Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Mr. Rabois's story has the ring of truth.

Consider the following, which are presumably objectively verifiable facts:

A. Mr. Rabois doesn't name his accuser. If he was looking to inflict damage on them, he'd publicize it.

B. The accuser is seeking a payment of "millions of dollars."

C. The relationship began several months before the accuser's employment with Square.

D. The two came into relatively little contact at work.

These facts all show a high probability that the relationship was consensual, and also give a low probability that the accuser will be able to produce conclusive proof of coercion, such as:

. Texts or emails from the accuser saying Mr. Rabois's advances were unwelcome or made him uncomfortable.

. Evidence that Mr. Rabois gave the accuser job-related threats and/or rewards in exchange for the continuing relationship.

This does not conclusively show, of course, that Mr. Rabois is innocent. Nor does it mean the accuser doesn't have a solid case that will stand up in court. But based on the available information, this does seem to be the likelier outcome.




A. His lawyer likely would prefer he not do that.

B. Allegedly.

C. It could easily go bad later, leading to "if we break up I'll get you fired" type statements.

D. An executive of this level has enough power to at least make the threat of punitive actions have weight.

I don't think we have anything to go on beyond a blog post from one of the parties.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: