The former close associates of Stathis Panagiotopoulos are going against their close associate of almost 14 years. After the televised "apologies" and the constant effort to convince that they did not know the slightest thing about his three-year judicial involvement after the lawsuit of his female victim, the statements that they would support the girl, they decided to move to promote him to weight: They seek restitution for the damage and moral injury they have suffered both as individuals and their television product.
The three of Radio Arvyla, Antonis Kanakis, Giannis Servetas and Christos Kioussis have found themselves in a particularly precarious position after the revelations about Stathis Panagiotopoulos. After being forced to explain "why they put this man in everyone's homes", they were forced to say an early goodbye to the TV audience amid a storm of reactions, but despite their efforts, social media users are still expressing the belief that it was not possible for them to know that their close associate was acting in a harassing manner towards women; moreover, this was confirmed by the complaint of a former employee of the TV production. Today they took the next step in the "disqualification" process by filing the lawsuit against Panagiotopoulos.
Former employee of "Radio Arvyla" complains: They all knew Panagiotopoulos was a harasser
The new complaint against Panagiotopoulos that saw the light of day today came from a former "Radio Arvyla" employee, who claims in a post that "they knew this guy was a slimy harasser," and also mentions the message he had sent her telling her "how good he is at oral sex." Her text was uploaded to another user's account, but was taken down a short time later. Subsequently, the employee in a communication with protothema.gr asked for her name to be removed.
Read the post:
"As a former employee of Radio Arvila I will say it, because as a woman I have said it many times and others have said it better than me.
The issue of publishing pornographic material without the knowledge of the participants obviously has many dimensions, social, psychological, legal. I want to address only one here, the one concerning the tolerance of others.
Let's assume that the other three on the panel did not know that the fourth person was posting other people's private moments on the internet without their knowledge. Since it's impossible to know whether that's really true or not, let's assume they didn't know. But I want to say, as a person who worked with them, what they did know.
They knew that the guy in question is a slimy harasser. They knew that he was hitting on everything that moved, proceeding immediately to make crude moves - crude moves if the girl in question tried to refuse in a polite manner. Because it wasn't enough to politely show that you weren't interested, as any politeness was taken as an excuse for more hitting.
They all knew that he harassed girls in the office, in the studio, wherever he stood and wherever he was. It certainly seems on the show itself over the years that it is acceptable to the rest of the show that his slimy pass to female co-workers and guest musicians.
I have many examples to give of his behavior towards me as well. Such as inviting me into the studio at the time of his radio show and while I was in the room for TV issues, to show me how the show is done and hit me on and off the air. Such as bringing me flowers "from his mother's garden", in good company and in front of my colleagues on the Arvila editorial team.
No word on how embarrassed I was, of course. When I resigned from the Arvila he approached me to offer me another job and when I agreed to meet with him to discuss it he told me point blank that I would first need to "stop by his house to show me his CD collection."
And when I left in disgust from that meeting of course he was undeterred as he sent me messages, which I never responded to, for YEARS. SMS and viber, morning or night, without me ever responding, it made no difference to "Dog".
The last message he sent me was about 4 years ago (8 years since I last saw him!!), to let me know, just in passing, about his performance in oral sex. Yes, you read that right.
So I can't tell you if they knew about his illegal acts, but I can certainly tell you that they knew about the "legal" and overt ones. The ones that are tolerated in everyday life, amidst jokes, pretending not to see and thoughts of "Come on, that's just how Stathis is". With tolerance, slanted glances and silent cover-ups, that's how the rest of us colluded with the slug.
I recognize their good intentions in general, but the cloud from which they seem to have fallen, I don't.
In the end, why not, after all, the majority of Greeks who have a friend, an acquaintance, a cousin, an uncle or a co-worker who is a slimy puffball who harasses women don't fall in line with this anyway."
Source: First Theme
Contents of this article including associated images are owned by Cyprus Times
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or Cyprus Times
Source
