TheOneWhoKnows

That being said, do you think DCI’s claim that this “retroactively waiving of statutes” goes against the constitution of the state holds merit and could well be challenged?

Okay are we changing the goal post? You started out by complaining about GE, but now it’s all music captions? And lord knows you are absolutely wrong if you think ALL music captions are being judged by people who don’t know #### about music. Don't come for me and say I “don’t understand”. I’m in the middle of it. I am an adjudicator who works with many of those who judge DCI. I know their backgrounds and what they bring to the table.

Sure DFTK has always been a standard, but society was different in that you didn’t talk about those things and there weren’t avenues to get help. That’s the difference. Society has changed now and we can’t hold prior decades to today’s standards. In regards to your points of car theft and burglary, well that’s a whole other societal issue pertaining to lack of discipline and morals in society.

The whole idea that “people with only one background are scoring one or the other” is really not true. At the DCI level, the GE judges are people who are highly esteemed in the activity and who have deep experience in pageantry, arts, and successful design. Each panel does get assigned judges with music leaning backgrounds and judges with visual leaning backgrounds. But in most cases, they have both. And in even more cases those with visual leaning backgrounds started out in music and took a path in life to the visual side. So there is understanding there. And to push back even more, take a look at John Howell who was on the GE panel at championships last year. He has a majority visual background. But he places emphasis on the music when it comes to GE judging. He understands that the musical component is the base for the activity all together. Even though he’s a colorguard guy. (I can say this with confidence because he and I have had conversations about this). But who did he have first overall in GE? Crown. Which if you have any understanding of music, was the right decision.

Understanding the optics may not be great, but at the same time one cannot simply go around trying to pay off every wrongdoing of the past. People don’t like to acknowledge and admit that times were different and society was different. It doesn’t make anything right or okay. But to say we must open the wallet in an attempt correct every event of the past doesn’t create a greater common good.

Not actually. It was a county zoning officer who felt the need to take frivolous positions on codes and hit the sports park with it. It’s all been resolved.

I guess I find it interesting for the court to file this when there is a settlement hearing and ultimate trial on the books. Not sure what else the plaintiff could do to “keep the case moving forward”

More looking to see if the warning for dismissal was for all parties or just “Garfield Cadets”

This was my thought based on the preview of the document so I could see. It only named the party “The Garfield Cadets”. After thinking about it, since the judge ruled CAE is the same organization, it would be a clean up tactic to remove parties that aren’t actually applicable at this sense. Could that somehow save the plaintiff money? With court costs or attorney fees by reducing the amount of parties? Not sure. I’m tempted to just pay for the service to go to all the docs and see.

Interesting development from the case. The judge appears to be dismissing “The Garfield Cadets” for lack of prosecution. I don’t pay for the legal website service so I can’t see the entire document. Not sure if this is just a formality since the Garfield Cadets don’t technically exist anymore so they’re just cleaning up the parties listed or the case is being dropped in full.

All of them. I’m a big history person and a big experience person. Granted, I’m only almost 30 so it’s not possible for me to have seen every show, but I wish I had been there for all of it.

When booking through the VisitIndy site, you’re guaranteeing a room, but the hotel doesn’t actually receive your booking until closer to the event.

https://wgi.org/wgi-mourns-the-loss-of-bob-thomas/ Incredibly sad to hear of Bob’s passing. I saw him in January and knew he wasn’t doing well. I’ve had the privilege to adjudicate with him many times and have been fortunate enough to call him a mentor when I began my adjudication career.

And there is truth to that. They were only just beginning to tap into the money streams that were possible here. Including local corporate funding that people were working on. (I can state that for a fact as I was one of them working on corporate funding from my employer). Plus the other areas of sponsorship that would have provided great benefit from a certain school here and the Cadets organization. Plus the improvements and new instructive the sports park was putting in place to support the corps and bring in revenue. People saw one year of them here. There was big potential for them here and a lot of people working behind the scenes to put things in motion. And now? I don’t see anyone supporting the corps if they magically made it out of the lawsuit.

And this right here is one of the top sad points of this all. Nothing is all good or all bad. But at the end of the day there is a storied history that exists here. The corps and its history are the members that marched. Those that put in the blood, sweat, and tears year after year and made the Westpoint a symbol.

In today’s society? Oh it’s definitely going in the complainants favor.

If a settlement is awarded against them, there is no coming back. Any asset the organization would automatically be seized to cover the settlement.

Rumors are their membership has been revoked

The Cadets

Everyone’s freaking out that they aren’t listed on the DCI website anymore

I agree. I could see wanting to sue the organization in terms of forcing them to acknowledge, apologize, and establish practices for prevention. But going after them for compensation is skirting the personal responsibility of those involved. Granted, there are 10 “John Does” listed on the lawsuit. I can only assume that includes individuals that were prevalent back then. But the big name at the top is Cadets and DCI.

The court documents state the complaint is that the organization knew it was going to happen and didn’t stop it from happening. So really it isn’t even about whether or not it happened, it’s about whether or not those in the organization at the time knew about it and intentionally didn’t stop it. The case skips over whether it actually happened or not.

It’s just society hungry for lawsuits. If you get into the details of that case regarding the Mother, I think they went way too far in charging her and subsequently a jury finding her guilty. Recklessness? Maybe. Manslaughter in regards to their claims against her? It’s a stretch. And before anyone wants to say “well a jury found her guilty”, a jury verdict isn’t necessarily pure fact, it’s an opinion based on persuasion.

The complainant didn’t want the trial. It was when DCI was added that a trial was demanded.

I guess my question is, isn’t the truth already out there?