DefinitelyDressage.com

I am really glad to see this, not because of them personally, but to show the system works and they are not going after everyone for no reason. They take things very seriously and investigate carefully, so a ban or a clearance has a lot of creedence.

But I am also very glad for Debbie and Bob.

And Aunt Becky is only getting 2 months in prison. Apparently, today was a good day to be a sleaze.

aunt Becky?

Chisamba wrote:aunt Becky?

Lori Loughlin...Aunt Becky was her character on Full House.
She and her husband were part of the college admissions scandal.
Susan

Anybody know why George Morris' victim also has a life-time ban?

Sue B wrote:Figures....

I don't understand this comment, either. Plenty of people have been banned by SafeSport and not had it reversed. SafeSport must have had good reason for its decision.

I'm sure it did.

SueB, you're not usually obtuse. What are you thinking?

Sue B wrote:I'm sure it did.

???

Tarlo Farm wrote:Anybody know why George Morris' victim also has a life-time ban?

He doesn't have a lifetime ban....

From NY times

Only one of Mr. Morris’s accusers has gone public: Jonathan Soresi, a former student and an assistant trainer to Mr. Morris, is himself a registered sex offender. In 2007, Mr. Soresi pleaded guilty to a felony count for the possession of child pornography. He was also barred by SafeSport but was reinstated last week.

It’s just a sad outcome for the victim. Perhaps others will come forward.
The “circle the wagons” entailed in “he’s my friend” thinking is why more don’t come forward.

Quite sad.

Ryeissa wrote:

Tarlo Farm wrote:Anybody know why George Morris' victim also has a life-time ban?

He doesn't have a lifetime ban....

From NY times

Only one of Mr. Morris’s accusers has gone public: Jonathan Soresi, a former student and an assistant trainer to Mr. Morris, is himself a registered sex offender. In 2007, Mr. Soresi pleaded guilty to a felony count for the possession of child pornography. He was also barred by SafeSport but was reinstated last week.

I think you miss read the story. Mr. Morris wasn't the one who was reinstated. That was Mr. Soresi who was reinstated. Mr. Morris is still under lifetime ban.

horsepepsi wrote:

Ryeissa wrote:

Tarlo Farm wrote:Anybody know why George Morris' victim also has a life-time ban?

He doesn't have a lifetime ban....

From NY times

Only one of Mr. Morris’s accusers has gone public: Jonathan Soresi, a former student and an assistant trainer to Mr. Morris, is himself a registered sex offender. In 2007, Mr. Soresi pleaded guilty to a felony count for the possession of child pornography. He was also barred by SafeSport but was reinstated last week.

I think you miss read the story. Mr. Morris wasn't the one who was reinstated. That was Mr. Soresi who was reinstated. Mr. Morris is still under lifetime ban.

QUOTE: does anyone know why HIS VICTIM is under a lifetime ban? (See red color above)
Me: His victim is not under a ban

This wasn't about Morris. Please re-read. thanks. Soresi is the victim in question. Does this help clarify?

Also, GM just did a clinic at Persimmons farm. Very concerning.....

Sorry. Yes I see that now.

horsepepsi wrote:Sorry. Yes I see that now.

No problem! Good to see you- blast from the past to see your username!

Bumping with the latest:
https://www.chronofhorse.com/article/bo ... -sex-abuse

https://horsenetwork.com/2021/12/usef-o ... ivil-case/

Was not thrilled at Debbie's public statement a) reiterating her support of her husband and b) arguing against the anonymous nature of the accusers. Not a great look for a (now-former) USEF high-level and very visible representative.

Ponichiwa wow makes Debbie M
Look just about as bad. Glad she is not representing the US or team coach now. Just ugh

Wow. So Safe Sport dropped the ban? From what I understand, they use ex FBI to investigate, so they are pretty thorough. I don't know what to say about the rest of it. Are there any lawsuits of sexual assault decades later where the plaintiffs aren't named?

Just. Ugh.

SafeSport put an "administrative closure" on the case prior to arbitration. It turns out that the plaintiffs on the civil suit withdrew from the SafeSport process in favor of civil redress. SafeSport was explicit in its comments re: "ban was overturned and Bob is innocent!" claim that the administrative closure does not at all mean that McDonald was cleared of the charges (or whatever the equivalent term is in SafeSport terms).

From the OC Register article in February 2021 after the administrative closure:

McDonald alleges SafeSport dropped the case after he provided the center additional information prior to an arbitration hearing triggered by his appeal of the lifetime ban.

SafeSport, however, in especially strong terms for the center, said both of McDonald’s assertions that the allegations against him were “proven false,” and that the case had been dropped because of new information, were “not true.”

“Absolutely not,” Dan Hill, a spokesman for SafeSport, said this week.

“The center is aware of his statement and it is not accurate as far as the center’s position,” Hill said.

The article is worth a read.
https://www.ocregister.com/2021/02/05/s ... onald/amp/

I totally believe the allegations, simply because the romantic tale of how he met and " courted" Debbie was, to my opinion, classical " grooming"

The last article explains it better. It put everything in it. But it's still confusing. It seems the victims don't like what Safe Sport did? And aren't their names going to come out if they sue?

"SafeSport officials decided to issue an “administrative closure” because of the reluctance of the two alleged victims to participate in the arbitration process. The victims each had concerns about how the center had conducted its initial investigation, according to four people familiar with the case and SafeSport documents.
. . .
SafeSport, however, in especially strong terms for the center, said both of McDonald’s assertions that the allegations against him were “proven false,” and that the case had been dropped because of new information, were “not true.”

Chisamba-- 100% agree.

Tanga-- plaintiffs can maintain anonymity (see: Roe vs. Wade-- "Roe" is a pseudonym).

And yeah, McDonald has maintained (vociferously!) his innocence and that the dropping of arbitration "cleared" him. SafeSport clearly disagreed.

Already lots of abuse of the young-and-hopeful in our sport-- working student conditions, etc-- so I'm happy to see us slowly, incrementally, painfully moving in the right direction.

It's so deeply disheartening when people we have admired turn out to have feet of clay.

Moutaineer wrote:It's so deeply disheartening when people we have admired turn out to have feet of clay.

Agree. I just have a hard time dealing with all of this. Too many things have happened. The older we are, mostly all of this BS was "normal."

It makes me understand what may have happened that bought a talented young kid i know running home prematurely from a "life-changing working student opportunity."

Tanga wrote:

Moutaineer wrote:It's so deeply disheartening when people we have admired turn out to have feet of clay.

Agree. I just have a hard time dealing with all of this. Too many things have happened. The older we are, mostly all of this BS was "normal."

this is a tangent thought, but the Ghislaine Maxwell case being so in the news. I have wondered if she was so well "groomed" as to think it was all normal. it seems fairly obvious that her relationship with her father was nqr. obviously at some point one should be able to say, this is wrong and I won't support it, but it may be seriously complex.

sorry for the tangent but in my.mind it seemed related because of the " all seemed normal " comment

I agree Chisamba. It took me a long time to realize what I thought was normal was not. As a teacher, all of the kids thought they had the problem situation and everyone else was good. You have no perspective if that is your life. Just think back on some of the things we accepted when we were younger that we would be appalled at today. I am not following Ghislane, but you can think of so many people in the world that do evil and just don't seem to care or learn. And what do you do when you learn that someone you thought was the good person in your life has that evil? I don't know. This really distresses me.

I have to admit I believed the bull shit.

I honestly didn't delve into if he was cleared or not. Rye said he was cleared. I believed it. I really should know better. I should have read the source. Safe Sport categorically did NOT clear him of all charges. those were his words.

like that song " it wasn't me" it's amazing how much power denial has.

now I have to decide if I want to delve or just live.my life

Chisamba wrote:I have to admit I believed the bull shit.

I honestly didn't delve into if he was cleared or not. Rye said he was cleared. I believed it. I really should know better. I should have read the source. Safe Sport categorically did NOT clear him of all charges. those were his words.

like that song " it wasn't me" it's amazing how much power denial has.

now I have to decide if I want to delve or just live.my life

No, this is a civil case now. It's in the courts....I say that it's about time, good. They are very brave. The COTH articles are truly hard to read. Those poor victims.

The SS case is still closed as the victims didn't want to speak and as I understand they didn't have enough to move ahead..... So yes, technically he was cleared. That is a true statement. They may reopen that now with the two victims ready to speak out and they may re-activate this SS case.

Debbie was just dropped from the USEF (I believe- whatever her official position was....Good)
https://www.eurodressage.com/2020/08/22 ... s-ban-life

I actually did delve. the SS case was dropped because the victims did not want to participate in arbitration. My source, which could perhaps be in error said that they are now willing to face arbitration and are prepared to if SS reopens the case because it was closed administratively, and he because WAS NOT cleared. Safe Sport CAN reopen the case, and yes, I know it is currently a civil case.

2 victims , one was 13 and the other 14 and Debbie is named in the suit because she had oversight responsibilities and failed to supervise safely.

Chisamba wrote:I actually did delve. the SS case was dropped because the victims did not want to participate in arbitration. My source, which could perhaps be in error said that they are now willing to face arbitration and are prepared to if SS reopens the case because it was closed administratively, and he because WAS NOT cleared. Safe Sport CAN reopen the case, and yes, I know it is currently a civil case.

2 victims , one was 13 and the other 14 and Debbie is named in the suit because she had oversight responsibilities and failed to supervise safely.

right. This is correct.

Ryeissa wrote:The SS case is still closed as the victims didn't want to speak and as I understand they didn't have enough to move ahead..... So yes, technically he was cleared. That is a true statement. They may reopen that now with the two victims ready to speak out and they may re-activate this SS case.

Slight quibble with respect to language here. SafeSport reps have categorically disagreed with the statement that McDonald was cleared. The case was closed "administratively" i.e. not because there was insufficient evidence to support the ban (i.e. "cleared"), but because structurally the claimants withdrew from the process.

There's a significant difference between those two outcomes: cleared vs. closed. "Cleared" suggests that McDonald was not at fault for any transgressions. Safesport reiterated that McDonald was not cleared.

Ponichiwa wrote:

Ryeissa wrote:The SS case is still closed as the victims didn't want to speak and as I understand they didn't have enough to move ahead..... So yes, technically he was cleared. That is a true statement. They may reopen that now with the two victims ready to speak out and they may re-activate this SS case.

Slight quibble with respect to language here. SafeSport reps have categorically disagreed with the statement that McDonald was cleared. The case was closed "administratively" i.e. not because there was insufficient evidence to support the ban (i.e. "cleared"), but because structurally the claimants withdrew from the process.

There's a significant difference between those two outcomes: cleared vs. closed. "Cleared" suggests that McDonald was not at fault for any transgressions. Safesport reiterated that McDonald was not cleared.

right, but the language presented in various news outlets included a variety of terms as this unfolded (which was super confusing)....(ie "his ban is lifted"). I think we all get this and can move on now.

Interested to see how the case pans out.