HockeyDad Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 23 minutes ago, Slingerland said: Muchachos and Crossmen both were busted of rules violations regarding age of members, something that was clearly spelled out in DCI's charter. Might as well say "Regiment got a .1 penalty in 1978, but DCI looked the other way on sexual predators." One thing has nothing to do with the other. DCI was not given the right or the responsibility by its founders to mandate background checks of corps staff in the 1970s/80s/90s. You can say "that was stupid" and you'd be right, but the fact is, no one else in American society in that period was background checking either, for anything besides criminal pasts. Hmmm…. That line of reasoning did not pan out very well for the Catholic Church. You cannot tell me “nobody knew.” That’s just false on its face. I’m afraid DCI might be in significant trouble here. The “I was in charge but the rules didn’t make me do anything” defense is a loser. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terri Schehr Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 (edited) 22 hours ago, jwillis35 said: . Edited April 6 by Terri Schehr 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 1 hour ago, Slingerland said: That's the equivalent of "I'm leaving to spend more time with my family." My recollection is that DCI's membership committee or exec leadership specifically told them to sit the year out and fix things. Could be, I was following on Spirits FB page so who knows how much real info was released there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 (edited) 1 hour ago, olddrummer34 said: First of all, you haven't gotten a response and you are jumping,ping to a huge conclusion here Alumni groups are ALL ADULTS. Soundsport groups DO background check staff, but the participants are all KIDS. DCI doesn't;t background check the performers either because they are kids. They all complete safesport. What else do you expect DCI to do? Do you have anything to do all day rather than stir up drama here? And what does any of your post have to do with the cadets bakruptcy. Why do you insist on turning every thread into a "DCI isn't doing enough and doesn[t care". Not all alumni group members are adults. And not sure why a performer being a “kid” makes a difference. Some of the incidents I’ve seen reported had a minor as a assailant. Terri did get a response, and it says that Sound Sport and Alumni have different criteria for checks. 🤔 Edited April 5 by JimF-LowBari 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terri Schehr Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 (edited) 21 hours ago, JimF-LowBari said: . Edited April 6 by Terri Schehr 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg_orangecounty Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 30 minutes ago, Slingerland said: Muchachos and Crossmen both were busted of rules violations regarding age of members, something that was clearly spelled out in DCI's charter. Might as well say "Regiment got a .1 penalty in 1978, but DCI looked the other way on sexual predators." One thing has nothing to do with the other. DCI was not given the right or the responsibility by its founders to mandate background checks of corps staff in the 1970s/80s/90s. You can say "that was stupid" and you'd be right, but the fact is, no one else in American society in that period was background checking either, for anything besides criminal pasts. Disagree Counselor. Because with that line of reasoning you could also say murder is “ok” because it’s not mentioned in DCI charter rules. I know they didn’t do background checks, but the perps were already through the door and doing bad things. We knew as kids in the 70’s and the adults in charge knew too. My point is DCI cared about the little stuff (marching overage members) and not the big stuff (protecting members). They had a moral obligation to do so even if not mentioned in any charter/rules. I could “somewhat” buy the excuse that those were just the times and it’s “wrong” to apply todays standards to different times, but some of these people (at least two) are celebrated to this day. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Terri Schehr said: It’s fine. They can just keep putting out fires rather than being proactive. Then when everything is a pile of ashes ask “what the #### happened? We ran things the way we always had before.” Edited April 5 by JimF-LowBari 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scheherazadesghost Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 (edited) 23 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said: Not all alumni group members are adults. And not sure why a performer being a “kid” makes a difference. Some of the incidents I’ve seen reported had a minor as a assailant. Terri did get a response, and it says that Sound Sport and Alumni have different criteria for checks. 🤔 SSI differentiates youth from adult safeguarding, but emphasizes that both are critical to be considered a safe sport entity. And not just for participants, but for staff, volunteers, and leadership as well: Adults: https://safesportinternational.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/SAFEGUARD-DOC-Proof-4-Single.pdf Children/minors*: https://safeinsport.org/8-safeguards/ *also available in Swahili 💪🏽 Edited April 5 by scheherazadesghost 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slingerland Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 (edited) 57 minutes ago, HockeyDad said: Hmmm…. That line of reasoning did not pan out very well for the Catholic Church. You cannot tell me “nobody knew.” That’s just false on its face. I’m afraid DCI might be in significant trouble here. The “I was in charge but the rules didn’t make me do anything” defense is a loser. Find where I said "nobody knew" in what I wrote. Good luck. What I said, for the hard of reading, is that DCI was not given any tools by its founders to screen and manage employees of the participating corps. They, as an organization, were not unique in that fact. I wrote that because it's accurate and provable. I try not to state things as facts that are not so. == BTW, re: the Catholic Church, you might want to consider that the priests involved in those scandals were actual employees of (wait for it) the Church. Nobody working at any of the competing corps were directly hired by or managed by the DCI offices. See the difference? Edited April 5 by Slingerland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
year1buick Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 8 minutes ago, scheherazadesghost said: SSI differentiates youth from adult safeguarding, but emphasizes that both are critical to be considered a safe sport entity. And not just for participants, but for staff, volunteers, and leadership as well: Adults: https://safesportinternational.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/SAFEGUARD-DOC-Proof-4-Single.pdf Children/minors*: https://safeinsport.org/8-safeguards/ *also available in Swahili 💪🏽 No Klingon? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts