Rob Gage

[Denali6298]

I can’t believe what I just read these past few pages. RG’s victims speak out in public during a Q&A and now we are going to spin the narrative towards adults and debate which offense towards minors is worse?

Is this actually happening?
[USER][/USER]judy big hugs. You are one strong woman.

[poltroon]

@Horsegirl's Mom

Yes, but keep in mind, Safesport also has jurisdiction over conduct that does not include minors. Hence my example above: what Safesport remedy would be appropriate where, say, a senior trainer plants an unwelcome kiss on a more junior trainer?

At a company, I believe this conduct by an employee would typically result in a reprimand and probably remedial training in sexual harassment. Of course, if the conduct was repeated, stronger discipline would ensue.

Right. I think it’s likely that SafeSport would take a similar tack.

Certainly we know without SafeSport, nothing happens. Or, maybe what happens is the junior trainer loses a job, and there’s a new junior trainer. Every year or so.

[ynl063w]

@Horsegirl's Mom

Yes, but keep in mind, Safesport also has jurisdiction over conduct that does not include minors. Hence my example above: what Safesport remedy would be appropriate where, say, a senior trainer plants an unwelcome kiss on a more junior trainer?

At a company, I believe this conduct by an employee would typically result in a reprimand and probably remedial training in sexual harassment. Of course, if the conduct was repeated, stronger discipline would ensue.

And the company would not reveal details of the incident or the investigation to the rest of the employees so that they could decide whether or not the punishment was appropriate.

[NancyHenson]

This was a Facebook post I made a few days ago. Originally, it did not have the final paragraph:

The next time someone comes forward with a report of abuse from decades ago, and you wonder, why did it take long? Why now? This is why. Days and days and days of sorrow and pity and anger on behalf of the man, and little to nothing about the young girls. Plural girls. Dismissing his actions, blaming the girls, the system, the ‘times’. And anyone who has even broached the subject of the girls has been chastised. People talking about tearing down the system and forming a new organization are being cheered on by convicted sex offenders. Criminally convicted sex offenders are in your corner!

Any child being abused right now and reading everything her heroes, mentors, parents, and parents of friends are posting? No way is she coming forward after all this. No fucking way.

So, you are the very thing that keeps victims from coming forward. It is you. You are the reason. And for some of you? I think this is exactly the point.

ADDING- Now that all of you have a name and an age (13!) for one of the victims, I hope you are all so very proud of the stance you have taken. You should all be looking in the mirror and and thinking, ‘What the hell have I done?’

[Horsegirl_s_Mom]

@poltroon

If you read the story, are you not appalled by the arbitrator’s reliance on an “expert” who never interviewed the victim? The arbitrator basically went with, “well maybe she was so drunk she doesn’t remember consenting” … which by definition, friends, is not consent.

And yes, I agree with you that this expert sounds extremely weak, but it also sounds like SafeSport did not offer an expert to counteract the testimony. So the arbitrators had to go with the evidence they had. Maybe SafeSport doesn’t have the budget for expert witnesses…

[Texarkana]

@Horsegirl's Mom

OneTooMany, you do raise some valid points about credibility of, and public confidence in, the process. And the posters who insist that our criminal and civil justice systems would also keep all the facts confidential seem to have confused our court system with China’s. In actuality, while a minor victim or rape victim might be referred to as “Jane Doe” in court, all of the surrounding facts will be public, and trials are public. Moreover, sentencing data is public at both the state and federal level: if you want to know what kinds of sentences are handed out for particular types of conduct, you can find that out.

I’ve concluded it is not possible in this forum to have an objective, reasoned conversation about what level of due process and/or transparency is appropriate for SafeSport. Any attempt to bring up the topic will quickly cause you to be branded a pedophile and/or RG sympathizer–even if, like me, you don’t know anything about RG and have made no comment on his culpability.

This is where I disagree with you.

The facts of an investigation are only made public IF there is a trial. Law enforcement does not make their tips or evidence public. Law enforcement doesn’t have to explain why they arrested someone, short of the charge (like “sexual misconduct with a minor”). Heck, so much evidence gets omitted/stricken from record in a trial it can be ridiculous.

