Sign in to follow this  
Jeff Ream

A year ago today

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Stu said:

Not trying to be snarky. Sorry if it came across that way. For clarification, you said it would be an interesting avenue to persue; and the quote of yours I was specifically responding to was: "...not even sure it that was considered a public building as building was owned by the church."

Problem was you had talked about schools and churches in an earlier post. I didn’t realize that you were only referring to churches that hold services in public buildings. I can’t think of any churches in my area that hold services in public buildings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said:

Problem was you had talked about schools and churches in an earlier post. I didn’t realize that you were only referring to churches that hold services in public buildings. I can’t think of any churches in my area that hold services in public buildings. 

I have seen it in every place I have lived as well as places I have traveled. So I assumed it was common knowledge. My bad; sorry.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BigW said:

...And your continuous naming of just one possibly innocent group indicates a narrower agenda than you may realize. It's also a rather poor optic and look.

There is no possibly about it; innocent until proven guilty is one of the foundational principles of true honor and righetousness. And I have named other corps such as Academy which are innocent. But will say now, for the record, for you, that the directors, boards, and staff of all DCI WC/OC corps, as well as the DCI corporate administrators, are 100% innocent until proven guilty.

Now if you have something solid to bring forth, the corps you have that solid info on should be investigated. I do care about the youth. And the moment proof, legal proof of criminal activity where someone gets convicted occurs, I will, at that time, say that person, board, corps, organization is guilty. Until then there is no possibly about it; they are all innocent.

Edited by Stu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, BRASSO said:

 If DCI really does improve marcher safety in the coming months and years, they won't need any PR, nor website to engage in PR  re.their" improvements", nor Press Release " statements on improvements ".The improvement itself is what is needed, and the rest ( PR, Websites, DCI  Press Releases, etc ) will take care of itself. If DCI only gives lip service however to improved marcher safety, then no amount of positive spin, nor positive press releases, nor website improvements, etc will save them from an embarrassing repeat of the last 12 months in one form or another again, imo.

A year ago I said DCP needs a 'duh' button. 

 

And we still do - that has not changed!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Stu said:

I did make a suggestion. Start with looking up the truth as to how many known convicted sexual offenders have been directly involved with all DCI corps from 1972 to the present. But if memory serves, you said that you did not care.

From a practical standpoint, to do this one would need the names of every instructor / volunteer / etc that has taught every Corps since 1972.  IIRC Jodeen Popp's book (published early 1979) had a list or prominent instructors, but that is 40 years old.   I suppose I could dig out my copy & start running names through available on-line databases.  But IDK if there is any kind of a list if individuals w/ Corps affiliation from 1979 on, without going to each Corps website (if available) & searching for names (if listed).  For most Corps I think only the caption head is available (if that) not necessarily the names of the various techs.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JimF-LowBari said:

Ok here is truthful and factual as of 4/2019.

Some DCI corps have had problems with doing what they are supposed to with member safety (predator and otherwise). DCI has (finally) come up with a policy and has kicked one corps out for not following it. Too early to tell if the new policy and how it is implemented will resolve the issue. School response might be to get back to us when you can tell if the new policy resolves.

Low percentage of corps people are predators. School response might be low percentage of general population are predators also and we don’t open the schools up for them either. 

Innocent corps being punished with the guilty: possible response that it is NOT the schools responsibility to care about drum corps. They are responsible for safety of students and local residents.

After few decades of meetings with military I've learned you don’t just present your case, you also have to anticipate the response and how to respond to that. Didn’t give the response to the response as don’t have one right now

I am reading a sense of entitlement that the schools are wrong for not allowing corps to use the schools. Frankly I’m surprised Corps (as totally local non tax paying entires) are using as many schools as they do. 

Yes, they kicked one Corps out (honestly, one that had been an anomaly within the DCI brand for some time).  But when a director of a top-12 Corps that knowingly hired a sexual predator and possibly tried to cover it up, well DCI did nothing.  The guy was allowed to slowly retire over the course of the 2019 season.  

Talk is cheap, so are electrons on a web page.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

From a practical standpoint, to do this one would need the names of every instructor / volunteer / etc that has taught every Corps since 1972.  IIRC Jodeen Popp's book (published early 1979) had a list or prominent instructors, but that is 40 years old.   I suppose I could dig out my copy & start running names through available on-line databases.  But IDK if there is any kind of a list if individuals w/ Corps affiliation from 1979 on, without going to each Corps website (if available) & searching for names (if listed).  For most Corps I think only the caption head is available (if that) not necessarily the names of the various techs.  

Currently, I believe, there are no known convicted sexual preditors within DCI or any DCI corps. As for historically, searching names from older programs, books, etc and checking data bases would be a good start (however, careful scrutiny is needed to make sure the issue occured prior to or during the tenure with the corps). It is far better to begin there than continue the speculative perception of guilty by proxy, possibly, and indirect association. Or, better yet, unless proof is found, the declaration of innocence should always prevail.

Edited by Stu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stu said:

 unless proof is found, the declaration of innocence should always prevail.

 I don't don't know about this. There is the requirement, imo, of the PRESUMPTION of innocence, especially in the court of law of the accused that has been arrested and charged with a Crime by legal prosecutors. But there is no requirement by the public for a "DECLARATION of innocence" after the accused has been arrested, charged, detained, and dates set for Trial., People are free to declare publicly what they think of the arrest and charge either way. Its a free country. As such, people are free to state publicly what they think about it, imo...People declared ( both ways ) here on DCP what they thought of the woman's public declaration of sexual assault by GH.  GH, and his attorney's have likewise been given the opportunity to declare the charges true or false too with the public. And they opted to declare their innocence... and a few posters on on here stated that they believe him. Neither Party should be told they have no freedom to declare what they want to believe before the case is tried and/ or settled..  Nor should there be restrictions on the public to declare their thoughts on it either. But the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a Court of Law still remains absolute in the US Jurisprudence System. This fundamental principal is not threatened by the public's comments. Juries are properly instructed pre trial. on the presumption of innocence principal too.  Sometimes, Jurors will even declare post trial they thought the accused was guilty of the charges, but they returned a not guilty verdict because the prosecutors did not establish a breech of the presumption of innocence legal requirement that the Juror( s) were obligated to retain throughout the legal proceedings.. Perhaps you meant to use the phrase of a " presumption of innocence should always prevail " until proven or an admittance of guilt has taken place. . If so, I would agree with you if this is what you meant to say instead here.

Edited by BRASSO
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, rpbobcat said:

I may have  missed it,but has anyone talked  about the December  "Failure to Protect" piece.

To me,that article was,in a number of ways,more damaging then the story about GH going public.

That article pointed out a number of systemic problems with the activity.

DCI's failure to either have their CEO be interviewed or even answer written questions did not,

based on comments made at the time,put DCI in a very good light.

That article,and follow up posts on sites like Reddit,as unreliable as they can be sometimes,

could give  school boards cause to rethink  housing corps.

I know there are a number of people on DCP with "ties" to corps or DCi.

Does anyone know what DCI has done since this article came out ?

 

nothing

they're weathering the storm

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, IllianaLancerContra said:

Yes, they kicked one Corps out (honestly, one that had been an anomaly within the DCI brand for some time).  But when a director of a top-12 Corps that knowingly hired a sexual predator and possibly tried to cover it up, well DCI did nothing.  The guy was allowed to slowly retire over the course of the 2019 season.  

Talk is cheap, so are electrons on a web page.

 

Wasn’t sure of the status of this one..... 2019 or 2018? but know who you mean. 

picturing someone telling a district that DCI is cleaning up their act and getting told “well check this #### out”. Ok that would be my dad talking, district would leave out ####. 

Again imo school districts could care less if individual corps are guilty or not. Their concern is keeping students as safe as possible. That and not upsetting the taxpayers/voters. And until DCI gets out from under that cloud districts will have that concern

Edited by JimF-LowBari
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.