Yesterday I found out via a comment on this blog that Yuval Peres, a person who has been accused by numerous students, trainees, and colleagues of sexual harassment, will be delivering a lecture today in the UC Davis Mathematical Physics and Probability Seminar.
The facts
I am aware of at least 11 allegations by women of sexual harassment by Yuval Peres (trigger warning: descriptions of sexual harassment and sexual assault):
- Allegation of sexual harassment of a Ph.D. student in 2007. Source: description of the harassment by the victim.
- Allegation of sexual harassment by a colleague that happened when she was younger. Source: description of the harassment by the victim.
- Allegation of sexual harassment of a woman prior to 2007. Source: report on sexual harassment allegations against Yuval Peres by the University of Washington (received via a Freedom of Information Act Request).
- Allegation of sexual harassment by one of Yuval Peres’ Ph.D. students several years ago. Source: report on sexual harassment allegations against Yuval Peres by the University of Washington (received via a Freedom of Information Act Request).
- Allegation of sexual harassment of a colleague. Source: personal communication to me by the victim (who wishes to remain anonymous) via email after I wrote a post about Yuval Peres.
- Allegation of sexual harassment of a graduate student. Source: personal communication to me by the victim (the former graduate student who wishes to remain anonymous) via email after I wrote a post about Yuval Peres.
- Recent allegations of sexual harassment by 5 junior female scientists who reported unwanted advances by Yuval Peres to persons that leading figures in the CS community describe as “people we trust without a shred of doubt”. Source: a letter circulated by Irit Dinur, Ehud Friedgut and Oded Goldreich.
The details offered by these women of the sexual harassment they experienced are horrific and corroborate each other. His former Ph.D. student (#4 above) describes, in a harrowing letter included in the University of Washington Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) disclosed report, sexual harassment she experienced over the course of two years, and many of the details are similar to what is described by another victim here. The letter describes sexual harassment that had its origins when the student was an undergraduate (adding insult to injury the University of Washington did not redact her name with the FOIA disclosed report). I had extreme difficulty reading some of the descriptions, and believe the identity of the victim should be kept private despite the University of Washington FOIA report, but am including one excerpt here so that it’s clear what exactly these allegations entail (the letter is 4.5 pages long):
Trigger warning: description of sexual harassment and sexual assault
“While walking down a street he took my hand, I took it away with pressure but he grabbed it by force. I was pretty afraid of getting in a fight with my PhD advisor. He stroked my hand with his fingers. I said stop, but he ignored it. I started talking about math intending to make the situation less intimate. But he used me being distracted and put his arms around my waist touching my bud. I was in shock. We came by a bench. He asked me to sit down. I removed his hands and sat down far from him. He came closer and told me that I had a body like a barbie doll. I changed topic again to math, but he took my hand and kissed the back of my hand. I freed my hand with a sudden move, and saw him leaning towards me touching my hair and trying to kiss me. I felt danger and wanted to go home. Yuval was again holding my hand, but this time there was no resistance from me. I thought if I let him hold my hand it is less likely that he harms me. Arriving at my home he tried to give me a kiss. I was relieved when he drove away.”
The victim sent this letter to the chairs of the mathematics and computer science departments at the University of Washington and made a request:
“I am not the only female who was sexually harassed by Yuval Peres and I am convinced that I was not the last one. Therefore, I hope with this report that you take actions to prevent incidents like this from happening again.”
Instead of passing on the complaint to Title IX, and contrary to claims by some of Yuval Peres’ colleagues that appear in the University of Washington FOIA disclosure report that the case was investigated, the chairs of the University of Washington math and computer science departments (in a jointly signed letter) offered Yuval Peres a path to avoiding investigation:
“As you know from our e-mail to you [last week], your resignation as well as an agreement not to seek or accept another position at the University will eliminate the need for the University to investigate the allegations against you.”
Indeed, Yuval Peres resigned within two months of the complaint with no investigation ever taking place. This is the email the victim received afterwards from the chair of the mathematics department, in response to her request that “I hope with this report that you take actions to prevent incidents like this from happening again”:
“I believe this resolution [Yuval Peres’ resignation] has promptly and effectively addressed your concerns.”
At least 8 women have since claimed that they were sexually harassed.
Seminar and a dinner
As is customary with invited speakers, the organizer of the seminar today wrote to colleagues and student in the math department at UC Davis on Monday letting people know that “there will be a dinner afterward, so please let me know if you are interested in attending.”
Here is a description of a dinner Yuval Peres took his Ph.D. student to, and a summary of the events that led to him and his Ph.D. student walking down the street when he forcibly grabbed her hand:
Trigger warning: description of sexual harassment and sexual assault
“I tried to keep the dinner short, but suddenly he seemed to have a lot of time. He paid in cash in contrast to dinners with other students, and offered to take me home. In his car half way to my place he said he would only take me home if I show him my room (I was living in a shared apartment with other people). I thought it was a joke and said no. He laughed and grabbed my hand. Arriving at home I said goodbye. But when I got out of the car he said that I promised to show him my room. I said that I did not. However, he followed me to the backdoor of the house. Fortunately some of my roommates were at home. It bothered Yuval that we were not alone at my home, so he said we should take a walk outside. I felt uncomfortable but I still needed to talk about my PhD thesis work. While walking down the street he took my hand, I took it away with pressure but he grabbed it with force…”
I wonder how many graduate students at UC Davis will feel comfortable signing up for dinner with Yuval Peres tonight, or even be able to handle attending his seminar after reading of all the sexual harassment allegations against him?
The challenge is particularly acute for women. I know this from comments in the reports of sexual harassment that I’ve read, from the University of Washington FOIA disclosed report, and from personal communication with multiple women who have worked with him or had to deal with him. Isn’t holding seminars (which are an educational program) that women are afraid to attend, and are therefore de facto excluded from and being denied benefit of, in a department that depends heavily on federal funding, a Title IX violation? Title IX federal law states that
“No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
An opinion
It’s outrageous that UC Davis’ math department is hosting Yuval Peres for a seminar and dinner today.
[Update November 10th, 2019: after reading this post a former Ph.D. student at UC Berkeley wrote that “Another PhD student in Berkeley probability and I both experienced this as well. About time this is called out so no more new students are harassed.“]
Bits of DNA 
43 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 6, 2019 at 3:34 pm
UC Davis grad student
Thank you for this post, we have notified all grad students of these allegations and linked your post(s).
November 7, 2019 at 12:59 pm
Concerned mathematician
Invited as seminar speaker at Stony Brook University 11/14/2019 https://www.math.stonybrook.edu/agenda?LocationID=41
November 8, 2019 at 11:12 am
Lior Pachter
I’ve received word that the seminar has been canceled.
November 9, 2019 at 3:34 am
Please Stop.
What you may not realize is that your repeated efforts to destroy this man’s reputation (which I assume are well-intentioned) carry a lot of collateral damage for his many female coauthors.
Enough is enough, please stop already.
November 9, 2019 at 9:21 am
Alex Jones
Lior, I was with you until the near end of the post. Of course, no women are being excluded from the seminar. They are free to go and focus on the (probably beautiful) math that Yuval discusses. Is the fact that they feel they cannot go a title IX violation?
Let’s change the situation and instead say that Yuval was an ordinary mathematics professor (or researcher) but wrote a blog about how to pick up (not necessarily mathematical) girls at bars. Would you say that him writing the blog is now a title IX violation if some women would feel uncomfortable going to a seminar in which he was the speaker due to the blog?
I agree that Yuval should absolutely not have been invited to give a talk. However, I think saying it is a title IX violation because women are being excluded is completely ridiculous.
November 9, 2019 at 10:04 am
Lior Pachter
First, a quote from the UW report. It is from a (female) professor:
“I, myself, though never harassed by Yuval, was extremely uncomfortable in going to any conference he was invited to talk in, and even to attend, after I heard of his continuing misbehavior a few years ago. What should I do or say? I simply didn’t want to be out there, out of solidarity with women I knew were harassed, as well as of general discomfort with the absurdity and the unethical situation. As a result, I __intentionally__ avoided several lectures and also a conference in [REDACTED] when I knew he was going to be there.”
Second, in mathematics in general, and in this case in particular, a “seminar” is an event that combines a lecture with a dinner. The dinner involves close proximity and interaction with the speaker. One might sit next to him. (Beautiful) mathematics is not the only topic of conversation at dinner. Furthermore, access to the speaker is a key part of the “seminar” event. It provides professional access to students and faculty. It is a benefit. So no, this is not just about listening to “(probably beautiful) math”.
