Jump to content

yukionna4869

Senior Member
  • Content Count

    175
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by yukionna4869


  1. 2 hours ago, ABT Fan said:

    Right, but as you mention as well, why weren't they added along with the donor and the other details in the first place? I realize no one here may know the answer, but that's strange to me. Not being an attorney, though, maybe this is common procedure... 

    I'm not sure, either. In Catazaro's case, I couldn't find what his messages with Finlay and Loughitano have to do with Waterbury. They were definitely gross, but it doesn't seem like he received photos of her. If anyone has standing to sue him, it's the girl whose picture he sent to Finlay.


  2. 2 hours ago, KayDenmark said:

     

    If he didn't, is the information she was not authorized to collect admissible in civil or criminal court? 

     

    It likely is. She doesn’t have the same constraints as the government.

    Finlay has a 4th amendment right to not have unreasonable searches and seizures from the government. 


  3. 33 minutes ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

    I too would like to see LaFreniere in the role when she's ready, but also Emilie Gerrity, who has been very impressive in some of Mearns' roles (Sanguinic and Namouna), and Ashley Laracey, who isn't quite in the grand ballerina mold either, but who could be very special in the role nonetheless. She was just a dream in Divertimento No. 15.

    I’ll add my vote to Gerrity as well. I thought she was fabulous as Sanguinic in 4Ts. 


  4. 13 hours ago, BalanchineFan said:

    I’m of the opposite opinion. I wish they’d let a few more women do 2nd movement Bizet. All the women who dance it have been doing it for quite some time (Kowroski, Mearns, Reichlen). They’re each good in their different ways but it would be so exciting to see someone new take a crack at it. 

    I remember Sterling dancing it. Justin Peck partnered her IIRC. She was good, but not earth shattering. They usually cast the taller women. Is that why you say she was miscast?

    I would like to see LaFreniere take on the 2nd movement Bizet. I’m eagerly anticipating her performance as the tall girl in Rubies. 


  5. 3 minutes ago, Olga said:

    To me, the major result of having used the company server, if they did, is that the company in conducting its “investigation” would have had access to emails even without going to a third party. I don’t think the no expectation of privacy rule means the company has a duty to read everyone’s emails etc. But it sounds like they were texting which as pointed out upthread is different.  

    Oh yes. If they used an email service hosted by the company, then the company would have copies of those e-mails for sure. I don't think it's been stated in the complaint that they did. I can't imagine Merson would omit that information in the facts of the case.

    Edited to add:
    Unless the company server somehow encrypts the e-mails it stores like Apple does. With Apple, the data they store is encrypted as well, so not even Apple knows what data is there. This is to guard against people who hack into their cloud services. The company could be using a third party e-mail server, as well.


  6. 3 minutes ago, balanchinefreak said:

    YES. 

    This is what I've been thinking - see my previous comments.  If this was done on company time, NYCB can't say, "I know nothing."

    That's not necessarily the case. My employer would not know the contents of texts I send during work hours, even if I'm on their WiFi. Apple iMessages are encrypted--the text is basically jumbled up and indecipherable to any one but the recipient. The  So only the recipient would see the un-encrypted message.


  7. 2 minutes ago, On Pointe said:

    The shot of her standing on a beach with her bare behind exposed also sends a mixed message.  Is it female empowerment or self-objectification?  If Finlay had posted this photo of her wouldn't he be condemned for it? 

    I don't understand what point you're trying to make with conflating what Finlay did to what Bouder posted. Finlay can posts semi nude photos of himself without issue. If Finlay took and distributed that photograph of Bouder without her knowledge and consent, then yes, he would rightfully be condemned for it.

    No one is saying NYCB dancers should not have any sexy or sexual photographs. But if it was done without consent, as with what happened to Waterbury, then it is unacceptable morally and legally.


  8. 5 minutes ago, fondoffouettes said:

    I can't see this working, given NYCB's rep. In some pieces, the principal men come into contact with so many female dancers, of all rank. It would turn into a casting nightmare if female dancers decided whether or not they wanted to come into contact with Catazaro and Ramasar. I think they either need to be brought back as fully integrated company members or not at all. 

    I don't know how much choice they have in the matter with respect to casting. Gina Pazcoguin's words here seems to agree with what Helene said. https://youtu.be/kyIzw8MqjFg?t=4m43s

     


  9. 1 hour ago, minervaave said:

     I agree with you - I think it’s partly that Finlay’s words make him an easy villain, but also that people are going easier on Ramasar because he’s a more painful loss to NYCB and the dance community.  But yes, if Ramasar shared nude photos of a woman without her consent, then he is every bit as culpable as Finlay and deserves the exact same condemnation.  I’m assuming the reason Ramasar is not also a defendant is because he allegedly sent photos of another woman, not Waterbury, so she doesn’t have any standing to sue him. 

    I agree. From what I can glean from the lawsuit, this is what it says with regard to Ramasar:
    It says that Ramasar sent photos to Finlay (paragraphs 53-54). It's not clear that the photos were sent without consent/permission from the woman.
    The lawsuit also says Ramasar asked Finlay for photos (paragraph 52), to which Finlay complied. While Waterbury did not consent to her photos/videos that Finlay took and sent, it's not clear if Ramasar knew that. 
    Merson wrote that Finlay has acknowledged to Ramasar that the photos of Waterbury were taken without consent (paragraph 61), but I didn't the evidence he used to support that claim to be sufficient to prove that claim (as I wrote above regarding the "pissed" comment). I think if Merson's claims turn out to be correct, then I believe Ramasar is as culpable.

    I'm curious as to how Merson decided which dancers to name, and which dancers remained anonymous. The behavior 55 & 56 are so much more misogynistic than Ramasar & Finlay's exchange. Paragraph 55 also involves an unnamed male principal share photos of a female dancer with Finlay, but it's also unclear if that was done with or without her consent.


  10. 6 hours ago, Helene said:

    The complaint states that Finlay wrote in at least one communication that Waterbury did not know about the images and that she'd be pissed if she knew, ie, notice to the recipient(s) that they were illicit. 

    Probably splitting hairs, but I think Finlay's "pissed" remark to Ramasar was in reference to "showing each other pictures of other women". Without more context, that could very well be Finlay mentioning that Waterbury would be mad that he's looking at pictures of other women (i.e. he was being unfaithful). Merson claims that this exchange shows that Finlay is acknowledging that that the pictures were taken and shared without consent, but that's not the only interpretation of that exchange. The "other women" could even mean women who aren't Waterbury or Maxwell.


  11. Just now, AB'sMom said:

    from the article:“The video was also disseminated to be viewed during their fraternity house meeting, the lawsuit states.”

    That was also the case I had in mind. I think that provides stronger grounds for her suing the fraternity. To me, that makes this different from NYCB’s involvement in what Finlay did. 


  12. 1 hour ago, AB'sMom said:

    Women sue fraternities on similar grounds, even though they aren’t members of the fraternity. 

    I think my point was unclear. Affiliation with NYCB is not necessarily limited to being a student or being in the company. I’m not convinced that NYCB’s relationship with Waterbury puts them in a position that they would be liable for what Finlay did to her. 

    I think the kinds of things fraternities get sued for are things that happened at events they sponsor or on their premises. But I can see where there are cases where one or more frat members do things outside of the official fraternity events, but the organization might nevertheless end up being on the hook for those. 


  13. 53 minutes ago, gigi said:

    I think it speaks volumes about NYCB and their respect for women that they chose to paint Alexandra as someone looking for a "payout."  The nature of her requests in the document for injunctive relief and other consideration seem reasonable considering there has been damage done to her career and mental health. 

    By the time she started dating Finlay, I believe she was not working for NYCB nor was she a student at SAB. I don’t think NYCB has any kind of responsibility for her at that point. 

    I think the unnamed NYCB dancers who have had their photos shared would have a stronger case. I hope they find the courage to come forward. I don’t think Waterbury can sue on their behalf. 


  14. 45 minutes ago, melissaga said:

     The relationship alone between should have raised concern, at least in some places, even if she was 18 when it started. 

    I think NYCB was probably not as vigilant at the time. They started dating before the Martins allegations came out.

    At the same time, if Waterbury was no longer a student at SAB when they started dating, how much say can NYCB have in who their employees date? I can see the company being able to place restrictions on inter company relationships as that could be an HR issue, but can the same be said for dating people not affiliated with NYCB?


  15. This first week of casting makes me want to throw all my money at NYCB.

    Many exciting debuts. I’m looking forward to Lauren King in Emeralds, as well. I didn’t realize she had done that role previously. 

    ETA: And Harrison Ball’s return!  A debut in Tschai Pas is a pretty good welcome back. 


  16. If she can work herself back up to dancing shape and up to NYCB's standard, I hope they give her another chance. Unfortunately, I don't NYCB is already overflowing in female talent.

×
×
  • Create New...