“M.I.T. Scientist Wins $6 Million in Sexual Harassment Defamation Suit” (New York Times):
The biologist, David Sabatini, was among the most prominent scientists in his field, and 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.
Nearly five years to the day after he filed his defamation lawsuit, a Suffolk County jury agreed with him, finding that Dr. Sabatini had proved in court that Dr. Knouse had defamed him and interfered with his ability to work.
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.”
It’s a remarkable day when a Maskachusetts jury doesn’t #BelieveWomen. But who will pay for the $6 million judgment against the survivor? MIT/Whitehead somehow skated free of this lawsuit despite having run a kangaroo court and tossed Sabatini based on statements that a jury found were obvious lies (truth is an absolute defense against defamation so the jury couldn’t have found that the survivor defamed Prof. Sabatini without finding that the survivor lied). Maybe the survivor, Prof. Knouse, has homeowner’s insurance and that means, as with the lies that Amber Heard and the ACLU told about Johnny Depp, we will pay? We might already have paid if MIT funded Knouse’s defense, in which case our tax dollars were used. If homeowner’s insurance paid for the defense then we’ve already paid via higher premiums. On the third hand, this Courthouse News article says that Sabatini was 50 and Knouse was 29 at the time of the sexual relationship. Absent family money, it would be rare for someone in her early 30s to be a homeowner or even a condo owner in Cambridge.
Grok says that MIT/Whitehead skated free because they fired Sabatini for violating a “consensual relationships policy” (maybe he was supposed to file some paperwork and didn’t?). It references this LegalClarity site, which covers some of the twists and turns in the case.
Here’s Kristin Knouse:
Related:
- Amber Heard, as perceived by the Musk family and friends
- Who paid for the consequences of the ACLU-authored, Amber Heard-signed op-ed? You did.
- Don’t let the ACLU write your op-eds and other lessons from the Amber Heard libel trial
Now that Dr. Sabatini has won his judgment against Dr. Knouse, he need to also sue the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the Whitehead Institute, and MIT for an even larger sum. After all, HHMI made the decision to fire him, while the Whitehead Institute initiated the internal investigation and wrongly concluded that Dr. Sabatini was at fault.