SafeSport alleges "culture of grooming and abuse" in U.S. figure skating

[Tinami Amori]

I don't think it is as easy as 3 people conspiring to report someone and... boom you are done. It appears SafeSport was conducting several interviews for a while going back as far as several decades ago.

I am not saying it was so in JC's case. But! if a procedure allows a complaint, with so loosely based and wide range criteria (3rd party, 15 years later, no police reports filed, no violence, no reported crime, possibly based on one person's idea what's moral what's not, religion, values, assumptions of "something is evil"), then how is "faulty reason/motives" are filtered out? Just the fact of a complaint, justified or not, puts a shade on a person who is accused....

 

[LarrySK8]

Believe it or not, I am aware that you don't have all the answers. I didn't say that I thought you did or that you claimed to. That wasn't the point at all. It never is.

Do you want a change of careers? On the USFS Job Opportunities branch of their website, there is a job opening for USFS representative to SafeSport.

No strict psychological or medical credentialing is indicated for consideration.

 

[hoptoad]

. . . I am horrified by the stories that were shared with me at Nationals (after my post that you reference) about how the Center is treating victims and what the Center has asked of victims in our community.

. . . The problem is not that the Center is failing to protect coaches; it is failing to protect athletes. Do you know the expression "Not my circus, not my monkeys"? This is my circus and these are my monkeys, and the Center is failing to keep our athletes safe, and there's nothing U.S. Figure Skating can do about it.

I hope I haven't distorted what you are saying by quoting only a few sentences.

Can you elaborate on what the Center is doing or not doing regarding victims? I realize you may not be able to say much, but are victims treated worse than they were by USFS? Will they be more or less likely to report in the future because of how the case(s) are being handled by the Center?

What should they be doing? Is it related to a lack of resources, not understanding the nature of the sport, wholesale incompetence, something else?

 

[Prancer]

oh, what the heck, i am going to ask...

"Third party reporting" ...
What happens if "someone with his/her own morals and understandings of what is allowed",

It's not about anyone's morals. It's about professional ethics. All the coaches are bound by a professional code of conduct. They agree to abide by this code of conduct. If someone reports something that isn't covered by the code, then it isn't something for SafeSport to pursue.

Well, one nasty breakup and SLAM, BAM, THANK YOU MAM...and there could well be a report.............several if friends decided to "support" the first person.

Okay, so let's say that you and Tinami are coaches and someone reports you for alleged violations of the code of conduct. What do you think will happen?

Again, what specific steps do you want SafeSport to take in such cases? Should third parties not be allowed to make reports? Or what?

 

[believed]

Well, one nasty breakup and SLAM, BAM, THANK YOU MAM...and there could well be a report.............several if friends decided to "support" the first person.

Aaaaaaand it’s attitudes like this that make people feel they aren’t safe or supported enough to report.

 

[rfisher]

Every professional organization has a code of ethics that have developed over the course of the profession. Every professional within that organization is always made aware of the code of ethics. Now, whether the profession strictly enforces the code or loosely enforces varies. But, everybody involved knows what they are. Ethics are based on morality, but not only morality. There are several schools of ethical theory. Which theoretical model is in place depends on the profession and the people within. It's really quite simple. What is not so simple is the fact many people are not ethical. People might not do something if they fear it's illegal and they might face criminal charges, but will let an ethical violation slide. As I tell my students, if it's illegal, it's unethical; however a behavior can be unethical and not be illegal. Accusations reported to SafeSport would not have to be illegal (i.e., require a police report) to be considered a violation of the ethical code of conduct. To me, ethics is how you behave when no one is looking. It's trust, honesty, integrity.

 

[IceAlisa]

I also have an impression that even in 21-st century, in progressive USA:
- "sex" is still considered to be some "big deal".
- that particularly "girl's" virginity is something valuable.
- that "a man takes sex, and woman gives sex".
- that to a female "sex is emotional issue rather than just fun" and to a man "it is nature's call".
- that females should "guard themselves against men who just want to have sex" without any assumption that "females may also just want a boy for a quick sex".
- that a quick affair "is wrong for a woman", and "ok for a man, and that's what they want".

Do "protectors of the young girls" ever consider a possibility that a 17 year old female, can have 3 boyfriends outside a rink, and still have a quick roll in a hay, with a 30-something coach... maybe just for experience, or conquest to add his name to her little black book?

Actually some of this is what irks me about the education and the bringing up of girls in the US. It is definitely implied that girls don't want sex and just want someone to like them. This is a complete and utter denial of female sexuality and warping of women's minds.

That and also the notion that the first time has to be special. Why?

 

[UGG]

I feel like people want so much for John to be innocent, they are not looking at this objectively.

 

[caseyedwards]

I feel like people want so much for John to be innocent, they are not looking at this objectively.

What’s to look at objectively? All the evidence against him? There is none. There aren’t even specific allegations to look at.

 

[MacMadame]

I feel like people want so much for John to be innocent, they are not looking at this objectively.

Also suicide is a very emotional action that leads to a lot of anger and finger-pointing. It's human nature to want someone to be at fault for John's suicide and SafeSport is a safe target as they are an organization, not a person people know.

 

[caseyedwards]

I'm not sure what you mean by the second half of that. I think my answer below might answer what I think you mean; if not, would you be willing to clarify?



That's an interesting question and I am glad that you asked. As you said, they are not necessarily contradictory, but they do need to be reconciled.

I continue to believe (and in fact believe more strongly than I did in January, based on additional evidence) that the Center for SafeSport doesn't issue interim suspensions lightly. When they do, there is significant evidence already collected and they have good reason to believe the accused poses a short-term danger, either to one of the identified victims or to vulnerable athletes, especially minors. I like your word: they do not act impulsively at the start of the investigation, and they do not issue suspensions impulsively or for more "minor" violations.

The figure skating cases are regularly taking over a year. Looking only at the public cases, three involved criminal charges. Of the others, Richard Callaghan, Steve Moore, and Kordale Bavor have all been under investigation for over a year. I heard at Nationals from reliable sources that neither Richard Callaghan nor Steve Moore's case is close to a resolution. There are several cases that are not public that have been under investigation for a year. I am horrified by the stories that were shared with me at Nationals (after my post that you reference) about how the Center is treating victims and what the Center has asked of victims in our community.

The Center for SafeSport appears to be bending over backwards to avoid "taking someone's career away" (based on what is being shared by people who have been involved with cases). The burden of proof to suspend a coach is very high; the burden of proof to ban a coach appears to be nearly impossible to reach. This is the opposite problem of what the most vocal people on social media are saying. The problem is not that the Center is failing to protect coaches; it is failing to protect athletes. Do you know the expression "Not my circus, not my monkeys"? This is my circus and these are my monkeys, and the Center is failing to keep our athletes safe, and there's nothing U.S. Figure Skating can do about it.



I agree with your assertion that allegations of fifteen year old behavior in a peer relationship with a power differential would be unlikely to result in a suspension.

"Allegations of sexual misconduct" protects the identity of the victims and also protects the accused. If SafeSport had put nearly anything more concrete on the website, it would have identified the victims to a very small community. If John had defended himself and been cleared, the allegations wouldn't have been known to haunt him. There have been coaches with interim suspensions who were eventually cleared by SafeSport who have returned to coaching just fine.



John was offered psychiatric resources on the day of his death, and many times before that. He chose not to take it. His family presents this as something new that just popped up; it was not and there had been concern about John for months. He had been offered help many times by many people; he chose not to take it. He was offered the same urgent appeal hearing of the suspension that everyone is offered (within 72 hours); he chose not to take it. He was offered love and support and friendship every day, including on the day of his death, and he chose not to take it.

John chose to kill himself.

The Center for SafeSport has thousands of cases, and one person chose to kill himself after being accused. The criminal justice system has hundreds of thousands of people accused each year. Don't blame the system.



One occurred less than fifteen years ago but not recent. One was recent. One, the timeline would identify the victim, IMHO, so I won't comment.

I am not going to discuss or defend that information. Some of you have been around long enough to judge my credibility for yourself; to others, I am an anonymous, random poster on the internet whose username they haven't seen before. You can choose to believe me or not.

