Understood.

Understood.
by Bruno95 (2018-12-11 10:30:19)

In reply to: I was reacting to this excerpt from your post posted by ACross

To be clear, my view is the current facts demonstrate that:

* Swarbrick was the chief lawyer involved in the development of faulty abuse reporting policies;

* USAG, with Swarbrick's counsel, maintained those policies after early coach-abuse allegations were reported;

* Swarbrick, as the outside general counsel until taking the ND job, was specifically aware of reports of abuse by coaches in member organizations; and

* Swarbrick's CYA approach extended beyond his tenure and governed the organization's continued non-responses to further abuse allegations.

Absent a specific explanation to the contrary, naming someone else who provided the advice, this is the record established by two lengthy independent investigative reports, the Indy Star work, Steve Penny's characterization of the role of counsel, and the public description of Swarbrick's role, since scrubbed from his ND bio.

I don't believe that's understatement. I believe that's more than enough to require due diligence on ND's part, and I would be surprised if that diligence ended well for Swarbrick.

I will cop to straddling in one sense. I would be relieved to learn that Swarbrick did overstate his role, and that Scott Himsel had taken on the client relationship well before Swarbrick left. I want the truth to be that an ND alum and ND officer bears no blame for this scandal. But if that is not the truth, then what we want doesn't matter. Everyone bearing any responsibility should be held to corresponding account.

A question, if you please. I'd like to believe due diligence

on ND's part would yield enough of the truth for them to take decisive action, but couldn't/wouldn't he just assert the same work product doctrine and client privilege objections he already has? I'm not an attorney and maybe the "probable cause" for termination of employment standards aren't as high as for a civil action in court.

By the the way, I agree with your last paragraph but most especially the last sentence on it.

I’d include Corr in the discussions.

She’s not the flustered attorney from the swimming dep. If he improperly invokes the privilege in response to basic questions about who provided the advice and did the work in the public record, that would speak for itself.

Thank you. *

Who was the USAG representative who specifically laid blame

on legal advice? Was it Penny? A predecessor?

In this article, two former presidents -- one was Penny. (link)

Click here for link at https://www.southbendtribune.com/news/local/ex-usa-gymnastic

Interesting comment on that article. And spot on.

"Let's see what ND does about this. My guess? Nothing." The comment was 44 weeks ago.