bleedToWin Posted June 3 Posted June 3 "It's against policy for coaches to murder their athletes. We found coach X guilty of breaching of this policy" Surely that reads as a problematic statement, no? mecheng89 1
Jewbacca Posted June 3 Posted June 3 1 minute ago, bleedToWin said: They have found him guilty of misconduct and then proceeded to declare the nature of the misconduct which happens to be criminal. They gave no details on criminal proceedings. They say lifetime was not appropriate, what are the mitigating factors then? @IceCreamMan is right. In a parallel universe CSA would've given the details of the ban, stressed that serious misconduct has occurred and that criminal proceedings is underway, given no further information regarding the findings, and urged the public to wait for due process. Some on this forum are ready for statutory rape verdicts! Dunno Grooming, introducing minors to pornography and various counts of inappropriate sexual or sexualised behaviour to which he has been found guilty more than once due to visual evidence. Grooming and being sexually inappropriate with more than one minor isn't a small matter. I don't think anyone here is out of line. It is disgusting, inexcusable behavior. There is no defence to this and the outrage is warranted. The whole thing makes my skin crawl ChrisF, mazambaan, Westcoastwayne and 7 others 8 2
bleedToWin Posted June 3 Posted June 3 1 minute ago, Jewbacca said: Dunno Grooming, introducing minors to pornography and various counts of inappropriate sexual or sexualised behaviour to which he has been found guilty more than once due to visual evidence. Grooming and being sexually inappropriate with more than one minor isn't a small matter. I don't think anyone here is out of line. It is disgusting, inexcusable behavior. There is no defence to this and the outrage is warranted. The whole thing makes my skin crawl Absolutely. I feel the same. I have two young daughters and the very thought that an adult with influence over minors could abuse that position is horrifying. Most likely SNB is guilty as sin. I would have just preferred to live in world where such serious misconduct findings are reported with 0% details shared (instead of the 10% we got) and criminal guilt is then swiftly established. Jewbacca, Bl4d3 and Danger Dassie 3
ChrisF Posted June 3 Posted June 3 Maybe one of the legal experts can provide some clarity on the NEXT STEP in the process. CSA followed their processes, and published a ruling Their same processes state they are to hand over this to the authorities. At which point it becomes an "active investigation" (hopefully). May CSA make public comments about the authorities, which could possibly impact an ongoing investigation ? Only asking this as so many comments elude to prosecution ... bleedToWin and Danger Dassie 2
IceCreamMan Posted June 3 Posted June 3 (edited) 14 minutes ago, bleedToWin said: Absolutely. I feel the same. I have two young daughters and the very thought that an adult with influence over minors could abuse that position is horrifying. Most likely SNB is guilty as sin. I would have just preferred to live in world where such serious misconduct findings are reported with 0% details shared (instead of the 10% we got) and criminal guilt is then swiftly established. I concur. and with that 10 percent, the mob have sharpened their pitchforks. and remember the ribald comments made on this here hub back in the day when Mrs Viotti was the perpetrator. Funny these double standards. Iirc bishops did not pursue as she resigned. But the case was sent to the authorities. Edited June 3 by IceCreamMan
bleedToWin Posted June 3 Posted June 3 Moving on. His IG really reads like a man that did not believe this was coming... Jbr, DieselnDust and Jewbacca 1 2
Danger Dassie Posted June 3 Posted June 3 5 minutes ago, ChrisF said: Maybe one of the legal experts can provide some clarity on the NEXT STEP in the process. CSA followed their processes, and published a ruling Their same processes state they are to hand over this to the authorities. At which point it becomes an "active investigation" (hopefully). May CSA make public comments about the authorities, which could possibly impact an ongoing investigation ? Only asking this as so many comments elude to prosecution ... That’s fair Chris, at the same time any case regarding minors is extremely sensitive Ito specifics shared, both in protecting the victims and prejudicing subsequent investigation and/or prosecution. With respect I don’t think we fully appreciate the dynamics around this and the time period required. Especially if/when it becomes a matter of investigation/prosecution. On the terms alone “grooming, harassment and abuse” these have VERY specific graphic details of definition. Not going to go into it. Imho all messaging semantics asides, CSA had a duty and they’ve followed it to the correct priority. DieselnDust, justinafrika, Red Robin and 1 other 2 2
Danger Dassie Posted June 3 Posted June 3 21 minutes ago, IceCreamMan said: I concur. and with that 10 percent, the mob have sharpened their pitchforks. and remember the ribald comments made on this here hub back in the day when Mrs Viotti was the perpetrator. Funny these double standards. Iirc bishops did not pursue as she resigned. But the case was sent to the authorities. You’re conflating two vastly different scenarios and circumstances. It’s incredibly disingenuous as well as condescending, particularly when making a claim of double standards. You were quick to snap at someone else who actually made a proactive post. Scalpel and nonky 2
avdlinde Posted June 3 Posted June 3 6 hours ago, Robbie Stewart said: I'm guessing he was married. Sad all round. So many victims. no winners. Robbie, he is still married and his wife will continue running the coaching business. Danger Dassie, nonky, bleedToWin and 1 other 2 1 1
OVERDRIVE Posted June 3 Posted June 3 This whole story is terrible. Inappropriate relationships with minors in any way is abhorrent.
