Purple Haize wrote:
He was removed from the suit not found Not Guilty. I have seen nothing to change my mind that he acted negligently in how he handled the situation. Was it criminal? Was it worth the resources required to continue to pursue? Was it part of a larger deal? I dunno. It does not mean he's not a good hire to get LU to where LU wants to go
I agree, if you want to choose the negative spin over the positive. Conversely, you also haven't been given anything to suggest negligence, beyond the broad "it happened on his watch."
If we start from a position of neutrality, accepting that we don't have access to what really happened (which you admitted), we are left with evidential snippets, accusations, denials, and then this case as one of our only objective chances to prove something.
And, after it played out, we are left with the fact that he was sued for negligence in a high profile money case, the charges were dropped against him personally, and Baylor settled (guilty). The McCaw narrative is that he wasn't negligent, reported it to JA, but the "system of Baylor" was actively working against IX cases and didn't act in accordance. His narrative matches what happened in this case. Doesn't prove anything absolutely, but that ship has sailed.
All your what-ifs are valid, but favoring those above all else doesn't seem to have a rationale.