# e-mail from George Morris



## jaydee

I don’t know. I haven’t had one.


----------



## horselovinguy

Some company you do business with sold yours and other customers email addresses to a marketing firm...
Mass email sent to horse enthusiasts...
Marketing, advertising ploy and a infomercial for many products endorsed by a name like Georges'...
He gets royalties and is a paid spokesman for many products = $$ in his pocket.

:runninghorse2:...


----------



## farmpony84

I was wondering if they got it from a horse expo? I can't imagine the breed registries or something like Smartpak would sell it?

Here is the e-mail:


A Statement From George H. Morris

I am deeply troubled by the U.S. Center for SafeSport's findings regarding unsubstantiated charges for events that allegedly occurred between 1968 & 1972. I contest these findings wholeheartedly and am in the process of disputing them. I have devoted my life to equestrian sport and the development of future riders, coaches and Olympians. Any allegations that suggest I have acted in ways that are harmful to any individual, the broader equestrian community, and sport that I love dearly are false and hurtful.

I share our community's commitment to protecting the safety and wellbeing of all our athletes who need reliable guidance and encouragement at every level, of which I have provided for over 50 years. I will continue, as I always have, to proudly support equestrianism and its continued development around the world. 

George H. Morris
Wellington
Wellington FL 33414


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians

Sounds like someone found their 'nads after 50 some odd years of feeling resentment. Funny, I competed in the same ring, same barns as GM and his students. I heard a lot of stuff about a lot of people but never him.


----------



## farmpony84

I have no idea if it's true or not. 50 years does seem like a long time to wait...

But then again - with the new movement....


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians

farmpony84 said:


> I have no idea if it's true or not. 50 years does seem like a long time to wait...
> 
> But then again - with the new movement....


Yeah I'm not gonna start on the "new movement" and what I think about people who stay shut for 20+ years and then want to dogpile on someone. My thoughts and feelings aren't PC so I'll just keep them to myself.


----------



## farmpony84

Dreamcatcher Arabians said:


> Yeah I'm not gonna start on the "new movement" and what I think about people who stay shut for 20+ years and then want to dogpile on someone. My thoughts and feelings aren't PC so I'll just keep them to myself.


I think we are on the same page. I don't like to judge anyone without facts. And by anyone, I do mean either side. I just... I don't know... if there is someone doing bad things to children out there and you know it... then well.... I don't know... Moral obligations and stuff....


----------



## greentree

This “Safe Sport” Company SMACKS of a way to make mega bucks capitalizing on people’s fears. They have ZERO evidence of any wrong doing, and are ruining many people’s lives with heresay.


----------



## farmpony84

I was googling it last night and couldn't find anywhere that he has been charged with anything. I see allegations and I see the ban but I don't see charges or evidence or conviction...

I'm not defending the guy and I'm not-not defending the guy but the articles are vague.


----------



## updownrider

George is listed as a client of Phelps Media. 
https://www.phelpsmediagroup.com/about-us/


----------



## farmpony84

And I assume they buy e-mail addresses from anything that requires someone to use an e-mail address to register?


----------



## COWCHICK77

I read an article from the New York Times, what I gathered was Safe Sport conducted their own investigation on which they based their ban, not the police? 
I am not of that world and have no idea who "Safe Sport" is but qualifies them to conduct investigations and how do you prove allegations of misconduct 40+years ago.

I'm not saying something did or didn't happen because obviously, I wasn't there or know George Morris. I'm confused about who Safe Sport is.


----------



## bsms

"_Make a report electronically to the U.S. Center for SafeSport... if you have a reasonable suspicion of sexual misconduct such as child sex abuse, non-consensual sexual conduct, sexual harassment, or intimate relationships involving an imbalance of power....USEF handles all reports of non-sexual misconduct, including harassment, hazing, bullying, physical, or emotional misconduct. Report to safesport..._"

https://www.usef.org/compete/resources-forms/rules-regulations/safe-sport

I took some legal classes at a community college some years back. Just for fun. A lawyer said statue of limitation rules existed to PROMOTE justice, not deny it. It varies with the nature of the crime, but there comes a point where an accusation cannot be investigated in a fair manner. I have no idea how one COULD investigate most crimes or bad behavior that took place 50 years ago. Heck, the standards for "bad behavior" 50 years ago were different.

A friend went through boot camp 50 years ago. He told me of a trainee who disobeyed a command and was decked by the drill instructor. In 1970, that was accepted. When I entered boot camp in the 80s, it was not. Now it would be considered criminal. Even during my time, I often used a theatrical butt-chewing to correct a situation instead of creating a paper trail that would follow some young kid around and mark him as a 'bad' person. I often found you could change a young person's perspective and straighten them out without doing anything that would harm their career. Now that would be called "bullying". Or "emotional misconduct"!

Rant off. Something I like about my horse Bandit: We can both get upset with each other. We can both express ourselves very strongly. And we can both be partners again 60 seconds later. I considered teaching after the military. Sooooo glad I did not do it. Although...when I was in high school in the 70s, the most popular science teacher was a VERY sarcastic chemistry teacher. He could cut the ground out from beneath you in 6 words, but his classes filled up immediately. He wasn't just respected. He was loved. Now he'd be fired.


----------



## farmpony84

I'm not part of that world either but it apparently is a non-profit organization that is dedicated to protecting athletes by ending abuse (of all kinds). It looks like the US Olympic organization has given them authority to investigate allegations of misconduct. They must have say over who gets banned and participating organizations must have to adhere to those bans? What confuses me is the legal aspect. I'm not saying anyone is guilty or not guilty but what I am saying is I THINK there doesn't have to be an actual criminal charge? It looks like it can be an in house investigation?


----------



## bsms

"On this episode Chris Stafford talks with an all time leading American show jumping rider and coach, Anne Kursinski about coaches and coaching, and her story of being a victim of sexual abuse." (Not George Morris, BTW)

https://www.wispsports.com/the-horse-show/s3e7/anne-kursinski-on-coaching-and-safe-sport

"George H. Morris, the foremost trainer in equestrian competition and a former coach of the United States Olympic team, was barred for life from the United States Equestrian Federation on Monday as a result of an investigation into “sexual misconduct involving a minor,” according to the published details of the suspension."

https://www.si.com/olympics/2019/08...trian-coach-ban-sexual-misconduct-allegations

I have no idea of the guilt or innocence of George Morris. I do have serious issues with destroying a man's life based on a secret investigation and secret ruling of a non-governmental body. We have laws for a reason, and guilt or innocence is to be determined by a public trial - one where BOTH sides get to make their case, and done in accordance with laws developed over centuries.

I realize the US system is intentionally designed to make it more likely the guilty will go free than the innocent be punished. That is part of our national culture. Sexual misconduct with a minor is a CRIME and should be investigated as such. Or dropped. Accusations of such a serious nature should be investigated and prosecuted by the government. Not a secret tribunal. Not because sexual misconduct isn't important, but because it IS - and so are the protections the law gives to the innocent.

You have a right to face your accuser and defend yourself. If George Morris is guilty, put him in jail. But we cannot have people's lives destroyed by secret accusations and secret trial. We banned the US government from doing that due to bad memories of the Star Chamber.


