Bl4d3 Posted June 3 Share 1 minute ago, Danger Dassie said: I like how the victims are secondary in consideration. What should CSA have done differently here? They haven’t named any of the victims and followed due process, he’s even been given leeway in the verdict. Its entirely possible criminal charges might follow, for obvious reasons. CSA posted a similar statement regarding one of their officials during the Tokyo Olympics. A criminal investigation first, then the punishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@grootlem Posted June 3 Share 3 minutes ago, Bl4d3 said: Sure, but should this not be tied to a criminal investigation? Putting something out in the open like this without having substantial evidence can open CSA up to being sued, quite heavily in fact. However, should they react by giving a ban in reaction to a criminal proceeding that found him guilty is a completely different story. This is a private entity with 0 criminal investigation experience who have just created a ton of **** for someone and if they can not substantiate their claims, they are in deep ****. I would trust an actual criminal investigation over that of a private entity. The article said an investigation was done. The accused wanted a short suspension and non disclosure according to the article. i believe charges has been laid. mazambaan, Sepia, DieselnDust and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Dassie Posted June 3 Share 3 minutes ago, Bl4d3 said: Sure, but should this not be tied to a criminal investigation? Putting something out in the open like this without having substantial evidence can open CSA up to being sued, quite heavily in fact. However, should they react by giving a ban in reaction to a criminal proceeding that found him guilty is a completely different story. This is a private entity with 0 criminal investigation experience who have just created a ton of **** for someone and if they can not substantiate their claims, they are in deep ****. I would trust an actual criminal investigation over that of a private entity. CSA and SASCOC are state institutions. They are not private. There’s also a process leading upto any criminal matter, which and investigating officer and prosecuting authority would determine thereafter. That’s the whole point of the safe guarding policy, which is adopted throughout the world. Bl4d3, justinafrika, Pandatron and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pandatron Posted June 3 Share 25 minutes ago, Spafsack said: Its scary how CSA just posts this, its really sensitive in nature, normally its not just blurted out in the open. But jeez, that's hectic, his career is over, poor victims as well. I doubt he can appeal this for a second time. Are you on his side? Sympathetic to groomers? McD23 and Pieterlab1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
binxc Posted June 3 Share 18 minutes ago, Bl4d3 said: Sure, but should this not be tied to a criminal investigation? Putting something out in the open like this without having substantial evidence can open CSA up to being sued, quite heavily in fact. However, should they react by giving a ban in reaction to a criminal proceeding that found him guilty is a completely different story. This is a private entity with 0 criminal investigation experience who have just created a ton of **** for someone and if they can not substantiate their claims, they are in deep ****. I would trust an actual criminal investigation over that of a private entity. In saying this, I do not condone any form of abuse what so ever. Should what has been said about him be true, he should suffer the consequences. I do however think a criminal investigation should've been run. If you read the full press release on the CSA website, it seems extensive independent investigations have been done since last year, along with several appeals. I doubt CSA would have issued this statement without having their boxes ticked, unless their legal advice is seriously lacking. Danger Dassie, nonky, BumblingBuffalo and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselnDust Posted June 3 Share 5 minutes ago, binxc said: If you read the full press release on the CSA website, it seems extensive independent investigations have been done since last year, along with several appeals. I doubt CSA would have issued this statement without having their boxes ticked, unless their legal advice is seriously lacking. Pretty much sums it up nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwissVan Posted June 3 Share 21 minutes ago, Shebeen said: Trying to find a way to justify his side of the story, I can't. I expect a criminal case should follow, or is that it? Do I have it correctly that his father is Nick Bester, former comrades runner and nedbank running team coach? He always seemed like a really tough guy, and wouldn't stand for any rubbish. Yes Nick is his old toppie If all of this is true I can only imagine that old man Nick gave him a Katseklap or 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselnDust Posted June 3 Share Overall this is a big loss on all fronts. On the one hand you have a coach abusing a position of authority and mentorship and on the other hand two or more minors having to deal with the consequences of his actions. Sexual grooming is brain washing. It makes me more and more sensitive to who I allow to coach or teach my daughters when more and more of these predators are exposed. The guy has issues that needs medical intervention and isolation ajnkzn, avalanx, justinafrika and 7 others 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mecheng89 Posted June 3 Share Firstly, his behaviour is not acceptable. I hope the punishment he receives was indeed fair, and that he learns his lessons from this. Secondly, why is there this culture that minors are just there for the taking?! Those who have been watching School Ties on MNet may know what I'm talking about. It completely baffles me why an adult man, with a seemingly highly developed brain, and emotionally mature (up for debate), could for one nano-second entertain the thought that doing unsavoury things with kids is OK. These people are not OK upstairs, and they should seek help, which is what I'm getting at. I hope for his sake that his family will not suffer too much in the end, and that he gets the mental assistance he so greatly requires. Trust NO ONE with your kids. avalanx, KERMIT THE UBOAT, Jako De Wet and 5 others 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shebeen Posted June 3 Share 8 minutes ago, Pandatron said: Are you on his side? Sympathetic to groomers? I don't think he is saying that at all. There are information gaps in the statement, one can definitely speculate and jump to conclusions on the limited information given on that claims and the steps taken. It's just the way these things work. Danger Dassie, DieselnDust, Bl4d3 and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spafsack Posted June 3 Share 20 minutes ago, Pandatron said: Are you on his side? Sympathetic to groomers? Calm down guy. Someone else also posted there concerns with how CSA went about this. I am not on his side, what a stupid comment. love the ride and Joshua C 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisF Posted June 3 Share 37 minutes ago, Bl4d3 said: A criminal investigation first, then the punishment. Get real .... How long do you want this guy to mollest these kids ? By all means, the case should now be handed over for statutory rape. Joshua C, Pieterlab1, DMJ and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Dassie Posted June 3 Share 6 minutes ago, Shebeen said: I don't think he is saying that at all. There are information gaps in the statement, one can definitely speculate and jump to conclusions on the limited information given on that claims and the steps taken. It's just the way these things work. It’s a difficult one unfortunately. Because any statement has to balance out sensitive information in both the protection of minors and possible criminal investigation, along with a duty of care to inform the public. Skubarra 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mecheng89 Posted June 3 Share 40 minutes ago, @grootlem said: The article said an investigation was done. The accused wanted a short suspension and non disclosure according to the article. i believe charges has been laid. This almost seems like a slap in the face of the governing body. He violated children, and now he just wants to shut his doors for a few weeks and ask the children and their families nicely to keep their mouths shut?! Sanette Rostoll 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave303e Posted June 3 Share There is an interesting choice here though. Surely he could take it to a court of law to get it over turned if he was in the clear. But he would then run the risk of criminal charges if he was found guilty? Not challenging it in a court of law would surely be an acceptance of guilt? I don't want to imagine what it must be like for those poor girls. Sepia and DieselnDust 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IceCreamMan Posted June 3 Share 7 minutes ago, ChrisF said: Get real .... How long do you want this guy to mollest these kids ? By all means, the case should now be handed over for statutory rape. How did we get to statutory rape? The allegations made are of a criminal nature, there should be a criminal investigation. Once found guilty in a court of law then sling his ass in gaol and ban him for life. CSA have erred here I believe. mazambaan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts