Here are excerpts from two posts I’ve done over the past several days to answer your outrage.
First post: "Even so, I gobbled up mags and books, and enjoyed reading GM. Knew all about his credentials. But then the internet came along and you could see his clinics online. And my God - the man was clearly an abuser. I don’t mean sexual predator. I had no way of knowing that. But he abused his students, even - and maybe most particularly - his teen students. In front of crowds. And any person who enjoys abusing children in front of crowds has some huge psychological problems. This was so apparent to me that I couldn’t fathom why the crowds sometimes tittered at his abuses and didn’t instead rush out there and lynch him. I watched a couple of clinics and then could stomach no more. What a piece of filth.
IMO, the whole equine community should share the blame for lionizing him and enabling him. Shame on us."
And second: "Many years ago, I was a crime reporter. Most of the stories I wrote about are lost to my memory but I will never forget one. A 77-year-old man enticed children into his apartment with money. I can’t remember if he raped them himself - there was no blue pill back then - but he did teach them to assault each other while he watched.
Sexual predators do not outgrow their tendencies. They will always be dangerous."
Yours and Virginia Horse Mom’s post and thinking about power as well as monopolies in the economic sense make me think that part of what allowed Nasser and Williams and Morris to do what they did, a bit “in plain sight” is that those individuals were granted a somewhat monopolistic level of power in that sport. So if a trainer or Chef d’equipe or doctor is a gate-keeper who grants or denies access to success, he’s got a ton of power within that small “economy” of opportunity in an elite sport.
Again, speaking in market terms, it’s not as if one could take one’s asset (the kid) and one’s business and go elsewhere to find an other George Morris who could do the job for you. Look at the story of how Micheal Hart Jr. and his family agreed that shipping the kid from Minnesota to Hunterdon was regarded as a great opportunity. And, if I could be the fly on the wall, I’ll bet there were lots and lots of instances of kids and parents and by-standing adults not wanting to admit what they saw or knew or to do anything precisely because of the extraordinary “King-Maker” kind of power these individuals were granted by the industry at large.
So perhaps it makes sense fo think of this as breaking a monopoly where the price all the adults involved agreed to set was some really nefarious behavior with a handful of kids who, as a class, had very little power.
Eeyore886… just because you don’t think there is proof from 50 years ago, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
Also… unless there is hard dna evidence, photos, texts, letters, taped confession, eye witnesses… it will always be a “ he said, she said”… weather it’s 50 years ago or 5 days ago.
But the 50 yr old cases maybe will have more people aware of the abuse because of long standing “ rumors “ and “ whispers “.
As others have said, just being a member of that Facebook group does not automatically signify support, since some people are there strictly to observe.
The relevant question is whether the person has made supportive comments on that page.
I too am disgusted, but by you. Shame on you and your ignorant, old, outdated ways. You should have read every comment, because you look like a damn fool believing everything you read on Facebook and taking ZERO time to read and learn about the process of Safe Sport, and the entire situation with GM.
you do understand that the incidents are not just from “50 years ago”. You are taking GM’s word for it that this was just a singular incident. Supposedly, from those involved in the investigation, his ban did not come from a singular incident 50 years ago. There is evidence and incidents that go as recently as the early 2000’s that were investigated thoroughly by SS. This information came from someone else on another message board who had close ties to the investigation. Safe Sport isn’t going to ban someone from a singular incident 50 years ago unless they admitted to it. For all we know, GM could’ve admitted to such incidents. Then what would people think of all of this?
It stands to reason that a guy who embellishes being a professor, dodges Safe Sport rules, and did whatever he did to children just might also fudge sponsors on his website. I’d give his ‘sponsors’ a bit of a break on that one.
Should have seen their faces in court when he pled “guilty”.
and 6 months after he was released from prison, one of these women messaged me apologizing saying he threatened her and she was terrified. I tried to warn her…
It’s been said about a million times already, but once more with feeling:
There is no proof that there’s “no proof.” There’s no proof that it’s “someone from fifty years ago” either - we do know about Soresi because he went on the record publicly. That does NOT mean his is the only testimony in the case, and given the length of this investigation I think it’s a very safe assumption that there is more to this. When you say there is “no proof” and it’s one incident from “fifty years ago” you are buying the PR spin that Mr. Morris’s people put out. SafeSport can not counter those claims publicly because it has a duty to protect victims from public scrutiny.
If things that happened “50 years ago” shouldn’t matter, and it’s just “too bad,” how bad of a crime does it have to be in your mind that it should be looked into or consequences given? When they find ex-Nazis hiding in Argentina decades after WWII, who committed crimes against humanity, should it be “too bad then”?
Is it more of a “sin” to ruin someone’s “reputation” than it is for that person to have destroyed someone else? What is more important to you, someone being able to give a clinic or a confused, hurt child who has his whole LIFE ruined by the demons that follow after being abused?
Yes, Me Too served as a bit of a bandwagon situation - but only because people who have kept things quiet for years, decades even, finally had the courage to speak up when they saw others being brave.
Abuse and manipulation by someone in a position of power is SUPER COMMON. If you think it’s not, you’re extremely lucky. I myself had something happen to me that I have not told a living soul. Don’t know if I ever will. But my incident was relatively minor, and it seems to come up in my mind and haunt me more and more the older I get. If I do come out with it, it’s not because I want to ruin anyone’s reputation or get attention but because sometimes a dam will burst.
But again, SS was investigating this for more than a year. All this shrieking about “no proof” is incredible, given the amount of time and attention and energy they put into looking into this.
And I honestly think that even if SS was to come out with every detail in the investigation, and every victim spoke up publicly with detail, people who don’t want to believe it will find some way to excuse it away. Well, sorry, I don’t want to live in that world anymore.
Safe Sport protects the victims by not releasing information about the accusations. It’s only George’s narrative saying it’s one person from 50 years ago.
Consider kindness when talking about this to friends and family. Chances are someone you know is struggling with something that happened to them years ago. Don’t put their tragedy in air quotes.
On and off topic re these millenials? They are often way smarter and ethical than those of us who came up back in the day. They are more likely to speak up or leave in the face of mistreatment by trainers, less likely to do things like ride through major injuries and concussions, less likely to use up and discard horses. (broadly speaking) I see a lot of jabs at them about being wimpy, weak, not tough enough and so on. Not the ones I’ve been seeing.
Alot of old school philosphy was unnecessary, cruel and/or downright wrong, I’ve had to do a great deal of unlearning myself.
I am going to engage with you, not to get into a vitriolic polarized argument, but because I sincerely want to point out a few things in a cool headed rational way.
If the facts of the allegations against Rob Gage or GHM were only a matter of a single complaint, from 35 or 50 years ago, based only on memory testimony… I would agree with you. It would be outrageous to ban someone for life and tarnish their reputation.
You say that the metoo movement has gone too far. In some ways, I understand why some people would feel that way. I watched every single bit of the Kavanaugh hearings and read detailed reports from all sides before and after what happened with that. I have opinions on it. I’m not going to get into it here because I do not want to take this thread in a “p” direction and inevitably get into WILD arguments with people. But I understand how and why there are multiple perspectives on the metoo movement.
I also followed a few of the stunning cases and stories in recent history related to Title IX and sexual assault on college campus. My son plays lacrosse, and I have immediate family members with deep ties to college lacrosse who played at a Div 1 level and have been close friends for years with people who coach college lacrosse and play in the MLL. The Duke lacrosse story, as well as the sad case of the death of Yeardly Love at UVA were both issues that impacted friends of close family members of mine personally. Coaches lost their jobs. The Duke case was found to be a hoax after the fact… but the whole situation rocked that program and deeply impacted people. The UVA case involved a young woman dying after being in a relationship with a guy who played in the men’s program, and who was known to be abusive to her, and an out of control young man. Coaches lost their jobs because the powers that be thought there was a culture with that team that essentially turned a blind eye to the out of control conduct going on with the players. I know people who were affected by this. They aren’t monsters. But a young woman died and a young man is in jail now, and young athletes lives have been lost and ruined. There also is the insane UVA case of a hoax perpetrated by a troubled young woman. Rolling Stone published the story nationally and it was shocking. It was eventually sorted out though, and our civil system kicked in, and the people who lied and didn’t fact check stories adequately (because of PC bias - there is no way to deny it) well - they wrecked their own reputations as journalists and were sued for millions.
So back to RG and GHM and your assertion that lives are being destroyed based on PC culture run amok and flimsy allegations from years ago based only on memories… and comparing it to the Ksvsnaugh hearings.
You don’t actually KNOW what evidence the investigators from Safe Sport have. The people investigating complaints are NOT biased journalists or pink hat activists. They are retired law enforcement in many case. Judges. Lawyers. It has been reported in the case of RG that there was a 400 page report and multiple victims gave testimony. In the case of GHM, Soresi has come forward. People know that he LIVED at Hunterdon from age 13 to 18. That is NOT comparable to Blasey-Ford being unable to prove the location of a specific party she attended, and being unable to produce one witness to confirm she attended that party. Mr. Soresi can produce many many people who can indeed verify he lived with GM. So we have the “where“ and “when” confirmed. And you and I do not know what other evidence is out there that indicates that the “what” did indeed happen. In RGs case, there apparently was a letter that he himself wrote ADMITTING to the conduct. He also admitted some of it to investigators apparently.
So if there is proof that GHM did indeed have a sexual relationship with a 13 year old boy who lost his father at the age of 6, and who was invited to live and train with Morris because the boy was talented and came from a modest background…
I don’t care if it was 50 years ago. That’s wrong and awful. The boy was vulnerable and groomed and then used. By a powerful adult he trusted. The ban is appropriate.
And bottom line, just as you assume there is no evidence and only memory testimony and one victim… I will admit to being biased. I assume there is more than one victim. And some much more recent ones. And I bet there is more than just memory evidence. So I reject that Safe Sport is just another example of government overreach and our pc culture run amok. I think it’s a good thing, and change that we need. And so far… I trust the investigations and the decisions they have reached. What we know about the people banned so far and allegations, and evidence and testimony that has made its way into the public eye… well… it’s all really sad. The lives that have been wrecked are those of the kids and young people who shouldn’t have had to go through this stuff.
I already stated they made supportive comments on a shared Dover post. I am hoping that’s a one-off, and would like to know if they are part of the group. If I could check myself, I would.
So now it’s a super secret club. Yall are ridiculous lol. Let’s out everyone we can, except those on a facebook group. Oi.
You do make very good points. I think why lawyers are reluctant to hang their hats on that is because those cases are just working their way up to the Supreme Court and it is a really unsettled area right now. It’s new territory currently developing, and one of the first things you learn in practice is never to ask a court to break new ground when you can argue your case should prevail under existing precedent. The Sherman Act line of reasoning is decades old as applied to private associations, it is an established technique.
Making a Constitutional law argument breaking new ground is the Hail Mary pass of legal strategy. You don’t rely on it unless you have to. I am sure if GM takes this to the courts it will be included. There may be other alternative strategies used to deal with this, I am simply not aware of them. This is the avenue I know. I would be happy to learn other theories that might be applicable I haven’t yet considered.
Originally posted by AlterHalter2019View Post
Update Re: RCF sponsorship
TEVA has responded to my message and has stated that they are NOT a sponsor. They stated that they take SafeSport seriously with their three veterinarians completing the certification, and their information has been removed from the RCF website. Their obligation lies solely with the horses and their welfare.
Comment by BLBGP
It stands to reason that a guy who embellishes being a professor, dodges Safe Sport rules, and did whatever he did to children just might also fudge sponsors on his website. I’d give his ‘sponsors’ a bit of a break on that one.
Bear in mind that RCF was up for "best riding school in Loudoun County. TEVA is the barn vet.
TEVA, SmartPak, Stubben, and Saddlery Liquidators were sponsors all right. I think they were all holding off until after the results of the appeal. Once the appeal process was over, they have removed their sponsorship - at least Stubben and TEVA did. Stubben indicated that they had received multiple calls to do so. The web page listing the sponsors has been taken down, but I have not spoken with Saddlery Liquidators and Smartpak.
