Woman accusing Hogsett aide of sexual harassment dragged out of Indianapolis council meeting
Lauren Roberts said she took time off work and crowdfunded to raise money for a flight from her home in Denver to Indianapolis, where she lived while working for Hogsett's mayoral campaign in 2014 and 2015, so she could speak to council members.
After minutes of interruptions and a spat with Council President Vop Osili about a two-minute time limit, Osili ordered sheriff's deputies to escort Roberts out of the council chambers when she refused to stop talking. Yelling at a deputy to stop touching her, Roberts was dragged forcefully out of the council meeting while dozens of her supporters chanted, "Shame!"
The encounter overshadowed a meeting where the council ultimately voted not to approve the final payment to the law firm responsible for investigating the Hogsett administration's handling of the alleged abuse. Many councilors are questioning why the final report omitted mentions of late-night texts and messages that the mayor sent Roberts and another woman whose complaints launched the investigation.
Roberts is one of two women who alleges she was sexually harassed or assaulted by top Hogsett aide Thomas Cook and received messages from the mayor that she said made her uncomfortable.
Video captured at the meeting by reporters also depicts two sheriff's deputies pushing back Roberts' supporters, including Democratic strategist Elise Shrock, who can be heard telling a deputy to stop touching her breasts as he tries to remove her and others from the meeting who surrounded Roberts to protect her.
One deputy told Roberts to "walk like a lady" before grabbing her to remove her from the room, footage shows.
"Do you have a daughter?" Roberts asked a deputy as he approached her. Moments later, four deputies surrounded Roberts and pushed her out of the chambers.
Several councilors said after the incident they were disturbed by Roberts' removal and took issue with Osili's strict adherence to the time limit for public comments, considering the severity of Roberts' allegations.
"I've never seen anybody taken out like that," said longtime Democrat Frank Mascari, who was first elected in 2011. "I really feel terrible she was taken out that way."
Democrat Jared Evans said he was "disgusted at what just transpired."
"This is a local issue that people are protesting," Evans said. "Why they are speaking is because they have not had an outlet with which to speak to this council."
Speaking after the meeting, Osili defended his decision to ask Roberts to leave, saying she told councilors she intended to take her time in spite of the stated time limit. Her stance went against long-standing council rules, Osili said.
"When someone indicates or says that they will talk for as long as they like, it's not something that this council can stand with," Osili said.
Just before the meeting, council Democrats released a statement criticizing Hogsett's leadership and calling for several reforms, including dissolving the city's human resources department and appointing an inspector-general.
But the Democratic caucus of 18 members stopped short of saying Hogsett should resign, a belief voiced by two councilors — Democrat Andrew Nielsen and Democratic socialist Jesse Brown — and dozens of people who attended the June 9 council meeting.
"Public trust is a sacred obligation continuously earned through principled moral leadership and responsible governance," the statement from the council's Democratic caucus said. "The mayor's past and recent conduct has compromised that trust and weakened the moral authority of the office. His actions are inconsistent with the ethical expectations we hold for ourselves and one another as stewards of this great city's future."
'We won't allow facts to be buried': Hogsett investigative report omissions raise concerns, Republicans call for additional details
An outside law firm's investigative report, presented to the City-County Council's investigative committee May 29, found that Hogsett's administration acted within the law during investigations of Cook's alleged misconduct. Three women told IndyStar that Cook sexually harassed them while he was their supervisor, and one said that Cook sexually assaulted her.
The report compiled by the Chicago-based law firm Fisher Phillips raised concerns about why Cook was allowed to stay on as the mayor's chief of staff for 68 days following a 2020 city investigation that found Cook had violated city policy.
Days later, an IndyStar story raised questions about factual contradictions in the law firm's probe and the omission of suggestive late-night texts that Hogsett sent two of Cook's alleged victims, Caroline Ellert and Roberts.
All but one councilor — Democrat Ron Gibson, who released a statement before the meeting backing the law firm's report and the mayor's leadership — ultimately voted Monday night to postpone a vote on the additional $300,000 owed to Fisher Phillips for the $450,000 investigation.
"Fisher Phillips did exactly what they were hired to do: they reviewed all evidence provided within the scope of the investigative committee's authority and authored a report that included all the information they deemed relevant given their significant expertise," Gibson said in a statement. "That report was clear: Mayor Hogsett followed all applicable law and policy whenever an issue was reported to him."
The council's Administrative and Finance Committee will hear public comment on the report in its next hearing on June 17 at 5:30 p.m. A few council members vowed to listen to the women's testimony during that upcoming committee meeting.
"I promise, whoever the victims are, they can speak 10, 15, 20 minutes," Mascari said.
The council Democrats said they would soon introduce a proposal that would, among other changes, establish an independent human resources board to replace the city's current human resources division and make the Office of Equal Opportunity an independent agency. They also called to update all anti-harassment, anti-discrimination, retaliation and non-fraternization policies.
Dozens of people came to the meeting to call for Hogsett's resignation, saying his leadership and interactions with young women employees show that he presides over a problematic workplace culture.
Maggie Adams-McBride, a former Hogsett administration employee who recently resigned after she said her harassment complaint against a mayoral appointee was mishandled, called on the mayor to resign, and for voters to hold Osili accountable at the ballot box for silencing Roberts.
Wearing a white T-shirt with the words "Bye Hogsett" drawn with black marker, near east side resident Brianna Dines said she's believed the mayor should resign since IndyStar first reported the allegations against Cook in July 2024.
Megan Alderman, a north side resident who also believes Hogsett should resign, said the mayor's texts asking if Roberts' boyfriend knew how "feisty" she is sent a chill down her spine. The messages remind her of past instances of sexual harassment she says she has experienced.
"There was something so inappropriate, something so deeply wrong," Alderman said.
Lawrence City Councilor Kristie Krone, who campaigned for Hogsett in 2023 before learning of the allegations against Cook, said the mayor should have pushed out his top aide as soon as an internal 2020 investigation discovered his alleged misconduct.
Now, she said, Hogsett should resign so the city can work to restore its ethical standards.
"It's not just politics. It's not just stupid stuff that goes on at work that you talk about at the water cooler," Krone said. "You are the leader of our city and you work for us. He's got to understand that the decisions that he makes (reflect on) who we are as a city."
Email IndyStar Reporter Jordan Smith at JTsmith@gannett.com. Follow him on X: @jordantsmith09
This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Woman alleging sexual harassment by Hogsett aide dragged out of council meeting
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
19 minutes ago
- Axios
Colorado lawmakers tap reserve, end tax breaks to fill budget gap
Democratic leaders at the state Capitol outlined plans Tuesday to increase taxes, cut services and tap reserve funds to close a $1 billion budget hole spurred by President Trump's "big, beautiful bill." State of play: The legislation will generate fierce debate about how the state should manage its money when lawmakers return Thursday for a special legislative session. The core of the Democratic plan eliminates a handful of corporate tax breaks worth a combined $300 million to $400 million. The five-bill package will limit the business tax deduction, remove corporate tax breaks on foreign-sold goods and crack down on corporate profit shifting to tax haven countries. The intrigue: The most controversial proposal is lowering the state's 15% financial reserve by $200 million to $300 million, dropping it to 13% at a time when fiscal analysts are warning about a potential recession. Yes, but: Those moves are not enough to close a roughly $750 million gap. Instead, lawmakers will punt $300 million in spending cuts to balance the $44 billion state budget to the governor in consultation with the legislative Joint Budget Committee in the coming weeks. The governor is expected to move quickly to implement cuts by Sept. 1. What they're saying: "We're looking forward to rolling up our sleeves and making sure we can maintain strong fiscal stewardship here in Colorado," Gov. Jared Polis told Axios Denver in a recent interview. Between the lines: More than most states, Colorado is susceptible to changes in federal taxes because they affect state income taxes. The federal tax bill, known as H.R. 1, reduced the state's individual and corporate income taxes by an estimated $1.2 billion, according to the governor's office. The other side: Republican state lawmakers are touting the cuts from Trump's tax bill and pushing back against Democratic efforts to generate new tax revenue, suggesting spending cuts are what is most needed. Sen. Byron Pelton (R-Sterling) plans to introduce legislation requiring voter approval for any bill that changes state tax liability caused by federal tax law. What's next: Beyond the budget, Democratic lawmakers also plan to introduce legislation to stabilize the state's health care marketplaces amid projections that thousands of residents could lose their insurance and enable Planned Parenthood to accept Medicaid payments.
