It all sounds so
known as the "elevated gluteus face on the floor welcome to my world...bitch" treatment?
that the few people who were early warners on this issue had to deal with. Until the flood gates opened, this guy was able to ward off singular complaints for a ridiculous amount of time. Going through the complaint process, and getting shot down, has to be a humiliating experience.
The establishment protected those in power. The doctor had perverted science that he operated under.
Everyone else just doing their jobs like the guards, like the engineers, planners, policy writers and enforcers.
How were they to know? How were they to do anything?
Yes, in this case the nazi environment analogy actually isn’t hyperbole.
by those who were upset that Jack's name was brought up in regards to this.
Those people should be, Clockwork Orange style, forced to read this over and over to truly understand what vile means.
That our AD helped run an organization where this happened and was allowed to happen is simply unconscionable. That we are still defending him and hunkering down hoping it will pass is a stain of embarrassment that cannot be washed off with national titles (which by the way, ain't happening under the current program setup) and football wins (when not vacated). This shame will last a generation.
I guess some folks just aren't that fond of transparency and accountability.
Also, our offense sucks when we dance around in the backfield.
I have no idea what exactly "General Counsel" means for USA gymnastics, but he was an outside attorney, correct?
Do we know what Swarbrick's role was, how much access he had to information, etc...?
I would hope that ND has asked these questions of him.
If she is considered to be someone who helps run the organization?
I've yet to meet a general counsel in any organization, professional or otherwise, who is not considered a key leader and part of the leadership group of said organization, especially at the not for profit level.
His title was general counsel to USAG, that matters. Attempts to now minimize his involvement (especially when they were touted so much at his hiring) are pretty embarrassing attempts by those at ND defending Swarbrick for transparently bullshit reasons (those folks should go with him when this is all said and done).
While the school/cronies have edited his bio, his hiring announcement remains, unscathed (and since the AP has a copy, they aren't likely to change it)
Swarbrick Press Release
"He has served as general counsel for numerous national governing bodies of Olympic sports, including USA Gymnastics and USRowing, and as a consultant to the 1996 Olympic Games"
If he was just some outside lawyer, why make a big deal out of it when we hired him?
"Steve Penny, President, USA Gymnastics:
Jack is a visionary and strategic leader with a strong sense for serving the best interests of great institutions such as Notre Dame. His outstanding leadership skills have helped to transform Indianapolis into one of Americas premier sports communities, and his experience – especially with the NCAA – will be a valuable asset to the University."
Why would he say this about some random "outside lawyer"?
I would thin that a General Counsel ,employed by an organization (and running a legal department within an organization like Corr does), has a different role than an outside general counsel who is employed by a law firm with an organization as a client, no matter the Title. Titles often mean different things within different organizations.
I'm not attempting to minimize anything. I'm asking questions that I don't know the answer to, but which many here, including you, are making important assumptions about.
Was Swarbrick serving other clients as well as USAG while he was serving as their General Counsel, or was that his sole endeavor for that time?
If not, how many hours did he bill to USAG during his time as their General counsel? How does that number compare to the time he billed to other clients?
Who did he report to and how often? How was the organization structured, for that matter?
Frankly, I think it quite unlikely that JS was as involved in USAG as Marianne Corr is at ND. If he was, he wouldn't have been employed by Baker and Daniels.
That doesn't mean that I'm convinced he doesn't hold some responsibility for what occurred, but I don't think it's fair to make assumptions about his role without getting the answers.
As far as online bio descriptions and recommendations, well, I'd hardly hold them as a smoking gun. They are mostly fluff.
Why would ND put it on his bio? To establish his experience in the sports world.
As far as the recommendation, I don't see much relating to USAG, there. It seems to tout JS's role in advancing sports in Indianapolis more than anything he did for USAG ,no?
There’s plenty of evidence you continue to ignore, so whatever.
There is no point in going on. If you think Jack was just an outside lawyer, despite all evidence and statements to the contrary, OK.
One last thing though. Go back and read all of his articles that he wrote for the USAG publication and references to him in that publication as well. If you still don’t think he was intimately involved in running the organization, at least you are fully aware of the facts.
He wasn’t just an outside lawyer. We don’t get to rewrite history here.
They're pretty simple questions. If you know that he was intimately involved in the organization, I'd think you'd be able to tell me how much time he spent working for them, who he was reporting to, and how the organization was structured.
Yet you haven't. You don't get to write history here without facts.
I haven't attempted to re-write anything. I've asked questions that I think are relevant. I haven't once stated he was "just an outside lawyer." I don't know what he did for USAG.
For all I know he was actively involved in a coverup. Or he only he gave sound legal advice and abuses still occurred. Or somewhere in between.
But you've already decide that he's a stain on the university without bothering to wait for facts.
They are easy to find. This isn't rocket science, but I'll restate what I said below.
Jack was their only lawyer and their general counsel.
Do you honestly think that an organization the size of USAG just has a side lawyer for the occasional question?
I'm sorry you are choosing not to read what's been posted or what's out there, not sure why. Again, this isn't that hard.
Here's just a snippet, from google
"Jack Swarbrick, the corporation's general counsel, continues to work with the organization on a daily basis and reports that the management committee concept is working well"
So he works with them on a daily basis, is involved with and can opine on the "management committee", but he's just an outside lawyer who delegates all the work to associates, because he's a partner at Baker Daniels.
Like I said, not too hard. And I don't blame you, but I do blame the dipshits who have actively sought to diminish his role with the organization because they are scared of what it means. It's pretty embarrassing for them. They are feeding ND alumni a bunch of lies and are just sycophantic spin machines, afraid to think that our AD had a large role in all of this.
Jack as the guy who dealt with the complaints. I can’t link it again. Look for “You give zero weight.”
I wouldn’t discount Jack just because he was outside-inside. Baker Daniels allowed USAG to call Jack its GC, and I can tell you from personal experience that law firms won’t do that unless both the work and the responsibility is substantial.
And we know that USAG had no in-house counsel.
The idea that he was just some outside lawyer, when he was their only lawyer, is preposterous
it is very doubtful this stuff got to him, or, if it did, that he did anything to enable it.
From reading the article, until the child porn, he had legit medical professionals prepared to say this was a real treatment. Obviously, he was hiding some of it from them, but that is what predators do.
Some of it should have been stopped. There were clearly adults who knew, but none of them really challenged any of it. Nassar manipulated the adults as much as he abused the girls.
As an outside attorney to a lot of companies, if people don't want you to know something, there is almost no way you are going to find it. USA gymnastics had a sexual assault policy, and a good one. JS helped write it; ironically, so did Nassar. It was not followed, but hard to blame JS for that. From the article many of these girls were lying about/hiding the abuse to/from their parents and coaches, some even to themselves. Do you really think JS randomly interviewing the girls to see how they were treated would have gotten an honest answer?
I do think more should have been done to make sure the policy was implemented and standard medical protocols followed. That likely would have stopped it. The outside attorney, if he got wind of the odd treatment methods could have forced it, but there were many more people more culpable as enablers than JS.
He shouldn't get a free pass though, and I do hope ND has asked him about it. I would be very surprised if they haven't. If he did know and participated in the doing nothing approach, he should be fired. We can argue whether just being there is enough to disqualify him as AD at ND. Based on this article and some of the other things that are posted, I don't think so. That said, you could want to hew to a higher standard. It might not be fair to JS, but higher standards are rarely fair to those who are effected by them.
For those wanting his resignation/firing, the question to ask is that if we were winning more football games would you be defending him from people demanding his firing. I recognize that my arguments are somewhat rationalizations and giving JS the benefit of the doubt. BUT, if the answer to that question is yes, you would be defending him, then you are not seeking to hold ND to a higher standard, you are just looking for an excuse to get rid of someone you don't like. For the record, I am not a big fan either.
Your last paragraph is insulting. A great deal of posters work professionally or voluntarily on behalf of children, children's rights, or advocacy. To suggest those folks would somehow favor pedophilia or covering for it for more football wins is disgusting.
If I thought JS was involved beyond my assumption, I would pack his office myself even if we were winning 14 games a year and I think everyone else on this Board would as well. My point was that people are using this as a means to demand his fire/resignation are off base.
Thank you.
The reality is that no one on this board knows what JS knows. We can make inferences based on the publicly available knowledge, but without the facts it's just pure speculation.
If it becomes clear that he was cognizant of the abuse and did nothing, THEN we can talk about how his presence in the Notre Dame administration is a stain that will last a generation. Like Vairish, I suspect the BOT has been asking Swarbrick some very probing questions and are perhaps already laying the groundwork for another AD in case his answers aren't good enough. No one at ND wants the fallout of this scandal to reach South Bend; if there's even a hint of impropriety, Swarbrick is out.
We'll just have to wait and see.
EDIT: Reading through the remaining replies, I can see I missed something. If Swarbrick did indeed help write the sexual harassment policy for USAG, then this scandal, even if he was unaware of Nassar's actions, reflects very poorly on him professionally and could be used as grounds to terminate him. Again, that's ND's call and we just have to wait.
Look up the word "scienter."
Then try to understand that scienter is not the primary issue.
Edit your subject line if you want your edits to be taken seriously.
In developing policies that allowed people like Nassar to continue to abuse children.
We're not talking JoePa and knowing about Sandusky, we're talking about developing policies (which a GC would be responsible for) that enabled the atrocities.
It's not about whether he knew about Nassar, it's his involvement in developing organizational policies that failed and his role in leadership of an organization that allowed this to happen. It's not whether someone told him on day X about Nassar.
The point seems lost on all the douchey ND bloggers who are more outraged about NDNation and its witch hunt than about the sexual abuse of minors.
If Jack Swarbrick wasn't a Notre Dame grad and wasn't our athletic director, would you want to know about his role as general counsel to USA Gymnastics from the 90s through 2008, given the Nassar situation?
What if Jack was a Michigan man?
People should remove current roles and attachments, and just focus on the fact that the general counsel of USAG from the 90s through 2008 would, without a doubt, be a "person of interest" in this Nassar story.
I just don't see how anyone could answer in any other way, if they dispassionately look at this from the outside.
president from 1983 to 1994, said Swarbrick discouraged the organization from distributing a booklet on child abuse to its members."
"Two former USA Gymnastics presidents have cited a longtime power player in Indiana sports as one of the key people involved in advising USA Gymnastics on policies related to sexual abuse: Notre Dame athletic director Jack Swarbrick."
"Jacki said he clashed with Swarbrick on the extent to which USA Gymnastics could discipline members."
"The one issue that came up on a regular basis with Jack on the child abuse issue," Jacki said, "was forcing me to accept that the only way we could terminate a member is if he was formally charged and prosecuted and convicted (in a court of law). Or charged and pleaded no contest."
Swarbrick said to IndyStar, "I never identified that as a requirement."
https://www.indystar.com/story/news/2018/02/05/notre-dame-athletic-director-jack-swarbrick-advised-usa-gymnastics-sex-abuse-policy/1079569001/?from=new-cookie
But since it's you, I don't.
I know what scienter means. My point stands: no one on this board has any direct knowledge of Swarbrick's awareness of the matter, therefore no one can conclusively claim that he has scienter. Feel free to assume that he does and that he should be fired immediately because his proximity to the scandal makes him radioactive. But understand that, on the question of whether or not JS was involved in some way, all we have is speculation.
scienter means.
I would guess that Andy's point is that him knowing about any abuse is not the issue; the issue is whether he helped create an environment that enabled the guy to abuse.
Nobody here knows for sure that he did or if he didn't. I don't think anyone has claimed that they do. I think that either way this looks pretty bad and if the guy had any class he would step away from his post before he became an embarrassment.
"Scienter" means that a person has prior intent or knowledge of wrongdoing, criminal or otherwise. I simply don't think such knowledge on the part of JS is A) easily proven, therefore making it a slam-dunk case where ND should automatically treat him like a pariah*, or B) knowable by anyone on this board.
My point is that there's no evidence (as of now) that Swarbrick had knowledge of the abuse. I neither think it likely that it could be proven in court that the sexual assault policy Jack crafted for the USAG was done with the INTENT to allow Nassar to operate with impunity (NB: I haven't read the policy; I'm making a reasonable assumption of basic competence here). The reason I made my initial post was because it seems like some folks are already assuming Jack is a terrible human being who enabled a pedophile, when it's not at all clear how much he actually knew. Perhaps I'm wrong to assume this, but that's my impression.
*With regard to your final point about how bad this looks for the man professionally and his employer...I completely agree. And for that reason, plus the near 100% chance of a very public lawsuit with a potentially embarrassing discovery process, I think that his days at ND are numbered.
He either misrepresented the nature of his work with USAG or performed that work in a negligent, possibly callous, manner.
swarbrick touted and used his USAG role to self promote and validate himself. Now he would like for that role to disappear. A simple question for him, "you publicly touted your proximity to elite coaches for 35 years. Why is there now a void in your ND bio with no reference to that experience?"
created the late 90s policy not to investigate complaints? This was deposition testimony (link).
He names Jack.
As a reasonable person, do you posit that “the lawyers” created a sexual abuse policy a priori as a theoretical exercise?
and so much of the activities around these types of issues was managed by our attorney, and it still is today, because the investigative process and things like that are all done through legal counsel."
Oops...
PS "Our attorney" = swarbrick. Also, with the missing "link" in saucy's bio will he still lay claim to being around elite coaches for 35 years? Or, will he explain away his hiatus...
USAG knew nothing about over 300 sexual abuse accusations involving over 50 pedophiles.
Both you and Vair have minimized the extent of the scandal to nassar. I’m not sure if that was deliberate or an oversight.
Vairish84 “Some of it should have been stopped. There were clearly adults who knew, but none of them really challenged any of it. Nassar manipulated the adults as much as he abused the girls.”
austindomer "If Swarbrick did indeed help write the sexual harassment policy for USAG, then this scandal, even if he was unaware of Nassar's actions, reflects very poorly on him professionally and could be used as grounds to terminate him."
Why did both of you ignore the scores of other pedophiles, some jailed and over 360 victims?
Why do you avoid not one but 2 USAG headquarter enabling policies that were in full force under swarbrick’s tenure? “Hearsay” and allowing pedophiles to change venues?
Saucy under oath:
Q. Let's go through those real quick. Are you aware of any sexual misconduct scandals involving coaches and athletes in USA Gymnastics?
A. Yes.
Q. Have you advised USA Gymnastics in that situation?
A. They were clients.
Q. And you're not going to say whether or not you advised them on sexual misconduct?
A. I'm not going to talk about anything I advised them on specifically.
Wow, that is some forthright testimony from the man who according to Vair, "USA gymnastics had a sexual assault policy, and a good one. JS helped write it;"
"Legal experts and child advocates expressed alarm about that approach, saying the best practice is to report every allegation to authorities. Laws in every state require people to report suspected child abuse.
“USAG failed at this,” said Lisa Ganser, whose daughter filed the Georgia lawsuit, which is still being argued. “USA Gymnastics had enough information, I think, to have done something about this. It didn’t have to happen to my daughter, and it didn’t have to happen to other little girls.”"
swarbrick finds himself dead smack in the middle of the most vile sports scandal in the history of the USA. You can throw him all the speculative lifelines in the world. He’s going to be put to task in the worst way. Right now he is praying for a settlement of sorts. He’s in the cross hairs of some very powerful people. ND would be wise to cut him loose so he can focus on his defense.
PS I am guessing that ND’s PTB haven’t asked him squat. The information they need is “privileged” for now. However, imo if they have asked him and he invoked privilege those would have been his last words as an employee. Lastly, the guy absolutely stinks at his job as AD. He's not worth a plugged nickel.
My knowledge is of the Nassar trial as that's what's being given top billing; I had heard something of other violations being alleged, but was not aware that there were so many.
Obviously, that changes my opinion on the matter and I'll cop to being wrong above. Were it just one guy who managed to pull the wool over Swarbrick's eyes as he had so many others, I'd be willing to give Jack the benefit of the doubt. But since it's a pattern, ignorance is exceedingly unlikely.
deposition testimony, research articles, trials, the Daniels Report and other information sources relating to the USAG's failure to protect adolescent girls. (I've pointed out that there will probably be a young male victim side to this and that has also started).
These girls (many now women) and their families deserve justice. The problem at the USAG was systemic, decades long and fueled by 2 executive policies emanating from USAG HQ. Both USAG presidents that book end swarbrick's career at the USAG confirm that those policies were in place for swarbrick's tenure. One named swarbrick while under oath.
In addition to the disastrously flawed oversight was a HQ culture of "see no evil", "speak no evil", hear no evil"... protect the brand.
(sound familiar?)
The University of Notre Dame's AD was the # 1 voice of legal counsel for the USAG while over 50 predators moved throughout their ranks drumming up over 360 complaints. Unbelievably, many complaints were tossed into a drawer at USAG HQ. Here are some cases that involved convictions under swarbrick's watch....
