George Morris on the SS list

[snaffle1987]

I am flabbergasted that the USEF hasn’t released a statement yet. But perhaps they will wait to see if the appeal is granted.

[poltroon]

@YankeeDuchess

They refer to the NYTs journalist as a “journalist”, and removed a post of hers, blocked her from the page, and provide the members of the group with the phone number of the NYTs editorial department. So outraged ISWG people could complain to the NYT that … what?

Sarah Maslin Nir is not exactly on her first rodeo. She was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize for a piece she wrote in 2015: https://www.pulitzer.org/finalists/sarah-maslin-nir-0

[Jealoushe]

@Laurierace

Copy and paste:
I’m the author of the New York Times’ investigation into George Morris. I have been reading social media, and wondering: Where did this false belief that Safe Sport treats people as “guilty before proven innocent” come from?

George Morris was the subject of a rigorous, two year investigation by ex-FBI and Special Victims investigators who make up Safe Sports team. It is no small thing to ban the most prominent face of a sport for life, it was done only because the facts were proved without a shadow of a doubt.

Just because you do not know what happened, does not mean it did not happen. Please feel free to be in touch with any questions, Sarah.Nir@nytimes.com

BOOM. Mic drop.

[YankeeDuchess]

@RugBug

They are wrong as a whole, however, there are some similarities. This idea of making lists of people who join that group and comments that ‘anyone who supports him must be hiding their own abusive tendencies’ etc definitely supports their thoughts.

People are grieving and you can clearly see the typical stages of grief in their responses. It’s a shame that it is playing out publicly, But the point that everyone becomes smart about what they post on social media will probably be the end of the world as we know it.

I have made no lists, but of those who said they are making lists, my understanding is that their purpose was that they don’t want to patronize or deal with people who can be so ignorant in their unthinking defense of GM and so willing to ignore the victims, past and future. That’s caveat emptor. It’s not McCarthyism. No one has said that they are using lists of ISWG posters as evidence that the posters themselves are child abusers.

[541hunter]

@snaffle1987

I am flabbergasted that the USEF hasn’t released a statement yet. But perhaps they will wait to see if the appeal is granted.

I do a lot of crisis communications work. I probably wouldn’t release a statement in their shoes either. Maybe a comment that the US Center for Safe Sport handles all investigations, sanctions, and appeal processes and that USEF will uphold all sanctions in accordance with the Safe Sport Code, but anything more in depth than that is just asking for trouble IMO. They’re the middle man in this case, their only involvement is to enforce sanctions set down by Safe Sport.

[Midge]

@snaffle1987

I am flabbergasted that the USEF hasn’t released a statement yet. But perhaps they will wait to see if the appeal is granted.

I thought they had. Something about Safe Sport did the investigation, found him in violation and we did what was required by law.

[Texarkana]

@Keep it Simple

George says he didn’t hurt anyone and people interpret that as innocence - because that is what they want it to be. If you read his statement (released by his PR people), he doesn’t say he didn’t do it and he is only focusing on the 1 case. (as did the other banned individuals). Why - because they don’t want people to know the truth.

This is so true. Some people also have a hard time realizing that there is a spectrum between “innocence” and “guilty.” It’s not one or the other.

Total tangent, but many years ago, I was a juror for a highly controversial murder case. The defendant was being charged with first degree murder and the state was seeking the death penalty. The evidence just wasn’t there to charge her with that, because she was working with a gang and there was no evidence presented that she was the one who actually committed the murders. We found her guilty of many other serious charges, including facilitation of first degree murder and aggravated sexual assault-- crimes that equivocated to life in prison.

Afterwards, the headlines all read stuff like, “Jury aquits X of murder,” and, “Jury finds X innocent of murder.” No we didn’t, we handed down so many convictions that woman was never going to see the light of day. But that didn’t stop the community from being outraged that we found her “innocent.”

[flofleming]

I asked this on the new Facebook group, but I’ll try here as well. Has Conrad spoken up? If not, his silence is deafening. He was the right age, right look, right time period. How was his stay with George? As an Olympic medalist, he needs to have the strength of little Simone Biles and say something, one way or the other.

[RainWeasley]

@Texarkana

This is so true. Some people also have a hard time realizing that there is a spectrum between “innocence” and “guilty.” It’s not one or the other.

Total tangent, but many years ago, I was a juror for a highly controversial murder case. The defendant was being charged with first degree murder and the state was seeking the death penalty. The evidence just wasn’t there to charge her with that, because she was working with a gang and there was no evidence presented that she was the one who actually committed the murders. We found her guilty of many other serious charges, including facilitation of first degree murder and aggravated sexual assault-- crimes that equivocated to life in prison.

