If this was you, or a friend, or your child, I pray it was reported and I pray you all know you did the right thing and I pray you are not further damaged by the utterly repugnant vitriol that has been Facebook for the past couple weeks.
6 Likes
What is interesting to me is how the timeline and narrative has changed among RG supporters. It started out with one girl 40 years ago who was only a couple years younger. Now it is up to three girls 38 years ago. 38 years ago, RG would have been 29? 30?
Other people seem to indicate that his interest in underage girls did not end 38 years ago.
9 Likes
The article on the weightlifter was interesting and brought up a thought I had in regards to the “statistic” NA refers to in regards to SS overturnings. I look at that and could just as easily say that the arbritration company is corrupt.
Thanks for putting that out there. I saw something else on twitter posted by someone who claimed to have ridden with him when they were 12, provided a photo, and claimed a lot of people were aware he was problematic with young girls… and no one looked out for the girls in the barn.
I do not automatically believe anything I read on Twitter, just like Facebook, just like COTH, but you are not the only voice who I have seen go there.
And no healthy, adult male, or even young adult male, should have a sexual interest or engage in any kind of sexual activity with a 12 year old. It’s not acceptable. Not then. Not now. That behavior is something only predators do. And thank goodness people spoke up.
Furthermore, there are one or two people on Facebook saying that one of the reasons people came forward now, is that they had witnessed what they considered to be inappropriate and worrisome behavior on RG’s part around minors RECENTLY.
I have no no idea if that is true or not, but if it is, and that was a major factor in the report, then the ban was not just about conduct from decades ago. It was also about a very possible current risk to minors.
My empathy goes out to the people on the sidelines who were involved in the complaint, and have to live with the truth of what really DID happen, have to live with the fact that RG did choose to take his own life, and have to deal with the incredible reaction to all of this now. I’d imagine it all is incredibly stressful.
11 Likes
That 90%, even if it is or was once true, is probably based on a small number, like maybe their first 10 cases. One can imagine several scenarios that could create a number like that. One might be that in their first year that they didn’t have their procedures locked down tightly enough. One might be that their decisionmaker is stupid or foolish. One might be that only questionable cases went to arbitration and that most didn’t. Another might be that the first few accused did not take the process especially seriously and chose some combination of noncooperation and not retaining an attorney, causing the process to go much worse for them than it needed to until they sat up and engaged an attorney for the appeal. I don’t know, obviously. I’m sure that whoever is in charge wouldn’t want to see a number like that and would take steps to change it, if it was in fact true.
The point about our sport being coach-centric instead of athlete-centric is so true. But also, I think it is worth a moment to consider how our sport is different, how people can participate in ways that does not necessarily involve contact with young athletes, which is unlike most other sports. You can be both a coach and an athlete in our sport, into your 60’s. It makes me wonder if there is an appropriate protective action that goes something like, ‘you agree not to train, judge, coach, or otherwise interact with minors’ that would make sense.
On the costs to the accused… So um, yes, it is very expensive to be accused of wrongdoing in America, in just about any venue (criminal, civil, arbitration, employment, etc). Is… this a surprise to anyone here? Because I thought that was common knowledge.
It’s also very expensive to be a victim, for what it’s worth. Counseling, lost wages, lost opportunities, PTSD… Can easily reach into the five figures, or more.
14 Likes
According to Wikipedia, the cutoff is 13 and it has the be the person’s primary interest.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia
This source - https://www.britannica.com/topic/pedophilia - says under 11: “Pedophilia may be distinguished from hebephilia (sexual preference for individuals who typically are between ages 11 and 14) and ephebophilia (sexual preference for late-stage adolescents, typically ages 15 and 16). “
IMHO 12 is young enough.
Just because I didn’t choose to label RG a pedophile, doesn’t mean I don’t acknowledge that this might have been the case. Bottom line though, people directly involved in this case have NOT chosen to step forward with their stories publicly in the same way that folks involved in the JW or John Lipari matters did. So it’s really hard as someone on the outside, with no direct knowledge, to support labeling RG as anything other than a predator.
In some respects it’s actually useful for everyone to see how quickly a lot of folks jumped up to defend RG when they didn’t have to cope with the reality of a victim identified by name, age, etc, much less the specifics of particular allegations with respect to what happened. It’s really sad. It’s like there’s no willingness to even acknowledge that victims might exist, merely because they are remaining private.
5 Likes
Great post.
I have an admitted love of statistics, after taking classes with a graduate level professor who studied Economics under Milton Friedman, and who was quirky and brilliant and taught me so much about analyzing and fact checking and studying evidence in just about ALL aspects of both economics, and life.
One of the most common reasons for there to wacky, invalid statistics about almost anything is “sampling error.” Safe Sport is brand new. Sampling error is to be expected in the early stages. Hopefully with more time and process adjustments… the process and related statistics will BOTH improve.
One last thought. That same professor DRILLED something into our heads. He wanted us to remember it for the rest of our lives whenever dealing with statistics, news reports, and people with agendas who quote statistics… though he was primarily talking about politicians and economists… nonetheless, it applies here I think…
”Statistics don’t lie, but PEOPLE do lie with statistics.”
12 Likes
@Virginia Horse Mom I suspect that a lot of us posting here speak to our friends and think to ourselves things that we would not put out on this board or Facebook.
That is what truly shocks me the most. That people are publicly saying who cares it was so long ago. These same people then allude to knowing about it but “it was a different time.” They post that if it was their daughter they would help her understand and come to terms with HER mistakes. It’s appalling.
14 Likes
There are really no “rights” with voluntary membership clubs, except perhaps protected classes in some situations. Don’t think sexual predator, pedophile, etc qualify as protected classes. Clubs can write up rules and regulations and pretty much do what they want with them, within the law. They are private organizations.
14 Likes
These people are trying their best to make them a protected class.
8 Likes
@RugBug I think we all get BN is trying to make that argument. It wasn’t completely expressed in her incoherent rant. I think a lot of people find her repugnant for doing so. Sure make the argument for the appeal, but my impression is she will make the argument just to make it.
4 Likes
Originally posted by Denali6298
There are posts from people saying if it was their daughter they “would help her understand the mistake she made.”
This…absolutely blows my mind. If you want to talk about victim blaming here it is. Last time I looked men (and women) who are adults have agency of their own. If a child comes on to you, it’s possible to walk away. It’s not a given that “she asked for it, so I had to do it.” which seems to be the mindset there. “She had a short skirt - she was asking for it!” “She was drunk, what did she expect?” It’s a common enough theme.
I’m not sure why I should be so shocked, except that it’s not just some nameless girl who is easy to label a slutty mcslut. These people would blame their own daughter for the "mistake she made???" ARGH!!
20 Likes
Navin’s argument is quite cogent. The US Constitution prohibits both states and the federal government from “ex post facto” laws, that is, those laws that punish conduct committed before the law was passed. However the Supremes have held that the prohibition only applies to criminal/penal laws and those laws which, although not criminal/penal on their faces, have consequences that are so similar to penal consequences that the law will treat them as “quasi-criminal.”
Since Safe Sport is a federal law, the ex post facto rules apply to it. I have to say that it, in my opinion, is VERY far from a slam dunk for Navin because she has a very complicated factual and legal framework to prove before Safe Sport is found to require ex post facto prohibitions.
It’s not going to be a case that can be settled either; Navin may be in way over her head if she pursues this.
2 Likes
Safe Sport is not giving anyone a criminal record or implementing fines as a punishment. They are simply saying you can’t participate in a voluntary membership.
19 Likes
With all the guessing out there on social media, I keep wanting to ask these people who say that there are no victims, that these young girls wanted him: WHAT AGE IS OK??? Seriously, with all the available, fit and attractive young, but over 18 women in the horse show world, what possible excuse is there for having sex with a minor? “She threw herself at him because he was such a star”? “She said she was 18”? How about taking the time to find out for sure? “Everyone was doing it”? That makes it OK???
17 Likes
I hear you about victims not coming forward. Of course, JW was already dead. Not sure about the timeline on JL. Neither of them committed suicide. Given what is out there on social media, can you blame them?
3 Likes
Exactly. Hopefully if Safesport is finding a high number of initial determinations later reversed in arbitration, they are investigating to figure out why that is the case and improve the process, if it needs improvement.
A lot of people are saying, “there are no legal rights in a voluntary organization.” That is really beside the point. Most decent humans don’t want to belong to a group that acts arbitrarily, unfairly, or irrationally, right? I would assume that as members of USEF, everyone on this board should want to feel confident that Safesport acts thoughtfully, fairly, and with integrity.
3 Likes
It is not beside the point. Most decent humans do not want want convicted sex offenders and child molesters in their club. Most decent human beings realize that while Safe Sport needs some tweaking, do not categorize the process as unfair.
Yes people want Safe Sport to be thoughtful, fair and act with integrity. That’s why we all raise our eyebrows at people condemning the process because a great horseman, friend, whatever the relation are spewing such nonsense. Just because someone g-you respect goes through the process doesn’t mean it’s unfair or acting without integrity.
14 Likes
The one I saw that said it is a trainer, has a young daughter, and has a wife who came out as a victim of John Lipari. I think my jaw actually dropped when I read it.
9 Likes