Also, as an educator, if I was reported to my boss for allegedly engaging in sexual misconduct with a minor, I would be immediately suspended without pay. My boss would follow the school’s protocol for investigation (which may be well detailed, or may be completely whimsical). Law enforcement may or may not become involved. And then my boss could potentially tell me they have enough evidence to terminate me. None of that evidence would be released to the public. Heck, I’m not even sure any of it would be released to me. Now, I suppose I could take my employer to court, at my own cost, if I chose to do so. If it went to trial, only then would details be made public.

SafeSport isn’t a “court.” SafeSport is regulating people who work/volunteer in sports organizations under the IOC. So I’m failing to see why they have to operate like a court rather than an employer.

[erinmeri]

@Horsegirl's Mom

And yes, I agree with you that this expert sounds extremely weak, but it also sounds like SafeSport did not offer an expert to counteract the testimony. So the arbitrators had to go with the evidence they had. Maybe SafeSport doesn’t have the budget for expert witnesses…

But the evidence they had was she couldn’t have possibly consented. End of.

[dannyboy]

Wow, that article about the Colin Burns case doesn’t exactly fill me with confidence about the SafeSport process. Based on the testimony of an expert witness, the arbitration panel decided not that Roberts did consent, but that she might have been physically and mentally able to consent. The case therefore came down to “he said/she said” so they decided that she probably did consent after all (despite the part where I didn’t see any testimony as to why she would have wanted to make a false accusation and despite the fact that he admitted lying about being in her room) and overturned the ban. Yikes.

[Texarkana]

@dannyboy

Wow, that article about the Colin Burns case doesn’t exactly fill me with confidence about the SafeSport process. Based on the testimony of an expert witness, the arbitration panel decided not that Roberts did consent, but that she might have been physically and mentally able to consent. The case therefore came down to “he said/she said” so they decided that she probably did consent after all (despite the part where I didn’t see any testimony as to why she would have wanted to make a false accusation and despite the fact that he admitted lying about being in her room) and overturned the ban. Yikes.

It’s situations like this where I’m questioning SafeSport. The seem pretty quick to overturn both their temporary and lifetime bans.

I suspect they don’t want to be at the receiving end of a lawsuit. So if someone in arbitration starts making their preponderance of evidence look lean, they back off.

What I don’t understand is how they allegedly release some people from their temporary suspension almost immediately, before the investigation is anywhere near complete. However, up thread it was mentioned they anticipated 35 cases and received over 800 within the first year; if that is true, I suspect lack of manpower may be the reason for releasing so many bans.

[2bayboys]

@Texarkana

This is where I disagree with you.

The facts of an investigation are only made public IF there is a trial. Law enforcement does not make their tips or evidence public. Law enforcement doesn’t have to explain why they arrested someone, short of the charge (like “sexual misconduct with a minor”). Heck, so much evidence gets omitted/stricken from record in a trial it can be ridiculous.

Also, as an educator, if I was reported to my boss for allegedly engaging in sexual misconduct with a minor, I would be immediately suspended without pay. My boss would follow the school’s protocol for investigation (which may be well detailed, or may be completely whimsical). Law enforcement may or may not become involved. And then my boss could potentially tell me they have enough evidence to terminate me. None of that evidence would be released to the public. Heck, I’m not even sure any of it would be released to me. Now, I suppose I could take my employer to court, at my own cost, if I chose to do so. If it went to trial, only then would details be made public.

SafeSport isn’t a “court.” SafeSport is regulating people who work/volunteer in sports organizations under the IOC. So I’m failing to see why they have to operate like a court rather than an employer.

It is mind boggling to me that behavior that would be completely career ending and intolerable in a middle school or high school teacher is written off by some people with a dismissive “well how bad was it REALLY” when it comes to a riding coach. Seriously??!!!

[Bogie]

Was anyone at the session this weekend where Hilary Ridland and others answered questions? How brave of them to step forward. What a crying shame that they felt it was necessary. I can’t find any coverage on the Q&A.

[skydy]

@OwnTooMany

My understanding is that the only things we know from SafeSport is that Rob Gage’s lifetime suspension was due to sexual misconduct with a minor. This was followed up by an interview with a SafeSport spokesman that indicated that there were several minors. If I am mistaken and SafeSport has revealed more, then please let me know.

So to begin, I would like to know what “sexual misconduct” he was found to have committed.

Things that fall under the category of “sexual misconduct” in the SafeSport code include verbal harassment, unwanted advances, kissing, touching through clothing, all the way up to forcible rape. This is a very broad category of things with a vast range of seriousness (in my view).

Given that SafeSport has not revealed what they decided Rob Gage has done, the “facts” appear to be trickling out via social media. Unfortunately, in many cases social media is not a good source of facts.

I would suggest that most of this thread (which is now 63 pages long in my browser and polarizing people into various camps) would be unnecessary if SafeSport had just revealed what Rob Gage did (to the level that the code defines things), the approximate ages of the victims at the time, and how long ago the offenses were committed (not dates and times, but number of years). In most cases, this information would not reveal the identity of the victims.

That was an horrific post. I’m happy that I don’t know you.

[Bogie]

@NancyHenson

This was a Facebook post I made a few days ago. Originally, it did not have the final paragraph:

The next time someone comes forward with a report of abuse from decades ago, and you wonder, why did it take long? Why now? This is why. Days and days and days of sorrow and pity and anger on behalf of the man, and little to nothing about the young girls. Plural girls. Dismissing his actions, blaming the girls, the system, the ‘times’. And anyone who has even broached the subject of the girls has been chastised. People talking about tearing down the system and forming a new organization are being cheered on by convicted sex offenders. Criminally convicted sex offenders are in your corner!

Any child being abused right now and reading everything her heroes, mentors, parents, and parents of friends are posting? No way is she coming forward after all this. No fucking way.

So, you are the very thing that keeps victims from coming forward. It is you. You are the reason. And for some of you? I think this is exactly the point.

ADDING- Now that all of you have a name and an age (13!) for one of the victims, I hope you are all so very proud of the stance you have taken. You should all be looking in the mirror and and thinking, ‘What the hell have I done?’

Yes. You nailed it. Even now there is no reporting about what the victims said, although there was plenty about how this could never have happened, or that it was crazy in the 70s, or that girls were flattered by the attention.

[OverandOnward]

@chisamba

I read every page of this and found it mostly reasonable and enlightening. I wanted to share my opinion that reading all if the victim shaming the excusing of the behavior and the failure to recognize sexual harassment and more than once instance of abuse of a minor has made me realize that every irksome aspect of Safe Sport is necessary. I was a little irritated at the ninety minutes it took to do the training. I was a little worried about the process. I though the idea of not being able to drive a student to a show without a signed release a real cover your arse move by the USEF. Now I sadly realize every bit of it is needed.

Quite possibly people like RG saw their mentors being sexually active with the “girls” at the barn and grew up thinking it was just fine. Hopefully SS will educate everyone to realize it is not.

I hope we do better. I will not be irked by measures designed to protect minors.

I agree.

And I like your point that SS will protect horse professionals as well as their students. All those annoying detail procedures are spelled out for a reason. Instead of complaining, horse pros should educate themselves on the foolish risks they have been running until now.

When SS was first announced, my knee-jerk reaction was ‘another meddling gov’t committee’. But the more I’ve learned about how SS has handled the RG case, the more credible SS has seemed to me.

@OwnTooMany

… This is actually important in order for the process to have credibility. And I expect that most would want the SafeSport process to be credible.

Just from what I’ve learned about the SS case, it seems credible to me. I’m much more of a believer now than I was at the beginning of the breaking news process.

[OverandOnward]

Re the complaints about SS communications procedures that some people are claiming are ridiculous - if only they were -

The more a revered figure like RG is seen by a significant set of the public as being credibly outed as a repeat offender, the more likely the public is to jump to similar conclusions about anyone else that appears on the SS list. The communications protocol asked for by SS will go a long way to helping keep an innocent person from being caught up in the maelstrom.

