N.E. Brigand Posted May 22, 2018 Share Posted May 22, 2018 4 hours ago, BRASSO said: The likes of Moody won't be hired any time soon in DCI, imo. Now, if I'm wrong on this, then we'll probably see a Corps or two not adequately learning a hard lesson through observance here, and thus most likely they'll be in the same soup like this for themselves and THEIR Corps in the future too. Some people in this thread seem to feel it was wrong for Crossmen to let him go (or for him to resign). If so, I wonder: why did that happen? What repercussions did Crossmen and/or Moody fear, if they truly believed there was nothing wrong with having him on staff for the past several years? Who was going to punish Crossmen for having done so? DCI? Parents? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted May 22, 2018 Share Posted May 22, 2018 3 hours ago, garfield said: Now he's irresponsible? Geebus. The man has given most of his adult life to the kids in the activity. Isn't that just as true of George Hopkins as it is of Fred Morrison? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted May 22, 2018 Share Posted May 22, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, N.E. Brigand said: Some people in this thread seem to feel it was wrong for Crossmen to let him go (or for him to resign). If so, I wonder: why did that happen? What repercussions did Crossmen and/or Moody fear, if they truly believed there was nothing wrong with having him on staff for the past several years? Who was going to punish Crossmen for having done so? DCI? Parents? Simple answer ? He was ok.. until he was outed by the Philly Inquirer. If the Philly Inquirer did not reveal this guys sordid past, he'd still be there today. Moody also was using recent Crossmen female age outs as his summer " fling thing " squeeze. Not criminal in nature per se, but good grief, pretty sleazy behavior we've got to to admit. That Crossmen female age out saw his sexual dalliance with her as nothing but a summer's fling for him. He apparently got upset with her when she dropped him for an apparent more substantial relationship with a guy more her age. Moody did not like that. Even staffers at Crossmen, and at least one other DCI Corps Director apparently told Morrison that this Moody guy should not be there on the Crossmen's staff. Morrison, for whatever reasons, did not want to hear any more about it. The marchers and recent age outs may not have been entirely safe there, but Moody was safe so long as Morrison was in charge, and the print media wern't writing front page stories on Moody. . Morrison gambled on this Moody guy... and lost bigtime as a result. Morrison hurt DCI's brand with this hire, as well as probably the Crossmen's brand. Thats their just " punishment ", imo for this. They did it to themselves. All hiring and retention and " resignation " decisions have consequences. These did as well. Edited May 22, 2018 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted May 22, 2018 Share Posted May 22, 2018 4 hours ago, garfield said: In this climate Moody is no longer there. going forward....it is the best approach. cant fix the past, but could publicly admit to it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted May 22, 2018 Share Posted May 22, 2018 1 hour ago, N.E. Brigand said: And the former does not invalidate that latter. That said, I actually agree with you more than Jeff about this. I think it's impractical for parents to have to conduct research on every staff member. But parents ought to be able to rely on more than just trust. There should be safeguards in place. i dont think parents should have to research. but in light of the lack of disclosure, what else should they do? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted May 22, 2018 Share Posted May 22, 2018 11 minutes ago, BRASSO said: Simple answer? He was OK until he was outed by the Philly Inquirer. If the Philly Inquirer did not reveal this guys sordid past, he'd still be there today. But even after the Inquirer story, why didn't Morrison stick to his guns and say, "Moody stays, and anyone who wants him gone is wrong"? Would DCI have punished Crossmen if that happened? Would Crossmen parents have told their children, "I'm not paying anything more for you to participate"? In other words: if Morrison didn't think it was wrong to keep Moody on, why cave? Does he think, deep down, that he was wrong to have hired Moody in the first place, and not told anyone? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted May 22, 2018 Share Posted May 22, 2018 Can I be the only who seriously doubts that we know the whole story about Moody? (Surely someone else has read or seen How I Learned to Drive?) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted May 22, 2018 Share Posted May 22, 2018 Just now, N.E. Brigand said: Can I be the only who seriously doubts that we know the whole story about Moody? (Surely someone else has read or seen How I Learned to Drive?) Anyway, according to reporting today on a non-DCI story, $189,000 is the going rate if you're a convicted pedophile who wants your picture taken with a really important person. Moody is not a pedophile, so far as we now know. His is a lesser offense. How much would he have to pay? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigW Posted May 22, 2018 Share Posted May 22, 2018 9 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: Lord knows moralmand legal aren’t mutually exclusive but better to be safe than sorry If I had two more arms, I'd give 4 thumbs up on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigW Posted May 22, 2018 Share Posted May 22, 2018 One thing I thought about that's been a thread within the thread is the risk, the choice to hire in this instance. There's a glut of exceptionally capable people out there who could fill those shoes and that position who wouldn't have the baggage, and wouldn't have had the subsequent issues that they had in that position with staff, etc. While the whole "give someone a second chance" can be hashed over... why not give someone else at least as able their first chance and have far less of a risk something going down? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.