Exactly. He plead down and didn’t even get jail time. A suspended sentence. Doesn’t even need to be on the sex offender list anymore. His Safe Sport ban involves extortion.
I don’t see this as either for Safe Sport or supporting sex offenders. But everyone questioning Safe Sport has yet to educate themselves. Got questions call or email Safe Sport not the USEF and then claim Safe Sport operates in secrecy.
What is the purpose of SafeSport? Is it protection or punishment? Everyone is focusing on punishment. Isn’t that law enforcement’s job? None of what SafeSport is trying to do protects minors from abuse. I believe every person is entitled to due process. I also believe that adults who bring forth claims from decades before, should not remain anonymous, unless each party is due the same right to privacy. So many want to get out their pitchforks and punish without knowing the facts. Unless you were there, you don’t know what happened. SafeSport is not part of law enforcement, but welds tremendous power. That alone should make people question the validity of the SafeSport findings.
By sanctioning individuals who have been determined through due process to have been engaged in sexual misconduct with minors SafeSport is in fact preventing any new minors from being abused.
I read to about page 10 of this thread. If they were posted after that, then I may have missed them.
The issue I have here is I want to know what is enough for a ban vs a suspension vs the case being dismissed. If there is no physical evidence (letters, police reports, or video/text from more recent years) how do they decide a report is credible? Are they taking into consideration how many people have reported the person? Do they verify with witnesses? How do they decide when it’s enough? Newer cases, IMO, would be easier since it’s fresher in the mind and we tend to have a digital footprint of everything we do. What is considered inappropriate enough to be banned for something that happened so many years ago? As others have said, standards have changed. You can’t look at decades old cases without remembering that times have changed.
By today’s standards, I have been sexually harassed in the workplace, many times. But at the time, it wasn’t considered harassment, just ‘men being men’. It doesn’t make it ok, but wasn’t discouraged by society. Should we hold our past to the same standards we have today? If so, a lot of my ex-bosses need to be reported!
Now, if it was something that happened that is clearly illegal, then yes, ban them by all means. I just want to know what the line is. I know of some people who haven’t come forward yet that really need to. Things happened to them that shouldn’t. Maybe in the future that won’t happen as much with these rules.
Having what they look at laid out for us, at least to me, would put my mind at ease. They don’t need to tell us details from individual cases, that would be a privacy violation.
The above has all been discussed and links to information posted within this thread. Why don’t you go back and read after page 10 before posting again?
The purpose of SafeSport is to stop the Jerry Sanduskys, the Jimmy Williams, the Larry Nassars, from continuing to be employed within sports organizations despite repeated allegations of sexual misconduct (ok, Jerry Sandusky would not fall under the umbrella of SafeSport, however, I think his example is just as pertinent).
All of these individuals repeatedly engaged in sexual misconduct to the detriment of numerous victims. All of these individuals had been reported and no action was taken by the governing bodies. All of these individuals continued to have unlimited access to youth even after accusations were made, causing even more incidents of sexual abuse.
SafeSport does not hand down sanctions without conducting an investigation.
What SafeSport does is:
a) Create actionable guidelines for appropriate adult/minor interactions
b) Uphold those guidelines by preventing those who do not abide by them from continuing involvement with their sport’s national governing body
The latter part is determined after thorough investigation, not merely by accusation. There is also a range of sanctions one may receive depending on the severity of the misconduct, spanning from suspension to lifetime ban.
If you have read the SafeSport information on their website and you still have questions you can send them an email. I didn’t find the information at all difficult to understand.
I believe I posted this many pages ago. People are complaining about policies and procedures that they haven’t read.
Just wading into the quagmire to say (in case it hasn’t been mentioned yet in this trigger-fest):
If you are in crisis, please call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273-TALK (8255), or contact the Crisis Text Line by texting TALK to 741741
Done. And there was nothing posted that was about safesport that was anything new to me, so I’m not sure what you thought I was missing from that.
I still feel Safesport is too vague on their policies for decisions on what is a large enough offense for banning.
So why did you email the USEF? Why not email Safe Sport? Why do you need to have the USEF tell you to email Safe Sport?
@skydy this poster has already said for clarification they emailed the USEF. There really is nothing we can say to help her understand. I believe she is choosing to be ignorant all in the name of condemning Safe Sport.
I guess since you’ve criticized SafeSport’s failure to publicly share its process after overlooking the many links posted to that very information AND additionally skipped past the discussions that addressed your questions, you got me. You’ve missed nothing.
Amazing isn’t it? Posters refusing to address posts and questions that attempt to clarify the process and yet these same posters keep criticizing Safe Sport because they don’t understand.