I will not engage in your ill-specified hypothetical. I do think that it’s highly problematic when faculty behave in ways that make it very difficult, impossible, or dangerous, for students of a certain group to interact with them. What exactly does or does not rise to a Title IX violation I do not know. I’m no expert. I asked a question. My understanding from your comment is that your answer to my question is no.
November 9, 2019 at 11:08 am
Alex Jones
Thank you for the response Lior. It seems, though, that you completely missed my point. Never did I say that mathematics was the only part of the seminar. My only point was that women are not being excluded. You did not *just* ask a question; while asking a question, you made a statement when you said “Isn’t holding seminars (which are an educational program) that women are afraid to attend, and are therefore de facto excluded from”. The question “when did you stop beating your wife?” contains a statement as well.
The point of the hypothetical is to show the difference between women feeling uncomfortable going somewhere and them being excluded. Of course, the fear of being sexually harassed doesn’t compare to the uncomfortability felt being near someone who writes a blog about how to pick up girls, but the point is the same. And by the way, I doubt anyone thinks Yuval will behave inappropriately at the dinner given all that has happened (and I doubt he ever behaved very inappropriately in a big group setting).
November 9, 2019 at 5:41 pm
Lior Pachter
I’ve visited many math departments in my career and while some are healthy and equitable environments, I’ve unfortunately encountered too many situations where I think it was legitimate to ask “when will you (math department consisting almost entirely of men) stop beating your wife (female graduate students, postdocs and faculty who are routinely subjected to sexual harassment and assault)?”
November 10, 2019 at 1:06 pm
eventhisoneistaken
But wait, it gets worse!
https://posttenuretourettes.wordpress.com/2019/11/10/metoo-squared/
Do read the whole thing to the end.
November 11, 2019 at 7:06 am
Lior Pachter
Have you coauthored any preprints or papers with Yuval Peres?
November 11, 2019 at 7:10 am
eventhisoneistaken
What difference would that make? At this point, the bigger story is you, not Yuval.
November 12, 2019 at 11:37 am
Anon
You really believe that there are people out there who will find this idiocy enthralling, don’t you.
It’s almost sad.
November 12, 2019 at 11:40 am
eventhisoneistaken
… says the guy I’m considering banning from my blog for repeated trolling.
November 12, 2019 at 8:49 am
Elizabeth Batory
While it is very kind of Professor Pachter to bring this to our attention, I am a little puzzled. While Professor Peres had certainly displayed poor judgment, I am not aware of any criminal proceeding against him, or am I aware of any retaliation he might have undertaken against people who had rebuffed him.
(of course, if Professor Pachter is aware of either, I would be delighted to hear of it). So, bad judgment it is.
Now, what is Professor Pachter proposing? Is he advocating a complete boycott of Professor Peres? Does this extend to not citing his papers? Not buying the (excellent) books he has coauthored? If we are to cite Professor Peres’ papers, then our graduate students will benefit greatly from talking to Professor Peres in person (even more so because he is one of the leading probabilists of the last thirty or so years).
If Professor Pachter advocates the complete erasure of Professor Peres from mathematics and computer science, surely this would extend to the erasure of Pontryagin and Vinogradov (persecuted Jews in the Soviet Union), Teichmuller and Bieberbach (Nazis), Lorentz (Nazi), Bloch (axe murderer), Severi (fascist), R. L. Moore (racist), J. J. Silvester (physically abused his students), all the ancient greeks (owned slaves), William Thurston and J.E. Fornaess (married their graduate students, so they must have exhibited even worse judgment than Professor Peres)?
Or does Pachter follow in the steps of Teichmuller, who was instrumental in banning Edmund Landau from his Professorship at Gottingen, but would come to Landau for private seminars, since he believed he (Teichmuller) had a sufficiently strong moral constitution to avoid pollution by the Jew Landau?
I await clarification anxiously.
November 12, 2019 at 8:55 am
eventhisoneistaken
The ancient Greeks didn’t just “sexually harass” their students — they elevated shtupping them to a philosophical ideal!
November 12, 2019 at 9:06 am
Elizabeth Batory
You are correct. The most famous instance of this was Socrates’ relationship with Alcibiades (see Plutarch’s biography of the latter).
November 12, 2019 at 10:31 am
Anon
Wow, sexual harassment must be good then!
This makes sense to me because my brain works very good.
November 12, 2019 at 10:30 am
Anon
Ah, yes, the well-known principle that anything which is not criminal is perfectly fine.
How could Pachter have forgotten about this.
November 12, 2019 at 10:47 am
Elizabeth Batory
Dearest Anon,
I am afraid that you are either very dense, or are trolling. If you were to actually read my comment, you will see that many people mentioned actually did commit crimes (including crimes against humanity), and so the question stands even if you believed that Professor Peres’s behavior was tantamount to a crime against humanity (do you?)
November 12, 2019 at 11:36 am
Anon
You began your comment with “I am not aware of any criminal proceeding against him”. If the point was not to minimize Peres’ actions, what was it?
As for the rest, well, it’s all very stupid since Pachter has never suggested anything remotely resembling what you’re talking about.
November 12, 2019 at 11:41 am
Elizabeth Batory
My point was to put Peres’ actions in context. However, since your point seems to be to insult, I have no interest in continuing this conversation. Have a nice life, dearest Anonymous Coward!
November 16, 2020 at 3:31 pm
Elizabeth Batshottery
“Others were bad, so we should ignore this one.”
Well, you obviously stepped outside for a J when the rest of us were learning logic, or was it ethics.
Just to finish up with your stupidity, you whined hysterically about someone below “posting anonymously”. Are you trying to tell us we should believe you are posting with your real name and it just happens to be Elizabeth Batory?
November 12, 2019 at 11:06 am
eventhisoneistaken
Posting anonymously is fine and good (if I do say so myself), but it does help to stick to a consistent unique handle, so we know if we’re dealing with a single or multiple personalities. (This does not exclude the possibility that the multiple personalities occupy the same skull.) Or it would if the specimen in question had ever uttered an interesting or original thought, which is not the case.
November 12, 2019 at 11:42 am
Elizabeth Batory
Our anonymous friend’s only interest is to troll and derail the conversation, so while what you are saying is correct, it is of no interest to it.
November 12, 2019 at 6:37 pm
Alex Jones
“I am not aware of any criminal proceeding against him”.
https://dw.courts.wa.gov/ –> “Name search” under “Search for a person” –> “accept” (at bottom of page) –> Peres, Yuval, Enter code, “Submit”
I don’t speak for Pachter, but here are my best guesses.
“Now, what is Professor Pachter proposing? Is he advocating a complete boycott of Professor Peres?”
Yes, in the sense of banning *him* from the community.
“Does this extend to not citing his papers? Not buying the (excellent) books he has coauthored?”
No. No.
“If we are to cite Professor Peres’ papers, then our graduate students will benefit greatly from talking to Professor Peres in person (even more so because he is one of the leading probabilists of the last thirty or so years).”
Okay. That is a downside to the boycott. The upside is an increased confidence that he won’t harass anyone else in the community and to show that there are consequences for sexual harassment.
“If Professor Pachter advocates the complete erasure of Professor Peres from mathematics and computer science, surely this would extend…”
This whole paragraph is moot, because the “if” condition you gave does not hold I presume (as explained above).
“I await clarification anxiously.”
I hope you have it.
November 20, 2019 at 10:21 am
valuevar
If the aim is to keep Peres from harassing others, and perhaps refraining from giving the impression that he is welcome in some sort of “club”, yet we still want students and colleagues to be able to talk to him in person, then the solution could be simply to invite him for a seminar, state explicitly that there will be *no* seminar dinner or other social activities, and arrange for him to meet with students and colleagues only under senior supervision, with this fact being known to both students and colleagues.
If judged necessary, he can also be privately told that he should not seek social contact with people in the department. I agree that there should be consequences for poor behavior, but there have already been very serious consequences of a different kind.
December 5, 2019 at 9:29 pm
Lior Pachter
Rebecca Binh-Wallace has written an article about YP’s visit to the UC Davis math department: Yuval Peres, math professor with series of sexual misconduct allegations levied against him, gives lecture at UC Davis
December 7, 2019 at 10:13 pm
Lior Pachter
The link works. As it stands your comment is just a link to infowars. So I will delete it.
December 25, 2019 at 12:45 am
Yuval Peres
Could we take some action about his mathoverflow activity as well https://mathoverflow.net/users/7691/yuval-peres
He frequently interacts with grad students via his posts there as well. I think this helps him integrate back into the community without ever addressing the pain he has caused.
