People Attempting to Undermine Safe Sport

[packy_mcgaughan]

Before I start down this road, let me perfectly clear about something. No one who speaks out against SafeSport is against its primary mission of protecting athletes and children from sexual predators. No one who speaks out against the process of how people are banned for life is engaged in victim shaming. No one who thinks that the punishment doesn’t match the crime is not arguing for child molesters or rapists. By and large these are serious professionals who want the process to be fair and sustainable. I find the ad hominem attacks on individuals who are engaged in the process by those that aren’t to be quite unfair and counterproductive.

I have been watching SafeSport develop since before the law creating it was passed. Many legal commentaries were writen that expressed profound concerns that warned its creators about the possible pitfalls of instituting a bad process. To be effective and fair, SafeSport should have ensured that the staff and process was interested in discovering truth and gave firm protections to the accused as well as the accuser. The organization has the ability to brand someone as a child molester or rapist which in our society is as close as you get to shunning, irreparably damages reputations and destroys ones ability to earn a living… It has to be done right. Unfortunately, what we hoped would happen has not happened and SafeSport has made significant missteps in its pursuit of the accused.

This is not a debatable issue. It is a fact that people like Bonnie Navin are trying to correct by calling attention to it.

The deference shown to anonymous allegations stands as a major policy problem for SafeSport. It allows people to claim victimhood who are not entitled to it. Because SafeSport allows anonymous allegations to be investigated using a method that does not require the accuser to provide evidence other than their own claims, concerns about an improper relationship or questionable “grooming” behavior, we have seen a sharp rise in the use of allegations for the purpose of revenge or as a way of claiming a competitive advantage.

Coaches have been accused in order to put their positions in question, athletes have been accused to keep them out of major competitions and official have been accused in order to intimidate them. I know of a prominent athlete in another sport who received a call from the lead SafeSport investigator to inquire as to whether she had been having affair with the US team coach, a man she had not seen for over a year. Safesport encourages people who see things where they want to see them , feel compelled to report rumors and innuendo, or worse, use SafeSport to further their own agendas.

The warning to Olympic hopefuls is real. Jeff Galouli used a crow bar to ensure Tanya Hardings spot on the team. How much easier is It to just pick up the phone and leave an anonymous message?. I am afraid we are going to see a lot more of this because there are really no safe guards against it.

[NoSuchPerson]

The sad thing is that @packy mcgaughan undoubtedly believes everything he/she wrote.

I especially love the list of falsehoods and half-truths followed by the claim that “this is not a debatable issue.”

[poltroon]

@packy mcgaughan

Before I start down this road, let me perfectly clear about something. No one who speaks out against SafeSport is against its primary mission of protecting athletes and children from sexual predators.

Packy, I’ll agree with you that not everyone who speaks against SafeSport is against its primary mission of protecting athletes from predators.

It is obviously and easily shown to be false that “No one” who does is against that goal. Some of the people who speak against it are convicted predators. Many who are not have dismissed the value of the survivors again and again and again.

People in this community, when asked to choose between a dead man and an Olympic medallist on this issue, chose the dead man.

No one who speaks out against the process of how people are banned for life is engaged in victim shaming.

Hundreds of people have in fact done exactly that, and with their real names attached. Read any Facebook thread on any COTH article on the topic of any of the stories - and you will see it. Against not just GM’s victims, but Rob Gage’s and Jimmy Williams’. Diann Langer experienced it from her article and she didn’t even name the man who molested her.

Where have you been?

No one who thinks that the punishment doesn’t match the crime is not arguing for child molesters or rapists. By and large these are serious professionals who want the process to be fair and sustainable. I find the ad hominem attacks on individuals who are engaged in the process by those that aren’t to be quite unfair and counterproductive.

I have been watching SafeSport develop since before the law creating it was passed. Many legal commentaries were writen that expressed profound concerns that warned its creators about the possible pitfalls of instituting a bad process. To be effective and fair, SafeSport should have ensured that the staff and process was interested in discovering truth and gave firm protections to the accused as well as the accuser. The organization has the ability to brand someone as a child molester or rapist which in our society is as close as you get to shunning, irreparably damages reputations and destroys ones ability to earn a living… It has to be done right. Unfortunately, what we hoped would happen has not happened and SafeSport has made significant missteps in its pursuit of the accused.