----------



## farmpony84

I think the issue is in the time frame. These incidents that are currently being reported are 40 and 50 years in the past so they have passed the statute of limitations. 

I get that if the guy is a sexual predator the organization should take action but it just seems odd that a private organization can make that determination and label it as such without an actual criminal charge. Even though it could be true it feels like there was no due process.

I'm not defending this guy. I haven't paid attention to the hunt world in over 20 years so I have no idea who is who. I mean, I know who this guy but he's a pretty huge name. I'm just.... thinking out loud?


----------



## jaydee

I suppose it now remains to be seen if others come forward with claims from more recent years and it does become a criminal case 
The whole Kevin Spacey thing went from 1 to 15 pretty quickly once the ball started rolling.
Australian Rolf Harris was a national treasure in the UK, it seemed unbelievable that he’d be found guilty of child abuse and would be sent to prison aged 84.

I don’t like the way the media handles theses sort of reports or what has happened in these Safe Sport cases, their has to be a better balance to protect the public without destroying the lives of people who are found to be innocent.


----------



## Avna

jaydee said:


> I suppose it now remains to be seen if others come forward with claims from more recent years and it does become a criminal case
> The whole Kevin Spacey thing went from 1 to 15 pretty quickly once the ball started rolling.
> Australian Rolf Harris was a national treasure in the UK, it seemed unbelievable that he’d be found guilty of child abuse and would be sent to prison aged 84.
> 
> I don’t like the way the media handles theses sort of reports or what has happened in these Safe Sport cases, their has to be a better balance to protect the public without destroying the lives of people who are found to be innocent.


Who has been found to be innocent? I'm not saying there hasn't been anyone but no one comes readily to mind (I also haven't really been following the safe sport thing closely). The hard truth is, that it is so enormously difficult and painful to accuse a famous well-loved person, and the trauma is usually already so great, that very few people have the strength and will to do so. That's why it is, usually, so very damning when it does happen.


----------



## SilverMaple

Behavior was vastly different 40 and 50 years ago. My mom remembers that it was pretty common to go to a professional gathering and have someone comment on your chest, swat your rear, or pull you in for a hug even if you resisted. It was the culture. Not to say it was wrong or right, it's just the way it was. These days, that same behavior or sexual harassment or abuse. But crying 'abuse' 50 years down the road when it didn't bother you before seems to be getting more common... there's a fine line to walk between allowing the victims of past abuse to air their grievances, and allowing those without credible reports to ruin someone's life decades later.


----------



## updownrider

@Avna I am not going to name anyone but a high profile rider was placed on the safe sport list then removed so it does happen. 
@Silver maple to say that a hug or swat did not to bother someone 40 or 50 years ago is not for you to say. The impact on someone’s life is individual. Just because it was the “culture” back then it is never okay to be groped.


----------



## bsms

50 years ago, flirting was common and awkward flirting was also common. I was too awkward to have a social life back then. It was also acceptable back then for a gal to slap a guy. Not super-awkward me, but I can remember more than one guy in HS who was humiliated to no end after a spectacular slap.

What was considered acceptable HAS changed. As a boy who moved almost every year, I was bullied and usually had to fight a few times at each new school. That was common for a new kid in the 60s. I still dislike it. I certainly didn't consider it "acceptable". But the schools did. So did parents.

Now...was having sex with a minor, or pressuring her to have sex with you, considered acceptable in 1970? Nope. But how in the heck do you prove an accusation 50 years after the fact? You cannot. And there is no way for a guy to clear his name, if accused 50 years later.

Either way, private tribunals doing private investigations and ruining someone's life based on THEIR conclusions is NOT the American way. We have laws for a reason. We have protections built into the law for the accused as well as the guilty. Innocent until proven guilty came to us from English law, as did the right to confront an accuser. Public trials. Is it perfect? No. But it beats a system where a life can be ruined by a private accusation to a private body with no transparency. 

"_There’s really no need for Pence—or any other man—to wall women off professionally. As my colleague Emma Green points out, the Pence rule (which is actually the Billy Graham rule) is meant to preserve a marriage at all costs. But in the age of sexting, avoiding co-ed meetings seems aimed more at managing one’s reputation than at preventing a sex scandal._"

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/pences-gender-segregated-dinners/521286/

Given what a single accusation can do to a guy's career and future, VP Pence is being sensible. And that is very sad. But from a guy's perspective, an open door policy may be the only way to protect yourself. And even that may not help 20, 30 or 50 years later...


----------



## gottatrot

I agree with @SilverMaple. I don't think anyone is saying it was OK to be groped, but if something is universally accepted within a culture, it doesn't seem right to ruin people's lives over it later on when society changes. This might be a different type of situation, but fairness in a society mean both victim and perpetrator have equal rights. Currently, potential victims are being believed based on their gender alone. 

An example I know of personally is a foster teen who was denied access to her cell phone and was grounded due to bad behavior. She immediately accused the male foster parent who grounded her of rape. There was no evidence and it was decided no criminal charges could be filed. Although supposedly there were hundreds of occurrences at all different times, the victim was unable to describe an unusual scar on the supposed perpetrator's anatomy. 

However, the judge said that since the girl was a female with a complaint, she had to be believed even without evidence. There was an order to keep all children away from the male parent, including his own children. So far it has been a year and they are still fighting in the courts and incurring expenses.

Nowadays it's not that the victim needs proof something happened, it's more like the accused person needs infallible proof that something didn't happen. That is quite ridiculous. 
I know Keanu Reeves has a possibly satirical approach to this modern age and he poses with his hands visible in photos or else in his pockets, so no one can accuse him later of being grabby. People think he is being courteous but I think more likely he's pointing out the ridiculousness of our society and taking measures to prevent the inevitable person from saying they were being groped.

I also don't think the amount of mental anguish a person suffers should determine the punishment. If my grandpa tickled me like a million other grandpas tickled their grandkids, if I was unusually sensitive and felt damaged by that, it doesn't mean my grandpa should have gone to court and lost his job or been sued. When I was a kid, tickling was a normal part of acceptable grandpa behavior. In the future they may decide this was child abuse, but that doesn't mean all the grandpas should lose their jobs or never be allowed around children.


----------



## updownrider

The safe sport mission and rules are available online. Training is $20 I believe for nonUSEF members. I promised myself I would not get involved in this thread and I should have listened to myself.


----------



## Dreamcatcher Arabians

When I was a kid and riding with my trainer, who NEVER ever stepped out of line with one of us girls, and we rode against the likes of George Morris, Hap Hansen, Rodney Jenkins and Jimmy Williams at Flintridge Riding Club and their students. There was a LOT of gossip that floated around pretty freely about certain trainers and none about others. George Morris was well known as a screaming, yelling, verbally abusive, and everyone knew you didn't send your daughters to Flintridge. GM was never even whispered about in an 'inappropriate behavior' way, just as being a demanding diva. So IF anything had gone on I suspect I'd have heard SOMETHING. No, I can't say he wasn't inappropriate (he wouldn't have been with me, I wasn't his type and we all knew it back then), but then again, I also knew better than to let John Lipari borrow my horse trailer, but he was a hell of a trainer. 

I really disagree with the witchhunt it looks like this Safe Sport group is promulgating. If someone is for real wrong, then let the cops sort it out.


----------



## Filou

I read some stuff here, talked to some people, read stuff online, read more here... Still not sure what's going on myself. 

It's important to know who George Morris is, an olympic rider, and olympic coach, jumping rider trainer. 

SafeSport didn't used to be required to be a member of USEF. I haven't had a membership since 2013, but it wasn't required then. 

Is SafeSport a new thing?

If USEF wants to include some company like SafeSport to manage a certain branch of their horse government I don't see why that's a problem. It seems like that's not the case to me, but I guess this is where I'm not sure. Is SafeSport new, and maybe navigating new ways of doing things that should come into question and be more transparent? Or is this something SafeSport has been doing for a while and this George Morris thing came out in the wash and SafeSport noticed?

Other than that there's a whole lotta other jam you could get into with all this that's being talked about here already but 
I'm just gonna stick with the request of transparency in findings from SafeSport and USEF before I have feelings about any of this.


----------



## greentree

Here’s a shot from SS’s page...


----------



## bsms

"What to expect: anonymity, confidentiality and privacy"

Contrast that with "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right…to be confronted with the witnesses against him." (Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution)

"_The Clause was intended to prevent the conviction of a defendant upon written evidence (such as depositions or ex parte affidavits) without that defendant having an opportunity to face his or her accusers and to put their honesty and truthfulness to test before the jury.

In Mattox v. United States, 156 U.S. 237 (1895), the Supreme Court enunciated the three fundamental purposes that the Confrontation Clause was meant to serve:

To ensure that witnesses would testify under oath and understand the serious nature of the trial process;

To allow the accused to cross-examine witnesses who testify against him; and

To allow jurors to assess the credibility of a witness by observing that witness’s behavior._"

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/right_to_confront_witness

SafeSport cannot send someone to prison. But they can certainly destroy a person's reputation and life. Justice is a two-way street. Justice requires protection for both the accuser AND the accused. Justice for the accuser cannot make it impossible for the accused to raise a meaningful defense. And some crimes - and sexual abuse of a minor is a crime - cannot be fairly pursued after some amount of time. 

If George Morris has committed a crime, let him be convicted and put in jail. If the evidence is insufficient or too far in the past, let someone write a book. But do not destroy someone's life without an open, fair hearing into BOTH sides!

One may or may not believe Brett Kavanaugh tried to force himself Christine Blasey Ford. But guilty or innocent, he deserved a chance to present his side of the story. He deserved an open hearing and a chance to argue his innocence in public. George Morris does as well.


----------



## bsms

"_There is no statute of limitation on SafeSport claims, nor any public record that details the specific nature of the claims. A previous statement by the Center addressed this point:

“The Center does not have a statute of limitations, as we disagree with those who seek to invalidate abuse that occurred many years ago. To change the culture of sport, individuals must be held accountable for their behavior, regardless of how long ago it occurred. The Center recognizes just how difficult it is for victims of sexual abuse to come forward, no matter the circumstances; the trauma of abuse is bad enough, which is why the Center works so hard to protect their privacy, allowing them to speak on their own terms, when and if they so choose._”

https://horsenetwork.com/2019/08/george-morris-gets-lifetime-ban-by-safesport/

That used to be called a "witch hunt". Sexual abusers, unlike witches killing people using supernatural powers, do exist. So do people who lie. So...let the accusation be made publicly. Put the evidence, pro & con, on the table. Let both sides make their claims, for and against, for all to see.


----------



## lostastirrup

Wasn't going to comment on this. But I have to thank you @bsms for being clear and logical. I have similar issues with the SafeSport methods and this recent accusation against the demigod of the hunter-jumper world is riling up a lot of people. I think its valid that all members of USEF would like to know what happened. And would like justice; and I think transparency is the cornerstone of such, not sweeping sexual abuse under the table or destroying someone's career over something that cannot be reasonably proven.


----------



## Foxhunter

What has happened to innocent until proven guilty? 

With old cases it is just he said, she said and, as has been pointed out, things were very different fifty years ago. 

A few years ago I was teaching at a camp. One girl in my ride had a pony that was to much for her and as she was leaving camp that evening, she was walking with her head down and looking miserable. 

I went to her and gave her a hug and told her that tomorrow, her pony, Champagne, would have all the fizz taken out of him and be like a glass of water. 

She walked off holding her head up. I was told that I should not have given her a hug as it might be taken as abuse. (The girl's mother was a few yards behind her and had said nothing. ) 

It is getting out of hand when a teacher is afraid to take a young child to the toilet for fear of allegations. 

As Jaydee pointed out, will there be others with allegations? 

What *is* very different is how these matters are handled. Back in the 80's if a child reported abuse they were swept under the carpet. Now they are more likely to be believed which, is totally the right thing to do. However there are going to be those who use the allegations as a weapon and falsely accuse.


----------



## jaydee

Hopefully there will be a full investigation outside of Safe Sport. 
When allegations like this are made and the person is still in a position where they’re training young people, then I can’t see any other way forward that doesn’t involve suspending them. It’s no different to the way it would be handled in a school situation.
The fact that this reported incident happened a long time ago doesn’t mean there haven’t been more recent ones but the young people haven’t had the courage to come forward and complain
Girls find it very embarrassing and difficult to talk about inappropriate sexual advances, boys and young men find it even harder.


----------



## bsms

jaydee said:


> ...The fact that this reported incident happened a long time ago doesn’t mean there haven’t been more recent ones but the young people haven’t had the courage to come forward and complain...


A reported incident is an accusation. Nothing more until it is investigated. But how does anyone do a genuine investigation into something that, if it happened, happened in secret 50 years ago? Meanwhile, the accusation is enough to justify destroying someone's reputation and ability to earn a living?

The law - unlike crusading SafeSport ("_To change the culture of sport_") - recognizes a balance between protecting victims and protecting the wrongly accused. The law, evolving over decades and centuries, tries to balance those needs based on how thousands of cases have shaped the law. JURIES exist as finders of fact. A jury listens to both sides and then decides who they believe. Lawyers for both sides get to challenge jury members to prevent (or encourage, depending on how you look at it) biased juries. And then we let the jury hear both sides, in open court, and decide.

Who does that role in SafeSport? SafeSport employees? Is there ANY jury? Or just a SafeSport employee who singlehandly determines guilt in cases the LAW says cannot be fairly investigated? Who is George Morris's accuser? What is he actually accused of? What evidence?

Since when is a secret tribunal run by advocates intent on 'changing the culture' allowed to punish people in America? Heck, we inherited our ideas of justice from England! Are we going to toss aside 500 years of experience?


----------



## jaydee

bsms said:


> A reported incident is an accusation. Nothing more until it is investigated. But how does anyone do a genuine investigation into something that, if it happened, happened in secret 50 years ago? Meanwhile, the accusation is enough to justify destroying someone's reputation and ability to earn a living?
> ?


Safe Sport has thoroughly investigated this accusation and found enough evidence that they feel justified handing out the most severe reprimand that's ever been used before. I don't think they'd have hit someone like Morris that hard if they didn't feel they had cause.
They will have access to investigating teams that are every bit as proficient as the ones working on criminal cases.

Morris has the right to appeal and may well be fully exonerated, if so he should get a public apology and the accuser named and prosecuted.

On the other hand, the person who's made the accusation must be in their senior years now but it doesn't mean that there aren't others who've remained silent in more recent years.

A teacher at the school I went too (also a Boy Scout leader) got away with child abuse for several decades because the young boys under his care were ashamed to speak out until they were adults.
Everyone thought he was wonderful.


----------



## farmpony84

Foxhunter said:


> What *is* very different is how these matters are handled. Back in the 80's if a child reported abuse they were swept under the carpet. Now they are more likely to be believed which, is totally the right thing to do. H*owever there are going to be those who use the allegations as a weapon and falsely accuse*.


There was a case here where a mother came home to find her 16 year old daughter with an 18 year old. The daughter claimed her climbed into her window and forced himself on her. The mother called the police and he was arrested, tried, and convicted. After he was convicted. (I think it was the day of or the day after) the girl told her mom that that his side of the story was the truth but she didn't want to get in trouble so she lied. They were actually boyfriend and girlfriend and had been since before he was 18. She also admitted that the sex was consensual. At this point he was already in jail. The mom of the girl immediately called a lawyer so that she could fix the problem. It took almost a year to get him released and I think it's been five years since his released and he is still listed as a sex offender. Still has to put it on any job applications. The process to have him removed apparently is a very long and tedious one. The paper has provided several updates on this case over the years. 

Now I know this is a rare case, but it does happen.


----------



## SilverMaple

^ It's not that rare at all. A relative is an attorney, and he says one of his most common cases he gets are instances where a high-school couple are turned in to law enforcement by the parents of a young lady once the young man turns 18 if the girlfriend happens to by 16 or 17 still. If they don't like the guy, or if she's hesitant on going to college because of the relationship, it's done or at least threatened. In many instances, it doesn't matter if the relationship was consensual--- if they had sex, he's now on the hook for statutory rape. 

There are three men in our area alone that I know of who are convicted sex offenders and on the registry due to this situation. One has since married the girl and they have three kids, but he's not allowed to live in the home she inherited from a relative because it's too close to a school. So he has an apartment on the other end of town--- but he also isn't allowed to be in the park, near the school, or in the public library--- all conditions of his release from prison, so he can't attend his kids' events, take them to swimming lessons, etc. He's now 29 and his wife is 27.

There's also a local young man who had a lapse in judgement who thought he was forwarding a photo of his girlfriend in a state of undress to her phone, when in fact he sent it to another friend. That friend's parents saw the photo and turned him in to law enforcement. He is now facing charges on the distribution of child porn... because his girlfriend was 17 at the time.


----------



## bsms

jaydee said:


> Safe Sport has thoroughly investigated this accusation and found enough evidence that they feel justified handing out...
> 
> They will have access to investigating teams that are every bit as proficient as the ones working on criminal cases....


Who the heck is "SafeSport" to investigate criminal activity? Where are the protections given by our JUSTICE system to the accused? In most cases, our justice system says a 50 year old complaint CANNOT be investigated fairly, which is why our legal system has statutes of limitation!

An accuser has a responsibility to complain in a timely manner. Why? Because the accused needs to be able to provide EVIDENCE that might conflict with the claim. A man I knew was accused of raping a woman he knew. The woman was very clear: The rape took place while he drove her home for a Super Bowl party earlier in the year. However, the guy was in the military and was in Saudi Arabia from Dec-March. 10,000 miles away.

But suppose he was a civilian who had been on a business trip, and the accusation was about a party that took place 30 years ago? Would he even remember the trip? Could he document the trip or provide eyewitnesses 30 years later? What about 50 years later?

There is a wonderful scene in A Man for All Seasons:



> Margaret More: He's bad!
> 
> More: There is no law against that.
> 
> Will Roper: There is! God's law!
> 
> *More: Then God can arrest him.*
> 
> Alice: While you talk, he's gone!
> 
> More: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law!
> 
> Roper: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law!
> 
> More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
> 
> Roper: I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
> 
> More: Oh? *And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast– man's laws, not God's– and if you cut them down—and you're just the man to do it—do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?*
> *
> Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law for my own safety's sake.*


----------



## avjudge

bsms said:


> Who the heck is "SafeSport" to investigate criminal activity? Where are the protections given by our JUSTICE system to the accused?


I believe SafeSport-the-organization is set up to implement this: 
"Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization of 2017" on Wikipedia

Are you seriously proposing that _nothing_ can be done to protect young people from predatory coaches unless the criminal standard of evidence is reached - i.e. _beyond a reasonable doubt_? 

You can argue - there are good arguments - against the current setup, and it will always be a balancing act between the safety of children and the livelihood of adults, but the arguments I'm seeing here ("leave it to the criminal justice system") seem to be logically lead to the above situation, where the adult's livelihood and reputation come first and foremost.


----------



## Filou

Well SafeSport was presumably hired by USEF to do this sort of thing, so maybe it's also a question of why did USEF need an investigation team? What was USEFs role in all this? To me that sorta resolves the who the heck is SafeSport to be doing this sorta thing. They were hired to do it. Ask the question of who hired them, and why was it needed. 

If George Morris was not a USEF member then I don't think SafeSport could have done much (other than release what they have, which they clearly need to do anyway), at which point, if someone felt strongly enough to bring him down they could report to a number of other agencies or to the media. 

Where's the rule out there saying you need to report stuff to the us government to have it investigated, private investigation is a thing too. It's not wrong, but I know for me personally, regardless of the avenue I expect transparency.


----------



## updownrider

USEF did not hire Safe Sport. Safe Sport was mandated by Congress and all sports that compete in the Olympics must participate. Because the USEF is the national governing body for equestrian sport in the US they have no choice but to abide by the laws. 

Safe Sport does the investigations, etc. once Safe Sport puts someone on a ban list the USEF must do so also. 

Again, please, before guessing read the rules and not Facebook or articles.

As for the incident being from 50 years ago, we do not know that except from a press release from a PR firm hired by George. Safe Sport does not comment on cases.


----------



## bsms

avjudge said:


> ...Are you seriously proposing that _nothing_ can be done to protect young people from predatory coaches unless the criminal standard of evidence is reached - i.e. _beyond a reasonable doubt_?...


Should we have monitoring systems? Complaint systems? Yes. Should we toss out 500 years of law and allow destruction of a person's life based on anonymous accusations to an anonymous judge meeting in secret, charged with "cleaning up" a sport, and acting as prosecutor, jury and judge all in one? No!

I absolutely reject tossing out the law and giving a secret group of people the right to destroy others! I absolutely reject the idea that the accuser has all the rights and the accused none. I don't want to live in a society with secret tribunals! And when - not if, but when - the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, the laws all being flat?

I love the law. The Protecting Young Victims from Sexual Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization of 2017 was a reaction to the gymnastics scandals. Hard cases make bad law, as the saying goes. Quick reaction laws often need to be rethought. The Patriot Act comes to my mind - a quickly passed law that hasn't worked out as well as hoped. 

If you have a charge of criminal acts, let the courts handle it. With protections for BOTH sides. Or use a civil case. With protections for BOTH sides. If 50 years has passed, talk to a reporter and make a public accusation. Allowing a public response. Did Dwight Eisenhower sleep with his driver in WW2? We'll never know for certain. But at least it is in the open.

"Protection for me but not for thee" is not just. Anonymous accusations with anonymous judges is NOT just. Secret trials are not just.


----------



## avjudge

bsms said:


> Should we have monitoring systems? Complaint systems? Yes. Should we toss out 500 years of law and allow destruction of a person's life based on anonymous accusations to an anonymous judge meeting in secret, charged with "cleaning up" a sport, and acting as prosecutor, jury and judge all in one? No!


I'm confused - monitoring/complaint systems are great, but not if they can actually act on the information. Unless maybe everything is _completely_ public. 

You'd be fine, as a minor victim of sexual predation, with that being all over the internet? (And don't give me that "50 years ago" thing - (1) that's GM's line but from what I'm reading elsewhere that's not the limit of it, (2) GM isn't the only case, and (3) that would mean things that happened 50 years ago shouldn't affect us emotionally any more. If only.) You'd be fine subjected to massive victim blaming, esp. if your abuser was someone with a large following?

The problem with these situations is you can't have it both ways - either you have complete transparency and re-victimize, or you protect the victims and, however thoroughly you investigate, people will choose to disbelieve the system. So you have to decide what balance works. 

I wish there were a way to provide everything - transparency _and_ confidentiality _and_ certainty - but there just isn't. It's an imperfect world and we have to make trade-offs. What you're willing to trade off is going to vary based on your personal values, age, experiences, social environment - and it's going to be different from person to person. You can believe your values should be universal, but that's not the way the world works.

And in the current world, we're increasingly valuing the safety of minors, at least in the context of middle-class kids doing what middle-class kids do. It's not just USEF, and it's not just sports. Other professional organizations, schools, Boy Scouts, they're all affected. And they all discipline or expel members without using the judicial system, which you appear to be objecting to.


----------



## Filou

@updownrider
Thanks for bringing that to light for me. I will amend my questions then based off of this. 

Why do the US Olympic committee and members need to be mandated by congress to require SafeSport screenings?

What was going on that required SafeSport to be needed?


----------



## Filou

I read your post above @bsms where you mention this started in part due to gymnastics scandals. 

I kinda feel like this isn't just about horse trainers, so I'm out.


----------



## bsms

"_You'd be fine, as a minor victim of sexual predation, with that being all over the internet?_" - @avjudge Well, George Morris's name is now all over the Internet as GUILTY! Are you ok with someone who is falsely accused - and I don't know if Morris is guilty as sin or pure as the driven snow - but are you OK with an innocent person needing to prove their innocence after being publicly found guilty? Of "something, sometimes, involving someone"?

What exactly has George Morris been accused of? They haven't said. When? They haven't said. Involving whom? They haven't said. Just...he's guilty.

"Innocent until proven guilty"

"The right to face your accuser"

"Trial by jury"​
Maybe YOU are ready to toss those aside. I am not.

"_ (And don't give me that "50 years ago" thing - (1) that's GM's line but from what I'm reading elsewhere that's not the limit of it, (2) GM isn't the only case..._"

If the accusation and investigation and judgment were public, we'd KNOW. Versus 'what you are reading elsewhere'. 

"_You can believe your values should be universal, but that's not the way the world works. And in the current world, we're increasingly valuing the safety of minors..._"

I haven't said my values are universal. They are based in English law and enshrined in the US Constitution. Ever hear of the Cultural Revolution? Not allowed under English common law or the US Constitution. I cherish those freedoms.

I value the safety of minors. I do not value the right to anonymous accusations, or secret trials, or standards of evidence that do not take into account the difficulty of finding witnesses decades after the supposed incident.

"_Other professional organizations, schools, Boy Scouts, they're all affected._"

And I oppose it everywhere. I think I am blessed, every day, that I live in a country where secret tribunals and secret accusations are not allowed. Where innocence is ASSUMED - until proven guilty. I didn't spend 25 years in the military so I can live in a brave new world where guilt is determined by secret vote on a secret accusation by an unknown person about an unknown event taking place who knows when!


----------



## ClearDonkey

Filou said:


> @updownrider
> Thanks for bringing that to light for me. I will amend my questions then based off of this.
> 
> Why do the US Olympic committee and members need to be mandated by congress to require SafeSport screenings?
> 
> What was going on that required SafeSport to be needed?



This is just a single experience in my realm of the horse world where a system like this could've helped prevent a few girls from having to deal with any abuse or assault. In the few years that I was in 4-h as a later elementary and early middle school child, one of my 4-h leaders was selecting girls on the team and touching them inappropriately. This was not revealed until nearly 6-8 years later, when I was in college. He is now behind bars. I took private lessons with this man, and fortunately for me, he never put me in that position. Others were not so lucky. One came forward, and before you knew it, there were at least three or four now-adult women admitting that he did the same to them. His two daughters were also on this team, and they were friends with the victims, which I also assume made it easier for him to get close to them. 

It happens in the horse world, and it needs to be taken seriously, no matter the time frame in which it happened. It doesn't matter if someone inappropriately touched someone 5 minutes ago, 5 years ago, or 50 years ago. If they were a danger, are a danger, or could be a danger to other people with their abuse, then it needs to be taken seriously. It doesn't matter if it was Joe Schmo or George Morris, these things need to be investigated whether or not they are found out to be guilty. 

Safesport probably needs to work on their way of doing things, yes, but what they are trying to accomplish is not bad.


----------



## egrogan

Filou said:


> Why do the US Olympic committee and members need to be mandated by congress to require SafeSport screenings?
> 
> What was going on that required SafeSport to be needed?



Not meaning to be snarky at all here, but you really didn't hear anything about the Larry Nassar scandal?
https://www.michiganradio.org/post/timeline-larry-nassar-scandal-msu


----------



## gottatrot

Everyone should be safe from being victimized. People can also be victimized by people making false accusations, so we need to give equal rights to people who make accusations and to those who are accused.

We can always believe a victims feelings, but we cannot always believe they are correct about what caused those feelings. So we can't always get justice for their feelings, if they are wrong in their memories or assumptions of what caused the problem.

This is why we shouldn't have people discredited because of one anonymous accusation. When there are supporting facts or multiple victims begin to corroborate, then there is more of a foundation to believe what the victim says is true.
What @ClearDonkey describes is legal, has evidence, and is clear cut. Hence the person was punished. Hopefully SafeSport will help with education and getting victims to speak up about abuse.

An accuser may not be trying to hurt the person they are accusing, but might be convinced that what they remember is true. An example is when a relative of mine stepped off a bus and a girl riding on the bus ran over to a police officer and said, "That is the man who raped me." My relative went in for questioning, people at his work heard what he was accused of, and he failed a polygraph. Fortunately for him, there was a record of him being at work during the time when the girl was raped. Later, they arrested the person who had done it. Some people he worked with remained suspicious of him due to this accusation. He was absolutely a victim, although the girl meant no harm. Some similarity in his features triggered a memory and she believed it. 

Memories can become warped over time, or we can build false memories into old ones. Emotions and memories without facts should never be used to discredit a person without supporting evidence. 

