
Pao vs. Kleiner Defense Rests Its Case, Showcasing a Different Side of the Story - doppp
http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/21/pao-vs-kleiner-defense-rests-its-case-showcasing-a-different-side-of-the-story/
======
youngButEager
It may go Pao's way after what the Judge (Kahn) did and said today:

"Kahn said there was enough evidence for the jury considering Pao's lawsuit to
conclude that Kleiner Perkins acted with malice, oppression or fraud, which in
California is the legal threshold for awarding damages that are designed to
punish and deter particularly bad behavior."

"Per this standard, there is sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror
could conclude that Kleiner Perkins engaged in intentional gender
discrimination by failing to promote Ms. Pao and terminating her employment,''
the judge said in the one-paragraph decision."

===================================================

It's a shame, because the jury will take this as 'direction' from the judge.

Pao should lose here.

1) She had a consensual relationship with another employee, Ajit Nazre, at the
firm.

2) She broke it off then complained to HR that he was still bugging her.

3) John Doerr himself (the top guy at KPCB) was made aware of her complaint to
the HR department and was going to fire Ajit Nazre.

4) Pao then pleaded with John Doerr and the other senior partners not to fire
Ajit Nazre. Those 'pleading' emails she sent were read out loud to the jury.

5) And now she complains the firm did nothing to 'save her' from Ajit Nazre ?!

Then she thought "let me add some 'gender discrimination' to my lawsuit here."
And yet three other female employees of the firm testified there was no
discrimination against women. One of the women spent 15 years at the firm too.
And she no longer works there, so has no reason to hold back anything.

Unfortunately, with the judge sending a strong signal to the jury today, Pao
is probably going to win here.

~~~
colmvp
I submitted this story a few days ago which didn't get any upvotes but
elaborates on your point

[http://recode.net/2015/03/20/ellen-pao-and-the-case-of-
the-m...](http://recode.net/2015/03/20/ellen-pao-and-the-case-of-the-
mysterious-missing-admins/)

> Ellen Pao said she filed her gender discrimination lawsuit against Kleiner
> Perkins Caufield & Byers partly because of three female administrative
> assistants who had been discriminated against because of their gender — and
> only with Pao’s lawsuit and a meaningful settlement would the firm take
> women’s issues seriously.

> There is only one problem: No one in the courtroom seems to know where these
> admins are. No one seems to know the details of their grievances. No one in
> court, including Pao, even knows all their names.

> Pao also said she was told by Kleiner Perkins talent partner Juliet de
> Baubigny that Nazre was a “sex addict.” To her, that pointed to a larger
> unspoken history. “I thought she must have additional information and maybe
> about the administrative assistants,” Pao said.

> Asked on the stand today whether she ever called Nazre a “sex addict,” de
> Baubigny replied, “No, that is completely ridiculous.”

~~~
facepalm
Would being a sex addict be punishable in court? I mean is it in any way
illegal?

~~~
strathmeyer
You're supposed to feel sorry enough for her to give her millions.

------
hobomonkey
Pao and her husband can play this game better than most.
[http://recode.net/2015/03/12/kleiner-perkins-cant-talk-
about...](http://recode.net/2015/03/12/kleiner-perkins-cant-talk-about-ellen-
paos-husband-and-his-finances-judge-rules/)

------
rjurney
I'm surprised at how effectively the defense painted the incidents of sexism
as simple misunderstandings. The book, the dinner, their defense seems
effective.

Not saying I believe them, just saying they're sort of convincing. Of course,
these could be simple misunderstandings and she was still discriminated
against.

------
paulhauggis
From this article, it sounds like Pao is just trying to extort money out of
this company.

Pao also sounds extremely self-centered. An example is thinking a book of
poetry is a sexual advance. After reading this, I question what she considers
"sexual advances".

