Well this isn't a particularly good look.
https://whitmancountywatch.com/2021...director-of-threatening-him-over-party-video/
https://whitmancountywatch.com/2021...director-of-threatening-him-over-party-video/
Pat Chun accused of verbal assault...by a Pullman councilman.
- Thread starter CougPatrol
- Start date
"Called back on Oct 19th"
Not sure why someone (Chun) with such exposure would further open himself up to scrutiny, or have a maskless party when you've planted your flag on the hill of "there is no room in this world for unwashed heathens".
Personally, idgaf if he had a maskless party, but I'm also not parading my self-righteous values and opinion in front of God and country.
Not sure why someone (Chun) with such exposure would further open himself up to scrutiny, or have a maskless party when you've planted your flag on the hill of "there is no room in this world for unwashed heathens".
Personally, idgaf if he had a maskless party, but I'm also not parading my self-righteous values and opinion in front of God and country.
Good for him, I like to see a little fire in my AD.
Another example of people taking videos to attempt to get their 15 seconds of fame. The whole thing is BS, should Chun have used a little more self control? Yes. Was it necessary to post the video on social media? No
I have people at my house, if they are all vaxed I don't insist in people wearing masks. The science behind wearing masks is weak at best, unless you are wearing an N95 mask.
Another example of people taking videos to attempt to get their 15 seconds of fame. The whole thing is BS, should Chun have used a little more self control? Yes. Was it necessary to post the video on social media? No
I have people at my house, if they are all vaxed I don't insist in people wearing masks. The science behind wearing masks is weak at best, unless you are wearing an N95 mask.
I don't care about him hosting the party, personally, as I think the mask mandate is ridiculous. With that said, the fact that other coaches have been fined for this sort of thing isn't a good look for Chun. It also adds credibility to Sorenson's accusation, as Chun likely learned of the video being posted and went off on him.
yet... it is mandated at every public place in WA, OR, and CA. The medical offices I've visited don't allow cloth masks, yet I'd bet that is the predominant mask that is being worn. But tell me again how any of the rules or mandates make any sense when you look at it as a whole.
You can't demand people live by one set of rules and then have another set for yourself. I mean, unless you're a member of the ruling elite, but to be honest I don't think Chun's position as AD gives him that status.
Name Withheld says:
November 1, 2021 at 9:15 pm
Over the last six years they have hired some real characters in admin over at Wazzu. The climate of fear and intimidation is real. I am very glad to be out of there.
November 1, 2021 at 9:15 pm
Over the last six years they have hired some real characters in admin over at Wazzu. The climate of fear and intimidation is real. I am very glad to be out of there.
Court records show Head Coach Kamie Ethridge received an infraction under the city’s nuisance party ordinance on Aug. 28 — about a week after authorities warned they would start enforcing violations of public health restrictions on large gatherings, social distancing and masks.
Pullman Police Chief Gary Jenkins said an officer responded to Ethridge’s home after getting a complaint about the party. The officer reportedly saw about 25 people outside in the yard without masks or social distancing. Ethridge identified herself as the owner of the property.*
Ethridge
“She said she was just hosting a mini-block party,” Jenkins said, adding, “The party started to break up while the officer was there.”
After weeks of providing “educational” warnings, Jenkins told officers on Aug. 27 to start immediately writing infractions for parties in violation of public health orders.
“Their direction is to enforce it equally,” he said, “regardless of who it is or where it is.”
Pullman Police Chief Gary Jenkins said an officer responded to Ethridge’s home after getting a complaint about the party. The officer reportedly saw about 25 people outside in the yard without masks or social distancing. Ethridge identified herself as the owner of the property.*
“She said she was just hosting a mini-block party,” Jenkins said, adding, “The party started to break up while the officer was there.”
After weeks of providing “educational” warnings, Jenkins told officers on Aug. 27 to start immediately writing infractions for parties in violation of public health orders.
“Their direction is to enforce it equally,” he said, “regardless of who it is or where it is.”
Where to begin....
Al Sorenson is...colorful. The fact that he spent 3 weeks deciding to report the supposed threats are interesting...and I don't expect they're coincidence.
Whitman COunty Watch is also...interesting. Not sure how they pick their stories, but everything I've read there comes from a particular perspective...just like every other media outlet.
"“You are a f—er,” Sorensen quoted Chun to police. “Do you know how many people f—ing hate you? … I’m going to try to destroy you.” Seriously? That's the best story he could come up with? Even if Chun did go on a rant in his office, I seriously doubt those words were spoken. Even if Chun was that dumb...those are lines from a bad movie.
