BigBadMadMan Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 My point would be, I don't think it's judging someone if I choose not to let someone who pleads "no contest" or is aquitted of child molestation charges watch my kids. Great...the court finds them not guilty...but if I do let them watch my kids and that person molests them, everyone will point the finger at me for being stupid enough to leave my kids in the company of someone who had been accused of molesting children. Of course this is hypothetical, and not quite an apples-to-apples comparison, but you see what I'm saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpaul Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 I don't see why you would bring up child molestation when it has absolutely no bearing on this situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMadMan Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 I don't see why you would bring up child molestation when it has absolutely no bearing on this situation. First of all, I said that it wasn't an apples-to-apples comparison. Secondly, the point was, it's always better to be safe than sorry. I highly doubt (given this kind of attention) that anything would happen, BUT on the off chance that something DID happen, there would be a LOT of accusations and finger-pointing...needlessly. Is that a risk worth taking? There's a reason why people react so quickly in situations like this. It's because of the stigmas attached to anything of a deviant sexual nature. No one wants to be on the receiving end of the "you shoulda known better" argument. Surely that's not so difficult to understand. I mean, if we all wanna be completely frank and honest here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMadMan Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) In other words, there's MUCH more downside than upside, IMO. It has the potential to be damaging to the organization regardless of whether something were to happen or not. I'm not arguing whether or not this guy is a good guy/good instructor/designer/etc. 90% of the time you hear "I had no idea the guy next door was a mass-murder...he was always so nice and helpful!" You almost never hear "ya, I knew that guy was up to something." More often than not, you hear nothing but great things from people about someone who does something shocking. Doesn't mean anything. Edited November 14, 2009 by BigBadMadMan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 In other words, there's MUCH more downside than upside, IMO. More downside. MUCH more downside. How much MORE downside? Sounds to me that you ARE making a judgment. And your judgment is to condemn this man forever, to bannish him from drum corps irrespective of everything else he might have accomplished on the basis of one step across the line, a step that involved only adults and only consent. HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Good grief. Good luck to the Colts. Can't wait to see the show. And pizza is delicious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lance Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Educators are help to another standard. If he were an accountant, this would not be an issue. At worst he was attempting to engage in a sexual act on public property. Whether you agree with it or not, that's against the law. At best, he was urinating on public property in the proximity of an unknown adult. Why would you urinate in a public place within sight of an adult that you do not know? At best this is a case of very poor judgement. Either way I would not want my kid around this person. Oh and by the way, he will probably teach again. He will go to another state and will be able to say he hasn't been never been found guilty of any charges for anything. His former principal will only be able to say he resigned. If there were any reasons listed in the resignation, she would be able to communicate that. My guess is the resignation says nothing about the incident in the park. But no one from the school district will be able to say anything about the charges in the public park. Which is probably why he resigned and pleaded "no contest". He was not fired. He was not found guilty. He will teach again in another state. What kind of background checks are actually performed on all staff for corps, out of curiosity? I'm an educator and I got a state highway patrol and FBI check. Unless all DCI staff are subjected to that, DCI educators are not held to the same standard as even public teachers. I'd be curious as to the number of DUIs (for example) drum corps staff have out there, but something tells me that won't be made public knowledge anytime soon. That's a poor decision that actually puts other lives at risk, too. Again, just a small example. If you don't want your kid around this person, good for you. I'd probably want to fork out the money to get individual background checks on all instructors before jumping to the conclusion that your kid won't be in the presence of somebody with a criminal background. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmroth1 Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) Good grief. Good luck to the Colts. Can't wait to see the show. And pizza is delicious. Good Grief is right... We have had discussions now about homosexuality, murderers, sexual predators, dancing peacocks and Relampago....ok maybe we left Relampago out so far but this is getting nuts. Bottom line for me is I trust Greg Orwolls judgment here. If anyone really thinks he would put his own child at risk or anyone elses in the corps that is just not the case. Edited November 14, 2009 by bmroth1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBadMadMan Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 (edited) More downside. MUCH more downside. How much MORE downside? Sounds to me that you ARE making a judgment. And your judgment is to condemn this man forever, to bannish him from drum corps irrespective of everything else he might have accomplished on the basis of one step across the line, a step that involved only adults and only consent. HH Well, possible downside to recruiting, for one. If there was a kid thinking about auditioning for Colts who finds this situation creepy, they might choose not to audition. Or parents reading this not letting their kid audition. As much as you want to challenge anyone here who is just being HONEST, you won't be able to change the mind of a protective parent no matter how much you want to make US the ignorant, intolerable ones. Anyone who errs on the side of caution, you call judgmental. Not very fair. You can try to paint all expressing concern as homophobes or judgmental or fear-mongers or whatever. Doesn't change the fact that it's a bad idea...period. It's a potentially harmful situation, no matter how you spin it. I'm all for redemption and second-chances...but not when kids are involved. I think it's fair to call a spade, a spade. It's also fair for people to express genuine concern. And hello, I marched there. I'm not just "stirring the pot" here. Edited November 14, 2009 by BigBadMadMan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcjordansc Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Based on this thread, the Colt's reputation has taken a hit this week and like it or not, this hire will have a negative impact on recruiting. Maybe there are so many kids trying to get into the Colts that they will still not have any problem filling out the corps, but this kind of debate at this time of the year is certainly a distraction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts