Jump to content

FormerXyloWhiz

Members
  • Posts

    51
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by FormerXyloWhiz

  1. I think you can replace "IMO" with "empirically based on the evidence" there. I sure wouldn't want to work for or program under the former long tenured director. 😜
  2. Yes. But, personally I say let it sleep. Let it stand as a beacon, possibly the beacon of modern drum corps as we know it, and as a cautionary tale of the realities of behavior and consequences in youth activities. It's not binary, one or the other. It's both. Besides, pick any top corps. You've got Rarick designing Bluecoats percussion forever now. You've got Derek Gipson running their brass. You've got Jared Huntley running visual. You've got Dan Riley captioning SCV guard. Cavaliers has Aungst & Stratton advising. You've got Sacktig, Klesh & Scully on design at Crown. And while his resume is far more expansive than just Cadets, let's not forget that Harloff was at Cadets brass staff late 90s (that jump in brass quality in 98). At Boston, 7 out of 11 design team members marched at or taught at Cadets. Brass & Battery instructional staff for the most part were literally the Cadets staff before it exploded. Hell, even at Blue Devils the electronics manager is a former Cadet. Let the corps rest and be at peace. What makes things in life special is that they end. You want to see the Cadets? Watch DCI drum corps in general. The Cadets are everywhere.
  3. Good question. Outside the scope of my experience, so I really don't know. Technically sure, anybody could commit fraud. But what exactly constitutes "fraud" as they're laying it out, i've got no clue.
  4. It also occurs to me that if what Spirit is alleging is true and if she signed the member contract herself, as a minor, rather than her parents, that contract is null and void.
  5. Criminal and Civil are two totally separate areas of law, penalties, and enforcement. Criminal activities and consequences are not decided in lawsuits with private attorneys. They are solely in the scope of governmental authorities to bring and prosecute, i.e., police & states/district attorney offices. No contract can protect against criminality. In criminal cases, the burden of the Plaintiff against the Defendant is to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt". This case and the subject matter is not a criminal matter. The case is a civil matter that is compensatory at heart, an attempt to "make the Plaintiff whole" (which can never happen of course, but that's the theory). The burden of proof is not as strict as criminal cases but still tough, Plaintiff has to prove based on a "preponderance of the evidence that it is more likely than not" that SoA or DCI was negligent. When it comes to civil liability and negligence, you CAN contract your way out of civil penalties. Example: go Bungie jumping. I guarantee you have to sign forms that basically say if something terrible happens you waive any right to come after them for civil compensation. That's what I'm referring to here and that's the sort of thing they are referring to in their filed Answer.
  6. MEGA speculation on my part here: I'm wondering if they are referring to member contracts. My bet is that those contracts generally hold harmless for liability should something happen. Don't know, haven't read one.
  7. If insurance pays out, their rates will definitely rise in the future. As to whether they have coverage for the incident, that's going to depend on the literal policy language, can only speculate there.
  8. Depends on whether or not their respective insurance companies are providing the defense. If yes - they aren't out of pocket on the billable hours at all. If no - ouch.
  9. If there's a financial payout, the nature of the NDA could be along the lines of forfeiting your right to the money obtained if you go public. So you "can" go public and report to the authorities and all of that sure, but if you do they may try to get their money back out of you. Either way - it's crap in my opinion for this sort of thing. In my experiences I don't know how enforceable such an agreement would be. At the end of the day - it would be hush money.
  10. Appreciate the attempted promotion but screw that. I see Lawyer hours face to face everyday. Hard pass. At 5:00 I gotta leave work and leave it all behind for my own mental health. 🤪
  11. Discovery isn't technically made public. But various items from discovery often are put forward as evidence at trial in exhibits. Anything like that which isn't sealed confidential by the Court could become public.
  12. It's financial. It's a civil action. All civil actions are financial at the end of the day.
  13. Not all victims actually have remedy at the end of the day. Sad, but reality. Plaintiff has sued and Defendant is defending themselves. That's how this is supposed to go when there is a dispute, no end-run around it.
  14. If that were to happen the money would just be gone. Even if you did get a judgment against the kid to get it back, blood from a stone issues. Tuition while huge compared to back in the day is not a large enough amount to make it worthwhile to get it back.
  15. This is standard, though it seems in the venue this is filed in requires more details than others do for content in an Answer to Complaint. Failure to state claim upon which relief may be granted, estoppel, etc - they are all standard defenses but spruced up here with some details and strong details at that. Every Answer filed to any complaint will always deny all claims. This filing is in no way a statement on Spirit's culture. It's a competent legal pleading drafted by an attorney and filed. Spirit likely gave them all the documentation they had, the attorneys reviewed formulated defense and filed. They have every right to vigorously defend themselves in the Court system. The information exchanged between the parties during discovery (which we will not get to see) is where the actual meat and potatoes is. This is a procedural standard response. Based on their filed answer, the facts of this matter have become more fascinating. This will be an exceedingly difficult case to prove on Plaintiff side I would imagine (Plaintiff has the burden, not Defendant). I don't doubt that things happened to Plaintiff. But what will they have or find in discovery as evidence that Spirit knew or should have known? And whatever they find, how will that hold up to the "hold harmless" contracts they reference in this Answer (basically - if there is a hold harmless contract, what actions did Spirit take that are so egregious that the contract is null and void)?
  16. I mean. Are we seriously wondering what would happen in that scenario? Money gone. Buh-bye. Back the wrong horse, lose. That straightforward. Willing to bet every main corps contract has language that should a member be dismissed for inappropriate behavior there is no refund. If not, they are truly sleeping on the job.
  17. Step in the right direction, thanks! I'd suggest posting and hosting your 501c3 determination letter there as well. 2 major criteria before donation considering: who am I giving money to, and do I have confirmation that they are actual 501c3? Example from a random non-profit online for example: https://parentbooster.org/resources/501c3-irs-affirmation-letter
  18. Double reply: I am certain that people's hearts are in the right place, but this is not ready for public yet IMO. Literally no human being is named or listed, board or otherwise. I would have no idea who I am actually giving money to or who is responsible should issues arise. 501c3 is claimed with zero information to confirm. No EIN is given. No information is given about which state you are operating out of. With only a name the IRS search option is a pain in the ###, but I can confirm at the moment that the organization does not show up on IRS.gov for tax exempt or charitable status (501c3) if the actual business name is "The 1934 Foundation." If that is not the formal business name, the formal name needs to be available. If that IS the business name, either the determination letter is less than 2 months old and isn't input yet, or it hasn't been issued yet. The language of what you are doing lacks clarity as to exactly who you are and whom you are fundraising for as well. The name gives an "obvious assumption" to the community in the know at large, but not saying it, along with the lack of corporate transparency makes it all feel a little "off" to me. Own who we are. The suit isn't gonna add you for merely mentioning that you happen to be former Cadets looking to sponsor drum corps tuition for marchers. If the mission is to help displaced modern Cadets find and afford new drum corps homes in the wake of the dissolution of the corps, I am on board for that. However, I won't donate to any charity that lacks this basic level of transparency. Full transparency is required.
  19. Question: "The applicant must have previously marched and will be given precedent and favor until such time as there are no more students previously associated with our corps marching in the activity." So i'm unclear - are these scholarships specifically aimed at Cadets that lost their home so they can march elsewhere first, and once there are no more former Cadets, open to the marching world at large? Everything on that website seems to indicate that this scholarship could literally be for anybody who has marched any corps before until this particular sentence.
  20. I doubt it. Drum Corps isn't special and immune from the realities of the world. Sexual violence is sickeningly common in American life in general: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/fastfact.html "Sexual violence is common. Over half of women and almost 1 in 3 men have experienced sexual violence involving physical contact during their lifetimes." This is only based on what is reported, let alone the unknown unreported (it's vast). But let's put that aside and go with the data for now. So to math out some of this data (i'm open to any corrections): Just shy of 42% of the USA population has experienced sexual violence in their lifetime based on that stat. A little over 14% have experienced rape. 80% of reported rapes happen before the age of 25. Choose any random 5 drum corps members. 2 of them already have, or are likely to, suffer sexual violence in their lifetimes. Now choose 7. One of them is likely to suffer rape in their lifetime. Choose any corps. Current capacity of 150 = 63 will suffer sexual violence in their lifetime. 21 of them will potentially suffer rape their lifetime. 17 of those people will experience it before the age of 25 according to the cdc page. I don't know the actual membership numbers, but let's say 15 of the corps are at max capacity. That's 945 people marching this summer that will or already have in their lives suffered sexual assault. 315 of them will or already have in their lives suffered rape. 255 of them will experience it before the age of 25. Extrapolate it back over the multiple decades many of these corps have existed, I'd be shocked if there is any corps where this has never happened. And even if a modern corps does everything absolutely right to protect their members, it will still happen. The sickness is in society at large. We'll never change what is commonplace by pretending it is exception.
  21. Unfortunately, statistically based on the odds and through the years - all of them.
  22. Somethings really are, unfortunately, as simple as "boy grows up watching dad abuse mom, grows up and abuses his partner." Drum corps is no different. It takes work to find a different path than the one you were brought up in. Any time I have been involved in marching education I have been keenly aware and focused on not letting how I was originally taught be how I put things forward. Those old behavior pathways are always there, worn into the brain, and available to travel if I am not cautious and mindful.
  23. I'll preface this by saying I agree with the spirit of what this person posted in general. But, as somebody who was there, they do not know what they speak of with the Cadets regarding Hop. Of course the abuse was there before him, because lets face facts: the abuse was, and is, everywhere in the activity. No corps is immune from it. The cycle didn't start with Hop, but he codified it there. He was dug in like a tick. His grip, an ironclad stranglehold. He was in charge for 34 years, more than one third of the corps' existence. He enabled the abuse there for those years and directly took part in it. Once he took over anybody who marched there can tell you: Hop's culture was the corps culture. Outside the abuse, that culture generally was "work yourself to absolute death if you have to in order to succeed." The work was literally all that mattered. Not people, not physical health, not mental health, not nutrition, not safety - work, even at the expense of all of these things. That was the lesson he wanted us all to get. With that culture, they won 6 out of 11 years with incredible performances. We all bought into that culture. We were flat out treated like dog sh** - and we lived for that experience. Looking back on it I see the absolute insanity. I would never let anybody treat me like that here in my adult life now. But I let them do it back then. Because they were the champions when I showed up for my first audition and I was not. I was a kid. I knew nothing. They're the adults. They must know. This is how you succeed. I must be wrong. I'll just take it. Removing Hop drastically altered the organization and the culture. Immediately. The members from 2018 - 2023 were genuinely supported and taken care of to a degree we never were. It was a valiant effort. It was imperfect. But it was far better. Abuse is everywhere in the activity. Hop made the corps an even easier place for abusers and perpetrators to thrive. I hold him directly accountable for that.
  24. Well they better be recent - because the window of waived statutes of limitations is closed I believe.
×
×
  • Create New...