[Santini] ran a research lab at the Whitehead Institute, in Cambridge, for 24 years. His lab studied cellular biology to better understand neurodegenerative diseases, cancer, diabetes, and aging. He was forced out of his lab in 2021 after an internal Whitehead investigation concluded he had a past sexual relationship with a younger and less experienced colleague, Kristin Knouse, over whom he had a career-influencing role. The investigation also found that his lab had maintained a sexualized atmosphere. Dr. Knouse said that the relationship was coerced. But Dr. Sabatini denied his lab had an improper atmosphere. He maintained that his relationship with Dr. Knouse had been consensual and that Dr. Knouse had schemed to get him fired and disgraced after he became interested in another woman....
17 అక్టోబర్, 2026
"It’s surreal. I’ve been dreaming about this moment for all this time, but often thinking I might not make it, financially, emotionally or physically."
Said David Sabatini, after the verdict, quoted in "M.I.T. Scientist Wins $6 Million in Sexual Harassment Defamation Suit/David Sabatini, once a prominent scientist at M.I.T., sued a former colleague who accused him of inappropriate behavior. A jury found in his favor" (NYT).
పోస్ట్లు
49 కామెంట్లు:
Less experienced colleague?
There's always "another woman." Women are trouble, pure and simple.
Soon AI will take over and professionals will be able to devote 100% of their time and attention to their dalliances and the subsequent legal battles.
"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"
Men have never ever been vengeful.
Based on their photos, not exactly a perfect match.
“R C Belaire said...
Women are trouble, pure and simple.”
And they lie, routinely. Believe no woman ever without independent corroboration.
…was he caught staring at women at the gym who dress like whores?
…oh I see the picture and he clearly does not go to the gym…
…in the company ink and all…ya know I’ve recently discovered the mail order wife stuff is more real than I suspected. There are seemingly lovely in and out women willing to make ‘agreements’…
“ The Whitehead Institute, in a statement after the verdict, said that earlier legal claims against the institution had already been dismissed, adding, “Therefore, Whitehead was not a party to this case, and the decision and judgment only apply to Drs. Sabatini and Knouse, the parties in the case.”
Does that mean the guy has to look to just Knouse’s assets to collect? I think so,
This is why we can’t get cancer cured! Lawsuits for sexual harassment.
“ Professor Knouse studies the differential regenerative ability of mammalian organs, seeking new treatments for conditions ranging from organ injury to cancer.”
What organs?
Not a whole lot of information in that NYT article.
Fight the Matriarchy
the Fun Thing Is: ALL of these things could be true
he *DID* had a past sexual relationship with a younger colleague
over whom he had a career-influencing role.
his lab *DID* have a sexualized atmosphere.
the relationship *DID* have coercion.
Dr. Sabatini *DID* think no of this was improper
his relationship with Dr. Knouse *DID* appear (to him) consensual
and lastly; Dr. Knouse *DID* scheme to get him fired and disgraced
after he *DID* became interested in another woman..
NEVER stop! once you start.. NEVER STOP. NEVER Change horses
I am a female - and I find females who behave in such scheming ways completely abhorrent. It sucks to get dumped. Get over yourself. There are other fish in the sea.
Glad this guy won.
I watched a real life crime show a few years back. It really stuck with me.
It was about a jealous ex-husband. He stalked his ex-wife and ended up killing her and her best friend (both mothers to young children) He shot them both as they cowered and hid in a closet.
At the trial - he told the judge he was truly sorry. I was happy to hear the judge tell that a-hole that sorry is not a get out of responsibility card. Prison for life. The idiot truly thought he could just crocodile tear his way out of responsibly for uncontrolled behavior... by saying "Ooops I'm sorry" "I was just so angry." (I worry that our justice system under the corrupt left's bad judges, will let people like that out. )
"What organs?"
I suggest a better question: What mammals?
Good thing he didn't call her a "lying nutjob." She could have sued him for defamation and been awarded >$100m. Right E. Jean & Reid?
