In legal theory, there are important reasons that statutes of limitations exist for almost all crimes–and none of them are 50+ years long (with the exception of murder). A main reason is that for an accused to defend himself/herself, s/he needs access to witnesses, documentary evidence, etc. around the time of the crime. When you are getting 50 years out, most of the possible witnesses will have died or will be un-locatable. That is fundamentally unfair to the accused.
I don’t know how old you are, but I’m in my 50’s. Suppose some tribunal accused me of assault and battery 35 years ago by shoving someone during a spat in high school. I’d be in a position of saying, (1) that doesn’t sound like something I’d do; but (2) I don’t remember much about high school; (3) I barely remember any kids from high school and certainly couldn’t find them now to be witnesses for me.
People generally understand the rationale for statutes of limitations when it comes to other crimes, but then when it comes to sexual harassment, they are willing to throw legal safeguards out the window.
All of that said, I don’t know anything about GM’s past conduct, and I am troubled when anyone thinks he has license to bully and belittle other people (I’ve certainly had bosses like that), let alone take advantage of them sexually.
I would be very interested to see if this ends up in a court of law.
Misconduct is pretty broad.
I’m not supporting his behavior. I don’t think there is a single person who thinks GM is some saint. But I also think it’s really important to make sure people understand that there is more than just sexual assault that is banned by SS.
SafeSport does their complete investigation and issues their decision, in this case a lifetime ban. The person then has the option of appealing the decision of SafeSport in front of an arbitrator. The appeal can address either the validity of the incidents that led to the ban, or admit the incidents occurred and dispute the severity of the sanction.
SafeSport can issue an interim ban while the investigation is underway if it thinks that minors are currently in jeopardy.
Wasn’t saying it wasn’t. Just was saying that immediately calling him a pedophile (which others on this thread have called him) is really jumping the gun.
If I haven’t said it earlier, I will say it now; I am not surprised at SS’s findings on GM. It was a matter of time, IMO, until his past caught up with him.
Everything “banned” by SafeSport that would warrant someone permanently ineligible status is of a serious, sexual nature.
People are more confused than ever because of the Minor Athlete Abuse Prevention (MAAP) policies. The MAAP policies are guidelines in place to protect both minors and adults from venturing into high-risk situations. SafeSport does not hand down permanently ineligible sanctions for not following MAAP guidelines.
Page 29 of the policies outlines all the possible sanctions one might receive after an investigation into alleged sexual misconduct is completed, ranging from a warning to permanently ineligible. Below I have quoted the considerations used when determining the appropriate sanction:
Factors relevant to determining appropriate sanctions include, without limitation: 1. The Respondent’s prior history; 2. A pattern of inappropriate behavior or misconduct; 3. The ages of individuals involved; 4. Whether the Respondent poses an ongoing and/or potential threat to the safety of others; 5. Respondent’s voluntary disclosure of the offense(s), acceptance of responsibility for the misconduct, and/or cooperation in the Center’s process; 6. Real or perceived impact of the incident on the Claimant, NGB(s), LAO(s), USOC, or the sporting community; 7. Whether given the facts and circumstances that have been established, continued participation in the Olympic Movement is appropriate; and/or 8. Other mitigating and aggravating circumstances. Any single factor, if severe enough, may be sufficient to justify the sanction(s) imposed.
SafeSport also does not always handle sanctions for instances of emotional/physical misconduct, instead fielding those cases to the National Governing Bodies in many instances (source: https://uscenterforsafesport.org/wp-…-Process-2.pdf).
Bottom line: if someone is handed down a lifetime ban because of misconduct with a minor, there is strong evidence that it was not benign behavior.
It goes back further than that. After Jimmy Williams, the next BNT of that era was GM and it was speculated that he would be next. When lesser BNT’s were named , it appeared that USEF was, in some way looking the other way on GM. He’s Top Gun for them and USET, after all.
Note: I’m saying it APPEARED that way, not saying that USEF actually did.
This has been a shocking couple of years for any humans who were living in the bubble of having not been victimized as young athletes. As a relative newcomer to the sport, I’m always taken aback by how many posters are unsurprised when such accusations come out. Reading more about these suspensions and also those in other sports is really horrifying.
There may be certain cultural or environmental factors that make equestrian sports especially prone to this type of misconduct, but it also seems no sport is blameless these days.
It does seem that unless we actively seek out stories of these abuses from other sports, or they are unspeakably heinous or involve culturally important figures (Nassar, Sandusky) they don’t often come to the forefront of the national consciousness.
While I am sorry to hear of another icon of the sport has been found to have committed sexual misconduct with a minor, and upset to hear another icon of the sport come to his defense, I do think it is important that GM has been suspended, and hopefully reflects the impact and scope these investigations can have and will continue to have in the future.
I do have a question about the SafeSport process which remains after going over the very helpful flowchart posted earlier on this thread.
How does the “interim” list relate to the other two (banned and suspensions)? Are those cases that have been decided but are being appealed, or do they only chose some cases to publicly list during the investigations, I am assuming if GM had been listed on the safe sport Interim list it would have been posted about sooner.
The courage of the victim(s) to report is inspiring. My support goes out to them.
I’m really interested in the fact that the NYT was already looking into GM before this, so obviously, there was smoke billowing already. So curious to know what they triggered their interest.
@MissCoco I had a similar question as you. My guess at this point, and it’s a guess, is that the allegations are different nature do to the nature, access to young children, etc.
It’s the same reporter as the JW story, which was an excellent piece of journalism. I’ll be very interested in what she says.
@MissCoco The actual SafeSport code lays it out very in-depth. I’d recommend reading pages 21-30 for more info on the initial investigation and sanction process. Arbitration rules start on page 31.
I have been vocal online in the aftermath of Rob Gage, during which time several people reached out to me mentioning their involvement with the George Morris investigation (people on both sides of the debate). It seems the investigation had been going on behind the scenes for quite awhile before SafeSport’s announcement yesterday.
Something that was said to me quite a lot was, “you’d be surprised how many people are under investigation that you don’t know about.”
Of course, I’d take this with a grain of a salt, as I’m sharing third party hearsay delivered to me by people with generally emotional responses towards SafeSport.
First, highly recommend reading the Rob Gage thread, especially the last quarter of it. Basically the situation went from “Oh I know he ‘dated’ a 17 year old decades ago and that must have been what they suspended him for” to what turned out to be several girls known to SafeSport and some not, one girl as young as 13, and one of them having a letter from Gage in his own hand where he admitted to his behavior.
Second, check out the posts by FiSk123, who is a journalist from figure skating. She has given several bits of background information and data compilation on SafeSport.
SafeSport is not banning people for old infractions based on one anonymous accusation. Everyone banned turns out to have some very very serious misconduct that is well supported by evidence from multiple sources, beyond a single person’s verbal testimony.
It hurts to hear that someone you respected or trusted may have hurt other people so badly. After watching the evidence drip out about Rob Gage, Jimmy Williams, and even figure skater John Coughlin, I think people would be wise to assume that in fact SafeSport has acted based on very clear evidence of serious misconduct, and probably some incident that the observer knows nothing about.
