Olympic governing body 'knows the truth' behind late figure skater's alleged sexual abuse

[Meoima]

“My clients and I want to make this clear: John Coughlin used his position of trust and power and prominence in figure skating to sexually abuse multiple minors, three of whom I represent,” Manly said in a telephone interview one day after a USA TODAY Sports story reported that...

Full article here https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...truth-behind-alleged-sexual-abuse/3313035002/

 

[tony]

Several of the recent articles say it was someone competing with John for a commentating job that first reported him — this originally was suggested by his family, I believe, but I may have mis-read another article.

So it is suggested by them that someone first blew a whistle out of spite and then (at least) three others came forward with their stories?

I’m not trying to rehash what was said in the other 1000-post threads, but genuinely wondering if his family truly believes this is what happened.

 

[AxelAnnie]

Another report brought to us by super objective Christine Brennen. Let the poor man and his family rest in peace.

 

[meggonzo]

The false allegations story is hyperlinked in the article. Here's the url:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...y-blamed-suicide-false-accusation/3300924002/

Here's the quote from the medical examiner's report:
In the Jackson County (Mo.) medical examiner investigative report, medical investigator Christina Hawkins wrote that Coughlin’s family told her Coughlin “had been depressed because of false allegations."

“The subject is an Olympic figure skater who was currently trying to get a commentator position with the U.S. Olympic Committee,” Hawkins wrote. “He was competing for the position with another person. This person made false allegations, which resulted in the subject getting suspended from all correspondence and activities.”

We already knew that John was only restricted from the first allegation. He was suspended after more complainants came forward. I'm not sure if that's a mistake on the medical examiner's part or the family not explaining correctly.

 

[VGThuy]

I don't know how USFS can be blamed for "allowing a story to circulate" that contradicts what the attorney said. The narrative the attorney is talking about is being pushed by family members of Coughlin. USFS can't control if they choose to speak to Brennan or USA Today or whomever and want their statements to be published.

 

[overedge]

Another report brought to us by super objective Christine Brennen. Let the poor man and his family rest in peace.

The complainants deserve some peace as well. BTW it's "Brennan".

 

[MK's Winter]

I don't know how USFS can be blamed for "allowing a story to circulate" that contradicts what the attorney said. The narrative the attorney is talking about is being pushed by family members of Coughlin. USFS can't control if they choose to speak to Brennan or USA Today or whomever and want their statements to be published.

I agree with you. The USFS has no control over what the Coughlin family says/does. They have pushed Safe Sport to continue the investigation but remain very canned and neutral. I think John Manley is indicating that the USFS knew exactly what was happening. John Manley is not always the most eloquently spoken, but he is damn good lawyer. He was a major force in the MSU lawsuit and the ongoing lawsuits with USAG/USOC. This is similar to how the USAG sh*t show started. I expect we are going hear a lot more in the near future...

 

[UGG]

Another report brought to us by super objective Christine Brennen. Let the poor man and his family rest in peace.

Do you think Christine Brennan is wrong for reporting a story regarding a statement made from a lawyer for 3 minors who say they were sexually assaulted just because John is dead and his family wants peace?

The article seems objective to me, she is only reporting facts.


" Asked if he was planning legal action on behalf of his clients, whom he did not name, Manly said, “My clients are going to pursue justice so this never happens to another little girl again."

I am pretty sure the "false accusation" narrative is dead in the water unless 3 people are so jealous of John's (really basic non extraordinary) career that they are moving forward with a criminal investigation and plan on committing purgery.

 

[mollymgr]

I don't know how USFS can be blamed for "allowing a story to circulate" that contradicts what the attorney said. The narrative the attorney is talking about is being pushed by family members of Coughlin. USFS can't control if they choose to speak to Brennan or USA Today or whomever and want their statements to be published.

I guess if the USFSA doesn't make any statement if they are aware of what happened (as stated by the attorney), that's quite bad. While they aren't responsible for who writes what about this, they are responsible for making sure that they are transparent for the sake of the safety of athletes. This sends the wrong message to both victims and abusers. From the actions of USFSA, it appears that they just want this to go away.

 

[kosjenka]

“but U.S. Figure Skating knows the truth, and for them to allow a story to circulate that a false accusation led to Mr. Coughlin’s decision to take his own life is despicable. It’s a mixture of denial, ignorance and in some instances, malice.”

Does this cover the behavior of (pairs) skaters at Nationals or is there more I am missing?

 

[wickedwitch]

So they aren't blaming USFSA for the abuse, but for allowing pro-Coughlin stories to circulate. That's completely different than what USAG was accused of in the Nassar case.

 

[VGThuy]

I guess if the USFSA doesn't make any statement if they are aware of what happened (as stated by the attorney), that's quite bad. While they aren't responsible for who writes what about this, they are responsible for making sure that they are transparent for the sake of the safety of athletes. This sends the wrong message to both victims and abusers. From the actions of USFSA, it appears that they just want this to go away.

I guess I could see that if Brennan asked for a rep from USFS to respond to the latest Coughlin family quotes and chose to say nothing allowing the family members to just push their narrative without push-back or a different take. I think they as an org aren't sure how to act yet and think staying silent and neutral is "safe".

 

[mollymgr]

I guess I could see that if Brennan asked for a rep from USFS to respond to the latest Coughlin family quotes and chose to say nothing allowing the family members to just push their narrative without push-back or a different take. I think they as an org aren't sure how to act yet and think staying silent and neutral is "safe".

That's bad leadership if they don't know how to act yet. How many months have gone by since the first allegation took place?? They care more about their own "safety" and "clean" image.

 

[overedge]

That's bad leadership if they don't know how to act yet. How many months have gone by since the first allegation took place?? They care more about their own "safety" and "clean" image.

The article mentions that the USFS rep didn't return a call seeking comment. Very bad look for USFS - it would be much better for them to respond, even if all they had to say was "no comment". This is not going to go away no matter how much they wish it would.

 

[wickedwitch]

That's bad leadership if they don't know how to act yet. How many months have gone by since the first allegation took place?? They care more about their own "safety" and "clean" image.

But bad leadership isn't illegal. (Otherwise, the USFSA would have been sued many times over.) I assume since they are pursuing this with a lawyer, there is a legal case.

I don't want to excuse bad leadership or poor PR by the USFSA, but I am confused about what the complaint is. Are they asking for the USFSA to say something now or stop the articles or pay up because they didn't stop the articles?

 

[laviemn]

Of the 3 accusers in the SafeSport investigation, am I remembering correctly that the first was an adult at the time of the alleged abuse?

If Manly is representing 3 women who were minors, then a fourth victim has stepped forward.

 

[mollymgr]

But bad leadership isn't illegal. (Otherwise, the USFSA would have been sued many times over.) I assume since they are pursuing this with a lawyer, there is a legal case.

I don't want to excuse bad leadership or poor PR by the USFSA, but I am confused about what the complaint is. Are they asking for the USFSA to say something now or stop the articles or pay up because they didn't stop the articles?

The article states:
My clients and I want to make this clear: John Coughlin used his position of trust and power and prominence in figure skating to sexually abuse multiple minors, three of whom I represent,
This is probably following up on the articles that have come out lately which have stated that the victims were out to get John Coughlin. The attorney probably won't go after the USFSA for not stopping the articles since that isn't really possible. But he does have something he is going to be suing them for, from this comment. "My clients are going to pursue justice so this never happens to another little girl again."

 

[Aerobicidal]

Over the last week, I watched the recent movies/series on Michael Jackson and R. Kelly, and something I noticed for the first time also seems true about the Coughlin case: Many of the arguments made in favor of the accused men (in this case, anyway, they're all men) and against the accusers/survivors function almost exactly like political talking points.

Obviously the three cases have extremely significant differences and lots of information will always be disputed, questioned, or unknown. However, after seeing and hearing as much evidence as I can, it's hard for me to doubt that those three men committed illegal and unethical acts.

The talking points ("the accusers just want money," "they're jealous," "no due process," "no opportunity to defend himself," "taken advantage of," "never had a childhood," etc.) are all such terrible arguments. It's insulting to hear these repeated as if repetition itself is going to make them persuasive, but equally insulting to know how many people are capable of being persuaded by them. (I don't mean to suggest that there aren't legitimate and persuasive reasons on the pro-accused sides of the debate, but presumably those wouldn't be or seem like talking points.)

I guess my overall thought is that I'm disturbed by how talking points trump critical thinking in so many different areas of popular discourse. I'm probably guilty of that myself in certain situations, but I've never thought about it in the context of public figures accused of abuse/assault before.

 

[meggonzo]

Obviously the three cases have extremely significant differences and lots of information will always be disputed, questioned, or unknown. However, after seeing and hearing as much evidence as I can, it's hard for me to doubt that those three men committed illegal and unethical acts.

The way that information was presented by either John or his family, which doesn't line up with when the suspension actually occurred or SafeSport's procedures, has me speculating about what John wanted to hide, or didn't want on record. Some of the information is from the article I linked in post #4 -- His family claims the suspension is from a false allegation, but he was first restricted and then suspended when multiple people made allegations. John also claimed SafeSport's rules prevented him from talking about the case, which SafeSport has stated is not true. I assumed his legal counsel told him not to make public statements, but why make up a reason that is easily refuted? Also the claims that he could not even get information on the case are problematic when he could have requested a hearing from SafeSport and been granted one within 72 hours. And if he couldn't get information, how did he and his family know the allegation was supposedly from someone he was competing against for the same job?!

 

[judiz]

What bothers me is that John’s father was in law enforcement, he certainly knew the rights of the accused and the rights of the victims and I find it hard to believe that he would accept John not being allowed to defend himself.

 

[tony]

The way that information was presented by either John or his family, which doesn't line up with when the suspension actually occurred or SafeSport's procedures, has me speculating about what John wanted to hide, or didn't want on record. Some of the information is from the article I linked in post #4 -- His family claims the suspension is from a false allegation, but he was first restricted and then suspended when multiple people made allegations. John also claimed SafeSport's rules prevented him from talking about the case, which SafeSport has stated is not true. I assumed his legal counsel told him not to make public statements, but why make up a reason that is easily refuted? Also the claims that he could not even get information on the case are problematic when he could have requested a hearing from SafeSport and been granted one within 72 hours. And if he couldn't get information, how did he and his family know the allegation was supposedly from someone he was competing against for the same job?!

ITA with the whole post. To add to the last point, people will probably argue that they came into this recently published information after John's death, but Sappenfield was writing on her social media just a day (IIRC) later that this allegation came from someone who is jealous, which to me suggests they knew that part from the beginning. Or maybe they just wanted to run with the 'tv commentator jealousy' as a reason why others came forward and hope no one read further into minors making allegations, etc. A lot of it doesn't make sense.

 

[Debbie S]

And if he couldn't get information, how did he and his family know the allegation was supposedly from someone he was competing against for the same job?!

The skating world is a gossip mill. (And I imagine other sports are, too.) I have no difficulty believing that info (or rumors of) spread wildly and John/his family obtained info through the grapevine.

 

[UGG]

ITA with the whole post. To add to the last point, people will probably argue that they came into this recently published information after John's death, but Sappenfield was writing on her social media just a day (IIRC) later that this allegation came from someone who is jealous, which to me suggests they knew that part from the beginning. Or maybe they just wanted to run with the 'tv commentator jealousy' as a reason why others came forward and hope no one read further into minors making allegations, etc. A lot of it doesn't make sense.

It makes a lot of sense if you believe his family made the statement because that’s what he told them.

 

[tony]

It makes a lot of sense if you believe his family made the statement because that’s what he told them.

But then my argument would be- why was he telling people that no one was telling him *anything* about the case? If it really was something as petty as another commentator trying to get him out of a marginal job (I mean, look at the lack of coverage this year aside from the Tara and Johnny show), then he should've had nothing to worry about.

 

[Doggygirl]

I'm curious about the attorney's statement that "US Figure Skating knows the truth..." I'm sure this thought comes to mind due to the recent gymnastics scandal, but I wonder if reports/complaints were made to the USFSA at some point, and were not investigated? If not this, then I wonder what he is suggesting they know, and when they came to know it?

With all my heart, I want young athletes protected. I want our culture to insist on it.

 

[UGG]

But then my argument would be- why was he telling people that no one was telling him *anything* about the case? If it really was something as petty as another commentator trying to get him out of a marginal job (I mean, look at the lack of coverage this year aside from the Tara and Johnny show), then he should've had nothing to worry about.

Good point. If he knew nothing about what he was being accused of, how would his family know it was someone who was jealous of his career making up a story. So yea I agree it doesn’t make sense.

 

[kwanfan1818]

I question the medical examiner writing up the family's allegations in an official report beyond that he committed suicide because he felt he had been falsely accused of a SafeSport violation, which is verifiable by speaking to family and friends, some of whom have already spoken on the record.

 

[AxelAnnie]

Do you think Christine Brennan is wrong for reporting a story regarding a statement made from a lawyer for 3 minors who say they were sexually assaulted just because John is dead and his family wants peace?
.

yep

 

[okokok777]

yep

Please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it his family who's trying to continue the coverage (the "Spun out of control" article, the 03/28 Brennan article, the active FB group that is advocating for politicians to reform SafeSport).

 

[meggonzo]

The skating world is a gossip mill. (And I imagine other sports are, too.) I have no difficulty believing that info (or rumors of) spread wildly and John/his family obtained info through the grapevine.

The point was that he shouldn't have lied to the media and said he didn't know what he was accused of since he had that information, and he could have requested a SafeSport hearing.