Jump to content

The Cadets and GH history of sexual abuse (news article)


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, GUARDLING said:

Believe me, I do hear you on how Hop was with just about everyone around him, the demeaning, the me, me, me, the using until you weren't needed anymore, let's just remember before Hop then after. He may have been a lot of truly despicable things but he did do his job and saved this corps. Like those facts or not. Was it worth it? well we all could have a different answer I suppose.

Given what this Inquirer article reveals, the only answer to that question must be "No".

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, N.E. Brigand said:

Given what this Inquirer article reveals, the only answer to that question must be "No".

Im not talking about the allegations against HOP but the years of running this corps how he chose, Which to the poster and what seems an alumni didn't care for it. Which my point was this should only be about this situation with victims and nothing else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ediker said:

They need to go, yes!  Doing it immediately would be more of a disaster.  Someone needs to attend to business for the organization.  The best course I can imagine would be if existing alumni and friends could organize suitable replacements for each board member.  Each board member can then resign as soon as a replacement is ready.  

The alumni have no control over the board of directors. I'd much rather an outside group (Perhaps DCI itself) select a competent independent group for the board of directors than a bunch of alumni who may be tempted to cover up things to "protect the corps".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, wallace said:

No, the BD was adamant, and he seemed assured the other schools will be leaving, too. He remarked it was bad enough YEA was being run by an alleged rapist, but the board covered it up which signaled, at least to him, that the organization didn’t have the best interests of students at heart. I agree with him.

And that's the collapsing roof that the YEA board has brought upon themselves by the completely inadequate response. A trust bond has been broken to the point that the schools are fully justified to ask, "what else are they covering up?" Some unbelievably poor crisis management. 

I have heard that some board members were extremely unhappy with that letter last night and did not want it released with its current wording. The objections were overruled. 

It really has to be a clean sweep to save the parent organization. I feel like the Cadets entity will survive even if they end up detached from YEA and harbored under a new funding umbrella.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, garfield said:

Breaking...

https://www.yamaha.com/marchingmusic/cadets/2018/yamaha-stands-with-the-cadets

YAMAHA STANDS WITH THE CADETS, VOWS SUPPORT DURING TRANSITION

--"...sending reps to this weekend's camp with support..."

(Fake News.  Fake link. A parody.  I made it all up because I am Schultz.  But you have to admit, it would be...)

A Great Headline In a Show of Support and Unanimity Behind the Marching Members!

 

I'm just not buying that it's a fait-accompli that support is going to bail.  And, if the accused is gone, and there are lots of supervision, transparency, and open dialog along with a fabulous distractingly-productive camp, this could just as easily turn out to be the cathartic cleansing that leads to much greater things, if the kids who DO show up do stay and do show that there are new leaders and better things coming - without the fear.

 

 

The page was deleted from Yamaha's site. (May have been previously reported.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, barigirl78 said:

As someone who marched in a corps that was suspended from DCI competition, I just don't believe DCI has no power here.  Keep in mind that suspensions only apply to DCI competition.  Suspended corps can still perform.  We (The Crossmen) performed exhibitions at DCI shows and competed in non-DCI shows.

We also came back and were even stronger the next year.  The recovery from that suspension--and other near disasters that almost killed the corps--is part of the Crossmen culture:  "When all else is gone the Bones remain."

I should add that getting out of YEA and surviving is also part of the culture, too.

 For DCI History buffs here, ( and Legacy fans )  DCI  provided no sanctions to a DCI Corps that marched overage marchers ( plural ) in 1989. That Corps was allowed to perform/ compete ( without their overage marchers )on Finals Night in 1989. Other Corps, with similar violations of utilizing overage marchers in some other years were disallowed from further DCI Competition scorings that season. What was the difference in how DCI handled what appeared to be equal violations  ?

 Prompt notification of suspected violations of DCI policies to DCI HQ..

 DCI allowed one Corps to perform further in competition because they gave DCI HQ notice promptly after Semi Finals that they unknowingly had overage marchers in their Corps all season long. DCI HQ made a quick unilateral decision to allow that Corps to further compete ( and they won the DCI Title that next day ). The other Corps did not notify DCI HQ promptly, so DCI made the decision to disqualify them, then DCI mandated those scores of that Corps sealed, then destroyed. They were disbarred by DCI from both competition AND exhibition performance the next day at finals( 1975).

 Prompt notification to DCI. That was the essential  difference in DCI's decision to disallow further exhibition/ competition  in one instance of similar violations of DCI policies, and in another to allow further performance/ competition with the similar violation.

 Did YEA notify DCI HQ  promptly of what the lawyers for the victims were requesting from YEA , and what the lawyers for the 9 victims were telling YEA months ago ? I suppose thats what we'll all find out later.

Edited by BRASSO
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BRASSO said:

 For DCI History buffs here, ( and Legacy fans )  DCI  provided no sanctions to a DCI Corps that marched overage marchers ( plural ) in 1989. That Corps was allowed to perform/ compete ( without their overage marchers )on Finals Night in 1989. Other Corps, with similar violations of utilizing overage marchers in some other years were disallowed from further DCI Competition scorings that season. What was the difference in how DCI handled what appeared to be equal violations  ?

 Prompt notification of suspected violations of DCI policies to DCI.

 DCI allowed one Corps to perform further in competition because they gave DCI HQ notice promptly after Semi Finals that they unknowingly had overage marchers in their Corps all season long. DCI HQ made a quick unilateral decision to allow that Corps to further compete ( and they won the DCI Title that next day ). The other Corps did not notify DCI HQ promptly, so DCI made the decision to disqualify them, then DCI mandated those scores of that Corps sealed, then destroyed. They were disbarred by DCI from both competition AND exhibition performance the next day at finals.

 Prompt notification to DCI. That was the essential  difference in DCI's decision to disallow further exhibition/ competition  in one instance of similar violations of DCI policies, and in another to allow further performance/ competition with the similar violation.

 Did YEA notify DCI HQ  promptly of what the lawyers for the victims were requesting from YEA , and what the lawyers for the 9 victims were telling YEA months ago ? I suppose thats what we'll all find out later.

,lots of questions there needed to be answered

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, GUARDLING said:

,lots of questions there needed to be answered

That's the understatement of the year.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MikeRapp said:

Sorry, but YEA was clearly taking advantage of what everyone knew was a very precarious leadership scenario. They could have stepped in and brought accountability to the organization and did not. That is despite almost countless incidents of unprofessionalism and allegations of impropriety. There are victims in this situation, and YEA is only a victim of their own incompetence.

It appears we are talking about different groups of people here. I see YEA to include alumni, current performers, sponsors, donors, etc. They are all victims of the lack of professionalism as well.

Like many others on this forum, I am a past performer and staff member of multiple drum corps. I think we can all admit that while this particular situation is extreme, it is reflects a deeper cultural issue within the activity.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dbc03 said:

The alumni have no control over the board of directors. I'd much rather an outside group (Perhaps DCI itself) select a competent independent group for the board of directors than a bunch of alumni who may be tempted to cover up things to "protect the corps".

I get you, for sure, but I don't think DCI has any real authority to do that.  Maybe they could make recommendations, but honestly, if you're going that route, it's probably better to just reach out to other corps' boards and network for folks willing to shepherd the org through a transitionary period. 

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...