|
Post by noblesol on Apr 25, 2019 12:25:58 GMT -5
"NCAA events do not fall under SafeSport, USOC or USA Volleyball authority, so suspended coaches are not prohibited by rule from coaching on collegiate teams while under investigation by SafeSport." The 'Interim Suspension - pending investigation' for POSSIBLE misconduct, would by jurisdiction apply only to USOC and USA Volleyball programs/events. Not to NCAA Men's Volleyball. The article states the misconduct in question is related to something someone in the USA Volleyball community 'became aware of' that was possibly 'misconduct', and the article suggests it involves a female. The paper suggests the timeline for the possible misconduct is from at least ten years ago to over twenty years ago. SafeSport was involved over a year ago to look into it. In September of 2018 they decided to investigate and suspend from USA Volleyball affiliations pending investigation. So there has been an investigation by this non-profit organization going on for at least seven months. Questions: 1. Why is this public? It appears to be over something possibly to have occurred from over a decade ago, possibly two decades ago, possibly charged anonymously, and still under investigation. An investigation that is now taking over at least seven months. So, apparently there is no hot smoking trail of evidence here. 2. We can probably assume Wade is trying to defend himself. But clearly he can't comment on it, no lawyer worth his salt would let him. So again, why is this being made public? Wade can't comment or defend himself in public. 3. What falls under the "Misconduct" umbrella? Assume it's nothing criminal, o/w shouldn't it be a police investigation, not a non-profit cut-out for USA Volleyball?
4. If the 'charge' isn't over something criminal, then why the publicity? Your take is almost entirely wrong. 1. The long-running abuse that was uncovered within US Olympic Committee sanctioned federations (gymnastics, swimming) led to the creation of SafeSport as the clearinghouse to receive, investigate and make determinations, including sanctions, on all types of complaints. Transparency with regard to the existence of complaints and potential issues is one of the priorities that was highlighted when it was established. 2. Nothing prevents Wade from commenting or defending himself publicly. In most cases, it's wiser not to comment at all in circumstances like this, but I think it might make sense for Wade to issue a carefully crafted statement right now through/with an attorney or the Hawai'i Administration (to hold the wolves at bay until a finding is made). 3. Sexual misconduct with a minor, if that is the charge, is always criminal. Depending on the circumstances or outcome, the SafeSport investigation can lead to a criminal referral or take place in parallel to a police investigation. 4. Discovering that there are two coaches with active or recent investigations in the National Championship Tournament is going to generate publicity and controversy. You don't have to be a social media influencer to figure that out. USOC through its cut-out nonprofit 'SafeSport', in its effort to shield itself from its own apparent lack of ability to manage its affairs, is hoping to hide behind 'SafeSport' and its charter and 'independence' to conduct 'investigations'. So, who is investigating the investigators here? They never have agendas? They never conduct improper investigations? They never run roughshod over the rights of the accused? They never destroy the presumption of innocence by publishing databases of ongoing investigations and interim suspensions, without specifying a charge or its seriousness, leading to worst case speculations and harassment of the accused?
USOC was flagrantly negligent in its responsibilities for oversight and management of its gymnastics and swimming programs. It had to be addressed, but the 'SafeSport' process must do a better job of balancing the scales between the accuser and the accused. If long never ending investigations of decades old anonymous accusations can lead to articles in the OCR publicly equating the unspecified misconduct charge of a coach of a team one week out from a NCAA Championship Tournament run, with that of an assistant coach on a team in that same tournament with a confirmed sexual misconduct history, then Houston we have a problem with 'SafeSport' and USOC.
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Apr 25, 2019 13:34:43 GMT -5
Your take is almost entirely wrong. 1. The long-running abuse that was uncovered within US Olympic Committee sanctioned federations (gymnastics, swimming) led to the creation of SafeSport as the clearinghouse to receive, investigate and make determinations, including sanctions, on all types of complaints. Transparency with regard to the existence of complaints and potential issues is one of the priorities that was highlighted when it was established. 2. Nothing prevents Wade from commenting or defending himself publicly. In most cases, it's wiser not to comment at all in circumstances like this, but I think it might make sense for Wade to issue a carefully crafted statement right now through/with an attorney or the Hawai'i Administration (to hold the wolves at bay until a finding is made). 3. Sexual misconduct with a minor, if that is the charge, is always criminal. Depending on the circumstances or outcome, the SafeSport investigation can lead to a criminal referral or take place in parallel to a police investigation. 4. Discovering that there are two coaches with active or recent investigations in the National Championship Tournament is going to generate publicity and controversy. You don't have to be a social media influencer to figure that out. USOC through its cut-out nonprofit 'SafeSport', in its effort to shield itself from its own apparent lack of ability to manage its affairs, is hoping to hide behind 'SafeSport' and its charter and 'independence' to conduct 'investigations'. So, who is investigating the investigators here? They never have agendas? They never conduct improper investigations? They never run roughshod over the rights of the accused? They never destroy the presumption of innocence by publishing databases of ongoing investigations and interim suspensions, without specifying a charge or its seriousness, leading to worst case speculations and harassment of the accused? USOC was flagrantly negligent in its responsibilities for oversight and management of its gymnastics and swimming programs. It had to be addressed, but the 'SafeSport' process must do a better job of balancing the scales between the accuser and the accused. If long never ending investigations of decades old anonymous accusations can lead to articles in the OCR publicly equating the unspecified misconduct charge of a coach of a team one week out from a NCAA Championship Tournament run, with that of an assistant coach on a team in that same tournament with a confirmed sexual misconduct history, then Houston we have a problem with 'SafeSport' and USOC. Of course the SafeSport model is not perfect--no existing model is--and the USOC and USA Gynnastics were atrociously negligent. There is no excuse for that. But that has very little to do with the process being used here. The alternative you seem to be suggesting is secrecy, which is exactly the root of the original problem.
|
|
|
Post by brooselee on Apr 25, 2019 13:42:41 GMT -5
Wait!! One poster stated that suspending a person while being investigated is standard procedure. Another stated that it’s takes time. So if you add these two together, Wade is supposed to not coach until the investigation is over. If the investigation last two year and no evidence is found.....who is going to play Charlie’s back pay??.
Maybe cops being caught on tape doing stuff and crimes with obvious evidence...yes you suspend immediately. He said...she said.....suspending the accused with no evidence is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by itsallrelative on Apr 25, 2019 13:49:55 GMT -5
Wait!! One poster stated that suspending a person while being investigated is standard procedure. Another stated that it’s takes time. So if you add these two together, Wade is supposed to not coach until the investigation is over. If the investigation last two year and no evidence is found.....who is going to play Charlie’s back pay??. Maybe cops being caught on tape doing stuff and crimes with obvious evidence...yes you suspend immediately. He said...she said.....suspending the accused with no evidence is wrong. In these cases, isn't the suspension to protect any possible current victims?
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Apr 25, 2019 13:54:19 GMT -5
Wait!! One poster stated that suspending a person while being investigated is standard procedure. Another stated that it’s takes time. So if you add these two together, Wade is supposed to not coach until the investigation is over. If the investigation last two year and no evidence is found.....who is going to play Charlie’s back pay??. Maybe cops being caught on tape doing stuff and crimes with obvious evidence...yes you suspend immediately. He said...she said.....suspending the accused with no evidence is wrong. Wade is suspended from direct involvement in USA Volleyball sanctioned activities. I'm not sure if he is allowed to attend tournaments for recruitment purposes under the terms of this suspension, but the suspension has nothing to do with his pay as a coach at Hawai'i. BTW, who says there is no evidence?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2019 14:00:47 GMT -5
Wait!! One poster stated that suspending a person while being investigated is standard procedure. Another stated that it’s takes time. So if you add these two together, Wade is supposed to not coach until the investigation is over. If the investigation last two year and no evidence is found.....who is going to play Charlie’s back pay??. Maybe cops being caught on tape doing stuff and crimes with obvious evidence...yes you suspend immediately. He said...she said.....suspending the accused with no evidence is wrong. In these cases, isn't the suspension to protect any possible current victims? Correct. My question is, do they specify boys and girls events or is a blanket attendance suspension for all USAV events? That's how Butler skirted the the initial ban, IIRC.
|
|
|
Post by bbk on Apr 25, 2019 14:14:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by noblesol on Apr 25, 2019 14:16:30 GMT -5
USOC through its cut-out nonprofit 'SafeSport', in its effort to shield itself from its own apparent lack of ability to manage its affairs, is hoping to hide behind 'SafeSport' and its charter and 'independence' to conduct 'investigations'. So, who is investigating the investigators here? They never have agendas? They never conduct improper investigations? They never run roughshod over the rights of the accused? They never destroy the presumption of innocence by publishing databases of ongoing investigations and interim suspensions, without specifying a charge or its seriousness, leading to worst case speculations and harassment of the accused? USOC was flagrantly negligent in its responsibilities for oversight and management of its gymnastics and swimming programs. It had to be addressed, but the 'SafeSport' process must do a better job of balancing the scales between the accuser and the accused. If long never ending investigations of decades old anonymous accusations can lead to articles in the OCR publicly equating the unspecified misconduct charge of a coach of a team one week out from a NCAA Championship Tournament run, with that of an assistant coach on a team in that same tournament with a confirmed sexual misconduct history, then Houston we have a problem with 'SafeSport' and USOC. Of course the SafeSport model is not perfect--no existing model is--and the USOC and USA Gynnastics were atrociously negligent. There is no excuse for that. But that has very little to do with the process being used here. The alternative you seem to be suggesting is secrecy, which is exactly the root of the original problem. Then we agree that the 'SafeSport' model is flawed. Your suggestion is that it solves the root problem of 'secrecy'. You make no substantive defense for the rights of the accused. So, the suggestion is that it's better to let the accused twist in the wind and be publicly harassed and humiliated, denied the ability to associate with USOC and activities under its jurisdiction, severely hampered in their ability to make a public defense, expending their time and resources on lawyers and answering to probably multiple investigations, reporters, and concerned employers, parents, students, family, etc., all pending 'SafeSport' investigating decades old anonymous charges over a period that can run in excess of seven months up to what, possibly years? Your suggesting that this is acceptable, I can't agree with.
I don't agree with the premise that the main root cause of the USOC problem were investigations that respected the rights of the accused. The root cause of the problem was lack of proper oversight by USOC management, lack of proper reporting procedures and outreach to athletes, lack of a proper internal investigative ability and oversight of those investigations, and a general disregard for the well being of young athletes and proper concern for the behavior and oversight of employees. A lot of 'root' causes, and to point to 'secrecy' that protected the rights of the accused as THE problem issue is dangerously shortsighted at best. Our system of justice in this country operates on a presumption of innocence. When we allow that to be weakened, then we are participating in something that is unacceptably flawed and an attack on human rights.
|
|
|
Post by 808 State on Apr 25, 2019 14:24:03 GMT -5
This goes beyond volleyball. There is an accusation and investigation made. The suspension set forth by USA Volleyball is to stop the perpetuation of another incident and secondly protect the organization from potentially high liability costs.
Yet Charlie is allowed to coach at UH. Nobody knows the truth but there is a possibility that Charlie could be guilty. Now he is a position of power, let’s face it, teachers and coaches are revered and respected by students and also afford them some trust. Now if you are a parent of a young female student, would you be comfortable knowing that there is a potential offender walking around campus?
Now as a University, what if now more students come forward with accusations? The university could now face potential liability unless they can show they’ve done everything in their power to prevent any potential abuse from happening again. Have they though? He is still coaching.
