Jump to content

The Cadets and GH history of sexual abuse (news article)


Recommended Posts

It is interesting to me that the mass exodus of staff occurred so recently.  If this was instigated by vets, it's reasonable to think that vet staff might have been included in those early discussions as well.  I'M SPECULATING, I AM SARGENT SCHULTZ. 

But it is interesting to recognize the timing coincidence, even as remote, IMO.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The paper will be publishing more info Sunday.

 

new trend found on Facebook: #hoptoo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, garfield said:

All due respect intended, this is not exclusive to NorCal, as you know.

One aspect of the current structure is that most corps - I'd say ALL corps - now have pretty good Best Practices docs in place.

This "sitch" is specific due to longevity, and prominence, of the accused.

 

BP only works if it's adhered to, tho.   Someone who really wants to groom a kid or straight up assault them won't be deterred much.

And I'll disagree about the length and prominence being key factors.  For Hop, yes....but there's no real-world difference between a corps director doing it over several decades with potentially multiple victims and the director of a first year start-up corps in his first position of authority doing the same thing.

A matter of degree?  Perhaps.

A difference in the damage caused to the affected?  Zero.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cainan said:

I think very high.. In fact, I think there is a good chance that The Cadets do not weather this storm at all for 2018.. and possibly forever.

I am an absolute believer in due process. Nobody is guilty of a crime unless they admit their crime, or are found guilty by a jury of their peers. If this ends up there (which I will be highly surprised if it does not), then whatever the outcome is.. so be it. 

That said...

If I am a parent with a kid in this corps right now.. with this current corps leadership.. and I am talking from the YEA board all the way down the chain.. there is NO WAY in a million years I let MY kid anywhere NEAR this corps. I think they will pretty quickish lose any and all members under the age of 18. If my kid is over 18, and I am funding their drum corps career... and let's face it, a LOT of mm's use the trusty old First National Bank of Mom and Dad... again, I wouldn't let my kids near this corps. If I am an advertiser, I want NOTHING to do with YEA, The Cadets or USSBA. If I am a sponsor with a worldwide brand recognition, say.. I dunno... YAMAHA... again, I want nothing to do with this corps. Once this corps loses sponsors.. it's game over.

Yeah.... it's quite possible George Hopkins just financially crippled (and therefore, killed) The Cadets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 84BDsop said:

BP only works if it's adhered to, tho.   Someone who really wants to groom a kid or straight up assault them won't be deterred much.

And I'll disagree about the length and prominence being key factors.  For Hop, yes....but there's no real-world difference between a corps director doing it over several decades with potentially multiple victims and the director of a first year start-up corps in his first position of authority doing the same thing.

A matter of degree?  Perhaps.

A difference in the damage caused to the affected?  Zero.

It can definitely affect the willingness of the victim to come out about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

The paper will be publishing more info Sunday.

 

new trend found on Facebook: #hoptoo

Are you referring to the Philadelphia Inquirer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CubFan said:

According to Twitter, DCI has just come out with a statement but the website is down right now!

Go back a page or two, buddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/5/2018 at 5:37 PM, camel lips said:

YEA is in a tough spot no doubt. Probably wanting to do the right thing but being held back by several factors. Lawyers for one being the biggest. Secondly they are probably trying to get advice from some of the biggest names in the industry that can help advise them on how to get out in front of this correctly. One misstep could be tragic. I feel for them. 

I agree with this.  I remember DCI dragging it's feet many times, particularly in the G7 Mutiny on the Bounty episode.  Their statement is carefully and well crafted, but they can honestly play ignorant, largely.  The BoD of YEA! has a personal, fiduciary interest that makes them personally responsible, individually, for their organization.  They have to tread very lightly (I understate, I'm sure!), and I'd, personally, be darned will not say a stinking word to anyone about anything until my lawyer says Go.

Frankly, I'd be shocked if the BoD makes any public statement at all except to say that they have terminated GH and begun a review of processes to root out and eradicate any residual cultural beliefs he espoused, and contact personally, individually, with each claimant and their counsel to reach conclusions.

I'm not impressed with their BoD for several reasons, buy keeping their mouths shut for days, if necessary to protect themselves, doesn't knock off any points of respect.  It's simply expected, IMO.

SCHULTZ

Edited by garfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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