Jump to content

“Failure to Protect”


Recommended Posts

"On the road again...!, sang Willy.  I'm livin' it today!

I wonder if the new BoD of DCI can arrange to resurrect that tradition, and maybe The Anthem done en-mass nicely and well again.

Those are but a couple on my list...

Ciao!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, karuna said:

The problem with this is A) it’s a virtual certainty that if the board directed him to remains silent , he has no evidence B) it’s essentially an illegal order. He should have known better.   

As for did he know...it is completely inconceivable that all of the DCI community knew about most of these incidents and yet the CEO somehow did not. He just can’t make that claim in a convincing fashion.  No will ( or should ) believe it.  

It will only take one or two persons willing to go on the record to detonate a much more serious crisis. Inappropriate behavior by individuals is one thing;  an active attempt to conceal that behavior is quite another.  Acheson’s resignation would go a long way to ameliorating that news.  The former CEO is a much more tolerable news item than the current CEO of DCI. 

And somehow, despite "...all of the DCI community..." (your words) knowing what was going on, these men STILL made it into the activity and in front of minors.

But, somehow, that's Dan A's fault because you've created this fallacy that he was some "head" of the activity? 

Don't you see the illogic?  

 

Now I'm late, I really have to go.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BigW said:

 

"Moby Dick with Richard Basehart"......  LOL!!!!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, George Dixon said:

In one of the original DCI statements on the matter didn't DCI/DA state they were informed back in January of the allegations?

No.  In fact, exactly the opposite.

The investigative reporting of Tricia Nadolny determined the following, as stated in her article in early April:

Quote

Drum Corps International (DCI), the nonprofit that oversees the activity, issued a statement Thursday after a version of this article was posted online saying it was “deeply concerned” by the accusations. The organization said it would assess what the Cadets were doing to investigate the allegations and whether any DCI policies had been violated. The organization said it could sever its relationship with The Cadets if its policies had been ignored.

Saying that it was previously unaware of the allegations against Hopkins, DCI also said it would "conduct its own internal review to determine whether any current members of our staff were aware of these allegations and failed to report them."

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If DA is not the head of DCI then just what the #### is he. 

If the answer is only a figurehead or someone to fill in a line on a legal document then DCIs organization needs to start over again. 

Inmates running the asylum comes to mind as no one overall to stop the crap from going on

 

 

Edited by JimF-LowBari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, George Dixon said:

well fact is > Dan knew about Hopkins last January and stood silent while the BOD did nothing - right?

Before we swerve too far from reality, a review of what happened in January.  A lawyer representing several of the GH victims contacted the YEA! BOD, privately, to try and compel the BOD to conduct a proper investigation of their claims.  At that time, these victims did not wish to go public for a number of reasons, chief among which were:

- fear of retribution

- a desire to avoid unnecessary damage to the corps and activity

Only after the YEA! BOD refused to conduct a proper investigation did the victims decide to go public instead.  Until then, anyone who appeared to be "doing nothing" was quite likely either:

- not informed about this private action, or

- respecting the wishes of the victims to keep it private at that time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BRASSO said:

 Its sad her case was heard before a Judge, and not a Trial by a Jury of her Peers, as would have been the case in the US.  The next time someone attempts to poke their finger in our face and tell us in no uncertain terms how much better things are in other countries.. in this case, Canada, ...remind them of the lack of a Guarantee Jury Trial for the victim in this case ( not guaranteed to victims in Canada, if the crime carries a sentence, if the rapist is convicted, of not at least 5 years in prison. In the US, its a mere 6 months requirement threshold, easily met, by contrast ) What is also astounding is that in 1976 an adult who has sex with a minor ( called statutory rape ) was not punishable, even if the rapist was convicted, of at least 5 years in prison as the penalty in Canada for raping the minor child multiple times over the course of several months .. Also, maybe send them along this discussion piece among Canadians themselves on how some there view the Trial by Jury, System so fundamental to our Bill Of Rights guarantees here in the US that most of us here probably just take for granted its a fundamental Right all should have in any Free Society.

 https://nowtoronto.com/news/reasonable-doubt-why-we-need-jury-trials/

I had a bench trial here in Illinois for what happened to me when I was nine.  The judge let him go because he had a pregnant wife.  Seriously.    He lived two blocks away.  I was terrified.  I couldn’t sleep, I had stomach trouble.  Back then, this wasn’t taken seriously at all. 