The SafeSport documentation says that one factor they consider in deciding on the sanction to impose is “Respondent’s voluntary disclosure of the offense(s), acceptance of responsibility for the misconduct, and/or cooperation in the Center’s process”
So I read Mary Babick’s question and answer and just want to clarify some things for myself
“The process as I know it is that when an incident is reported, a preliminary investigation is carried out. If the conclusion is that there is merit to the claim, and the person is perceived as a danger, the accused is placed on an interim suspension while the incident is further investigated. From there, an exhaustive investigation occurs and a ruling is made when it is completed. The most difficult element is that people are exposed publicly before the investigation is concluded”
So the RG case had definitely concluded the final “exhaustive” investigation for him to be permanently banned vs the interim suspension. That is was he was appealing - the final ruling, right? He had been through the entire process?
I think maybe an idea would be to name the person and include the charges as Class A or B once past the preliminary investigation, but NOT suspend. Or just name the charges outright. Therefore one’s livelihood is not ruined if clients choose to support - it sure seems like RG’s would have - but they are also aware of the pending investigation and nature of the charges. Still a bad situation if the person is innocent, but maybe better than being named AND suspended before a final ruling?
Another question - are the victims also notifying regular law enforcement? Have any of the permanently banned had a criminal trial as well?
I hope I made sense, I form questions while I am typing a question!
Who is condemning safesport?? Where did you get that from my posts?
i think you read what you want to see in others posts.
Ive read all the pages of this thread now. I’ve read all of what is provided by safesport and USEF.
None of it has told me what I wanted to know.
I’m sorry you can’t see other sides to a discussion but your own. Asking for clarification and transparency isn’t the same as asking to kill safesport.
@keepthelegend One person is permanently banned because of a conviction. If the complaints are within the statute of limitations law enforcement is notified.
Even in criminal trials the information is kept under wraps beyond this person has been arrested for X. The details do not come out until after sentencing. So I’m not sure why people want Safe Sport to be different. Or are you asking for a detailed summery of what they did?
Common sense would dictate lewd comments and only lewd comments wouldn’t fall under “a danger.” Actual molestation however would.
School teachers who get accused of similar are named AND suspended. Why would you want the process to be different for a coach?
You haven’t found your answers because for some reason your email doesn’t get sent to Safe Sport. Only the USEF. Most people here don’t need clarification on your questions and me personally, have no idea how to dumb it down even more for you. Do you need pictures?
Sure, go ahead and explain the answers to my questions! I would love that.
So what gets someone an interim suspension is if the accusation, after an initial investigation, warrants the person being barred from participation because they are a danger. For example if a trainer makes creepy comments about minors looking nice but never goes beyond that they probably won’t get an temporary suspension. If the trainer instead is accused of sexual contact, with enough preliminary evidence that trainer will probably get a temporary suspension until the complete investigation is done.
You seem to be assuming they don’t gather evidence because they don’t publish it. They do. Police departments work cold cases all the time so it is possible to get a conviction after the fact. Same with Safe Sport.
Also, if it is recent law enforcement is called. Say my kid tells me she was molested by the trainer. If I call Safe Sport they will tell me to call the police, which obviously I would. Safe Sport will do their own investigation as well as the police. The courts could come back with a not guilty verdict or the trainer could plead out to a lessor offense. Safe Sport can and will ban that trainer.
The process is as transparent as possible. When someone faces child molestation charges in our criminal justice system, that case is sealed. The general public won’t know the evidence. Same with Safe Sport.
I get people looked the other way over a lot of stuff we now call out but it that didn’t make it okay or legal. The law is the law and you break it at your own risk. Is it kinda stupid two kids dating and having sex for a while are technically breaking the law in California because one turns 18 two months before the other? Yes. However I do not believe that was the only complaint against RG.
There is a lot being said and we have no way to know what is what since we aren’t privy to the details. My frustration with you and other posters is while you guys are saying we have no evidence to convict him in the court of public opinion, neither do his supporters to say he didn’t do it and repeat stuff being said online.
I have not once commented on his guilt or innocence. I do however take issue with people who repeatedly question the validity of Safe Sport because they want details the general public doesn’t even have access to in criminal trial.
Does that help? Do you have any more questions? I’m genuinely trying to help.
ETA: Say you no kidding walk in on your child getting raped by your trainer. Some how trainer is found not guilty. Safe Sport can still ban the trainer. That’s where it’s good and fills a hole.
As stated before SafeSport does not act on anonymous reports. They do not suspend or ban based on an email/letter/anonymous complaint. They provide the accused with initials. They supply the name once the investigation has begun. The accused can also request the name and SafeSport will provide it to them. The public does not get to know the name of the accused.
SafeSport policies will prevent abuse if people act morally and report or confront those abusing minors. It has been stated many times that so and so likes young girls or adults knew trainers were having sex with their minor students. They need to say something. The need to protect the kids, don’t expect the kid to stand up for themselves. Look at the number of grown women would not stand up to Harvey Weinstein. Look at the number of women that complained about Bill Cosby. How many gymnasts complained about Nasser? They say it takes a village, well the village needs to protect the young.
Suicide affects all sides. We will not know how many complaints were filed against Rob Gage, or Jon Coughlin. We won’t know why they committed suicide. In this article one of the gymnasts feels her father committed suicide after he realized his daughter was telling the truth and they supported other adults, including Nasser.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
