[News] Stan Bowman resigns after 2010 sexual abuse investigation

[sketchyt]

Originally Posted by tfi racing

Refreshing to see that the cancel culture is still alive, well and appears to be thriving...

Found Sean Chu's CP account.

[ben voyonsdonc]

Yes, my reading of the report was that Black Ace 1 was the person referred to in the report as receiving the homophobic slur about enjoying the blowjob.

Black Ace 1 did receive "accidental" dick pics from Aldrich.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Yes, I am not saying because Q lied so did Toews. I'm just saying these "I learned of it later" stories can't just be taken at face value. Let's just say I'd be less than shocked.

Not sure who JC is.

Sorry, I meant JQ.

There is little evidence he lied, outside a tweet stating he lied, for the reason I stated above.

This is the only issue I'm having with this whole situation (outside of the situation it revolves around, of course). The report lays out pretty clearly what happened and who was responsible and for what. Everyone who was in the room is responsible for (as you put it) the best case scenario: ignoring sexual harassment (and maybe in words lighter than that). You can say everyone in the room is equally responsible for not doing anything, but there were people there whose responsibility it is to make those decision and people there whose responsibility it isn't. I can't see holding them equally accountable. Then you have HR, which offered Aldrich the opportunity to resign and save his career or be investigated. Why isn't this more talked about than the meeting? John McDonough drove this entire situation and from all accounts, was not afraid to hold control of decisions outside his scope of President and he did nothing. He told people in that meeting that he would handle it, and he did nothing. He directed HR to keep it quiet, and so they did the equivalent of nothing.

I don't agree with placing all of the blame on this one meeting and holding everyone in it equally responsible, because in no way were they equally responsible. It's not that it's unfair to guys like Chevy and JQ, because their involvement was not admirable, but by treating them the same as guys like Bowman and McDonough, we let Bowman and McDonough off the hook for just how responsible they were.

And I don't agree with pointing to players who were not mentioned in the report and who do not fit the description of those mentioned in the report and placing blame and doubt on them.

We should take the report at face value and trust that Jenner & Block did their job, but I don't see a lot of people doing that. I see a lot of people jumping to conclusions beyond the report, when there's plenty in the report to be upset about.

[Knut]

Quenneville is coaching tonight then meeting with Bettman tomorrow. Here is his prepared statement. Still stands by what he said about not knowing.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1453386629926764544

[CroFlames]

Interesting he made any statement at all. I was expecting radio silence until his meeting with Betts, then a written statement (written by a lawyer of course).

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Sorry, I meant JQ.

There is little evidence he lied, outside a tweet stating he lied, for the reason I stated above.

This is the only issue I'm having with this whole situation (outside of the situation it revolves around, of course). The report lays out pretty clearly what happened and who was responsible and for what. Everyone who was in the room is responsible for (as you put it) the best case scenario: ignoring sexual harassment (and maybe in words lighter than that). You can say everyone in the room is equally responsible for not doing anything, but there were people there whose responsibility it is to make those decision and people there whose responsibility it isn't. I can't see holding them equally accountable. Then you have HR, which offered Aldrich the opportunity to resign and save his career or be investigated. Why isn't this more talked about than the meeting? John McDonough drove this entire situation and from all accounts, was not afraid to hold control of decisions outside his scope of President and he did nothing. He told people in that meeting that he would handle it, and he did nothing. He directed HR to keep it quiet, and so they did the equivalent of nothing.

I don't agree with placing all of the blame on this one meeting and holding everyone in it equally responsible, because in no way were they equally responsible. It's not that it's unfair to guys like Chevy and JQ, because their involvement was not admirable, but by treating them the same as guys like Bowman and McDonough, we let Bowman and McDonough off the hook for just how responsible they were.

And I don't agree with pointing to players who were not mentioned in the report and who do not fit the description of those mentioned in the report and placing blame and doubt on them.

We should take the report at face value and trust that Jenner & Block did their job, but I don't see a lot of people doing that. I see a lot of people jumping to conclusions beyond the report, when there's plenty in the report to be upset about.

Sorry, JQ's version makes zero sense. This was his direct underling. which is also why he bears as much responsibility as the GM. Tell me that Q couldn't say "I want him off my staff now" and it wouldn't have happened. Or even "I want him sidelined until this is done".

[Monahammer]

Based on the report, it is hard to hold any individual player accountable in this.

But you can bet your ass that I don't want a single person who was in the 2010-2014 blackhawks near the organization anymore.

The coaches and management named in the report all certainly bare blame.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Sorry, I meant JQ.

There is little evidence he lied, outside a tweet stating he lied, for the reason I stated above.

