Former JP Morgan employee Chirayu Rana, who filed sexual abuse case against Lorna Hajdini under the pseudonym John Doe is ‘socially awkward’ and but still someone who met the bank’s performance expectations.
During the internal investigations, one of the former colleague described Rana, a former basketball player and Rutgers graduate, as “socially awkward” but someone who “met the requirements” to remain at the bank, a New York Post report said.
The report further said, Hajdini and Rana were simply colleagues on the leveraged finance team, which works on large corporate acquisitions, mergers, and buyouts.
Sources close to the development, told Post, Hajdini reported to managing director Brandon Graffeo, while Rana was supervised by another managing director, Jon Wolter - that indicates Hajdini did not have any power to influence his bonus amount.
“He has tarnished her with a complete fabrication,” another colleague told the Post.
According to sources, he lodged an internal complaint in May 2025, alleging race- and gender-based harassment and abuse of power, and later sought a multi-million payout as part of an exit from the company.
What is the JP Morgan sexual abuse row?
According to a Daily Mail report, a former Asian coworker of Hajdini claimed that he was subjected to months of racial discrimination and sexual assault. The man, in a lawsuit, claimed that Hajdini even visited his house and abused him while he pleaded with her to stop.
According to the lawsuit, the man alleged that the misconduct began in 2024. He claimed the first encounter happened when the exec dropped a pen and grabbed him as she picked it up. “Oh, you did play basketball in college? … I love basketball players… they get me so wet,” she allegedly remarked.
The accuser claimed that the exec drugged him on an occasion and took advantage of him. She allegedly made suggestive moves and derogatory remarks not just about the man, but also about his wife.
JPMorgan strongly denied all of the claims
A bank spokesperson declined to comment on Doe’s identity, adding that a comprehensive internal review by HR and in-house legal teams—including an examination of team phone records and emails—found no evidence to back the allegations.
“Following an investigation, we don’t believe there’s any merit to these claims,” the spokesperson said. “While numerous employees cooperated with the investigation, the complainant refused to participate and has declined to provide facts that would be central to support his allegations.”
