Now that we have 7 accusers the narrative in the MSM is insinuating that there is no need for due process. The sheer volume of accusers is enough to demand Mayor Filner resign. But we have to just take a minute to look at each case and allegation on its own merit and when you do that you will see that there is not much here but there are potential political motives that should be examined.

1:Irene McCormack Jackson

Vice President of External Relations for the San Diego Unified Port District and worked for the Port Authority for 9 years. The Port has been a bastion of corrupt GOP political maneuvering for decades.

She started working at the Port District in November 2003 and held roles like Director and Assistant Vice President.

Prior to working for the Port District, McCormack spent 25 years as a journalist, working as a newsroom manager, reporter and assistant metro editor for The San Diego Union-Tribune. Her specialty according to her zoominfo profile was government, politics and public safety.

Here is a very telling excerpt from a State of California Lands Commission where the Port is applying for a development permit.

ACTING COMMISSIONER GORDON: Yeah. So am I to understand that you did not request the waiver, that the Coastal Commission granted it on their own behest?

MS. McCORMACK: Yes. We went and we were going to -- we filed a coastal development permit and they said it was a waiver.

MR. BRIGGS: That's not true. ok so....

Why did Corey Briggs think she is such a credible witness now when he knew her firsthand to say things that are not true as shown in this transcript?

Allegation

McCormack filed a lawsuit with attorney Gloria Allred.

McCormack claims in her lawsuit filed in San Diego Superior Court Filner put her in the Filner headlock and made off-color remarks.

In February, she contends he allegedly put her in a headlock while they rode an elevator with a police officer who was adjusting his handcuffs, prompting him to tell her, "You know what I would like to do with those handcuffs?" (interesting to note the comment was in front of an armed police officer). On another elevator ride, Filner allegedly said, "Wouldn't it be great if you took off your panties and worked without them on?"

The lawsuit also claims Filner asked McCormack to marry him.

Civil litigation just filed

No claim ever filed with the DFEH. CORRECTION: McCormack filed to get a right-to-sue letter from DFEH which is mandatory in order to file a lawsuit. But of course it will take time for DFEH to actually investigate the claim which would allow the statute of limitations to run out on the case. At any rate the DFEH claim can be filed online and was only just filed so there has been no verification of the veracity of the claims.

UPDATE July 31, 2013: Per Don Bauder's recent article No known witnesses yet in Jackson lawsuit, says Filner's lawyer

Filner denies her accusations, which lawyer says are unverified

"Mayor Robert Filner's attorney Harvey Berger "mentions that McCormack Jackson filed an unverified lawsuit, not a verified one. That is, McCormack Jackson did not sign the complaint. Her lawyer did. Thus, allegations could change. "I am currently not aware of any witnesses supporting the plaintiff's specific allegations," said Berger, noting that Filner denies them."

This is an important fact. At this point the plaintiff has not signed under penalty of perjury that the allegations are true.

2: Morgan Rose

Psychologist who works in the San Diego Unified School District.

Runs a non-profit: America’s Angel Campaign

Allegation

Rose contends that in 2009 she and her team met Democratic congressman Filner, to bring her non-profit initiative to him. Filner allegedly called her house to request a private meeting to figure out “who in the hell” she is.

They met at a restaurant near his office in San Diego. Rose contends that at some point Filner began staring at her stating “your eyes have bewitched me.”

She claims that Filner repeatedly tried to kiss her four separate times the restaurant.

“He tried to move my face towards his to kiss me on the mouth,” Rose told KPBS that she said she asked him to stop so they could continue discussing important matters, but Filner said he wouldn’t stop until she kissed him.

No Civil litigation filed

No claim ever filed with the DFEH.

Statute of Limitations passed

3: Laura Fink

Laura Fink runs a political consulting firm, and was a deputy campaign manager for Filner at a 2005 San Diego fundraising event.

Fink worked for Filner from 2004 to 2006.

Don Bauder said this in a recent blog about Laura's background:

"One of my contributors found this: in a biography of Laura Fink by the NGS (Next Generation of Service), there is a discussion of how Fink works for Congresswoman Susan Davis. Then there is this: "Other roles include fiscal fundraising, communications, and event responsibilities for prominent campaigns such as Hillary Clinton for President, Bob Filner for Congress (D, CA-51), Todd Gloria for City Council [emphasis mine], and Marty Block for State Assembly."