Chun can make disparaging remarks about whoever he wants to. It's called an opinion.
Chun can have a party at his house too. The mandate doesn't extend past his front door. Etheridge got her ticket because she had a big, open party during the gathering ban. The ban has expired. Plus, nobody even knows when the video was taken...was it even during the pandemic?
This isn't news.
Al Sorenson is...colorful. The fact that he spent 3 weeks deciding to report the supposed threats are interesting...and I don't expect they're coincidence.
Whitman COunty Watch is also...interesting. Not sure how they pick their stories, but everything I've read there comes from a particular perspective...just like every other media outlet.
"“You are a f—er,” Sorensen quoted Chun to police. “Do you know how many people f—ing hate you? … I’m going to try to destroy you.” Seriously? That's the best story he could come up with? Even if Chun did go on a rant in his office, I seriously doubt those words were spoken. Even if Chun was that dumb...those are lines from a bad movie.
Chun can make disparaging remarks about whoever he wants to. It's called an opinion.
Chun can have a party at his house too. The mandate doesn't extend past his front door. Etheridge got her ticket because she had a big, open party during the gathering ban. The ban has expired. Plus, nobody even knows when the video was taken...was it even during the pandemic?
This isn't news.
Sounds like Sorenson is angry that his buddy Rolo got fired and is seeking some revenge. What a clown. Too bad Chun didn't just ignore him.
I told you all that Chun was going to provide some popcorn worthy entertainment.
I just assumed it would be via the discovery process in Rolo's suit. Councilperson Sorensen just accelerated the need for some Orville Redenbacher.
I just assumed it would be via the discovery process in Rolo's suit. Councilperson Sorensen just accelerated the need for some Orville Redenbacher.
Where to begin...
How about with you getting the facts wrong right off the bat. He reported it immediately, but PPD didn't get back to him at all and he decided to call again on the 19th, and in light of the way Chun tried to burn Rolo to the ground I don't blame him.
I don't even understand what the issue is:
1. Chun had a "maskless" party?
If everyone was vaccinated, or it followed public health orders (IE not prohibited) what's the issue? Chun and his family have the right to private personal lives.
2. Chun allegedly called some guy a "f**ker?"
It sounds like Chun went to his office to cancel his insurance with the guy. Maybe there was back and forth during that exchange.
Seems like the insurance agent is the one trying to make this an issue.
1. Chun had a "maskless" party?
If everyone was vaccinated, or it followed public health orders (IE not prohibited) what's the issue? Chun and his family have the right to private personal lives.
2. Chun allegedly called some guy a "f**ker?"
It sounds like Chun went to his office to cancel his insurance with the guy. Maybe there was back and forth during that exchange.
Seems like the insurance agent is the one trying to make this an issue.
Outside of the context of the university, there is nothing to report. However, you conveniently left out the part where Chun threatened to use his influence to have people cancel their policies with Sorenson. Now, if that is Joe Blow on the street, then who cares, but it isn't. Its Pat Chun, the AD at a major university in a very small town. If the allegations are to be believed, that it is something that should be concerning.
Not only that, but if the party was such a nothing-burger why did Chun come down to Sorenson's office and demand for the video of it to be taken down? What was he trying to hide? What was he ashamed of? If it was filmed from the street, it was perfectly legal as well, but we don't know the details of the video.
Why would someone wait this long to make a complaint ? He either needs the votes for re-election or he is just a Dick. I’m not picking sides but why wait all that time to decide. He has an agenda and funny thing it’s after Rolo was fired. Hmmmmm just saying
You believe all kinds of dumb shit, no surprise you believe Sorensen's dumb story too.
Whatever dude. You don't know all of the facts. Neither do I.
I was calling you out for jumping to conclusions....because you don't know what you are talking about. You are just making assumptions.
Whitman County Watch used "f__er" with no "k"
This could mean Chun doesn't like "father(s)", "farmer(s)" "flyer(s)" or heaven forbid "farter(s)"
The difference is people aren't on here making statements as if they know what is going on about Rolo.
Oh, sure they are. The Leaders of Men, Vax Papers, and More Rolo ... threads are full of statements about Rolo's motivations, as if they were in the very room with Rolo and Chun.
I agree. I'd also add that his decision not to press charges, combined with the suspicious timing of not coming out weeks ago, and only coming out 1 day after Rolo's firing, both combined together, makes it even more extremely suspicous of his ALLEGATIONS, and makes it even more likely his ALLEGATIONS are either exxagerated, the result from misperception, and are UNTRUE. And thats giving him the benefit of the doubt that he's not LYING, instead of just being wrong, mistaken.
