Jeff Ream Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 35 minutes ago, MikeD said: I am not sure school districts would be wiling...or really be legally able...to provide personal information like that to an outside private group. That opens up a legal can of worms not covered by the new Trash law here in NJ. The districts must provide the information on an individual person basis to a new district under the new law, and they are held harmless in doing so. They would not be covered in providing that same information outside of the education system. However DCI claims it's about education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 10 hours ago, Bluzes said: Great I will get a grip. I will totally ignore the gaping hole, Fred created in the vetting process, that others may use these services to find employment in drum corps. I will ignore that the school districts just push these individuals out the door making dci a last resort to continue their livelihood, that dci should not use these same resources to help protect the kids. That comments in their press releases should not be open for discussion. That posters on DCP need to join the hive so not to be attacked, Fred may or may not have done "something", but there is still a lot of online info out there that many of us have seen on his staff member. We have not idea what Fred did; there was a one-liner in a news report that said "somebody" saw a receipt on Fred's desk or something about paying for some online "scrubbing" company to do something to hide online information. That single line in a news report, that one anonymous person said they saw, has been blown up here on DCP in an almost hysterical manner. School districts in states without a Trash law are constrained by the existing laws in what they can and can't say. If parents do not prosecute the offender, there is little a school district can do, unless the person's license is suspended. As was the case here in NJ, the un-prosecuted offender would normally be forced to resign, and that would be the end of it. If the person applied for a new teaching job, the person would be able to sue the original district if that district said anything. Why? Because the person who resigned is technically a teacher in good standing, if no legal case was brought. All the original district could report is that the teacher taught from X to Y and then resigned their position. That is why these new Trash laws are great; they permit the original district to pass along the reason for the resignation...actually mandate that the original district do so. What resources are you thinking DCI should use? They are not part of the education system; they are not schools. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 11 minutes ago, Jeff Ream said: However DCI claims it's about education. Claiming they are "about education" and being part of the actual education system are not the same thing. Sure, lots of non-school activities, including but not limited to drum corps, teach students, but they are not part of the school systems in the legal sense. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, MikeD said: Fred may or may not have done "something", but there is still a lot of online info out there that many of us have seen on his staff member. We have not idea what Fred did; there was a one-liner in a news report that said "somebody" saw a receipt on Fred's desk or something about paying for some online "scrubbing" company to do something to hide online information. That single line in a news report, that one anonymous person said they saw, has been blown up here on DCP in an almost hysterical manner. MikeD... the reporter's article ( on the 1st page of this thread ) does explain that Morrison knowingly hired a staffer in 2012 for his Corps that Morrison knew could not work in Florida as a teacher any longer for at least 5 years from 2011 onward as he had been found to be sex texting a minor on several occasions, and thus deemed unsafe by Florida authorities to be on school grounds in the state of Florida. So we DO know what Moody did, and we DO know that Morrison hired him despite his being deemed unsafe and a high risk among the young. We also know, if the reporter is to be believed, that TWO people within Morrison's Corps was aware that he apparently paid a firm to bury the fact that he lost his license in Florida for at least 5 years, but was deemed worthy by Morrison to apparently travel from schools to schools on overnight trips for the summers in DCI Drum Corps. One person saw the receipt in the Corps office for the payment made to bury Moody's behaviors and the 5 year loss of teaching license . DCI has had less than a " one line " response to the reporter's finding on Morrison. They've said nothing public about this. Moody left the Crossmen in May, but only AFTER the info on Morrison's hire of Moody in 2012 was reported in the media this past spring.. There has not been a " hysterical " response here on DCP to the article's reporting on Morrison's hire of Moody, imo. My overall sense here on DCP from reading people's postings is that people are a mix of those angry, and others highly disappointed. I don't sense much " hysteria" as you do with this here on DCP. Many here on DCP probably just want to know if the reporter's report is true or not. But DCI has apparently refused a response to this charge with either the reporter, or with its fan base. DCI has gone silent on it. Fred Morrison was on the DCI Board of Directors itself, but has resigned that position. However, he remains the Corps Director of the Crossmen. And DCI has not responded at all as to what they intend to do with a Corps Director... if the reporter's findings are accurate.... that worked behind the scenes to circumvent DCI public posture that they intend to improve MM safety. But how can they improve MM safety as they claim if there are leaders in leadership positions of DCI at this very moment that have reports from the outside media that they attempted to bury a hires apparent disgusting and wholly untrustworthy episodes ( plural ) with minors. It is not " hysteria " for people simply wanting DCI to respond to these allegations by the reporter's investigatory piece, and tell us what they found. If the reporter has it wrong on what Morrison allegedly did, then say so. If the report is accurate, then its inconceivable that DCI can move forward with such a person as the Director of one of its DCI Drum Corps. Do you agree,... or disagree ? Edited January 3, 2019 by BRASSO 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 4 hours ago, MikeD said: Fred may or may not have done "something", but there is still a lot of online info out there that many of us have seen on his staff member. We have not idea what Fred did; there was a one-liner in a news report that said "somebody" saw a receipt on Fred's desk or something about paying for some online "scrubbing" company to do something to hide online information. That single line in a news report, that one anonymous person said they saw, has been blown up here on DCP in an almost hysterical manner. School districts in states without a Trash law are constrained by the existing laws in what they can and can't say. If parents do not prosecute the offender, there is little a school district can do, unless the person's license is suspended. As was the case here in NJ, the un-prosecuted offender would normally be forced to resign, and that would be the end of it. If the person applied for a new teaching job, the person would be able to sue the original district if that district said anything. Why? Because the person who resigned is technically a teacher in good standing, if no legal case was brought. All the original district could report is that the teacher taught from X to Y and then resigned their position. That is why these new Trash laws are great; they permit the original district to pass along the reason for the resignation...actually mandate that the original district do so. What resources are you thinking DCI should use? They are not part of the education system; they are not schools. IMO if he used one of those “cleaning companies” to hide things he is gullible as thats not really possible. I’m more interested in what DCI knows and if they even questioned corps management about it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigW Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 5 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: Given Kilties have the same board minus 1 since then, and apparently one member of the board is victim shaming on social media, I doubt anything is happening True, and to me, it's appalling. Given my penchant for understatement.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigW Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 1 hour ago, JimF-LowBari said: IMO if he used one of those “cleaning companies” to hide things he is gullible as thats not really possible. I’m more interested in what DCI knows and if they even questioned corps management about it. There are some things some firms do to bury searches online. For instance, ticket companies evidently do what they can to try and convince you tickets aren't available at the box office at the Hershey theatre and one must buy from them. I complained to the Hershey Theater about this after getting seriously ripped off and they said they're aware of this issue and received numerous complaints but can do little or nothing about it- to get their website, call them directly, or go the the box office for tickets. Evidently, the parent company seems to not care nor use their serious financial clout or both. Could be what they're doing is buying priority ads or buying top searches on google et al. Wondering if this is how some of these companies as part of their attempts try and mask searches for their clients... I did a bit of quick searching myself and evidently, there are a ton of places that claim they can bury unwanted search results of names from page one of the search. My guess is, they figure people are too lazy to continue to go deeper. That could be the technique, Jim, just bury anything bad underneath a plethora of positive search results so the bad ones don't show up on page one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 (edited) I can think of a few things for businesses mainly dealing with bad reviews on sites. But for Crossmen we have a person and supposedly “cleaning” what they did from the internet. Let’s use GH as an example: you’d have to “cleanse” newspaper websites (Inquirer, PennLive), personal SM accounts of people who posted about it including dcp, etc, etc. Not possible unless you threaten legal action to have it removed or hack the accounts. Then closer to the original source we have arrest reports, court actions, school suspensions, etc that might be found for some states or municipalities. I question what exactly Crossmen head was trying to hide and where did this info reside Edited January 3, 2019 by JimF-LowBari Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cixelsyd Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 53 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said: I can think of a few things for businesses mainly dealing with bad reviews on sites. But for Crossmen we have a person and supposedly “cleaning” what they did from the internet. The article described it as "bury Moody’s past in online search results". I think that means the information would still be "in online search results", just further down in the lists. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 9 hours ago, Jeff Ream said: to be honest ( since you ignored me when i replied to you bringing this up earlier)....it may be being dealt with, we don't know yet. i expect we would know more after the Januals “Ignore” is such a harsh word 😉. Probably I was agreeing with you but too lazy to respond. Anyway my real motivation here is to not allow Fred Morrison to slip into memory. We need to keep bringing this up. I strongly believe his actions have disqualified him from being the ED of the Crossmen. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts