Oh golly gee whiz, I forgot where I was posting for a minute. 
lol:
2 Likes
Right…
Let’s not lose sight of the fact that this is a BB forum, and not a court of law. Therefore, open and free discussion on possibilities Is admissible. No one is bound by other threads on god knows what, written by god knows whom, that others believe that everyone needs to read in order to form an opinion.
Strangers on the Internet indeed. Let’s all be reminded that there have been cases where the perpetrator was not known to the victim…while all the “experts” of prosecution failed to make that connection because they were focused on the obvious. Focusing on the obvious has led to people being wrongfully convicted of crimes they did not commit. I am sure that nobody wants that to happen here, if we truly believe in a fair and just system,
This is not a done deal folks, irrespective of what you believe or don’t believe. All of the evidence of the case is clearly not on the table and won’t be until it goes to court. In fact “the evidence” as postulated on this BB it is very one sided in its balance. There are reasons for that and the balance obviously favors a certain party with publicly articulated vested interest.
13 Likes
huh?
:lol:
1 Like
Question regarding the Safe Sport report:
If one completed the SS training, wouldn’t one know the purpose and role of SS? From my understanding, LK would’ve had to complete the SS training in order to compete in the US, so if after completing SS she still didn’t know what type of reports they deal with, maybe this is a point that SS needs to be clearer on in their trainings. Or improve them?
Does that sound ridiculous? :lol: I’m not super familiar with SS and this is kind of a tangent.
1 Like
Well, there is a discussion over in H/J about someone who took the safe sport training, but posts things on Facebook that sound completely contrary to it. So the fact that someone has taken the training does not automatically mean that they fully understand it, or agree with it.
6 Likes
Online training is not magical. If it were, no one would ever need to refer to a manual, ask someone a question, or Google it 
4 Likes
Yeah, kind of what I figured. I also don’t retain everything I read, and online trainings can be a bore and not as in depth as in person trainings.
2 Likes
If this is something that SS does - I’d consider that a gross overreach…They ARE NOT a law enforcement agency. They should not be reporting accused people to CPS UNLESS there is a direct complaint of child abuse. If an adult reports to SS over bullying of a adult - which is supposedly what LK did - there is NO reason for SS to report to CPS. I don’t consider one adult being accused of bullying another adult a “natural” progression to child abuse.
Guilty or not, a report to CPS CAN be something that hangs over the accused for years. Someone who doesn’t know it was a vendetta against an ex during a custody battle just remembers that their neighbor “Joe Smith” had CPS called on him, not that it was totally bogus.
This is just an example - I have no first hand or even eighth hand knowledge of the whys, wherefores, and hows of the CPS visit to MB the day of the shooting.
4 Likes
You are most welcome to not believe my scenario, but please give me credit for not stating that I knew for a fact that that is what happened. The point of my clearly labeled hypothetical scenario is to point out that there is a plausible scenario which is consistent with everything LK has said that is inconsistent with the statements of@MorganSercu and
@NotGrandPrixYet to the effect that they knew “that LK reported MB alleging child abuse”.
It is conceivable that LK reported MB to SS alleging child abuse. Conceivable.
No one on this board has shown anything that establishes as a fact that she did so. It is really, really not OK to casually sling around that claim that you know that “LK filed an allegation of child abuse against MB” when you don’t know for a fact that that happened, and are just assuming the child abuse part.
WHILE I DON’T KNOW FOR A FACT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, my inference based on what she posted and what I know about SS is that she reported MB to SS for bullying and harassing her, LK, and they responded saying we don’t handle bullying of adults, but the situation sounds ugly, are there children in danger?
ETA: with the benefit of hindsight, there were children in danger.
2 Likes
take comfort that there is no evidence to suggest that that scenario occurred.
1 Like
What does it mean when you say “I don’t believe the firearm was a MB manifestation”? Genuine question.
2 Likes
If someone other than MB owned the gun, and negligently left it laying around for MB to pick up, or handed it to him, that would create criminal and legal liability for the gun owner, but wouldn’t diminish MB’s responsibility for using it, I would think.
4 Likes
SS’s role in USEF is new, and Jan 1, 2019 was the first date that USEF required people to have completed the training in order to compete.
I have taken the training, and I know that
- While SS is primarily focused on protecting minors, they are not exclusively focused on minors. As an example, Tommy Serio was interim suspended by SS due to a complaint concerning sexual misconduct toward an adult employee. The interim suspension was lifted, and the investigation did not go forward, but the reason the investigation failed to go forward was insufficient evidence, not because the reporter was an adult.
- Based on the training, SS addresses cases of bullying.
- Based on time spent in SS threads, I have come to believe that SS will get involved in reports of bullying toward minors, but not bullying toward adults. I believe that is referred back to USEF, but frankly I’m not sure.
- Based on all this, I find it highly plausible that LK, in the ugly situation she was in, may have believed that SS would or might get involved in bullying of an adult, to the extent she thought it worthwhile to send them an email or give them a call.
- I interpreted her post as saying that they informed her that in the case of bullying, they did not get involved when the target was an adult, something she had previously been “not aware” of.
Given SS is so new, there is indeed considerable confusion about precisely what they will and will not get involved in, despite the training.
3 Likes
The RG and GM threads are actually more concerned with SS than they are with RG or GM.
1 Like
Actually, it’s not a tangent.
LK has said she initiated a report on MB to SS.
@MorganSercu
and
@NotGrandPrixYet
DEDUCED (assumed) that the report alleged child abuse due to their incorrect belief that the only reason one would make a report to SS would be to make a report concerning minors.
2 Likes
Your last sentence: do you mean “do not have” instead of “have”?
You think it a gross overreach if SS referred a concern over the safety of children to CPS? Really? REALLY?
The only thing that has been definitely established is the the general situation was tense, ugly, and escalating, and 911 calls were made on a daily basis. We know in retrospect that there was (at least) one adult who was under great psychological and mental stress (unhinged), and there was a hand gun available.
The children were in danger!
Everyone agrees that it is stupid and irresponsible that neither antagonist had the sense to walk away before someone got shot/ committed a serious felony, and you are taking the position that it was “gross overreach” for SS to refer to local CPS the question of whether the children should be removed for their safety?
4 Likes
What this article fails to mention is that LK’s call to 911 regarding an SUV in the driveway at 3AM was made the next day in the afternoon, NOT when she saw the SUV and supposedly felt threatened. That is not something that someone would do if they truly were afraid.
16 Likes
Does anyone else find it fascinating that @YankeeDuchess has gone from being a naive questioner to a full blown expert suddenly? How does she know children were there at the time?
17 Likes
Any children, if present, were in danger. Responding to whoever it was who said it was a gross overreach for SS to follow up on a report from an adult being bullied by referring a concern about children to CPS. SS did follow up to the extent of getting back to LK about the general scene. Which was a tinderbox.
The children, if present, were in danger, and it would have been gross negligence on the part of SS not to look into the situation regarding the children, pretty much the opposite of “gross overreach”.
2 Likes
