How does this “highlight the differences between Safesport and a legal tribunal?” A “legal tribunal” that assembles for arbitration also takes place in secret. That can be one of the advantages of arbitration in some situations. Arbitration is not as public as going to court. I’m not sure how him acknowledging these relationships took place highlights the differences between Safesport and a legal tribunal. That connection confuses me. Arbitration IS a legal tribunal. It’s not just something made up. The award is legally binding, and the arbitrators generally are legal professionals with much experience. Abritration is a form of dispute resolution just like going to court, only it takes place outside of court. However, the award is enforceable by courts. There are pros and cons to arbitration and going to court…for example…arbitration is generally faster.
We don’t neccessarily need to know what the evidence, defense, decision was. It’s not as thought we are entitled to that information.
I don’t know on what grounds GM can bring any sort of legal action against Safesport or USEF. Under certain conditions he can challenge the award (result) issues by the arbitral tribunal. I’m 99.9% sure that he consented to arbitration. It isn’t neccessarily that one signs an arbitration agreement, it is quite common for an clause for arbitration to be included in a contract. Perhaps by being a member of USEF or SafeSport one consents to arbitration.
I suspect he’ll fade a bit, and there are some limitations on him now.
So arbitration isn’t something that happens outside of the legal system. It is part of the legal system. He can challenge the award (as stated above) under certain conditions…that may not apply here. So it is binding. Nothing about this is hugely contrary to “public policy” If he didn’t agree to an arbitration clause from SafeSport…he would be limited in what he could do and it would void his USEF memebership and actions, no? There is no “getting him” “forcing” or any of that. It’s really not that exciting.
SafeSport isn’t some shady illegal operation that is looking to lay guilt under cover in dark shadows.
Plus, Safe Sport is an organization. I’m also not saying it is perfect or free from growing pains as it is relatively new, but neccessary.
I think some people (in general) are frustrated that this is noy playing out in a traditional court room setting as a criminal trial. I get that, it is what you’re primarily used to, and what feels like “real justice” but there are alternative mechanisms to settle disputes and there are just a lot of things to consider especially in respect to contracts and organizations.
A bit more than a decade ago, when I was a law firm associate, I worked on a series of arbitration matters.
As I recall, it is extremely difficult under US law to challenge the results of an arbitration hearing in court. Arguing that the panel made the wrong decision will not get you anywhere. You have to show that the panel was somehow corrupt/biased/etc.
The whole concept underlying arbitration is that it is a more streamlined, less expensive version of litigation. Allowing the losing party to appeal to a court of law would effectively eliminate those benefits, as the parties would ultimately just end up in court anyway.
Yes, this is what I meant by “under certain conditions” in respect to challenging an award. One of the benefits of arbitration is demonstrated here, as we got a fairly speedy result. Arbitration is not always less expensive, though. It is a more “customized” process, which again, can be seen as a benefit.
Yes, the concept is to avoid court, but oddly enough, some have just ended back up in court regardless. The appeal process and circumstances vary by country. One could also appeal if they felt that the tribunal didn’t have jurisdiction over the matter. So yes, there are appeals, but there are limitations.
But, as I said, he more than likely (did) consent to arbitration. So if he wasn’t okay with the process, he shouldn’t have consented. Isn’t it somewhat ironic (in a sick way, so my apologies) that the topic of consent is being brought up here…
The thing that I just don’t get - well, there’s a lot that I don’t get about the whole GM ‘thing’ - but why on earth would the ISWG folks think anyone would make up these stories of abuse?
Why would anyone leave themselves open to the kind of insults, viciousness, threats, outright hatred, etc. that is being hurled their way for even daring to suggest that GM did to them what everybody knows has been talked about for years and years? “looking for attention” doesn’t quite cut it. What possible benefit could accrue to GM’s accusers by coming forward? Future lawsuits? Book deals? What are they supposed to be getting out of lying about George?
Yes, the award is probably binding. But that doesn’t mean he can’t sue SafeSport on other grounds (i.e., defamation, IIED, constitutionality of the act, etc. Not saying these all would apply, just throwing them out as examples). That’s what I was referring to. I specifically said that I don’t think any court would be able to undo SafeSport’s decision. Signing away those other legal rights would be contrary to public policy
I don’t think this is correct. I believe that an arbitration conducted in response to a Safe Sport finding is more properly considered an administrative action, not a legal action.
There are arbitrations that arise from the legal system (criminal and civil) and these would indeed be considered legal actions.
And yes, George Morris can indeed sue USEF and Safe Sport because in our legal system, pretty much anyone can sue pretty much anybody for pretty much anything. Identifying the appropriate venue in which to file and how far the suit gets are different questions, but sure, GM can go ahead and file a lawsuit if he wants to.
I will take a stab at it, but draw a distinction between the die-hard ISWG people, and the Safe Sport is a Witch Hunt people. There is a huge overlap between the two groups, but I am personally aware of a number of folks who are agitated and upset and concerned about Safe Sport… but not publicly supporting GM, and have privately told me they think he got what he deserved.
I think that by and large, the ISWG people who are longtime HJ competitors, and actual professionals, seem to believe that the accusations which we know about (Soresi, and those from the incarcerated partner of the deceased person who was apparently also abused) are essentially a form of “sour grapes.”
Most of the ISWG people (except for the random dumb dumbs who think this involved young girls :rolleyes:) do not deny that some form of sexual activity took place between GM and the accusers… who were teenage boys and students at the time. They sidestep that aspect of it (“I never saw anything personally” “It was a different time back then” “They were students, and then employees of GM for years… and never reported abuse at the time”).
They seem to also all emphasize how much “hard work” it takes to make it to the top, how GM has “given so much to the sport” and how it’s “wrong” to take away an influential figure’s life achievements and tarnish his legacy in this way. They also consistently imply… or outright state… that the accusers are lowlifes.
I think there is a “subconscious” belief at work here that essentially amounts to something along the lines of… “These relationships happened a long time ago. Many boys who trained with GM probably had this sort of relationship with him… but we don’t know for sure, and don’t want to know, and don’t care. Other boys who did train with him grew up to be successful pros and seem fine on the surface as far as we know, and are well liked and well respected pros now. And they aren’t saying anything right now. However, these guys grew up and had problems as adult men, that eventually led to drug abuse, AIDS, conviction for felonies, etc. And they didn’t grow up to become successful horse pros like others. THEREFORE, these low lives are stepping forward now, and dredging up ancient history during the Safe Sport era just to justify their own poor life choices and lack of success.”
I wish I was better at shortening up my take on it… but that is the most broad take I have regarding the mentality I am observing. These people seem unable and unwilling to lock onto the notion that this is about child abuse and sexual abuse first and foremost, and that confronting that issue is bigger, and more important, than who “made it” and who didn’t in the hunter jumper world. There are plenty of folks who are all about stupid hero worship of GM, and plenty of others who are hysterical about how terrifying and threatening Safe Sport is… but I think the unifying belief of the entire crowd underlying the whole notion of these particular accusers “unjustly” launching this investigation into GM and the eventual ban, is that they are just discontented, screwed up low lives. They are people who weren’t that talented/hardworking in terms of the equestrian aspect of their lives, and are just using the Safe Sport process now to make excuses for their lack of major achievements in life, and their other choices that led to things like drug addiction, etc.
Anyone else agree with that perception? Or am I reading too much into the rants I am seeing on social media in support of George?
I will say… if I am on point with respect to my perception of it all… it’s pretty obvious as to why we need Safe Sport, and why the process needs to be secret. I for one, do not believe there are not MANY other victims. I hope the silent people are doing ok. I hope they had the chance to speak to investigators if they wanted to, and I hope it brought them some sort of peace and closure… without them fearing they would sacrifice their own careers in the process, or be subject to the sort of attacks Soresi is experiencing. I also hope that folks FINALLY are beginning to grasp that this whole notion of children and teenagers and young adults “sleeping their way to the top” in terms of sports, corporate america, whatever… it’s always been garbage. People suffer silently with shame about stuff like that years later… even if they appear fine and successful on the surface. Even if the situation wasn’t out and out child abuse or rape (it sure seems like this case was that dark in more than one way though). Transactional sexual activity as some sort of price we require other humans to pay for entree into a specific group of “elite” people/professionals, and a way to build a career? That’s always been EVIL and HARMFUL, and we should embrace ending that sort of thing… not sneer at “losers” who paid that sort of price, and never made it to the top anyway. Honestly… that’s how sick and ugly I think some of this reaction is amongst some folks.
One of the lawyers can correct me if I am wrong… but I think there is almost ZERO chance of him being able to sue Safe Sport for defamation. Defamation would require Safe Sport to have knowingly put forth false information about GM.
If GM was able to win on those grounds… I think he would have won his appeal in front of the independent, professional arbitrators.
There’s no chance of him getting a valid defamation claim in, for several reasons. Like I said in my parenthetical, I was just using that as an example of the type of right he probably couldn’t have arbitrated away.
You are correct that it is virtually impossible to merely challenge the outcome of the litigation–i.e., arguing that the arbitrator reached the wrong result, and there really was not a preponderance of the evidence. However, the legitimacy of the arbitration process and the “jurisdiction” (for lack of a better word this early in the morning) of the arbitrator can, indeed, be attacked. We had a case where there was an arb agreement, but the evidence was overwhelming that the person who signed it on behalf of the elder lacked legal authority to do so. The judge compelled arbitration anyway. Our remedy was to go through the arbitration, then appeal the order that required us to go to arbitration in the first place.
What I don’t understand about the ISWG group is the “whispers” about George were very loud & wide spread. It was no secret or surprise to most people when he was SS listed. Why did/do the ISWG group act like they were in the dark about his pediphilia?
The notion of what “rights” someone has is something that keeps on coming up relative to SS… but many of us get confused about what we mean by that, and speak around each other inadvertently. What I was trying to say, is even if he has a right to sue for defamation, it seems like most competent lawyers would advise against it, and if a defamation suit was actually brought by a willing lawyer, it would get dismissed pretty quickly.
Some of the ISWG and Safe Sport Needs Reform people seem to speak about how there is a lack of due process, or how people are being forced to give up their rights… but what they really seem to be against is the fact that once someone is banned and a decision has gone through the appeal and arbitration process and been upheld, there are practical limits in terms of ways to continue fighting the decision administratively and legally.
I changed it to “long term sexual activities” to remove any suggestion that it was akin to a relationship consenting adults would have. My point is simply that (based on my understanding) the accusation related to conduct that persisted over a long period, not a one-time thing. None of us knows what the evidence was in the arbitration, but in my mind long-term conduct is harder to deny outright because there is more likelihood that there may be witnesses who observed inappropriate conduct, heard about it at the time from one of the parties, etc. To sum up: We don’t know if GM’s position was, “Nothing ever happened” or “It happened but it was legal/acceptable”… or some entirely different defense.
A brief version of my earlier post. They seem to be side stepping it, and very focused on the two accusers who have been publicly mentioned. Then they look at the whole issue as being about sport, who ended up being a successful professional, and widely respected… vs. these accusers going on to have problems over the course of their adult lives.
I sort of wonder what the reaction would be if someone else came forward publicly now… someone who was widely liked and respected… and shared about their experience.
Sadly… my guess is that they would be attacked. HR did EXACTLY that following the Rob Gage decision and subsequent events in June… and there are numerous UGLY public comments about her on FB now.
I agree with a lot of posters above ( VirginiaMom) about GM . I think after some conversations in my little world in Canada that many are just scared of GM and his ability to mess up a persons career or sale or whatever with just a flippant but rude comment. Once he is for sure gone I hope the ISWG group will see otherwise . I am just amazed that so many professionals etc who claim to be a friend were so under his power that they chose to not speak up about the abuse the was going on. Not one person has ever claimed that it did not happen - yet they walked away and let kids get hurt. And I thought the baby beauty contests were weird!!
i admire your post… IMO, lets be clear about it, most of them (if not all) are against SafeSport because they are uneducated about SafeSport and use that to blindly worship GM, someone they believe to be powerful. How can people question why we need SafeSport at this point?
