Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What is equally disgraceful is that Rose had the nerve to play the holier than thou, outraged routine as he attacked on air others accused of assault and harassment. What a disgrace.
Delighted to see Charlie paying a price for his actions.
But it also exposes some flaws. By owning his own shows Charlie was able to avoid HR oversight. I am sure not how to deal with that, but perhaps independents should be required to provide some safe channels for staff to seek recourse. and maybe they should be required to provide proof of that in order to sell shows on...
What makes this so gut wrenching is that he had the persona of a gentleman and intellectual. His fall from grace is monumental.
I doubt that Charlie will be welcome at his country club. While he may own several expensive properties their purchase and maintenance was predicated on income that he doesn't have now. If he is as smart as I think he is will sell off a couple of his homes/apartments. As a disgraced member of the media the apartment in NYC would be first on my list, can you imagine the reaction of New Yorkers if he dined at a restaurant or walked on the street? Bums would spit at him, reporters would follow him with mics and camera. Some co-ops have provisions in their leases that should a stockholder's conduct become notorious the shareholder could be, effectively, evicted.
His future may be as an author, a solitary venture. Go back home to Henderson, North Carolina and write.
Last edited by Nell Plotts; 11-22-2017 at 03:29 PM..
He admitted to the behavior. No one is buying his mumbo jumbo apology that he thought his advances were welcome lol.
You seriously are unable to make the distinction between dangling your privates in front of your employee albeit fresh from the shower and a hello and a smile? C'mon...........
Yes, and, I'm sure some people may be "tired" of it, but the women living with his behaviors (and others like him) are also "very tired" of having to live w/ the effects of his and others' actions.
People get fired because there's an over preponderance of evidence that is against the person, pointing to the fact the person is predatory. Difference between that and other behaviors that don't rise to that level.
What makes this so gut wrenching is that he had the persona of a gentleman and intellectual. His fall from grace is monumental.
I doubt that Charlie will be welcome at his country club. While he may own several expensive properties their purchase and maintenance was predicated on income that he doesn't have now. If he is as smart as I think he is will sell off a couple of his homes/apartments. As a disgraced member of the media the apartment in NYC would be first on my list, can you imagine the reaction of New Yorkers if he dined at a restaurant or walked on the street? Bums would spit at him, reporters would follow him with mics and camera. Some co-ops have provisions in their leases that should a stockholder's conduct become notorious the shareholder could be, effectively, evicted.
His future may be as an author, a solitary venture. Go back home to Henderson, North Carolina and write.
New Yorkers will let him know what they think of him for sure!
Yeah, the consequences for Rose are awful. Monumental (per upthread) is a good word. Consider the life he's losing - formerly invited to everything, now ignored and ostracized - everywhere. To not be able to come and go in NY - wow. Descent from stature to disgrace. It's a shame, really. An entire life in the ash heap.
Here is a common clause in co-op leases:
Termination shall be called for if at any time the Corporation shall determine, upon the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Board, or upon the affirmative vote of at least half of its outstanding shares at a Shareholders meeting duly called for that purpose, because of objectionable conduct on the part of the Lessee, or of a person residing in or visiting the apartment, the tenancy of the Lessee is undesirable. Objectionable conduct shall include (i) conduct on the part of the Lessee, or any person residing in or visiting the Building with the consent of the Lessee, which (A) repeatedly violates or disregards the terms of this Lease or the House Rules and Regulations established in accordance with the provisions hereof, or (B) permits or tolerates a dangerous condition or dangerous or disruptive person to enter or remain in the Building or the Apartment, or (ii) conduct on the part of the Lessee, or any person residing in the Apartment or regularly visiting the Building with the consent of the Lessee, which constitutes a felony or any crime of violence or threatened violence affecting the Building or any person lawfully in the Building. If objectionable conduct is found under the terms described above the lease and right of tenancy is revoked.
Hard to know if the women's description of his behavior would violate the above and occurred at his co-op apartment building. Note there is no statute of limitations for those leases.
His country club may have similar policies (I meant to say above that he would be unwelcome). A country club isn't a residence so they may be able to just call him before their Board of Directors and tell him that he is no longer welcome. Doubtless he can sell his membership for at least what he paid for it.
What makes this so gut wrenching is that he had the persona of a gentleman and intellectual. His fall from grace is monumental.
I doubt that Charlie will be welcome at his country club. While he may own several expensive properties their purchase and maintenance was predicated on income that he doesn't have now. If he is as smart as I think he is will sell off a couple of his homes/apartments. As a disgraced member of the media the apartment in NYC would be first on my list, can you imagine the reaction of New Yorkers if he dined at a restaurant or walked on the street? Bums would spit at him, reporters would follow him with mics and camera. Some co-ops have provisions in their leases that should a stockholder's conduct become notorious the shareholder could be, effectively, evicted.
His future may be as an author, a solitary venture. Go back home to Henderson, North Carolina and write.
Perhaps in public or professional life he will be shunned, but in his private life he may have a few cronies who themselves have and still are getting away with this behavior. They may circle around him to make sure his fall isn't too far down because they will understand what drives old men to this. As unfortunate as this sounds I think that is the reality.
Here is a common clause in co-op leases:
Termination shall be called for if at any time the Corporation shall determine, upon the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Board, or upon the affirmative vote of at least half of its outstanding shares at a Shareholders meeting duly called for that purpose, because of objectionable conduct on the part of the Lessee, or of a person residing in or visiting the apartment, the tenancy of the Lessee is undesirable. Objectionable conduct shall include (i) conduct on the part of the Lessee, or any person residing in or visiting the Building with the consent of the Lessee, which (A) repeatedly violates or disregards the terms of this Lease or the House Rules and Regulations established in accordance with the provisions hereof, or (B) permits or tolerates a dangerous condition or dangerous or disruptive person to enter or remain in the Building or the Apartment, or (ii) conduct on the part of the Lessee, or any person residing in the Apartment or regularly visiting the Building with the consent of the Lessee, which constitutes a felony or any crime of violence or threatened violence affecting the Building or any person lawfully in the Building. If objectionable conduct is found under the terms described above the lease and right of tenancy is revoked.
Hard to know if the women's description of his behavior would violate the above and occurred at his co-op apartment building. Note there is no statute of limitations for those leases.
His country club may have similar policies (I meant to say above that he would be unwelcome). A country club isn't a residence so they may be able to just call him before their Board of Directors and tell him that he is no longer welcome. Doubtless he can sell his membership for at least what he paid for it.
Whoah...are you trying to get him kicked out of his home? Damn, that brutal! lol
I am not trying to get him kicked out of his co-op just pointing out the risks, Manhattan co-ops are very 'clubby'. A co-op is not a condominium, they do background checks before they agree to permit a sale. Prominent people have been rejected because their occupancy would be disruptive to their community. There is no predicting what would happen in this instance but odds are the co-op Board of Directors has engaged counsel to make sure that the other shareholder rights are protected. Either the Board or the shareholders can give him the boot.
The clause above is actually much more protective of the leasee than the one written by a New York judge, look up Pullman Clause as that is what is likely in his lease. Here is a discussion and obsene behavior can be a reason for eviction: https://cooperator.com/article/pullm...onths-out/full
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