This is the only issue I'm having with this whole situation (outside of the situation it revolves around, of course). The report lays out pretty clearly what happened and who was responsible and for what. Everyone who was in the room is responsible for (as you put it) the best case scenario: ignoring sexual harassment (and maybe in words lighter than that). You can say everyone in the room is equally responsible for not doing anything, but there were people there whose responsibility it is to make those decision and people there whose responsibility it isn't. I can't see holding them equally accountable. Then you have HR, which offered Aldrich the opportunity to resign and save his career or be investigated. Why isn't this more talked about than the meeting? John McDonough drove this entire situation and from all accounts, was not afraid to hold control of decisions outside his scope of President and he did nothing. He told people in that meeting that he would handle it, and he did nothing. He directed HR to keep it quiet, and so they did the equivalent of nothing.

I don't agree with placing all of the blame on this one meeting and holding everyone in it equally responsible, because in no way were they equally responsible. It's not that it's unfair to guys like Chevy and JQ, because their involvement was not admirable, but by treating them the same as guys like Bowman and McDonough, we let Bowman and McDonough off the hook for just how responsible they were.

And I don't agree with pointing to players who were not mentioned in the report and who do not fit the description of those mentioned in the report and placing blame and doubt on them.

We should take the report at face value and trust that Jenner & Block did their job, but I don't see a lot of people doing that. I see a lot of people jumping to conclusions beyond the report, when there's plenty in the report to be upset about.

If I am in a meeting and it comes up that one of our employees sexually assaulted another employee, you can be damn sure I going to follow through to ensure the appropriate action is taken, even if I'm not in HR or the highest ranking person in the room. We are talking about peoples safety, which is everyone's responsibility, period.

And 2010 me would do the same thing.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Sorry, JQ's version makes zero sense. This was his direct underling. which is also why he bears as much responsibility as the GM. Tell me that Q couldn't say "I want him off my staff now" and it wouldn't have happened. Or even "I want him sidelined until this is done".

Given what we're talking about here, both what happened with Aldrich on the Blackhawks and what happened after he left, what would that have prevented? What would that have accomplished?

Aldrich still wouldn't have been investigated. Aldrich still would've gone on to assault another person.

Originally Posted by Infinit47

If I am in a meeting and it comes up that one of our employees sexually assaulted another employee, you can be damn sure I going to follow through to ensure the appropriate action is taken, even if I'm not in HR or the highest ranking person in the room. We are talking about peoples safety, which is everyone's responsibility, period.

And 2010 me would do the same thing.

But that's not what came up in the meeting.

And this went to HR, which answers to the President, and they let him resign. Could you have prevented that?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Given what we're talking about here, both what happened with Aldrich on the Blackhawks and what happened after he left, what would that have prevented? What would that have accomplished?

Aldrich still wouldn't have been investigated. Aldrich still would've gone on to assault another person.



But that's not what came up in the meeting.

And this went to HR, which answers to the President, and they let him resign. Could you have prevented that?

First of all, those actions would probably have led to him being treated differently on his termination - no recommendation, etc.

Second, the main point is that Q has said he didn’t know until THIS SUMMER. I find that impossible to believe since he was at the meeting. And what - he never asked why Aldrich resigned? Had no idea he was meeting with HR? And moreover, either he is lying or Bowman is. And Bowman has no good reason to name Q in that fashion.

Third, Q wrote a nice evaluation of Aldrich in June 2010, after he resigned. I bet that helped him get his next job.

[GioforPM]

Quenneville’s story to the investigator was that the meeting was about “a coach doing something improper and whether to make it public”. Are we to believe that he didn’t ask what coach? He only had so many. And in the “multiple interviews” he was vague about Aldrich’s name coming up.

ETA: I’ve now read the entire report. It doesn’t help Q at all.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

First of all, those actions would probably have led to him being treated differently on his termination - no recommendation, etc.

Second, the main point is that Q has said he didn’t know until THIS SUMMER. I find that impossible to believe since he was at the meeting. And what - he never asked why Aldrich resigned? Had no idea he was meeting with HR? And moreover, either he is lying or Bowman is. And Bowman has no good reason to name Q in that fashion.

Third, Q wrote a nice evaluation of Aldrich in June 2010, after he resigned. I bet that helped him get his next job.

If Bowman was telling the truth, do you believe this was the truth:

Bowman recalled that, during the May 23, 2010 meeting, either MacIsaac or Gary stated that there was an incident between John Doe and Aldrich in which Aldrich had tried to “climb into bed” with John Doe one night at Aldrich’s apartment. Bowman recalled that Gary said he had spoken to John Doe earlier that day and that John Doe did not want to talk about it. Bowman told us that, as described to him, the situation did not strike him as immediately alarming at the time as the allegation did not involve a sexual assault as having occurred.

