The aftermath of DG's resignation - what next for the FFSG?

This kind of half-baked 'investigation', where the so called disciplinary committee have not even bothered to collect evidence, in some ways could be worse than no investigation at all. I mean now the abuse apologists will probably feel validated and use this 'official' result to back their claim that Cipres is innocent because this 'independent' committee has said so etc. :rolleyes:
 
I hope that if they ever attempt a competitive comeback, the booing drowns out their music at every competition. That there are signs and banners. That the skating world doesn't let him forget that we know what a piece of shit he is.

Also, yo, French Sports Minister lady? That nuclear button's looking real good right about now.
 
overedge said:
How can they say there were "no witnesses" when the skater received the Instagram and Cipres confirmed to Dispenza that he sent it? This info is public and no one has denied it.
Click to expand...
Whoever initiated the complaint didn't offer any witnesses, just newspaper clippings, and the FFSG didn't get any to offer evidence. Of course, if you don't make any effort to obtain testimony, you won't get any.

Who was it who initiated the complaint?
 
Okay I am surprised by the no sentence decision. Once again out of touch with reality. This is really disappointing.

I do not know if the French Sport Minister will do anything. The French government has angered feminists quite a lot recently (mostly by putting a man investigated by a rape claim as French Interior Minister so Head of Police). So maybe it will intervene on this one to give itself a good conscience but overall I am hurt by how little claims of rape and sexual assault are considered.

Besides, who will want to cheer on Cipres ? His career is over. Why are they not punishing him, except to say that young girls do not matter ??
 
So upset. But with the investigation in US through SafeSport, he still cannot come to US to teach?
 
Last edited:
Sylvia said:
Cipres is being investigated by the Pasco County, Florida Sheriff’s Office (per Brennan's 6/30 article), not by SafeSport.

@okokok777 posted last month in a now closed thread that "Cipres is not a USFS member and therefore wasn't covered under SafeSport rules": https://www.fsuniverse.net/forum/th...uation-12-16-2019.106562/page-10#post-5827206
Click to expand...

Thank you Sylvia, I guess you could tell by my wording that I was thinking I might have something wrong, I had forgotten that Cipres is not a USFS member, therefore not available for investigation, thanks for setting the record straight.
 
The Gilles Beyer decision I can understand - it's basically the equivalent of a court saying it lacks jurisdiction. But it must have taken some effort to ensure that there would be no evidence in the Cipres case.

Pechalat just shrugging her shoulders about it is disgusting.
 
Bigbird said:
She has lost my respect. No wonder he has been so smug on his instagram. I had really thought this time it would be better. Shame on the Federation, shame on Ms Pechalat. If this was your intended response it would have been better to do nothing at all.
Click to expand...

Same thing for me, but the worst is yet to come, it will fall on innocent people and athletes, the reputation of French skating has been damaged for years
 
Orm Irian said:
Welp, that's your cue, Minister. Time for FFSG to go boom.
Click to expand...

From your post to G-d's ears. Seriously, though, does any one know of what would be involved (i.e., meetings, hearings, etc.) before the Minister could exercise the nuclear option? Or, how much time can pass before we can assume that nothing will be done ever?
 
I really don't have much to say about this other than I am deeply disappointed and disgusted at the decision.

I would love to see the ISU remove all competition allocations from FFSG - no more annual GP, no GPFs, no Euros and certainly no Worlds until they can treat survivors with the respect and compassion that they deserve. I know this will never happen, but one can dream.

(and on a side note there are other European ISU members who are far more worthy of hosting an annual GP event, but I digress)
 
Why Ciprès and Beyer didn’t get sanctioned?

A new article. It’s behind the paywall, so I couldn’t read it.

@litenkyckling Multiple countries have had their own abuse scandals recently, including Germany, Sweden and Finland. The rest of the countries are not necessarily any better. The problems might not be revealed yet. Just because the other cases are not so well-known, doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
 
Last edited:
This article from Le Nouvel Obs (also behind a paywall) is interesting.

Sarah Abitbol is blasting the fed and Nathalie and so is Anne-Line Rolland, another abused skater.
Candeloro explains some stuff.

Nathalie Pechalat called upon the disciplinary commission on several sexual abuses cases at the end of April.
Then she realized that the regulations of the disciplinary commission were... illegal, inconsistent with the Code du Sport.
Some of the members of the disciplinary commission were also members of the Conseil Fédéral which was forbidden.
So she worked on new regulations with the new FFSG lawyer.
On June 5th, once it was done, the lawyer told her that, if the commission was staying as it was, its decisions could be nullified if a lawyer was invoking the illegality of the regulations and of the commission.
She then asked for the resignation of the 2 members of the commission who had a double role and proposed two other names. That caused a crisis with the refusal and the resignation of Maryvonne Del Torchio, president of the Conseil Fédéral (ex interim president after Gailhaguet's resignation).
The new commission was complete by June 15th.
4 lawyers (1 specialized in sport, 1 in associations) and 1 synchro skating judge.
They couldn't set an audition date before July 9th and Beyer's lawyer used that to invoke Beyer's expired membership by June 30th.

About the Ciprès case
The commission says there is nothing concrete in the file, no pics, no documents, no complaint, no testimony, nothing that would have a judicial value. So they have no choice other than dismissing the case.

