George Morris on the SS list

[hut-ho78]

Reading the procedures, it is possible to have a hearing prior to resolution but it has to be requested along with the person accused cooperating in the process. So if someone gets the initial notice and email and text can be considered written notice, if they immediately say they want to cooperate and during cooperation, ask for a hearing, then it appears to happen. There is no cross questioning but questions can be submitted for the investigative parties to ask.

It seems that if someone ignores the process or doesn’t cooperate then they can only wait until the time to request an arbitration hearing. An attorney acting as advisor would have to switch gears from the mindset of a criminal case to a civil hearing. SafeSport sounds more like a permit and permit violation hearing where one would almost be served by grabbing an environmental attorney or someone familiar with civil procedures for permitting and violations as well instead of a criminal attorney unless they did commit the crime and would be foolish not to have a criminal attorney. Or they can just read the procedures with any attorney they choose, early on. I think it’s a mindset shift and with possible criminal charges, anything said in any hearing will be submitted to a criminal investigation, it makes it really interesting what the best advice would be. Say nothing and fight the ban in the public throwing all that money from sponsors to elected officials to change the procedures? Deny deny deny yet if actually culpable risk falsifying a federal government document which is a felony? I’m familiar with civil permitting for environmental permits at local, state, and federal level and with responding to violations. It is interesting because when a minor permit violation heads into criminal activity from someone telling falsehoods or the nature of the violation the whole world changes and I’m not very familiar with that as the lawyers took over.

I’m reading his book and it’s kind of sad because he was put into a young adults with unlimited party money as a kid because of his talent. His first encounter was with a much older woman. Not a good environment for kids. We need to do better.

[YankeeDuchess]

@roseymare

What exactly do they feel is unfair? Is that answered anywhere?

I was in the SafeSport Overhaul group for a few days. It is the usual incoherent ranting about “unconstitutional” and “no due process”.

I posted a reply saying that “due process” is not a zero/one thing, instead it is a continuum with, say, the level of due process of zero for a 1930’s lynch mob up to level 10 due process for the US criminal justice system. On this continuum, say SafeSport is a five.

My point was that useful and potentially achievable reform might be achieved by identifying one or two or three specific changes that would move SafeSport from a 5 to a 6 or a 7. Doesn’t matter if you want to say that SafeSport now is a 2 or an 8. The point is that the useful discussion is how to move up the ladder one or two steps.

The are legitimate reasons that SafeSport was designed with a level of due process less than the due process of the criminal justice system. No reform will be achieved by continuing to scream “No due process”.

My assessment was that most people just want to bash SafeSport. Kathy Hobsetter may want reform, but as her Gofundme statement illustrates, she is not running the group in a way that can produce coherent, specific suggests for improvement.

I quit the group after being scolded by Kathy in a PM for correcting a poster on the age of consent in the US since 1920. The poster provided a link to a Wikipedia article, and stated that the article said that as of 1920, most states had an AOC of 14.
Me: No, it says that as of 1920 most states had age of consent of 16-18.
OP: No, it says that feminists “wanted” to raise the AOC to 16 to 18.
Me: Here is the direct quote in the Wikipedia article that you posted which says that when Georgia raised the AOC to 14 in 1918, it was then the only state with age of consent lower than 16-18.
Kathy scolded me for contradicting the OP, and said that everyone was entitled to their opinion.
I left.

[Tiramit]

@LexInVA

I believe he’s been here for about a decade and only popped up on people’s radar a few years ago, when he was showing himself in conjunction with Riverchase Farm’s clients, after taking over the business. If he was hanging around here before that, he’d been completely on the sidelines and under-the-radar.

It seems like I’ve heard negative stories about him for, oh about 6-7 years, but these have been of the “lack of business and management skills” variety and how he’s wasting a gold mine of a location. RC always seems to come up in conversations where people sit around and gossip over drinks or sitting in the stands about making money on lessons in the horse business. His sexual predator status was news when first mentioned on the RG thread.

Having said that, I’ve never met him and, since I have my own place, have had no need to visit RC in recent years.

[Mosey_2003]

@vineyridge

And Harry Chamberlin and Gordon Wright. I was under the impression that GM was molded by Wright. If he started in Connecticut there was a very famous school for young riders there but I forget the name.

Looked it up. It is the New Canaan Mounted Horse Troop, founded and run by Margaret Cabell Self in GM’s time. She was a very prolific writer of horse books, most for children. Since GM is from New Canaan, it’s very likely that he got his start in horses with her.

I know I’m about 8 pages behind here, but catching up after the weekend. I’m reading that book of his now, and that’s part of the first bit, he did ride there at first. But he says he didn’t stay there longer than he had to because it wasn’t enough riding and was too much marching and other stuff, so moved on to a private riding club.

[Jenerationx]

[quote=“YankeeDuchess,post:2468,top![](c:460643”]

I quit the group after being scolded by Kathy in a PM for correcting a poster on the age of consent in the US since 1920. The poster provided a link to a Wikipedia article, and stated that the article said that as of 1920, most states had an AOC of 14.
Me: No, it says that as of 1920 most states had age of consent of 16-18.
OP: No, it says that feminists “wanted” to raise the AOC to 16 to 18.
Me: Here is the direct quote in the Wikipedia article that you posted which says that when Georgia raised the AOC to 14 in 1918, it was then the only state with age of consent lower than 16-18.
Kathy scolded me for contradicting the OP, and said that everyone was entitled to their opinion.
I left.

[/quote]

WOW! It looks like Kathy needs a dictionary.

fact
/fakt/
[IMG]https://www.chronofhorse.com/forum/core/image/svg xml;base64,PHN2ZyB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcvMjAwMC9zdmciIHhtbG5zOnhsaW5rPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy8xOTk5L3hsaW5rIiB3aWR0aD0iMzIiIGhlaWdodD0iMzIiIHZpZXdCb3g9IjAgMCAzMiAzMiI CiAgPGRlZnM CiAgICA8cG9seWdvbiBpZD0ic21hbGwtdmlzZW1lLXYzLWEiIHBvaW50cz0iMCAwIDMyIDAgMzIgMzIgMCAzMiIvPgogIDwvZGVmcz4KICA8ZyBmaWxsPSJub25lIiBmaWxsLXJ1bGU9ImV2ZW5vZGQiPgogICAgPG1hc2sgaWQ9InNtYWxsLXZpc2VtZS12My1iIiBmaWxsPSIjZmZmIj4KICAgICAgPHVzZSB4bGluazpocmVmPSIjc21hbGwtdmlzZW1lLXYzLWEiLz4KICAgIDwvbWFzaz4KICAgIDx1c2UgZmlsbD0iIzQyODVGNCIgeGxpbms6aHJlZj0iI3NtYWxsLXZpc2VtZS12My1hIi8 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 CiAgICA8cGF0aCBzdHJva2U9IiM0Mjg1RjQiIHN0cm9rZS1saW5lY2FwPSJzcXVhcmUiIGQ9Ik0yNSwxMyBDMjMsMTUuMzMzMzMzMyAyMCwxNi41IDE2LDE2LjUgQzEyLDE2LjUgOSwxNS4zMzMzMzMzIDcsMTMgTDEzLDEwLjUgTDE5LDEwLjUgTDI1LDEzIFoiIG1hc2s9InVybCgjc21hbGwtdmlzZW1lLXYzLWIpIi8 CiAgICA8cG9seWdvbiBmaWxsPSIjNDI4NUY0IiBmaWxsLXJ1bGU9Im5vbnplcm8iIHBvaW50cz0iOCAxNCA3IDEzIDI1IDEzIDI0IDE0IiBtYXNrPSJ1cmwoI3NtYWxsLXZpc2VtZS12My1iKSIvPgogICAgPHBhdGggc3Ryb2tlPSIjNDI4NUY0IiBzdHJva2UtbGluZWNhcD0icm91bmQiIGQ9Ik0yMCwzIEwxNy43Njc4NzUsNS4yNTg5MjYyMiBDMTYuNzkxNSw2LjI0NzAyNDU5IDE1LjIwODUsNi4yNDcwMjQ1OSAxNC4yMzIxMjUsNS4yNTg5MjYyMiBMMTIsMyIgbWFzaz0idXJsKCNzbWFsbC12aXNlbWUtdjMtYikiLz4KICA8L2c Cjwvc3ZnPgo=)Learn to pronounce
noun
a thing that is known or proved to be true.
“he ignores some historical and economic facts” [TABLE]
[TR]
[TD]synonyms:[/TD]
[TD]reality, actuality, certainty, factuality, certitude; More[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD] [/TD]
[TD] [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

