Cycling South Africa notes and welcomes high court judgment in the matter of Mr shaun Nick Bester

[Skubarra]

8 minutes ago, IceCreamMan said:

Minors are protected and presumably their names were known during the CSA hearings. 
 

I accept the privacy requirements especially regarding minors and the nature of this, but surely the greater good of society is more important esp given the nature of this. 
 

if the allegations are of such a seriousness the state has no option but to investigate etc. 

None of what you say address @Bro Derek's point that if the victims choose not to lay charges or pursue a criminal case then there is not much further the state or CSA can do.

[IceCreamMan]

25 minutes ago, Skubarra said:

None of what you say address @Bro Derek's point that if the victims choose not to lay charges or pursue a criminal case then there is not much further the state or CSA can do.

I guess there are too many unknowns here but courts do protect minors and in cases they do not even need to appear in court. Court can use intermediaries as well. 
 

if there is reasonable grounds to believe a crime has been committed you don’t need someone to lay charges. 
 

Edit: moot point I guess as it is not going to happen. No criminal charges laid. The man walks free in society. If guilty it’s a travesty, if innocent it’s a millstone. 

Edited February 19 by IceCreamMan

[Martin Albrecht]

1 hour ago, Skubarra said:

None of what you say address @Bro Derek's point that if the victims choose not to lay charges or pursue a criminal case then there is not much further the state or CSA can do.

CSA is able to lay the criminal charges as well, and if the state chooses not to prosecute, they can proceed with a private prosecution. The Afriforum private prosecutions arm headed up by Gerrie Nel is there exactly for cases like this. 
 

As I said, I was indirectly involved in a similar matter at a scout group where one of the adult leaders groomed and eventually statutorily raped a teenage girl under his care. The girl/her parents did not want to proceed with criminal charges, but Scouts SA decided the internal disciplinary action and banning him from scouting alone was not sufficient, and they went ahead with criminal charge. The guy was charged, got a suspended sentence and will for the rest of his life be a registered child sex offender, which makes it impossible for him to work with children ever again. 
 

the girl was protected throughout the process, was never required to appear in open court etc. 

Edited February 19 by Martin Albrecht

[Shebeen]

11 minutes ago, Martin Albrecht said:

CSA is able to lay the criminal charges as well, and if the state chooses not to prosecute, they can proceed with a private prosecution. The Afriforum private prosecutions arm headed up by Gerrie Nel is there exactly for cases like this. 
 

As I said, I was indirectly involved in a similar matter at a scout group where one of the adult leaders groomed and eventually statutorily raped a teenage girl under his care. The girl/her parents did not want to proceed with criminal charges, but Scouts SA decided the internal disciplinary action and banning him from scouting alone was not sufficient, and they went ahead with criminal charge. The guy was charged, got a suspended sentence and will for the rest of his life be a registered child sex offender, which makes it impossible for him to work with children ever again. 
 

the girl was protected throughout the process, was never required to appear in open court etc. 

I was unaware of this, but as the dad of a girl scout this is refreshing to hear. They took this action against the individual but more importantly to set a precedent that there is zero tolerance and no idle threats either. Actively prevents potential incidents down the line, as we can see what sweeping it under the carpet has done for much publicized Waterpolo coaches.

[Bro Derek]

2 hours ago, IceCreamMan said:

Minors are protected and presumably their names were known during the CSA hearings. 
 

I accept the privacy requirements especially regarding minors and the nature of this, but surely the greater good of society is more important esp given the nature of this. 
 

if the allegations are of such a seriousness the state has no option but to investigate etc. 

Again, referring back to the statements from the families, they don't want their kids to be saddled with this down the line in life. 

The kids are offered 'some' protection, but names and crimes are common knowledge

The families did not want to be named publicly, which is 100% unavoidable in criminal court.

[Bro Derek]

40 minutes ago, Martin Albrecht said:

CSA is able to lay the criminal charges as well, and if the state chooses not to prosecute, they can proceed with a private prosecution. The Afriforum private prosecutions arm headed up by Gerrie Nel is there exactly for cases like this. 
 