The progressive condition of regenerative, degenerative organization leads us to conclude thar courtship was a viable social experiment to mitigate exploitation of liberal license and regret.
Well on my planet everybody understands that workplace sexual atmosphere is actually good for productivity and innovation and the adults just deal with it with no needed assistance from the lawyers. The "harassment" part kicks in when (a) you're not getting it from those you want to get it from, or (b) you're just not getting any at all.
Although I'm pretty new here, I note that your females spend a great deal of money on clothing and cosmetics to get harassed, so I still find it puzzling that they complain.
Re: lying nutjob, apparently MA has different standards of litigious schemes, themes than NY. Both, however, are notably, politically, religiously Pro-Choice.
She is considerably more attractive than he is, though that court picture is not meant to be flattering. A candid photo of her might make things more equal.
I looked at other photos of Sabatini posted in other articles. He's nowhere near as bad looking as the picture posted in the NYT. The woman involved is very attractive. It's easy to see how all this happened and how it unfolded the way it did. Super hot chicks are not in the ordinary passage of events attracted to Dr Sabatini and somewhat rumpled guys do not ordinarily give women like Dr. Knouse the bird . Historic inevitability. I don't think there's any great moral to this story, other than that human beings are flawed and particularly flawed in matters of sex. Also the NYT photo editor is prejudiced against Sabatini.
"She is considerably more attractive than he is,"
Isn't that always the case? And when the less attractive man dumps you, that's totally unacceptable, because she knows that means it was her personality, which then requires the woman to prove the man is right about that.
IMO, it would be better if people were professional and simply did not get involved with people with whom they work. More often than not, it's too disruptive and it opens up the workplace to avoidable turmoil. I look down on behavior like that and always have.
That said, I am glad that Sabatini got some justice. I have no use for the Knouse's of the world, who want to play but then, as vengeance, want someone else to pay.
Let's hope more opportunities come to Sabatini as he works to restore his reputation. He paid a high, one-sided price for bad ***professional*** behavior on both of their parts.
Don't shit where you eat is still pretty good advice.
Seems to me this would requires his reinstatement and her dismissal. She is a loose canon on the deck.
Jury of seven women and six men. I would assume this was a tough case to win, so there must have been some really strong evidence that she was lying.
Not only a woman scorned, but a redhead. Hoo Boy. But Romeo ain't gettin' his career back. He's got a few million to attract a few new bar flies, but he should have known better. His big head gave a research grant to his little head.
Never have sex with a coworker
Graduated in early 1980s from that other Cambridge big-name university, but had friends at MIT too. Both schools, but particularly the Big H, was rampant with sexual harassment of female students. Witnessed it myself, had several female friends who endured it. Phone calls, innuendo from professors in classroom in front of class, invites, and inappropriate behavior within and outside classrooms. Uninhibited. Unchecked. Tolerated by administration, fellow professors, and most other students.
And yes, that one professor who picked his female "girlfriend" target during initial school-week, kept her in-play for entire school-year, then unceremoniously would dump said girlfriend at end of school year, for her to be trapped in the major and in the school for remaining two years of program. Friendless, because her classmates thought she was doing it "for the grade", socially-isolated, because that invisible scarlet "A" reputation for remainder of her stay at school. Unless she befriended her predecessors, which these women usually did after their one-year relationship with professor ended.
Year after I graduated, I recall reading either Time or Newsweek magazine article, which stated "sexual harassment of female students" was the number one administrative problem at Big H, largely unaddressed by university board, or by executive administration, and largely tolerated by department committees. Certainly was a huge problem at my school, probably tolerated because most professors had already traded their 1st wives in for the cuter younger model upon their appointment.
Had one professor who refused to speak to any female student in his lab classes. He apparently was dumped by his chosen prior student-girlfriend from years ago, then decided to avoid all temptation by not speaking to any female student regardless of job requirements. During my time-period there, he was never rebuked nor disciplined nor fired for his failure to properly conduct his instruction obligations to all his female students, though his discriminatory behavior was blatantly obvious to anyone attending any of his classes.