• a piece of information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article. [TABLE] [TR] [TD]synonyms:[/TD] [TD]detail, piece of information, particular, item, specific, element, point, factor, feature, characteristic, respect, ingredient, attribute, circumstance, consideration, aspect, facet;More[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]
• used in discussing the significance of something that is the case. noun: [B]the fact that[/B] "the real problem facing them is the fact that their funds are being cut"

o·pin·ion /əˈpinyən/ [IMG]https://www.chronofhorse.com/forum/core/image/svg xml;base64,PHN2ZyB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcvMjAwMC9zdmciIHhtbG5zOnhsaW5rPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy8xOTk5L3hsaW5rIiB3aWR0aD0iMzIiIGhlaWdodD0iMzIiIHZpZXdCb3g9IjAgMCAzMiAzMiI CiAgPGRlZnM CiAgICA8cG9seWdvbiBpZD0ic21hbGwtdmlzZW1lLXYzLWEiIHBvaW50cz0iMCAwIDMyIDAgMzIgMzIgMCAzMiIvPgogIDwvZGVmcz4KICA8ZyBmaWxsPSJub25lIiBmaWxsLXJ1bGU9ImV2ZW5vZGQiPgogICAgPG1hc2sgaWQ9InNtYWxsLXZpc2VtZS12My1iIiBmaWxsPSIjZmZmIj4KICAgICAgPHVzZSB4bGluazpocmVmPSIjc21hbGwtdmlzZW1lLXYzLWEiLz4KICAgIDwvbWFzaz4KICAgIDx1c2UgZmlsbD0iIzQyODVGNCIgeGxpbms6aHJlZj0iI3NtYWxsLXZpc2VtZS12My1hIi8 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 CiAgICA8cGF0aCBzdHJva2U9IiM0Mjg1RjQiIHN0cm9rZS1saW5lY2FwPSJzcXVhcmUiIGQ9Ik0yNSwxMyBDMjMsMTUuMzMzMzMzMyAyMCwxNi41IDE2LDE2LjUgQzEyLDE2LjUgOSwxNS4zMzMzMzMzIDcsMTMgTDEzLDEwLjUgTDE5LDEwLjUgTDI1LDEzIFoiIG1hc2s9InVybCgjc21hbGwtdmlzZW1lLXYzLWIpIi8 CiAgICA8cG9seWdvbiBmaWxsPSIjNDI4NUY0IiBmaWxsLXJ1bGU9Im5vbnplcm8iIHBvaW50cz0iOCAxNCA3IDEzIDI1IDEzIDI0IDE0IiBtYXNrPSJ1cmwoI3NtYWxsLXZpc2VtZS12My1iKSIvPgogICAgPHBhdGggc3Ryb2tlPSIjNDI4NUY0IiBzdHJva2UtbGluZWNhcD0icm91bmQiIGQ9Ik0yMCwzIEwxNy43Njc4NzUsNS4yNTg5MjYyMiBDMTYuNzkxNSw2LjI0NzAyNDU5IDE1LjIwODUsNi4yNDcwMjQ1OSAxNC4yMzIxMjUsNS4yNTg5MjYyMiBMMTIsMyIgbWFzaz0idXJsKCNzbWFsbC12aXNlbWUtdjMtYikiLz4KICA8L2c Cjwvc3ZnPgo=)Learn to pronounce [I]noun[/I] a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge. "I'm writing to voice my opinion on an issue of great importance" [TABLE] [TR] [TD]synonyms:[/TD] [TD]belief, judgment, thought(s), school of thought, thinking, way of thinking, mind, point of view, view, viewpoint, outlook, angle, slant, side, attitude, stance, perspective, position, standpoint; More[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE]

• the beliefs or views of a large number or majority of people about a particular thing.
• "the changing climate of opinion"
• an estimation of the quality or worth of someone or something.
• "I had a higher opinion of myself than I deserved"

[snaffle1987]

I burned my GM book in the middle of my arena over the weekend, and then when it was reduced to ash, I raked it into the footing with the tractor.

[Texarkana]

@IPEsq

I know what is actually supposed to happen. What I don’t understand is all the contradiction within BN’s statement. She is supposedly giving us a look on the inside of the procedure. Yet she simultaneously says something doesn’t happen then later says it does.

Which is why Bonnie Navin’s behavior on social media makes me wonder if she is fit and capable for practicing law. She unprofessionally shares details publicly complete with poor grammar and riddled with emotion. Then she can’t even keep her own facts straight, contradicting herself in a manner that makes her look like she is grasping at straws. To top it all off, she tags convicted sex offenders in her posts to help support her claims.

Are state bar associations really okay with their members behaving in such a manner?!?

[dannyboy]

Now George will always be a part of your riding life and you can say I stand on George rather than with him.

[SmartPak_Customer_Care]

Hi @Texarkana and @dannyboy - SmartPak here! Please know that as a company, we take SafeSport violations very seriously as they are in direct conflict with our mission of healthy horses and happy riders. We want to clear up the confusion regarding our association with Tom Navarro and River Chase Farm, since it’s been mentioned here a couple of times. SmartPak does not currently, nor have we ever, sponsored Tom Navarro or River Chase Farm. We appreciate you drawing our attention to River Chase Farm’s unauthorized use of our logo on their Sponsors page. Having reviewed it, we found that this was seemingly a copied image of an outdated corporate logo that has not been use for several years. We also see that, in any case, the unauthorized logo has now been removed from River Chase Farm’s website. If you have any additional questions or concerns, please feel free to reach out to our Customer Care Team at 1-800-461-8898 or CustomerCare@SmartPak.com and one of our team members would be happy to help. – the SmartPak Team

[Texarkana]

@SmartPak Customer Care

Hi @Texarkana and @dannyboy - SmartPak here! Please know that as a company, we take SafeSport violations very seriously as they are in direct conflict with our mission of healthy horses and happy riders. We want to clear up the confusion regarding our association with Tom Navarro and River Chase Farm, since it’s been mentioned here a couple of times. SmartPak does not currently, nor have we ever, sponsored Tom Navarro or River Chase Farm. We appreciate you drawing our attention to River Chase Farm’s unauthorized use of our logo on their Sponsors page. Having reviewed it, we found that this was seemingly a copied image of an outdated corporate logo that has not been use for several years. We also see that, in any case, the unauthorized logo has now been removed from River Chase Farm’s website. If you have any additional questions or concerns, please feel free to reach out to our Customer Care Team at 1-800-461-8898 or CustomerCare@SmartPak.com and one of our team members would be happy to help. – the SmartPak Team

Thank you for clearing this up! You guys are always quick to address these situations. This is not the first time someone of dubious character has claimed SmartPak sponsorship…

[Jealoushe]

@snaffle1987

I burned my GM book in the middle of my arena over the weekend, and then when it was reduced to ash, I raked it into the footing with the tractor.

I hope this is true :lol:

[Gainer]

@SmartPak Customer Care

Hi @Texarkana and @dannyboy - SmartPak here! Please know that as a company, we take SafeSport violations very seriously as they are in direct conflict with our mission of healthy horses and happy riders. We want to clear up the confusion regarding our association with Tom Navarro and River Chase Farm, since it’s been mentioned here a couple of times. SmartPak does not currently, nor have we ever, sponsored Tom Navarro or River Chase Farm. We appreciate you drawing our attention to River Chase Farm’s unauthorized use of our logo on their Sponsors page. Having reviewed it, we found that this was seemingly a copied image of an outdated corporate logo that has not been use for several years. We also see that, in any case, the unauthorized logo has now been removed from River Chase Farm’s website. If you have any additional questions or concerns, please feel free to reach out to our Customer Care Team at 1-800-461-8898 or CustomerCare@SmartPak.com and one of our team members would be happy to help. – the SmartPak Team

Another misrepresentation (LIE) by Navarro. And people actually believe anything he says?

[Keep_it_Simple]

@roseymare

Which brings me right back to the whole “we want this to be in a criminal court” argument. No they don’t.

Because the same people arguing innocent until proven guilty don’t want to accept a guilty plea.

They just want to stick their fingers in their ears and pretend sexual abuse doesn’t exist in their little world.

Exactly. And do you think accused really want the world to know who they abused, how many they abused and what they did to them?

[anon6923113]

@SmartPak Customer Care

Hi @Texarkana and @dannyboy - SmartPak here! Please know that as a company, we take SafeSport violations very seriously as they are in direct conflict with our mission of healthy horses and happy riders. We want to clear up the confusion regarding our association with Tom Navarro and River Chase Farm, since it’s been mentioned here a couple of times. SmartPak does not currently, nor have we ever, sponsored Tom Navarro or River Chase Farm. We appreciate you drawing our attention to River Chase Farm’s unauthorized use of our logo on their Sponsors page. Having reviewed it, we found that this was seemingly a copied image of an outdated corporate logo that has not been use for several years. We also see that, in any case, the unauthorized logo has now been removed from River Chase Farm’s website. If you have any additional questions or concerns, please feel free to reach out to our Customer Care Team at 1-800-461-8898 or CustomerCare@SmartPak.com and one of our team members would be happy to help. – the SmartPak Team

A great, professional response. It’s good to know that SmartPak will step up, and follow up when folks engage in this sort of false advertising about “sponsorship.” Associating oneself with a respected, and widely trusted company like SmartPak provides a veneer of credibility. At this point, it seems quite clear that there are serious credibility issues with Tom Navarro, in addition to the Safe Sport issues.

As as for the earlier poster who was upset that these issues have been brought up on these threads? The poster who claimed that contacting companies which were listed on the River Chase Farm website as sponsors and questioning it amounted to malicious harassment of Mr Navarro of some kind?

No. Mr. Navarro has falsely represented his qualifications and endorsements to the local community and accepted money in exchange for riding lessons on the basis of qualifications he does not possess. Someone posted earlier about “letting the free market decide” who should be a coach and who shouldn’t. Indeed. Let the free market decide whether or not someone with a record as a sex offender, who also falsely represents sponsorships, as well as dubious claims about their equestrian experience and credentials (coached riders and horses to Grand Prix? :rolleyes:) - open your eyes.

[RainWeasley]

I’m reading his book now and…well, I keep highlighting bits of it so I can go back and look at it all later, there are some things said in it that are just…weird.

[snaffle1987]

@Jealoushe

I hope this is true :lol:

it very much is true

[anon6923113]

@Gainer

Another misrepresentation (LIE) by Navarro. And people actually believe anything he says?

It’s pretty fascinating how brazen this guy is. He put a lot of really obvious “embellished” stuff out there on the website. Not a smart move for someone who has a record of a sexual offense involving a minor and is trying to promote a junior oriented lesson business in the heart of horse country.

yes… some “sheeple” just accept what he puts on the website and tells them in person as true, and don’t think to question it.

Other people smell the b.s., and make a few phone calls, and then reveal it all for what it is. He should consider himself fortunate to have gotten away with it for so long.

And the whole special ops/army ranger stuff? Safe Sport will be the LEAST of this guy’s problems if he goes and spouts off about an obviously fabricated/embellished military record to the wrong person. Northern Virginia is FULL of active and retired people who have served, many of them very senior given the proximity to the Pentagon, etc, and no one cares for people who lie about their service.

[Soaponarope]

@YankeeDuchess

I quit the group after being scolded by Kathy in a PM for correcting a poster on the age of consent in the US since 1920. The poster provided a link to a Wikipedia article, and stated that the article said that as of 1920, most states had an AOC of 14.
Me: No, it says that as of 1920 most states had age of consent of 16-18.
OP: No, it says that feminists “wanted” to raise the AOC to 16 to 18.
Me: Here is the direct quote in the Wikipedia article that you posted which says that when Georgia raised the AOC to 14 in 1918, it was then the only state with age of consent lower than 16-18.
Kathy scolded me for contradicting the OP, and said that everyone was entitled to their opinion.
I left.

Actually Yankee Duchess you and Kathy are both right on this. The Wikipedia article does discuss how early feminists were behind the move to do things like raise the age of consent, change victim blaming laws like the Contagion Act (which subjected only women, not men, to undergo forced medical exams for venereal disease - any woman could be forced to undergo such an exam), and, let’s see, another law from the early nineteenth century in England which absolved men from having to provide child support to illegitimate children (this one openly sought to punish women who conceived as a deterrent to others…). Prior to this advocacy by early feminists, male politicians were quite happy with the AOC being at 12 so as to absolve themselves and their friends of child rape. During the Victorian period, amongst wealthy johns there was a practice of “purchasing” virgins to deflower. Of course, it was also early feminists who pushed for women to be admitted to law school…wonder why, right?

We should all be proud of those early feminists who, although far from perfect, gained many of us the right to bodily autonomy and to an education, not to mention a vote.

I mention this because I wonder why it matters to Kathy that feminists tried to raise the age of AOC? Of course they did. That’s something we should all be proud of as it helped curb total male privilege over… 12 year old girls and all adult women.

The idea that anyone would object to this is so beyond my ken I can’t really fathom it. Do they want to return to pre-Victorian England? In reading Unrelenting, I noticed that GM mentions that his SAT scores were so high - “with some help!” - that he was able to attend any college he wanted. How much help? from whom? To what extent has privilege informed every aspect of his life?

And my last thought is that the #metoo movement and “snowflake” mentality (where people claim their right not too be abused?) bugs people defending GM because they seem to want to have pockets of elite privilege, forgive the expression, intact. Something to look up to or aspire to perhaps? The victim blaming and #metoo bashing, the conflation of excellence and achievement with GM’s abusive and often misogynist training practices (calling women paying him what $900 for a clinic “dumb blondes”). Awful. Some people aspire to achieving an elite position because of the opportunities it holds out for them to lord it over others. Power does corrupt.

I can’t wait for the Times reporter Sarah Nir’s book, Horse Crazy, she mentioned in the podcast. That’s the one I’m buying. I thought the podcast was excellent. I also found it ironic and a bit disturbing that the podcast began with a brief rundown of Pony Finals 2019 and discussed not only its historic growth (they may need to add another day?) but the frequent defenses there of GM from … pony parents. I can’t even.

[LexInVA]

I don’t know how much of it is embellishment, but there’s a lot that just doesn’t make sense with RF, between the owners, TN, and the fact that the business is claiming - according to what’s out there - to be multi-million dollar income generating, despite other - and far more well-regarded - facilities in the immediate area only generating 1/4th the income, at best. I don’t want to speculate, but the who-is-who tied to this business makes me wonder if there’s some “additional business” that is really what’s going on, as we’re seeing with horse farms in other parts of the country.

[LexInVA]

@Texarkana

Which is why Bonnie Navin’s behavior on social media makes me wonder if she is fit and capable for practicing law. She unprofessionally shares details publicly complete with poor grammar and riddled with emotion. Then she can’t even keep her own facts straight, contradicting herself in a manner that makes her look like she is grasping at straws. To top it all off, she tags convicted sex offenders in her posts to help support her claims.

Are state bar associations really okay with their members behaving in such a manner?!?

#AFloridaWoman