Coughlin's Safe Sport Status Changed to Interim Suspension

[ZilphaK]

Interesting that these points are coming up - and I know this is off topic from this specific situation - but there is a viral social media outrage that started today over some (apparently - guessing age) high school aged boys taunting/bullying Native Americans at a demonstration in DC. I don’t want to discuss that incident here - we can in PI if people want. You can search on Twitter to see what I’m taking about.

Here’s my point for this thread: As awful as these boys’ actions have been right now, I can’t imagine what’s going to happen if the social media mob ends up doxxing them. Which I guarantee someone will do by (probably) the end of today. And I think there’s a real possibly of these boys changing their ways from some truly awful views. But what’s the motivation to “redeem” yourself when society won’t ever give you the space to do it?

I just saw this. I feel so especially sad for kids these days. Often, social media "outing" doesn't differentiate between degree or kind of offense, and the protections that courts offer juveniles are thrown away by online justice seekers. And "respected" news outlets can be just as bad. I remember seeing a headline about a 13-year-old stealing money from a candy store at school; $13 I think it was. The comments on the news site were brutal. Another news story reported kids throwing gallons of milk in a local grocery store; stupid kid stuff, and the store and police were dealing with it. However, in the middle of the night -- when social media managers weren't watching -- someone posted the kids' names and addresses on the store's Facebook, and a crowd was ready to descend on their neighborhood.

It's scary. Kids get to be idiots, even really big idiots, and their parents and teachers, and when appropriate, law enforcement get to deal with them in appropriate ways. But the Internet-at-large is often very quick to take matters into its own hands and escalate, and that can be devastating.

 

[TallyT]

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't Safesport's job consist of investigating all claims of sexual, physical and verbal abuse within the sport. As well the accusation did not state which it was. So for all we know it could have been a prima Donna who thought her skating was perfect and a coach was there to tell her how wonderful she was and in frustration of her ignoring everything he said he told her loudly just how ugly her spins were and the brat went home,complained to parents who complained to Safesport. It looks like the exact same procedure would have been followed if this had happened or if it was a sexual assault. To post this on a site and suspend someone when you have no idea if the accusation is real or contrived strikes me as not completely fair. I think a better way of handling this sort of thing should be thought out and procedures put in place. There is a middle ground. I have seen both sides so I am leary of commentating on this sort of thing until the facts are out. I have had physical attempts on a long term basis by someone well liked and respected and also a few attempted groppings of males in responsible positions and I know someone very well who was raped in a sporting situation ...she and her parents and lawyer did everything right and he still got off. I have also when I was younger seen teens who were way too young to be thinking that way hit on try to seduce older men and some were quite nasty when they were turned down. So....it really depends.....

And this screed pretty much exemplified why many victims are afraid to come forward and long-term predators get away with it for so long.

There is NO EASY ANSWER, no matter how much we want there to be, in matters where crimes and abuse can be carried out in the shadows of shame, blame and lack of concrete proof.

 

[PDilemma]

There has been "frontier justice" way before the invention of social media. Salem witch trials, anyone?

Like many have said, this is a tragedy all around. SafeSport, TSL, and Christine Brennan are not at fault. In the light of the horror that Larry Nassar was able to inflict on countless girls under his care for years, the public should be made aware of any serious allegations so they don't put more children in harm's way. We have to set up the system to do that, because "innocent until proven guilty" in public discourse has put thousands of children in harm's way for decades, in sports, religion, schools, etc etc.

False accusations are rare. (They happen, but they are rare compared to the number of survivors who don't report or only report after years or decades.) Multiple false accusations that corroborate each other are even rarer. I don't believe SafeSport would escalate Coughlin's case after a month without due diligence.

But like @Louis I agree that this loss of life is still a waste and a tragedy. People can be rehabilitated, and can still give back to society. It's a tragedy that Coughlin couldn't see another way out.

SafeSport is not above question. A report by Deadspin last year indicates that there are reasonable questions about the qualifications of their investigators, how investigations are being handled and the organization's priorities.

Link: https://deadspin.com/safesport-the-usocs-attempt-to-stop-child-abuse-is-se-1826279217

It's a long read. My takeaway was that SafeSport as it is currently organized and operated is not a solution to the problem in any way. It may be better for the sporrts involved to demand to start over entirely if they are serious about protecting children. But I suspect they are not.

