George Morris on the SS list

[CHT]

I am still reading this thread even though I was never abused. I am reading it because I keep looking for the right words to help people I previously respected understand safesport and the process being undertaken. It seems though, that @HoolieB is in the minority and most seem entrenched in believing whatever they want to believe about Safesport’s processes, and are unwilling/unable to be swayed by facts. Although I would rather educate, I have instead decided to distance myself from such people.

I am awaiting Jay Duke’s interview with Safesport though. He seems to be trying to undermine the Safesport process by sharing other people’s posts without actually stepping up and voicing his own opinion. I thought he did the interview yesterday?

I am very curious what will happen when a similar process is in place in Canada for 2020. I image they are taking note of the current state of affairs.

[dannyboy]

@ Crashing Boar Are you actually claiming that your post provided “a more balanced perspective”??? Srsly???

[NoSuchPerson]

@Crashing Boar

Obviously, and goes without saying. My hope is that when it all comes out in the wash, the finding will be that GHM’s relationship was with someone of the age of consent, who consented. .

You seem to refuse to understand the facts of the situation. I don’t understand how you can willfully disregard the things you have been told repeatedly and keep holding onto that same old bunk that “no one knows what really happened” because it already has come out in the wash.

SS conducted an 18 month-2 year investigation. They talked to multiple victims, some whose interactions with GM were much more recent than the '70s. They talked to GM. They talked to the witnesses that GM identified and wanted them to talk to. They spent months collecting evidence. Trained investigators, such as former FBI agents with experience in sex crimes, ran the investigation.

The final sanction, a lifetime ban, was handed down only after this exhaustive investigation was completed. The ban is not the beginning step of the investigation, it’s the final step.

Sure, GM can appeal this via the arbitration process, but, contrary to what you and others seem bent on believing, the full investigation has already been completed. We already know that more than one of GM’s “relationships” were not with individuals “of the age of consent, who consented.” We know this because, after an 18 month-2 year investigation, SS concluded that GM had committed sexual misconduct involving a minor.

The capacity of humans for self-delusion is always amazing to me.

[IPEsq]

@fordtraktor

I do think that if SadeSport runs afoul of the Sherman Act, this aiding and abetting aspect is what is going to do it.

I’ll agree with you on this one.

As for tying that came up, no USEF isn’t engaged in tying. I may have to pay an administrative fee and/or not get all of the benefits of membership if I show without being a member, but I can show without being a member. I can also coach, give clinics, and a bunch of other things. There are also non-USEF affiliated shows.

[ladyj79]

@h0rsel0ver

Catherine Haddad posted a link to this article. It is well written and thoughtful.

Glad that she did! (it’s also been posted here several times, but definitely worth reposting and noting who hasn’t lost their damn mind)

[dannyboy]

On the subject of the Canadians’ reaction, I happened to see this article by Nancy Jaffer in Horse Canada. I have no idea how influential a site this is, but I know she is a well-known writer. If the comments below are representative, the remarks seem painfully familiar. https://horse-canada.com/due-south/supporters-rally-around-george-morris-safesport-ban/

[ladyj79]

@dannyboy

On the subject of the Canadians’ reaction, I happened to see this article by Nancy Jaffer in Horse Canada. I have no idea how influential a site this is, but I know she is a well-known writer. If the comments below are representative, the remarks seem painfully familiar. https://horse-canada.com/due-south/supporters-rally-around-george-morris-safesport-ban/

dude, now we have to fight the Canadians too?! ugh.

[anon6003733]

del

[poltroon]

@Crashing Boar

Obviously, and goes without saying. My hope is that when it all comes out in the wash, the finding will be that GHM’s relationship was with someone of the age of consent, who consented. I honestly don’t think the man is STUPID enough to have raped a 13-year old. Just because someone was a live-in student, it does not automatically follow that he was being predated at age 13 by George. My hope is that he was 16 plus. I make no apologies whatsoever for pedophilia.

GM says that it’s about events from 1968-1972. I don’t think SafeSport agrees but for the moment let’s go with that.
Jonathan Soresi was 13 years old in 1968. So either the first problematic events happened when Soresi was 13 or there is more than one active claimant. You can’t really escape that conclusion.

A reminder: As of now no one but SS knows and they aren’t saying.

So true. But people like you insisting that the evidence can’t possibly exist or even if it does, how can it matter 50 years later, are causing people like me to dig up, recall, and repeat these inconvenient facts that explain in detail that it does matter, that it’s unlikely that the SafeSport investigators walked into this buzzsaw on a whim and without solid evidence, and it’s making more people speak out about the things they know and put the pieces together.

