What if Sen. Baumgardner didn’t grab that woman’s buttocks?
What if I indicted an innocent man? The question has haunted me for weeks.
I wrote in my March 8 column that “The Colorado Senate should take up a resolution to expel Randy Baumgardner, RHot Sulphur Springs, because an investigation had determined that “it was more likely than not” he had grabbed/slapped an aide’s bottom multiple times. Like everyone else, I knew what I knew from the newspapers. I have since read a redacted copy of the investigation report and I am no closer to answering to that question.
It’s not that I doubt the sincerity of the victim; something happened in that crowded hallway two years ago. The delay between the incident and investigation is not unusual. Sexual harassment often demoralizes and embarrasses a victim into silence and until the #MeToo movement, women have been reluctant to speak up. The interval does, however, make it harder to determine what exactly happened. Memories fade. A colleague couldn’t remember the victim confiding in him after the incident although he remembers her being distraught about something.
Baumgardner’s handling of the investigation didn’t help his case. The investigator found him defensive and arrogant when she interviewed him, which reduced his credibility. Also the senator has a reputation for saying inappropriate things. Nonetheless a colleague who worked closely with him said she was surprised by the allegation. No other women have come forward with grabbing allegations so there does not appear to be a pattern of that behavior.
Could it have been an accidental touch in a crowded hallway? That’s the question. The investigator’s conclusion is still quite plausible but there are other possible explanations. I did not consider other possibilities when I wrote my column because of my own bias.
In my 32 years in the workforce I’ve experienced three incidents of sexual harassment — a butt slap by a D.C. lobbyist, a cable news pundit who feigned interest in helping my writing career until I declined an invitation to his hotel room, and a manager who made a pass at me and fired me when I refused.
Recent revelations of sexual harassment by powerful public figures have reinforced my perception that accused men are guilty, willing to lie about it, and unwilling to apologize for their atrocious behavior. They deny the evidence, attack the accused, offer excuses, and when all else fails, they issue a vague PR-vetted apology to try and save their jobs. Such men get what they deserve. But not every accused is another Bill O’Reilly or Harvey Weinstein. Some men are innocent and some incidents are not clear enough to render a good judgement.
What do we do with a twoyear-old case involving a packed hallway, an accused man who botched an interview, a sincere victim, no direct witnesses, the vague recollection of a friend told of the incident at the time, and another staff member who stands by the accused? When the answer is unclear, how do we do what’s right for the victim and the accused?
In general, the #MeToo movement has been a long overdue reset of behavior in the workplace. No longer will we tolerate groping, disrobing, demands for sex, repeated unwanted sexual advances, or sexually explicit texts or emails. What we still have to work out is what to do in more ambiguous situations.
Seeking justice isn’t easy when political power is at stake. Democrats in the General Assembly understandably want to retake the Senate and are happy to use the sexual harassment issue to attract women’s votes. Republicans would do the same thing if the situation were reversed. No doubt the GOP is tempted to toss Sen. Baumgardner overboard to quell the storm.
Both parties should tread carefully. They could destroy an innocent man.