What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Harvard 2023-24: Now is the Winter

Sierra said:
Coach Stone has coached well over 1500+ Female athletes. Interesting how nobody seems interested in hearing from Coach Stone. Now we all will hear what Coach has to say. If anyone has ever competed in D1 athletics or served in the Armed Services what was alleged in the Harvard program is the daily way of life (not for everyone). The simple fact is Coach Stone was at Harvard for how long? And Harvard didn't know the style of Coach Stone? This suit is designed to get her narrative out and settle with Harvard on a financial level. Harvard's women's hockey program will never recover from the firing of Coach Stone.
Click to expand...

Harvard won't settle financially because it will open up a Pandora's box of future lawsuits. The school's attorneys will expose and rip apart her basis for the suit. This isn't their first 'rodeo'.

Regarding her narrative, in all likelihood, Harvard had her sign an agreement not to discuss her removal as hockey coach with anyone including the press. If in fact she did sign such an agreement (and I'm pretty sure Harvard had her do it), her calling a press conference is in violation of the agreement. She would have been smart to keep this lawsuit quiet if she wanted any chance of getting any renumeration.
 
Skate79 said:
Harvard won't settle financially because it will open up a Pandora's box of future lawsuits. The school's attorneys will expose and rip apart her basis for the suit. This isn't their first 'rodeo'.

Regarding her narrative, in all likelihood, Harvard had her sign an agreement not to discuss her removal as hockey coach with anyone including the press. If in fact she did sign such an agreement (and I'm pretty sure Harvard had her do it), her calling a press conference is in violation of the agreement. She would have been smart to keep this lawsuit quiet if she wanted any chance of getting any renumeration.
Click to expand...

We all know Harvard and Stone are one. What organization makes one sign such an agreement, if, such an organization is scared and knows of their guilt. We all know these "agreements" never hold up (just ask Stormy Daniels). Trying to silence ones speech is oppressive at its core. Let ALL parties be heard. Harvard doesn't have a very good track record as of late. This whole situation is a mess and a huge distraction for HWH. This reminds me of the Duluth fiasco. I think that was a 3M settlement. Bad press. Pay Stone make amends and move on. Harvard owes that to the new staff and athletes.
 
Sierra said:
We all know Harvard and Stone are one. What organization makes one sign such an agreement, if, such an organization is scared and knows of their guilt. We all know these "agreements" never hold up (just ask Stormy Daniels). Trying to silence ones speech is oppressive at its core. Let ALL parties be heard. Harvard doesn't have a very good track record as of late. This whole situation is a mess and a huge distraction for HWH. This reminds me of the Duluth fiasco. I think that was a 3M settlement. Bad press. Pay Stone make amends and move on. Harvard owes that to the new staff and athletes.
Click to expand...

Harvard and Coach Stone are not one. Harvard was the employer; Coach Stone was the employee. And Harvard is far from scared. In a termination or mutual parting of the ways, if there is a monetary transaction such as a buyout of her contract or severance, there is usually a non-disclosure type attachment that precludes the employee from speaking out or revealing anything that could be considered inflammatory or injurious to the employer. Since Coach Stone held a press conference announcing the lawsuit, that would give Harvard the right to go after her severance or monetary pay out that was part of the termination of her employment. You can't have it both ways.

While Coach Stone does have grounds to pursue the pay equity disparity, she is neglecting the fact that Harvard's benefit package is equal for both men and women. I know this because I had a parent who taught at Harvard and the package was outstanding. This will reduce her claim.

Of greater importance I would imagine is the legal action against 50 of her former players. Undoubtedly, some of these "Jane Does" have families who have connections including legal representation that won't mess around. If people are outraged by what came out in the Boston Globe and The Athletic, that will look like a day at the beach compared to what will happen if this goes to deposition and trial. We are talking about people's lives here. And in what can only be described as the irony of all ironies, Coach Stone's defamation claim against these girls is exactly what is being perpetrated on them by this suit. Who's to say that these women's livelihoods won't be disrupted or damaged in some way by this suit? To say nothing of the mental trauma of a lawsuit and having to relive the past you are trying to bury. When you open Pandora's box, you may not like what comes out.
 
Skate79 unfortunately for the 50 other "Jane Does", I am nearly certain that the act of being sued cannot be legally construed as causing defamation, mental stress, all that - in short you cannot 'counter sue' because the act of being sued is causing your distress. Same as you cannot recover your costs if you 'won' the suit. One of the major major issues with the US legal system hence the term 'lawfare'. However, as a poster above said, there could be 50 separate depositions Coach Stone will have to go through. if so, if there is ANY discrepancies in her testimony, even if by 'accident', in these 50 depositions, she could be criminally charged for perjury at worst and at best, gives the 50 individual legal teams plenty of room to cause doubt in the eyes of a jury.
 
Skate79 said:
Harvard and Coach Stone are not one. Harvard was the employer; Coach Stone was the employee. And Harvard is far from scared. In a termination or mutual parting of the ways, if there is a monetary transaction such as a buyout of her contract or severance, there is usually a non-disclosure type attachment that precludes the employee from speaking out or revealing anything that could be considered inflammatory or injurious to the employer. Since Coach Stone held a press conference announcing the lawsuit, that would give Harvard the right to go after her severance or monetary pay out that was part of the termination of her employment. You can't have it both ways.

While Coach Stone does have grounds to pursue the pay equity disparity, she is neglecting the fact that Harvard's benefit package is equal for both men and women. I know this because I had a parent who taught at Harvard and the package was outstanding. This will reduce her claim.

Of greater importance I would imagine is the legal action against 50 of her former players. Undoubtedly, some of these "Jane Does" have families who have connections including legal representation that won't mess around. If people are outraged by what came out in the Boston Globe and The Athletic, that will look like a day at the beach compared to what will happen if this goes to deposition and trial. We are talking about people's lives here. And in what can only be described as the irony of all ironies, Coach Stone's defamation claim against these girls is exactly what is being perpetrated on them by this suit. Who's to say that these women's livelihoods won't be disrupted or damaged in some way by this suit? To say nothing of the mental trauma of a lawsuit and having to relive the past you are trying to bury. When you open Pandora's box, you may not like what comes out.
Click to expand...

What's nice about this lawsuit is that either way, the truth will come out. And depending on what does come out, perhaps this will give future student-athletes a pause that if they try to embellish facts just to get their coach fired, it might actually have consequences to their own actions. I'm not saying that's the case here at all, but this is the first time I've heard of a coach actually attempt to make former players held accountable for their words. There have been many cases of coaches being fired because players use the buzz words of "mental abuse, emotional damage". These kids are not stupid, they all talk, they all understand what needs to be said to get a coach fired. Again - NOT SAYING that's the case here. But, if it is, it will be interesting to see what comes out and as someone else put it, who has the most consistent story. And Katie Stone better be prepared to have all her laundry aired out as well. She's taking a huge risk to expose the underbelly of her last 30+ years of coaching and I can't imagine its all roses.
 
Sierra said:
Harvard's womens hockey program will never recover from the firing of Coach Stone.
Click to expand...



The most curious feature of this most curious situation is to remember that Stone was not fired . . . she resigned, and it’s hard to find a trace of coercion in this: “I believe a coach knows in their heart when it is time for change and I look forward to supporting the next chapter in Harvard Women’s Hockey.” In light of her current decision she would have been better advised to write “In my own case my heart tells me that the time is right to remove myself from the toxic environment that Harvard has allowed to grow unchecked, and which confirms my personal history of the University's gender-discriminatory behavior, behavior that pre-dates the current controversy surrounding me." Something to that effect, rather than the standard “Thanks for the memories" that now becomes hard to explain in cross-examination. Harvard, for its part, instead of dithering, could have fired Stone forthwith for ineffective leadership, given HWH’s attrition numbers and its rock-bottom position in the student-athletes’ satisfaction poll. This would have been an easy out and would have spared all concerned the fruitless investigations that delivered the startling conclusion that “some traditions in recent years were experienced differently by different people.” But the University, institutionally paralyzed as it was by an aggressive press, didn’t have the stomach to simply act and spare its athletes continued scrutiny. Luckily for Harvard, given the delayed release of Jenner & Block’s secret non-finding, Stone must have grown impatient and not only blinked first but also appears to have hanged herself in the process.

An angry, self-justifying letter of resignation from the coach, or an outright, forthright firing from Harvard could have led to one of two much better options for Stone: (1) Establish a more plausible context for the current discrimination lawsuit (while ixnaying the nasty defamations bluff), or (2) Channel her grievance into a writing of her memoirs (with the aid of a psychologically savvy co-author!): a portrait of her coaching era that would include a candid account of the events contributing to her downfall, especially the self-destructive ones. Granted, this would require a degree of self-awareness not evident at the lawyer’s podium last week, but such an account would serve the cause of women’s sports going forward far more than paying legal assistants to establish that, because of our fraught times, “the [female] coaching profession is losing excellent coaching at an alarming rate.” Katey Stone’s career was special. It merits an illuminating written profile. Skating on Thin Ice, maybe, as a working title.
 
Last edited:
I hope a current Harvard fan will create a new thread for the 24-25 season that we will all agree to leave alone for the sake of the new chapter of HWH, and keep all the past garbage here. The new coaches and players deserve that.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first Stone." I think this Stone is going to be cast about quite a lot in the days ahead! : D

I'm also sure the lawyers of the 50 Jane Does will make it their collective mission to leave no Stone unturned (I couldn't resist that obvious one too). I think she's in for a very turbulent journey ahead, but hey, sports is all about the journey and not the destination. I don't think she's going to be thrilled with either of those!
 
Last edited:
Cornholio said:
Skate79 unfortunately for the 50 other "Jane Does", I am nearly certain that the act of being sued cannot be legally construed as causing defamation, mental stress, all that - in short you cannot 'counter sue' because the act of being sued is causing your distress. Same as you cannot recover your costs if you 'won' the suit. One of the major major issues with the US legal system hence the term 'lawfare'. However, as a poster above said, there could be 50 separate depositions Coach Stone will have to go through. if so, if there is ANY discrepancies in her testimony, even if by 'accident', in these 50 depositions, she could be criminally charged for perjury at worst and at best, gives the 50 individual legal teams plenty of room to cause doubt in the eyes of a jury.
Click to expand...

Not actually 50 separate depositions. There would be one long deposition (over multiple sessions) where the attorneys for the 50 can ask questions but they don't all get a separate deposition. Typically a party is deposed once in a case, although that sometimes that can take multiple sessions over multiple days depending on the complexity and number of parties. Likely many of the Does will use the same attorney to save on legal expense so that will shorten things up.
 
I dont often agree with Shelfit, but I really hope for all current and future Crimson players that we can focus on the game on the ice, now. This is not to minimize the importance of the issues that need to be resolved from the past, but the women who are going to take to the ice this season for Harvard deserve respect and attention. Maybe we need 2 threads...Harvard hockey and Harvard litigation.
 
hab said:
I dont often agree with Shelfit, but I really hope for all current and future Crimson players that we can focus on the game on the ice, now. This is not to minimize the importance of the issues that need to be resolved from the past, but the women who are going to take to the ice this season for Harvard deserve respect and attention. Maybe we need 2 threads...Harvard hockey and Harvard litigation.
Click to expand...

