Mark Stryker

Steve Coleman & #MeToo Moment in Jazz

154 posts in this topic

yeah, been following it on the socials. He is not looking like a particularly good guy here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is going to win this one but Coleman is surely going on offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He said/she said is ugly in the legal system. It is especially so in this case, where the woman admits that it was a consensual relationship but then goes on to accuse him of forcing her into that relationship. His tactics to continue that relationship are disgusting if true, but again, that's still he said/she said.

Legally, the only thing actionable in court is what she put into print. It'll suck if he wins, because what she says sounds very believable, but she really doesn't have much of a defense here, especially if Coleman's ex-wife corroborates some of what has been said about her voluntary involvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Infidelity is a word that comes to mind. Must be an outmoded concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to read this. 

Also sorry to have to read it from The Mail Online which is a rag of a paper that usually peddles pretty salacious titillation - see their sidebar.  There certainly seems a disconnect between them reporting potential sexual abuse and their editorial standards towards the portrayal of women. Not to deflect from the seriousness of the story one iota

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a thread on this, although I can't find it. My first reaction then was that this is one more reason why jazz should not be taught in college. I'll stand by that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, JSngry said:

There was a thread on this, although I can't find it. My first reaction then was that this is one more reason why jazz should not be taught in college. I'll stand by that.

I think the thread you are recalling was actually related to Greg Osby. This story just broke recently and does not appear to be significantly related to any teaching activities in college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, you're right. My bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consensual relationship with a very young person who was likely manipulated into that relationship... yeah. Gross all around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Old habits die hard, if they die at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably the first time that the Daily Mail has even mentioned jazz..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"You owe me a lifetime of p***y."

Seriously?

The only thing as fucked up as using that line is falling for it.

He said/she said, I'll gladly call bullshit on both of them.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, JSngry said:

"You owe me a lifetime of p***y."

Seriously?

The only thing as fucked up as using that line is falling for it.

He said/she said, I'll gladly call bullshit on both of them.

 

 

You don't think its reasonable or even possible that a person starting their career, dependent upon an "elder" would fall for it at least for a time? It's the power differential in action, leveraged to the hilt - if its all true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's both reasonable and possible - likely, even -  that an immature person will make immature decisions, just as I think it's both reasonable and possible - likely, even -  that an aggressive person will make aggressive calculations as to who/what they can successfully target their aggressions.

I also don't think it's at all unreasonable to define predatory behavior as one type of aggression, just as I don't find it unreasonable to view an intrinsic willingness to cede one's own power as one form of immaturity, or even weakness.

However, I also don't think it's unreasonable to recognize that weakness and aggression can coexist in the same person, and that one trait can be used to position one's self to better utilize the other.

In other words, people be fucked up creatures, and seldom more predictably than when sex becomes a calculated strategy rather than an innate urge.

I see that happening here, and yeah, fuck 'em both for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unrelated question, when did Steve Coleman get to be 62! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

365 days after turning 61?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On September 20, to be specific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mjazzg said:

a disconnect between them reporting potential sexual abuse and their editorial standards towards the portrayal of women.

There is a series of Mail stories with female celebrities opposing the MeToo movement - an indicator of an editorial agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because I posted the initial story, I feel compelled to alert folks that Coleman has posted a long rejoinder on his Facebook page that quotes at lengths from his lawsuit. The link I was trying to share isn't working, but folks can find it. Or maybe someone else can link to it here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter the appearances, I am not attacking or intimidating Maria Grand. I am defending myself from being attacked and falsely accused of wrongdoing. I filed my lawsuit against Ms. Maria Grand, as a very last resort, for two reasons.

First, my past relationship with Ms. Grand was a legal, consensual, intimate relationship that spanned the course of 6 years.

Second, after our intimate relationship fell apart, Ms. Grand began to covertly spread misinformation as to my character and the nature of our relationship, culminating in a secret seven page letter written by her, in which she deliberately lied about the nature of our relationship and tried to ruin my reputation, by co-opting the very necessary, warranted and powerful #MeToo movement, while simultaneously trying to deny me the opportunity to defend myself.

After spending 9 months and considerable emotional energy, stress, and financial resources to mediate with Ms. Grand privately, to no avail, I felt that I had no recourse but to sue Ms. Grand, so that I will have the opportunity to defend myself against her false accusations. I will prove that Ms. Grand's accusations are false, as I have documentation demonstrating the true nature of our consensual, intimate relationship.

Anyone who is interested in fairness and the truth should have no problem with both Maria and I presenting our evidence to prove if Maria’s accusations are true or false. Given that attempts at mediation have failed, at this point, the truth can only be proven in a court of law. The positions of both Ms. Grand and I are presented in my public complaint, not in the tabloid news reports with false sensational headlines designed to attract viewership, that are currently being shared.

I have included some relevant excerpts from my publicly filed complaint below, to which I have all of the supporting documentation.

Steve Coleman

——

11. On or about January 3, 2011, Defendant initiated numerous flirtatious correspondences with Plaintiff, proactively seeking future sexual interactions.

12. On or about June 2, 2011, the parties began to engage in a mutually consensual sexual relationship that lasted until approximately late September 2016. Both the first and last sexual encounters were initiated by Defendant.

13. On or about July 7, 2011, Defendant stated in an electronic chat that she was using sexual intimacy to get Plaintiff to give her "musical information".

16. On or about September 30, 2011, Defendant stated, in a Skype electronic message, that she had been lying to both her aunt and her mother that Plaintiff forced her to have sex with him, in order to make herself look innocent.

17. On or about February 14, 2012, Defendant sent Plaintiff a message stating that she was attracted to him from the beginning, that she wanted to get into a relationship from the beginning, and that Defendant deliberately "trapped" the Plaintiff because of what she could learn from him, and that she could express her sexual nature (i.e.,”freakdom 1”) freely.

1 “Freakdom” is a slang term referring to the release of one’s sexual inhibitions. The term was used by Defendant in her message to Plaintiff, and is therefore quoted herein.

18. On or about February 21, 2012, at Defendant’s request, Plaintiff agreed to sponsor her for an O-1 artist work visa.

19. In or about September of 2013, Plaintiff and Defendant had an argument and a temporary break-up. After a brief pause in their relationship, the relationship resumed and thereafter continued off and on until 2016.

20. Throughout 2014, Plaintiff and Defendant maintained an ongoing consensual sexual relationship, in which each of them would occasionally initiate sex.

21. On or about May 29, 2015, at Defendant’s request, Plaintiff again agreed to sponsor her for an O-1 artist work visa.

22. In or about late 2015, Plaintiff and Defendant actively engaged in frequent consensual sexual intercourse. Both parties would initiate sex from time to time.

24. On or about September 16, 2016, Defendant propositioned Plaintiff for sex and then asked Plaintiff not to tell her then-boyfriend about the sex, which was described as a "birthday present” for Plaintiff.

25. On or about September 21, 2016, the Parties engaged in sexual intercourse for the last time. The encounter was consensual and was initiated by Defendant, as described in the paragraph immediately preceding the instant one.

29. On or about May 17, 2017, after approximately five months without extended communication, Defendant stated in an email to Plaintiff that he sexually harassed her for three years. She further stated that she was not in a position to deal with it publicly at the time, but that someday she would be, and that she did not"...ntend on being quiet."(Ex. A).

32. On October 25, 2017, Defendant sent Plaintiff the following text message:

[10/25/17, 9:11 PM] Maria Grand: I will say what I want to say when and however I want. And yes, you will be held accountable for your actions, one way or the other, especially after you would send me these threatening texts.

33. On November 6, 2017, Defendant emailed Plaintiff’s now-estranged wife indicating she was "going to be public" about her relationship with Plaintiff. Defendant subsequently published her false accusations of sexual harassment against the Plaintiff, and later forwarded the Letter to the Plaintiffs estranged wife, identifying the Plaintiff by name in the forwarded email.

34. On or about November 14, 2017, Defendant sent an email with the Letter attached, to approximately thirty individuals in the parties’ shared music community. The recipients included music industry business professionals. In the email and attached Letter, Defendant falsely accused Plaintiff of criminal sexual acts and sexual harassment. Although she did not include his name, other facts, and statements in the publication made it crystal clear to the recipients that she was referring to Plaintiff (Exs. C, D). Defendant requested in her email and letter that none of the recipients forward the email and attached Letter, in an obvious attempt to keep the knowledge of the accusations from the Plaintiff, thereby denying Plaintiff an opportunity to defend himself.

35. On or about November 18, 2017, Defendant sent an email to Plaintiff’s estranged wife with the Letter attached, after previously informing Plaintiff’s estranged wife the Letter was describing Plaintiff. The Defendant specifically mentioned the Plaintiff by name, and requests of Plaintiff's estranged wife to keep their communication from the Plaintiff, thereby denying Plaintiff an opportunity to defend himself. Defendant’s request clearly demonstrates that the Defendant knew that her accusations about the Plaintiff were false, and the Defendant specifically was attempting to keep the knowledge of the accusations from the Plaintiff, thereby denying Plaintiff an opportunity to defend himself. This attempt to keep the accusations from the Plaintiff was successful for a period of approximately two months.

37. In all of the written communications Defendant sent defaming Plaintiff, Plaintiff’s identity was so thinly veiled that all recipients knew exactly who was being accused, as the recipients knew both parties well. The recipients also knew the nature of the parties' relationship, Defendant's meeting Plaintiff at his workshop and Plaintiff's providing numerous employment opportunities in the form of musical "gigs" playing alongside Plaintiff at his performances. Separately, Defendant explicitly informed some recipients, including Plaintiff's estranged wife, that the defamatory communications were about Plaintiff. Other recipients, including Plaintiff's manager and another colleague, were able to immediately recognize Plaintiff as the person described in the Letter.

38. Defendant's email, along with the attached Letter, was re-published (forwarded) to many other people.

39. Although Plaintiff was unaware of the defamatory emails and letters at the time, the damage to his reputation was immediate. People in his industry/musical community stopped talking to him, and other musicians canceled on gigs that he had hired them for. The cancellations caused Plaintiff to find last-minute substitute musicians (who were not as capable as the original musicians), rearrange flights, concerts, performance riders, bookings and also rearrange and recopy musical scores. Also, as the previous musicians who canceled had been present on the released recordings, the Plaintiff was forced to complete gigs with an ensemble different from the advertised ensemble listed on the released recordings.

40. On January 11, 2018, Plaintiff discovered that Defendant had published defamatory information about him throughout his professional community as he was notified by his manager, one of the recipients of the email and attached Letter, who immediately recognized Plaintiff to be the unnamed person described in the Letter.

41. Plaintiff reached out to Defendant to request a retraction and an apology. Plaintiff attempted to resolve the matter privately for approximately three weeks, prior to hiring an attorney for the purpose of engaging in private alternative dispute resolution.

42. Defendant rebuffed or ignored all of Plaintiff's attempts to resolve the matter privately.

——

Regarding #32 above, I did not send any threatening texts and emails to Maria Grand in October 2017, and I can prove this in court. What I sent to Maria was a complaint about a Facebook post that she made that I saw as a veiled threat against me.

1 hour ago, Mark Stryker said:

Because I posted the initial story, I feel compelled to alert folks that Coleman has posted a long rejoinder on his Facebook page that quotes at lengths from his lawsuit. The link I was trying to share isn't working, but folks can find it. Or maybe someone else can link to it here. 

Here it is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah - but this probably wouldn't happen if it was "Martin" Grand. Of course "he" probably wouldn't have received any tutoring. No p****y to exchange.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a real downer.  Some seriously bad judgment here. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

will be interesting to see how this works out in court. If his postings are accurate, I think he has a case.

The other thing that it is interesting (for no reason related to the case) is that she basically plays like Steve Coleman on the tenor. She sounds like a clone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.