Coughlin's Safe Sport Status Changed to Interim Suspension

[Prancer]

She raises a good point. If you all you put is "allegation of misconduct", then people will fill in the gaps in their minds. Some will go to "It must not have been that bad." Others will think, "He's a child rapist." I don't think the investigation would be undermined if SafeSport included a few more details, ex. "allegations of misconduct: bullying of minor", "allegations of misconduct: sexual assualt of minor" allegations of misconduct: "sexual misconduct involving an adult".

Let's say that they include the details "allegations of misconduct: sexual assualt of minor" or "allegations of misconduct: sexual misconduct involving an adult"

Do you really believe that this would make life better for the accused?

 

[Frau Muller]

In that case, I hope he hugs every woman in the place.

Mervin better do that. A “Tran Cam” will be following him throughout Detroit!

 

[MK's Winter]

Hummm...I understand and support their mandate. On the other hand, I understand also the family wishes to clear his name, if they want to pursue the case. Tricky situation...sigh!

I think we will hear more about this. Safe Sport could continue with this if they see a systemic issue. I think that was put out there in Christine’s article for a reason. We have seen 3 other NGB’s either begin to or have a reckoning. Figure Skating is definitely due and I believe it’s coming.

 

[missing]

I just did some skimming of the Safe Sport code and practices and procedures because I was curious as to what was covered by the term "sexual misconduct."

For starters, there is no statute of limitations. On the whole, I understand this, since the statute of limitations was a roadblock for Catholic adults who wanted to report abuse they had suffered as children from their priests.

But without a statute of limitations, everyone is at risk of accusation for the rest of their lives, especially since "sexual misconduct" includes "sexual harassment."

When I was a little girl, on occasion I had to walk down fire escape stairs. I would be wearing a skirt, and the little boys who had already climbed down would look up so they could see my underpants. Little boys seemed to get great pleasure out of that, but then (although I didn't know the term) and now I would regard it as sexual harassment. With no statute of limitations, I could report this behavior, and since even after a final decision has been reached a case can be reopened, I could hold this over the heads of those nasty little boys for the rest of their lives.

Sexual misconduct with a minor includes this in the code:

Sexual Conduct (or attempt to commit the same) between a Covered Adult and a Minor where the age difference is three or more years.

That would include consensual sex between a 19 year old and a 16 year old, or an attempt at same. Attempt covers a lot of ground when it involves two teenagers. And what must be kept in mind is there is no statute of limitations. A 36 year old woman could report an incident that happened 20 years previously, and a 39 year old man would then become the "Covered Adult." And if I've read the code correctly, it wouldn't even have to be the woman who reports the incident. If someone else knew that 20 years previously a 19 year old boy had made a pass at a 16 year old girl, or that the two had had an affair, that third party could report it and the 39 year old man would then become a "Covered Adult."

I don't know the exact nature of the accusations (if they've been listed somewhere, I've failed to see it). But without that knowledge, I think it's important to realize the term "sexual misconduct" doesn't automatically mean rape or statutory rape, and with no statute of limitations it doesn't mean the misconduct happened last week or last year. With third party and even (although not encouraged) anonymous reporting, the "Covered Adult" might not be able to confront the alleged victim (who might not care enough to have reported it). And with sexual harassment not having been defined, in theory those nasty little boys who were so transfixed by my underpants could be subject to investigation until their deaths or mine.

 

[ZilphaK]

The original coverage was one-sided but the students aren’t blameless: https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...78f092-1ceb-11e9-9145-3f74070bbdb9_story.html

On the larger issue, nothing can be done about immediate media coverage of complex stories. Journalism is on-deadline news. No newspaper is going to hold a story that meets journalistic standards until all the facts come out months later.

Watch the entire 1:48 minute video. The kids are pretty much entirely blameless, other than in the eyes of some people who may think that wearing certain clothing is an invitation to confrontation. here's another take on it, but this guy swears like a sailor (no offense to sailors who don't swear). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVvpVRJ-NH4 At any rate, I have no idea why the adults in this situation -- both the ones who accosted the kids and the ones who waded into a crowd of minors -- who at that point had moved away and were doing their silly school chants -- aren't being held to some higher standard of behavior than children. But if you want to discuss this further, I've enjoyed parsing this video, and would be glad to continue in the Political Whatsit forum.