Bowman recalled that, after learning of the incident, Quenneville shook his head and said that it was hard for the team to get to where they were, and they could not deal with this issue now. Bowman further recalled that McDonough referenced his previous employment with the Chicago Cubs. Bowman recalled McDonough saying that the Blackhawks might never make it this far in the playoffs again, and that they needed to think about when to handle the issue. (The Blackhawks had not played in the Stanley Cup Finals in 18 years.) Bowman did not recall anyone explicitly referencing the notion that the issue should be tabled until after the playoffs. Rather, Bowman recalled discussion about the need to find out more about what happened. Bowman further recalled that he asked McDonough what McDonough wanted to do and McDonough responded that Bowman should leave it to McDonough. Bowman stated that when the meeting ended, Bowman believed the issue was in McDonough’s hands and everyone else should focus on the upcoming Stanley Cup Finals.

If Bowman is telling the truth, and the situation as presented did not seem alarming in nature or involving sexual assault, then that is very different than the allegations that came out over the summer. And McDonough's commitment to handling it explains JQ's inaction.

And I very much doubt those actions would have him treated differently. HR answers to the President, HR did nothing, and few (if any) records of Aldrich were kept. Why? Obviously we know why. McDonough is, by far, the person with the most blood on his hands. It's not even a discussion.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

If Bowman was telling the truth, do you believe this was the truth:


If Bowman is telling the truth, and the situation as presented did not seem alarming in nature or involving sexual assault, then that is very different than the allegations that came out over the summer. And McDonough's commitment to handling it explains JQ's inaction.

And I very much doubt those actions would have him treated differently. HR answers to the President, HR did nothing, and few (if any) records of Aldrich were kept. Why? Obviously we know why. McDonough is, by far, the person with the most blood on his hands. It's not even a discussion.

You are conflating not knowing about sexual assault allegations with claiming to not know anything at all. Quenneville tried to make it seem like he was just learning about the whole mess this summer. He knew enough. Now if he comes out and says "when I said I didn't know about the allegations I meant the precise sexual assault allegations in the lawsuit" then that's too cute by half.

Not to mention one of his other staff members (the skills coach) knew all about everything and asked for a police report. And still Q didn't know?

As for inaction and relying on HR, he wrote a glowing job review after the guy was terminated. That's not inaction - it's action. Just the wrong kind. And yes, a guy like Quenneville had enough muscle to do what he thought was right anyway.

It's not a contest about who was worst. I'm only talking about Quenneville here. His statement was extremely misleading at best and a lie at worst.

[KootenayFlamesFan]

JQ says they couldn’t ‘deal with this now’ .

Why not? That part drives me bonkers. Of course he could have. He chose not to.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

If Bowman was telling the truth, do you believe this was the truth:


If Bowman is telling the truth, and the situation as presented did not seem alarming in nature or involving sexual assault, then that is very different than the allegations that came out over the summer. And McDonough's commitment to handling it explains JQ's inaction.

And I very much doubt those actions would have him treated differently. HR answers to the President, HR did nothing, and few (if any) records of Aldrich were kept. Why? Obviously we know why. McDonough is, by far, the person with the most blood on his hands. It's not even a discussion.

Your defense of "not my responsibility" for Q is the exact reason this crap continues to happen. This is the exact same logic that leads to the "just following orders" defense.

[foshizzle11]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

JQ says they couldn’t ‘deal with this now’ .

Why not? That part drives me bonkers. Of course he could have. He chose not to.

That is exactly the problem, they could have just removed the video coach until the season was over for them or until an investigation could be done.

The guy goes onto sexual misconduct on other levels after he left the organization because they didn't take this accusation seriously. It is bonkers, all these guys who knew deserve punishment. I hope Bettman fires them all.

[dino7c]

JQ is way worse than Peters

Sorry I know half this board loves the Panthers but this is beyond hockey

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

You are conflating not knowing about sexual assault allegations with claiming to not know anything at all. Quenneville tried to make it seem like he was just learning about the whole mess this summer. He knew enough. Now if he comes out and says "when I said I didn't know about the allegations I meant the precise sexual assault allegations in the lawsuit" then that's too cute by half.

Not to mention one of his other staff members (the skills coach) knew all about everything and asked for a police report. And still Q didn't know?

As for inaction and relying on HR, he wrote a glowing job review after the guy was terminated. That's not inaction - it's action. Just the wrong kind. And yes, a guy like Quenneville had enough muscle to do what he thought was right anyway.

It's not a contest about who was worst. I'm only talking about Quenneville here. His statement was extremely misleading at best and a lie at worst.

Who did Vincent tell?