~~~
adventured
I find it fascinating that the judge won't allow any discussion in regards to
Pao or her husband's finances, which would fairly bring into question why she
filed the suit.

~~~
bhayden
How does her motivation for entering a lawsuit change the facts of the
discrimination? Either she was unlawfully discriminated or not. Just because
she's tight on money a jury should somehow weight that into their decision?
They need to start determining not only if was she wronged, but does she also
deserve restitution? That's fucked up.

------
michaelochurch
At worst, Ellen Pao is like Michael Brown: not sympathetic, not a victim, but
with a story that is still illustrative of systemic bias and wrongdoing. At
best, she's a hero for taking on a prominent VC firm and putting her whole
professional life at risk. My guess is that reality is between those two
endpoints.

First, Kleiner's been playing _really_ dirty. It's one thing to say, "We
didn't do anything wrong" and call witnesses to argue that there isn't a
persistent pattern of gender bias. It's another to push your own employees
(who can't say anything other than what you tell them to, since you can take
their jobs away, and most people would rather commit perjury than get fired,
because when it comes to he-said/she-said civil matters perjury is almost
never prosecuted) into talking smack about someone who left 3 years ago.
Bringing her husband and his finances into it is also beyond the pale.

The character attacks being made against Pao are also transparently sexist ("a
female chip on her shoulder"). Yes, she played politics, and sometimes
clumsily. She probably felt that she had to make many of the moves that she
did. For example, her request that Nazre _not_ be fired could have been
motivated by a concern for her own safety, or out of a fear that his being
fired because of her would lead to out-of-band professional retaliation
(against her, or against Kleiner) later on down the road. VC is a clubby
world; you can understand why she'd plead for someone not to be fired, even
after being wronged by that person.

It's also possible that these two seemingly contradictory claims are true: (a)
Kleiner Perkins does not have systemic bias against women, and (b) Ellen Pao
was a victim of gender discrimination. (I'm not saying that _either_ is true.
I'm saying that both could be true at the same time.) One case isn't a
pattern. It might be an isolated fuckup by a now-fired employee that KPCB (out
of negligence rather than intentional discrimination) failed to correct. It
still needs to be addressed. For example, I might be a person with no pattern
or history of killing homeless people (as it were, I am, since I've never
killed anyone) but if I go off and kill a homeless person, then I should be
tried, convicted and jailed. The lack of a pattern doesn't matter. The fact
that you could have 99 homeless people testify that I never killed them
doesn't matter. If I kill one, I belong in jail.

Here's how it looks to me: Ajit Nazre damaged Ellen Pao's reputation within
the firm, after she broke off a sexual relationship. He _used Kleiner 's
performance review system and its culture_ to ruin her career. I doubt that
its HR system and culture were _designed_ to ruin womens' careers, but that's
beside the point. Ill-designed buildings that drop snow or ice on people from
great heights, and kill them, weren't designed to murder people, but we still
hold the developers and architects responsible for negligence.

After Nazre destroyed Pao's reputation, she struggled to recover and could
not. KPCB did not do enough to help her recover; that is clear and obvious to
me. It could have reached out and extended invitation to, for example, events
like the ski trip and the meeting with Al Gore. It could have formally cleared
her name and improved her performance review. As far as I can see, it didn't.
That may not have been intentional discrimination, but it was severe
negligence. It doesn't matter whether John Doerr is sexist; it doesn't seem
that he is. But that's not the point. If KPCB didn't do enough to clear her
name, then it should be held responsible even if it was Nazre himself who was
guilty of the gendered component of the harassment.

~~~
CPLX
As usual, Mr. Church chimes in with the most accurate and nuanced analysis of
one small broken piece of Valley culture.

------
venomsnake
What I take from the case - there is rampant sexism in the industry but she
was not harmed by it, because she is a Machiavellian cutthroat overachiever
...

The blackbook especially shows she did the groundwork for that case way back
...

~~~
lifeisstillgood
Let me rephrase that - "there is rampant sexism in the industry, leading to
harm to pretty much every woman in the industry, but only a Machiavellian
cutthroat overachiever will manage to drag the whole industry into court to
demonstrate the rampant sexism in front of a jury."

The first half of your sentence condemns Kleiner and suggests that the laws
under consideration here should be applied fully - else why do we have them?

PS - laying the groundwork for a case years prior is exactly the kind of top
notch risk-management capability we wan running major companies. As DeMarco
says "risk management is project management for grown ups"

~~~
venomsnake
Because I cannot see her as a victim and only as a player in the game that was
dealt somewhat weaker hand. Of course all of Lady McBeths of the world have
the same protection under the law ... I just don't feel sympathies for them.

~~~
lifeisstillgood
The major part of her hand was dealt when she got two X chromosomes.

If you agree (and it seems so with "sexism is rampant) that Kleiner was
discriminatory, then what does it matter how Machiavellian she was or was not.
The case is about their actions not her sympathy-worthiness.

I think you have to respect her ability to take this to the mattresses, even
if you can see the PR briefings against her (husband was doing something
illegal etc).

If you feel "playing politics" is a bad thing, I would suggest that the
centuries long battle to achieve legal equality, will be as nothing compared
to persuading politicians to pass anti-Machiavellian laws ...

