Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Terri Schehr said:

That’s exactly why this has been allowed to happen for decades.  I heard people defend the lifetime registered sex offender marching six years ago.  Important people.  You’d recognize their names. 

What were they defending?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I've been living under a rock for the past few months, forgive my lateness.

As a person still in eligibility, this kind of revelation is something that makes me not want to participate in DCI. I have a friend (a DCI rookie) marching Cadets this year. I wonder how he feels. Can't be good.

Edited by cube
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Terri Schehr said:

Is Atchison working a drum corps this summer?   Anyone?  Bueller? 

Edited after reading Garfield's most recent post, which added some perspective:

Was YEA acting within the letter of the law when they hired him?

 Absolutely. His record had been cleared, on paper. All legal. No question about that.

But the spirit of the law, the sheer optics of the situation, in this case... different story. At least that is how it all seems to me.  

My personal opinion... given the circumstances of the offense this guy committed, and the optics of the "creep factor" involved... there is no way I would hire anyone like that to be part of an organization that deals directly with young people.

Whether someone else wants to hire him, that is entirely up to them. It's all legal, right? :ninja:

 

Edited by Fran Haring
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Tim K said:

As far as lawyers are concerned, while they would not necessarily recommend dodging reporters, they may recommend requests in writing and would supply talking points with the advice of not changing the wording at all. This is standard practice in these matters which I know from professional experience. 

The ONLY time this would occur from a communications stand point was if there was something of concern. This is what I know based on the communications professionals who work for me and are experts in the area of iris communications. That said... given the way this reporter handled the first story regarding Dan and DCI (using very loosely sourced third party information) I can understand DCI wanting to be cautious. But again... this just looks bad. This is not about whose right or wrong but how things will be perceived.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Terri Schehr said:

I send them direct message to myself on Twitter and then copy.  

THANK YOU Terri! That is a handy trick!

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, cixelsyd said:

What were they defending?

His marching in am all-age corps.  My days of reporting  lifetime registered sex offenders in drum corps are over however.   All you get is a hard time. No good deed goes unpunished. 

Edited by Terri Schehr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, BRASSO said:

 George Hopkins even hired ( with the former YEA Board rubber stamping the hire ) as recently as 2 years ago an individual found guilty by a Jury of his Peers of secretly videotaping a female minor in a school shower with his hidden camera. Such individuals should be given " a second chance " in a NON youth activity, if thats what an adult oriented Company or organization wants to do so. But should such an individual be allowed to be hired by an all summer long touring youth group ?. No. I don't think so.  Not on my watch, if I'm a DCI HQ Executive Director, anyway. One strike and you're  out,... forever... when it comes to working with minors in youth organizations. I know, I can be pretty unforgiving on this with maybe some here. But  "he's  paid his dues " is the frequent refrain sometimes heard . No, I don't think so, in my view. As the " dues " travels with that minor victim forever and is incalcuable as " dues " to be paid.. Maybe its because I've raised 2 daughters, and that explains my extraordinary cautiousness in wanting to protect them at all costs when they were minors and when they were put in trust of other, non related adults, when I was not present, ie... like summer youth tours, or whatnot. The GH hire was eventually let go. But what got that to happen ? It was " public opinion " that came to the fore, when DCI and YEA failed to do what needed to be done in the 1st place, ie not hire a guy that previously had been found guilty in a jury trial of deviant sexual behaviors around minors on school grounds. There is no Statute of Limitations with Crimes visited upon minors by adults when it comes thinking about rehiring them. We should tell them to take a hike. Our Youth are are most precious National Resource, imo. They should be protected better than Fort Knox is, imo.

I agree. However in that case sadly the law workedto clear the guys record. Sad that the legal system did that, but it did

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, skevinp said:

We don't know that.  Just because one woodwind pusher is gone doesn't mean there aren't other saxual predators lurking in the shadows.  

Sigh. It’s been well known for years the other corps aren’t in favor of this due to cost alone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, MikeD said:

Wow, that is a total misrepresentation of what took place with the guy.

Not to mention,   since the misdemeanor conviction was not for a crime the level you state above, it was later set aside, as any misdemeanor may be upon successful completion of any imposed sentence.

The verdict was this...

"…guilty of unlawfully attempting to view, by means of any instrumentality, to wit a camcorder, the interior of an area in which the occupancy has a reasonable expectation of privacy, with the intent to invade the privacy of a person or persons inside…"

The statute broken was not a sex-based crime at all, actually, but could have applied to filming a custodian going about his/her daily duties. 

Plus, after the case, the person was both the Troopers and Cavies brass caption head before the verdict was set aside, and was also a college band director at two different universities in that time.

He passed the PA credential check performed by YEA, as he has no record.

I've never met the man, and I have no idea why he was taping in the closet, but your description does not fit the actual situation in this case. 

There is enough real stuff to fill page after page in the thread. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And the Troopers should not have hired him. And the Cavies should not have hired him. And the Cadets should not have hire him.  (Assuming they were aware of his background related to this event). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, HockeyDad said:

And right here on this very website, several posters strongly defended GH's right to hire this "gentleman". Sad. 

Sadly the law worked to the guys advantage. His lawyer earned his fees

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...