Rob Gage

Is anyone else alarmed that the victims essentially had to stand up at the Oaks and hold a “question and answer” session in order to pacify their fellow athletes? It’s interesting that prior to this happening the outrage on fb was out of control, people were hopping on to a bandwagon without giving any thought to the consequences this may have on the victims who reported RG, on athletes that were currently in situations where they should be reporting but are afraid to, never mind the fact that every twisted individual who is preying on young riders would take all of those posts to be empowering and solidify in their sick minds that what they were doing is acceptable behavior.

Equally twisted is the fact that because at least one of these women is widely respected in the industry and whose husband is also widely respected it seems to have shut down the rampant bullying/victim blaming that was occurring on social media. It does, however, make me curious as to what the response would have been had it been someone who was viewed as less “important” in the industry. If the victim(s) didn’t have any “clout” would people continue to be denying what is clearly evident, that there was a pattern of abuse over many years? Abuse that was “whispered” about. Abuse that many other individuals who were close to RG knew was happening but continued to support him anyway.

A quick look at the current list of banned individuals and those under temporary sanctions confirms that all sports need to be monitored and rules need to be in place to help prevent this from occurring in the future.

This sport will not survive without new and upcoming riders. Those riders deserve to be able to train and compete without worrying about the additional “costs” to be able to compete at the top of the sport. My guess is that if you polled the top 100 female athletes in this sport we would be horrified at the results. Suffering from sexual, physical and/or emotional abuse is not a “right of passage” in this sport.

Every trainer who has a program full of up and coming riders needs to sit back and take a good look at all of their riders and accept that they play a significant role in how these kids futures will unfold. How they see themselves, what they learn to understand as normal behaviors in training, competing, and socializing in general.

For those that have posted online or verbally communicated to others that RG was innocent and all these accusers were lying - shame on you. You have just potentially stopped those at risk or those that are being abused from coming forward.

For those that are blaming safesport and their process - take a look at the list of sanctioned “trainers” and ask yourself what other inappropriate behaviors these individuals display. Deep down anyone who knows these people on an intimate level will recognize the truth, and be able to accept that they have seen the signs displayed, that they are capable of the allegations made against them. Someone who has spent years “grooming” young riders and manipulating them into abusive situations is also going to be manipulating all of those around them. Of course, they are not going to allow others to see their dark side, but it will slip out from time to time. People will get the chance to see their true colors.

Too many people have been trying to protect their own image because they are associated with these individuals. Or they feel obligated to defend them because they are also tied into “shady” dealings with them, or possibly because they don’t want their own “secrets” outed.

It is long past time for all of that to stop. Moving forward every single person in this industry to wants to “guide” up and coming riders needs to act professionally, and needs to act with their riders best interest at heart. They need to have open discussions so that they are aware of the potential “risks” out there and how to ensure you are not taken advantage of. They need to keep their eyes open for signs of inappropriate behavior and when it is seen it is to be addressed, reported, etc. Not whispered and gossiped about. This isn’t going to be an easy transition.

How many people in this industry feel obligated to have sexual relations with others to gain some sort of advantage in the sport? To pay their bills; to keep their job because if they aren’t willing to have sex with their boss, there is a long line of other girls who will; to be able to ride the best horses in the barn; or how about just to feel included and be a closer part of someone they idolize world. For far too long this has all been considered normal and it isn’t. It is an abuse of power (even if people are of age). Coercion does not translate to being consensual. This isn’t only about minors as the abuse spans to athletes of all ages.

To every “lawyer” out there contributing your opinions on the matter - your job is to defend the guilty. That does not translate into your opinion being the truth. Safesport bans are not a constitutional issue. There is no “right” to belong to this organization. If you don’t abide by the rules in place, you do not get to be a member. Simple as golf clubs not allowing people to wear tank tops and short shorts. While I understand that you are paid to defend people in your daily lives because everyone has a right to a defense, that does not mean that you get to try to coerce the rest of the world into believing your arguments for these predators is the truth or is lawful.

24 Likes

I think the original purpose of bringing up the drug rule was not so far out there

The argument seemed to be that

It is against the rules to give performance impacting drugs, even if they currently “don’t test”

the equivalent being there have always been vague code of conduct rules in place

samples are kept on file to retest as testing becomes better, and more specifically named drugs are added to the list

the equivalent being apparently we are so awful that we actually need it spelled out that usef members shouldn’t sexually assault minor children

you can be punished retroactively for doping violations

the equivalent being you can be retroactively punished for SEXUALLY ASSAULTING A CHILD.

It really wasn’t a bad analogy at all.

And coming as no surprise, the same people who rail against and abuse doping rules are the same who rail against enforcement of DON’T SEXUALLY ASSAULT CHILDREN

21 Likes

This exactly sums up many issues within horse sports: everything is just fine and allowed until a rule or law states otherwise. Until then, carry on and bask in the glory of your many wins, no matter how unethically you obtained them, because you’ve earned them without breaking any current rules. And how dare they change the rules and ruin your winning program!

The people arguing the timeline loophole must need a microscope to find their ethics.

For those arguing the legal aspect, have you forgotten that rules and laws are created to catch then prosecute people who aren’t upright citizens? That the rules and laws wouldn’t be necessary if those who break them didn’t exist?? That they are a response to bad behavior, not an excuse to behave however one likes until they’re put in place???

I’ve been out of pocket and it took a while to catch up on this thread. I want to thank the victims for their bravery and commend the 5 women who publicly came forward after The Oaks. Ladies, you are so very, very brave. I’m so sorry that you were put in that position, but please know that there are many, many people out there sending you a standing ovation… and a hug.

21 Likes

It is legal to give your horse drugs at home. It is NEVER legal to have sex with a minor. Sex with a minor is against the law, drugging a horse is not.

10 Likes

You summed up what I have been thinking for a long time. People run to defend the accused because of what they “know”. If they disclose their knowledge of sexual abuse, they have to disclose they did nothing about it. They also have to reconcile within themselves the person they idolize is a child molester, the lowest of the scum. (close to animal abusers). They have enabled this person. I have little to no sympathy for enablers. I believe they bear a large responsibility in perpetuating the abuse. I wonder if you ask the friends, girlfriends, spouses of those people on SS list what they would do if a teen came to them today and said, “Your husband/boyfriend just molested me”. Would they call the police? I recognize it is a hard decision, but who you protect says a lot about you as a person.

6 Likes

And yet here we are, with people arguing that sexually assaulting a child was cool “back in the day”, and simultaneously saying that there’s no grounds for retroactively punishing a member for past “infractions”.

Neither of those statements are true.

You don’t have to like an analogy, but it certainly wasn’t an egregious one to make.

15 Likes

I used to think the horse killing was the biggest stain on our sport and always would be. I am sad to be proven wrong.

27 Likes

Ironic that when men come forward speaking of priestly abuse from 30-40 years ago, they are “heroic” and “victims”; when women come forward speaking of trainer/coach abuse, they are probably lying, flirting or it was ok back then. Makes me laugh and laugh until I want to scream!

42 Likes

Im going to quote this post to ensure it still stays relevant.

9 Likes

Many of the SafeSport Incident Reports that my interview subjects, friends and colleagues have filled out include the exact section of the existing code that was violated at the time of the incident (i.e. they will write something along the lines of “On January 1st, 2015, the then 38 year old Coach A forcefully kissed and groped the then 15 year old Athlete B in a changing room. This was a clear violation of GR 1.02, which states…” )

As I stated previously, it is up to the reporting party to prove that the accused violated the existing code. IIRC there was one case where the reporting party’s attorney had to argue that putting a hidden camera in the girl’s locker room was “unethical behavior” since there was, technically, no rule written rule against it & no criminal charges had been filed at the time.

@MHM Thank you for the welcome! I posted about my background a few pages back (and @snaffle1987 was kind enough to repost it here). Due to my familiarity with the investigative process, I thought I could add a bit of clarity around SafeSport practices to this discussion.

15 Likes

Yes. All of this. If anyone here honestly thinks this is a ‘horse industry’ issue, not a human issue, do you know the name Larry Nassar? Please tell me it rings a bell.

15 Likes

That is a hideously accurate observation.

19 Likes

Thanks for posting this article - it is very interesting and perhaps very important going forward.

As I have indicated previously, I do not automatically trust organizations such as SafeSport, particularly when they are not transparent and have weak due process.

Evidence I would offer that my position is, at the very least, not unreasonable is what has been happening at universities in the US over the past decade or so. Universities are being sued and their processes found to violate due process. Here is an article I quickly found from Inside Higher Ed from 3 years ago providing some examples:

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/04/14/several-students-win-recent-lawsuits-against-colleges-punished-them-sexual-assault

There have, of course, been more cases since then.

Organizations like SafeSport tend to attract people committed to the cause. People “committed to the cause” often lose perspective (or never had any to begin with) even when the cause is a great cause (like preventing child abuse). They will believe any “fact” or any hearsay that supports their position. This has a name in psychology and related fields: confirmation bias. It is a natural human tendency. They will ignore information that does not align with their beliefs as it is also natural to avoid cognitive dissonance (another useful concept to understand from psychology). Unfortunately, such people often staff the organizations in universities that are called things like “The Office of Sexual Assault Prevention and Response.” In many universities, sex assault hearings are kangaroo courts. The details of this have been coming out over the last few years.

If you look at the totality of comments in this thread (now more than 70 pages), you clearly see people that do not really give a damn about a fair process that takes into account well established principles of justice or the context of the situation and they accept and repeat as fact things that are unreliable (like posts on the internet). Of course, there are people as extreme on the other side. They don’t seem to care anything about what may have happened, just that they knew and liked the accused.

I have no idea who staffs the SafeSport Center, so nothing I have said should be interpreted as a specific accusation against them. What I am saying is that I do not automatically trust SafeSport.

So I will say it once again: We need a reliable source of key facts. In my view, SafeSport should at the very least state (at the level of the specificity of the Code - not salacious details) what they found to have occurred. The names of minor victims should not be revealed.

Edited this part out because I was a little snipey in my comment and because someone else already pointed out how the discussion has evlolved and the relevance of different posts.

Claiming that one has a lifetime membership and therefore should be grandfathered in and not have to comply with Safe Sport is just wow.

This was kind of silly, but I imagine the person didn’t fully consider what they were saying. Of course lifetime members have to agree to new rules and regulations whether that means juniors have to wear an approved helmet with a harness (remember that change?) or all adults have to wear an approved helmet, etc.

Maybe before pontificating further you should read the thread and about Safe Sport. All of it is explained.

Safe Sport doesn’t send people to jail, nor does it require people to register as a sex offender. That is why I am okay with the level of due process.

Why do people keep acting like not being able to go to USEF shows is the equivalent of jail time?

Why is it okay for you you and others to believe as fact the hearsay that it was one person who was 17 and he was 18-20 but when the actual complainants speak out, first hand accounts, it’s still hearsay?

The lengths at which you and others are willing to go to cast doubt towards the victims is incredible.

Please, take your wishes, your money and join all the others and start your own H/J club where, unless it’s criminal or there is a criminal complaint, you can ignore the problems people are trying to solve.

25 Likes

Well as someone who was bullied by a Residence Hall director into not pressing assault charges against a roommate, maybe I do have a bias. Universities for too many years swept assault under the rug. Even non sexual.

I am sorry that some innocent are forced to attend a different college. But victims have not had a say for WAY TO LONG.

”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹”‹I after being thrown against a wall and punched at was the one who had to move out of the room not the aggressor. The university did not at all take my side. My next door neighbors really wished they had called the police. But hey I wasn’t bruised or hurt so I guess I was at fault. Right?

13 Likes

I followed it just fine thank you very much. I get its hard to understand that there are people out there who follow the rules and don’t toe the line. There are also people out there who don’t demand participation in a club as if it’s some constitutional right. My world does not begin and end with the USEF and no one else’s should either of its at the expense of kids.

5 Likes

What more do you need to know besides sexual misconduct involving a minor?

25 Likes

Oh and I had JR status and had lived in that dorm for three years. My roommate was a freshman. I almost had to move to a different dorm. One nowhere near my classes. I don’t believe I am too scarred by the issue but still it makes me mad. Incidently the new roommate who was supposedly more “accepting” moved out after one week. Victim blaming at it’s worst it was.

1 Like

From personal experience, one of the biggest problems with revealing even a non-specific blurb (such as “Coach A (DOB 01/01/1950) was accused of having an inappropriate, sexual relationship with a 14 year old student in 2001. This accusation was corroborated by several witness, handwritten letters exchanged between the two…”) is that these sports are very insular communities. In other words, people talk A LOT.

For example, most lawsuits related to sexual abuse of a minor will not use the name of the victim (instead, it will use Jane Doe or John Doe). However, they will describe the evidence, the nature of the allegations, the setting, and etc. I’ve looked at a number of these complaints related to figure skating (a sport that I am heavily involved in) and I was able to identify the plantiffs with extreme ease.

It doesn’t take too much imagination to guess what happens once the supporters of the accused read these reports or non-specific blurbs. The claimants are harassed, threatened, etc. I’m assuming that SafeSport keeps the details to a minimum to protect the claimants. And as I stated previously, it is up to the reporting party to prove that the accused violated the existing code.

25 Likes