Horse pros need to realize: Maybe they have a good relationship with 99% of their clients and don’t need to worry about something blowing up unnecessarily from those people. But it only takes one report to bring down trouble that may be made worse by having practiced poor communications procedures. And what if the report really is to the local police, rather than to SS? A public-contact career individual has to be aware that it only takes one person to shake their world. People thought it would never happen to them, but it did. Merited or not.

If RG were still alive, and appealing or not appealing the SS sport decision, the public might still be having a debate somewhat like this one.

As they read through this thread (I hope they read every word), horse pros need to come to understand that they are their own best protection through their standard of professional behavior. So many other career paths are drilled in these procedures, and it’s time for the horse world to wake up.

[roseymare]

@Mac123

Sure it is…once and if it goes to trial. The accused is arrested once there is enough evidence that the person is guilty that they feel a case is buildable, and from that point on, they are detained in jail (or held on bond)…and this is all prior to the public getting all the nasty details in a trial and prior to any guilty sentence. One can be arrested early in the investigation based on a piece of evidence that ends up getting explained away, and we the public don’t get all the details at that point to determine our opinions.

There are a lot of RG supporters / Safe Sport critics saying that it isn’t fair to have a temporary ban during the investigative process and that the details should be made public at that point…and that any temporary ban during the investigation violates the “innocent until proven guilty” ideology. Which completely flies in the face of the criminal justice system (which they say we should use instead of Safe Sport).

I think Safe Sport’s effort to to keep the details private is far kinder to the victims. Do you have any idea how hard it must be to sit in a jury trial that’s reported on globally and painstakingly go through every awful detail, and then be questioned about it and judged on it by cross examination, the media, and the public? I find it sad that the “need” to know outweighs any respect for the victims.

I pose this question yet again…How can we as a culture say “Victims, please come forward, we must stop sexual abuse” and then when someone comes forward we want to explain it away or evaluate the sexual acts for ourselves so we determine if they’re valid? Why do we have that right?

Systems and processes are put in place to prevent the public from being judge, jury and executioner of the accused or accuser(s), which this case exemplifies is a damn good thing.

Thank you. I started a reply similar to this.

[atl_hunter]

@Horsegirl's Mom

Yes, but keep in mind, Safesport also has jurisdiction over conduct that does not include minors. Hence my example above: what Safesport remedy would be appropriate where, say, a senior trainer plants an unwelcome kiss on a more junior trainer?

At a company, I believe this conduct by an employee would typically result in a reprimand and probably remedial training in sexual harassment. Of course, if the conduct was repeated, stronger discipline would ensue.

Unless your coworkers are all French, in which case you are considered rude and culturally unaware not to exchange the “air/cheek” kiss.

All French air kissing aside, coworkers cannot force advances on you in the United States. We are protected by the EEOC. However, the company does not broadcast to everyone that “Joe” is suspended for doing something to someone. It actually happens quite quietly.

Darling French coworkers aside, SafeSport should be doing more than just protecting minors from sexual assault. It should be helping minors and adults who are being abused both mentally and physically, sexually, physiologically or emotionally. It should be stopping online bullying (they would have a field day with some of the RG posts I have seen on here - this forum has its share of people who cannot be kind to those with differing opinions). It should also be holding the parents accountable in cases where the parent was supportive of their child being with a known abuser did nothing to stop the activities. If you allow you child to date someone older than they are, and it’s general knowledge that said child is dating an adult, then the parent should also have a SafeSport violation for supporting that activity UNLESS they can show that they tried to stop it and their child was not controllable (feral, runaway, emancipated, had psychiatric issues rendering the child uncontrollable). But even for the latter, if the child is under 18 the parents have the responsibility to restore structure to the child’s life.