Afterwards, the headlines all read stuff like, “Jury aquits X of murder,” and, “Jury finds X innocent of murder.” No we didn’t, we handed down so many convictions that woman was never going to see the light of day. But that didn’t stop the community from being outraged that we found her “innocent.”

I kind of just hate the general public sometimes…

[JanM]

I bet USEF and other organizations have been advised to keep their mouths shut by their attorneys.

[YankeeDuchess]

@snaffle1987

I am flabbergasted that the USEF hasn’t released a statement yet. But perhaps they will wait to see if the appeal is granted.

USEF has said that they will enforce the ban, as they are obligated to do. I think they are counting their blessings that it was SafeSport and not them, who had the job of ruling on this.

  He has the right to an appeal. Just needs to decide if he wants to appeal.

[anon6003733]

Not GM specific but some thoughts I’ve been mulling over re the SafeSport discussion…

Of the two groups that criticize SafeSport I dismiss the one entirely, those who make it clear that they’re clueless about the process or simply anti SS in all of its components and are happy to have their world return to child abuse Shangri-La.

However in my view the second group, consisting of well informed SafeSport supporters who may point out weaknesses in its execution and ways in which it can be strengthened, are integral to the long term viability of the organization. I say informed because of their background and knowledge, such as being well versed in the law or having firsthand experience with making a report. Or those on the ground with ideas of how it can made more workable in real life.

For me they have an enormously valuable seat at the table.

SafeSport is new, and it’s good, very, very good. But with the tidal wave of wealth and power that’s about to be unleashed on it we need it to be excellent, formidable, no cracks or weaknesses, ie; superior grade concrete. Otherwise we hand the ferocious (equine industry) lobby against it leverage in their attempts to water it down or take it apart.

Maybe I’m being dramatic, but regardless of my own emotional and protective spirit towards SafeSport, I commend those who are brainstorming ideas to make it better, more solid and able to stand up to the intense scrutiny and attack that’s headed its way. Because of its newness, I’m guessing this thorough examination of every detail is a continual process for SafeSport as it is.

So to sum up (sorry!!) … imo having a flow of ideas and a broad spectrum of perspectives on here is a positive, and essential to the conversation.

[dannyboy]

@ flofleming I haven’t heard that Conrad has released a public statement, but you can bet the investigators spoke to him.
ETA: If so, he may have been advised not to speak out.

[YankeeDuchess]

@poltroon

Sarah Maslin Nir is not exactly on her first rodeo. She was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize for a piece she wrote in 2015: https://www.pulitzer.org/finalists/sarah-maslin-nir-0

Also gleaned from the ISWG page: Someone noted that GM was not supposed to talk to the media about the case, and noted that, nevertheless, his friends could. They talked about approaching 60 Minutes, 20/20, and Anderson Cooper.

I’m thinking, gee, if you get national investigative TV journalists on this, you’re not going to like what you get. Then the NYT article comes out.

[HLMom]

@anon6003733

Not GM specific but some thoughts I’ve been mulling over re the SafeSport discussion…

Of the two groups that criticize SafeSport I dismiss the one entirely, those who make it clear that they’re clueless about the process or simply anti SS in all of its components and are happy to have their world return to child abuse Shangri-La.

However in my view the second group, consisting of well informed SafeSport supporters who may point out weaknesses in its execution and ways in which it can be strengthened, are integral to the long term viability of the organization. I say informed because of their background and knowledge, such as being well versed in the law or having firsthand experience with making a report. Or those on the ground with ideas of how it can made more workable in real life.

For me they have an enormously valuable seat at the table.

SafeSport is new, and it’s good, very, very good. But with the tidal wave of wealth and power that’s about to be unleashed on it we need it to be excellent, formidable, no cracks or weaknesses, ie; superior grade concrete. Otherwise we hand the ferocious (equine industry) lobby against it leverage in their attempts to water it down or take it apart.

Maybe I’m being dramatic, but regardless of my own emotional and protective spirit towards SafeSport, I commend those who are brainstorming ideas to make it better, more solid and able to stand up to the intense scrutiny and attack that’s headed its way. Because of its newness, I’m guessing this thorough examination of every detail is a continual process for SafeSport as it is.

So to sum up (sorry!!) … imo having a flow of ideas and a broad spectrum of perspectives on here is a positive, and essential to the conversation.

That’s a great, very fair-minded post.

[Anniemaymay]

@YankeeDuchess

Also gleaned from the ISWG page: Someone noted that GM was not supposed to talk to the media about the case, and noted that, nevertheless, his friends could. They talked about approaching 60 Minutes, 20/20, and Anderson Cooper.

I’m thinking, gee, if you get national investigative TV journalists on this, you’re not going to like what you get. Then the NYT article comes out.

Just the suggestion that it would be a good idea to go on TV to discuss this shows how insanely out of touch they are.

[arnikalm]

@Crashing Boar

Here are some questions to ponder about the larger societal context–the petri dish in which all this squirms:

(1) In an age when physical strength and prowess is completely unnecessary to the making of an upscale living (we’re pretty much all pixel-pushers now), WHY does “sport” occupy a plane of social importance unseen since ancient Sparta? Why do we pour unholy amounts of money into “winning” absolutely nothing useful at any cost?

(2) Who kicked a ball into whose goal, who struck out, who had a rail in what obscure class at some obscure show, all these are things that (a) produce no result in the real world whatsoever beyond momentary advertising revenue and (b) won’t be remembered 3 days from now except by paid statisticians and obsessed fanatics (derivation of “fan”). Why do we place more value on utterly useless striving after contrived, arbitrary and ultimately pointless “goals” than we do the intellectual and social capital that actually moves the human race’s progress forward? I don’t see patent applications occupying 30 pages of the daily paper like “sports” does.

(3) If “sport” is thought to be a societal good for “building character,” etc., why have we allowed it to be corrupted by money to the point where its participants get a “pass” on anti-social behavior that in any other context would get one instantly fired? Not only the pervy coaches, but how about football players whose domestic violence, weapons charges, larcenies, etc. are winked at and the story quickly killed in the press?

(4) Why do we hold such people up as “role models” for youth when in fact their morals are nonexistent, their methods beyond questionable, their reputations dubious, their substance abuse public knowledge, and the entire point of what they do completely irrelevant outside their tiny-little-bubble “sport” enclaves? Why are they “important?”

(5) Why do we put our kids through this crucible to begin with? Just imagine if we spent the time and money supporting cutting-edge academics (STEM) that we pour into school and college “athletic” programs. And BTW, you only hear about the successes, never the lifetime of crippling pain for many, that those mills produce. Maybe we’ve reached an age where all this has jumped the shark, eh?

Maybe we just ought to let kids be kids, and have low-key fun playing with ponies . . .

It is only in the US that sports are so overblown. In Europe, in eastern Asia as well as many other western countries, academics are what is focused on and sports are for fun and exercise. Sports are so important here due to lack of access to colleges by the poor. They see sports scholarships as their only chance. When you can’t afford university and you don’t have family money, parents push their children into sports, at the expense of their academics.

[Jealoushe]

@YankeeDuchess

Also gleaned from the ISWG page: Someone noted that GM was not supposed to talk to the media about the case, and noted that, nevertheless, his friends could. They talked about approaching 60 Minutes, 20/20, and Anderson Cooper.

I’m thinking, gee, if you get national investigative TV journalists on this, you’re not going to like what you get. Then the NYT article comes out.

Anderson Cooper has some major demons in his closet coming out soon, he won’t want to draw any attention to himself that might make people get any ideas about him lol

[Toblersmom]

@Texarkana

None of the anti-discrimination legislation in this country provides protection for adults who choose to engage in felony sexual misconduct with minors.

It also doesn’t provide protection for rules and standards of behavior that have nothing to do with classes of people protected by those laws. Even government organizations can hold members to different (some would say “higher” but that’s a stretch in some cases) standards of behavior or they face consequences (including expulsion) if they are violated. San Antonio has a heckuva lot of military bases, and a list is sent around periodically of perfectly legal businesses (mostly bars that have a history of lots of fights or underage drinking, and “head shops”) that military personnel are forbidden to use. Isn’t there at least one Friesian registry that will kick you out for breeding registered horses to non-registered horses? Unless you can prove that breeding your stallion to non-Friesian mares is part of your religion or due to a handicap or something, that registry is fully within its rights to give you a lifetime ban, rescind the registration of your horses, etc.

If the MLB can give Pete Rose the boot, for activities that (near as i can tell) are not illegal but only against the MLB’s rules for standard of conduct, SafeSport is within their legal rights to ban GM.

[ladyj79]

@arnikalm

It is only in the US that sports are so overblown. In Europe, in eastern Asia as well as many other western countries, academics are what is focused on and sports are for fun and exercise. Sports are so important here due to lack of access to colleges by the poor. They see sports scholarships as their only chance. When you can’t afford university and you don’t have family money, parents push their children into sports, at the expense of their academics.

no. go tell soccer fans that.

horse sport is huge in europe, way bigger than here.

your statement is inaccurate.