Because? Lay out your evidence.

This is not a debatable issue. It is a fact that people like Bonnie Navin are trying to correct by calling attention to it.

I wrote and deleted several responses here that I think in the end were not appropriate. But Packy, you don’t get to decide what is debatable for all the rest of us.

The deference shown to anonymous allegations stands as a major policy problem for SafeSport. It allows people to claim victimhood who are not entitled to it. Because SafeSport allows anonymous allegations to be investigated using a method that does not require the accuser to provide evidence other than their own claims, concerns about an improper relationship or questionable “grooming” behavior, we have seen a sharp rise in the use of allegations for the purpose of revenge or as a way of claiming a competitive advantage.

Yes, SafeSport allows anonymous reporting. However, they are unable to build a case on an anonymous tip alone. What they can do is follow it and see if it leads to actual evidence. Like if someone calls the sheriff (our sheriff has an anonymous tipline that they beg the public to use) and says someone was murdered and the body is at location x. The sheriff goes to location x and there’s a body there or not. That the anonymous tip encouraged them to look there is irrelevant to the case and in no way invalidates their independent evidence that someone was murdered.

Victims are not anonymous to the accused nor to SafeSport investigators when the case goes forward. No one is banned for life based solely on an anonymous phone call, as you and so many others are implying.

Coaches have been accused in order to put their positions in question, athletes have been accused to keep them out of major competitions and official have been accused in order to intimidate them. I know of a prominent athlete in another sport who received a call from the lead SafeSport investigator to inquire as to whether she had been having affair with the US team coach, a man she had not seen for over a year. Safesport encourages people who see things where they want to see them , feel compelled to report rumors and innuendo, or worse, use SafeSport to further their own agendas.

So let’s tell those stories. If SafeSport is bumbling and needs better management, then sure, we’re all in. But I’m not convinced by your anecdote.

That SafeSport would call to check in with an athlete and see if a report they received was true is exactly what they should do. Having gotten that report, what do you think should have happened?

The warning to Olympic hopefuls is real. Jeff Galouli used a crow bar to ensure Tanya Hardings spot on the team. How much easier is It to just pick up the phone and leave an anonymous message?. I am afraid we are going to see a lot more of this because there are really no safe guards against it.

Meanwhile, we have people totally upset that a man who went through the process after two survivors testified directly, went past the SafeSport process and an independent arbitrator with what I am sure were excellent attorneys, admitted to all kinds of questionable and rulebreaking behavior in his own autobiography… was banned… and yet somehow this is handwaved off as a witch hunt. Pro tip: don’t write it down.

[Midge]

@packy mcgaughan

Before I start down this road, let me perfectly clear about something. No one who speaks out against SafeSport is against its primary mission of protecting athletes and children from sexual predators. No one who speaks out against the process of how people are banned for life is engaged in victim shaming. No one who thinks that the punishment doesn’t match the crime is not arguing for child molesters or rapists. By and large these are serious professionals who want the process to be fair and sustainable. I find the ad hominem attacks on individuals who are engaged in the process by those that aren’t to be quite unfair and counterproductive.

Except posts on Facebook indicate the victim shaming is frighteningly overt. Or is calling Hilary Ridland a murderer not as unfair and counterproductive as wondering about Bonnie Navin’s seemingly unprofessional posts?

The deference shown to anonymous allegations stands as a major policy problem for SafeSport. It allows people to claim victimhood who are not entitled to it. Because SafeSport allows anonymous allegations to be investigated using a method that does not require the accuser to provide evidence other than their own claims, concerns about an improper relationship or questionable “grooming” behavior, we have seen a sharp rise in the use of allegations for the purpose of revenge or as a way of claiming a competitive advantage.

Can you give us actual examples? TS is the only one I know of and those allegations were not he said/she said. The investigation was made, it was found the accuser had invented parts of her story and he was cleared.

Coaches have been accused in order to put their positions in question, athletes have been accused to keep them out of major competitions and official have been accused in order to intimidate them. I know of a prominent athlete in another sport who received a call from the lead SafeSport investigator to inquire as to whether she had been having affair with the US team coach, a man she had not seen for over a year. Safesport encourages people who see things where they want to see them , feel compelled to report rumors and innuendo, or worse, use SafeSport to further their own agendas.