This is so sick and perverted!!! In the me too and post Nassar era a persons whole life in skating is completely destroyed forever after they are put on skatings nassar list and they think it’s all fixed by some doctors visits?!? Sick and perverted!

 

[Tinami Amori]

Every professional organization has a code of ethics that have developed over the course of the profession. Every professional within that organization is always made aware of the code of ethics. Now, whether the profession strictly enforces the code or loosely enforces varies. But, everybody involved knows what they are. Ethics are based on morality, but not only morality. There are several schools of ethical theory. Which theoretical model is in place depends on the profession and the people within. It's really quite simple. What is not so simple is the fact many people are not ethical. People might not do something if they fear it's illegal and they might face criminal charges, but will let an ethical violation slide. As I tell my students, if it's illegal, it's unethical; however a behavior can be unethical and not be illegal. Accusations reported to SafeSport would not have to be illegal (i.e., require a police report) to be considered a violation of the ethical code of conduct. To me, ethics is how you behave when no one is looking. It's trust, honesty, integrity.

I think all codes, rules, laws are there to protect people from harm (physical, financial, something tangible and material). In a case where two consenting adults, let's say at a rink, are having a consensual affair, if they keep it private and outside the rink, and it does not affect operations of the rink, other students and employees (operationally), it is nobody's business. The policies of sports clubs in USA, as i see it, seem to prohibit such relationship, given under the law such are legal. And even if there is no harm to ANYONE, it can still be reported.

If rules/codes, that have to do with private relationship that are legal, are based on something other than "protecting people from harm", they have no place to exist.

Ethics and morals are subjective..
There have been laws in US states prohibiting certain sexual positions even between married couples.
There have been laws in the USA prohibiting inter-racial marriages, same sex relationship, etc..
All such laws are based on "morals" and "personal ethics"... these laws have been abolished.

As I tell my students, if it's illegal, it's unethical.

It is illegal to cross a country's border without a visa, and to overstay a visa, and to hide from the law enforcement...

 

[Tinami Amori]

It's not about anyone's morals. It's about professional ethics. All the coaches are bound by a professional code of conduct. They agree to abide by this code of conduct. If someone reports something that isn't covered by the code, then it isn't something for SafeSport to pursue.

Ethics is how one chooses to behave, act in a situation that may or may not be guided by laws. Behavior, not guided by laws, is based on morals. Morals usually based on religion, upbringing, social influences and other factors.

Code of conduct is either there to protect someone from "harm" and/or is there to protect "values" not connected to "harm" to someone. Preventing "harm" is right, imposing "values" when there is no harm, is subjective.

a) Okay, so let's say that you and Tinami are coaches and someone reports you for alleged violations of the code of conduct. What do you think will happen?

b) Again, what specific steps do you want SafeSport to take in such cases? Should third parties not be allowed to make reports? Or what?

1-a) The code of conduct should not cover situations where there is no harm to others, like two consenting adults having sex outside of the given environment, even if they are members of that "environment", if their affair does not affect others.
2-a) One should not be allowed to report anything if he/she is not witnessing something that is "material/physical harm" or "crime" or "illegal activity".

1-b) I want for SafeSport to look at the complaint objectively and determine if there is "material/physical harm" or "crime" or "illegal activity", to the 3rd party, or to the one who the 3rd party is trying to protect.

 

[Prancer]

Code of conduct is either there to protect someone from "harm" and/or is there to protect "values" not connected to "harm" to someone. Preventing "harm" is right, imposing "values" when there is no harm, is subjective.

Where do you get that definition? Because every code of ethics or conduct I have ever seen covers a lot more than just "preventing harm."

Is that what the code of conduct for coaches is for? According to whom?

2-a) One should not be allowed to report anything if he/she is not witnessing something that is "material/physical harm" or "crime" or "illegal activity".

What if one sees something that violates the actual code of conduct that the coach has agreed to follow?

1-b) I want for SafeSport to look at the complaint objectively and determine if there is "material/physical harm" or "crime" or "illegal activity", to the 3rd party, or to the one who the 3rd party is trying to protect.

Isn't that exactly what an investigation is for? Except, you know, that they are investigating based on the rules by which they are actually governed and NOT the rules that suit Tinami.

 

[AxelAnnie]

Deleted.

 

[Prancer]

Were I reported for unethical behavior, I would expect to be notified immediately. I would expect to see the report immediatly. I would expect to have the opportunity (immediately) to refute the allegation. I would expect a hearing to occur within 30 days, and a ruling to be handed down. Done!

Well, you would then be very disappointed one way or another, as investigations take generally take a while.

But correct me if I am wrong on other issues. I believe that the accused are notified that they are under investigation. I believe that they have the opportunity to refute the allegations as part of the investigation. And I believe they all have the right to an urgent appeal hearing of the suspension within 72 hours of an actual suspension.

What part of that have I gotten wrong?

I have no inherent issue with third party allegations. All the above would apply. But here is where it oh so easily turns to $hit.

Now, let's say that Tinami leaves and takes all the best students. I am pissed. Eventually I decide to report the time that Tinami was in the locker room soothing a crying client. The kid is crying, Tinami is hugging the bereft student.

Then, (remember, I lost 75% of my best students) I find two other people who remember the incident, and on reflection they see that Tinami's behavior was inappropriate, and they file a report also.

So essentially you have three complaints about one incident, which means you have essentially one complaint. And?

Let us allow the Duke LaCross team fiasco inform outlook. Allegations were completely false, but the 3 men from the team were villified not just locally but nationally.

And exonerated.

Let's say that I want to go to the police tomorrow and tell them that you stole cash from me and I get three of my friends to say they saw you do it. You would probably be under investigation for months. And you are at just as much risk of this happening to you every single day as coaches are of having your scenario above play out, because there is no way to reasonably protect people from false reports because it is only known that they are false when an investigation is complete.

I find it bizarre that so many of you think that if you were to report Tinami for hugging a crying student, she would be suspended immediately. There is no evidence that such things have happened, at least not that I know of. And if you are going to say that this has happened in skating, I want links, not anecdotes.

 

[Tinami Amori]

Where do you get that definition? Because every code of ethics or conduct I have ever seen covers a lot more than just "preventing harm."
Is that what the code of conduct for coaches is for? According to whom?

Yes, code of ethics in an organization covers many elements, which are listed and described in details, and yes elements of morals are included. But, in the end, such code is there to protect (or to provide a positive outcome, which is also a form of "protection" as it is opposite to "negative outcome" or "less positive outcome").

What if one sees something that violates the actual code of conduct that the coach has agreed to follow?

The right answer is.... report. My whole argument is "behavior that is legal by law" should not be made "illegal" in the code of conduct of any organization, if it causes no harm to others.

Isn't that exactly what an investigation is for? Except, you know, that they are investigating based on the rules by which they are actually governed and NOT the rules that suit Tinami.

It's not about "my laws". If something is officially legal, and causes no harm, there can not be an "investigation" because there should be no such report.

 

[Prancer]

It's not about "my laws". If something is officially legal, and causes no harm, there can not be an "investigation" because there should be no such report.

And whose rule is this? Because many, many organizations have codes of conduct--and courts have upheld their right to do so provided those codes don't violate Constitutional rights and other laws.

In any case, my original challenge, which no one has answered, was:

I am not looking for some general "in a way that protects both accuser and accused" but for a specific proposal for how you would go about:

1. Protecting the identity or identities of the accusers
2. Protecting the identity of the accused
3. Protecting potential victims of the accused during the investigation process
4. Bringing forward other accusers, if any

Because it seems to me that all of those things are necessary. Perhaps it doesn't to others, so feel free to modify the list as needed, but please explain your reasons for doing so.

Also, if your answer is "I don't know, but there must be a way," be aware that I will consider this a waste of bandwidth, as it isn't helpful at all.

 

[overedge]

Do you want a change of careers? On the USFS Job Opportunities branch of their website, there is a job opening for USFS representative to SafeSport.

No strict psychological or medical credentialing is indicated for consideration.