 

[Jarrett]

John replied by email to USA today that he had been informed by SafeSport of allegations made against him and that he could not discuss them at that time. I would hope he had retained an attorney. So, they reported what they knew. They reached out to Coughlin. They were able to confirm that he'd resigned from being a representative for Wilson Blades, had been removed from his job by NBC and that the USFSA had removed him from all positions. Those were the facts as reported. People's responses were based on their own speculation. That is not the fault of the news outlet. I'm certain nobody anticipated the ultimate and tragic outcome. But, I do not see that SafeSport, USFSA nor even USAToday were irresponsible in their actions. I have nothing to say about TSL or any of the people who follow them on FB or Twitter.

I was only questioning Christine tweet elaborating about the nature of the allegations and that there were multiple. I never questioned her reporting in her articles or the responses from safesport or usfsa because she didn't say those things in the articles. I believe the content of the articles from today are more inclusive that the alleged misconduct could have my something other than sexual and none of them alleged there were multiple people coming forward unlike her tweet.

 

[2sk8]

TSL reported that John was under investigation by Safe Sport for sexual misconduct. Which he was. That is a fact. They did not imply he was guilty of these charges. They were very deliberately measured about what they said.

Where is the error?

someone may have already noted this for you, but if you look at the Safe Sport site, it says "allegations of misconduct" NOT "sexual misconduct" (whereas others do say "sexual misconduct")
I only note that to point out that what TSL & Brennan said is NOT just what Safe Sport stated publicly.

 

[2sk8]

Typically Safe Sport handles allegations of a sexual nature, and leaves other allegations to the applicable sporting body. The fact that Safe Sport is handling these allegations suggests that they are sexual in nature.

Just a note: "typically" & "suggest" BUT Safe Sport itself says "The Center has discretionary authority on a case by case basis over any other form of misconduct, including bullying, harassment, physical and emotional abuse." AND the info for John DID NOT says "Sexual Misconduct" as it did for others on the site.

 

[MsZem]

AND the info for John DID NOT says "Sexual Misconduct" as it did for others on the site.

As far as I can tell, ongoing cases are listed as "allegations of misconduct", while resolved cases are listed with the specific type of misconduct.

 

[2sk8]

As far as I can tell, ongoing cases are listed as "allegations of misconduct", while resolved cases are listed with the specific type of misconduct.

No, there are cases where decisions have been made that still do not say sexual misconduct. But, even if you're right about ongoing cases - that really is the point, isn't it? No decision or statement has been made by "Safe Sport" re: sexual misconduct, so it shouldn't be assumed.

 

[Moustaffask8r]

But there's a bigger issue here......

If he assaulted someone, sexually or otherwise regardless of age, or if he sexually or physically abused minors, then this shouldn't have been an unspecified silent investigation by an outside organization with no legal standing. This should have been turned over to local law enforcement and (if minors were involved) a local child protection agency. The fact that it wasn't either means that the allegations were not criminal in nature--not assault or abuse of minors-- or SafeSport is run by Benedict XVI. So which is it?

If I'm not mistaken, all report to Safe Sport implicating sexual misconduct are in fact also transfer to local authorities... maybe someone can correct if I'm wrong

 

[mollymgr]

There are two questions on the SafeSport incident reporting form to report child abuse/neglect to law enforcement if the person reporting is over 18:

https://cm.maxient.com/reportingform.php?SafeSport&layout_id=0

 

[CantALoop]

I really hope there's a way to rehabilitate abusers, but the fact remains that their victims will always bear the burden and scars of their abuse. Maybe abusers can be rehabilitated, learn from their mistakes, and have a "second chance", but their victims will never get the chance to undo what's been done to them.

That being said, I do think it's tragic that John thought there's no way out and feel for his family and loved ones.

(Edit: clarifying points) I also agree that vigilante justice does nothing, but I disagree that social media is wholly to blame - these things happened before social media was as inescapable as it is today. In 2006, Chris Hansen's To Catch A Predator made a big spectacle of a sting operation to take down a district attorney, who was to be their biggest catch yet. End result? The attorney blew his brains out just before they wanted to videotape the whole spectacle. Disgusting on all accounts.