December 27, 2019 at 12:03 pm
Tim Bonners
I don’t like that suggestion. I think he should not be allowed to integrate back into the academia community yet, via talks at seminars, etc, but I don’t think he should be banned from using a website, such as math overflow.
January 7, 2020 at 12:42 pm
Dog Patch 6
I find this whole post and thread to be disgusting. You have gone out of your way to try to destroy a man’s reputation. Yuval is a brilliant mathematician, eccentric at times, yes, but a brilliant mathematician.
January 7, 2020 at 2:24 pm
A PhD Student
OK. How about you ask YOUR university’s administrators how this pimple-faced imbecile got into this country in the first place?
https://www.sfexaminer.com/tag/yishun-dong/
January 7, 2020 at 2:49 pm
PHD Student
OK. How about you ask YOUR university’s administrators about how this pimple faced imbecile even got into the country in the first place?
LOL the “number 1 student” from YOUR university
https://www.gocaltech.com/sports/msoc/2012-13/bios/dong_yishun_cfip?view=bio
https://www.sfexaminer.com/tag/yishun-dong/
January 8, 2020 at 4:34 am
Anon
Being eccentric does not include abusing power or sexually harassing anyone!
January 12, 2020 at 12:55 am
Anon 2020
I find comments and reactions of the type made by Dog Patch above both confusing and disappointing. I am confused because the issue here is not Yuval’s merits as a mathematician, but his actions as a human. Shall we accept all poor behavior from those who excel at one skill or another? While well accomplished as a mathematician, Yuval clearly needs to take his current time-out and reflect on how to be a better person. I do not advocate for a life-time ban, but clearly it is not yet time for business as usual without some reflection and discussion on what Yuval did.
Finally, I don’t understand the comment that it is Lior who has ruined Yuval’s reputation. The only person who did that is Yuval, by his own actions. And the evidence shows it was not one lapse of judgement, but a continued pattern, with many opportunities for self correction along the road. I am somewhat troubled by “trial by internet”, but nothing publicly posted has been untrue.
The truth will set you free. I hope Yuval can come out the other side of this, but he is nowhere close as far as I can tell.
January 12, 2020 at 12:35 pm
Lavuy Serep
Anon 2020, I think both points you bring up are stupid.
First, obviously Yuval’s merits as a mathematician are relevant. The better he is, the more impactful and detrimental his time out would be. Taking things to the (insane) extreme, suppose his mathematical output was 10 times that of all other mathematicians combined (not just quantity of output, quality as well); then it would make no sense to give him any time out.
Second, Lior did ruin Yuval’s reputation and career. True, it is Yuval’s fault Yuval did those things, but you cannot deny that Lior caused his firing/resignation and took the situation to a whole new level.
January 16, 2020 at 2:27 am
STEM Caveman
> “Yuval clearly needs to take his current time-out and reflect on how to be a better person.”
That was exactly the language and logic used unironically (as is done here, too) in the Cultural Revolution when sending people to the gulags, re-education centers etc. Of course the whole series of attacks on Peres also reeks of a struggle session in which the students get to settle scores with their teachers.
In academia today, Cult Rev herd behavior has become pervasive, all-powerful (forget about any protections associated with tenure), and easily focused against particular targets. This is a larger and more important story than the evolution of sexual harrassment standards.
January 12, 2020 at 4:41 am
eventhisoneistaken
@Anon 2020: ok, I’ll bite. Without defending Yuval’s (alleged) behavior, I’m trying to get a sense of proportion. If not a lifetime ban, then how long? Suppose you’re a math department chair at a decent university — that that would be thrilled, under normal circumstances, to hire someone of Yuval’s caliber. How long before you’d be willing to consider hiring him? 2 years? 5? 10? 25?
January 16, 2020 at 3:25 am
STEM Caveman
The imperious outrage against Peres is unbelievably hypocritical coming from the specific people who have set this campaign in motion.
Of the people writing the letters and blog campaigns on this matter, several (at least 3 by my count, including Pachter) are actually married to people in their own field. All of these marriages are between more senior/famous men and less senior, less well-known women in the field.
Which is of course a very common mode of mating for women in math, CS, physics, philosophy and other male dominated subjects. A LARGE MAJORITY of women in such fields date or marry within the field, for more or less obvious sociological reasons. Given the sex ratio and females’ higher interest (compared to males) in older partners, the women usually can and do choose to do this dating with men in the field who are more senior and accomplished than themselves. A woman at the 60th percentile can command a man at the 95th percentile, or something like that.
Given all this, a guy in Peres’ position, that is, a senior but not senior-citizen superstar, is entirely correct to take the Bayesian prior probability of “this 40th percentile female grad student might be interested in my advances” to be orders of magnitude higher than the same figure for a random woman from the general population: the intra-departmental sexual calculus is different, because it is. And since the couplings and marriages are visibly and regularly happening in any large department, and range from tolerated to celebrated, he would see evidence throughout his career that dating women from the office is not, per se, deviant behavior.
The other feature that changes things is that the aforementioned male-dominated fields have an obviously high percentage of autistic, Asperger or undersocialized individuals, disproportionately male. This does not mean that prevailing social norms should automatically be relaxed, but it does mean that there will, just as a matter of statistics, inevitably be a lot of men who will respond dysfunctionally to the peculiarities of the intra-academic dating environment. Draconian mass punishment after the fact is not a reasonable mechanism for enforcing the norms, especially norms that are changing over time. Preventive and educational approaches are more appropriate when a lot of the people are not realistically likely to “get it” just because it is written somewhere in a code of conduct.
Pachter & Co are well aware of all this. It is incredibly hypocritical to have literally built their own lives around the assortative mating possibilities that are enthusiastically pursued in every academic STEM environment, and at the same time treat it as outrageous that Peres and others like him might calibrate their own behavior to account for the reality of this dating market (which is a huge but publicly unacknowledged driver of behavior within the field).
January 16, 2020 at 9:41 am
stem tree dweller
You are completely overlooking the fact that he made advances on someone whom he was in a position to hire, and also on his PhD student. Everything you said does not apply to that.
January 16, 2020 at 11:51 am
STEM Caveman
I have not overlooked it. Plenty of the academic meat market, possibly including marriages or other relationships of the individuals leading the public attack on Peres, involves people in-a-position-to hire, grade, recommend, etc.
Something that you and most other commenters are overlooking in this regard is that the professional conflict of interest by crusaders such as Pachter or Anima Anandkumar. People who develop a reputation for relentlessly attacking and shaming others in the name of moral purity acquire a career superweapon for themselves: anyone who could potentially find themselves the target of such a campaign, or just does not want to have experiences of the sort that Steve Pinker and Scott Aaronson have had with Anima, learns to defer to such crusaders in all sorts of professional settings, giving them more power and career advantages over others who don’t engage in the purity-contest-with-live-ammunition.
How many times, for example, did Pachter get his way because (unknown to him) somebody had some dirty laundry and did not want to get on Lior’s bad side? Imagine the leverage he gains over X in situations where it *isn’t* unknown to him, and Lior knows that X knows that Lior knows that X knows…
Turning sexual harrassment (or racism, discrimination, and other not-quite-illegal crimes proved by ex parte reports) into nuclear weapons against the perpetrators also means that arms control is needed to prevent actual or potential abuses by the white knights.
January 16, 2020 at 3:39 pm
Lior Pachter
A crime is an unlawful act so a crime cannot be “not-quite-illegal”.
January 16, 2020 at 5:23 pm
STEM Caveman
They are mostly social crimes, not legal crimes (at the moment) and certainly not felonies. Which is what allows them to be prosecuted in ways that are more irregular and more punitive than anything that would go through a court.
The 3 Israelis’ letter on the Stanford email list stated that nothing they heard in the reports of Peres’ behavior was illegal, which is consistent with all that has come out since then. At most one case, the one with the PhD student featured on this blog post, sounds like something that could prevail in a civil court (had it somehow been captured on video, and if all the rest of the facts that might develop would favor only the accuser). In the meantime, the man’s career is being dismantled with no end in sight.
By the way, with regard to the Terry Speed case, your wife was his PhD student. Obviously this creates many possibilities for your private and public campaign against him, years after the fact, being a personally motivated vendetta rather than merely a principled enforcement of universal standards against harassment. It’s very convenient that Speed has to defend himself or resign, but the white knights such as yourself do not need to explain the background to bringing the case.