Terri Schehr Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 (edited) On 7/9/2019 at 9:12 PM, MusicManNJ said: Agreed... I am getting the sense this is opportunism. . Edited July 12, 2019 by Terri Schehr 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NakedEye Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 Interested to see how this plays out. Reading the report, something seems a bit...off...with it. Especially the apparent enthusiasm to return to the organization where the alleged trauma occurred and leadership was allegedly negligent in its response. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 (edited) Found the letter and just gets murkier... the guardian (and why in the #### would the name be given out if you want to protect the minors identity?) said the member needs to return to the corps to help him recover. That medical advice needs to come from a professional and not the guardian. Edited July 10, 2019 by JimF-LowBari 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MusicManNJ Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 Just now, Spatzzz said: The women Hopkins allegedly assaulted went back to the Cadets and also didn't want to come forward because of the damage they thought it would do to the organization. So is it REALLY that odd that the kid wanted to go back? Did we learn nothing from the last episode? Completely different situations. If the organization had done nothing, turned a blind eye, not notified the authorities and tried to sweep it under the rug then I would agree with you. That is not how they handled it. The played it by the book. Reported it to the authorities. The guardian is acting in a very peculiar manner. Asking for a settlement... then spewing this all in the public when they do not like an offer (which could be argued they were not entitled to). I feel really badly for the victim having to deal with this all out in the public while an active member in another corps. Strange way to act as a guardian. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Lancer Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 I doubt any professional would advise G to go back for his healing. I don’t buy it. 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 4 minutes ago, Jurassic Lancer said: I doubt any professional would advise G to go back for his healing. I don’t buy it. BINGO.... 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terri Schehr Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 6 minutes ago, Jurassic Lancer said: I doubt any professional would advise G to go back for his healing. I don’t buy it. Never. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
March mom Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 There’s a few things that stand out: 1- The two persons involved were both minors. That is not something you publicly announce. 2- there was both a criminal and a child protective investigation. The child protective investigation was determined as Unsubstantiated/ with no findings and report was closed. it is not clear from what I read if there was an actual arrest? The words testify and testimony which are court related words are used in the email, but I do not see any other reference that would indicate there was a court or trial proceeding, but either way, what would a DCI investigation do that criminal/CPS investigation was not already doing? there are many times that independent investigations hold off until the formal investigations are complete ( which appears to be 4/30/2019 by review of the cps record) It appears that both child protective and the police were contacted immediately . 3- approximately six months after this incident, and still during the open cps report, this person returned to the cadets for an audition. It appears that after he was cut, further resolution was sought. 4- various photo evidence, showing the other child after the incident was outlined. However his presence such as the group photo at finals or some of the other times he appeared in photographs does not mean that he was without supervision/monitoring. 5- I 100% agree that this must of been agonizing to have gone through and the other child should not have had the ability to return to the room. I am definitely not defending that point. I am however struggling to see where the cadets failure was. 6- The writer of the email indicates that she was not contacted until CPS contacted her. She also writes that the guardian asked why she was not contacted... But I am left wondering if the guardian was contacted first? as this would be reaching out to notify of the incident . 7- I am glad that this child found another place to March . 8- I am disheartened that the writer of this email chose to disclose the name of her son and then the physical characteristics and month/year of the other child. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NakedEye Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 11 minutes ago, MusicManNJ said: I feel really badly for the victim having to deal with this all out in the public while an active member in another corps. Strange way to act as a guardian. And to announce the corps the kid is now with? So people can connect the dots about who it is? What possible benefit could that have for the alleged victim? Very unfortunate situation. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 2 hours ago, garfield said: You have no idea at all what you're talking about. I have no connection to the organization what-so-ever. None. It's because of your screen name and nobody knowing who John Garfield is anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts