They just want the higher bar for evidence so that people would have a slim to none chance of being banned. Apparently not being able to horse show = prison to some people.
11 Likes
I think in their world, important, wealthy, charming people (which they believe themselves to be) tend to get a pass from law enforcement. I wish I thought they were wrong.
9 Likes
There’s a “yes but” there. That could be a huge roll of the dice, with the life of the accused. But - they would get due process!
But I think chucking it all to LE would be a risk in the metoo era. Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein, Matt Lauer, et. al. probably thought they were unreachable, too. And they were right for a very long time - until they weren’t, anymore.
However, some of the rhetoric from these anti-SS people is right out of the early 70’s. Back when people were arguing if there was such a thing as ‘rape’. And child abuse hadn’t yet become part of the public discussion. And children were told fiercely never to speak up and embarrass someone that everyone enjoyed looking up to.
3 Likes
This poster - which you so kindly refer me to - live in a society where you’re presumed innocent till proved otherwise in a court of law!
A society in which you unlike the American court system cannot plea bargain your way out of trouble in any kind of way. It is a world of difference.
If you had cared to read previous posts of mine on this topic you’d see I am like the first in line to claim it could be ok to accept some collateral damage in regards to complete innocent people when on a quest to clean up the sport.
I find it difficult to understand what you are trying to say. Your point is lost to me.
Perhaps the non-stop fireworks are affecting my comprehension of the English language. :o
7 Likes
Many on here who advocate for “innocent until proven guilty” are forgetting that there Is a statute of limitation, and it’s usually ten years. These guys cannot be arrested on probable cause and they remain in the public with the likelihood (if they are guilty) of sexual misconduct with other minors. Removing them from the sport subsequent to a thorough investigation is the only way to try to help the minors in the sport. And keep in mind that these guys are STILL free to prey on minors even after the ban, but at least parents are made aware.
Having a chance to appeal and clear one’s name is fair, given the alternative of no remedy at all for the victim. Someone who is innocent would serve himself or herself better by publicly acknowledging and supporting the importance and purpose of SS while cooperating with the process and moving confidently forward through an appeal.
26 Likes
This bears repeating.
19 Likes
Except in this case there is no presumption of innocence at this point. They have been found to have engaged in sexual misconduct with minors. End of.
They don’t need to go through a court of law to face professional consequences of misconduct. Lawyers, teachers, doctors, stockbrokers…people in all kinds of professions lose their licenses and their right to practice due to misconduct all the time, without ever setting foot in a courtroom.
31 Likes
Why is this so difficult for some people to understand?
17 Likes
What country doesn’t allow for plea bargains and where does one not get fired from a job or have their professional license suspended until after a trial court has found them guilty?
7 Likes
In the United States, prosecutors have an enormous amount of power and also discretion. This includes the power to hold someone in jail before the trial, in some cases for years before the trial, in some cases for longer than the sentence would be for the alleged crime… if you get enough continuances.
Among other things, they sometimes use this power to force plea bargains from people who are not guilty, including people who would likely win if their case got to trial. Of course, this power works strongest on people without a lot of resources - the people whose kids will go to foster care if they are in prison, the people whose attorneys are overworked and don’t have an open schedule, the people whose families have no income if their breadwinner is in jail.
Not to mention the possibility that you might not survive the arrest, of course.
But all that stuff happens to Other People, right?
17 Likes
The rich and powerful who own or ride are already lawyer-ed up and the people who train the rich and powerful likely also train the lawyers of the rich and powerful who make up much of the H/J and Dressage elite, so bringing lawyers and the legal system into it just puts them in a position of power and there are many who can exercise undue influence on the legal system to have charges dropped, in the event of “an official trial”. Without name dropping, I did some digging into one of the AFE supporters who stands with George and found a bunch of - nothing overly serious - dismissed traffic charges attached to their name that would be annoying inconveniences to trouble them later down the line. These dismissals were likely due to the person’s social status in the local Who’s Who, which would give them social connections to the prosecutor’s office in the locality in which they reside.
6 Likes
The criminal courts are used for criminal violation of state or federal laws, and can result in fines or incarceration.
You don’t have the choice to opt in or opt out of those laws.
When you voluntarily join the USEF, you voluntarily agree to a code of conduct that overlaps somewhat, but not perfectly, with criminal statutes. In the case of child sex abuse, SS automatically notifies the criminal justice system if the incident was within the statute of limitations. If the incident is not within the criminal statute of limitations, or if the criminal prosecutors think the evidence is not strong enough to pursue (given the higher standard of evidence), then SS investigates, and if the respondent wants to protest his innocence, the case goes before a retired judge instead of a current judge for adjudication.
I agree with you that the respondent should be presumed innocent until after the arbitration upholds the sanction, or until he declines to appeal, which is the equivalent of pleading guilty.
How do you not get that the adjudication of allegations of violation of the code of conduct voluntarily agreed to by the participant is NOT exactly the same as the adjudication of the violation of state and federal laws?
The arbitration is not a criminal trial, but it is the analogous adjudication establishing guilt.
@BigMama1 As before, I am NOT saying that the allegations should be kept secret until after the adjudication.
4 Likes
I do not think the appeal is comparable to a guilty plea. It is comparable to the appeal phase, following the rendering of the verdict.
That’s why it’s called an appeal. Because it’s appealing the decision.
11 Likes
You’re letting facts get in the way of someone’s alternate facts.
9 Likes
I doubt Ghislaine Maxwell is going to get off.
1 Like
Maybe not get off totally, but she will sing for a shorter sentence or try for immunity if the evidence she holds has enough weight.
5 Likes
She’s already being set up for an early demise.
Just reported that she is COVID-109 positive…
4 Likes
Did you see the statement of Dan Hill in response to the AES statement?
SS makes a finding based on its investigation. Their finding is that “the allegations are credible” and based on the finding of the allegations bring credible, SS hands down the sanction.
If the respondent thinks the sanction is inappropriate, either because he professes innocence or because he thinks the sanction is too harsh for the misconduct, he can appeal the sanction imposed by SS.
The word “appeal” is more general that the narrow sense of appealing the verdict in a trial. So yes, it’s an appeal of the decision of SS to issue a lifetime ban, but not an appeal of a verdict. SS conducts the investigation and decides on the sanction, but does not adjudicate. If the respondent thinks the sanction unfair for either reason, he asks for the third party adjudication by the arbitrator.
1 Like
She ain’t getting immunity.