Any day a MeToo case loses in court is a good day - and, I'm sure, a rare one.
Cherchez la Femme..
--- at Big H
Harrad?
You shouldn't date coworkers. Another good idea is to sprout gossamer wings. This will considerably cut down on commuting times.........If an extremely attractive woman is in a subordinate position, such a position enhances her magnetism. Woman have similar feelings towards their male superior if he older, wiser, and in a position to dispense meaningful favors. We are what we are, and very few people have sex lives that aren't married by occasional episodes of utter foolishness.
I have three stories, but I'll tell only one today.
A professor from a Big Ten law school came to Creighton Law to give a lecture. The lecture was in the early evening and there was a wine and cheese reception afterwards.
I liked to study in the Creighton Law Library and went to the reception.
In those days, the law school had a visiting professor apartment - with a bed - on the premises.
This Big Ten professor - probably married - propositioned two of my female classmates. One was married and one was engaged. Both went to Creighton undergrad and both are Catholic. I knew them both very well.
Of course, my classmates turned them down.
Good thing that my classmate, Virginia Lamp Thomas, wasn't at the lecture. The course of history could have been changed!
Naive Dave, who had lived a sheltered life, was very shocked when I learned about it later that evening.
When this professor passed away, all sorts of praise for him at his Big Ten law school.
Just checked. He was married. And a big time scholar. Lots of books and articles published.
"...a sexualized atmosphere" sounds pretty subjective, like "eye of the beholder" stuff or MeToo verbiage. Bruh.
Workplace romantic relationships should be considered okay so long as they're consensual (duh), there's no quid pro quo, and the relationships are initiated and conducted outside the workplace and business hours (i.e., no closed-door smooch sessions, etc.). Mere "power imbalances" don't justify impeding the ability of consenting adults to find romance. Millions of happy couples originally found each other at work.
Does that mean the guy has to look to just Knouse’s assets to collect? I think so
I think that's wrong. MIT is still on the hook.
Regardless of this case, many women ex college students I trust have tales of profs that were a bit too open to “meet with them for some focused instruction.”
Saint Croix:
Whitehead Institute is out. Not clear if MIT was a party defendant. Also not clear to me the legal relationship between MIT and Whitehead Institute.
I certainly hope MIT is on the hook.
Birches said...
She is considerably more attractive than he is, though that court picture is not meant to be flattering. A candid photo of her might make things more equal.
Thus we get to the heart of the issue.
This was purely transactional.
The man did not pay the whore enough to make her go away.
Friends with "benefits". Be careful who you lie with, to.
“He maintained that his relationship with Dr. Knouse had been consensual and that Dr. Knouse had schemed to get him fired and disgraced after he became interested in another woman....”
Preposterous. Everyone knows a woman would never do something like that. What kind of idiots were on that jury?
A jackass, both, sitting on the john, in a water closet, braying for a tidy goal.
The most remarkable things about the case are that it was tried in Suffolk County, Massachusetts (!!) and the jury was majority female.
I met Sabatini a few times a little more than twenty years ago. He is one of those guys whose photos can be deceiving. Especially when younger, he had charisma and was better looking than many of his photos might suggest. Mix in a little Argentinean-Italian charm with a family tradition of excellence (his father and brother also are/were noted researchers), and you can imagine the rest.
I have no knowledge of the situation that was at trial, but it is not hard at all to imagine that both parties were indulging in their own fantasies, but those fantasies were mutually incompatible.
In the end, anyone engaging in workplace romance is playing a dangerous game (on either side of the game), especially when there is a seniority difference between the players. Occasional successes aside, it is best for everyone to look elsewhere as a matter of practice.
PS. I meant to add that my wager is that neither side was innocent. Unlike TV dramas, the truth often is messy, embarrassing to all, and worst of all, ambiguous, especially when it comes to romantic liaisons.
కామెంట్ను పోస్ట్ చేయండి
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.