• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Investigation into RiotGames CEO finds no evidence of misconduct/wrongdoing

cormack12

Gold Member
Source: original accusations

A lawsuit filed to the Los Angeles County Superior Court in January by Sharon O’Donnell, a former executive assistant at Riot Games, accuses Riot CEO Nicolas Laurent of creating a hostile work environment, with allegations ranging from unwanted sexual advances to demeaning comments about O’Donnell’s tone and femininity. The filing alleges that O’Donnell, who reported to Laurent, was stripped of duties at work and eventually terminated in July of 2020 for not reciprocating his advances.

“The plaintiff was dismissed from the company over seven months ago based on multiple well-documented complaints from a variety of people. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false,” wrote a Riot spokesperson in a comment to The Post. Riot’s statement also said a special committee of its board of directors is conducting an investigation with the aid of an outside law firm in an effort to ensure impartiality and transparency

O’Donnell alleges that Laurent invited her to travel with him and work from his home when his wife would not be there, and directed numerous sexual comments to her, including remarks about the fit of his underwear. Laurent asked O’Donnell whether she “could handle him when they were alone at his house,” according to the filing.
According to the lawsuit, when O’Donnell refused, Laurent became angry and hostile, and O’Donnell’s workplace responsibilities were limited, ultimately resulting in her termination.

Source: Dismissed by investigation

Riot Games has announced that the investigation issued into the allegations of sexual misconduct by its CEO Nicolas Laurent has revealed no evidence of wrongdoing on his part after all.

Allegations of this misconduct were made at the beginning of January this year by a former executive assistant at Riot, Sharon O’Donnell. O'Donnell filed a lawsuit against Laurent, and a formal third party investigation into the matter was initiated shortly thereafter.

“We concluded that there was no evidence that Laurent harassed, discriminated, or retaliated against the plaintiff,” reads a statement on the matter issued to Riot employees yesterday. “We have therefore reached the conclusion that, at the current time… no action should be taken against Laurent.”

In a second statement sent to The Post Tuesday evening, a Riot spokesperson provided additional details in its account of O’Donnell’s termination. “To clarify, this individual was terminated following more than a dozen complaints from both employees and external partners and after multiple coaching discussions to try and address these concerns.”
 

jigglet

Member
What does that matter? #metoo proved that people are willing to brush aside the fundamental pillars of our legal system (such as innocence until proven guilty, the need for evidence etc) when it's convenient. Evidence here is only a small impediment to the real mob justice. Let the cancelling continue unabaited!
 
Last edited:
Think they are owed an apology from the shrieking set?


Oh well I'm sure someone on Kotaku will put up a one sentence correction somewhere. Journalism is the one career where if you fuck up it doesn't matter at all.

Meanwhile that narrative lives on. I'm sure no crazy Twitter people sent abuse towards this company for any of this.....
 
Last edited:

llien

Member
What does that matter? #metoo proved that people are willing to brush aside the fundamental pillars of our legal system (such as innocence until proven guilty, the need for evidence etc) when it's convenient. Evidence here is only a small impediment to the real mob justice. Let the cancelling continue unabaited!

The problem is that it is very often something that happens when nobody else is present, between accuser and alleged perpetrator.

So, go figure.
 

Saber

Member
Twitter is a land free of law. Say what you will, accuse someone of something...you name it. And don't worry about missing...if you fail to cancel someone you can aways try a new target.

They should totally do something against Twitter. Nothing good comes out of it.
 
Last edited:

NickFire

Member
Think they are owed an apology from the shrieking set?


Oh well I'm sure someone on Kotaku will put up a one sentence correction somewhere. Journalism is the one career where if you fuck up it doesn't matter at all.

Meanwhile that narrative lives on. I'm sure no crazy Twitter people sent abuse towards this company for any of this.....
It takes a special kind of reporter to get breaking news regarding who got farted on.
 

Golgo 13

The Man With The Golden Dong
Hate to say this, but... after #metoo, and the “believe all women” hysteria that followed, why would anyone hire a woman to work for their company at this point? You automatically raise your risk of legal liability by %1000 by hiring women in our current culture.

When saying “I like your outfit” can be grounds for a sexual harassment lawsuit, you only have yourselves to blame. What a mess, and a disaster for the “sane” women out there to be tangled up in this disastrous cultural moment.
 
Hate to say this, but... after #metoo, and the “believe all women” hysteria that followed, why would anyone hire a woman to work for their company at this point? You automatically raise your risk of legal liability by %1000 by hiring women in our current culture.