As I said, I was indirectly involved in a similar matter at a scout group where one of the adult leaders groomed and eventually statutorily raped a teenage girl under his care. The girl/her parents did not want to proceed with criminal charges, but Scouts SA decided the internal disciplinary action and banning him from scouting alone was not sufficient, and they went ahead with criminal charge. The guy was charged, got a suspended sentence and will for the rest of his life be a registered child sex offender, which makes it impossible for him to work with children ever again. 
 

the girl was protected throughout the process, was never required to appear in open court etc. 

'protected' is not anonymity, which is what the parents wanted in this case.

Seriously, you guys should find out what was said when this story broke and WHY before blaming CSA and making other statements that don't align with what has happened here.

Kids are very different and dynamics from each family differ hugely. Respect that in this case, the parents chose a route which protects their child's anonymity, which cannot be done in criminal court.

That was 3 odd years ago, so the families are able to change their minds, but this conversation is just a few people being critical of a process they evidently know little about/remember little of

[IceCreamMan]

36 minutes ago, Bro Derek said:

'protected' is not anonymity, which is what the parents wanted in this case.

Seriously, you guys should find out what was said when this story broke and WHY before blaming CSA and making other statements that don't align with what has happened here.

Kids are very different and dynamics from each family differ hugely. Respect that in this case, the parents chose a route which protects their child's anonymity, which cannot be done in criminal court.

That was 3 odd years ago, so the families are able to change their minds, but this conversation is just a few people being critical of a process they evidently know little about/remember little of

Where a crime is committed the state MUSt investigate. 
 

but let’s face it, the CSA found him guilty of misconduct. The exact nature of which is difficult to determine. There is a lot we don’t know but it would be really really rotten if he repeats his behaviour. If it was my child I would have a long hard look at CSA and ask many questions. 
 

I suspect this is not the end of this story. It will pop up again in time. 

Edited February 19 by IceCreamMan

[Shebeen]

55 minutes ago, Bro Derek said:

'protected' is not anonymity, which is what the parents wanted in this case.

Seriously, you guys should find out what was said when this story broke and WHY before blaming CSA and making other statements that don't align with what has happened here.

Kids are very different and dynamics from each family differ hugely. Respect that in this case, the parents chose a route which protects their child's anonymity, which cannot be done in criminal court.

That was 3 odd years ago, so the families are able to change their minds, but this conversation is just a few people being critical of a process they evidently know little about/remember little of

 

here's the original thread following the news in june 2024. 13 pager

 

[Bro Derek]

42 minutes ago, IceCreamMan said:

Where a crime is committed the state MUSt investigate. 
 

but let’s face it, the CSA found him guilty of misconduct. The exact nature of which is difficult to determine. There is a lot we don’t know but it would be really really rotten if he repeats his behaviour. If it was my child I would have a long hard look at CSA and ask many questions. 
 

I suspect this is not the end of this story. It will pop up again in time. 

I don't disagree with this.

I fully believe that anyone who messes with kids deserves proper punishment.

I also don't believe that people with a manipulative and predatory history are ever able to truly put that behind them. 

But the process for doing that in this case would involve a change of heart from the victims/guardians

[Martin Albrecht]

1 hour ago, Shebeen said:

I was unaware of this, but as the dad of a girl scout this is refreshing to hear. They took this action against the individual but more importantly to set a precedent that there is zero tolerance and no idle threats either. Actively prevents potential incidents down the line, as we can see what sweeping it under the carpet has done for much publicized Waterpolo coaches.

Yeah, it was almost 15 years ago that this wet down. But I am also glad they followed the route they did with this. I was very impressed with the way they handled it, an also the way the courts handled it. Contrary to what some here believe, the victims in cases like this are very well protected by the courts, especially when minors (at least in this case they were).

1 hour ago, Bro Derek said:

Again, referring back to the statements from the families, they don't want their kids to be saddled with this down the line in life. 

The kids are offered 'some' protection, but names and crimes are common knowledge

The families did not want to be named publicly, which is 100% unavoidable in criminal court.