His claim:

Vincent said that after he spoke to the two players, he approached Jim Gary and Brian Higgins—a United Center security person—while the team was in San Jose. Vincent said that he shared with Gary and Higgins what the two players told him regarding Aldrich, and stated to us that he was particularly confident he had spoken to Higgins. Vincent further stated that he was asked to join a meeting with McDonough, Bowman, MacIsaac, and Gary in a meeting room at the team hotel in San Jose. He stated that he told the group what the two players told him regarding Aldrich. Vincent stated that MacIsaac said they were handling the situation, and that Vincent told the group that they should call the Chicago Police Department and have the police quietly investigate.492 Vincent said that MacIsaac told Vincent not to worry about the situation and that he could leave the meeting.

Vincent said that after he left the meeting, he told two assistant coaches about the situation before heading to dinner. One of the assistant coaches told us that Vincent did not raise issues with him regarding Aldrich or a meeting with management in San Jose, and stated that he would have recalled such a conversation had it occurred. The second assistant coach, John Torchetti, did not respond to our requests to be interviewed. Torchetti informed a reporter in 2021 that, during the 2010 playoffs, Vincent told him about two players confiding in Vincent regarding Aldrich, and that Vincent alerted management. Boynton and Sopel told us that Vincent reported to them in 2010 that he had informed management of the situation involving Aldrich.

No mention of Q.

The JB finding:

Vincent’s account is directly contradicted by witnesses and records from May 2010. Brian Higgins—by all accounts and as proven by contemporaneous records—was not in San Jose in May 2010 and stated that he never had a conversation with Vincent about Aldrich or John Doe. All of the individuals who Vincent stated he met with at the team hotel in San Jose stated unequivocally that they did not meet with Vincent about Aldrich when the team was in San Jose or at any time thereafter. And, as noted above, one of the assistant coaches Vincent stated he told of the incident and meeting with management denied Vincent spoke to him about either event. Based on our investigation, we could not conclude that Vincent took the information that John Doe provided to Vincent in San Jose and shared it with management.

Again, do you believe the report, or not? Do you believe people like Bowman, or do you not? Do you believe Vincent? or do you not?

If we're just talking about Q, there isn't anything in the report that supports your conclusions about him. Whether it's the words of Vincent who didn't mention it to him and the people he told who didn't mention it to them. Whether it's Bowman who said it didn't seem like an issue that required immediate action as presented. Or whether it was the report, which shows zero evidence that Q knew about the assault.

Why didn't anyone go to Q with it? Because it wasn't his responsibility. If you believe the report, people went to those who had a responsibility to do something and they did nothing. We can't say with anything definitive what Q knew, because there's nothing in the report that says he was told anything but "Jim Gary told the group that he was 'aware of an incident' and John Doe “was embarrassed about the incident” at best and "Gary recalled during his interview that he told the assembled group in McDonough’s office what John Doe told him: that Aldrich was pressuring John Doe for sex, that John Doe told Aldrich he was not 'into that,' and that Aldrich threatened John Doe by saying if John Doe did not comply, Aldrich could hurt John Doe’s career" at worst, and we don't know whether Q was there for the entirety of that statement or not, because:

After Game 4 ended, a meeting occurred in John McDonough’s office in the Front Office space at the United Center. Jim Gary, Stan Bowman, Al MacIsaac, John McDonough, Kevin Cheveldayoff, and Jay Blunk were present. The participants recalled the meeting lasting for between ten and twenty-five minutes. After the meeting started, Bowman recalled McDonough saying that Quenneville should participate because the incident involved Aldrich, a coach. Quenneville was subsequently called to the Front Office to join the meeting.

I believe whatever decision Bettman makes will be the correct one. But I don't believe Q is uniquely or even equally to blame here, and there is enough the report that calls into question whether he knew anything that would have encouraged action. There is no indication he knew about the assault, and there is some indication he may not even have known about the details of the harassment.

You can choose to believe the report or not. I believe it.

[GioforPM]

If you believe the report, Quenneville should be fired.

And if you believe the report, Quenneville lied to the press.

If you believe Quenneville (and not the report), then he was the least in touch HC of any team ever. His entire coaching staff knew and he didn’t?

I’m not sure why you are nitpicking about his level of knowledge, or while you are glossing over his glowing recommendation.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

If you believe the report, Quenneville should be fired.

And if you believe the report, Quenneville lied to the press.

If you believe Quenneville (and not the report), then he was the least in touch HC of any team ever. His entire coaching staff knew and he didn’t?

I’m not sure why you are nitpicking about his level of knowledge, or while you are glossing over his glowing recommendation.

Because I believe that just judgement is more important than careless blame, even if it's less rewarding emotionally.

I believe there's enough cause for him to be fired and as I said, if that's what happens, it will be the right outcome. The only issue I'm taking is a guy like Q being seen and treated as equal to guys like McDonough and Bowman. And guys like Toews being casually lumped in as potential liars who had responsibility and must have known.