When saying “I like your outfit” can be grounds for a sexual harassment lawsuit, you only have yourselves to blame. What a mess, and a disaster for the “sane” women out there to be tangled up in this disastrous cultural moment.
Dammed if you don't
 
Hate to say this, but... after #metoo, and the “believe all women” hysteria that followed, why would anyone hire a woman to work for their company at this point? You automatically raise your risk of legal liability by %1000 by hiring women in our current culture.

Why would anyone hire a man to lead their company at this point? You automatically raise your risk of legal liability by 1000% hiring men in our current culture.

:lollipop_yum:
 

Fake

Member
Not necessarily. They couldn't prove it doesn't automatically mean he didn't say some foul shit. He may be a victim. He also may be a problem.

Dude, this is how the investigation works. Whether you like it or not. By this standart people can make all the shit from people they don't like. He can be a jerk, she can be a jerk, but none of this matter. Personal thing don't work outside internet.

Keep that in mind, people say this all the bloody time until they got accused of something.
 
Last edited:

Saber

Member
Not necessarily. They couldn't prove it doesn't automatically mean he didn't say some foul shit. He may be a victim. He also may be a problem.

This is kinda of silly take. We have legal system for a reason and is to prove whether someone is guilty of allegations or not. If you can't prove your accusations, then who would even taken your accusations seriously?
 

Hendrick's

Gold Member
Not surprised, but still sounds like a horrible place to work based on the games they produce lol
 
This is kinda of silly take. We have legal system for a reason and is to prove whether someone is guilty of allegations or not. If you can't prove your accusations, then who would even taken your accusations seriously?

You're right. The legal system is never wrong and bad people never get away with their misdeeds. I'm the one with the silly take?
 

Saber

Member
You're right. The legal system is never wrong and bad people never get away with their misdeeds. I'm the one with the silly take?

Yes kid, unfortunatelly thats how it works. If you think he is bad or culprid of miscondut(which could be totally true), you then present your proof so it can be taken legal action. If not, this is nothing but a post on Twitter.
 
Last edited:
Yes kid, unfortunatelly thats how it works. If you think he is bad or culprid of miscondut(which could be totally true), you then present your proof so it can be taken legal action. If not, this is nothing but a post on Twitter.

a). STFU with that "kid" shit. I'm 40.

b). Read the article. This wasn't a court of law.
 
You might want to read this as well

Man I love how these court filings are publicly accessible. Exhibit A and B are damning.

To summarize, Sharon O'Donnell and her people harassed and threatened two other female employees to try to get them to testify with her to sexual harassment. It seems like one woman is likely a programmer and commands a good salary while the other was likely in administrative work and was broke. Both refused. They not only testified that Laurent never sexually harassed them, they also testified to O'Donnell's harassment. Here are some select quotes:

Exhibit A:
- "During another phone call, Shari told me that 'let's file the lawsuit together.' I asked her why. She said something along the lines of 'didn't you know if you join the lawsuit you can make $500,000.' I asked why, since I can earn that money in the right way. I don't want to ruin a family, it's not fair."

- "I am submitting this information because I do not believe this is fair to me, Mr. Laurent, or his family."

Exhibit B:
- "I think she made up the claims in her lawsuit"

- "The woman then said that I could 'get money out of' the Laurent family if I worked with Shari on her lawsuit. I said that I didn't want or need to sue the Laurent family. I said I wasn't hungry for money like Shari seemed to be. The woman then called me a 'bitch', said 'fuck the Laurents', and kept insisting that I meet with Shari and come up with claims against Mr. Laurent"

- "I asked who the man was, and he said, 'bitch, is this fucking [name]?' I said yes. The man said I 'need[ed] to be united with Shari' so that 'all this lawsuit shit can come to a conclusion.' He said it would be a 'win-win' [...] The man then said, "bitch you have no money, you are fucking broke'. I said that didn't matter and I wasn't going to work with him or Shari or anyone to make up things about Mr. Laurent"

- "I'm sharing these details because I'm concerned about the Laurent family"


These two women going to the attorney (and one even to the police) independently from one another with very similar stories makes it extremely believable. They had no chance to 'collude' on a story here. I #BelieveWomen 😤

By the way, the first woman mentioned that journalists non-stop calling her even after she asked them to stop got her fired from another job. I hope the gutter press is happy they they harassed a woman out of a games industry job.

Yeah, Shari was lying. Nicolas Laurent may like tapping them balls but he didn't sexually harass any female employees. Guess it was a lot harder than Shari imagined to get women to falsely accuse a guy of sexual harassment for profit lol
 
Top Bottom