Earlier this week, The CJ and WDRB began unraveling the single most confusing aspect of the Haymarket saga.
In short, what happened to all the others?
Haymarket owner says former employees exaggerated the number of his rape accusers, by Bailey Loosemore and Darcy Costello (Courier Journal; January 17, 2018))
The numbers spread faster than anyone could explain.
First, it was one woman who publicly accused a Louisville bar owner of rape. Then eight, then 17, then more than 20.
Where the numbers were coming from appeared to be any social media user’s guess. But now, the figures — repeated as fact by two of the owner’s former employees — are being used against them in a civil lawsuit.
Attorney for Haymarket bar owner Matthew Landan claims rape allegations are ‘deliberate attempt’ to ruin reputation, by Jason Riley (WDRB; January 17, 2018)
An attorney for Haymarket Whiskey Bar owner Matthew Landan claims there was “a deliberate attempt” to destroy Landan’s reputation and his business by falsely accusing him of rape and spreading allegations online and through the media.
The goal, according to attorney Andrew Horne, was an attempt by two Haymarket managers to take over the bar.
In court records filed last week, Horne argues that “within hours” of a woman claiming on Facebook in November that she was raped by Landan, managers Eric Snider and Christopher Maggio “joined in the takedown” and staged a coup in hopes of getting the bar.
Horne claims Snider and Maggio privately and publicly embellished the number of Landan’s accusers, vouched for the allegations and engineered a walk-out by other employees — all in an attempt to buy the bar at a low price.
It would seem that in terms of verifiable substance, and if we’re aggregating correctly, there have been a total of three or maybe four scenarios involving Landan that are capable of being traced to an actual social media posting. Of these, two factor into the Haymarket owner’s lawsuit.
Costello and Loosemore explain:
As of January, just one of the two women named in Landan’s initial lawsuit has responded by court record.
The woman who accused Landan of drugging her drink filed a countersuit against him alleging that he committed criminal assault and wanton endangerment when he placed drugs in a drink that he served her in his bar on Market Street.
The second of these two women is the original pseudonymous Facebook accuser whose post prompted the firestorm; in it, she made reference to employment at Monnik Beer Company, hence this emerging story line, again reported by Jason Riley.
Attorney for Matthew Landan asks judge to hold brewery in contempt for refusing to provide information about rape accuser, by Jason Riley (WDRB; January 19, 2018)
An attorney for Haymarket Whiskey Bar owner Matthew Landan has asked a judge to hold Monnik Beer Company, a local brewery, in contempt of court for refusing to provide certain information about an employee who accused Landan of rape.
Jefferson Circuit Court Judge Audra Eckerle had ordered a representative of Monnik to provide testimony to attorney Andrew Horne, who was trying to identify the employee he believes posted a picture of Landan on Facebook on Nov. 13, saying, “Matthew Landan is a rapist” and accused him of raping her.
During the Jan. 17 deposition, Monnik provided the employee’s name but refused to give other information, including her address, phone number and personnel file, Horne wrote in his motion, filed on Thursday.
Horne has asked Eckerle to order Monnik to provide the employee’s last known address, personnel file and pay attorney’s fees.
An attorney for Monnik did not immediately return a phone message.
By any objective standard, the terrain has shifted since the initial furor, and this is why I’ll continue updating the story.