read the article: "As a complaint, the document is only an allegation and has not been confirmed by the court. Still, it echoes a number of details reported by the New York Times in October, including the allegation that Andy supported a string of mistresses, who would often be loaned to other men in what he described as “an ownership relationship.” The complaint alleges Andy had at least five such mistresses, including one (dubbed “M”) who was “complicit with Rubin in running what appeared to be a sex ring.” The complaint also alleges that Andy diverted joint funds in order to make personal payouts to a number of women, payouts consistent with the Times’ reporting. According to the complaint, he stopped depositing his Google paychecks in the couple’s joint account in February 2014, shortly after he left the company amid allegations of sexual misconduct. But Andy continued to be paid by the company, subject to his severance agreement, and simply had the deposits diverted to an individual account, which made hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments to other women."
  - gjsman-1000 7y ago
    Basically, consensual, but with possible manipulation (thus the sexual misconduct allegations), possible violations of higher position cannot date lower position rules, possible financial malfeasance, yeah. Also, financial malfeasance seems to go hand-in-hand with sexual misconduct. Not everyone is guilty of one or the other, but the two show up together pretty frequently.
  - amanzi 7y ago
    I did read the article first, and what I meant was: is there any allegations of illegal behaviour in relation to what the blogs are all reporting on (i.e. the sex ring).
- gjsman-1000 7y ago
  According to the complaint: Complaint For: - Fraud, Misrepresentation, Fraudulent Concealment - Breach of Fiduciary Duty - Aiding and Abetting Breach of Fiduciary Duty - Breach of Contract - Negligent misrepresentation - Constructive fraud - Professional negligence

gjsman-1000 7y ago

Unproven, but incredible high odds of proof. There are actual screenshots of his messages in court filings, according to Business Insider. Secondly, this is allowed by HN. Plus, he founded Android after all. Whenever a big-name programmer has a big-name incident, of course we can comment on it here. Elizabeth Holmes? Still technically Unproven, but we all know by now.

gjsman-1000 7y ago
Go here, and go to Slide 10. Pretty damning. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6180235/Rie-Andy-Rubin-complain7-2-19.pdf https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6180235/Rie-Andy-...
- belorn 7y ago
  I might be missing a detail here, but how is page 10 relevant to the validity of the premarital contract? The key argument seems to be page 4, which says that the lawyer of the wife had worked for Rubin in the past and filed a restraining order against the Rubin previous wife. The claim is that because of this the contract should be nullified because the wife did not have proper legal representation when she signed it. Seems pretty dull and fairly common court case where a judge will make a decision to either uphold or nullify a contract based on circumstances. Page 10 seems like a distraction because the contract did not have a "cheating clause", and regardless, the argument in the case is that the contract is invalid. If the contract is invalid then that relevance of slide 10 is unimportant, and if the contract is valid then the relevance of slide is also unimportant.
labster 7y ago
> Still technically Unproven, but we all know by now. Your honor, I ask that juror 1000 be dismissed for cause.

amanzi 7y ago

Are there even any allegations of illegal behaviour? And what is a "sex ring" anyway? Is it like a swingers club, or something more sinister?

gjsman-1000 7y ago
Read the article: "As a complaint, the document is only an allegation and has not been confirmed by the court. Still, it echoes a number of details reported by the New York Times in October, including the allegation that Andy supported a string of mistresses, who would often be loaned to other men in what he described as “an ownership relationship.” The complaint alleges Andy had at least five such mistresses, including one (dubbed “M”) who was “complicit with Rubin in running what appeared to be a sex ring.” The complaint also alleges that Andy diverted joint funds in order to make personal payouts to a number of women, payouts consistent with the Times’ reporting. According to the complaint, he stopped depositing his Google paychecks in the couple’s joint account in February 2014, shortly after he left the company amid allegations of sexual misconduct. But Andy continued to be paid by the company, subject to his severance agreement, and simply had the deposits diverted to an individual account, which made hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments to other women."
- gjsman-1000 7y ago
  Basically, consensual, but with possible manipulation (thus the sexual misconduct allegations), possible violations of higher position cannot date lower position rules, possible financial malfeasance, yeah. Also, financial malfeasance seems to go hand-in-hand with sexual misconduct. Not everyone is guilty of one or the other, but the two show up together pretty frequently.
- amanzi 7y ago
  I did read the article first, and what I meant was: is there any allegations of illegal behaviour in relation to what the blogs are all reporting on (i.e. the sex ring).
gjsman-1000 7y ago
According to the complaint: Complaint For: - Fraud, Misrepresentation, Fraudulent Concealment - Breach of Fiduciary Duty - Aiding and Abetting Breach of Fiduciary Duty - Breach of Contract - Negligent misrepresentation - Constructive fraud - Professional negligence