I do remember the initial reporting on this, and I understand (even if I don’t agree with it) that the parents did not want to proceed with criminal charges. But as has been said before, they don’t have to. If their sufficient evidence, the state must investigate/prosecute, and if they don’t, private prosecution is also an avenue that is now possible. 

CSA has a duty of care to take further action in my opinion. As I mentioned in the example with Scouts I was involved with, the organisation was able to proceed with a criminal complaint in their own right, and they were successful. 
 

The minor victims also never had to provide evidence in open court, and there names were redacted when the judgment was handed down - as is common practice in cases involving minors. 

[Daniel Christensen]

People are speaking as if they know exactly what happened when not one of you actually know anything. I remember the situation and won’t discuss details here, but there is definitely more to it, and people in the actual cycling/ racing community know what went on and that things weren’t as black-and-white as social media makes it sound.

Lets not act as if 17 year olds are innocent.  Situations like this are often more complicated than outsiders assume. What’s also not okay is dragging his wife and personal life into this, families shouldn’t be targeted. Discussing his wife is totally not fair. 

And calling him a bad coach because of him saying he is the best qualified coach in SA or whatever you guys said has nothing to do with the matter and just turns this into personal attacks. 

If it was "my daughter" comments is silly.  Peoples daughters still train with him because guess what.. theres more to the story. 

[IceCreamMan]

Still poor judgement I would imagine but I hear you. 
 

there is definitely more to the story and it’s not the end of it. 
 

wonder what happened to Fiona. 

[capediver]

1 hour ago, Daniel Christensen said:

People are speaking as if they know exactly what happened when not one of you actually know anything. I remember the situation and won’t discuss details here, but there is definitely more to it, and people in the actual cycling/ racing community know what went on and that things weren’t as black-and-white as social media makes it sound.

Lets not act as if 17 year olds are innocent.  Situations like this are often more complicated than outsiders assume. What’s also not okay is dragging his wife and personal life into this, families shouldn’t be targeted. Discussing his wife is totally not fair. 

And calling him a bad coach because of him saying he is the best qualified coach in SA or whatever you guys said has nothing to do with the matter and just turns this into personal attacks. 

If it was "my daughter" comments is silly.  Peoples daughters still train with him because guess what.. theres more to the story. 

I'm sorry but this: "Lets not act as if 17 year olds are innocent."... sounds totally like victim blaming....but aside from that ALL 17 year old klds are MINORs in the eyes of the law...shame on you!!!!

CSA saw fit to ban him....let us hear your side of the story!!

Edited February 20 by capediver
spelling ...and just gobsmacked at this statement

[Iwan Kemp]

1 hour ago, Daniel Christensen said:

People are speaking as if they know exactly what happened when not one of you actually know anything. I remember the situation and won’t discuss details here, but there is definitely more to it, and people in the actual cycling/ racing community know what went on and that things weren’t as black-and-white as social media makes it sound.

Lets not act as if 17 year olds are innocent.  Situations like this are often more complicated than outsiders assume. What’s also not okay is dragging his wife and personal life into this, families shouldn’t be targeted. Discussing his wife is totally not fair. 

And calling him a bad coach because of him saying he is the best qualified coach in SA or whatever you guys said has nothing to do with the matter and just turns this into personal attacks. 

If it was "my daughter" comments is silly.  Peoples daughters still train with him because guess what.. theres more to the story. 

Oh, my.

He was found guilty. Three times. I don't know what happened, but the ADULT in the room clearly did not make the decision he should have. REGARDLESS OF WHAT SOME 17-YEAR-OLDS WOULD DO. 

Your posts read like the kind of argument why victims don't come forward. Let's assume she played a role in whatever happened; HE was the adult in the room; HE crossed the line. If he wasn't guilty, surely somewhere along the line one of his appeals whould have stuck?
 

1 hour ago, Daniel Christensen said:

...
I remember the situation and won’t discuss details here, but there is definitely more to it, and people in the actual cycling/ racing community know what went on and that things weren’t as black-and-white as social media makes it sound.

