We have had women on these boards in the last couple of years suggesting that yes, the problem is women --or children-- in breeches.
13 Likes
Actually asking about virginity is a relevant question. It speaks to the victim getting an added trauma if say she was saving herself for marriage or religious or when discussing injury.
4 Likes
They like it remember? Ugh shudder thinking back to those comments.
4 Likes
I canāt find the link to the comments on the OC Register article can someone pm it to me?
Ah, I had not considered that. A valid reason. Yet perhaps if the SS investigator had explained it that way, in perhaps a more sympathetic manner (?) K.D. would not have been so upset, apparently, by that question.
Disclaimer: Not any kind of legal anything; do not even clean legal offices. 
8 Likes
Question for You Legal Type Folks (with all that book learninā and such):
The civil suit includes the Orange County Fairgrounds and the Calif. State Agricultural District as defendants. It seems to imply that a lack of supervision at the Fairgrounds contributed to an environment where the predatory behavior was allowed to go unchecked.
At the time all this occurred, there really was no on-site management at the Fairgrounds. There was just a grumpy guy, Mr. Lujan, who sat in a rundown administrative office about 1/2 mile away, past all the barns, cow and sheep pens. Once in a blue moon heād drive down to the barns and hassle the trainers who were late paying their lease fees. Then off heād go. It wasnāt until years later that the place became an equestrian center with an on-site manager with an actual office right there.
Soā¦ Would the argument perhaps be that the Orange County Fairgrounds and the state of Calif./Agricultural District should have foreseen that having unsupervised female minors taking mentored instruction from men could lead to problems?
Sorry for the long post! But remembering what the place was like back then, itās something that intrigues me.
1 Like
The comment is on the CoTH article in the OP.
2 Likes
You would name anyone responsible for the show or event during which the tort occurred. Then, in the papers, each defendant is listed along with their role of responsibility laid out.
This is done to assess responsibility like the event was lacking security, that bad lighting left dark, unprotected areas, etc etc for each defendant. (For example)
If you only named the one alleged predator it may be harder to collect $$$ should you win while corporations or entities might be more financially actionable. Attaching a corporate bank account is more fruitful than trying to attach the assets (for instance) of an old guy on disability or social security which are exempt from collection.
4 Likes
Not anymore, not that I can see.
IANAL, nor do I have a huge prestigious legal team on retainer that I can go to with questions about legal matters when discussing issues on the COTH forumsā¦ 
but I will take a minute to add some relevant background information on this pointā¦
Mike Reck is the attorney representing the plaintiffs in this case. Heās also the attorney representing Jonathan Soresi and a John Doe victim in lawsuits filed in New York, suits that named George Morris, as well as USEF and Topping Riding Club as defendants. Mr Reck is also the plaintiffās attorney for Gigi Gaston in a lawsuit against USEF and Flintridge Riding Club, which pertains to abuse perpetrated by Jimmy Williams.
The Chronicle did a pretty thorough report on those suits last year. Itās worth reading to understand the logic in terms of how and why they are filing suits against these organizations, as well as the actual perpetrators of the abuse. It seems to me that this attorney is following this same pattern as the other key suits in terms of how they have named both the McDonalds and the Orange County Fairgrounds in this suit.
2 Likes
Yes, it is still there.
Go to post #1 on this thread.
Click article on COTH.
Scroll to bottom
Itās a comment under a comment, the first of about three, I believe.
1 Like
I donāt think Iām seeing what you are.
Think about who is dating who. Then consider that sometimes people use their spouseās accounts when commenting on social media.
7 Likes
Iām puzzled by this as well. The OCF property sold some years ago; most of the principals from the 1970s would be long dead.
2 Likes
Itās worth noting that Mike Reck has worked on a lot of Catholic Clergy abuse cases. There are similar dynamics involved in those cases, at times, when a Catholic school has long since closed, but abuse survivors are coming forward now with claims.
2 Likes
Yes, I see it as āpuzzlingā too, unless itās a standard legal strategy to go after Deep Pockets.
Going after Flintridge I can understand. An organized group of members oversaw JWās tenure there. In contrast, during the time of K.D.'s case, the OC fairgrounds was not much more than a huge dirt parking lot with rows of wooden barns that were once army barracks. There was only one fenced arena.
There was no assumption of an overseer who managed the goings on. Each barn supplied their own feed and mucked their own stalls. Several of the barns had professional trainers, but the rest were filled with individual boarders. People just came and went. There wasnāt any security (not even a locked entrance gate), and there certainly wasnāt any central figure keeping an eye on the interpersonal dynamics. If you had a complaint about someoneās behavior, aside from going to the police, where were you supposed to go? In retrospect, it was kind of like the Wild West.
I can understand how someone today would be aghast that there were unsupervised, minor girls running amok with their horses and ponies, with who-knows-who hanging out at those barns. Yet thatās the way it was back then. And since the organizational set-up that existed then, along with the few souls who worked in the far-flung fairgrounds admin. building are long gone, I donāt quite understand how the OC fairgrounds/ag district can be held accountable. Iām not against it, I just donāt understand it.
But Iām definitely open to being educated! 
7 Likes
Ahhhhhā¦ Ok. that one wasnāt there for me for some reason. Thank you.
3 Likes
Itās always nice to get an entity on the hook in a lawsuit. They generally have insurance, as well as deeper pockets, than an individual. I havenāt read the suit, but I am sure the argument is that the property was under the jurisdicition and oversight of the County, and, as such, the County had a duty to protect the users from harm.
Itās a little like a slip and fall: you arenāt going to sue the person with the mop, but the entity that owns the premises.
Hope this helps.
6 Likes
Iām looking for a comment about the victims āliking itā, but the first comment states:
āNo sane person would subject themselves to arbitration to be re-manipulatedā¦ā i.e. the poster is indicating that RMD may be able to gas-light the victims and wheedle his way out of charges, not that the victims āliked itā.
I think what the poster is implying is that why go through arbitration and potentially be re-victimised, when you can go through court and have the facts laid bare for the public.
Perhaps?
5 Likes
