garfield Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said: The alleged perpetrator denied it to the police. That said, it does appear that the police didn't believe his denial, since they apparently recommended that the local prosecutor file charges. Do we know what happened after that? Also, what part of the policy did Cadets violate? The sexual harassment policy says the following the "remedies" section: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Remedies for sexual harassment shall be designed to ensure that the harassment is effectively eliminated. Sanctions will be appropriate to the seriousness of the conduct and may include, but is not limited to: putting an immediate stop to any activity which qualifies as sexual harassment; limiting contact between the victim and the harasser; reprimand to the harasser; apologies from the harasser to the victim; requesting the harasser to leave the YEA! event; suspension of the harasser for a designated period of time; or terminating the harasser’s involvement or employment with YEA! permanently. I've not studied the policies; is the tone of this policy indicative that these remedies apply to both adult/minor AND minor/minor incidents? Edited July 10, 2019 by garfield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFA1970 Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 Jeez...I just read the reports and accusations. I have no idea what to think. It's sad it had to come to this. Both are underage juveniles. Both are males. One might be gay and the other is not (I have no idea). Maybe he thought it was okay and it wasn't. The last thing is not to criminalize a thing like this unless it was a violent act. I didn't read it as that. But I don't know. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, DFA1970 said: Jeez...I just read the reports and accusations. I have no idea what to think. It's sad it had to come to this. Both are underage juveniles. Both are males. One might be gay and the other is not (I have no idea). Maybe he thought it was okay and it wasn't. The last thing is not to criminalize a thing like this unless it was a violent act. I didn't read it as that. But I don't know. Wait. What? I didn't realize there is a qualifier on sexual assault. If the perp had love and not violence in his heart while the was doing his deed, is he innocent of the criminal act of sexual assault? Sorry, to clarify, I tend to agree with your "don't jump" suggestion, but I think you need to duck to avoid the incoming attacks from those here who feel differently than you do. Edited July 10, 2019 by garfield 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 11 minutes ago, garfield said: "Lucky"? I wouldn't characterize Supreme Court decisions that way. Wrong bakery. You've very possibly been to the one I'm thinking of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFA1970 Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 1 minute ago, garfield said: Wait. What? I didn't realize there is a qualifier on sexual assault. If the perp had love and not violence in heart while the was doing his deed, is he innocent of the criminal act of sexual assault? There was a police report but as for as I read no charges filed. I can accuse you of coming on to me. Are you guilty because I said so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said: Wrong bakery. You've very possibly been to the one I'm thinking of. Oh! Yes! I have! Many, many times. It was a Sunday morning ritual to drive the 7 miles north for their incredible cinnamon rolls! Thanks for the great memory. Edit: And they weren't lucky. They were totally and completely due every penny of student funds the school has to cough up to pay the penalty. That school has gotten away with that attitude for decades. Edited July 10, 2019 by garfield 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N.E. Brigand Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 (edited) 11 minutes ago, garfield said: I've not studied the policies; is the tone of this policy indicative that these remedies apply to both adult/minor AND minor/minor incidents? Yes, the policy doesn't prescribe different remedies based on the majority of the alleged perpetrator. Edited July 10, 2019 by N.E. Brigand Spelling error: prescribe not proscribe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E3D Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 39 minutes ago, George Dixon said: Actually yes really. Your child who is a minor is sexually assaulted and you as parent feel the response is not adequate- you them allow the minor child to go BACK to this organization that you feel didn’t adequately respond? Uh, no. I meant from the perspective of the minor or marching member. That they still might want to go back and march with the same corps. My post was not clear that I would not expect a parent to send their child back to that same organization. I was just trying to say there are situations where the kid would still return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 1 minute ago, N.E. Brigand said: Yes, the policy doesn't prescribe different remedies based on the majority of the alleged perpetrator. Thanks for the info. (I caught the misuse but was going to let it slide because, well, I know how persnickety you are about details and this was a rare occurrence.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted July 10, 2019 Share Posted July 10, 2019 55 minutes ago, cixelsyd said: Out where? word of mouth, things seen online in a few places, gofundme accounts to pay dues for one corps using a copyrighted video of a different corps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts