Aer reading this case, and careful consideration of the facts presented, I wish to make a case in favor of
Ms. Elyse Roberts claims against the District of Columbia regarding the issue of sexual harassment in this
case. I wish to demonstrate, with the facts that are presented, testimonies and legal precedence; that
sexual harassment as it is defined by the law, had indeed occurred. First, I wish to present all the facts. I
wish to present the time line in which the events in question occurred. And I wish to emphasize the
personal and professional e)ects to Ms. Roberts, as a consequence of those events in question. I will
show how the inappropriate actions of her colleague, Mr. Kevin Murphy antagonized and created this
unprofessional, negative, and stressful work environment. And how his actions, done on various
occasions; could by law be defined as a clear form of sexual harassment. I will present the testimonies of
the various witnesses. On that I will build a case of the character or lack thereof, of Mr. Kevin Murphy.
And %nally, when all the facts and testimonies are presented, I wish to present the legal precedence that
came before; and from that, state my case saying that the incident in question; without a shadow of a
doubt was sexual harassment.
For my introduction to this case, I wish to present the facts, the people and the timeline of the events in
question. Elyse Roberts upon her graduation from law school in May, 1987; began her employment as an
Assistant District A0orney (ADA) with the O3ce of the District A0orney of the District of Columbia on
August 1, 1987. The O3ce of the District A0orney is a practice made up of 120 a0orneys, and a support
sta) of 175. Her %rst assignment was to the o3ce of the, Intake and Misdemeanor Bureau. This is the
customary beginning for all newcomers who come into the practice. Aer her %rst six months, on