 

So you were part of the disciplinary inquiry, or do you also only have one side of it and decided to run with it? 
 

1 hour ago, Daniel Christensen said:

And calling him a bad coach because of him saying he is the best qualified coach in SA or whatever you guys said has nothing to do with the matter and just turns this into personal attacks. 

As far as I can remember, what was called into question is his self-proclaimed "the most qualified coach in South Africa". That's not quite saying he's a bad coach. Although I say that related to his actual cycling coaching and not his ethics in a broader sense. I think being found guilty, THREE TIMES, of sexual grooming makes you an actual bad coach.

 

1 hour ago, Daniel Christensen said:

people in the actual cycling/ racing community know what went on and that things weren’t as black-and-white as social media makes it sound.

 

Like quite a few hubbers are, to be honest. Some hubbers are more in the racing scene than some racers. Not sure what your point is here.

Maybe you missed this:
https://www.cyclingsa.com/cycling-south-africa-shaun-nick-bester/

Some bits from it:
- The notices accused Bester of sexual grooming, harassment and abuse.
- The appeal panel concluded that in respect of two of the charges related to one of the victims, the appeal was dismissed, in respect of three of the charges related to the other victim, similarly the appeal was dismissed.- Two of the charges related to one of the victims, the appeal was upheld.  Bester was found to be guilty of five of the charges of misconduct.
- In the finding dealing with the sanction, the appeal panel recorded its awareness to “numerous incidents of inappropriate sexual conduct”.
- As locus parentis Bester should have shown more discretion and judgment.  Instead, he was grooming the victims.

 

Really a terrible post on all counts on your part. 

[Barry]

4 minutes ago, Iwan Kemp said:

Oh, my.

He was found guilty. Three times. I don't know what happened, but the ADULT in the room clearly did not make the decision he should have. REGARDLESS OF WHAT SOME 17-YEAR-OLDS WOULD DO. 

Your posts read like the kind of argument why victims don't come forward. Let's assume she played a role in whatever happened; HE was the adult in the room; HE crossed the line. If he wasn't guilty, surely somewhere along the line one of his appeals whould have stuck?
 

So you were part of the disciplinary inquiry, or do you also only have one side of it and decided to run with it? 
 

As far as I can remember, what was called into question is his self-proclaimed "the most qualified coach in South Africa". That's not quite saying he's a bad coach. Although I say that related to his actual cycling coaching and not his ethics in a broader sense. I think being found guilty, THREE TIMES, of sexual grooming makes you an actual bad coach.

 

Like quite a few hubbers are, to be honest. Some hubbers are more in the racing scene than some racers. Not sure what your point is here.

Maybe you missed this:
https://www.cyclingsa.com/cycling-south-africa-shaun-nick-bester/

Some bits from it:
- The notices accused Bester of sexual grooming, harassment and abuse.
- The appeal panel concluded that in respect of two of the charges related to one of the victims, the appeal was dismissed, in respect of three of the charges related to the other victim, similarly the appeal was dismissed.- Two of the charges related to one of the victims, the appeal was upheld.  Bester was found to be guilty of five of the charges of misconduct.
- In the finding dealing with the sanction, the appeal panel recorded its awareness to “numerous incidents of inappropriate sexual conduct”.
- As locus parentis Bester should have shown more discretion and judgment.  Instead, he was grooming the victims.

 

Really a terrible post on all counts on your part. 

@Iwan Kemp I wouldn't concern myself too much with a troll trying to provoke reactions.

[Iwan Kemp]

1 hour ago, Daniel Christensen said:

If it was "my daughter" comments is silly.  Peoples daughters still train with him because guess what.. theres more to the story. 

Somehow missed this. So you're openly saying that, despite the ban, he is still coaching? Want to co-sign that statement?

People sending their daughters to a coach found guilty of sexual grooming, harassment, and abuse are bad parents making terrible decisions. I'm sure he has his side of the story. Unfortunately, that side of the story got him banned and found GUILTY THREE TIMES. Of
- sexual grooming,
- harassment,
- and abuse