Gosh, just taking a wild guess here, but maybe that's because the job involves liaising between USFS and SafeSport, not providing psychological or medical advice

 

[caseyedwards]

Well, you would then be very disappointed one way or another, as investigations take generally take a while.

But correct me if I am wrong on other issues. I believe that the accused are notified that they are under investigation. I believe that they have the opportunity to refute the allegations as part of the investigation. And I believe they all have the right to an urgent appeal hearing of the suspension within 72 hours of an actual suspension.

What part of that have I gotten wrong?



So essentially you have three complaints about one incident, which means you have essentially one complaint. And?



And exonerated.

Let's say that I want to go to the police tomorrow and tell them that you stole cash from me and I get three of my friends to say they saw you do it. You would probably be under investigation for months. And you are at just as much risk of this happening to you every single day as coaches are of having your scenario above play out, because there is no way to reasonably protect people from false reports because it is only known that they are false when an investigation is complete.

I find it bizarre that so many of you think that if you were to report Tinami for hugging a crying student, she would be suspended immediately. There is no evidence that such things have happened, at least not that I know of. And if you are going to say that this has happened in skating, I want links, not anecdotes.

You just ignore the complete destruction of the accused life! Their name being publicly announced and publicized by people looking for fame, The loss of jobs! People telling their rape or abuse stories when your name is mentioned. Being compared to Nassar or Weinstein! But good news! You can be exonerated! Yeah right! There is no exoneration. It’s permanent. It lasts forever. Unremovable tattoo!

Even if SafeSport supported people who lost their jobs because they were put on their Scarlet list-doesn’t make up for it!

 

[Prancer]

You just ignore the complete destruction of the accused life! Their name being publicly announced and publicized by people looking for fame, The loss of jobs! People telling their rape or abuse stories when your name is mentioned. Being compared to Nassar or Weinstein! But good news! You can be exonerated! Yeah right! There is no exoneration. It’s permanent. It lasts forever. Unremovable tattoo!

Even if SafeSport supported people who lost their jobs because they were put on their Scarlet list-doesn’t make up for it!

Yes, it is a terrible thing. How do you propose changing that while still

2. Protecting the identity of the accused
3. Protecting potential victims of the accused during the investigation process
4. Bringing forward other accusers, if any

Or do you consider those things unimportant?

 

[meggonzo]

And I believe they all have the right to an urgent appeal hearing of the suspension within 72 hours of an actual suspension.

I think the accused can request a hearing, and SafeSport would grant one within 72 hours? I'd have to go back and read the old articles again, or see if I can find the info on their website. Regardless, it sounded like John never requested a hearing.

 

[Tinami Amori]

And whose rule is this? Because many, many organizations have codes of conduct--and courts have upheld their right to do so provided those codes don't violate Constitutional rights and other laws.

If by law, in a given state, the age of consent is 18, that person is allowed to have sex with another adult over 18.
If both adults over 18, hold their relationship in private, outside of an establishment where they both "operate", and there is no direct "material" negative affect on other members of this establishment, then the establishment has no right to have rules what these two adults do outside of this establishment, if what they are doing is allowed by law.

Liquor is legal. But the rules in work place are: you can't come to work drunk, or drink at work. Because it can cause various harm. But the company can't fire an employee just for the fact of drinking liquor outside of work place and on employee's own time.

Plus, if the concern is "misuse of power" and "favoritism" between two people in a love relationship (at the rink) or against other members, then why the Code of Ethics for USFSA (sited earlier in this topic) allows "couples who were married prior to joining the club"? What would stop a coach-wife favoring her husband she is training over other students? or her son or daughter? or a friend's child? or simply someone she really likes as a person/athlete?

There are many forms of "personal connections" and reasons why someone can treat another "not connected" unfairly. The rules should be based on preventing any form of unfairness, and not single out "lovers".

If it is ok for 2 spouses to operate/function together at the rink, then why not two lovers? is not it a discrimination based on "family status"?

PS. What if Meagan Duhamel and Bruno Marcotte came to work at a US rink, and someone reported them, that 5 years ago, they were lovers, while he was a coach and she was his pupil? Would they be investigated and suspended?

 

[Prancer]

If by law, in a given state, the age of consent is 18, that person is allowed to have sex with another adult over 18.

And restricting certain people from doing so within an organization is not against the law, as the organization has the legal right to do so.

What would stop a coach-wife favoring her husband she is training?

Nothing, apparently. In fact, I would think it would be expected. Or it could make her harder on him. Hard to say.

What is to stop a coach from having a favorite student and favoring that student? What is to stop a coach from disliking a particular student and sabotaging that student? What is to stop a coach from manipulating the emotions of a dance or pair team to get a particular result? What about this, what about that?

PS. What if Meagan Duhamel and Bruno Marcotte came to work at a US rink, and someone reported them, that 5 years ago, they were lovers, while he was a coach and she was his pupil? Would they be investigated and suspended?

Would they have been reported? Maybe. Would they have been investigated? Maybe. Would they have been suspended? Again, maybe, although I think it's highly unlikely and again find it bizarre that people think that the goal here is to hand out suspensions without regard for circumstances. There is no evidence to support this.

I am done with this conversation, as I think it is increasingly pointless and far from the issue at hand. SHARPIE will be rolling her eyes and closing this thread for going in circles any minute now.

 

[Tinami Amori]

What is to stop a coach from having a favorite student and favoring that student? What is to stop a coach from disliking a particular student and sabotaging that student? What is to stop a coach from manipulating the emotions of a dance or pair team to get a particular result? What about this, what about that?

Would they have been reported? Maybe. Would they have been investigated? Maybe. Would they have been suspended? Again, maybe, although I think it's highly unlikely and again find it bizarre that people think that the goal here is to hand out suspensions without regard for circumstances. There is no evidence to support this.

I am done with this conversation, as I think it is increasingly pointless and far from the issue at hand. SHARPIE will be rolling her eyes and closing this thread for going in circles any minute now.

Thank you for responding with your thoughts. I will only state my conclusion that i came to. There are many possible scenarios why people at a rink can be made uncomfortable. Yes it is "sex" that attracts most attention/concerns and gets reported. What's reported and who is reported depends on what the "reporter" thinks of "circumstances". ok.

 

[5Ali3]

Eventually I decide to report the time that Tinami was in the locker room soothing a crying client. The kid is crying, Tinami is hugging the bereft student.

Then, (remember, I lost 75% of my best students) I find two other people who remember the incident, and on reflection they see that Tinami's behavior was inappropriate, and they file a report also.

This is a violation of the locker room policy. It would be handled by USFS's SafeSport Committee. No promises, but based on precedent: you, the three witnesses, the athlete, and (if the athlete was a minor) the athletes' parents would be interviewed. If at that point, all five parties agreed that the incident involved you taking a crying student into the locker room alone, with a closed door, to comfort them, the likely consequence would be what USFS calls "a private letter of admonition" to be placed in your permanent file. The letter would be provided only to you. The people who filed the complaint would be notified that you had received a private letter of admonition, but would not receive the letter. You would likely be required to read the locker room policy and the policy on two deep leadership, and to sign a document stating that you had read both policies and you agreed to abide by them.

More painful than a flu shot, less painful than Garasil.

But correct me if I am wrong on other issues. I believe that the accused are notified that they are under investigation. I believe that they have the opportunity to refute the allegations as part of the investigation. And I believe they all have the right to an urgent appeal hearing of the suspension within 72 hours of an actual suspension.

What part of that have I gotten wrong?

The accused are not notified that they are under investigation until the Center has evidence that a violation took place. Then they are notified and given the opportunity to refute or rebut that evidence, and to offer their own evidence. That eliminates many of the "But what if pure lies are reported for retaliation!" in this thread.

I find it bizarre that so many of you think that if you were to report Tinami for hugging a crying student, she would be suspended immediately. There is no evidence that such things have happened, at least not that I know of. And if you are going to say that this has happened in skating, I want links, not anecdotes.

