[OT] Welcome to Benignogate/WFANgate

[jetsons]

On 7/19/2018 at 9:35 PM, joewilly12 said:

If he asked her once and she shunned his request then nothing, if he asked her daily then that's sexual harassment.

Only if she felt harassed, annoyed or alarmed... if not then it’s ZERO .

[jetsons]

Just love how it took her 12 Years & being Fired to realize she didn’t quite enjoy the atmosphere at WFAN ?.

[Larz]

43 minutes ago, jetsons said:

Just love how it took her 12 Years & being Fired to realize she didn’t quite enjoy the atmosphere at WFAN ?.

My sister worked for cantor Fitzgerald back in the day. She is gorgeous. 

She avoided the brokers bullpen because they are all animals 

She left after about 2 years. 

She could have complained every day 

Doesn't make it right or wrong, just her way of dealing with it 

[FlagmanL11]

On 7/19/2018 at 12:48 PM, GATA-Bot said:

Well when this is the accuser what do you expect 

Cyclops 

[kevinc855]

Due process to all

[The Crusher]

2 hours ago, Larz said:

My sister worked for cantor Fitzgerald back in the day. She is gorgeous. 

She avoided the brokers bullpen because they are all animals 

She left after about 2 years. 

She could have complained every day 

Doesn't make it right or wrong, just her way of dealing with it 

Yeah but she was a Viking warrior princess who drank wine from the skulls of her fallen adversaries.  So yeah probably little different scenario. 

[Charlie Brown]

9 hours ago, Larz said:

My sister worked for cantor Fitzgerald back in the day. She is gorgeous. 

She avoided the brokers bullpen because they are all animals 

She left after about 2 years. 

She could have complained every day 

Doesn't make it right or wrong, just her way of dealing with it 

And when I was single you failed to mention that your sister was gorgeous why again........  

And here I am a Jets Fan.... Oh I see; never mind...  

[Larz]

22 minutes ago, Charlie Brown said:

And when I was single you failed to mention that your sister was gorgeous why again........  

And here I am a Jets Fan.... Oh I see; never mind...  

To be fair that was in the 90s ?

[southparkcpa]

33 minutes ago, Larz said:

To be fair that was in the 90s ?

Thank God she wasn’t there on 911.   I almost took a job there back in the 80s and think often of what or where I would have been on 911.  

[Larz]

22 minutes ago, southparkcpa said:

Thank God she wasn’t there on 911.   I almost took a job there back in the 80s and think often of what or where I would have been on 911.  

Yeah I think about it every year. Just so sad. Pretty sure they were on the top floors. 

[southparkcpa]

Just now, Larz said:

Yeah I think about it every year. Just so sad. Pretty sure they were on the top floors. 

Yes, very impressive offices on the top floor.  I’ve been there a few times. 

[Jetsbb]

This would be a huge loss to the Jets fan community if Joe doesn't come back. I used to look forward to Joe's rants Sunday night when he did overnights as a teenager

[Dunnie]

This would be a huge loss to the Jets fan community if Joe doesn't come back. I used to look forward to Joe's rants Sunday night when he did overnights as a teenager

...never enjoyed his SOJ schtick

 

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[Jetsbb]

3 hours ago, Dunnie said:

...never enjoyed his SOJ schtick

 

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

 

 

He is he only talking head not afraid to call Bowles a terrible HC. Everyone else kisses his ass despite making inexcusable boneheaded decisions almost every game.

[jack48]

On 7/20/2018 at 7:41 AM, Sperm Edwards said:

If it was on the station’s premises, yes. If it was in a bar/gathering after work, no (unless it was formally company sponsored). 

Who gets in a fist fight over Floyd Mayweather?  Low lifes. This trial should be a real trailer park block party 

[Snell41]

Well when this is the accuser what do you expect 

Hooray for victim shaming!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[southtown24th]

On 7/22/2018 at 7:23 AM, FlagmanL11 said:

Cyclops 

oy vey

[Jack Straw]

1 hour ago, Snell41 said:

Hooray for victim shaming!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Until she positively proves that she's been victimized, she's not a victim. 

