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

[Terri Schehr]

5 minutes ago, year1buick said:

Regardless of the level of legal severity, it sounds creepy as hell to me and shows extremely poor judgement and lack of common sense. That alone would keep me from hiring him. 

Exactly.  Why hire him?  Is he that extraordinary?  I don’t think so.  The results certainly didn’t justify the risk.  Just sayin’.  At any of those corps. 

[Jim Schehr]

13 minutes ago, MikeD said:

I don't defend sexual predators or creeps. They need to be exposed and handled as harshly as possible. IMO this case, as determined by the legal system, does not fit remotely what GH has been accused of doing. 

That’s your opinion. Stop trying to convince me. You sound  desperate for me to see it your way and I don’t. 

Edited May 3, 2018 by Jim Schehr

[BRASSO]

59 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

To be fair to Mike: it wasn't a shower, was it? Mike says it was a closet; is that right?. 

 A " closet " ?  No, he was not arrested and charged for videotaping a girl in a closet. To be precise, it was a girls shower, that had an acompanying " changing area " ajacent. it was not entirely clear from the court testimony I read, of what stage of undress she was in. But the expectation by this creep was that he would catch her on his hidden camera rolling  behind some shelves in a stage of nudity. But she saw the camera light flicker behind the boxes, became petrified and screamed. Whether she was in a stage of total undress at that moment was unclear in my readings. But to be clear, he did not want to tape her in a closet full of books, reading a book or whatnot, in full clothing, or some such, if thats the narrative to be put out there with her/ him. It was a " shower- changing area ", and its pretty clear to most what his intent was in his secret private videotaping of this female minor on school grounds. She had no idea he was doing this, according to her sworn testimony. The creep forced her case to go to a Jury Trial too. Imagine that. He denied it all. Jury didn't  believe him though. They believed her, and had the evidence they believed they needed for their guilty verdict too... the camera. She was just a kid at the time. No doubt trusted this  " teacher " too at one time. He appealed the case. She decided to put it behind her. He got the guilty verdict expunged thru legal manuverings several years after the guilty verdict. He lost his teaching license.  But the expungement of the initial guilty verdict was done in her absence at appeal. Thats what Lawyers can do when they are paid well to do so. All perfectly " legal ",.... while unsavory at the same time, imo

Edited May 3, 2018 by BRASSO

[Jim Schehr]

1 minute ago, BRASSO said:

 A " closet ". No, he was not arrested and charged for videotaping a girl in a closet. To be precise, it was a girls shower, thgat had an acompanying " changing area ". it was not entirely clear from the court testimony I read, of what stage of undress she was in. But the expectation by this creep was that he would catch her on  his camera in a stage of nudity. Whether she was in that stage of total undress was unclear in my readings. But to be clear, he did not want to tape her in a closet full of books, reading a book, in full clothing, or some such, if thats the implication. It was a " shower- changing area ".

I find it disturbing that we have reached the point of selective outrage and now some are voicing their opinion of which perverts and creeps should be allowed to be hired. SMH 

[MikeD]

21 minutes ago, BRASSO said:

 A " closet ". No, he was not arrested and charged for videotaping a girl in a closet. To be precise, it was a girls shower, thgat had an acompanying " changing area ". it was not entirely clear from the court testimony I read, of what stage of undress she was in. But the expectation by this creep was that he would catch her on  his camera in a stage of nudity. Whether she was in that stage of total undress was unclear in my readings. But to be clear, he did not want to tape her in a closet full of books, reading a book, in full clothing, or some such, if thats the implication. It was a " shower- changing area ", and its pretty clear to most what his intent was in his private videotaping of this female minor on school grounds.

Please post a link to the above. The court record does not mention any shower at all. 

[BRASSO]

42 minutes ago, MikeD said:

Please post a link to the above. The court record does not mention any shower at all. 

  Please post a link that this female minor victim was not the victim of " a sex crime ".

 The court record does not mention the " video taping of a school custodian going about his duties on school grounds " at all.

 The court testimony tells us the sex crime incident upon this female on school grounds took place in a " changing area " off the girls school shower area.  You can read it yourself, if so inclined. But this is all a distinction without a difference anyway, imo. You apparently believe that creeps like this should be allowed back into school settings, with minor youths around,(or just removed from minors status). This perverse attitude is precisely why YEA/ DCI is in deep doodoo now, imo. This apparent cavalier attiude that.. oh well," it really was just a misdemeanor".. and " hate to see this  this record follow this guy around forever.". Such attitudes are quire sickening, imo.... and why DCI/ YEA really does need a total institutional enema to rid itself of such backward, and potentially dangerous attitudes. We notice that not ONCE,  in all your commentary tonite, did you even mention the female minor victim. Just the creep that YEA/ GH hired. All of your commentary above was directed toward defending this creep's hire by GH and other Corps. I really am quite surprised by this MikeD.. I expected you'd have had little to no defense on a guy that under public pressure GH decided to terminate from working with the Cadets.  i think you are on the wrong side of history, MikeD to want to figuratively die on a hill defending this creep's right to be hired back into youth activities where he had so egregiously violated this girl and her parents trust. Shame on you, and frankly any others out and about that still harbor such cavalier attitudes regarding indecent sexually deviant acts perpetrated by adults upon the most vulnerable among us.... children..

Edited May 3, 2018 by BRASSO

[One n Done]

Some of you choose to PUBLISH some fairly damaging stuff about individuals based on incomplete facts, inaccuracies, and the vehemence of your own ideals and beliefs.  Good luck with that.

[ajlemm]

Jeez you guys, it’s all over the place. Here’s one of many links.

 

Napa Valley Register

[year1buick]

6 minutes ago, One n Done said:

Some of you choose to PUBLISH some fairly damaging stuff about individuals based on incomplete facts, inaccuracies, and the vehemence of your own ideals and beliefs.  Good luck with that.

What is specifically factually incomplete or inaccurate? (I’m not being sarcastic— I’m genuinely interested.)

[N.E. Brigand]

1 hour ago, ajlemm said:

Jeez you guys, it’s all over the place. Here’s one of many links.

Napa Valley Register

Thank you! So not a shower, but "a storage room inside a band room that members routinely use as a dressing room", and in fact discovered by a girl who was changing clothes.

MikeD, I have to say that while not quite as extreme as Brasso described, that still doesn't good at all for Atchison. If I were any school or corps, I'd want to know that Atchison had been convicted for that behavior, because I wouldn't hire him for any job where he interacted with students.