“Failure to Protect”

[Jeff Ream]

2 hours ago, karuna said:

Ludicrous indeed.  You keep repeating your nonsense about not understanding corporate structure.  You're just painting yourself as DCI whitewasher.

As leader and chief executive of the organization,  Acheson gets to take all the credit and all the blame.  If he knew and did nothing,  he's culpable morally and ethically.   Hiding behind corporate structure may or may not cover his ### legally.  It does nothing to shield him from his duty to the marching members.  

It really doesn't matter if he was hamstrung by the board (a supposition for which there is currently no evidence).  What matters is knowing about sexual abuse and doing nothing.  Your defense of his inaction amounts to:

"Sorry guys.  I know you're being raped and sexually abused.  But my job responsibilities don' t include taking action to prevent it.  Sorry. But hey --  now that the scandalous behavior is out in the open,  we're making all kinds of positive changes.  So let's forget I was in charge before hand and just move on from that.  Yeah that's the ticket.  Let's keep looking forward".

Tricia nailed it with the title of this article:  failure to protect indeed.

 

what's the biggest complaint people had about Paterno after Penn State's story broke.....he didn't do more. 

Dan was warned before, it's been verified on this site and elsewhere. some hack claims like Rice, serious claims with info and proof like Larson. And he did nothing. 

[Jeff Ream]

2 hours ago, MikeD said:

When I try and read the article it says I have reached my quota for the month, though as far as I know I have not read any philly.com articles at all. Is there any way to see the article another way?

i got the app on my phone for free.

[Jeff Ream]

2 hours ago, garfield said:

And you keep repeating that phrase as if by repeating it often enough it will become true.

Nobody said he was hamstrung by a Board.  His Board established a procedure and he followed it.

All of these accusations occured at the individual corps level. 

To blame DCI is diverting attention away from those responsible.

 

his board is the corps, who chose to do nothing. 

[Jeff Ream]

2 hours ago, garfield said:

In the context of the rest of my post, I'm defending DCI for the betterment of the activity.  I never said any others' opinion was not taken for the betterment of the activity.  It was a justification of my comment, not a condemnation of others.

Your rationality is appreciated.  Don't lose it now.

DCI is NOW responsible for these issues; back when the accusations occured, DCI was responsible for notifying the corps of these issues, not acting on them itself.

Dan's office should not be scalped because its BoD wrote policies that are not acceptable today.

 

DCI IS THE CORPS.

 

so all along they were responsible. The office had to get involved because the corps couldn't do their job

[Terri Schehr]

1 minute ago, Jeff Ream said:

his board is the corps, who chose to do nothing. 

But I wonder if they were given the information that was conveyed to him. 

[Jeff Ream]

2 hours ago, garfield said:

Regionality and geography are the difference.  There's one Penn State and only one PA.

There are a bunch of states with drum corps in them.  The decision was made long ago to allow the corps to deal with issues such as this in the light of their local governments and acceptable mores.  Maybe coordinating national standards is easily accomplished now with technology.  Maybe back then it was such a daunting project that they made the decision to pass down all such issues to the corps to deal with locally.

 

yeah reading the article 2010 was so pre-technology

[Jeff Ream]

2 hours ago, garfield said:

No, smh, in fact I am speaking of Dan's LEGAL obligation according to his employment contract and the duties his BoD charged to him.  His moral belief is beyond me, and is not relevant.  Further, it's possible that, in his mind, passing the information to the corps WAS fulfilling his moral obligation, too.

ok let's try this approach. 

a soldier follows orders from a Co that are illegal, and the soldier knows it, they still go down with the ship ( think A few good men).

So Dan followed his boards orders to do nothing...and he's off scot free, knowing full well he'd been given credible information?

 

hmmm......just hmmmm.....

[Jeff Ream]

2 hours ago, dark-helmet said:

Ugh, people that don't understand the structure are not going to be helpful.  The structure failed, but if you don't understand why, how and what it takes to LEGALLY change it, you are failing too.  Could DA have done something different? Probably.  But the structure of a competition committee is different than a wholly owned operation.  Much like 501c10 orgs fall under an umbrella and 501c3 orgs operate on their own.  One follows the governing body structure similar to service orgs that have local chapters and a national body and the other is like your local art center that may belong to an association, but runs under it's own rules.  

Just yelling that DA didn't do enough doesn't do anything.  The question that needs to be asked is what structure can we create that allows corps to retain their identity, but force them to give up control and self governance.  Would BD enjoy sharing the wealth their ingenuity and success have created with Spirit or Madison?  No, OK so then what?  So, being serious, now what?  Change is needed, but how do you get all of the members on the same page without watching the G7 threat return.   Obviously, it needs to be fixed.  But instead of simply blaming DA, let's fix the structure that failed in a useful and legal way.  It's not easy, and ultimately the lack of foresight might be the end of an activity we all enjoyed.

 

some of the 7 should be afraid breaking off will bring their skeletons out. 

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, dark-helmet said:

And finger pointing with no viable solutions.  No one is defending what happened, we are asking how to fix it in a meaningful way that has a chance of getting voted on favorably by the membership.  I don't see a good answer.  Dftk, that's easy.   However for any meaningful oversight the corps would have to become part of the DCI organization.  If not, see blast!   DCI had no control of star other than field competition.  If DCI was truly the umbrella, cook wouldn't have been able to just leave.   DCI is toothless other than suspending corps from competing in DCI.

So, show me a viable way to change it that would pass with the corps.  Otherwise we're just trolling each other to sound important.

it's easy. the executive board has the least amount of actual corps directors on it as legally possible, as we've seen they can't police themselves. I feel sad to say at this stage i am pretty sure every corps has had at least one issue since 1972/their inception. 

[Jeff Ream]

1 hour ago, Cadevilina Crown said:

Statement from DCI:

https://www.dci.org/news/dci-statement-december-13-2018

they must have forgotten for the part where they apologized that these things happened on their tour of events and they failed to have the proper policies in place. oversight i'm sure