  • Sad 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, BRASSO said:

 In 2009, DCI HQ put the Troopers on Probation, and disallowed them from Competition until such time as they agreed to remove their Corps Director. His failings ? That he put in the Corps ( and by extension DCI ) into financial hardships with his apparent financial mismanagement of his Corps and its mounting debts.

Lots of fact-checking to do today, apparently.  Just in these two lines, we have...

Quote

 In 2009,

2005

Quote

DCI HQ

no, the DCI membership, via a vote of the corps directors

Quote

put the Troopers on Probation, 

no, they revoked the member corps status of the Troopers

Quote

and disallowed them from Competition 

no, Troopers later chose to sit out 2006

Quote

until such time as they agreed to remove their Corps Director. 

no, removal of the corps director was not an explicit condition (said corps director resigned the next day, but the corps was not reinstated until passing an evaluation a year later)

Quote

His failings ? That he put in the Corps ( and by extension DCI ) into financial hardships with his apparent financial mismanagement of his Corps and its mounting debts.

no, the reason for the DCI action was "internal and external compliance issues, spanning several years"

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, karuna said:

The problem with this is A) it’s a virtual certainty that if the board directed him to remains silent , he has no evidence B) it’s essentially an illegal order. He should have known better.   

As for did he know...it is completely inconceivable that all of the DCI community knew about most of these incidents and yet the CEO somehow did not. He just can’t make that claim in a convincing fashion.  No will ( or should ) believe it.  

It will only take one or two persons willing to go on the record to detonate a much more serious crisis. Inappropriate behavior by individuals is one thing;  an active attempt to conceal that behavior is quite another.  Acheson’s resignation would go a long way to ameliorating that news.  The former CEO is a much more tolerable news item than the current CEO of DCI. 

Did DCI and member corps conceal and cover up, or ignore? Morally there is little difference, and for victims it does not change things or what is required for the healing process, but if we’re looking to solve problems and right wrongs, the differences are crucial. 

I am not letting anyone off the hook by saying this, but I don’t think DCI has been trying to conceal sexual misconduct and I don’t think the directors ordered DA to be quiet on these matters. DCI does not believe that it is their job to police the individual corps. The corps themselves, including some of the corps I love most and believe have many fine attributes, at times look out for themselves and what is best for them. The member corps can appear as one happy family, but recruiting practices, acquiring staff, and other less than noble actions remind us it can be a competitive and cut throat activity and it’s survival of the fittest above survival of the activity. Did they know about GH? Most likely, maybe not all the specifics, and with a personality like GH, sorting facts and rumors would be a challenge.  Did they see it as an issue that impacted their corps directly ? No. Do they see that questionable hiring practices of one corps impact everyone? Obviously not. They figure Corps X hired the person, they can pay the price. While some of the corps with longer histories may be concerned that an allegation, known or unknown, may come to light, overall if corps have been careful about hiring for the past ten or fifteen years, it is my guess this is viewed as a problem of other corps problems, not theirs. 

Ignoring a problem or pretending a problem does not involve you can be just as wrong as concealing a problem, but if we are looking for solutions, identifying the problem is the only way lasting change can be made. 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, George Dixon said:

Stuart Rice offered nothing credible up. Morgan Larson was easily verified looking him up on the national sex offender registry and seeing tons of posts acknowledging him as a member of the Kilties, a DCi affiliate member corps. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...