Jump to content

Sign the Petition


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, garfield said:

If, if, if...look how many times you wrote it in just this response.  How is it possible that it becomes acceptable that we justify throwing a gas can on a currently-sensitive subject 

 

 

 

 

 I can't answer your question, because I don't believe in your premise. You see the petition as this awful and terrible thing that is automatically harmful and destructive, as its " throwing a gas can " on a subject to create what ? I guess arson or some such. So thats the dilemma here it would appear. I see the petition as mostly harmless at worst, and potentially productive at best. You don't see it this way, so thats the widest of gulf divides on this that can not be bridged, it would appear.

Edited by BRASSO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fran Haring said:

Exactly. Good luck with that. LOL

A question I don't have the answer to... perhaps someone here does, and forgive me if this has been asked and answered, I haven't had time to read this whole thread...

If... and I mean IF... NOT accusing any corps of anything here, so this is a hypothetical wrapped up in a theoretical... a given corps is found to have a registered sex offender on its staff, can DCI (by that, I mean the front office) step in and take any action to have that staff member removed?  I guess by "take action" I mean... does the front office have the legal means/right to do so? Or can they act solely on moral grounds?  And yes, I know "moral grounds"  can be open to interpretation, and might open an entirely new can of worms.

 


 

 

1 hour ago, Fran Haring said:

DCI... Dan Acheson and the crew at the home office.

Dan and DCI are not vested with any power beyond that which is bestowed on them by the BoD.  Dan and DCI exist at the behest of the member corps and is completely willing to be anything that the corps want it to be.

What basis would DCI have to take action against the fictitious offending corps?  If the corps is compliant with all laws of their states of domicile and performance, why would DCI step in?  Only if the BoD of DCI had charged DCI with the tasks of implementing and controlling the policy would DCI be able to suggest that the corps is, or is not, in "compliance".

So, No, DCI has no power beyond that vested in it by the member corps.  The Boards of the member corps are where the liability and responsibility rest.  Which is exactly why DCI has not centralized the application of the policies.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, garfield said:

 

Dan and DCI are not vested with any power beyond that which is bestowed on them by the BoD.  Dan and DCI exist at the behest of the member corps and is completely willing to be anything that the corps want it to be.

What basis would DCI have to take action against the fictitious offending corps?  If the corps is compliant with all laws of their states of domicile and performance, why would DCI step in?  Only if the BoD of DCI had charged DCI with the tasks of implementing and controlling the policy would DCI be able to suggest that the corps is, or is not, in "compliance".

So, No, DCI has no power beyond that vested in it by the member corps.  The Boards of the member corps are where the liability and responsibility rest.  Which is exactly why DCI has not centralized the application of the policies.  

Got it. Thanks for answering and clarifying.

Edited by Fran Haring
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

.... Howeverthis topic is very sensitive to me right now. Someone i considered a close friend was accused and agreed to a plea on this. a promising career as an educator as well as a designer/instructor in the activity thrown away.

 

what really gets me is in the plea, after very minor time served, if they are a good little adult for a period afterwards, they can get it removed from the record and not have to go on the abuser list. This horrifies me that the legal system allows this. and from the legal docyuments posted on reddit, it has happened to someone else, thus making them eligible to teach groups again. this to me is a HUGE flaw in our already screwed up legal system. It is however why the person targeted on reddit is still working with a corps.

You and I happen to agree on this, but Gar is on the opposite side.

Edited by Stu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unpleasant stuff but so important to be thoroughly discussing.  I'm appreciating all the input, even if I'm a little dizzy from reading through the last 5 or 6 pages.  I'll get over it.  This is important.

My question is this:  At the end of the season, are corps members given the opportunity to give feedback about the staff?  A review of sorts? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, RetiredMusTeach said:

 

My question is this:  At the end of the season, are corps members given the opportunity to give feedback about the staff?  A review of sorts? 

 Yes, RetiredMusTeach... many DCI Corps do have such post season reviews that Corps utilize with marchers to gauge their feedback on their experiences from the summer's season just completed. Questions that are asked on the post season questionnaires naturally can vary a bit from Corps to Corps. Such feedback is considered essential for these Corps future planning to assure their marchers have the most positive overall experience they can possibly provide for them,  these Corps believe.

Edited by BRASSO
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, garfield said:

Dan and DCI are not vested with any power beyond that which is bestowed on them by the BoD.  Dan and DCI exist at the behest of the member corps and is completely willing to be anything that the corps want it to be.

What basis would DCI have to take action against the fictitious offending corps?  If the corps is compliant with all laws of their states of domicile and performance, why would DCI step in?  Only if the BoD of DCI had charged DCI with the tasks of implementing and controlling the policy would DCI be able to suggest that the corps is, or is not, in "compliance".

So, No, DCI has no power beyond that vested in it by the member corps.  The Boards of the member corps are where the liability and responsibility rest.  Which is exactly why DCI has not centralized the application of the policies.  

So the corps do not want 'DCI' to develop a corporate policy to help protect the performers, they instead want 'DCI' to actually turn a blind eye if a corps existing under the banner of 'DCI' decides to put people at risk in their corps. Now that is really brilliant; full sarcasm intended. Because that actually opens up DCI to being sued for neglegence if a corps puts kids at risk at a DCI sanctioned event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

i stopped reading through the whole thread, Stu gave me a headache.

 

However this topic is very sensitive to me right now. Someone i considered a close friend was accused and agreed to a plea on this. a promising career as an educator as well as a designer/instructor in the activity thrown away.

 

what really gets me is in the plea, after very minor time served, if they are a good little adult for a period afterwards, they can get it removed from the record and not have to go on the abuser list. This horrifies me that the legal system allows this. and from the legal docyuments posted on reddit, it has happened to someone else, thus making them eligible to teach groups again. this to me is a HUGE flaw in our already screwed up legal system. It is however why the person targeted on reddit is still working with a corps.

If you are talking about the case on reddit...

There was no 'plea'. The person was convicted of a misdemeanor. Not a sex offense, but rather attempting to video in an area where privacy is reasonably expected. So the punishment was fit to the verdict and the level of the charged offense.

Being a misdemeanor, it was eligible under California law to be expunged, and it was. 

The person now has NO record, and in fact passed multiple criminal checks before being hired.

I find this entire thread, the one on reddit, as well as the petition,  to be  a not-so-veiled attempt to attack Hopkins and YEA, using one of their staff as the weapon in the attack. Very sad.

BTW...I think there are 30-something signatures on the petition, at least earlier today that was the count...they are hoping to hit 100. Hardly enough to warrant DCI giving it any time at all, IMO.

There are sufficient real criminals committing real acts that need to be put away, IMO. 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MikeD said:

If you are talking about the case on reddit...

There was no 'plea'. The person was convicted of a misdemeanor. Not a sex offense, but rather attempting to video in an area where privacy is reasonably expected. So the punishment was fit to the verdict and the level of the charged offense.

Being a misdemeanor, it was eligible under California law to be expunged, and it was. 

The person now has NO record, and in fact passed multiple criminal checks before being hired.

I find this entire thread, the one on reddit, as well as the petition,  to be  a not-so-veiled attempt to attack Hopkins and YEA, using one of their staff as the weapon in the attack. Very sad.

BTW...I think there are 30-something signatures on the petition, at least earlier today that was the count...they are hoping to hit 100. Hardly enough to warrant DCI giving it any time at all, IMO.

There are sufficient real criminals committing real acts that need to be put away, IMO. 

 

 

 

 

 

Mike, I gotta be honest here... if I had kids in drum corps, marching band, or whatever activity... I would not want any of them even near an individual like this.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...