By your own statements, shouldn’t that coach have just been summarily banned by safe sport based on the allegations? Are you saying Safe Sport shouldn’t have called her? Why not?

[TheMoo]

What amazes me is somehow the equine world insists that these policies are detrimental despite being policies for DECADES in areas of our lives that involve children. It amazes me how professionals in our sport think that somehow it’s harder/unfair/etc despite evidence to the contrary. It amazes me how people can say it’s not good enough and unfair but cannot outline in detail what changes they want to see.
@packy mcgaughan it would do your crowd more good to outline actual solutions than just scream it’s not fair.

[poltroon]

I find it ironic that Packy makes his case for why anonymous evidence and hearsay is bad solely with anonymous evidence and hearsay.

[skydy]

@poltroon

I find it ironic that Packy makes his case for why anonymous evidence and hearsay is bad solely with anonymous evidence and hearsay.

:lol: So true.

[Moesha]

I hope we all agree that these horrific crimes, and that is what they are, are not to be tolerated, accepted or swept under the rug. That being said I think it is also important to question and want answers and accountability from any oversight like this. While I personally support Safe Sport, I do not think it is perfect and I appreciate people like Packy, who I know is a good person asking questions and wanting transparency , accountability and fairness . I think there is a vocal minority that seems to miss the point and that is sad - but their anti Safe Sport stance should not blind us to those and ourselves expecting Safe Sport to be immaculate in its process.

[poltroon]

@packy mcgaughan

The warning to Olympic hopefuls is real. Jeff Galouli used a crow bar to ensure Tanya Hardings spot on the team. How much easier is It to just pick up the phone and leave an anonymous message?. I am afraid we are going to see a lot more of this because there are really no safe guards against it.

Interesting that you picked this out, of all things, a situation that has nothing to do with SafeSport. But the imagery of poor Streetwise won’t leave me now.

[poltroon]

@packy mcgaughan

The warning to Olympic hopefuls is real. Jeff Galouli used a crow bar to ensure Tanya Hardings spot on the team. How much easier is It to just pick up the phone and leave an anonymous message?. I am afraid we are going to see a lot more of this because there are really no safe guards against it.

Interesting that you picked this out, of all things, a situation that has nothing to do with SafeSport. But the imagery of poor Streetwise won’t leave me now.

[TheMoo]

@Moesha

I hope we all agree that these horrific crimes, and that is what they are, are not to be tolerated, accepted or swept under the rug. That being said I think it is also important to question and want answers and accountability from any oversight like this. While I personally support Safe Sport, I do not think it is perfect and I appreciate people like Packy, who I know is a good person asking questions and wanting transparency , accountability and fairness . I think there is a vocal minority that seems to miss the point and that is sad - but their anti Safe Sport stance should not blind us to those and ourselves expecting Safe Sport to be immaculate in its process.

I don’t think people questioning it and wanting fairness, accountability and transparency is a bad thing per se. It is however tiresome when that’s all one hears with no actual viable solutions.

We get it. People aren’t happy with the process. Start proposing solutions.

Oh and that Athletes for Equity thing would be more of a starter if it wasn’t just the horsey set.

[Moesha]

@TheMoo

I don’t think people questioning it and wanting fairness, accountability and transparency is a bad thing per se. It is however tiresome when that’s all one hears with no actual viable solutions.

We get it. People aren’t happy with the process. Start proposing solutions.

Oh and that Athletes for Equity thing would be more of a starter if it wasn’t just the horsey set.

Of course- I live in a large city with its share of problems and no one is discounting them but it is the same complaints without solutions or community problem solving- it is sadly equated with victim blaming ( in the case of crime) and it is not so- Like I said I support the goals of Safe Sport and believe it is long overdue.

[skydy]

@packy mcgaughan Again, there will be an opportunity for your concerns to be heard and your questions answered here;https://www.ushja.org/news/ushja-new…ship-safesport.

I hope that people who are worried about the process will attend. It will be a much more effective manner of having your concerns addressed than forming groups online.

[ladyj79]

it’s funny to me that again, as I stated earlier, most big name actual still current show jumpers are behind the decision and the process, and the one big name who is opposed himself has real problems in that area, but is not American.

I am absolutely not hearing this outcry of the dangers of weeding out sexual predators from my camp.

I think Packy and company overestimate the number of child rapists in the general horse world, which says a lot of really bad things about that small circle.

[TheMoo]

@Moesha

Of course- I live in a large city with its share of problems and no one is discounting them but it is the same complaints without solutions or community problem solving- it is sadly equated with victim blaming ( in the case of crime) and it is not so- Like I said I support the goals of Safe Sport and believe it is long overdue.

But there has been overt victim blaming on Facebook. I don’t think Packy’s post is victim blaming but when people post comments calling HR a murderer… you can’t deny there IS victim blaming.

Even on CoTH. At the beginning of the GHM thread someone expressed doubt about the claims against GHM because a minor could have gotten something out of it. Granted the person knows nothing about GHM beyond his name but that is victim blaming under the guise of not knowing.

[neigh]

And the score is Poltroon 2 and Packy 0

[Jenerationx]

The deference shown to anonymous allegations stands as a major policy problem for SafeSport. It allows people to claim victimhood who are not entitled to it. Because SafeSport allows anonymous allegations to be investigated using a method that does not require the accuser to provide evidence other than their own claims, concerns about an improper relationship or questionable “grooming” behavior, we have seen a sharp rise in the use of allegations for the purpose of revenge or as a way of claiming a competitive advantage.

I too would love to have some examples of this behavior. You would think there would be more than one “testimonial” about the atrocities of SafeSport investigations if this were true.

[skydy]

The USHJA meeting will be livestreamed for those who can not attend.

It is understandable that people are interested in the Safe Sport process and want to learn more, however the near hysteria online coming from some people, seems a lot like fear to me. There is a difference between wanting to learn about the process and having it be fair, and the real freak out about Safe Sport that we are seeing from some folks.

Fear is natural if you or your friends are concerned that your past behavior may be coming back to haunt you. When the rot includes some people in high places it is difficult for the people involved in the sport to face. At first.

The sport will only get better when people in the H/J world are no longer allowed to prey on children.

[poltroon]

@Jenerationx

I too would love to have some examples of this behavior. You would think there would be more than one “testimonial” about the atrocities of SafeSport investigations if this were true.

There are also a lot of people eliding that SafeSport has options other than Permanently Ineligible.

FiSk123, a journalist who comes to us from figure skating, did an analysis of the people from all sports listed as Permanently Ineligible. Nearly all in that bucket come from a criminal conviction. Some have pretty compelling stories and kind of horrifying reasons why the case did not go to trial (in one the victim died before she could testify at the trial). You can search for her posts but here is one with some data.

@FiSk123

I’ve spent most of this work week cataloging every violation that resulted in “Permanent Ineligibility” that was not under “Criminal Disposition - Sexual Misconduct” or “Criminal Disposition - Involving a Minor”. So far, my search has found:

• An athlete who was arrested and charged with felony sexual battery and false imprisonment (the criminal charges were ultimately dismissed, however).
• A coach whose former athlete was granted a permanent restraining order against them due to sexual harassment and stalking (the evidence included over 15,000 text messages)
• A coach who purchased his then 14 year old student lingerie and exchanged sexual messages with them over SnapChat (this coach was sentenced to 3 years probation for the incident after a plea deal).
• A coach who was accused of raping an underage student, tried in criminal court and acquitted in 2005. When another student came forward with similar allegations, the coach was arrested and charged again, however, the charges were ultimately dismissed. The reason - the former student died of an apparent overdose two months prior to testifying.

The reason I bring this up is because I feel like some of the apprehension around the SafeSport recommendations come from fear of SafeSport itself. You’re not getting suspended for hugging a student after they win a competition. You’re not getting banned for life for accidentally texting a 16 year old “good morning” without another adult in the chat. In reality, these guidelines provide protection for all covered individuals - coaches and athletes alike.

Also, as several of you have already stated, these recommended guidelines did not come out of thin air. Other institutions, especially in education, follow the same guidelines.

Some counts from her search are here.

@FiSk123

I just went through the SafeSport Centralized Disciplinary Database. I selected cases based on the following pair of criteria:

1. The sanction was “Permanently Ineligible” - meaning that I did not include people who had temporary measures, suspensions or non-permanent ineligibility.
2. The adjudicating body was the U.S. Center for SafeSport - meaning that I excluded people whose bans were imposed by their NGB pre-SafeSport (for e.g. if a person was banned in 2015 by USA Volleyball, they were not counted).

