George Hopkins removed from DCI Hall of Fame

[HockeyDad]

19 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

Was thinking blood pressure saving....

And to be even more serious enough tension going on without jumping the gun and removing before trial. Board might think it looks bad to remove while GH is still legally innocent.

Then that brings me back to this question:  was DCI HOF acting prematurely in removing him almost a year ago?  Were they jumping the gun?  I don’t think so. What do you think?  By the way Gar, I have my eye on you. You didn’t answer this question. 

Edited August 22, 2019 by HockeyDad

[JimF-LowBari]

9 minutes ago, HockeyDad said:

Then that brings me back to this question:  was DCI HOF acting prematurely in removing him almost a year ago?  Were they jumping the gun?  I don’t think so. What do you think?  By the way Gar, I have my eye on you. You didn’t answer this question. 

That’s their business and don’t have an opinion one way or another. IOW not important enough to me to care

[garfield]

1 hour ago, HockeyDad said:

Then that brings me back to this question:  was DCI HOF acting prematurely in removing him almost a year ago?  Were they jumping the gun?  I don’t think so. What do you think?  By the way Gar, I have my eye on you. You didn’t answer this question. 

Oh, sorry, I missed (or ignored ) the question.  Heh.

I think the DCI BoD was exactly correct in removing him before his trial proves anything.

If stink comes the WDCHOF from his eventual conviction, so what?  Who cares?  And even if he's found innocent and the WDCHOF is vindicated, who cares?

The DCI HoF, however, reflects right now on a whole bunch of other people recognized in the DCI HoF. DCI acted correctly and preemptively to spray themselves with stink repellent.

I applaud the action.

[HockeyDad]

5 minutes ago, garfield said:

Oh, sorry, I missed (or ignored ) the question.  Heh.

I think the DCI BoD was exactly correct in removing him before his trial proves anything.

If stink comes the WDCHOF from his eventual conviction, so what?  Who cares?  And even if he's found innocent and the WDCHOF is vindicated, who cares?

The DCI HoF, however, reflects right now on a whole bunch of other people recognized in the DCI HoF. DCI acted correctly and preemptively to spray themselves with stink repellent.

I applaud the action.

Thanks. I just noticed something else about the WDCHOF. Roman Blenski is a member. George Bonfiglio was never inducted. Good quality control there. You could probably go on and on, but WDCHOF is so discredited in my mind now that it’s pretty much a joke. 

Edited August 22, 2019 by HockeyDad

[rmm155]

2 hours ago, HockeyDad said:

Thank you. Where are you getting this information?  Teach me how to fish. 

PM'd in case explicit posting violates a community standard

[Terri Schehr]

Just a clarification...

“At the end of a criminal trial, a finding by a judge or jury that a defendant is not guilty. An acquittal signifies that a prosecutor failed to prove his or her case beyond a reasonable doubt, not that a defendant is innocent.”

Edited August 22, 2019 by Terri Schehr

[JimF-LowBari]

6 hours ago, Terri Schehr said:

I was wondering why Roman was selling t-shirts in the lobby of the Genetti on Friday night last year at DCA Championships.  Now I know. 

Not that I’d buy a shirt but just seeing him there would turn me away if I did want one....

[Terri Schehr]

7 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

Not that I’d buy a shirt but just seeing him there would turn me away if I did want one....

This was my posse when we saw him.

 

[Tim K]

4 hours ago, HockeyDad said:

Then that brings me back to this question:  was DCI HOF acting prematurely in removing him almost a year ago?  Were they jumping the gun?  I don’t think so. What do you think?  By the way Gar, I have my eye on you. You didn’t answer this question. 

I would say no. For one thing being a member of the Hall of Fame is a privilege and honor, not a right. Second, DCI and YEA deemed the accusations as credible. Remember too, an accusation of rape often has little to do with whether sexual activity took place, it is based on consent. Did the accuser consent or was the accuser able to consent is critical. So even if he is found not guilty, he is not declared innocent, and you still have the boundary issues.

[Jeff Ream]

9 hours ago, HockeyDad said:

So the WDCHOF is pretty much a useless entity that nobody knows about nor should care about?  I don’t have a problem with that idea. I do find it a bit of cognitive dissonance that the DCI HOF removed GH nearly a year ago yet the WDCHOF has not. Nobody seems to even care enough to actually discuss it. Fine by me. I shall consider the WDCHOF not worth anyone’s time or effort. 

many people in drum corps know about it. Several people are in both halls of fame. One chose to actin accordance with a massive public outcry based on reports in a newspaper, and one didn't. For all we know, DCI removed him because of what they found out about the administrative issues at YEA and not the allegations that i think were uspposed to start being heard in court this week.