 

[PRlady]

I also considered the impact of doxing those nasty kids who insulted the Native American at the Lincoln Memorial. You know what? Just like BBQ Becky and Permit Patty et al, those kids are bullies who thought they got to be racist in public because they’ve got their president, doncha know. It’s about time the bullies got publicly called out on their racist nastiness, for hundreds of years it’s gone the other way. If a few Neanderthals think twice before picking on minorities because they might end up on YouTube, so much the better.

As for social media in general, there’s no respectable research yet that links its omnipresence to increased suicide rates. It’s horrible to be beaten up in public as I know from personal experience. But it’s rare that social media alone will send someone over the edge - the reaction of one’s friends, family and community are much more important.

 

[platniumangel]

Can anyone shed some light on how safesport conducts their investigations—what their strategies and tools are?

Considering they are not a law-enforcement agency, how do they go about investigating/validating “evidence” etc? Do they work hand-in-hand with local law-enforcement ?

 

[analia]

An "investigation" from SafeSport I imagine like many workplace misconduct investigations involves calling around people he had worked with/for asking for more information (interviewing witnesses). It could take months without reaching any conclusion but the news would have spread regardless. In many cases it can indeed be "he says she says" with no reliable witness statement after months of interviewing. I can imagine how stressful this can be for a person if he believes himself to be innocent but has no way to defend himself.

The part that intrigues me is that SafeSport doesn't allow someone accused to talk about the case in public. I don't know why and how they have this authority or is it just what they told Coughlin. And yet at the same time it was obvious someone was leaking to reporters. I vaguely remember Alex Naddour insisting his innocence on Twitter the moment he was accused and it helped him a great deal.

 

[Japanfan]

Having gone through something the same I know how it can make a difference the rest of your life. I am very strong willed (and was always this way) and valued my privacy but know that some of my personality defects came from these incidents. For instance I tend to mentally buck authority. I do not automatically respect someone because of their position. I quietly observe their behavior for a period of time and then make the decision if I should respect them or not.

I digress, but this is not a character defect. Authority should always be questioned before respect is granted - not automatically obeyed. It's often obedience without questioning that allows tyrants to rise to power.

 

[Frau Muller]

Do we know if John had a legal team? Defense Lawyers should’ve been advising him every step of the “Interim Restricted” phase (Dec 17 through Jan 16) so that his status not be elevated to the more serious designation of “Interim Suspended.” Of course, assuming innocence...the innocent need good lawyers too. USA TODAY and the other reports/obits don’t quote any lawyers.

 

[Japanfan]

Tragic for all concerned. No matter what your labels are people are not their behaviour they are all people first. My thoughts are with all those who are impacted by this and one can only hope some lessons learned to prevent future tragedies.

I digress again, but people's behavior is an expression of who they are.

 

[overedge]

An "investigation" from SafeSport I imagine like many workplace misconduct investigations involves calling around people he had worked with/for asking for more information (interviewing witnesses). It could take months without reaching any conclusion but the news would have spread regardless. In many cases it can indeed be "he says she says" with no reliable witness statement after months of interviewing. I can imagine how stressful this can be for a person if he believes himself to be innocent but has no way to defend himself.

The part that intrigues me is that SafeSport doesn't allow someone accused to talk about the case in public. I don't know why and how they have this authority or is it just what they told Coughlin. And yet at the same time it was obvious someone was leaking to reporters. I vaguely remember Alex Naddour insisting his innocence on Twitter the moment he was accused and it helped him a great deal.

I would guess that his lawyers told him not to comment publicly, not SafeSport. SafeSport doesn't have any legal power to control what people say AFAIK, and anything that anyone on either side says in public after the investigation starts could be used or strategically misinterpreted by the other side.

 

[Spun Silver]

I would guess that his lawyers told him not to comment publicly, not SafeSport. SafeSport doesn't have any legal power to control what people say AFAIK, and anything that anyone on either side says in public after the investigation starts could be used or strategically misinterpreted by the other side.

Do you even know he had lawyers? In his position, do you think he would feel free to disregard advice from SafeSport about how to handle himself during the investigation? You seem to be making a lot of assumptions. AFAIK we know very little at all.