On the second point, educated and critical readers -- and just good people -- would take into consideration that all the facts are surely not in place within 24 hours or even later, and would go tat lace or cook a casserole or volunteer with homeless kittens before taking to social media to do the detective work to personally destroy someone's life.

 

[mag]

So I am confused about something. There was a suggestion in either this or the other thread that this could be a case of John saying something inappropriate. I think the example was that perhaps he told a skater he/she was too fat or had too big boobs or something crass like that. Perhaps he said this sort of thing to all three skaters. Or, as in the example above, maybe he made an unwanted pass at a teenage girl when he was a teenager but it was rebuked and didn’t go any further.

If that was the case, that it was some sort of verbal abuse or yelling, or even slamming the boards, when Safe Sport contacted John, and I believe he said he didn’t remember the incident (or if he did remember, either way) would the next reasonable course of action be for John to admit that was not a great thing to have done, for Safe Sport to talk to the accuser and for perhaps some sort of mediation to take place where John would apologize?

I just don’t understand how it would even get to the point of being published, then upgraded, and the police being called in, for verbal abuse or an angry outburst. Unless it was longer term, ongoing verbal abuse, in which case others must have been aware, I just don’t see a one or two time comment, or a teenage misreading of signal getting to this level of investigation.

I have no idea what the allegations are. I am just confused and shocked that some of the things people are suggesting would get to this level of investigation - especially including law enforcement.

 

[Willin]

And, unfortunately, for the individual, based on some of the skaters social medial messages, they already have speculated as to who they are, and apparently so do some of the officials. I really feel for them if they are indeed still a competitive skater.

FWIW, while I don't think we should speculate at all (and I have no desire to do so), according to Mervin Tran and Dave Lease/Christine Brennan's sources the identity of the accuser is widely known among the elite skating community and the officials at the event. That makes the accuser even more brave, as being a small community she knew her identity would get leaked or quickly figured out. But that's also part of the problem: with skating (especially elite skating) being such a small world, it's far too easy for people in the know to identify and retaliate against accusers even if they are supposed to be anonymous.

 

[genevieve]

Can we please not get into debate about the DC incident here? That story has nothing in common with the SafeSport investigation or John Coughlin's death, other than people formed opinions based on initial reporting, which is true of literally everything that is reported. There is a lot to talk about regarding the DC incident, but it deserves its own thread, rather than derailing an already-complex discussion here.

 

[overedge]

I am never a fan of TSL, but found the interview very informative on how SafeSport works. It is an organization made to protect athletes from abuse after the gymnastic scandal, so they publish names of those accused even before the accusations are proven to be true because people wanted that way. Once the accused is dead, whether the accusation is true or not is no longer an issue because the accuser is safe now. They will only continue the investigation after the accused is dead, assuming the accusation is true, if there was a systemic problem, like whether someone knew but turned a blind eye to it.

The accuser is "safe" in that the alleged abuser won't do it again. But the accuser still deserves an investigation of why, with all of USFS' "tell someone" and safe sport policies, the incidents still happened.

Also, the complainants were probably very much aware of the kickback they would get for filing their complaints, especially in a sport with a culture of silence and looking the other way. I would be very surprised if the complaints are about something like being asked for a date.

 

[canbelto]

An inappropriate comment or joke would not result in a complete suspension of activities. People really have their heads in the clouds over this. The accusations had to have been much more serious.

 

[puglover]

Christine Brennen stated in her interview with TSL that SafeSport has been overwhelmed since it's inception with complaints and needs more funding and additional qualified investigators to handle the huge numbers of reports they receive. That would make it seem that most of these complaints do not meet the threshold of concern requiring any kind of action that would restrict the livelihood of the accused. My husband has acted on peer review committees in his profession, I have been a worker for Child and Family Services. Complaints may be carefully considered but don't see the light of day unless there is collaborating evidence or some other marker that elevates it. I can't see all of this happening over a hurtful comment or something that fairly commonly occurs, less than desirable or not.

 

[overedge]

Isn't the DailyMail called DailyFail for a reason? I wouldn't want to be quoted by them myself vs. other news outlets.

And if DL is such an attention whore/needs press for clicks, you'd think he'd be alllll over it, and yet...

Dave Lease refusing to talk to the Daily Mail because it's a sensationalist tabloid should be in the dictionary as the definition of "pot calling the kettle black".

 

[MsZem]

FWIW, while I don't think we should speculate at all (and I have no desire to do so), according to Mervin Tran and Dave Lease/Christine Brennan's sources the identity of the accuser is widely known among the elite skating community and the officials at the event. That makes the accuser even more brave, as being a small community she knew her identity would get leaked or quickly figured out. But that's also part of the problem: with skating (especially elite skating) being such a small world, it's far too easy for people in the know to identify and retaliate against accusers even if they are supposed to be anonymous.

If this is indeed the case, I would like to see the investigation continue. If the allegations are true, the accuser(s) deserve to have their account officially confirmed, and the message needs to be sent that such behavior (whatever it was) is not acceptable. If the allegations cannot be corroborated, the Coughlin family deserve to have John's name cleared.

I wonder if going public would actually give the accuser(s) some protection against retaliation, since it would make any judging (or other) shenanigans visible and obvious. Of course, going public would be difficult at any time, let alone with emotions running as high as they are now.

 

[skatfan]

I wonder if going public would actually give the accuser(s) some protection against retaliation, since it would make any judging (or other) shenanigans visible and obvious. Of course, going public would be difficult at any time, let alone with emotions running as high as they are now.

Are you serious? Have you not seen how the gymnastics community responded to the Nassar allegations? Go take a week or two to review how that went for the gymnasts before saying something like that.

The skating community is not reacting well to this news.

 

[vesperholly]

An inappropriate comment or joke would not result in a complete suspension of activities. People really have their heads in the clouds over this. The accusations had to have been much more serious.

No one knows that either way - that's the whole problem.

 

[puglover]

Bill Cosby went on for decades and over 50 women had to speak up and tell similar stories and still many people do not believe he did anything wrong. I am concerned that the accusers lives can be put under a magnifying glass. It seems this is getting far too close to their identity being known. That would be truly tragic!

 

[overedge]

No one knows that either way - that's the whole problem.

But like @canbelto says, the suspension that was given, and then the stronger suspension after the first one, is a pretty good indicator that these must have been fairly significant complaints.

 

[MsZem]

Are you serious? Have you not seen how the gymnastics community responded to the Nassar allegations? Go take a week or two to review how that went for the gymnasts before saying something like that.

I realize that this is a very difficult case for everyone to process, but I suggest we try to treat one another with respect.

I'm well-aware of what happened in the Larry Nassar case.

Given that the rumor mill is already swirling and the accuser(s) may already be targeted, going public could give pause to people who would have to explain why they are marking someone down/treating someone poorly for no apparent reason. Of course, the decision whether and how to go public is very individual, and there isn't one correct way to bring forward such allegations. I did get the sense that many gymnasts have found it empowering to go on the record about what was done to them. But not doing so is an equally valid choice. An accuser's only obligation is to do what she feels is best for herself.

 

[vesperholly]

But like @canbelto says, the suspension that was given, and then the stronger suspension after the first one, is a pretty good indicator that these must have been fairly significant complaints.

It indicates to me an overabundance of caution - suspend his activities lest the accusations prove true.

Gymnast Alex Naddour was accused of sexual misconduct by Safe Sport, suspended from USA Gymnastics and later cleared: https://www.azcentral.com/story/spo...dour-cleared-u-s-center-safesport/1283769002/

Gym owner Daniel Witenstein was accused of sexual misconduct, suspended and later cleared: https://www.azcentral.com/story/new...cs-centers-owner-suspension-lifted/812996002/

Naddour's suspension took 6 months to lift while Witenstein's took a week.

Cyclist and politician Marty Nothstein was accused of sexual misconduct and cleared by Safe Sport: https://www.mcall.com/news/breaking...rt-closed-news-conference-20180824-story.html

It makes this situation that much more tragic. No way to be cleared now.

 

[zoe111]

If this is indeed the case, I would like to see the investigation continue. If the allegations are true, the accuser(s) deserve to have their account officially confirmed, and the message needs to be sent that such behavior (whatever it was) is not acceptable. If the allegations cannot be corroborated, the Coughlin family deserve to have John's name cleared.