Start with this frightening example which points to the USAG/swarbrick's negligence...
"The girl’s family was shocked to discover the history of complaints against Schiefelbein, which came to light only after prosecutors subpoenaed records from USA Gymnastics."
"USA Gymnastics would not disclose the total number of sexual misconduct allegations it receives each year. But records show the organization compiled complaint dossiers on more than 50 coaches and filed them in a drawer in its executive office in Indianapolis. The contents of those files remain secret, hidden under seal in the case filed by Ganser’s daughter. IndyStar, as part of the USA TODAY Network, filed a motion seeking to make the files public. The judge in that case has not yet ruled."
"USA Gymnastics had compiled a thick file of complaints about coach Mark Schiefelbein years before he was charged with molesting a Tennessee girl when she was 10 years old. The girl’s family contacted police in 2002. Schiefelbein penetrated her with his finger multiple times, according to police records. He also videotaped her exposed vagina for what he called “training purposes, so he would know where not to touch her.” The girl’s family was shocked to discover the history of complaints against Schiefelbein, which came to light only after prosecutors subpoenaed records from USA Gymnastics. A jury in Williamson County, Tennessee, convicted him in 2003 of seven counts of aggravated sexual battery and one count of aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor. He is serving a 36-year prison sentence.
• USA Gymnastics had a sexual misconduct complaint file on James Bell at least five years before his 2003 arrest for molesting three young gymnasts in Rhode Island. It’s unclear what allegations were contained in that file. But IndyStar found prior police reports on Bell in Oregon. In 1990, an underage gymnast told police that Bell had climbed on top of her and told her he wanted to take off her pants. In 1991, a 10-year-old gymnast said Bell stuck his hand inside her shirt and pinched her breast. Bell wasn’t charged and continued coaching until his former employer reported him to police in Middletown, Rhode Island. He went on the run in 2004 and wasn’t rearrested until last year. Bell pleaded guilty in December in Newport County, Rhode Island, to three counts of child molestation and is serving eight years in prison.
• USA Gymnastics received at least four complaints about coach William McCabe as early as 1998. One gym owner warned the organization in 1998 that McCabe “should be locked in a cage before someone is raped.” USA Gymnastics never reported the allegations to police and, according to federal authorities, he began molesting an underage girl in 1999. McCabe continued to coach children for nearly seven more years, until Lisa Ganser went to the FBI with concerns about emails to her then-11-year-old daughter. McCabe was charged with molesting gymnasts, secretly videotaping girls changing clothes and posting their naked pictures on the internet. He pleaded guilty in 2006 in Savannah, Georgia, to federal charges of sexual exploitation of children and making false statements. He is serving a 30-year sentence."
jack swarbrick is milking Notre Dame for every red dime he can get. He has also used the University's relationships to secure employment for his children. His AD record is abysmal and includes: ND football's worst NCAA scandal culminating with vacated wins, multiple deaths, a HC hire who has under-performed while regularly providing on and off field embarrassing incident after embarrassing incident, winning National Championships at a slower pace than his immediate predecessor who was awful, a UA agreement that is paltry compared to others... just where has he succeeded? Digital media? bwahaha, making the stadium a year round asset? bwahaha The guy is not suited for the job. There is zero value added and in fact Notre Dame's reputation has been lowered under his watch. imo The USAG/swarbrick/ND connection will further lower our reputation by association.
At the end of the day we have an AD and a FB HC who are grasping at straws. There's no plan it's an annual crap shoot. swarbrick is out of opportunities as is kelly.
jenkins had better wake up fast because his press conferences are about to make his NCAA BS pcs look like reading a children's book.
The gymnasts deserve justice and ND does not deserve to be dragged through the mud by association.
Cross wrote:
"try to understand that scienter is not the primary issue"
and then you wrote:
"no one on this board has any direct knowledge of Swarbrick's awareness of the matter, therefore no one can conclusively claim that he has scienter"
And then jt wrote:
"Andy's point is that him knowing about any abuse is not the issue; the issue is whether he helped create an environment that enabled the guy to abuse"
and then you wrote:
"My point is that there's no evidence (as of now) that Swarbrick had knowledge of the abuse."
So you are repeatedly being told that the issue is not what Swarbrick knew, and repeatedly arguing against the point no one is making.
What part are you not getting?
What is SCIENTER?
Lat, Knowingly. The term is used in pleading to signify an allegation (or that part of the declaration or indictment which contains it) setting out the defendant's previous knowledge of the cause which led to the injury complained of, or rather his previous knowledge of a state of facts which it was his duty to guard against and his omission to do which has led to the injury complained of.
The insertion of such an allegation is called "laying the action (or indictment) with a scienter."
And the term is frequently used to signify the defendant's guilty knowledge.
Scienti et volenti non fit injuria. Bract, fol. 20. An injury is not done to one who knows and wills it Scientia sciolorum est mixta ignoran- tia. 8 Coke, 159. The knowledge of smat- terers is diluted ignorance Scientia utrimque par pares contra- hentes facit. Equal knowledge on both sides makes contracting parties equal. 3 Burrows, 1905. An insured need not mention what the underwriter knows, or what he ought to know. Broom, Max. 772.
assault policy, and a good one. JS helped write it;"
Where is it? When was it drafted? Who deemed it that?
Show me a reference to swarbrick's work.
It was also mentioned that JS helped push for it. These policies are all fairly standard. It is the execution that makes them meaningful.
I’m not sure if that was deliberate or an oversight.
Vairish84 “Some of it should have been stopped. There were clearly adults who knew, but none of them really challenged any of it. Nassar manipulated the adults as much as he abused the girls.”
Do you know when criminal background screening was required by the USAG?