But that said even tho I'm ok with Chun's party, it does come off as hypocritical. And this is a bad look, optics for Chun, and WSU.
Should he be fired? No.
But it should put him on the Hotseat.
And he will need to make good hires, not have anything else bad happen, or he might get fired.
Any way that sliced, this not good for Chun, WSU
He's an insurance agent and he was.....yelled at? Oh no.
*Career insurance agent here; we get yelled at all the time.
*Career insurance agent here; we get yelled at all the time.
Well .that very well could be the case. I pretty much tuned out the discussions on CovidZone and Vaccine Watch
96 made a statement as if he is an authority on the subject...and I called BS
Please don't misunderstand me. Anyone speaking with any authority about goings-on of Rolo, Chun, or the Lady Cougs are speaking out their arse.
"He did not file a report then, but called back on Oct. 19 to make an official statement on the matter."
Agree with this too. Even tho I dont think think the allegations are true, because of no chargess, timing, etc.
However if they are true, thats definitely abuse of power, threats, harrassment, and maybe borderline coercion, blacklisting, blackmail, defamation, slander, libel, etc.
That kind of behavior would be bad from anybody, but especially bad from a WSU AD.
If the ALLEGATIONS are true, proven true, then its probably a borderline fireable offense, and if he was fired, I would support that firing.
I also agree with the stance that he cant or shouldnt be a hypocrite. And I do believe Chun didnt want the party thing to get out, so that he would not come out as a hypocrit, etc.
Anyway its sliced, even if ALLEGATIONS are not true, its a bad look for Chun, WSU, and should put chun on the hotseat.
Let's deconstruct this:
Is it:
Abuse of power? Not until he actually carries out some action - in his capacity as AD - that causes harm. And Sorenson isn't handling insurance coverage for the university, so there's not really an avenue for this, short of Chun telling his staff 'if you buy insurance from him, I'll fire you.'
Threats? Of a sort. But threatening to reduce someone's business - even to force it out of business - is not a crime.
Harassment? No. There's no allegation that Chun threatened physical harm (which is part of the harassment statute). Statute also requires that the victim have a reasonable fear that the threat will be carried out, which a one-time statement probably doesn't provide. There is also an allowance in the statute for threatening one's mental health, but it's a long road from 'he threatened to put me out of business' to 'i feared for my mental health.'
Coercion? Not sure. Sorenson claims that Chun told him to take down the video "or else." It's not clear what that means. There's no claim that any physical harm or property damage was threatened. The insurance policy was already in the process of being cancelled, so that is not part of a threat. It's also unclear whether Sorenson had a legal right to make and post the video, although the narrative indicates that it was taken from a public street, so he probably did.
Blacklisting? No. Not a crime in Washington, except as related to employment. Providing poor reviews of a business would not qualify.
Blackmail? Not really. There would be a narrow pathway here (not exactly within the intent of the statute, but within its language), except that the video has already been deleted. By definition, any actions that Chun takes against Sorenson's business after the video was deleted are not in an attempt to extract a service, so the extortion statute does not apply.
Defamation, slander, libel? Probably not. For starters, libel has to be printed, so since Chun hasn't written any statements, that one is out the window. Defamation and slander both require that Sorenson prove that Chun is making statements, presented as fact, that are false and that those statements have caused him harm. Really easy way to defeat defamation and slander: "in my opinion." In truth, if Chun can show that he was not in the insurance office on the morning of Sept 29, he has a defamation and libel claim against Sorenson.
Bottom line is that, as stated in the police report, "no criminal activity at this time."
I did say that IF IF the ALLEGATION are, were true. And that I DO NOT BELIEVE the ALLEGATIONS are true.
. it is mandated at every public place in WA, OR, and CA
It was a party as his home, I assume food and something to drink was provided. You don't wear a mask in a restaurant or bar while eating or drinking, plus this was his home not a public place. So a mask is NOT required at all times in public places, and as I mentioned this was not a public place. His home, his rules, i don't see a problem with this,
I'm pretty disappointed reading those quotes, guys. Just really not what I want to see from my AD.
Let's take a look at the quote.
"I'm going to try to destroy you."
What the hell is that? Have some conviction!
"I'm going to destroy you and all you ever even considered holding dear, you piece of shit!" Much better.
Let's take a look at the quote.
"I'm going to try to destroy you."
What the hell is that? Have some conviction!
"I'm going to destroy you and all you ever even considered holding dear, you piece of shit!" Much better.
This is an impressive virus if it can tell the difference between a crowd at a private place and a crowd at a public place.
That's some damned fine lab work.