20 minutes ago
Minnesota sues TikTok, alleging it preys on young people with addictive algorithms
ST. PAUL, Minn. -- Minnesota on Tuesday joined a wave of states suing TikTok, alleging the social media giant preys on young people with addictive algorithms that trap them into becoming compulsive consumers of its short videos. 'This isn't about free speech. I'm sure they're gonna holler that," Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison said at a news conference. "It's actually about deception, manipulation, misrepresentation. This is about a company knowing the dangers, and the dangerous effects of its product, but making and taking no steps to mitigate those harms or inform users of the risks.' The lawsuit, filed in state court, alleges that TikTok is violating Minnesota laws against deceptive trade practices and consumer fraud. It follows a flurry of lawsuits filed by more than a dozen states last year alleging the popular short-form video app is designed to be addictive to kids and harms their mental health. Minnesota's case brings the total to about 24 states, Ellison's office said. Many of the earlier lawsuits stemmed from a nationwide investigation into TikTok launched in 2022 by a bipartisan coalition of attorneys general from 14 states into the effects of TikTok on young users' mental health. Ellison, a Democrat, said Minnesota waited while it did its own investigation. Sean Padden, a middle-school health teacher in the Roseville Area school district, joined Ellison, saying he has witnessed a correlation between increased TikTok use and an 'irrefutable spike in student mental health issues,' including depression, anxiety, anger, lowered self-esteem and a decrease in attention spans as they seek out the quick gratification that its short videos offer. The lawsuit comes while President Donald Trump is still trying to broker a deal to bring the social media platform, which is owned by China's ByteDance, under American ownership over concerns about the data security of its 170 million American users. While Trump campaigned on banning TikTok, he also gained more than 15 million followers on the platform since he started sharing videos on it. No matter who ultimately owns TikTok, Ellison said, it must comply with the law. TikTok disputed Minnesota's allegations. 'This lawsuit is based on misleading and inaccurate claims that fail to recognize the robust safety measures TikTok has voluntarily implemented to support the well-being of our community," company spokesperson Nathaniel Brown said in a statement. "Teen accounts on TikTok come with 50+ features and settings designed to help young people safely express themselves, discover and learn. "Through our Family Pairing tool, parents can view or customize 20+ content and privacy settings, including screen time, content filters, and our time away feature to pause a teen's access to our app,' Brown added. Minnesota is seeking a declaration that TikTok's practices are deceptive, unfair or unconscionable under state law, a permanent injunction against those practices, and up to $25,000 for each instance in which a Minnesota child has accessed TikTok. Ellison wouldn't put a total on that but said, 'it's a lot.' He estimated that 'hundreds of thousands of Minnesota kids' have TikTok on their devices. 'We're not trying to shut them down, but we are insisting that they clean up their act,' Ellison said. 'There are legitimate uses of products like TikTok. But like all things, they have to be used properly and safely.'
28 minutes ago
US appeals court blocks New Mexico's 7-day waiting period on gun purchases
SANTA FE, N.M. -- A panel of federal appellate judges ruled Tuesday that New Mexico's seven-day waiting period on gun purchases likely infringes on citizens' Second Amendment rights, putting the law on hold pending a legal challenge. The ruling by the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sends the case back to a lower court. New Mexico's waiting period went into effect in May 2024, and does hold an exception for concealed permit holders. 'Cooling-off periods do not fit into any historically grounded exceptions to the right to keep and bear arms, and burden conduct within the Second Amendment's scope,' wrote Judge Timothy Tymkovich in the split 2-1 ruling. 'We conclude that New Mexico's Waiting Period Act is likely an unconstitutional burden on the Second Amendment rights of its citizens. In a dissenting opinion, Judge Scott Matheson said New Mexico's waiting period 'establishes a condition or qualification on the commercial sale of arms that does not serve abusive ends.' The National Rifle Association and Mountain States Legal Foundation, an advocacy group for gun rights, filed the lawsuit on behalf of two New Mexico residents, citing concerns about delayed access to weapons for victims of domestic violence and others. Democratic state lawmakers had enacted the restrictions in hopes of ensuring more time for the completion of federal background checks on gun buyers. In a statement, Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham expressed 'deep disappointment' and said Tuesday's ruling was likely to cost lives. 'New Mexico's waiting period law was carefully crafted to minimize gun violence while respecting Second Amendment rights,' said Lujan Grisham, highlighting additional exceptions for gun purchases by law enforcement officers and transactions between immediate family members. 'Waiting periods prevent impulsive acts of violence and suicide, giving people time to step back and reassess their emotions during moments of crisis.' —-