Fink also currently has a photo on her Facebook page where she is proudly standing next to Bill Clinton, the most infamous sexual harasser in U.S. political history in 2008.

Allegation

Fink told KPBS that Filner patted her on the butt 8 years ago while she was a deputy campaign manager for him at a 2005 San Diego fundraising event.

She said this to KPBS:

“One of the attendees at the party was giving me credit and saying I had done a wonderful job, and that I had worked my tush off for him and that he should appreciate my efforts,” ...... “I was standing next to him, and he turned to me and he said, ‘Turn around.’ … And so I turned around, and he proceeded to take his hand and pat me on my posterior and laugh and say, ‘No, it’s still there.’”

Fink said a few days later, she documented the incident and sent an email to Filner and his chief of staff asking for an apology,

Fink said Filner did apologize saying, "I'm sorry." .

The statute of limitations has long passed to make any official claims but Fink called the sheriff's hotline to report the event.

No Civil litigation filed

No claim ever filed with the DFEH.

Statute of Limitations passed

4: Veronica Froman

Froman became Jerry Sander's chief operating officer in 2005. She left the job in June, 2007, in the midst of the Sunroad scandal.

Froman was also senior vice president of General Atomics. Don Bauder reported at that point she was dating Republican mega-donor Linden Blue, Vice Chairman of General Atomics, a big player in building killer Predator drones. According to Matt Potter in the SD Reader The two then married.

Allegation

Veronica Froman, claims Filner once blocked the door in front of her after a meeting and stroked her face while asking if she was in a relationship.

No Civil litigation filed

No claim ever filed with the DFEH.

Statute of Limitations passed

Bauder also states in his article in regards to the non-filed allegations:

"Berger noted that alleged activities related by women who have come forward following McCormack Jackson's complaint "were committed years ago, not while Mayor Filner was in his present role, and such claims would be barred by the statute of limitations...It is highly unlikely that any of these witnesses will be allowed to testify to such remote and alleged incidents in this pending lawsuit." He also noted that "many of the alleged statements and behaviors are not even employment related, and therefore not legally sexual harassment.""

Obviously there are a few more accusers to look at, but let's start with these.....

More to come....

Please come join the campaign to demand Due Process for Filner. There is far too much at stake.

The campaign to oust Filner strangely began as early as April-May of 2013

The developer behind the recall effort

None

Comments

Yankeedoodle July 29, 2013 @ 8:39 a.m.

I think that would be 'sheer' volume but 'shear' is an interesting innovation of usage here. I won't complain.

0

Yankeedoodle July 29, 2013 @ 8:42 a.m.

Please, though, refrain from putting an apostrophe when 'it' is used as a possessive. That word does not follow the convention, because of ubiquitous use perhaps. The apostrophe for 'it' is used only for the contraction of 'it is.'

Thanks for your forbearance.

1

jelula July 29, 2013 @ 9:12 p.m.

Yankeedoodle: thanks for pointing out it's vs. its - the former seems to have totally supplanted the possessive w/o apostrophe. However, I'll admit that I am constantly correcting my own typing because my fingers persist in inserting that pesky apostrophe into the possessive its.

The other use of apostrophe that seems to be spreading like kudzu is making plural nouns into possessive singular nouns by inserting an apostrophe before the plural s.

1

Yankeedoodle July 29, 2013 @ 11:10 p.m.

Like rice and bean's. This I have seen.

1

Diogenes July 29, 2013 @ 10:20 p.m.

Mccormack did file with DFEH and got a right to sue letter meaning that her own attorney would file a complaint in Superior Court.

This was stated by Gloria Allred in the press conference.

The token filing with the DFEH does not obligate the Department to take any action, but going through the process may entitle the prevailing litigant to attorneys fees and cost as well as other statutory benefits for complying with that procedure,

McCormack filed the day she filed the complaint in court. This is called an over-the-counter right to sue letter. It is requested by the complaining party to expedite the lawsuit.

2

historymatters July 30, 2013 @ 1:42 a.m.

ok good to know. I know she waived the DFEH to sue. I am unclear on how all that works but will try and figure it out.

1

historymatters July 30, 2013 @ 1:48 a.m.

I know they have to exhaust administrative remedies to sue so its confusing how they can sue w/o having the claim investigated first w/ DFEH, but I will look into it.

1

historymatters July 30, 2013 @ 1:50 a.m.