Thanks hab. This is a serious issue and I genuinely believe the "new" Harvard women's hockey team deserves some sort of separation from the old regime and all these sordid legal discussions, and I believe we all can at least provide that separation here if nowhere else. And don't worry about any times you haven't agreed with me in the past. I think most people here know and understand that most of the time I just like to have fun messing with the men on here. I mess with my husband the same way when he gets too opinionated about women issue's. ; )
 
Last edited:
As a longtime off-the-books paid shill for HWH I've always obeyed their strictures about not starting a new thread until they officially announce the incoming class, usually sometime in July, months after the new names are no longer news (mine not to reason why), but it's now August, I believe, so I am not only blowing my cover but also promising a new thread very soon, so all the heretofore closeted Crimson fans will have a place to share the usual exciting pre-season news coming out of Bright.
 
thirdtime's . . . said:
As a longtime off-the-books paid shill for HWH I've always obeyed their strictures about not starting a new thread until they officially announce the incoming class, usually sometime in July, months after the new names are no longer news (mine not to reason why), but it's now August, I believe, so I am not only blowing my cover but also promising a new thread very soon, so all the heretofore closeted Crimson fans will have a place to share the usual exciting pre-season news coming out of Bright.
Click to expand...

Paid?
 
Cornholio said:
Skate79 unfortunately for the 50 other "Jane Does", I am nearly certain that the act of being sued cannot be legally construed as causing defamation, mental stress, all that - in short you cannot 'counter sue' because the act of being sued is causing your distress. Same as you cannot recover your costs if you 'won' the suit. One of the major major issues with the US legal system hence the term 'lawfare'. However, as a poster above said, there could be 50 separate depositions Coach Stone will have to go through. if so, if there is ANY discrepancies in her testimony, even if by 'accident', in these 50 depositions, she could be criminally charged for perjury at worst and at best, gives the 50 individual legal teams plenty of room to cause doubt in the eyes of a jury.
Click to expand...

I wasn't referring to a legal definition of mental stress. Or any countersuits. I was merely pointing out that a lawsuit brings with it mental and possibly physical stress. It's practically unavoidable. I should not have used the word "defamation". What I meant to say is that if these "Jane Does" are working in organizations where their direct supervisor happens to find out about this suit, these supervisors quite possibly could look at these women and wonder "Could they pull something like this on me?" It's a legit question to ask in this day and age of having any action or spoken or written word misinterpreted to the point where some form of complaint is filed, or legal action brought against a party. Or worse, made known on social media. What passed for harmless banter 30 years ago has long since disappeared.
 
thirdtime's . . . said:
As a longtime off-the-books paid shill for HWH I've always obeyed their strictures about not starting a new thread until they officially announce the incoming class, usually sometime in July, months after the new names are no longer news (mine not to reason why), but it's now August, I believe, so I am not only blowing my cover but also promising a new thread very soon, so all the heretofore closeted Crimson fans will have a place to share the usual exciting pre-season news coming out of Bright.
Click to expand...

Do you share your 'off the books" comp with the State of MA Dept of Revenue and the IRS? Just wondering, :-)

Strange that the men have announced their incoming class on GoCrimson.com but the women have withheld their incoming class. Leads me to wonder if they have had some decommits. Here is a link for what I believe is the incoming class for this year and next. I cannot confirm the accuracy.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...OlPsV4P-oWT5dRMoI4felYFLk/edit?usp=drive_link
 
Skate79 said:
Strange that the men have announced their incoming class on GoCrimson.com but the women have withheld their incoming class. Leads me to wonder if they have had some decommits. Here is a link for what I believe is the incoming class for this year and next. I cannot confirm the accuracy.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...OlPsV4P-oWT5dRMoI4felYFLk/edit?usp=drive_link
Click to expand...

Harvard has remained mute since Bow Wow Wow was first to get this link on his ECAC thread in late March! What struct me then, if these names hold, is that Stone’s last class will also be the first class since forever (2016-17) to not have a skater from either Nobles or BB&N. It occurred to me that maybe the locals were the first to see the gathering storm clouds and were spooked. You’re suggesting others may have gotten spooked after committing. Scary, though sounding more and more plausible. Though some seem to be getting bored with the Stone affair, its ripple effect is considerable. Nevertheless, I’m also ready to move on, as promised, with or without the nameless class of ’28.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top