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

[Peel Paint]

6 hours ago, Whiskey said:

I appreciate the journalist trying to go after the story. My heart is with the victims. Reading that article today referencing RAMD and Mr. Rice, all that credibility is slowly going out the window.  I understand chasing the lead, but slow down there.  

 

I’ve seen and dealt with reporters like this wanting a story. I was a superintendent and dealt with journalists just like what I’m seeing here. Trying to find any lead and person who they can interview to get any additional dirt. It’s why I never take any news on TV or in paper as the absolute truth. 

 

A couple years ago I dealt with a journalist student studying to be an investigative reporter.  They were dragging in anyone who wanted to put the school in a bad light. They wanted to come on campus and do interviews with staff, the whole nine yards. Our Governing Board didn’t play and I had my PR person squash that in an instant. We went to her boss/professor and even the president of the university.  We told them if they run this sensational piece we’d come with our own and how they are attacking our school that is quite unique and diverse.  We were already being as transparent as we could and were holding information nights for community.

 

In the end, the article was published but had nothing to do with the original reason they wanted to write about. It sounded more like disgruntled parents and some staff. It was quickly forgotten.  The reporter’s article didn’t have legs because of the sources she was using.  In the end the reporter could only salvage what they could because we were proactive about it and her sources lacked credibility.  That reporter has a webpage and all the investigative articles they have written over the years. Ours is not included on their page   

 

Honestly this issue with Yea! is starting to feel just like it.  Some us know or read the ramblings of Stu back in the days and we know just how interesting an individual he was.  This issue is important and I want the victims to get justice but let’s do it in the right way and for the right cause.  

 

 

I disagree. I wasn't at all a fan of Stuart Rice--his argumentative diatribes were one key reason I left RAMD. (And I'd forgotten but do now recall his series of RAMD posts back in 2003.) I wouldn't give Dan Acheson a free pass here just because Rice was a PITA. Rice may be dead-on right in his posted recollection of Acheson's response. If Jeff Ream felt most people at Januals were aware something was up with Hopkins and sex abuse, how credible is Acheson's claim that he heard nothing about this until the first Inquirer story? That claim is going to crumble if a number of other people come forward to say, well I brought this to DCI's attention too years ago, especially if they have a way to back it up, like an e-mail trail, corroborating witness, phone bills, any number of ways. (This story will serve to fish for more leads along similar lines.)

What I like even less than the dismissal of Rice's posts is the growing suspicions about Inquirer journalist Patricia Nadolny being in this overall story of sex abuse in drum corps to burnish a resume. Maybe, some here seem to be beginning to think, other parts of the story may be unfair or untrue. It reminds me of the film Spotlight and the story behind it, and the criticisms the reporters faced. I am sure Nadolny is not acting as a lone wolf here but is being checked out carefully by at least one editor. People talking to her are being asked to document their claims, and the documentation is being cross-checked. Stuart's posts back then, still visible now, are credible documentation, exactly what this reporter needed to run this story, not proof of a specific case of sex abuse, but documenting that there likely was a report that was made that led to no action. She wouldn't have run Rice's one report alone as a story if all she had was Rice's memory from 2003 of calling Acheson, without the documentation.

As far as I'm concerned, the safety of the participants is Job One for DCI and its member corps and staffs. At what point should Acheson have heard enough to step up and have DCI look into it? Acheson is saying, well in April 2018 with the Inquirer article, I had enough. I'm not yet convinced that was soon enough.

The story about sex abuse in DCI needs to continue if verifiable leads develop.

Edited April 14, 2018 by Peel Paint

[Terri Schehr]

54 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

You and I butt heads but I’d never compare you to him.

 

he once contacted the boosters where I taught claiming I was a serial harrasser

Didn’t she call your work?  Or email them or something? 

[MusicManNJ]

9 minutes ago, Peel Paint said:

The story about sex abuse in DCI needs to continue if verifiable leads develop.

I am just not sure gossip is a verifiable lead. If I chose to report all the gossip about people involved in the DCI activity there would be a lot fewer people in the activity. There is a lot of gossip that is no where near the truth and should not be given credibility without verifiable facts let alone end up in a newspaper story. 

[Peel Paint]

1 minute ago, MusicManNJ said:

I am just not sure gossip is a verifiable lead. If I chose to report all the gossip about people involved in the DCI activity there would be a lot fewer people in the activity. There is a lot of gossip that is no where near the truth and should not be given credibility without verifiable facts let alone end up in a newspaper story. 

This is fair game, reportable in a newspaper as part of this ongoing story. There's enough there there to run it, as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not saying Acheson can't or shouldn't stay as DCI head if this 2003 report that he doesn't recall is all there is. He can certainly make a case that he couldn't have done more at the time, without the name of a victim, and even I may agree. But if he repeatedly heard from other people that this specific corps director was engaging in sex abuse with members and staff and didn't do more to follow up until it hit the paper, he may have a problem.

 

[Slingerland]

21 minutes ago, Peel Paint said:

 If Jeff Ream felt most people at Januals were aware something was up with Hopkins and sex abuse, how credible is Acheson's claim that he heard nothing about this until the first Inquirer story?

DCI's statement says that they were unaware of "specific allegations." The topic of harassment was a primary element of the Board members' consortium group in January, but from my understanding, it was driven by numerous examples provided by drum majors in attendance that weekend that they weren't sure what to do with their own corps' members contacting them about being harassed, and not about claims in the air that weekend about any one specific individual or organization.

Acheson's statement could have been better worded, but it's worth noting that his advice (to contact the YEA Board with the information) was correct. DCI wasn't set up to police the internal workings of the individual corps. 

Having said that, I also heard that the Board consortium group had recommended that DCI implement a requirement from every corps who participates that they have whistle blower and anti-harassment polices and procedures in place to investigate and discipline offenders. I'd imagine that after all of this, it shouldn't be too hard of a jump for the DCI Board to embrace that recommendation.

[Jim Schehr]

25 minutes ago, MusicManNJ said:

I am just not sure gossip is a verifiable lead. If I chose to report all the gossip about people involved in the DCI activity there would be a lot fewer people in the activity. There is a lot of gossip that is no where near the truth and should not be given credibility without verifiable facts let alone end up in a newspaper story. 

Bottom line - some thought that once Hopkins was gone and no charges filed this story would pass quickly and order could be restored in the activity. Once others came forward with similar accounts and stories of lore from RAMD surfaced, the ride is becoming a little bumpy. Some might have to resign and lose their cushion jobs for covering up this ugliest. 

Edited April 14, 2018 by Jim Schehr

[Peel Paint]

11 minutes ago, Slingerland said:

DCI's statement says that they were unaware of "specific allegations." The topic of harassment was a primary element of the Board members' consortium group in January, but from my understanding, it was driven by numerous examples provided by drum majors in attendance that weekend that they weren't sure what to do with their own corps' members contacting them about being harassed, and not about claims in the air that weekend about any one specific individual or organization.

Acheson's statement could have been better worded, but it's worth noting that his advice (to contact the YEA Board with the information) was correct. DCI wasn't set up to police the internal workings of the individual corps. 

Having said that, I also heard that the Board consortium group had recommended that DCI implement a requirement from every corps who participates that they have whistle blower and anti-harassment polices and procedures in place to investigate and discipline offenders. I'd imagine that after all of this, it shouldn't be too hard of a jump for the DCI Board to embrace that recommendation.

Yes. For those new to the activity, DCI was set up because pre-DCI, in the veteran's organizations, the corps had no control. The corps directors wanted control of their destiny. They set up a decentralized organization with very limited executive powers. The directors votes are the key, not the DCI CEO. It was at once their greatest strength and greatest failing and increased the chances for problems like this. More oversight will be needed. But that has to come by vote of the corps directors.

Edited April 14, 2018 by Peel Paint

[MusicManNJ]

3 minutes ago, Jim Schehr said:

Bottom line - some thought that once Hopkins was gone and no charges filed this story would pass quickly and order could be restored in the activity. Once others came forward with similar accounts and stories of lore from RAMD surfaced, the ride is becoming a little bumpy. Some might have to resign and lose their cushion jobs for covering up  this ugliest. 

I am not sure about those who thought this would pass quickly (i certainly have not encountered them). This is just the beginning for the activity as far as I can tell. It is like a centipede... lots more shoes to drop (hat tip to John McCain). My only point is rumor and gossip is not actionable. If someone comes forward with concrete allegations that is another story because action can be taken. All the victims should be heard and supported. All the perpetrators should be dealt with appropriately. But the rumormongering will only lead to damaging people who do not deserve it. 

[MusicManNJ]

A heart wrenching story by one of the victims in today's Allentown Morning Call.

http://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-nws-kim-carter-cadets-hopkins-20180412-story.html

[Jim Schehr]

1 minute ago, MusicManNJ said:

I am not sure about those who thought this would pass quickly (i certainly have not encountered them). This is just the beginning for the activity as far as I can tell. It is like a centipede... lots more shoes to drop (hat tip to John McCain). My only point is rumor and gossip is not actionable. If someone comes forward with concrete allegations that is another story because action can be taken. All the victims should be heard and supported. All the perpetrators should be dealt with appropriately. But the rumormongering will only lead to damaging people who do not deserve it. 

All there is now is allegations - no criminal charges filed. I bet that people are on their best behavior this and next weekend.