Who was in charge of putting things in the file ?
I've looked for the disciplinary commission's regulations.
It states that the president of the federation calls upon the disciplinary commission.
The president of the federation also designates a person from the fed to gather informations and put stuff in the file.

And given the writing of the decisions, and the blur aka the lockdown that existed between March 17th and June 2nd, I'm not sure which president presided over the opening of Ciprès's case and decided who was going to handle the gathering of informations for Ciprès (for Beyer and another coach, it is clearly stated that it is Nathalie in late May, but for Ciprès, it's an "old" decision that the commission is made aware by late May).

My take is Nathalie is struggling with the "old fed". Everything is difficult. Like we say in french, there are corpses in every closet and she can't open any without struggling to contain problems. She struggled with outdated rules, then with important people of the fed to not have the whole disciplinary action crumble in a very challenging time and it still does.
And she has been summoned by a very dissatisfied minister.
Candeloro has the most accurate description, I think :
"This situation shows the difficult position Nathalie Péchalat is in : move fast, show the federation is changing, without having the means to achieve that."
He thinks Nathalie should have protested against the decisions and renounced too quickly

I don't pity her as it was her decision to push to keep the FFSG unchanged/to be reformed, with people from team Gailhaguet and the Ghost himself with banana peels ready for her but I think she is indeed in a very delicate position.
 
Last edited:
misskarne said:
Sorry, but Pechelat was publicly supported by Cipres and welcomed that support. I don't believe any of this "oh it was all the old FFSG's fault!" shit at all.
Click to expand...
Both can be true. It's possible that Pechalat wants to make meaningful changes and is bumping up against Gailhaguet's cronies and existing bureaucratic hurdles (I mean, French bureaucracy...) but also that she has some serious blind spots when it comes to those close to her, as demonstrated by her accepting Cipres's support and also her defense of her husband's work with Roman Polanski.
 
Let's go back in time a little bit :

- in december, Brennan's article is published. We learn about the case.

- Gailhaguet doesn't react

- on december 16th, he publishes a communiqué : "considering the available informations we have at the present time, the federation has no motive to revoke its trust in Morgan" (maybe not the best formulation, but I'm struggling on that one)

- on January 29th, Gailhaguet's butt is put on the grill with the sexual assault cases, especially Beyer. Some are calling for his resignations.

- on February 5th, he gives a press conference :
" Morgan has unquestionably committed a major and intolerable error. I forced him to come explain himself in front of the Conseil Fédéral and his president, Mrs Torchio, and to apologize. We have expelled him from the Conseil Fédéral (Mrs Torchio will later say Ciprès chose to resign instead). Now, he is having a curative treatment with a psychologist and we are studying a preventive mesure in a police department specialized in minors, for him to witness the reality of certain tragedies."
Later a journalist will make him say what was exactly the intolerable error (or how Morgan "shamefully screwed up" as Gailhaguet will say later) : he sent a picture of his privates to a minor girl and it's proven, Gailhaguet says to the journalists. The journalists asked why he was not punished more and the lawyer of the fed answered that there was no lawsuit in the USA and that in the meantime, they intended to protect Vanessa and her right to pursue her career without having to pay for Morgan's faults.

So we know Morgan had to talk about this story in front of the Conseil Fédéral, has apologized, has "been resigned" from the Conseil Fédéral, that sanctions were taken against him (by whom ? under which regulation other than Gailhaguet's decision ? That's why I'm curious about the disciplinary committee receiving the information on May 23rd that there was a disciplinary action against Cipres, is it some late regularization ?)

- on February 8th, Gailhaguet resigned, leaving Mrs Torchio at the head of the federation. Half of the Conseil Fédéral resigned.

- on March 15th, Péchalat was elected. Mrs Torchio stays as the president of the Conseil Fédéral. This is immediatly followed by the lockdown.

- in late April, Péchalat starts to put things in order for the disciplinary commission to be legal

- at the begining of June, Mrs Torchio protests against Nathalie's demand that 2 members of the Conseil Fédéral resign to make the disciplinary commission legal. Mrs Torchio resigns

- at the begining of July, during the audition, Morgan Ciprès doesn't admit anything anymore. Nothing of what the federation "knew" or had heard from Morgan by February 5th is in the file. The then president of the fed is gone, the then lawyer of the fed is gone, half the Conseil Fédéral is gone, its president is gone. The other half still should have memories of hearing Morgan but there is no trace of anything in the final decision.

Did Nathalie even foresaw that Morgan would backpedal during the audition ?
Did anyone think of asking ex or remaining members of the Conseil Fédéral what Morgan told them ?
Did they agree to talk ?
Because admission is a way of proof. That should have been in the file.

The fed's regulations were illegal because Gailhaguet didn't care. He knew he would take decisions by himself and that no one within the FFSG would dare contradict him. But people knew that, with him, all the matters would be treated "within the family"
At the opposite, Nathalie tried to be formally flawless but she is not Gailhaguet. People are not going to admit things because she's friend with them, even if they admitted before. They come with lawyers, possibly smart ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

N
In deep sh... French fed
Replies
9
Views
6K
Nmsis
N
Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information