Hint 2007
So, the USAG and swarbrick not only sat on hundreds of complaints involving 50 plus coaches they did so over decades coupled with no background checks.
The USAG in 1990 – "Permanently Ineligible Membership List Established List of persons who are permanently banned from membership and consequently any role in a USA Gymnastics‐sanctioned competition"
"Further, the USA Gymnastics’ practice of “banning” (adding to the Permanently Ineligible list) and suspending offenders may be flawed. At
least in past years, according to an article in The Indianapolis Star
following the release of voluminous documents by a court in Georgia in a pending case, it was possible to be convicted criminally of child
sexual abuse but not banned by USA Gymnastics. Documents reviewed by
the Star also reportedly revealed that USA Gymnastics has in the past sometimes temporarily suspended an offender but has not made the publicaware of that fact.
"And despite its efforts to provide more and more information and
guidance to clubs, individual members, and parents of athletes, the
external appearance in the eyes of many observers has been that the
primary focus of USA Gymnastics is on the competitive side, culminating in the U.S.winning medals at the Olympic Games and other international competitions."
Lastly, the 2 policies followed by the field and noted by past USAG presidents involved "hearsay" and allowing the accused to change venues without any legal follow up or warning.
Robert Colarossi (President and Chief Executive USA Gymnastics 1998-2005) said he inherited an executive policy of dismissing complaints as “hearsay” unless they were signed by a victim or victim’s parent — a policy that experts said could deter people from reporting abuse."
“What we’re talking about,” Colarossi said, “is a policy that was a policy of the executive office.”
Michael Athans, an attorney representing USA Gymnastics, told IndyStar those policies go back to at least the 1990s and “really haven’t changed.”
Spare me that swarbrick was at the forefront of anything positive here. The whole thing is an HQ clusterf*** not some back office screw up.
Had swarbrick been on the USAG staff as an employee he'd have been jettisoned/forced to quit along with everyone else. In addition, every legal problem that occurred under his watch falls at his feet as GC. Yeah, he'd like to hot potato it and that is not going to work.
Wash DC "So mr swarbrick, we see that you implemented a robust set of policies and guidelines to protect the gymnasts under the USAG's watch." (chuckle)
js "Yes, and I am quite proud of the work we did."
Wash DC "At what point did you determine that those policies weren't working? Was it the 20th coach athletes accused of being a pedophile 28th, 35th, 50th? Seriously, at what point would you deem these policies a failure?"
js "Uh, I don't know.."
Wash DC "Okay I'll try to make the math easier and this question will be a little longer. When the 20th girl, 50th girl, 75th girls 100th girl 150th girl, 175th girl, 200th girl, 235th girl 260th girl, 290th girl, 320th girl, 340th girl, 350th girl 360th girl complained that they were being sexually assaulted by USAG employees/coaches what did you do?"
js "I didn't know there would be math."
Wash DC "hiding your head in the sand and hiding complaints in a drawer and protecting molesters via your hearsay policy is an abomination...."
PS Didn't swarbrick also suppress the circulation of a safety brochure? Methinks he did just that...
Two past USAG presidents have publicly named Swarbrick as the architect of the policies that led to the scandal. The question now is whether they were simply using him as an expedient scapegoat. That will all come out at some point given the lawsuits that are pending, but the point many here have been making is that even having to watch the Notre Dame AD give sworn testimony on this subject will be an embarrassment for the University. They should have cut ties before any possible connection could have been made. But it's too late to do that now.
I'll defer to legal experts for specific legal opinion, but in general, the issues for ND to assess are whether and to what degree did JS play a role in crafting policies that enabled predatory practices to occur AND if so, whether a person who was incapable of crafting policies that could prohibit such is suitable for employment at ND.
Edit to add: the above preceded your edit.
What, in God's holy name, would constitute a BAD sexual assault policy?
i could be wrong but this seems much worse.
Cliffy
attorney plucked from a firm with no ties to sports. He had many clients from all industries.
Can’t recall all of them.
Acting General Counsel for USAG....hmmmm...gee that was a long time ago, so many clients...I may have done a little work for them...maybe.
It couldn’t have been touted at one point when was hired by ND, could it??
If he knew about and did nothing then he enabled these predators.
Winning games or championships has nothing to do with this, he should have been terminated at the first mention of him being involved.
Cliffy
One that protected serial molestor for decades?
One that protected the USGA entity for decades of accountability and liability by burying accusations?
Or these hundreds of girls?
This is basically saying the ADT security guy robbed my house. There’s nothing fucking ironic about it. He installed a system he knew he could abuse for personal gain. If a sexual predator is anywhere near your sexual abuse policy then it’s not to make it stronger to protect the victims.
How can you write that sentence and then later state it’s a good policy? I’ve never seen anyone defending these shitty policies and using Nassar’s involvement as a positive seems particularly loony.
To evaluate the quality of a policy, look at the results. The policy put in place by Jack allowed extensive files of complaints to continue to be accrued about >50 coaches with USA Gymnastics, with nothing being done about any of them. It treated almost all accusations as hearsay. It made unaccompanied treatment of minors by said doctors with laundry lists of complaints against them mandatory, with punishment being levied if any complaints were made.
These are not the hallmarks of a good sexual assault policy that simply wasn't being followed.
Moreover, your assertion that your fellow alumni would be defending Swarbrick instead of vilifying him if the football team were performing better has been discussed here repeatedly. It's enormously insulting and completely incorrect.
Yes, Nassar molested at least 250 girls, but how many girls didn't he molest? Billions. I rest my case.
I, I'm a one way motorway
I'm the one that drives away
Then follows you back home
I, I'm a street light shining
I'm a wild light blinding bright
Burning off alone
It's times like these you learn to live again
It's times like these you give and give again
It's times like these you learn to love again
It's times like these time and time again
I, I'm a new day rising
I'm a brand new sky
To hang the stars upon tonight
I am a little divided
Do I stay or run away
And leave it all behind?