Criminal Disposition: 89.04% (n=260)
Non-Criminal Disposition: 10.96% (n=32)

Criminal Disposition - Involving a Minor: 64.04% (n=187)
Criminal Disposition - Sexual Misconduct: 21.92% (n=64)
Sexual Misconduct Involving a Minor: 6.51% (n=19)
Sexual Misconduct: 3.77% (n=11)
Criminal Disposition (General): 3.08% (n=9)
Other (e.g. Intimate Relationship Involving a Minor): 0.68% (n=2)

Total Number of Cases: 292*

(While the Morning Call article citing Dan Hill’s statement of 285 was released on July 1st, I believe that his quotes came from a little over a week ago. For example, I know that two people from USA Swimming were given lifetime bans on 6/28/2019 and 7/1/2019, respectively. I will triple-check my numbers later this evening after a power-nap LOL).

I also want to note that the “Sexual Misconduct” and “Sexual Misconduct - Involving a Minor” categories are very broad. For example, Larry Nassar is listed as “Sexual Misconduct - Involving a Minor” with a 02/06/2018 decision date - even though he was sentenced to 60 years in federal prison for possession of images of child sexual abuse in July of 2017 + 40 to 175 years in state prison after pleading guilty to multiple counts of sexual assault of minors in January of 2018.

[BITSA]

@BeeHoney

The pushback over Safe Sport is astounding to me. Sadly, it is driven by people like BN who truly is a bottom feeder.

Anyone can look back through all of my posts on this forum and see that it is not my style to use such labels and I do not do so lightly. It is one thing to defend child molesters. In our country everyone has the right to legal counsel, and someone needs to do that job. It is perfectly honorable to provide legal counsel and defense to even the most heinous of criminals because it is a necessary part of how our system works.

What I have a problem with is the use of social media and websites to discredit and undermine Safe Sport through carefully worded inflammatory misinformation intended to mislead the public. Safe Sport was created because youth sports in our country have long been a rich hunting ground for sexual predators. For years, sexual predators have been able to prey on children in plain sight in youth sports organizations. Relying on our criminal justice system has been completely ineffective in protecting children from abuse.

NOT ONCE have I seen one of these “we need to reform Safe Sport” folks put forward a SPECIFIC, REALISTIC suggestion that includes references to how Safe Sport actually works or it’s actual policies.

Here’s a link to current Safe Sport policy. Read the policy. What exactly would you change and how? No, the hearings can’t be made public to satisfy everyone’s salacious curiosity. No, the names of victims cannot be released to the public so that they can be harassed and intimidated. Yes, the process allows for multiple hearings with ample opportunity to present evidence and testimony. And finally, YES, there is outside oversight as the final binding arbitration is conducted by an INDEPENDENT arbitrator.

https://uscenterforsafesport.org/wp-…yperlinked.pdf

I support safe sport. And here’s what I would change. The statute of limitations. I think it should be similar to what is used for sex harassment cases. There is a specific SOL, but if you can show a pattern you get to reach farther back under the “continuing violations doctrine.”

If we are trying to keep our kids safe (and I have a vested interest in this having a 13 year old daughter who rides), it seems safe sport needs to decide at some level whether it is trying to be punitive or protective. I’d like to see the focus on protective. We cannot right the wrongs of the distant past through safe sport. This is not to diminish what victims went through at all, I cannot imagine being a victim or having my daughter be a victim of some of the horrific things I read about. My $.02 it’s that we need to make sure there are not future victims and to care for current victims. I think focusing on allegations from 25+ years ago–where there is no intervening, continuing violation(s)–is not the best use of resources, does not flesh out child predators, and fosters ill will (which our kids hear about; it would be much better to have a united front we could all get behind–maybe that’s pie in the sky, but “no current predators/violators” seems like something almost everyone would support). I’d much rather see time and money put into keeping current violators and predators out of the organization and educating parents and kids about what to look for and what their rights are.

I also think there should be three member arbitrator panels for lifetime ban cases. It’s more than just being excluded from a club in reality given the aiding and abetting rules.

And better discovery, if not depositions, at least written interrogatories. The purpose of discovery is to obtain facts and information that will reveal the truth in a matter. Again, maybe this could be limited to lifetime ban cases.