What I DO know is that on FB and IRL an impressive list of horse pros of stature have put their names (and therefore reputations and businesses) on the line coming out in public defense of George. People who’ve known him personally all their lives and worked alongside him all the way back to that time, vs.concern trolls who have no connection whatsoever.
To me, that speaks volumes, and drove my insufficient attempt to provide a more balanced perspective here.

I am sad for them, and for us. They did it for Rob Gage too, only to learn that another prominent person was among his survivors, that she was quite young, and had a compelling story, as well as that there were quite a few other girls involved. I unfortunately and quite sadly believe that the same will happen here. I don’t think the investigators would have turned in this report if they weren’t extremely certain of their facts.

[YankeeDuchess]

@Crashing Boar

This will not be a popular stand here, but I agree with the above post. What we are talking about is equal to sitting in judgment in 1950 (many of you were around in 1950!) on events from 1899. THAT is how far removed we are now from that distant day and its entire social context. If you would like to read, in depth, about the cultural background in which these alleged event(s) took place, please read this article straight through to the end: https://quillette.com/2019/08/10/the…f-gay-culture/ First-hand historical detail about Studio 54 and more with emphasis on how free-wheeling it all was at that time and why that is equally unimaginable today.

The law may arbitrarily place the age of consent today at 16, 18, 21, the way things are trending it may soon hit 26! That is actually an historical anomaly; in just about all early cultures, women were considered marriageable post-puberty, and the Bar Mitzvah or equivalent for young men happened at 13 for a reason. Sexually mature older teens are not physically or mentally the same as “children,” and I think repeatedly branding GHM a “pedophile” right now is out of line; totally different levels of agency there. Rife speculation and gossip aside, until either SafeSport or someone else comes forward with the specifics of this allegation, WE DON’T KNOW what the issue was with GHM or when it took place. “Misconduct” could be an inappropriate relationship because it involved both age difference and power disparity, but that is neither the definition of rape nor pedophilia. And anyone paying attention knows #metoo is very much a moving target that erupted extremely recently. Many things are now considered “abuse,” just like in riding itself, that 50 years ago very few even thought about. We also know people can be wrongly accused; that’s why “Thou shalt not bear false witness” is one of those Commandments that could use dusting off.

It’s a sad fact of human nature that when dealing with sports legends, music stars, movie luminaries, or the rich and powerful who can make or break others’ rarefied dream careers, the “casting couch” is a lure. There are just as many young people (even their parents!) who think the ends justify the means to reach “the top” and bask in the limelight of that fame and fortune as there are “stars” whose human weakness or sense of entitlement takes advantage of it. If we were to memory-hole the work of every actor, model, musician, sportsman or even writer who exchanged sex for preferment, there honestly wouldn’t be much left to watch on TV. We seem to be in a strange, post-religious cultural moment where we elevate ordinary, flawed, weak humans as “gods,” and anoint them with perfection, then a few years later take great delight in ripping them down like wolves from the very pedestals we put them on to begin with.

As the participants in this thread have thinned out after 90+ pages, it’s quite noticeable that a majority of the remaining claim personal childhood abuse. Without in any way diminishing the experience of ANY victim, it must also be noted that such would be automatically excluded from jury selection in a case like this because any objectivity is impossible.

Your debating technique seems to be to sort of talk around some issues without actually saying anything clearly enough for anyone to hold you accountable for it.

You make a reasonably accurate statement that at some points in history and some cultures, barely pubescent children of 13 were considered marriageable and full adults. True.

But the age of consent in the US has not changed from the range 16 to 18 in the last 50 years.

The age of consent in New Jersey was 16 in the sixties and it is now.

I assume the article is included to say that huge numbers of sex partners was not unusual for gay men in the pre-AIDS era. Again, true. While crashing boar doesn’t come out and state it explicitly, I think the accusation she is lobbing at us is that we, and SafeSport, are persecuting GM because he is gay and lived the pre-AIDS gay lifestyle in 1968-72.

This is not a legitimate smear of SafeSport or of us, which is probably why she doesn’t say it outright.

Nobody cares that he is and was gay. Nobody cares about 10,000 partners.

What matters is whether some of those partners were minors, and, beyond being minors, he used his position of power and trust to coerce them.

[poltroon]

The Believed podcast is really good, and really important, because it talks about how beloved Larry Nassar was. How he was the nice guy who advocated for the athletes. How he was on a first name basis with everyone.

WELLS: This guy looks like your typical suburban dad. He is silly. He is friendly. He is good at his job. He is a white guy in a polo shirt with his cellphone holstered to his belt.