It's times like these you learn to live again
It's times like these you give and give again
It's times like these you learn to love again
It's times like these time and time again
It's times like these you learn to live again
It's times like these you give and give again
It's times…
coaches are currently in jail? This isn't just nassar. It's systemic over decades by over 50 predators.
"USA gymnastics had a sexual assault policy, and a good one. JS helped write it;" bwahahahahaha
Where are you getting that?
Here are some facts:
"USA Gymnastics would not disclose the total number of sexual misconduct allegations it receives each year. But records show the organization compiled complaint dossiers on more than 50 coaches and filed them in a drawer in its executive office in Indianapolis. The contents of those files remain secret, hidden under seal in the case filed by Ganser’s daughter. IndyStar, as part of the USA TODAY Network, filed a motion seeking to make the files public. The judge in that case has not yet ruled."
"USA Gymnastics had compiled a thick file of complaints about coach Mark Schiefelbein years before he was charged with molesting a Tennessee girl when she was 10 years old. The girl’s family contacted police in 2002. Schiefelbein penetrated her with his finger multiple times, according to police records. He also videotaped her exposed vagina for what he called “training purposes, so he would know where not to touch her.” The girl’s family was shocked to discover the history of complaints against Schiefelbein, which came to light only after prosecutors subpoenaed records from USA Gymnastics. A jury in Williamson County, Tennessee, convicted him in 2003 of seven counts of aggravated sexual battery and one count of aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor. He is serving a 36-year prison sentence.
• USA Gymnastics had a sexual misconduct complaint file on James Bell at least five years before his 2003 arrest for molesting three young gymnasts in Rhode Island. It’s unclear what allegations were contained in that file. But IndyStar found prior police reports on Bell in Oregon. In 1990, an underage gymnast told police that Bell had climbed on top of her and told her he wanted to take off her pants. In 1991, a 10-year-old gymnast said Bell stuck his hand inside her shirt and pinched her breast. Bell wasn’t charged and continued coaching until his former employer reported him to police in Middletown, Rhode Island. He went on the run in 2004 and wasn’t rearrested until last year. Bell pleaded guilty in December in Newport County, Rhode Island, to three counts of child molestation and is serving eight years in prison.
• USA Gymnastics received at least four complaints about coach William McCabe as early as 1998. One gym owner warned the organization in 1998 that McCabe “should be locked in a cage before someone is raped.” USA Gymnastics never reported the allegations to police and, according to federal authorities, he began molesting an underage girl in 1999. McCabe continued to coach children for nearly seven more years, until Lisa Ganser went to the FBI with concerns about emails to her then-11-year-old daughter. McCabe was charged with molesting gymnasts, secretly videotaping girls changing clothes and posting their naked pictures on the internet. He pleaded guilty in 2006 in Savannah, Georgia, to federal charges of sexual exploitation of children and making false statements. He is serving a 30-year sentence."
"Robert Colarossi (President and Chief Executive USA Gymnastics 1998-2005) said he inherited an executive policy of dismissing complaints as “hearsay” unless they were signed by a victim or victim’s parent — a policy that experts said could deter people from reporting abuse. It’s not clear exactly when that policy was created or by whom."
“What we’re talking about,” Colarossi said, “is a policy that was a policy of the executive office.”
Michael Athans, an attorney representing USA Gymnastics, told IndyStar those policies go back to at least the 1990s and “really haven’t changed.”
Here's the history of USA Gymnastics presidents
Mike Jacki 1983-1994 confirms swarbrick
Sandy Knapp 1995 - ?
Robert Colarossi 1998 -2005 confirms Jacki's and Penny's account about swarbrick under oath
Steve Penny 2005-2017 confirms swarbrick
Here's what Colarossi said under oath, “to the best of my knowledge there’s no duty to report if you are --if you are a third party to the allegation… you know…”
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2940097-gggNo
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2940097-gggNo-Reporting-Colarossi-Kelly.html
Here's some more testimony from Robert Colarossi. (link)
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2940097-gggNo-Reporting-Colarossi-Kelly.html
Robert Colarossi (President and Chief Executive USA Gymnastics 1998-2005) said he inherited an executive policy of dismissing complaints as “hearsay” unless they were signed by a victim or victim’s parent — a policy that experts said could deter people from reporting abuse. It’s not clear exactly when that policy was created or by whom."
“What we’re talking about,” Colarossi said, “is a policy that was a policy of the executive office.”
Michael Athans, an attorney representing USA Gymnastics, told IndyStar those policies go back to at least the 1990s and “really haven’t changed.”
https://www.indystar.com/story/news/investigations/2016/08/04/usa-gymnastics-sex-abuse-protected-coaches/85829732/
Jacki and Penny are the bookends to saucy's tenure.
Yep, it's very doubtful that the General Counsel would be in the dark....
Saucy will be asked about this stuff and more in multiple depositions over the next decade or so. There is already litigation up the wazoo and this party is just getting started.
As a further note, Homeland Security is getting involved. Apparently some of this stuff occurred in various foreign jurisdictions. I wonder if the Turks could get jurisdiction? Some jurisdictions like Turkey might clap saucy in the cooler while they seek answers to these various questions. Stay out of Istanbul Jack!
program in Notre Dame history. Rogue....
When an AD lists creating digital media as his top bio accomplishment one need not wonder. That is followed by making the stadium a year round asset. Huh? He attached classroom buildings to the football stadium. It should read. We copied Doak Stadium almost to a T and tried to pass it off as an original thought. He's an underachieving, overpaid, arrogant fraud. In Turkish prison he would be Fat Eddie incarnate.
PS There is not one person on this board who would have negotiated worse than a 5 game commitment to the ACC. That wasn't a negotiation. It was a step from full surrender.
with the USAG. It was a crowning achievement until well... you know...
Let's examine the robust policy in place during sally's tenure. Now where would the President's of the USAG come up with "hearsay"?
"Colarossi, who was USA Gymnastics president from 1998 to 2005, acknowledged in a deposition last year that the organization dismissed the allegations against McCabe as “hearsay” because they did not come from a victim or victim’s parent.
No one at the organization ever interviewed Dickey, Giunipero or two other coaches whom Giunipero recommended USA Gymnastics contact about McCabe’s conduct, according to court records.
“Because they are unsubstantiated allegations,” Colarossi explained as he was being deposed by attorney W. Brian Cornwell of Lasky Cooper Law, who is representing Ganser’s daughter. “This one says he’s a dangerous coach. Over here it says an incident happened. We don’t know what the incident is.”
“But you made no further inquiry into what any of the incidents or allegations were?” Cornwell asked.
“We didn’t,” Colarossi said.
He said USA Gymnastics instead placed the complaints in a file. (SMH)
In fact, the organization compiled confidential sexual misconduct complaint files about 54 coaches over a 10-year period from 1996 to 2006, court records show. It’s unclear which, if any, of the complaints in those files were reported to authorities. It’s also unclear how many files have been added since 2006."
At least savvy has been forthcoming... He is milking ND for every last cent while spending like a drunk sailor. Hey, who knew that an Ad with zero experience on his first roll of the dice would find the answer to ND football problems. He's pathetic.... Declan, Lizzy, vacated wins, scandal after scandal, a wilting department wide NC run, .... I crack up that he takes credit for fencing and soccer championships. He's such a putz.
we have plenty of hearsay and conjecture, and those are TYPES of evidence!
wonderful policy he authored.
"PROTECT THE BRAND... relocate accused pedophiles, don't kiss and tell, don't remember anything, claim privilege ...file it, get a bigger drawer...!"
A boy can dream, I guess.
sort of conclusions or predictions or whatever you tried to articulate in your first sentence.
The only intelligent thing to do is ask questions and demand answers. Save the goddamned speculation, conjecture and sausage for someplace else.
Your post was ricewater stool.
times. The answer is no, we are not upset about this issue as a pretext for getting rid of the AD we don't like.
In fact, I think you were the poster who spawned at least two of those threads. Forgive me if I'm misremembering.
Sure, there has been some discussion as you mentioned but it's been pretty rare as far as I have followed. Especially since the first days of the discussion on the board.
As I recall, in that most recent, repetitive subthread, a very well-liked poster responded something like, “I’ve lost patience with this shit.”
They all occurred during the week in January after the 156 impact statements in the Nasser trial. The posts weren’t deleted, which is why it’s quite annoying when someone shows up to make the same accusation/judgment.
posters and, in many cases, alums. The suggestion is that the people on this Board would forgive an AD's relationship to decades of child molestation if only that AD was overseeing a successful football program. That's a shitty suggestion.
privilege, but I wonder if they are capable of engaging in it.
If you have details of what Swarbrick did for USA gymnastics and how much he knew, I'm all ears.
I've got no love for Swarbrick, believe me. But assuming a lawyer is complicit in his clients' crimes seems to be a little much to me.
so that the professionals could read it and then do their job.
Of course, that timeline cannot come from anyone on this board lest it be considered vile.
...it does not say, as far as I can tell, that he was involved in the day to day running of the organization.
It’s that characterization that I’m questioning, and Inagree that it should be investigated.
that he knew about their policy on reporting abuse allegations. In his words, the USAG did not report "anonymous" allegations to authorities.
Unless he explicitly advised them against that policy, it doesn't matter to me what (if anything) he did in the day-to-day operations.
USA Gymnastics 1998-2005) said he inherited an executive policy of dismissing complaints as “hearsay” unless they were signed by a victim or victim’s parent — a policy that experts said could deter people from reporting abuse."
"the USAG did not report "anonymous" allegations"
Apparently, they did not report any allegations unless they were "signed" by a victim or victim's parent.
It looks like that policy is a against the law.
"Legal experts and child advocates expressed alarm about that approach, saying the best practice is to report every allegation to authorities. Laws in every state require people to report suspected child abuse."
swarbrick's Sgt Schultz defense will be waxed...destroyed...blown to smithereens when he is eventually under oath....
He will be pasted, eviscerated...
Policy.
I maintain that scienter is not the main inquiry here.
Are you referring to the statements in the depositions that abuse allegations were referred to USAG's attorneys?
Do we know if Swarbrick was the attorney that handles them, for certain? Do we know that those statements were complete and true?
I agree that knowledge of the abuse is not necessary to hold JS responsible. But I also don't know what his involvement was in crafting and implementing the policies about it. It is possible he specifically advised against what USAG did, isn't it?
link Penny’s deposition. He names Jack.
I'm not a professional journalist.
I let the professionals do their job.
Jack was "General Counsel" (outside-inside, at Baker Daniels) starting appx. 1993 and through his acceptance of the ND job in August 2008. Jack was heavily involved in USAG starting appx. 1990, and chaired the World Championships in 1990.
Fmr. Pres. USAG Steve Penny has stated that during his time as Pres. (2005-2017) "the lawyers" handled the policies about dealing with complaints of abuse.
Nassar started with USAG in 1986. He was indicted for assault that began in 1998.
BOTTOM LINE: Either Swarbrick approved the policy of sticking abuse compliants in a drawer or he was grossly negligent as GC and fleeced USAG of decades' worth of fees.
Counsel and you will get a good idea from the various firms hawking it as to what they do. The idea is to have an outside attorney/firm play the role of GC for entities that don’t have one in house. Often it’s a flat fee so you don’t have to hesitate calling them anytime an issue comes up for fear of racking up hourly fees.
nobody would even care about the role of a general counsel.
or Outside Head Football Coach?
That the osteopathic community hasn’t strongly condemned this.
They have condemned Nassar individually, but continue to make vague statements about intravaginal manipulation being a “legitimate” treatment in certain circumstances.
To be clear - there is zero high quality evidence that this is an effective (much less appropriate) clinical therapy. The anatomic/physiologic principles underlying it are suspect at best.
The DO leadership/community should throw this “treatment” in the garbage where it belongs. They unfortunately seem more concerned with protecting the reputation of osteopathy.
This stuff would make me highly question any manual manipulation techniques that a D.O. would recommend.
If the manipulation techniques are effective, then why don't MD's also use them?
Manipulation therapy includes a lot of stuff. Some of it is basically just basic musculoskeletal work and stretches, similar to what a physical therapist would offer.
But it also includes a large grab-bag of quackery and hocus pocus such as “cranial manipulation” (believing you can manually move the bones of the skull and relieve various psychiatric and neurologic complaints), belief that you can palpate small intra-abdominal ganglia and regulate the GI tract by doing so - for a couple of examples.
The single “best” ever study of OMT showed that it was basically equivalent to physical therapy for treatment of acute low back pain. That study was over 20 years old but is still touted by DOs as the “evidence base” for much of what they do.
In reality, only a very small fraction of DOs actually use manipulation therapy in their practice. Most of them abandon it as soon as they pass their licensing exams.
It persists as a “thing” largely because it is the only way the leadership of the DO and the DO schools can justify their existence as a separate entity from the MD degree.
First, I agree manual pelvic floor therapy is almost never necessary. But that's because any attempt to resolve issues with muscles from the muscle itself ignores the reality that muscles are only responding to afferent signalling and/or the misprocessing of afferent information in the brain.
If I poke you in the hand with a pin, your biceps will contract. If the brain continues to think you're being poked in the hand due to bad afferents, the biceps will remain in a state of contraction. It will hurt. Manual therapy on the biceps may bring relief, but probably will not solve the problem. The problem is in the hand, the source of the bad afferent causing the biceps to contract.
The same is true for the pelvic floor. It is mostly responding to the afferents from the golgi tendon organs in the sacrotuberous, sacrospinous, sacrococcygeal, and other pelvic ligaments. If you want the pelvic floor to function properly, you fix the ligament afferents. But there is most certainly an anatomical justification for attempting to release/calm/lengthen/soften/relax the pelvic floor muscles. They anchor and control the entire sacrum, and they allow for proper coordination of the entire breathing apparatus by managing intra-abdominal pressure.
And calling cranial manipulation quackery is ignorant at best and wilfully, obtusely biased at worst. Feel free to come into my office and I'll happily demonstrate how I can pick and choose which muscles to shut off in your body by manipulation of the cranial sutures. It is possible to literally feel these bones shifting against one another just by putting your hands on someone's head. If you don't have the palpatory skill to do so, that isn't justification for the condemnation of an entire field of care.
Finally, no, manipulation is not the only justification D.O. schools have for remaining separate from M.D.'s. From day one, students are operating under an entirely different philosophy of healing. If you don't think that makes a difference, even if ultimately using the same tool set as an M.D., then I'm not really sure what to say.
I apologize if this comes off the wrong way, but man it gets old seeing people bash healing modalities they really don't know anything about.
you have the brainpan of stage coach tilter."
Just kidding.
You're real smaht.
For one, osteopathy offers no different “philosophy of healing” outside a marketing spiel to premeds with shitty MCATs.
For two: cranial is an utter joke. I’ve linked a rebuttal that reiterates its complete lack of biological plausibility.
As I said, it’s embarassing that the DO community is on its heels about this issue wrt Nassar. They’d be better off jettisoning some of the more embarassing aspects of their pseudoscience.
Those are always clean and foolproof.
The far bigger problem in medicine than D.O.'s is M.D.'s who come to conclusions based on reading a paper despite the actual evidence that exists.
It's always telling when I share, "Here's this thing I do every single day of my life to help people feel better," and someone says, "Here's a paper proving that you're wrong."
Every Osteopath embraces this:
-The body is a unit, and the person represents a combination of body, mind and spirit.
-The body is capable of self-regulation, self-healing and health maintenance.
-Structure and function are reciprocally interrelated.
-Rational treatment is based on an understanding of these principles: body unity, self-regulation, and the interrelationship of structure and function.
Your contention that this is someone no different than the mindset of most M.D.'s is, again, blatantly and willfully obtuse.
It is on the manipulator to give data that what he or she is doing actually helps - controlled study data. To proceed with treatment without controlled study data that shows the treatment helps is mysticism, not science or medicine.
An osteopath should only embrace that philosophy if there is a proven scientific reason to do so.
Uncontrolled "I do this and it helps" data is subject to a very strong placebo effect, as well as confirmation bias. The medical record is littered with useless treatments that persisted for years because they seemed to make sense. And often people continued to believe in the treatments even after they were debunked because the biases were so strong. See prostate massage for chronic prostatitis.
Note that I did not accuse you of doing these things, you may have controlled study data to back up everything you do. But I did not see it here, aside from a reference to "actual evidence that exists."
I linked a perspective piece from a leading osteopath.
But such eagerness to dismiss evidence is the very epitome of pseudoscience.
“Every osteopath embraces” - no, they don’t. 90+ percent of them move on to practice medicine in a fashion exactly identical to MDs. Outside of a few attempted brainwashing courses as first and second year medical students, their education and training is the same.
If not for the Indy Star, this guy might still be well respected and molesting kids.