 

[overedge]

Do you even know he had lawyers? In his position, do you think he would feel free to disregard advice from SafeSport about how to handle himself during the investigation? You seem to be making a lot of assumptions. AFAIK we know very little at all.

It would be extremely unusual for someone accused of something that serious to *not* have lawyers. The tone of the "no comment" statement sounded like lawyers were involved. It's an assumption but I think it's a fairly safe one.

 

[once_upon]

We don't know any of the specifics, I have empathy for both his family and friends and the accuser (s?) and family/friends. Neither sides are going to have closure. Or even truth to be known.

 

[Prancer]

Whatever is and is not true or what people choose to believe, his family and friends have suffered a loss.

Condolences and peace to all who loved him.

 

[Tahuu]

I wish John was wrongly accused. It's hard to imagine someone would take his life over an alleged misconduct that is not as serious or is false. According to FBI statistics only 2% of all rape and sexual assault reports are false. But there could be false accusations from personal vendetta. Could SafeSports notify the federation, issue interim restriction and suspension to the accused and require the accused to comply without publicizing these sanctions in order to protect the wrongly accused?

 

[AxelAnnie]

Whatever is and is not true or what people choose to believe, his family and friends have suffered a loss.

Condolences and peace to all who loved him.

I know this has been asked, but could we please change the title of this thread. It rips at my heart when I see it. And, it feeds the problem. Sure he was accused. Sure he was suspended (or whatever) without any kind of process. The man died. Could we have a little respect? Even just taking off the "Interim Suspension" would be helpful.

Do we all know what SafeSport is? Do you know that the accusations are sent to another group of people aside from the people who are "governing" from SafeSport.

There has to be a better way than to ruin a person's life simply with an accusation.

When Maureen O'Hara was hit on as a young actress.........she dealt with it with a huge uppercut to the guy. She never had a problem again.

 

[Prancer]

And, it feeds the problem.

It feeds what problem, exactly?

 

[Rukia]

The real question is can SafeSport trust the feds to actually look out for the best interest of their athletes? I feel like the fact that SafeSport keeps these things public is to protect people because history has proven the individual federations will not.

This whole situation just breaks my heart. I feel sorry for friends and family who lost someone they loved. I feel sorry for anyone who was the victim of abuse who may feel intimidated into not reporting lest they be accused of contributing to the death of another person. I hate that this whole thing had to happen at all. It just sucks. All of it.

 

[VGThuy]

Just from observing the posts in both threads, I think there could be a very loaded discussion about why people start really caring about supposed lack of due process and anonymity when it comes to sexual assault or crimes of a sexual nature (especially when women are victims) when other people are accused of other crimes, they are public and there have been hundreds/thousands of recorded cases of other nature where due process was severely lacking. Is it because people really think anybody anywhere can be falsely accused of sexual misconduct despite stats saying how rare it is? It does happen but given what we know about the rate of underreporting compared to other crimes and the rate of false accusations compared to other crimes, it's lower for sexual assault. Is it because of how we perceive the accused? (Looking like upstanding men who could do no wrong).

 

[AxelAnnie]

It feeds what problem, exactly?

The problem I was referring to was that when a complaint is made, the complainee is kept secret, and the person who is being accused is smeared in public. No due process. No way to disprove it.

What would have been appropriate would be: Complaint against John Coughlin being investigated.

IMO this title would allow some dignity for the man, and give people a place to voice their concerns, outrage, or whatever.

 

[VGThuy]

Due process was happening at the moment. Read any local newspaper and you'll find all sorts of stories of people getting arrested and with a listing of all of the crimes they are accused of committing being made public before an indictment much less trial.

 

[TallyT]

There has to be a better way than to ruin a person's life simply with an accusation.

I would hate to think that - if there is some base for the whole thing - the young people who came forward are in the habit of reading FSU. Or anyone else being victimised and trying to get up the courage to speak.

We don't know the truth. We may never know the truth. Or the authorities may release it and we may all wish we had never known.

I can't help wondering if there would be all this outpouring had the accuser, whose face and voice people haven't seen, and whose perceived goodness isn't a measure to be defended, had been the one to take their life. But then again... would we ever know?