Teal Sound 2012

[Jeff Ream]

This thread is full of enablers.

Corps management that says, "oh don't worries about it yo's, he's just doing truck driving and logistics...ignore the fact he'll see the members every day!"

Posters (many of whom are probably music educators, SCARY) that say, "everyone deserves a second chance and everyone makes mistakes... I don't see the problem with allowing this guy to establish contact and be around young people again!"

I pose these questions, yes, she was an adult... but only by a few months. Are you claiming that in his sexual power moves, he only waited until this girl turned 18? I imagine there was a long time building for this. If he had established these texting relationships with two girls, there were surely more. He did share texts with all of his section leaders, etc. Hell, I know of parents that would try to get a director fired just for the sharing of texts, let alone, sexual ones.

Jesus, people.

This man tried to establish a sexual relationship with a high school student, that was his student, and tried to get her to lie about it. This is not "well he chose the wrong toilet paper" business... this is the actions of a SEXUAL PREDATOR. You don't have to be having sex with someone underage to be a sexual predator. You can be a manipulator, misuse your power, break the oath of education, rape someone, etc.

While I agree many people, myself included, said they believe in 2nd chances, I dont think you see nearly as many saying this is the right move for Teal to make.

There is a difference between believing in 2nd chances, and condoning the corps decision.

I personally believe in 2nd chances. I also think the corps ####ed up big time

[Teuphal]

*Removed*

Edited October 11, 2011 by Teuphal

[DrillmanSop06]

That's what I read. That totally changes the tone of these postings from really REALLY bad ( fire and brimstone bad) to something that is simply bad. I think it makes it a little worse that there was a significant age difference, but we've drawn the line at 18 here in the US. Other than that, I don't know the details and this is all simply gossip time...

That's the bad part. It doesn't make professional sense to do this. It's interesting that this keeps happening over and over in every walk of life with all these people.

If she were graduated and 18, it would change the situation. Big time. But it doesn't matter if you're 18 or 19 - if you are STILL ENROLLED IN HIGH SCHOOL, it is equally as wrong. It's 18 years old AND graduated from high school, not just one. Any teacher with half a brain can tell you that. Anyone who believes that it's less bad because she was able to vote doesn't work in education. There is NO gray area. If she was legally enrolled in high school at the time, the action was wrong.

This thread is full of enablers.

Corps management that says, "oh don't worries about it yo's, he's just doing truck driving and logistics...ignore the fact he'll see the members every day!"

Posters (many of whom are probably music educators, SCARY) that say, "everyone deserves a second chance and everyone makes mistakes... I don't see the problem with allowing this guy to establish contact and be around young people again!"

I pose these questions, yes, she was an adult... but only by a few months. Are you claiming that in his sexual power moves, he only waited until this girl turned 18? I imagine there was a long time building for this. If he had established these texting relationships with two girls, there were surely more. He did share texts with all of his section leaders, etc. Hell, I know of parents that would try to get a director fired just for the sharing of texts, let alone, sexual ones.

Jesus, people.

This man tried to establish a sexual relationship with a high school student, that was his student, and tried to get her to lie about it. This is not "well he chose the wrong toilet paper" business... this is the actions of a SEXUAL PREDATOR. You don't have to be having sex with someone underage to be a sexual predator. You can be a manipulator, misuse your power, break the oath of education, rape someone, etc.

Spot. On.

While I can agree with everyone that these actions were poorly decided upon, and very poorly acted on, I DO NOT, view them as the actions of sexual predator. As I read the responses, I see that many people have responded to this issue out of pure malice and distaste for pedophiles and predators in our culture. However it seems to me that many, if not a majority of the people replying to this poll have not read the news clipping released by the paper in Winterpark. According to the article, the "child" in question was 18, and, in the US, a consenting adult, Some may say that she could have been pressured into the relationship, but there is no evidence to support the theory that she was unwilling in this affair. While I cannot condone this kind of relationship between a teacher and student on a professional level, he by no means predatorized the young lady. Another thing that seems out of place to me, is that the article and police failed to publish any responses made by the girl to Mr. Moody, which to me points that the girl was at least cooperating in the same manner. The paper probably decided to keep those messages out of their release in order to sensationalize the story, an effort that I find horrendous. The police, the school board, the "victim's" family, and the "victim" all failed to press charges of any kind. While it might have been impossible to press real criminal charges due to the girl's age, there were numerous choices available to the parties mentioned to take legal action, yet they chose not to. To me this stinks of secrets that the family or girl wish to keep, perhaps the girls cooperation? Which would ruin any accusations of predatory actions. Despite the account of the unnamed girl in the DCF investigation with her replies of surprise, she never really said how she responded after that. It was even stated that Moody said that the relationship would not work due to their respective positions.