Safe Sport's website discusses their ideals of ending bullying, harassment, emotional abuse, and etc. This is all wonderful going forward but although someone like GM has probably toned himself down quite a bit, he still was noted to say a couple of years ago at a clinic, "Is she too bloody, or can she get back on?" Nowadays some might consider that quite insensitive, maybe even a form of emotional abuse or bullying, although the blog writer seemed to idolize GM and did not mind. I can only imagine what he things he said 50 years ago. 
Now the blogger says she was "creepily in love" with GM. 
I Survived George Morris?With Six Stitches! Day 1 Clinic Recap ? Jumper Nation


----------



## egrogan

I have been trying to stay out of this but I guess feel compelled to say a couple of things. First, equating a SafeSport ruling with the US criminal justice system doesn't make sense to me. No one is going to jail. No one is being convicted of a crime. The privilege of participating in a private organization is being removed given a judgement of inappropriate behavior. USEF can extend membership to anyone it wants, like any private organization. They make the choice to be the national organization affiliated with the Olympic Committee, so they are subject to SafeSport decisions. They don't have to be that affiliate. Yeah, I get it, it's someone's "livelihood" at stake here- but I'm willing to have certifications/coaching privileges suspended when an investigation of abuse occurs and concludes fault. No, it's not my business to know the details of that. Yes, I do agree that the accused should have more details than SafeSport currently provides them directly. (Note: abuse is not only rape, and whether you think groping, harassment, sexualized or racialized jokes are no big deal, that's out of step with protections in place.)

I really had to hold my tongue at the comment that people "didn't mind" the abuse they experienced if they were quiet for a long period of time. That shows such a profound lack of understanding of power dynamics and the incredible authority adults- particularly "legendary" adults- hold over children. How many of you have actually taken the SafeSport training? It is a very common-sense overview of how to maintain a professional relationship as a coach supervising children. It's no different than a teacher goes through. A teacher can be stripped of their license and no longer allowed to teach (though our ridiculous lack of a federal licensure system and lack of coordination of state data systems mean a teacher who loses a license in one state can often drive over a state line and teach there) without a public trial. If you live in a district where this has happened to a teacher, even if that was a teacher your own child had, you have no right to the details of that investigation and decision- it's not "transparent" and publicly available. If historical, unreported abuse was just people being "fussy" because of changing social mores, would we really be facing an emerging horror show of Boy Scout abuse decades ago? Or clergy abuse in multiple church denominations? 

I've been a teacher, my husband has been a college professor. Yes, if you are an adult working with vulnerable young people, you do have to be aware that intentions and actions can be misconstrued by young people. If you feel that things are going in a questionable direction, you say something to your supervisor, you document situations, you communicate with families when possible, you _are _careful about being alone with children. Yes, that's sad. But to me, that's not sad because adults have to be hypervigilant and actively work to manage their reputations, but sad because abusing children is so common that we do err on the side of believing them first now.


----------



## gottatrot

egrogan said:


> First, equating a SafeSport ruling with the US criminal justice system doesn't make sense to me. No one is going to jail. No one is being convicted of a crime. The privilege of participating in a private organization is being removed given a judgement of inappropriate behavior. USEF can extend membership to anyone it wants, like any private organization.


I agree completely that everyone needs to be protected, and things like the gymnastics abuse need to be prevented. 
The issue I have is that with Nasser we know what he did, we know his sanctions were justified. With Morris all we know is that he is banned for sexual misconduct. I'm not saying he was not an abuser, but the problem is that we don't know if he was or not.

SafeSport is unfortunately not independent from the US Olympic Committee, so is subject to abuse. 


> But no matter how many times SafeSport CEO Shellie Pfohl promises independence, the center’s history tells a different story. The center is not only reliant on funding from the USOC and other national sports bodies, but is a root-and-branch creation of the USOC. Meeting minutes for the first two years of the SafeSport board, reviewed by Deadspin, show that many of the USOC’s top people, including lawyers like Gary Johansen, were present at meetings offering the SafeSport board guidance and direction.


https://deadspin.com/safesport-the-usocs-attempt-to-stop-child-abuse-is-se-1826279217

There have been two suicides so far relating to SafeSport rulings, so unfortunately it is more than just being removed from an association for some people.
McLain Ward wrote this after Rob Gages killed himself:


> Having a young family myself and being a mentor to many young adults I thought it was important to be supportive of such efforts. Over the last year though I have seen many situations that seemed very unclear, often unfair and certainly questionable in their due process. I also have no doubt that these problems and shortcomings in the safe sport process have adversely effected both the accuser and accused equally. What does seem clear is that the safe sport policies are broken in their application, that very little information regarding cases is made public even in a redacted form so that the community understands better the accusations and the process clearly and very little regard is being given to the effects on the accused life and livelihood before due process is applied.


Apparently Gages was sensitive and no one knows if he was guilty or not, but he definitely lost his income for a year, spent retirement funds, his girlfriend worked two jobs, and in the end he decided there was no way out.


> ...the lack of transparency, is a serious point of contention among SafeSport critics. There is no hearing before an independent arbitrator for an individual accused and under investigation of sexual misconduct until after the final decision is made. Only then can an appeal be lodged.


https://horsenetwork.com/2019/06/safesport-and-dangerous-games/


----------



## avjudge

The New York Times now has an article up on George Morris (by the same reporter who did their piece last year on Jimmy Williams): 
Whispers of Sexual Abuse Tailed an Equestrian Legend for Decades. At 81, He Was Barred for Life.

(This is in addition to their article of a few days back, reporting the suspension.)


----------



## updownrider

@gottatrot. That is about 1/3 of a quote of what McLain said on Facebook. Either post the whole quote or ask the mods to remove the quote. You missed a lot of what he said and changed what he said by posting only a little of it.


----------



## egrogan

@gottatrot, the suicides are tragic. Of course, decades of research show that survivors of sexual assault are significantly more likely to experience and follow through on suicidal thoughts than people who have not been assaulted: https://news.illinois.edu/view/6367/541218

I personally do not feel concerned about the link between USOC and SafeSport during its start up-if anything, I would imagine that leads it to be even more conservative when it comes to following through on disciplining it’s former stars. Never good for the Olympic dream when your former coach is banned.

My bigger point is that USEF can ban people all day, but if you or I wanted to hire George Morris to come to our farm and teach us tomorrow, he can do that. He’s not in jail. We’re not competing in sanctioned shows. So sure, his prestige and access to a certain caliber of student is gone, but he could charge us any amount of $$ we’d be willing to pay and come teach us if we didn’t care about any of this.


----------



## gottatrot

updownrider said:


> @gottatrot. That is about 1/3 of a quote of what McLain said on Facebook. Either post the whole quote or ask the mods to remove the quote. You missed a lot of what he said and changed what he said by posting only a little of it.


A partial quote is still a quote. I properly attributed the source link for anyone who wants to delve deeper. Notable news sources often give partial quotes. Long quotes get too lengthy for people to read, so I added the part pertaining to my points. Ward's intention is open for interpretation and I did not change anything he said, it was copied and pasted. I happen to agree with his entire quote, but it contains 788 words. 

I agree completely with Ward's post and my interpretation of his post is that he supports what SafeSport is doing to prevent abuse but believes there should be openness about the investigative process and that the secretive nature of it harms everyone. 
That is my opinion also.


----------



## bsms

I understand Morris is not being sent to jail. He could not be since the SafeSport approach violates the US Constitution - for criminal charges. But everything he built for a lifetime is gone. Does he deserve it? Maybe. Maybe not.

Based on centuries of English and American law, the process used was unfair. If innocent until proven guilty has been turned into guilty until you prove your innocence, then SafeSport violates ideas about justice that have stood for centuries.

There is a huge difference between hushing abuse up and assuming it has occurred. The middle ground between those two extremes is what our justice system has evolved to find - an approach that fully allows accusations, but requires letting the accused mount a defense. In public. SafeSport admits it rejects traditional ideas of fairness to interfere with its mission of cleaning up sports. I've written my representative to ask Congress to take another look at how SafeSport operates. Beyond that...I've said my piece, probably more often and more heatedly than needed. Time for me to drop off the thread.


----------



## Foxhunter

What bothers me is the term 'sexual abuse'

This now seems to cover _everything,_ from the worse to just brushing against a woman's body. 

I had an older man step back in a store and nearly knock me over, just caught me off balance. He automatically grabbed my arm to stop me being felled, the whole time apologising profusely. 
No harm done but his face was a picture when I said, " Perhaps I could accuse you of sexual abuse?" 

We both laughed at the idea of it but, some do cry out for something so trivial.


----------



## jaydee

Morris would not be getting such a severe reprimand for something as trivial as putting his arm around a woman.
His inappropriate behavior towards underage men has been a source of strong rumors for many years. It’s only his position in the elite of the equestrian world that’s protected him. 
It isn’t just one man that’s come forward to accuse him, its three men and one other man who doesn’t claim to have been abused by him but was fully aware of what was going on. 
These trainers are no different to teachers, if a teacher crosses the line they’re immediately suspended.

The investigation took a year to complete, he isn’t being sent to the guillotine, he isn’t being sent to prison, he just can’t continue to train people under the USEF banner.


----------



## farmpony84

I'm curious about the "year to complete" portion because I've also seen 18 months but then I read a notice from safesport explaining the process and in that if I understood it right - they actually place the interim suspension BEFORE the investigation occurs and it doesn't become a "final" suspension until after the appeal which is 45 days. So does that mean it has just now begun to really be investigated? But if so, where did these other time frames come from?

Also - I am bothered by the number of people on all sorts of social media that keep talking about the rumors and whispers as if it were common knowledge. That means that everyone that was in the know chose not to file a report. Reading through the safesport information - it appears that it will view all potential problems so people should follow the "Know something - say something / hear something - say something". Especially since the reportee will be protected....


----------



## avjudge

farmpony84 said:


> . . . they actually place the interim suspension BEFORE the investigation occurs and it doesn't become a "final" suspension until after the appeal which is 45 days. So does that mean it has just now begun to really be investigated? But if so, where did these other time frames come from?


No, Morris's suspension is final, not interim. Apparently they decided an interim suspension was not necessary in this case.

I saw posted elsewhere, and thought those here might be interested, a quote from the reporter of the NY Times story on this - she actually cites a longer timescale, 2 years:



> I'm the author of the New York Times' investigation into George Morris. I have been reading social media, and wondering: Where did this false belief that Safe Sport treats people as "guilty before proven innocent" come from?
> 
> George Morris was the subject of a rigorous, two year investigation by ex-FBI and Special Victims investigators who make up Safe Sports team. It is no small thing to ban the most prominent face of a sport for life, it was done only because the facts were proved without a shadow of a doubt.
> 
> Just because you do not know what happened, does not mean it did not happen. Please feel free to be in touch with any questions, [email protected]


And also, back to farmpony's original note asking about the email, I'm really coming to see what a brilliant move that was on Morris's part - because he very clearly set the narrative by doing so. I see it parroted over and over, taking at face value that it was a single accusation from nearly 50 years ago, only because the PR release stated that. And it appears there are so many people who choose to look no farther.


----------



## gottatrot

avjudge said:


> And also, back to farmpony's original note asking about the email, I'm really coming to see what a brilliant move that was on Morris's part - because he very clearly set the narrative by doing so. I see it parroted over and over, taking at face value that it was a single accusation from nearly 50 years ago, only because the PR release stated that. And it appears there are so many people who choose to look no farther.


Actually, I don't think there was information out there because I searched online to find out more details so I could have an opinion about it. What came up was nothing about Morris' apparently known-to-insiders history with young men, but rather only the information about Safesport and their statements about privacy and not being able to give any information. That is what I believe led many people to all of the speculation. The first information I heard was that GM had been 18 with a 17 year old girlfriend, which was obviously quite far off the mark.

I think Safesport could revamp their process and it would benefit both victims and accused (assuming some might be found innocent). As was mentioned, since there was no information regarding Morris, he was free to drive the dialog in favor of himself. Which created a lot of negative press for Safesport. This is not the first time this has happened with them. I am guessing this was not good for the victims either, to hear how many people were defending Morris. 

Even though we know that many abusers blend well into society and seem "nice" to many who know them, hiding the shameful things they do, many people think they can discern if people are "good," or "bad," and so rush to defend people who are accused. This is a lot less likely to happen if some details are released, with careful protection of the victims' identities. 



> (*@Jaydee*)..The investigation took a year to complete, he isn’t being sent to the guillotine, he isn’t being sent to prison, he just can’t continue to train people under the USEF banner.


I'm not interpreting anyone as saying it is unjust to ban Morris or anything like that. What I think people are protesting is the process used by Safesport. If the press had not finally given more information, it would seem just as likely that he had been banned because someone complained he had a consensual relationship with a 17 year old when he was 18. Since Safesport does not give any details, there does not seem like there is anything to stop them from potentially ruining someone's reputation and career based on some flimsy complaint. All we know is that we are told they will be fair and follow good investigative techniques, but no one knows if that is true, or what checks and balances are in place. 

I guess people could say in the grand scheme of things it is just sport, but for some it could mean their lifelong Olympic dreams would not come true. I'm definitely in favor of weighing things toward victims and victim advocacy, if there is an imbalance. However, I still believe there should be fairness for all. In the ER I've seen a woman kicking a police officer in the face and when he put his hands out to stop her she tried to get me to say I would be her witness that he had grabbed her inappropriately. I've know doctors that had to go to court and bring witnesses to prove they didn't rape someone in a busy ER with no private areas. 
So while we absolutely need people to speak up and report things and to be advocates for victims, we also need to be aware that there are some people with mental health or behavioral issues who will accuse people falsely. 

The impression I got from this thread was that people seem to feel it is either "support the victims," or "be fair to the accused." I don't understand why it should be one or the other. Why can't we have both? I feel strongly about victims being supported and people being encouraged to speak up and investigating anything that seems out of place. There needs to be more education and it is appalling that powerful people such as GM can get away with using their position to exploit others. 
I also feel strongly about making sure people who are accused of something are treated fairly and not assumed to be guilty without supporting evidence.


----------



## updownrider

@gottatrot what information were you looking for online? Information about the investigation?


----------



## gottatrot

updownrider said:


> @gottatrot what information were you looking for online? Information about the investigation?


Yes, searching for George Morris along with words like banned, safesport, misconduct, scandal, investigation, things like that.


----------



## updownrider

Never mind


----------



## gottatrot

I was able to find out some more information about Safesport's jurisdiction and procedures.

For those of us who are interested and want to feel more reassured about Safesport's actions in the future:

-A lifetime ban from Safesport only occurs after investigation into a credible complaint that there has been a violation that is of a serious, sexual nature. This investigation requires a reasonable amount of evidence that the violation has occurred. This does not include things like bullying, harassment, etc. 

-Any allegations that include criminal misconduct are also reported to law enforcement agencies.

-Anonymous reports may be investigated, but will be dropped if there is not enough evidence.

-If the person is banned and wishes to appeal, an independent arbitrator is assigned who has experience in criminal law, law enforcement, social work or similar. This person hears evidence and witnesses from both sides before making a decision. Arbitration fees are refunded if the arbitrator decides in favor of the accused.

They do investigate what they call "minor athlete abuse," and reprimands or lesser sanctions can be applied, which may be as minimal as a written warning or probation. Some of these more minor issues are given away to be handled by individual sport governing bodies. An example would be a coach verbally abusing athletes or encouraging someone to compete after a concussion. 

After Rob Gage's suicide, Safesport did away with temporary suspensions and releasing names of the accused when a credible complaint came in, to protect people's reputations. The only time they will apply a temporary suspension is if there is preliminary evidence that minors may be currently at risk for sexual abuse by the individual who was reported.

Here is a link to their current policies:
https://uscenterforsafesport.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/2019-SafeSport-Code-04.15.19-Hyperlinked.pdf


----------



## Foxhunter

At the start of this thread I thought that Safe Sports was a group who took it into their own hands to discipline people after complaints. This is obviously not the case. 

To ban someone as prestigious as GM surely means that there was solid proof, probably more than one before such a decision was made. 

I think it was JAydee that commented on Rolf Harris, an Australian TV personality that was found guilty of child sexual abuse. To say that's the IK was in shock was an understatement! No one could believe it to be true. This was a man of great talent that had entertained all ages for years. He had even been commissioned to paint a portrait of the Queen. 

Twelve people believed the evidence and he served time for his sins. 

Another was Jimmy Saville, another personality always in the limelight for his charity work with hospitals. Only after his death did his sexual abuse come to light. That too was a shock to many though several had always thought him a creep. 

It happens, it will continue to happen, and good on people who investigate into it especially when it is against people with influence.


----------



## gottatrot

Foxhunter said:


> At the start of this thread I thought that Safe Sports was a group who took it into their own hands to discipline people after complaints. This is obviously not the case.
> 
> To ban someone as prestigious as GM surely means that there was solid proof, probably more than one before such a decision was made...
> ...It happens, it will continue to happen, and good on people who investigate into it especially when it is against people with influence.


Agree, and I also forgot to say in the last post that Safesport states that those who make false accusations may be reported and subject to state criminal law. 

From what I've been reading, there is some assumption out there that "everyone" in that niche of the horse world knew that Morris was probably molesting young boys, which I find quite appalling. I did not read his memoir, which apparently discloses a lot of unethical behavior, and all I knew about him was from reading books on riding, watching videos and reading articles online that were just about riding. Personally, I thought he was a bit harsh on horses but had some good tips. Most of my friends were similar in their knowledge of him, and so I think many who could not believe some were "defending" him before more information came out, thought most people had heard of his behaviors when apparently most of the larger horse world had not, and only thought of him as a respected horseman.
So I can understand why that would be upsetting also.


----------



## Foxhunter

The good thing about abuse now is that it is recognised and the victims more likely to be believed than not. 

The bad thing is that all to often, the allegations are false. 

Big case here where a man made all sorts of allegations of sexual abuse from prominent people, mostly politicians. It had been proven he had lied before and police investigating went about it like a bull in a china shop. 

Big huha over it all and the man is now serving time.


----------



## Avna

Over at the Other Board, where a significant number of people move or moved in the same circles as Mr.Morris, the same discussion is going on, except with a lot more information.

To summarize -- George Morris was always known as a pedophile (boys not girls), or possibly ephebophile (young adolescents, not pre-pubescent, there is a distinction). For decades. It was just something "everyone" knew. There are lots of very famous powerful men (there are only two women I can think of) about whom it is/was an open secret that they engaged in sexual behavior either criminal or at least extremely unethical. Until very recently, it was just another piece of information about them, they operated with complete impunity, and anyone who tried to get any kind of justice would be hounded and shamed and no doubt counter-sued into silence, often by lawyers on permanent retainer for just that purpose. 

These particular emails were sent out by a PR firm hired by Morris, which is also the PR firm for most major show venues -- that is the email list they are working from, the list of people who attended these shows. They are obviously trying to get out in front of more revelations, since he was active for decades doing this ... stuff. He has a lot of victims. Male victims are just as, or even more, reluctant to go public with their past abuse. 

My own opinion is that these accusations are very, very rarely false. Those few that are, are blared to the skies. The emotional and economic cost to the accuser and their family is extremely high, virtually always. There are a huge number of people, mostly but not all men, who find the spectacle of a well-respected public male figure being accused of sexual crimes to be extremely unsettling. There is a roar of internet noise coming from men who fear that now it is open season on their sexual behavior, no matter how long ago or how innocent they thought it was. Although this is quite untrue and the fear is irrational, there is such a large subset of men who never imagined in their darkest dreams that women (or boys) would ever be allowed to truly object to anything they might do to them that the fear is overwhelming -- you read it everywhere. 

And large numbers of men who have never done anything objectionable in their lives somehow feel that they too will be caught up in the net of women's anger, it seems. 

I find the whole thing enormously depressing.


----------



## egrogan

Not surprisingly, it is very hard to measure the percent of allegations that are false, though research back to the 1970s generally suggests that they are "rare," but do occur: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29913113. 

I do understand why it can be unsettling to contemplate the possibility of a false allegation- just using my own anecdotes, I definitely thought very, very hard about which students stayed after school with me when I was teaching, knowing my classroom was in a pretty isolated part of the building and no one would be nearby to corroborate my version of a story vs. a student's. And I'll be honest, one of my friends who taught at my school one time got involved in a "he said, she said" situation with a student- not sexual in nature, but a questionably ethical situation where the student got in trouble but my friend had really been the instigator- and in that case, the student lost out because the teacher was believed over the student. My friend later admitted to me that she had been at fault, but as a first year teacher, was too scared of repercussions so let the student get suspended because he was already known as a trouble-maker, and people believed that his accusation against her was false. And when my husband was a professor, a female student was flirting with him openly during class and always made it a point to stay afterwards to "talk about the content." After it happened a couple of times, he started having his dept chair sit in on the class and when she would stay after, there was someone else in the room. She got the picture and stopped. 

This weekend there was a major eventing competition in town, and Friday night I went out to dinner at the restaurant next to the show venue by myself since my husband was out of town. I was sitting at the bar and struck up a conversation with a middle aged woman next to me, who was here competing. She had just read the NYTimes article and was reacting very emotionally to it. We had a conversation very similar to the points raised in this thread, and the conclusion she kept coming back to was basically: "I just feel bad because he's _old _and this happened so long ago- I mean, everyone knew, but he's just so old now..." And to me, I guess that's why it IS really important that these cases are publicized and brought to light, because the excuse that "he (or she) is old and behaved badly but is too old to hurt anyone else now" is why every generation has these high profile abusers who get away with using their power to hurt countless young people.


----------