[jetsons]

On 7/22/2018 at 8:06 AM, Larz said:

My sister worked for cantor Fitzgerald back in the day. She is gorgeous. 

She avoided the brokers bullpen because they are all animals 

She left after about 2 years. 

She could have complained every day 

Doesn't make it right or wrong, just her way of dealing with it 

My point exactly... this one decided to stay for TWELVE YEARS & ONLY AFTER Being Fired she makes these allegations... SHOW ME PROOF... if Not ... Hit The Bricks.

[Snell41]

Until she positively proves that she's been victimized, she's not a victim. 

Well that’s just completely false and imbecile. If she’s telling the truth she absolutely is a victim already. The problem is you want the truth yourself before you can accept that and all the meanwhile everything about her is open season for taunting and insults. And we wonder why so many victims just stay silent and never report anything. I would expect a little more thought from a fellow Head.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Philc1]

14 hours ago, Jetsbb said:

He is he only talking head not afraid to call Bowles a terrible HC. Everyone else kisses his ass despite making inexcusable boneheaded decisions almost every game.

This

 

the rest of the media acts like Bowles is our best head coach since Parcells

[Jack Straw]

31 minutes ago, Snell41 said:

 

Well that’s just completely false and imbecile. If she’s telling the truth she absolutely is a victim already. The problem is you want the truth yourself before you can accept that and all the meanwhile everything about her is open season for taunting and insults. And we wonder why so many victims just stay silent and never report anything. I would expect a little more thought from a fellow Head.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Well first of all, I'm not condoning the taunting or name calling. I haven't called her any names, or taunted her, or claimed that she's a liar, so I don't know why you would insinuate that.

What I am saying, however, is that since she's the one who made the accusation (the positive claim) against Joe Benigno, the burden of proof is on her to prove the claim to be true and not on Joe Beningo to prove that it is false, as it's essentially impossible for him to prove a negative (unless he can prove that her claim is an impossibility or that he has evidence of absence).

Just because this claim hasn't been disproved by Joe Benigno does NOT automatically make the claim against him to true.

As Carl Sagan said, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Hitchen's Razor also states that if the burden of proof to support a positive claim is not met, the opponent does not need to argue further to dismiss the claim - it is fair for it to be assumed false.

The gist of my point is that I'm not going to burn the guy at the stake until the accusations against him are corroborated with evidence. He has a right to face his accuser, as she has the right to hold the accused responsible for his alleged actions. Let's wait and see before we burn either of them at the stake.

[dbatesman]

1 minute ago, Jack Straw said:

Hitchen's Razor also states

lmfao

[Dcat]

1 hour ago, Philc1 said:

This

 

the rest of the media acts like Bowles is our best head coach since Parcells

It is unfathomable to me that the entire sports media actually thinks Bowles is a competent head coach.  I do not know why he never gets criticism of any kind from the any NFL media coverage.  Maybe he's a real nice guy, but geez he is an awful NFL head coach.  

[Philc1]

3 hours ago, Dcat said:

It is unfathomable to me that the entire sports media actually thinks Bowles is a competent head coach.  I do not know why he never gets criticism of any kind from the any NFL media coverage.  Maybe he's a real nice guy, but geez he is an awful NFL head coach.  

The problem is the local columnists like Mehta, Costello, Vacchiano etc are Mac/Bowles ballwashers

 

 

The national pundits are either indifferent (NFLN, Fox) or they’re patriots fans on ESPN who are happy the jets are stuck with a horrible regume

[BROOKLYN JET]

On 7/19/2018 at 1:05 PM, joewilly12 said:

No way not even Beningo would go for that.

That's what happens from looking at this all day...

[BROOKLYN JET]

New video surfaces of Barclays brawl cited in WFAN sex harassment suit

https://nypost.com/2018/07/24/wfan-sexual-harassment-accuser-involved-in-bar-brawl/amp/

[Snell41]

Well first of all, I'm not condoning the taunting or name calling. I haven't called her any names, or taunted her, or claimed that she's a liar, so I don't know why you would insinuate that.
What I am saying, however, is that since she's the one who made the accusation (the positive claim) against Joe Benigno, the burden of proof is on her to prove the claim to be true and not on Joe Beningo to prove that it is false, as it's essentially impossible for him to prove a negative (unless he can prove that her claim is an impossibility or that he has evidence of absence).
Just because this claim hasn't been disproved by Joe Benigno does NOT automatically make the claim against him to true.
As Carl Sagan said, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Hitchen's Razor also states that if the burden of proof to support a positive claim is not met, the opponent does not need to argue further to dismiss the claim - it is fair for it to be assumed false.
The gist of my point is that I'm not going to burn the guy at the stake until the accusations against him are corroborated with evidence. He has a right to face his accuser, as she has the right to hold the accused responsible for his alleged actions. Let's wait and see before we burn either of them at the stake.

I think we’re talking from two separate spectrums of view. I agree, Beningo should not be burned at the stake until the facts are vetted. But if what happened is true, she is already a victim. Others in this thread have posted a pic of her and said basically she’s too ugly for this to be true, in jest or seriously doesn’t much matter. That was where my original comment stemmed that you quoted she’s not a victim yet. If what she says is a lie, she deserves to be sued and criminally prosecuted. But if she’s telling the truth she became a victim the days the actions began, and she shouldn’t be shamed for her looks about it. That’s what I’m referring to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bgivs21]

14 hours ago, BROOKLYN JET said:

New video surfaces of Barclays brawl cited in WFAN sex harassment suit

https://nypost.com/2018/07/24/wfan-sexual-harassment-accuser-involved-in-bar-brawl/amp/

It's being described as a brawl but looks more like a shoving match. 

[kelly]

On 7/22/2018 at 6:28 PM, Larz said:

To be fair that was in the 90s ?

90's..

 

?

[SayNoToDMC]

I should have got a job in radio

[JetFreak89]

I guess we all now know why Joe B. needed two new hips...couldn't give it to his wife and the hooker the same way after all these years. 

[jgb]

How exactly is it a threesome when it’s you, your co-worker, your Wife, and prostitutes plural? What I take from this situation is that Benigno can’t count.

 

[jgb]

On 7/24/2018 at 4:10 AM, Jack Straw said:

Well first of all, I'm not condoning the taunting or name calling. I haven't called her any names, or taunted her, or claimed that she's a liar, so I don't know why you would insinuate that.

What I am saying, however, is that since she's the one who made the accusation (the positive claim) against Joe Benigno, the burden of proof is on her to prove the claim to be true and not on Joe Beningo to prove that it is false, as it's essentially impossible for him to prove a negative (unless he can prove that her claim is an impossibility or that he has evidence of absence).

Just because this claim hasn't been disproved by Joe Benigno does NOT automatically make the claim against him to true.

As Carl Sagan said, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Hitchen's Razor also states that if the burden of proof to support a positive claim is not met, the opponent does not need to argue further to dismiss the claim - it is fair for it to be assumed false.

The gist of my point is that I'm not going to burn the guy at the stake until the accusations against him are corroborated with evidence. He has a right to face his accuser, as she has the right to hold the accused responsible for his alleged actions. Let's wait and see before we burn either of them at the stake.

Not disagreeing but workplace isn’t a court of law. Can nearly fire anyone for anything as long as not on the basis of protected characteristic or in violation of an employment contract

[nyjunc]

having spent time there and knowing Joe I would be totally shocked if any of this was true.  unless there was a dramatic turn in office atmosphere there's no way anything was happening at the station itself.  could things have happened at events? sure but I'd still be shocked if guys like Joe and others mentioned were involved.