7 ms·

Impressive how they managed to nail seven underlings for doing it (five plead guilty; two went to trial[0]) but not CEO Devin Wenig for ordering[1] it, instead

• nkingsy 5y ago
  "While there’s no suggestion in court papers that Wenig knew of the plot, prosecutors say his angry emails triggered the scheme, and they play a central role in the narrative spelled out by the government. "Take her down," Wenig is alleged to have written in response to a post by the blogger." That would be the smoking gun, but who's alleging it? Article didn't say.
  • da_chicken 5y ago
    "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest? With a sword, ideally."
    • tomcam 5y ago
      Appropriate quote, love the edit
    • ghaff 5y ago
      The same thought occurred. And, even if prosecutors correctly thought that this was a waste of time to take to trial, GM saying nope "nothing here" doesn't, shall we say, impress me.
      • cwkoss 5y ago
        Yikes, maybe now is a good time to short GM.
        • ghaff 5y ago
          I don't really think he does much harm to GM as a board member but personally I like to think I wouldn't have swept it under a rug myself were I in a position to do otherwise.
  • cactus2093 5y ago
    Is that even a smoking gun? Surely that one text message is not enough to prove that he meant "harass and cyberstalk her" rather than "sue her for libel" or some other non-criminal action.
    • nkingsy 5y ago
      I just know from my big Corp training manual that things like “crush” and “take down” should never be in corporate communication for legal reasons. From a “reasonable” perspective, there are two possibilities, both of which implicate the ceo. 1. “Take her down” was enough information, in which case he is at fault. 2. It wasn’t enough information, in which case further discussion was had offline. I am convinced beyond reasonable doubt that there is no option: 3. The employees thought it was enough information incorrectly and began a criminal conspiracy because they’re just so eager to please.
      • pyuser583 5y ago
        But enough information for what? Let’s say they had previous conversations about how to handle hostile media. Ideas included raising concerns with editors, pulling advertising, raising concerns with platforms/ISPs about “disinformation”, suing for libel, etc. So yes the CEO is implicated. He’s clearly in the decision chain - no doubt about it. But there’s nothing here about how much was deferred to subordinates. I guess that falls into the category of “offline discussion” - but that doesn’t mean anything nefarious.
  • khazhoux 5y ago
    There are plenty of legal interpretations of "take her down." E.g., file a hard-hitting lawsuit. I will give the CEO the benefit of the doubt that he did not mean: "Take a half-dozen people and engage in a massive, obsessive, batshit-crazy online and real-world cross-state harassment campaign."
    • whatshisface 5y ago
      You don't think it could have come out over coffee one day?
      • khazhoux 5y ago
        I have to assume there was no evidence of that, or else he'd be charged too.
        • whatshisface 5y ago
          Well, no evidence and benefit of the doubt are separate concepts. You can say that no record was made of it, and that it probably happened.
          • to1y 5y ago
            If there is no evidence what exactly are you giving benefit of the doubt for?
  • 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago
    "... but who is alleging it? Article didn't say." Initially the Government alleged it. The Government secured criminal convictions. Now the Steiners' lawyers are alleging it in a civil case. Wenig is a named defendant. https://www.scapicchiolaw.com/pdf/Steiner.pdf https://www.scapicchiolaw.com/pdf/Steiner.pdf See pages 15 and 19.
• techrat 5y ago
  Rich people don't go to jail.
  • shadowgovt 5y ago
    Mostly because rich people can pay someone else to mail cockroaches to their enemies instead of getting their own hands dirty.
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    • pope_meat 5y ago
      Damn, how do I get in to the cockroach mailing business, that sounds like a good gig.
      • tartoran 5y ago
        Join a corp hierarchy and be a pleaser.
      • rrauenza 5y ago
        You can make a lot of money. Dubia roaches for reptiles seemed in a bit of a shortage a few months ago. Dubias (where legal) won't breed outside of captivity, so you don't have to worry about escapees.
  • javajosh 5y ago
    "Rich people don't go to jail" is a tautology masquerading as cynicism. In a world where nothing happens unless it's paid for, then it follows that more happens when there is more money involved. This includes criminal defense, where more money means more defensive moves which, in general, means a better defense. For the record, I think this is a strong argument for a world where things happen despite you not paying for them, and to level the playing field (spending) in a few key areas, like legal defense and political speech. Imagine if even rich people were forced to use the public defender; you would see an immediate improvement in their quality!
• pessimizer 5y ago
  It's like Bridgegate. The way these people become powerful is by being smart enough to both delegate crime and never write anything down about it.
  • nickff 5y ago
    Former director of homeland security Janet Napolitano has actually stated that she avoided e-mails, and did everything in-person of via phone calls (presumably to avoid documenting her actions and motives).
    • pyuser583 5y ago
      Very common for high level officials. Or low level officials for that matter. There was scandal in a city I lived in. It turned out city council members were turning off their cell phones and actually talking face to face during council meeting bathroom breaks. The press was ticked, because they were used to accessing the SMS messages. The council members pushed back hard - nasty blog posts were written - and the press ended up looking a little silly and spoiled.
• hacknat 5y ago
  "It is the curse of kings to be attended By slaves that take their humors for a warrant"