In The News – Drum Corps Chairman Resigns Amid Scrutiny Of His Hiring Of Disgraced Teacher

[Jim Schehr]

4 minutes ago, Quad Aces said:

What makes Moody so special to warrant all of this?

Exactly a point I’ve made numerous times. Have we reached the end of qualified educators? Or do birds of a feather.....

[Quad Aces]

9 minutes ago, Jim Schehr said:

Exactly a point I’ve made numerous times. Have we reached the end of qualified educators? Or do birds of a feather.....

Excellent question.

[Icer]

7 hours ago, BRASSO said:

 In retrospect, I do believe you have the timeline correct it would appear. Morrisson essentially was well aware of Moody's repetitive sex texting to  H.S. female and the revocation of his teaching license for a 5 year period. Morrison hired Moody during the 5 year teaching license revocation timeframe. For context during this timeline, Moody was deemed a risk  to be in any school classroom, and thus was barred from being there. Fred Morrison, the Crossmen Corps Director knew about the sexual misconduct and the disbarring from the schools, but decided to hire Moody anyway and allow him to travel from school to schools  on day and night trips for 9 weeks in the summer. No background checks were needed for the disclosure of Moody's disgusting past with the H.S. female student as Morrison admitted he knew of it, and hired the guy anyway. Most importantly, the reporting in the press seems to indicate that when the subject of Moody being there was brought up as being a risk not worth taking ( by more than one there at the Crossmen ) Morrison's reaction reportedly was not to explain it, nor attempt to justify it. The report stated that he would cut off conversation about this curious decision to take on this huge risk. The quote was " he did not want to further talk about it  ", He  made that clear to staffers, and others.

 The timeline that set in motion the departure of Moody from the Crossmen was indeed the revelations in the national press about the alleged sexual assaults by George Hopkins at YEA/ Cadets.  If we recall, the press report was that Moody was getting ready to go on on summer tour once again with the Crossmen. Had the GH alleged sexual assaults not surfaced, its likely that Moody would still be at the Crossmen tonite. Morrison defended the Moody hire with Moody's retention throughout. Except when the news media  began investigating DCI. Then Morrison quickly decided he needed to do a 180,. He decided he needed to be further away from Moody now than all the states public schools decided they needed to be away from Moody. Moody now suddenly became a risk liability to MORRISON..  But Morrison was ok having the young marchers, recent age outs, and young staffers of his Crossmen Corps within elbow's length of Moody on summer tours for several years.. How ironic... and how sad.   People on several occasions apparently told Morrison that Moody was a huge risk, and not worth taking. The former Chairmen of the Board of Directors of DCI found out the hard way, how right they were.

Here is what I can't figure out.  In the case of YEA, while GH was certainly a polarizing figure, but he would have passed every background check.  The accusations of sexual misconduct took pretty much everyone (except the accusers) by surprise.  That's why it was such big news.  But in this case, the checkered past of the individual was known by all involved, and they went ahead and hired him anyway.  What were they thinking!!??

[MusicManNJ]

2 hours ago, JimF-LowBari said:

I didn’t read it as I make the final decision and accept it or leave. I read it as there will be no discussion and if you want to talk about it leave. The no discussion is unacceptable to me.

Only Emil knows the correct reading of this as he was there...

I agree with your last sentence. My point is... how many instances have you personally had where the boss does not want to discuss something and expects everyone to move on. I have seen this a lot throughout my career. So the fact that he made a decision, folks challenged the decision, he didn't;t want to discuss it and expected people to either follow his instructions or move out is not an unusual scenario. The stakes were certainly higher given the topic... but action by a CEO like this is not unusual (in my experience). 

Edited May 23, 2018 by MusicManNJ

[JimF-LowBari]

28 minutes ago, MusicManNJ said:

I agree with your last sentence. My point is... how many instances have you personally had where the boss does not want to discuss something and expects everyone to move on. I have seen this a lot throughout my career. So the fact that he made a decision, folks challenged the decision, he didn't;t want to discuss it and expected people to either follow his instructions or move out is not an unusual scenario. The stakes were certainly higher given the topic... but action by a CEO like this is not unusual (in my experience). 

I work with DoD so different situation than a company dealing with bottom line. And final say comes out of that funny five sided building two hours south of here.  What scares me is the thought that he could be making a horrible mistake, doesn’t realize it and won’t listen to anyone who could explain why it’s a horrible mistake. 

Edited May 23, 2018 by JimF-LowBari

[IllianaLancerContra]

8 hours ago, Amil Muzz said:

The thing I think the YEA situation and this situation have in common is competent Board over sight. YEAs Board, it seems, were enablers and blind supporters of the Executive Director. In this second case, there really is no Board Oversight. The Board are the owners/buyers of the Crossmen, a recent age out, and one other person. 

This is an issue with many drum corps and an area that needs to be addressed. DCI does have the authority to get into internal Day to Day business.

I worked for a drum corps who’s board couldn’t meet regularly because Board Members simply would not come to meetings.

I worked for another drum corps who’s Board Members, when called about totally unsafe conditions with Transportation and Food Safety would get ###### that they were being called.

It’s like Congress now days, when that Check is not operating or non existent, what do you do? Who do you talk to? Who’s responsible? 

If Board Members aren’t engaged, If Board Members are ignorant of things that they are responsible to oversee, If Board Members aren’t aware of Policies that are being implemented; what do you? It’s hard to fix ignorance, especially if it’s willful ignorance. I have seen plenty of that.

I hope those individuals are good D&O Insurance. I hope they have a strong firewall protecting their assets. Drum Corps have stop being amateur hour organizations and look at the realities of the World today and take more seriously the potential and very real perils of taking 154 kids and 20-30 adults and travel the way we do.

With a serious board oversight the YEA situation would not have developed the way it did in the end. With serious oversight chances are the Crossmen situation wouldn’t have happened. It’s a systemic issue. It’s not a DCI issue, per se. 

I think this thread has been a pretty good demonstration of some of the approaches to oversight don’t work. The dismissive attitudes towards professional people who have to get a State Issued credential and maintain it and who because of that State Credential are BOUND BY LAW to report issues is beyond stupid. But that attitude has been on display here. For All To See. The excuse of “no one reported it” doesn’t fly IF THERE IS NO ONE TO GO TO or worse they didn’t think they would be listened to.

That’s the nut of all of this; powerlessness. 

Whether it’s a man using his authority to take advantage of someone in unspeakable ways or a situation where decisions aren’t questioned because no one is there to effectively challenge questionable judgements giant, ugly, messy, problems inevitably follow.

Winner winner chicken dinner.

We need a 'Duh' buttom

[BRASSO]

8 hours ago, Amil Muzz said:

 

This is an issue with many drum corps and an area that needs to be addressed. DCI does have the authority to get into internal Day to Day business.

 

 Before much of this DCI Corps mess developed, there were lengthy discussions here on DCP suggesting that DCI HQ. essentially had little to no legal authority over the actions of its member Corps. That discussion defending the essential powerlessness of DCI HQ went on for days and days on here too.  Some were unconviced of DCI HQ' legal authority. It took DCI HQ stepping in to convince them otherwise. DCI HQ put one of its organization's premier elite Corps on Probation, spelling out specific steps it would needed by that Corps to convince DCI HQ of its responsibleness that would allow that Corps probation in DCI to be lifted. DCI HQ was not the implied powerless entity suggested in some quarters at all. DCI HQ, even told the new YEA Board that DCI HQ was going to have access to that Corps financials too as part of DCI HQ probationary status it imposed upon this Corps.

Edited May 23, 2018 by BRASSO

[MusicManNJ]

8 hours ago, Amil Muzz said:

If Board Members aren’t engaged, If Board Members are ignorant of things that they are responsible to oversee, If Board Members aren’t aware of Policies that are being implemented; what do you? It’s hard to fix ignorance, especially if it’s willful ignorance. I have seen plenty of that.

I think we can have a whole other conversation on Corps Governance. It is clear that, with a few notable exceptions, the activity does not really follow proper board governance as you correctly point out. YEA is the poster child for bad board governance (the old board) and as this story unfolds all of the O and D insurance in the world may not shield them from some of their behavior. But just as we are finding out now about  additional stories of the sexual assault, contact, inappropriate behavior issues the original inquirer story has uncovered the same may be true regarding proper Corps governance. My guess is the YEA model (happy to be there and let the CEO do what they want with little/no accountability) is more the rule than the exception. This should be troubling.

[Fran Haring]

2 hours ago, Icer said:

Here is what I can't figure out.  In the case of YEA, while GH was certainly a polarizing figure, but he would have passed every background check.  The accusations of sexual misconduct took pretty much everyone (except the accusers) by surprise.  That's why it was such big news. 

Sexual misconduct at that level, sure. My jaw dropped when I read some of that stuff.  But the stories had been out there for years... decades... that he was a junkyard dog, for lack of a better term.

[Amil Muzz]

3 hours ago, JimF-LowBari said:

I didn’t read it as I make the final decision and accept it or leave. I read it as there will be no discussion and if you want to talk about it leave. The no discussion is unacceptable to me.

Only Emil knows the correct reading of this as he was there...

That is what I (we) interpreted that to mean, yes.