SMITH: Videos like this are why I can’t stop thinking about this case. As a mom, when I think about my two sweet little girls, I just - I really hope I would be able to spot someone like Larry Nassar. But I don’t know.

WELLS: And that’s the thing, right? You are not stupid. You’re an extremely good, vigilant mom. And we all think that we have these really good bullshit detectors. But I listened back to tapes of Larry Nassar before he got caught. And my bullshit detector does not go off. We’re going to let you hear what I’m talking about, coming up in just a minute.

WELLS: So after that '96 Olympics with Kerri Strug, Nassar goes from being a trainer with the Olympic team to its top doctor. He also becomes a professor of medicine at Michigan State University. Anybody who is anybody in gymnastics knows who this guy is. So if you could get Larry on your gymnastics podcast, that was a get, man.

(SOUNDBITE OF PODCST, “GYMCASTIC”)

O’BEIRNE: I’m just going to tell you that I’m totally biased in this interview - completely and totally biased because I just love Larry Nassar. And I don’t know when he sleeps, honestly. But he’s just - he’s great. I’m going to stop going on and on about how awesome he is because…

WELLS: On the podcast, Jessica says that watching Larry work is like watching an Inspector Gadget. He is always doing a million things at once. But Larry told Jessica he had one very simple motto.

(SOUNDBITE OF PODCAST, “GYMCASTIC”)

NASSAR: Gymnast first, gymnast first, gymnast first - nothing, nothing, nothing gets in the way of gymnast first. Gymnast-centered - their health, physical and mental, then comes everyone else. Everything else is secondary.

WELLS: This attitude made Larry a unicorn because in gymnastics, even the best careers are brutal and short. By the time your kid is 2, coaches are watching like hawks for something that they can mold. By age 6, they know which kids have it and which ones don’t. And by the time you’re out of college, your body is just done, man. You are Brett Favre doing infomercials. So for those fleeting years in between, no matter how bad you’re hurt, you suck it up. But on that podcast, Larry talked about pushing back against screaming coaches and demanding parents.

(SOUNDBITE OF PODCAST, “GYMCASTIC”)

NASSAR: You have to protect your athletes. You have to let them know that we care. You have to - not let them know, but let them feel it. Let them understand it. Let them breathe it. It’s there. You know, it’s not just a pat on the back, you know what I mean? It has to be sincere.

WELLS: Larry was the guy who saw you, who protected you. This is how he earned your trust.

(SOUNDBITE OF PODCAST, “GYMCASTIC”)

NASSAR: And if you screw up once with one of those gymnasts, it’ll spread like wildfire. If you do something where you break their train of trust, you’re done.

SMITH: Maybe you noticed we’re calling him Larry. That’s what most everyone called him, coaches, patients, their parents. It tells you something about how much they trusted him.

WELLS: And I want you to be able to separate this guy, Larry, in your mind from the Nassar on the news - because that guy, in court, he doesn’t have any power anymore. But when it’s one-on-one, when it’s Larry, this beloved dude, that’s where his power came from. It was always just one on one.

SMITH: Dawn Homer called him Larry.

DAWN HOMER: Who did I trust to keep his eye on her? Larry. I knew Larry would not let her be hurt.

[fordtraktor]

@IPEsq

I’ll agree with you on this one.

As for tying that came up, no USEF isn’t engaged in tying. I may have to pay an administrative fee and/or not get all of the benefits of membership if I show without being a member, but I can show without being a member. I can also coach, give clinics, and a bunch of other things. There are also non-USEF affiliated shows.

Thanks, yes I think the aiding and abetting with clinics and possibly teaching is what makes or breaks the antitrust case. HINT TO USEF, DROP IT.

[dannyboy]

Nobody cares about 10,000 partners.
Don’t forget the “and counting!” The book was written a couple of years ago. Wonder how many he’s up to now.

Wait - no I don’t.

[poltroon]

@fordtraktor

Thanks, yes I think the aiding and abetting with teaching is what makes or breaks the antitrust case. HINT TO USEF, DROP IT.

That’s not in USEF’s court; it’s SafeSport. And their position is that people are given a lifetime ban because they were found to be abusive and dangerous and cannot be trusted with athletes.

[Soaponarope]

This: "Nobody cares that he is and was gay. Nobody cares about 10,000 partners.

What matters is whether some of those partners were minors, and, beyond being minors, he used his position of power and trust to coerce them.

[/QUOTE]

The “pre-Aids gay culture” defense of sex with a minor is ridiculous. No one would argue that the molestation of children by clergy could be excused by a church culture which allowed and accommodated child abuse. Some of those children also “consented,” although consent is highly problematic when the power differential is so vast.

The situation in HJ with working students is completely unregulated and it needs to be regulated just as any other form of child labor is. Only then will children be safe from a spectrum of exploitation in the industry.

[cloudyandcallie]

Kate Vosbury wrote a letter to editor of the horse of Delaware Valley.

[vagabondrider]

@Peggy

If you wanted an understanding of how a sexual predator works and avoids getting into trouble, I highly recommend the podcast Believed about Larry Nassar.
https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510326/believed

It was recommended upthread, or maybe on the RG thread, and I’ve listened to four episodes. One of his victims was six when it started and I think that was roughly twenty years ago.

But it I don’t think I’ll ever think about PowerPoint quite the same way ever again.

Second this. Thank you to whomever first mentioned this upthread. I’m only 4 episodes in as well & it is outstanding. Highly recommend (if you can stomach it- lots of disturbing info).

[oneequestrienne]

@Crashing Boar

This will not be a popular stand here, but I agree with the above post. What we are talking about is equal to sitting in judgment in 1950 (many of you were around in 1950!) on events from 1899. THAT is how far removed we are now from that distant day and its entire social context. If you would like to read, in depth, about the cultural background in which these alleged event(s) took place, please read this article straight through to the end: https://quillette.com/2019/08/10/the-rise-of-drag-kids-and-the-death-of-gay-culture/ First-hand historical detail about Studio 54 and more with emphasis on how free-wheeling it all was at that time and why that is equally unimaginable today.

The law may arbitrarily place the age of consent today at 16, 18, 21, the way things are trending it may soon hit 26! That is actually an historical anomaly; in just about all early cultures, women were considered marriageable post-puberty, and the Bar Mitzvah or equivalent for young men happened at 13 for a reason. Sexually mature older teens are not physically or mentally the same as “children,” and I think repeatedly branding GHM a “pedophile” right now is out of line; totally different levels of agency there. Rife speculation and gossip aside, until either SafeSport or someone else comes forward with the specifics of this allegation, WE DON’T KNOW what the issue was with GHM or when it took place. “Misconduct” could be an inappropriate relationship because it involved both age difference and power disparity, but that is neither the definition of rape nor pedophilia. And anyone paying attention knows #metoo is very much a moving target that erupted extremely recently. Many things are now considered “abuse,” just like in riding itself, that 50 years ago very few even thought about. We also know people can be wrongly accused; that’s why “Thou shalt not bear false witness” is one of those Commandments that could use dusting off.

It’s a sad fact of human nature that when dealing with sports legends, music stars, movie luminaries, or the rich and powerful who can make or break others’ rarefied dream careers, the “casting couch” is a lure. There are just as many young people (even their parents!) who think the ends justify the means to reach “the top” and bask in the limelight of that fame and fortune as there are “stars” whose human weakness or sense of entitlement takes advantage of it. If we were to memory-hole the work of every actor, model, musician, sportsman or even writer who exchanged sex for preferment, there honestly wouldn’t be much left to watch on TV. We seem to be in a strange, post-religious cultural moment where we elevate ordinary, flawed, weak humans as “gods,” and anoint them with perfection, then a few years later take great delight in ripping them down like wolves from the very pedestals we put them on to begin with.

As the participants in this thread have thinned out after 90+ pages, it’s quite noticeable that a majority of the remaining claim personal childhood abuse. Without in any way diminishing the experience of ANY victim, it must also be noted that such would be automatically excluded from jury selection in a case like this because any objectivity is impossible.

I. Can’t. Even. 😂😂😂🤣😅🤪

[fordtraktor]

@poltroon

That’s not in USEF’s court; it’s SafeSport. And their position is that people are given a lifetime ban because they were found to be abusive and dangerous and cannot be trusted with athletes.

USEF is the one who posted a PSA that holding a clinic is aiding and abetting, so it is possibly with them. It SafeSport is giving them this guidance, same applies.

They will be much safer from an antitrust challenge if they lose what they have said about the aiding and abetting aspect of clinics. Given the broad nature of the language used, I would think a trainer arranging GM clinics, not approved by USEF, would be OK but the guidance doesn’t say that. It says clinics in general.

In this sense, PV and his ilk have more freedom to teach and clinic than GM. That is a vulnerable spot for the case. Affecting competition is important. Affecting a single competitor, no.

[Midge]

@fordtraktor

i do think that if SadeSport runs afoul of the Sherman Act, this aiding and abetting aspect is what is going to do it. It makes it possible to argue a broader affect on competition, as opposed to only an effect on a single competitor. That is key.

If someone brings a case, would the whole thing get thrown out, or just this part?