...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.