Now I’m a huge UH fan and I hope Charlie is proven innocent but we have to take these accusations seriously, no matter how inconvenient the timing can be. We must be cautious and think about protecting our children.
|
|
|
Post by noblesol on Apr 25, 2019 14:38:30 GMT -5
This goes beyond volleyball. There is an accusation and investigation made. The suspension set forth by USA Volleyball is to stop the perpetuation of another incident and secondly protect the organization from potentially high liability costs. Yet Charlie is allowed to coach at UH. Nobody knows the truth but there is a possibility that Charlie could be guilty. Now he is a position of power, let’s face it, teachers and coaches are revered and respected by students and also afford them some trust. Now if you are a parent of a young female student, would you be comfortable knowing that there is a potential offender walking around campus? Now as a University, what if now more students come forward with accusations? The university could now face potential liability unless they can show they’ve done everything in their power to prevent any potential abuse from happening again. Have they though? He is still coaching. Now I’m a huge UH fan and I hope Charlie is proven innocent but we have to take these accusations seriously, no matter how inconvenient the timing can be. We must be cautious and think about protecting our children. You've demonstrated so well the damage that SafeSport has done to the rights of the accused. Over an unspecified, and anonymous charge of 'misconduct'. Since it is unspecified, and all you know is that there is a suspension pending investigation, most everyone must default to the worst they can imagine. And of course, then any rights of the accused can be dismissed, 'for the children'. But, did the charge involve a minor? You don't know. Is it a charge of sexual misconduct? You don't know. Could the accused be innocent? Well, better to let them be punished by shame and denial of opportunities and long open ended investigations, until they can affirmatively prove themselves innocent of anonymous charges potentially of something alleged decades ago. Wow.
|
|
|
Post by brooselee on Apr 25, 2019 14:51:04 GMT -5
Don’t be so naive to think false accusations can’t be made. I take the side of the innocent until the accuser prove his or her case.
If there is evidence, then show it and take on Charlie right away. If he done the dirty deed, then I have zero problem firing him but you down just take someone else’s word because she he said so.
If there is not enough evidence, then don’t throw stuff like this out during that person’s biggest moment.
|
|
|
Post by WahineFan44 on Apr 25, 2019 14:54:44 GMT -5
I hope the truth comes out one way or the other.
If in charlies favor, great, it shows he was innocent and can continue to coach our boys.
If not, he needs to be let go, step down whatever. If he indeed engage in sexual misconduct, that is not ok what so ever, and discipline needs to happen.
Also on a side note, Austin may have left on bad blood, but ive spoken to him a few times outside of the volleyball world and he seems like a genuinely nice guy. I hope he doesn't too involved as that won't look to good on him.
Regardless, with it being so public now (not that I agree with the article and it seems like its just to stir the pot) but it happened and may distract wade and the team. Milan is capableto help this team and he should.
|
|
|
Post by WahineFan44 on Apr 25, 2019 14:56:44 GMT -5
Innocent until proven guilty is fine
But to totally discredit the victim in this case is not fair. We should take every claim seriously. Does that mean firing everyone, suspending everyone etc that has a claim made against them? No. But should we say "omg this person is probably lying blah blah blah" is NOT needed. Look at all the sexual misconduct that has gone in the sports world lately. If we discredit this, we are no better than the accussed
|
|
|
Post by brooselee on Apr 25, 2019 14:56:56 GMT -5
808State......For the children”? You must be brain dead. Charlie have kids of his own....one has special needs. If you ever saw how much he love his kids, you would never make such idiotic statement.
|
|
|
Post by WahineFan44 on Apr 25, 2019 15:04:25 GMT -5
And before ANY Hawaii posters attack me. Im not on either side here. I just think we need to take this seriously. More seriously than some of you are taking it.
This is not me saying Wade is guilty or innocent. Its me saying the university, or whoever, should do a throurough investigation till they get to the bottom of it.
|
|