While I will not approve or disapprove of Mr. Moody's actions, I simply cannot stand by and let a man who has obviously had remorse for his actions and knows they were wrong be called a "predator" or any other similar term. Teal Sounds decision to hire this man was obviously not based on his past actions or transgressions, but rather on his performance as an employee. He did an excellent job with the corps last year, and has obviously done an outstanding job creating the design team, recruiting the illustrious Robert W. Smith (arranger of the renowned 2011 Scouts program), and the Noah Bellamy and Tim Fairbanks, both very accomplished visual designers. They would obviously be reluctant to let someone go after such performance.

Whether they knew before hand or not of his past actions, is unknown. As to those of you who say they do not understand why The Teal Sound would make it public as to the actions of their employee, they simply wished control the issue and not be made out to be covering it up. They controlled the issue by announcing it publicly, and while there is some obvious negative publicity here on DCP, its just DCP. a number of perhaps 20 people have responded to the issue, which speaks to me that not many people are terribly interested or outraged. The Teal Sound wished this topic to be out in the open, and for the community to have its opinions, which it obviously does.

In my opinion, the corps should not be penalized, removed from circuit, or asked to fire the individual in question.

So in your opinion, making inappropriate sexual advances on ONE OF YOUR STUDENTS, isn't being predatory?

Man, some people not in education really just don't get it. There is no gray area. There is no second chance. It was a predatory action and Teal Sound, like other corps, made a huge mistake.

His performance as an employee DOESN'T MATTER. This isn't the rest of the civilian world. This is education. And education is DIFFERENT. He could have the ability to blink and turn the Pio hornline into a Box V line. He could cough and make Teal Sound DCI Champions. IT. DOES. NOT. MATTER. Because this isn't the civilian world where performance is the sole factor that makes someone worthwhile. This is education. Education is different.

And then you throw in victim blaming? Because she didn't press charges or because she consented (for whatever reason), it wasn't predatory?! Do you REALLY believe that's how it works?

Edited October 10, 2011 by DrillmanSop06

[jjeffeory]

If she were graduated and 18, it would change the situation. Big time. But it doesn't matter if you're 18 or 19 - if you are STILL ENROLLED IN HIGH SCHOOL, it is equally as wrong. It's 18 years old AND graduated from high school, not just one. Any teacher with half a brain can tell you that. Anyone who believes that it's less bad because she was able to vote doesn't work in education. There is NO gray area. If she was legally enrolled in high school at the time, the action was wrong.

Spot. On.

So in your opinion, making inappropriate sexual advances on ONE OF YOUR STUDENTS, isn't being predatory?

Man, some people not in education really just don't get it. There is no gray area. There is no second chance. It was a predatory action and Teal Sound, like other corps, made a huge mistake.

His performance as an employee DOESN'T MATTER. This isn't the rest of the civilian world. This is education. And education is DIFFERENT. He could have the ability to blink and turn the Pio hornline into a Box V line. He could cough and make Teal Sound DCI Champions. IT. DOES. NOT. MATTER. Because this isn't the civilian world where performance is the sole factor that makes someone worthwhile. This is education. Education is different.

And then you throw in victim blaming? Because she didn't press charges or because she consented (for whatever reason), it wasn't predatory?! Do you REALLY believe that's how it works?

There's a huge divide between being a pedophile and sexual predator and a "predatory action".

We do not have the facts, and what facts I've read aren't good, but they aren't that of a sexual predator or pedophile.

That is a fundamental problem that I have with this whole thread.

