JimF-LowBari

Actually that’s a lot longer move than NJ to Allentown. Going SE PA to top NW corner.

I had SoL in mind too. But as we have seen the limit can be changed. That’s why I was thinking corps looking over their shoulders

Question I would have is what might have been reported to a corps and/or DCI and basically ignored. Don’t need a policy saying “no abuse” to be held liable for that IMO

Oh not those kids in the Junior corps 😈. Knew a guy who marched in the 50s with a local Senior corps in PA. “For retreat they would stick us between Archer Epler and Reilly Raiders (2 Philly corps) to keep them apart. Yeah like we would have stopped them”.

Wonder if any other corps are looking at this and thinking about crap that went on years ago…. 😱

Yeah but only Wormleysburg can actually claim to be on the shore. 😆 Mechanicsburg, Linglestown, Carlisle and those were just the sponsors. My favorite intro on the DCA recordings is “greater Harrisburg district”… district???

That was due to sponsorship changes from what I could tell. lol same reason the WESTshoremen were later located in Harrisburg which is the EAST shore of the Susquehanna.

Sky Ryders went from KS to TX but forget what’s in History of DC book (book is on dcxmuseum site).

Sad thing is you just described what happened at Penn State with Jerry Sandusky allegations. PSU did their own investigation and found nothing that should be reported to outside authorities. IMO it’s a conflict of interest to have someone paid by the corps to decide if there is a problem within the corps. Thinking of my college in the 70s. If any crime occurred on campus it was hushed up for school’s reputation. Took a state law to make the students aware and safer.

Theres your excuse.. err reason for any increase..:

Ding ding ding winner IMO. Some people act like this is new territory so DCI has to be overly careful in what they do (or do nothing). Other groups have faced this problem and are handling it without being sued out of existence. Also where is the DCI legal team to advise how to enact (and act upon) protection measures. Or is DCI “the corps” so every corps is on their own? Three Stooges bit: Moe: One for all Larry: All for one Curley: Every man for himself

That’s why I had “under investigation” in my database example. Corps could see that and go at their own caution. Never worked with an employer that dealt with youth. But would think they wouldn’t be hired until cleared or hired with understanding if found guilty they would be fired. Different world but worked DoD with a security clearance. If my record was clear I would be hired. But if I didn’t pass the security checks… bye. And of a potential employee had problems with those conditions then don’t bother applying. edit: and chance to do pull my “this ain’t the first time it happened” line. Anyone know what other youth groups do if someone accused of wrongdoing (but not found guilty/innocent yet) wants a job? Sure it has happened before.

Of course Spirit got their act (apparently) together after they got hit big time and BoD was changed (IIRC). Still think it would be a deterrent if DCI would have a database of (suspected and proven) harassers/abusers so corps could check when looking at a potential new hire. Of course it would only be a deterrent if people know it exists. Database could also include status of any investigation, IOW accused, being investigated, found innocent, found guilty, etc. I worked databases for 25+ years and biggest hurdle IMO is making sure people who know the contents keep their mouth shut unless a corps makes a valid request.

Thinking it’s like DCI is ashamed that these services are needed so nothing is said unless necessary. Including the info of what types of info DCI uses to protect members. Note: I said “types of info” not the information itself

Reminds me of the .04 check I got when I switched my mortgage. I kept it for a laugh and month later got a letter. “Our records show you have not deposited the check we sent you so…”. Also enclosed was another .04 check. 🤦‍♂️

Agree MAAS wouldn’t release info to general public. But brings up the question if someone applies for a job with a corps, how would that corps find out if that person had problems elsewhere? Other than background check how could a corps find out? And if the corps where problems occurred keeps their mouth shut about it.🤔

Taking for granted FBI still has my records even though I’m retired and no longer have a security clearance. Late wife’s Cousin works for FBI and joked that he’d check my file when he went back to work. My in laws heard that and kind of freaked “why would the FBI have a file on you?” 😱

Thanks, I was in DoD before they had a policy (IOW before Project Tailhook abuse scandal hit) until few years ago. What strikes me is how the policy and training kept changing to keep up with the times or to cover something that was missed. Originally only male harassing female was covered, then oh yeah females can harass men so put that in. Finally same sex harassing and adding prevention of sexual assault (do not take this training after lunch).

Lot of information on the threads about abuse and reporting. But what I haven’t seen is a definitive answer to: After an issue is reported to a corps or DCI, then what should happen according to policy? I’ve seen that DCI is connected to a group (MAASN??) that handles reports. But nothing on what is done with those reports by anyone. Does DCI really have such a huge hole in protection or am I just missing info? Just looks like “ok problem has been reported so that’s all we need to do”

I was talking about organizations that didn’t even do background checks. Usually some religious groups that went with the “God will protect us” mentality. Yes background checks only work after someone is caught and reported. But figure how bad it would be without that check. Biggest problem I see with background checks is places don’t want to report because of the effort or possible legal action

I’d suggest a person at each corps to handle reported issues. And someone who has no connection to the corps (and no connection to DCI) to report to in case of problems with that person or reporter feels nothing is being done. In DoD first person to report to was supervisor. Then an outside agency to contact in case the supervisor was the problem (saw it happen) or abuser had pull with upper management (or was upper management).

Back in 1990s had training from churches insurance company on protection from child abuse. Line that applies here is “abusers are looking for organizations that either do not check for abusers or have holes in their protection policy “. More I read about abusers (staff and members) being able to bounce to another corps….. no wonder this is still going on as much

The problem is the bad ones stay under the radar. Good for Boston for kicking them out but… how do other corps know that their new staff member should never work with young people again? Just too #### much of corps worrying about themselves and not the whole activity. And DCI is useless if they don’t take the lead on this. OK DCI should dissolve itself if it isn’t taking more action.

Wonder if any of this pertains to the current suit against Spirit. How did BD find out and not Crown (if Crown didn’t know). Know it’s a gray area but DCI needs to keep track of staff and members with allegations/proven issues against them.

Have no idea how corps protect themselves so basic question. What kinds of insurance do corps carry and what does it protect against? And what are the corps responsibilities to make sure the insurer will cover a claim? (And probably unanswerable question is if rates are going up with more abuse claims coming out) Only background is dealing with a church and child abuse protection. Our insurer wanted us to come up with a protection policy AND FOLLOW THRU WITH IT. After we would do that our rates would go down (win win for church and insurer)