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

[N.E. Brigand]

[mfrontz]

1 minute ago, N.E. Brigand said:

It's cool. "There, there" is a key line from the book. By Yossarian to Snowden as the latter is dying.

(Which, I learned, is an homage to a World War I play called Journey's End.)

It's been a while since I read the book. It might be time.

[N.E. Brigand]

The Second Coming

(Wm. B. Yeats)

 

Turning and turning in the widening gyre   

The falcon cannot hear the falconer;

Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;

Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,

The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere   

The ceremony of innocence is drowned;

The best lack all conviction, while the worst   

Are full of passionate intensity.

 

Surely some revelation is at hand;

Surely the Second Coming is at hand.   

The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out   

When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi

Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert   

A shape with lion body and the head of a man,   

A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,   

Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it   

Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.   

The darkness drops again; but now I know   

That twenty centuries of stony sleep

Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,   

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,   

Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

[Jeff Ream]

19 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

For instance, I was part of a public book discussion club in 2004-2005. Then the person who ran the site went off to grad school, and all the content was lost. There was a first-class discussion of Catch-22 that taught me so much more about that book than you'd ever find in the likes of Cliffs Notes. Who promoted Peress!?

RAMD Is a google group. It ain’t going anywhere 

Edited April 14, 2018 by Jeff Ream

[JMS1995]

On the Acheson article, it can be viewed in two time periods, historically in 2003 and now, 15 years later.  Also, the fact that we are all now aware of multiple accusers of GH coming forward can taint our perspective of how believable the source was in 2003.

If the phone call happened, let's say hypothetically that --at the very least-- Acheson became aware of a rumor (unsubstantiated or not, first or second hand) that GH was engaging in sexual behavior with a corps member(s); did Acheson break the law by not doing anything with that information (assuming he did nothing with it)?  I don't know the legal obligations he would have had then.  Rather than directing fire at the person who made the alleged phone call (why didn't you call other people, etc.), the question is should Acheson --even back then-- have done something with that information?  Even looking at it through 2003-eyes, I can't find a valid excuse for him doing nothing with it, or dismissing it without doing any follow-up at all.

I can stipulate that the cultural norms surrounding sexual-harassment back then are different than they are now, but I think that if you were the parent (then or now) of the victim, your reaction would have been the same: "You had been informed my daughter was possibly being abused and you did nothing?"  Therefore, even in 2003, I would think that this phrase would have at some point come into Acheson's mind and once it did, should have been the driving force that would move him to some level of action.

What should happen now, with the revelation of this article is that DCI should suspend Acheson while they hire an outside agency to conduct an investigation.

We just saw what happened at Yea! when an internal agency investigated itself, "All's well, boss --pay no attention to the men behind the curtain."  In this case, though, there is no higher sanctioning organization above DCI.  The only thing above DCI is IPD (Indianapolis Police Department), or authorities in Lombard.

Edited April 14, 2018 by JMS1995
punctuation

[N.E. Brigand]

Just now, Jeff Ream said:

RAMD was s google group. It ain’t going anywhere 

Indeed yes; I was responding only to the idea that everything on the internet was preserved.

[Terri Schehr]

1 minute ago, Jeff Ream said:

RAMD Is a google group. It ain’t going anywhere 

That’s for sure.  I just found the post about why the Capitolaires went inactive in 1995.  

[JMS1995]

20 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

For instance, I was part of a public book discussion club in 2004-2005. Then the person who ran the site went off to grad school, and all the content was lost. There was a first-class discussion of Catch-22 that taught me so much more about that book than you'd ever find in the likes of Cliffs Notes. Who promoted Peress!?

True, of course.  I'll revise my point and say that we don't know what will be saved or not.  If Murphy is running the internet, it won't be the post we made about making cookies with grandma while watching drum corps on PBS.

[N.E. Brigand]

6 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,   

Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

"What Rough Beast" would be a good show title.

[Jeff Ream]

12 minutes ago, JMS1995 said:

On the Acheson article, it can be viewed in two time periods, historically in 2003 and now, 15 years later.  Also, the fact that we are all now aware of multiple accusers of GH coming forward can taint our perspective of how believable the source was in 2003.

If the phone call happened, let's say hypothetically that --at the very least-- Acheson became aware of a rumor (unsubstantiated or not, first or second hand) that GH was engaging in sexual behavior with a corps member(s); did Acheson break the law by not doing anything with that information (assuming he did nothing with it)?  I don't know the legal obligations he would have had then.  Rather than directing fire at the person who made the alleged phone call (why didn't you call other people, etc.), the question is should Acheson --even back then-- have done something with that information?  Even looking at it through 2003-eyes, I can't find a valid excuse for him doing nothing with it, or dismissing it without doing any follow-up at all.

I can stipulate that the cultural norms surrounding sexual-harassment back then are different than they are now, but I think that if you were the parent (then or now) of the victim, your reaction would have been the same: "You had been informed my daughter was possibly being abused and you did nothing?"  Therefore, even in 2003, I would think that this phrase would have at some point come into Acheson's mind and once it did, should have been the driving force that would move him to some level of action.

What should happen now, with the revelation of this article is that DCI should suspend Acheson while they hire an outside agency to conduct an investigation.

We just saw what happened at Yea! when an internal agency investigated itself, "All's well, boss --pay no attention to the men behind the curtain."  In this case, though, there is no higher sanctioning organization above DCI.  The only thing above DCI is IPD (Indianapolis Police Department), or authorities in Lombard.

Here’s the thing about the call: we only know what Rice said on RAMD. We don’t have a transcript of the whole call. I’m not defending either one, just stating an obvious fact