After two years with the Company, Jaclyn Platten, a research analyst, loses her job in a reduction-in-force. Meg Holman, Ms. Platten's supervisor for only 60 days selected Ms. Platten based primarily on Ben Fryer's (Ms. Platten's former manager), assessment of her performance. Ms. Holman didn't know that Ms. Platten had complained to Mr. Fryer about her co-worker's unprofessional conduct, and re-buked Mr. Fryer's alleged sexual advances. After Ms. Platten was terminated, she filed a lawsuit asserting sexual harassment and retaliation. The Company denies any liability. Was it really her performance, or her report of inappropriate conduct that resulted in her being selected for the lay off? How does a "he said - she said" scenario look when presented to a jury? Is a racy cartoon ever funny when it's introduced in a courtroom? Does everyone on a jury see the same evidence through the same glasses? These are just a few of the questions that you, "a member of the jury," will experience first hand.
Welcome to Jury Duty, please rise to accept the oath for this sexual harassment trial.