I wonder if going public would actually give the accuser(s) some protection against retaliation, since it would make any judging (or other) shenanigans visible and obvious. Of course, going public would be difficult at any time, let alone with emotions running as high as they are now.

I agree with the point that I think this should be pursued. Given John’s general popularity in skating, if the allegations are proved to be founded, then she deserves to have that confirmed. If they prove unfounded, the Coughlin family deserve that. I think we all need to remember that these are still investigations, not final proof of anything. I really think the speculation all around needs to just stop quite frankly.

 

[believed]

But like @canbelto says, the suspension that was given, and then the stronger suspension after the first one, is a pretty good indicator that these must have been fairly significant complaints.

And that there were not one but three complaints.

 

[genevieve]

Given that the rumor mill is already swirling and the accuser(s) may already be targeted, going public could give pause to people who would have to explain why they are marking someone down/treating someone poorly for no apparent reason.

Unfortunately, in the US at least, accusers going public often results in doxxing and death threats. I'd like to think that the figure skating community is relatively small enough and better than that, but even based on the conversations here, I don't really think so.

 

[overedge]

Significant complaints doesn't necessarily equal true complaints. Mere existence does not impart veracity.

Significant enough, and seen as strong enough, to trigger a more intensive investigation.

 

[MsZem]

Unfortunately, in the US at least, accusers going public often results in doxxing and death threats. I'd like to think that the figure skating community is relatively small enough and better than that, but even based on the conversations here, I don't really think so.

I'd like to think so too.

I hope those who came forward are getting a lot of support from their family and friends. This must be an incredibly difficult time for them.

 

[Perky Shae Lynn]

An inappropriate comment or joke would not result in a complete suspension of activities. People really have their heads in the clouds over this. The accusations had to have been much more serious.

It's not one joke we are talking about. It's an a pattern of unwelcome frat boy behavior / inappropriate conduct stuff. See the CBS settlement with Eliza Dushku.

 

[my little pony]

they had to settle with Eliza because she was fired when she complained about the workplace environment, not because of "jokes"

people have such a strong urge to minimize these complaints. when people get robbed, I never hear people try and downplay the crime. I was in an attempted car jacking once. no one ever suggested it was an unfounded complaint even though there were no witnesses.

 

[Stephori]

Thank you for that link. Now I'm curious. I knew Richard Callaghan had an interim suspension. His category is listed the same as John's, allegations of misconduct. Has what he was accused of ever been disclosed? John might have been under this cloud for a very long time. It seems to me that more must be done to speed up the process for the sake of both the accused and the accuser. Closure along with transparency is important.

Yes, it is well known what Callaghan was accused of. That was reported to USFSA 20 years ago. If you wish to read the details google Richard Callaghan.

 

[Perky Shae Lynn]

they had to settle with Eliza because she was fired when she complained about the workplace environment, not because of "jokes"

people have such a strong urge to minimize these complaints. when people get robbed, I never hear people try and downplay the crime. I was in an attempted car jacking once. no one ever suggested it was an unfounded complaint even though there were no witnesses.

We know that, for Pete's sake. But the ABUSE she originally reported was inappropriate verbal communication, not sexual assault. The way she was treated was a classic case of sexual misconduct prior to her firing. Once she was fired for complaining, it became much more than that.

 

[vesperholly]

people have such a strong urge to minimize these complaints. when people get robbed, I never hear people try and downplay the crime. I was in an attempted car jacking once. no one ever suggested it was an unfounded complaint even though there were no witnesses.

Was there a crime? Right now there are only accusations and we don't know any details.

Maybe Coughlin would be found guilty. Maybe he would be cleared. I posted those links because multiple people have been accused of sexual misconduct before via SafeSport and have been cleared. A lot of posters here seem to have concluded that the complaints mean guilt.

 

[Stephori]

For those who have not seen this, Mervin Tran left a lengthy and thoughtful message on Twitter (in 3 or 4 parts, click the arrows on the side to read the complete post). He addresses John, the act of suicide, the Me Too movement and more:

https://twitter.com/skate_moivo

As I recall, Tran mentions John's demons. That seems rather provocative to me.