There is no evidence that this has happened in any sport. In figure skating, the only interim suspensions that have been issued (besides John) are:

Interim suspensions later changed to permanently ineligible:
1. Thomas Incantalupo (currently facing nine felony charges for sexual abuse of a child between the ages of 14-16)
2. Eugene Heffron (currently facing ten felony counts for sexual abuse of multiple children under the age of 18)
3. David Delgado: no additional public information

Interim suspensions that remain interim suspensions:
1. Richard Callaghan: not all of these allegations are public, but the public allegations are quite serious and involve sexual misconduct with multiple students over an extended time period
2. Kordale Bavor: no additional public information

Other figure skating decisions from the Center:
1. Andrew Lavrik: declared ineligible based on felony criminal charges of sexual abuse of a child under 18; if he is cleared of the charges, he can appeal the Center's decision
2. Steve Moore: "interim restrictions based on allegations of sexual misconduct," no additional public information

In any case, my original challenge, which no one has answered, was:

I am not looking for some general "in a way that protects both accuser and accused" but for a specific proposal for how you would go about:

1. Protecting the identity or identities of the accusers
2. Protecting the identity of the accused
3. Protecting potential victims of the accused during the investigation process
4. Bringing forward other accusers, if any

Because it seems to me that all of those things are necessary. Perhaps it doesn't to others, so feel free to modify the list as needed, but please explain your reasons for doing so.

5. Protecting the identities of witnesses
6. Protecting the identity or identities of third party reporters, especially if mandated reporters

Why? Elite sports are very small communities with histories of retaliation, harassment, and even blacklisting for speaking out, especially against popular, well-liked, and/or powerful individuals. Encouraging people to report and to participate in investigations requires an attempt to protect them from retaliation.

I think the accused can request a hearing, and SafeSport would grant one within 72 hours? I'd have to go back and read the old articles again, or see if I can find the info on their website. Regardless, it sounded like John never requested a hearing.

Yes, and such a hearing gives the accused the opportunity to see the evidence against them.

 

[caseyedwards]

I think the accused can request a hearing, and SafeSport would grant one within 72 hours? I'd have to go back and read the old articles again, or see if I can find the info on their website. Regardless, it sounded like John never requested a hearing.

His life was already completely destroyed forever. Why bother! He lost all his jobs. That’s why he killed himself. SafeSport provides no support to accused people. They publish their names so people can call them molesters and pretend a doctors visit can help.

 

[Tinami Amori]

Now, let's say that Tinami leaves and takes all the best students. I am pissed. Eventually I decide to report the time that Tinami was in the locker room soothing a crying client. The kid is crying, Tinami is hugging the bereft student.

I know this is a hypothetical example, but i'd like to request not to use me for such examples. I have a child-free life, and don't come near kids on my own free will, let alone hug them. may they all be happy and healthy.

 

[AxelAnnie]

I know this is a hypothetical example, but i'd like to request not to use me for such examples. I have a child-free life, and don't come near kids on my own free will, let alone hug them. may they all be happy and healthy.

Sorry, I have deleted the post. As they say in Fiddler on the Roof (about the Tsar) May they say happy and healthy......and far away from us!

 

[MacMadame]

Btw, up above a few people have indicated that SafeSport must have some information as a result of their investigation that lead them to say that figure skating has a culture of abuse and grooming (and that therefore there is something they could investigate). I don't think that logically follows. I think any objective observer (or even some unobjective ones) could easily come to that conclusion just from paying even the slightest bit of attention.

For example:
* stories of parents, coaching and partners screaming at their kids at the rink, sometimes hitting them
* a culture that exalts pair teams where they are sleeping together. i.e., Gordeeva & Grinkov are held up as an example of a great pair that should be emulated; people in skating with power opining that a particular pair should sleep together as it would improve their chemistry
* eating disorders are common
* several recent well-documented cases of elite skaters stepping away from the sport to improve their mental health as well as former elite skaters talking about mental health issues they went through in the not so distant past

And this is just stuff the casual fan would know about. People actually at rinks day in and day out could tell you more and insiders could probably add to this list too.

There is nothing specific here that SafeSport could investigate unless someone made a specific report about specific people. But it's all troubling and should be addressed by all the NGB and the ISU in my opinion. It would make our sport better in the long run even if it was difficult in the short run.