'In California, before an employee can sue an employer for discrimination, harassment, etc., the employee must first present an administrative claim to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing [DFEH]. The DFEH will then undertake an investigation. When the investigation closes, and the employee desires to file a lawsuit, then the employee must request, and be given a “Right-to-Sue letter” from the DFEH. If the employee files a lawsuit without first obtaining the Right-to-Sue letter, then the employer can ask the Court to dismiss the lawsuit, on the grounds that the employee failed to exhaust the administrative remedies. In short, the lawsuit is thrown out of court, and the employee loses.'

1

AStarSpangledGrl Aug. 8, 2013 @ 4:08 p.m.

What about the Constituents? They were sexually assaulted and that should be a criminal charge. If you did this, you would be in jail. So should Filner.

1

historymatters July 30, 2013 @ 1:51 a.m.

So, it is simple: the employee needs to get a right-to-sue letter from the DFEH before filing a lawsuit, or else the lawsuit will be dismissed. What does that entail?

The DFEH used to require that the employee actually submit a hard copy of the employee’s discrimination/harassment complaint, on the DFEH form, with a signature of the employee, under oath, to the DFEH in order to obtain the Right-to-Sue letter. The DFEH changed that a while back by creating an on-line process which would result in an electronic Right-to-Sue letter being issued without the formality of preparing a physical hard copy form with an actual signature on it and then submitting it, by mail to the DFEH.

1

Mp1975 July 30, 2013 @ 1:14 a.m.

Wow Reader. Very disturbing. She has a picture with Bill Clinton so she must be lying. I bet in your next article one of the women "meant yes when she was saying no" or was showing too much leg and deserved it. Disgusting!!!! No longer a "Reader"!!!

1

AStarSpangledGrl Aug. 8, 2013 @ 3:49 p.m.

Don't believe the Reader hype. They are disgusting for supporting Filner after 14 women (plus counting) have come out. There is no way so many women have to do with their "imaginary little ploy" conspiracy. I know someone that was harassed by him in 2010 and has already called the authorities and planning to come out real soon. This man is dangerous and must be stopped.

1

sddialedin July 31, 2013 @ 12:37 a.m.

I was curious about Laura Fink when I read about her coming forward last week. Funny that she didn't seem to have a problem in 2009 when she was paid $20,000 in consulting fees from SEIU local 122. I'm sure her Filner association didn't benefit her at all in landing that client. Now she takes issue with him? The timing of all of these complaints is so transparent.

2

barryjohnjohnson July 31, 2013 @ 7:59 a.m.

The Reader may want to be a little more wary of getting into an attack the accusers mode, when Mr Filner is saying that he has a personal problem with how he treats women; so much so that he is leaving the City for two weeks to seek help for him to address his problems. Please note that Ms McCormack Jackson was apparently a Filner fan and devotee. I would think that she wanted him to succeed. She had the courage to walk out when prompted by Mr Filner. As an employee she would be the only one eligible to file a DFEH claim, so listing that for the others doesn't make sense. Ms Fink did document the incident she experienced via an email complaint back when that occurred.

I have to say as a Dem & a Reader fan - this coverage/opinion seems to be way off base. Mr Filner seems to have created this entire scenario via his own actions.

2

AStarSpangledGrl Aug. 8, 2013 @ 3:50 p.m.

I COMPLETELY agree Barry. It is sickening to see this. It like those jerks that tell a woman that is raped that she shouldn't have worn a skirt. DISGUSTING!

1

historymatters Aug. 9, 2013 @ 1:06 a.m.

You are right "it doesnt make sense"...precisely my point. Most of these women were not employees therefore no DFEH complaint could be filed . therefore sexual harassment is a moot point. So why are we being told these are all sexual harassment cases? This is all smoke and mirrors. Some people are suggesting it still qualifies as sexual harassment because they are "clients", but it does not and if it did the women STILL did not file DFEH claims so excatly my point

1

G. Glenn July 31, 2013 @ 8:28 a.m.

Note: This is not journalism or commentary from the San Diego Reader. This is a "community blog" entry posted by a site user.

1

KevinTodd Sept. 12, 2013 @ 7:55 a.m.

When is it the victims fault you neanderthals, grow up. Put down your dems kool-aid filled sippy cup.

0

Yankeedoodle Sept. 12, 2013 @ 8:10 a.m.

Kevin: Filner's accusers are accusers until and unless it is demonstrated or proven in court that they are indeed victims.

0

Sign in to comment

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!

Close