So, the black and white, cut and dry application of a standard of two different scenarios is disconcerting. The mob is a dangerous thing. A witch hunt is not in order in this scenario.

I do understand the issues of an educator dating a student. This case seems to be exactly why something like this shouldn't happen. There are too many things unknown and withheld to pass life condemning judgement. The line drawn for pedophilia is drawn at 18 years old, not 18 and a hair. The line isn't 18 AND graduated from high school. The line for sexual predator is likely anything that is NOT consensual, yet pressed.

There are two theoretical issues here for me: One is the age issue. The other is the student/teacher issue. The student/teacher issue is the only one with merit. This would be present no matter what the two people ages. Obviously, this seems to be a line that was crossed, possibly by all parties. It's not good, it's not productive, and it causes a lot of problems.

None of us have any facts on this drama other than the newspaper article. That told me that it's not a pedophile, which is the most important thing to me. The student/teacher issues is bad. I'm glad I don't have to deal with this issue personally.

[jjeffeory]

So in your opinion, making inappropriate sexual advances on ONE OF YOUR STUDENTS, isn't being predatory?

Can you please tell me what an "appropriate sexual advance" on a student is?

I'm not sure if it's predatory if it's consensual, but I don't think it's something that a teacher should do. It's very stupid in fact.

You see, the word predatory implies that the teacher was seeking to take advantage of the student. I'm not sure what this was, as we don't have the facts.

Like I said, I'm glad that I don't have to sit down and actually parse through this issue, but I'm not ready to ruin someone's life over what we know.

Edited October 10, 2011 by jjeffeory

[Teuphal]

*Removed*

Edited October 11, 2011 by Teuphal

[BRASSO]

but perception is everything, and in an activity where now word gets around about everything...it can, will and in this case, has led to bad PR

Teal Sound probably would be well served now to make a telephone call to their Insurance Agent that sold them their Liability Insurance Policy. You can bet your life that their current Insurance policy will not cover them now that they have willingly hired an individual that has resigned due to a sexual pursuit of a student under his supervision. If this individual has another incident, Teal Sound will most likely be sued by the parent of the young person. The liability policy will not pay for such gross negligence where Teal Sound knowingly hired this individual with this risk clearly out of the ordinary provisions of the liability insurance policy that covers standard risks... not gross negligence by the Corps that knowingly took on this 10 fold worse risk with this hire. Once the policy provisions decline the coverage at point of claim ( it would ) Teal Sound would need to pay the damages to the victim themselves out of Corps revenues. If sufficient revenues were not available, Teal Sound would need to file for Bancrupty protection, and in that case the Corps is finis.. done... kaput. Additionally, depending on the circumstances, a lawyer could sue DCI as well for damages should it be believed that they had oversight responsibilities that they failed to perform once this individual's hiring became known to them. ( DCI, might be held harmless in this, but it certainly is open to some question in my opinion). Teal Sound is taking on a HUGE financial risk for themselves ( along with the all important Human risk ) in hiring this individual. This part is indisputable.

Edited October 11, 2011 by BRASSO

[Teuphal]

*Removed*

Edited October 11, 2011 by Teuphal

[Rifuarian]

I want only for the CORPS to not be hindered in its pursuit of academic and performance excellence.

Then they'd do best not to make an announcement like they just made when they're facing financial difficulties.

Most of us aren't saying this guy is a pedophile, that he's child abuser, or that he did anything illegal. Those that are saying this are waaaaaay off base and are, as you've said, buying into the general paranoia regarding these issues. I do hope the guy recovers from this, turns himself around, and finds success somewhere.

But what he did was highly unethical. It's the ultimate breach of trust for an educator. It's trap many teachers have fallen into before . . . and lot of them were otherwise good guys and good educators. But there's no coming back from it, or at least there shouldn't be. He won't work in a school system again (or at least not for a very long time), either as a teacher or as an administrator. And since corps want to be seen as "academic" organizations - not something I personally agree with, but that's the way things are going - should they not hold their employees to these same standards?

Yes, or no?

Edited October 11, 2011 by Rifuarian

[Teuphal]

*Removed*

Edited October 11, 2011 by Teuphal