Danger Dassie Posted June 3 Posted June 3 1 hour ago, bleedToWin said: Absolutely. I feel the same. I have two young daughters and the very thought that an adult with influence over minors could abuse that position is horrifying. Most likely SNB is guilty as sin. I would have just preferred to live in world where such serious misconduct findings are reported with 0% details shared (instead of the 10% we got) and criminal guilt is then swiftly established. Understandably so. At the same time damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Imho in this case the damned if do served the greater responsibility. The sad reality is that cases like these are never swift/straightforward, because of the everlasting damage on everyone it touches, including the (alleged) perpetrator. But the first and foremost priority of well being in that line are the kids. ChrisF and Rowl 2
DieselnDust Posted June 3 Posted June 3 3 hours ago, IceCreamMan said: I concur. and with that 10 percent, the mob have sharpened their pitchforks. and remember the ribald comments made on this here hub back in the day when Mrs Viotti was the perpetrator. Funny these double standards. Iirc bishops did not pursue as she resigned. But the case was sent to the authorities. Look , I get where you’re going with the argument. - you’re wanting to hear more about the case in terms of the accusations that lead to the complaint. - was there any misunderstandings that could have lead to the situation escalating? - is there any misrepresentations of facts , false testimony or any other that could have transpired 1 - unlikely with three different investigation panels assembled to review the information 2- CSA has been messy with disciplinary hearings at times , however they included external consultants in their deliberations and in three different panels. 3- The accused never denied the allegations , instead asked for a lighter sentence. Is there anything more damning than that? so now the loving wife will run the business while his lawyers look for opportunities to oil him up like Zuma and side out of the charges and and exit umshimiwami…. the fact he hasn’t denied it and tried a plea bargain a lighter sanction appears to be the elephant in the room or are you suggesting there’s one wearing sunglasses too? JohanDiv, Danger Dassie and avalanx 3
IceCreamMan Posted June 3 Posted June 3 3 hours ago, Danger Dassie said: You’re conflating two vastly different scenarios and circumstances. It’s incredibly disingenuous as well as condescending, particularly when making a claim of double standards. You were quick to snap at someone else who actually made a proactive post. Not condescending at all, and no, it’s not 2 vastly different scenarios. They are more alike than different. one elicited a nudge nudge wink wink, the other a lynch mob. however, it could be construed as disingenuous. But, precedent is quite an important aspect of law. The post you refer to has a fairly condescending sentence in it. But alas, it matters not much really. as the matter is sub-judicial it will be interesting to see the outcome. If mr Bester is found to be innocent, CSA may have some egg on face. Won’t be the first time.
IceCreamMan Posted June 3 Posted June 3 20 minutes ago, DieselnDust said: so now the loving wife will run the business while his lawyers look for opportunities to oil him up like Zuma and side out of the charges and and exit umshimiwami…. That is quite cynical and you have found him guilty already by all accounts. the exact reason why CSA should perhaps not have mentioned the charges themselves. And I get it, I have grand daughters and they must be protected from predators, they must be cherished and kept innocent as long as possible, as should all kids. But at the same time we need to be careful of tarring and feathering potentially innocent people. hey, to make it quite clear , again. Child molesters have a special hell reserved.
DieselnDust Posted June 3 Posted June 3 31 minutes ago, IceCreamMan said: That is quite cynical and you have found him guilty already by all accounts. the exact reason why CSA should perhaps not have mentioned the charges themselves. And I get it, I have grand daughters and they must be protected from predators, they must be cherished and kept innocent as long as possible, as should all kids. But at the same time we need to be careful of tarring and feathering potentially innocent people. hey, to make it quite clear , again. Child molesters have a special hell reserved. Not I’ve not found him guilty, similarly as I don’t find an athlete guilty of doping . The governing body does that in terms of violating its rules and constitution. from a criminality perspective that up to a different process. I just pointed out the facts as presented by the governing body. you seem to have a lot vested in his innocence Westcoastwayne, McD23, Pieterlab1 and 2 others 3 2
IceCreamMan Posted June 4 Posted June 4 7 hours ago, DieselnDust said: you seem to have a lot vested in his innocence Absolutely no vested interest in this gents innocence, or guilt for that matter. I just don’t like the lynch mob mentality that pervades in society, both online and in real life. I believe CSA should have kept the charges discreet and allowed the law to take its course. That’s my only interest if this does go further then his *** is booked as they say, assuming a guilty verdict is reached. By some quirk he is friends of friends on vleisboek and he has a good looking family, connected to a number of brands etc. According to the missive previously posted , the matter is being taken further. Let’s keep tabs on it if possible to see where it goes.
Recommended Posts