O’Day’s alleged victims criticize efforts by partner to distance himself from financier

The women who said they were assaulted or harassed by Crispin O’Day in multiple incidents over a 25-year period have denounced efforts by their firm’s partners to distance themselves from the scandal-hit financier .

In the wake of a Financial Times investigation detailing decades of abuse by O’Day on female employees and acquaintances, partners at his namesake firm O’Day Asset Management said on Saturday they had put him out of business.

Subsequently, a number of financial institutions, including Morgan Stanley, Exxon, Goldman Sachs and Schroders, acted swiftly to cut ties with the hedge fund.

Oday Asset Management chief executive Peter Martin and chief operating and financial officer Michael Aday said in a statement on Saturday that Oday was leaving the partnership and would have “no financial or personal involvement” from then on.

The name of the company, which has about $4.4 billion in assets under management, will also change, according to a person familiar with the situation.

Some of the 13 women who came forward to the FT inquiry said efforts by the partners to hold O’Day accountable were too late.

One of the women, who said she was assaulted by Oude in her London townhouse after a business meeting in 2013, said: “When are people in power going to do the right thing at the right time?

“The timing is not right after significant public exposure and opinion is affecting cash flow. It’s awfully transparent that his abuse was relevant only when the bottom line was relevant.

He said: “It is positive that there are results, but when the management has not acted with integrity and intent for almost 20 years, there is collusion in it. The senior management of ODE must be held accountable and what I have done for the last 10 years Shame is felt, it should be felt.

It is unclear what mechanism the firm’s executive committee used to oust O’Day, who held a majority stake. O’Day suggested to the FT that he might oppose the move but made no further comment.

As part of the FT’s investigation, a number of women suggested that O’Day’s behavior had been “normalised” at the company.

One, who worked as a marketing assistant in the early 2010s, has said that Martin, her then boss and now chief executive, apparently told her not to agree to any shopping trips with O’Day. Said. “You were told to avoid that position,” she previously told the FT.

In response to news that O’Day was to be fired, a woman who said she was violently assaulted at her Gloucestershire mansion at Eastback Court in late 2021: “(Senior figures at the firm) are still guilty of hiding their behaviour”. And they are complex. They may have gotten rid of their tarnished heads, but they are still guilty.”

A former receptionist who was physically harassed by O’Day agreed: “It’s not enough. The partner worked for years knowing what he was doing to female employees and other women in general.” They are also complicit in my opinion.”

In a statement on Saturday announcing O’Day’s departure, O’Day Asset Management said: “We can only reiterate that the Executive Committee takes all allegations of misconduct extremely seriously and adheres at all times to its robust policies and procedures.” Has been done.”

Another former female employee, who came forward as part of the FT’s investigation, challenged the firm’s statement that it had “robust policies and procedures which have been followed at all times”.

“Again, maybe is the strong word (because) they have covered up and allowed women to continue to be abused for so long,” she said.

A law firm representing O’Day previously said the FT’s allegations against him were “strongly disputed”. Last week O’Day said that “none of the allegations have stood up in court or in the investigation”.