I still wonder since how many people have stated retrospectively that JW was molesting girls and have spoken openly that they knew about it, why isn’t SafeSport calling on them to hold them accountable as well? Enablement is just as evil and is, in my opinion, even more disgusting. The abuser clearly has a mental issue. But can we say all the enablers did, too? Was AHSA just chock full of mentally ill people who couldn’t tell right from wrong and thought this was all okay? But wow did those pitchforks come out when it was posh to do so. Where were all these people through the 80’s, 90’s and 00’s, leaving the abused to deal with this on their own? Same goes for RG. If all of this is true and he was actively dating a woman under 18, where were the parents and why were they okay with this? And why is everyone okay with the fact that some parents let their teenage daughter date a 20 or 30-something year old guy? That is equally disgusting to me. It’s amazing what details come out after a week where now so many claim “they knew.” REALLY? If you all knew and did nothing, then that is disgusting. It’s also a violation of the rules of SafeSport to not report.

The post a few pages back about the mom being warned about a trainer liking young girls is absolutely gross IF it’s true. And if it is true, why hasn’t anyone spoken up? That is also disgusting and negligent. Everyone who is aware is culpable.

[roseymare]

But shouldn’t we be questioning the arbitration company?

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@NancyHenson

This was a Facebook post I made a few days ago. Originally, it did not have the final paragraph:

The next time someone comes forward with a report of abuse from decades ago, and you wonder, why did it take long? Why now? This is why. Days and days and days of sorrow and pity and anger on behalf of the man, and little to nothing about the young girls. Plural girls. Dismissing his actions, blaming the girls, the system, the ‘times’. And anyone who has even broached the subject of the girls has been chastised. People talking about tearing down the system and forming a new organization are being cheered on by convicted sex offenders. Criminally convicted sex offenders are in your corner!

Any child being abused right now and reading everything her heroes, mentors, parents, and parents of friends are posting? No way is she coming forward after all this. No fucking way.

So, you are the very thing that keeps victims from coming forward. It is you. You are the reason. And for some of you? I think this is exactly the point.

ADDING- Now that all of you have a name and an age (13!) for one of the victims, I hope you are all so very proud of the stance you have taken. You should all be looking in the mirror and and thinking, ‘What the hell have I done?’

Thanks for this post. I have pointed out the activity on Facebook multiple times on this thread. I find the presence of one CONVICTED sex offender, and another person who is on the Safe Sport banned list because there was a police investigation that revealed OVERWHELMING evidence (but the prosecutor never brought it to trial… a complicated sad case) he had sex with a teenaged student when he was in his mid forties… their presence in the midst of multiple Facebook posts attacking SafeSport, the process, etc etc… it’s alarming.

People need to take notice of stuff like this.

[HLMom]

@Texarkana

Also, as an educator, if I was reported to my boss for allegedly engaging in sexual misconduct with a minor, I would be immediately suspended without pay. My boss would follow the school’s protocol for investigation (which may be well detailed, or may be completely whimsical). Law enforcement may or may not become involved. And then my boss could potentially tell me they have enough evidence to terminate me. None of that evidence would be released to the public. Heck, I’m not even sure any of it would be released to me. Now, I suppose I could take my employer to court, at my own cost, if I chose to do so. If it went to trial, only then would details be made public.

SafeSport isn’t a “court.” SafeSport is regulating people who work/volunteer in sports organizations under the IOC. So I’m failing to see why they have to operate like a court rather than an employer.

That’s an interesting point. I’m an attorney, and I think of SafeSport as being more like the bar association than like my private employer. Somewhat analogous to Safesport, the bar association has a high level of control over my ability to practice law as an attorney. If I am disbarred, I can still work in law (for example, I could work as a paralegal or write legal treatises) but I could not represent clients as an attorney. This is kind of like how people say if SafeSport bans a trainer, they can still do horse stuff like training horses at home, but they can’t bring clients to rated shows.

As you can imagine (and sadly), the bar association conducts many disciplinary hearings against attorneys for a wide variety of misconduct, including sexual misconduct. (It is a violation of the code of professional responsibility to have sex with a client). A summary of each disciplinary action is published to the entire bar. The disciplined attorney is identified, the facts of the misconduct are summarized (without identifying the client-victim), and the penalty is stated (i.e., suspension, disbarment, etc.)

So SafeSport could do something like that, which brings a lot of transparency without harming the victims in any way.