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

[HockeyDad]

Attacking the reporter and Stuart Rice is a bad look right now. 

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, Peel Paint said:

I disagree. I wasn't at all a fan of Stuart Rice--his argumentative diatribes were one key reason I left RAMD. (And I'd forgotten but do now recall his series of RAMD posts back in 2003.) I wouldn't give Dan Acheson a free pass here just because Rice was a PITA. Rice may be dead-on right in his posted recollection of Acheson's response. If Jeff Ream felt most people at Januals were aware something was up with Hopkins and sex abuse, how credible is Acheson's claim that he heard nothing about this until the first Inquirer story? That claim is going to crumble if a number of other people come forward to say, well I brought this to DCI's attention too years ago, especially if they have a way to back it up, like an e-mail trail, corroborating witness, phone bills, any number of ways. (This story will serve to fish for more leads along similar lines.)

What I like even less than the dismissal of Rice's posts is the growing suspicions about Inquirer journalist Patricia Nadolny being in this overall story of sex abuse in drum corps to burnish a resume. Maybe, some here seem to be beginning to think, other parts of the story may be unfair or untrue. It reminds me of the film Spotlight and the story behind it, and the criticisms the reporters faced. I am sure Nadolny is not acting as a lone wolf here but is being checked out carefully by at least one editor. People talking to her are being asked to document their claims, and the documentation is being cross-checked. Stuart's posts back then, still visible now, are credible documentation, exactly what this reporter needed to run this story, not proof of a specific case of sex abuse, but documenting that there likely was a report that was made that led to no action. She wouldn't have run Rice's one report alone as a story if all she had was Rice's memory from 2003 of calling Acheson, without the documentation.

As far as I'm concerned, the safety of the participants is Job One for DCI and its member corps and staffs. At what point should Acheson have heard enough to step up and have DCI look into it? Acheson is saying, well in April 2018 with the Inquirer article, I had enough. I'm not yet convinced that was soon enough.

The story about sex abuse in DCI needs to continue if verifiable leads develop.

I agree with most of this. The problems are:

 

if dan heard rumblings, called hop and hop said “ it’s a disgruntled employee: what can dan do? He has no specific information. No victims or friends of victims reached out to him. Dan probably heard thousands of drum corps rumors a week.

Rice in hindsight was right. But again he gave dan nothing concrete. Dci was not set up to be the ncaa compliance department. Plus Rice engaged in some pretty petty behaviors towards those he didn’t like on ramd. He contacted the boosters where I taught trying to claim I was a “ serial harasser” on a Usenet group. If you read the whole thread she highlighted in the article many of us told him to go to the authorities that could do something or encourage those victimized to go to them. He wouldn’t. He just continued his anti dci rants 

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, Terri Schehr said:

Didn’t she call your work?  Or email them or something? 

No she did that to Alma Sennett May she Rest In Peace 

[Jim Schehr]

2 minutes ago, camel lips said:

DCI and DAN Acheson's take on this seems to be lets just move on IMHO. It reminds me of then those Dallas Cowboys cheerleaders raped that woman in the Vegas Motel room and Jerry Jones got on Television and said America just needs to get back on with Football. 

 

SMDH. 

DCI is nothing more and nothing less that an show scheduling and promoting company. No different than any other promotional company. All else is for the matter of its member corps to vote and agree upon. The sooner they can distance themselves from this the sooner they can get back to promoting shows. 

[garfield]

6 hours ago, N.E. Brigand said:

[1] Except that DCI has now done what Dan A. supposedly said in 2003 DCI couldn't do.

[2] When was "I was only following orders" ever acceptable? Do we not all have moral obligations?

(As I indicated in another post, I'm willing to give Acheson a pass here, but not without some scrutiny.)

1] Did he?  Are you sure he has.  What, EXACTLY, has Dan and his staff done and, importantly, as directed by whom (including his own initiative)?

2]. There's a presumption of guilt because "he MUST have known something".  Did he have an obligation to speak up?  Dunno, what did he know?  He's already said that the FIRST learned of these accusations in January (after all these years) and didn't know of THESE specific claims until the article came out.  There was some discussion here that Hop had the obligation to report to DCI.  While I'm not convinced that was established as true prior to Hop's departure, it certainly is the policy from DCI now during the restructuring. 

DCI's press release said they asked the new BoD/staff to report to them in two-week blocks, but that's for Cadets in this situation, and not some requisite that DCI has for all corps.

Will DCI's role change from reactive to proactive as a result of this circumstance?  I think this is an important question.

[Peel Paint]

6 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:

Attacking the reporter and Stuart Rice is a bad look right now. 

Optics, optics, optics.

[Jeff Ream]

11 minutes ago, camel lips said:

DCI and DAN Acheson's take on this seems to be lets just move on IMHO. It reminds me of then those Dallas Cowboys cheerleaders raped that woman in the Vegas Motel room and Jerry Jones got on Television and said America just needs to get back on with Football. 

 

SMDH. 

You couldn’t be more wrong 

[garfield]

6 hours ago, skevinp said:

Just a dumb question here.  Were there specific DCI rules at the time against a director or staff member having a consensual relationship with an adult corps member?  

crickets?

Now ask: Did Cadets have policies in place against a director or staff member having consensual relationship with an adult corps member?  (And I presume you are being very specific here and not asking about a relationship with an adult staff member, right?)

 

[Terri Schehr]

10 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said:

No she did that to Alma Sennett May she Rest In Peace 

I definitely understand.  Caused a lot of trouble for people.

[Jim Schehr]

4 minutes ago, garfield said:

Will DCI's role change from reactive to proactive as a result of this circumstance?  I think this is an important question.

No and shouldn’t. It’s has never been anything put a show scheduling and promotion company for shows. Its only responsiblity is to that of its member organizations and that is fiduciary.