Former figure skater says she was abused by partner who killed himself | Page 2 | Golden Skate

Former figure skater says she was abused by partner who killed himself

el henry

Go have some cake. And come back with jollity.
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 3, 2014
Country
United-States
I would think so too, but the article suggests there are skaters who disagree.
Plus, what was that exact form of "hitting"? I think that's the key.
"Hitting" might have a very wide range. From simple attraction to physical enforcement. With tons of actions in between, ranging from perfectly legal and innocent, through simply inappropriate and going all the way to criminal.

The standard would not be criminal conduct.
Indeed, it could be that a 19 year old and a 15 year old engaging in sexual activity is not criminally illegal if a state has a “Romeo and Juliet” exemption to its laws.

The standard is SafeSport guidelines, which I have not reviewed in detail, but if they are like many other organizations (particularly since the posts use the word “grooming”) prohibit grooming between an adult of influence and a minor. And Google, or perhaps even SafeSport, can be your friend as to what that means.

I agree with Mathman; John Coughlin is not the story now. He is beyond the reach of any enforcement agency (and how I wish the posting skater had shown some knowledge of suicide, and mental illness, and its effects, rather than the statements she apparently wrote:()

The issue is did USFS know that violations of its standards were occurring (and it might not have had those standards at the time). And what did it do. :confused:
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
I would think so too, but the article suggests there are skaters who disagree.

Well, the majority of skaters are not lawyers or legal scholars. There is such a thing in law as a "postumous trial," where you bring a dead body into court as a defendant. I believe, though, that this is extremely rare and is undertaken only when there is an overwhelming public stake in the outcome.

Here is a famous one, held in Rome in the year 897 CE.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaver_Synod

On the other hand, the victims of John's actions can bring suit against various entities, such as the USFSA, and try to collect monetary damages. Or even to get court-ordered changes in the way these organizations do business.

They can also try to raise public consciousness of an pervasive societal problem.
 
Last edited:

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Indeed, it could be that a 19 year old and a 15 year old engaging in sexual activity is not criminally illegal if a state has a “Romeo and Juliet” exemption to its laws.

I'd be surprised if that's legal anywhere in the US. Four years is a lot when you're talking about a 15 year old. Imagine if the boy was 15 and the girl 11.
 

Sugar Coated

Final Flight
Joined
Apr 20, 2018
I'd be surprised if that's legal anywhere in the US. Four years is a lot when you're talking about a 15 year old. Imagine if the boy was 15 and the girl 11.

I don't know the exact rules, but they are meant for young adults over 18 dating people relatively close in age. A high school senior (18) dating a sophomore (15) may be legal in some states but not in others.

But this relates to consensual relationships between similar aged individuals. From what is described, the relationships were not consensual in that there was a power differential and girls were being pressured into relationships or physical intimacy.
 

el henry

Go have some cake. And come back with jollity.
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 3, 2014
Country
United-States
I'd be surprised if that's legal anywhere in the US. Four years is a lot when you're talking about a 15 year old. Imagine if the boy was 15 and the girl 11.

Most laws are tied to specific ages. In Pennsylvania, persons under 13 cannot give consent. A person between 13 and 16 may consent with someone not more than four years older. Last time I checked;). ETA: The age of consent is 16, which means at 16, you can consent, period, no matter the age of the partner.

Of course, none of this is relevant here. We don't know the activity, we don't know the state, we don't know whether there is an allegation of consent. Most importantly, no state (I know of) will indict or charge deceased persons.

This is all about Safe Sport, and, at this point, all about organizations and what they knew and didn't know. At least as far as any current investigation would be concerned.
 
Last edited:

flipsydoodle

On the Ice
Joined
Mar 19, 2004
Ugh, the cliches from both legal teams are just gross.

Calling an accuser "unstable," even if true in certain cases, just looks like the same old victim-blaming.

I agree. I find Modlin's comment bizarre and gratuitously mean-spirited. I guess she wants to convey that if you're "unstable" you must be lying about a person sexually harassing you.

In fact, someone who is emotionally frail may be more likely to be assaulted than someone who is perceived as more self-protected.

The victim may actually be emotionally frail from what she experienced from a perpetrator.

And let's be sure not fault emotional frailty while we're on this topic. I find this equation of Modlin's with lying absolutely despicable. Many people have difficult lives; and most people have difficult spells at some point. Those facts say nothing about character.

Moreover, being "unstable" does not entitle anyone to harass you for any reason, including sexual. Same as everyone else.
 

sailormoon

On the Ice
Joined
Aug 9, 2016
Country
Japan
At the beginning of their partnership, Namiotka was 14 and Coughlin was 19. They were junior partners for three years and won medals in the World Junior Championships. They parted ways afterwards in 2007 when she was 17 and he was 22. Namiotka is now 29 and it may be hard to prove what happened more than 12 years ago. His adult partner, Caydee Denney, has never commented on the allegations against him. Denney's right ankle injury forced the pair to retire from competition in 2014.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
John was born in December and Brigit in January, so he is 4 years and one month older than she. Although they were introduced in 2004 they did not really begin training seriously together until the spring of 2005, when she was 15 and he was 19. John moved in with the Namiotka family during this time (not uncommon, I believe -- the boy has to have a place to live.)

https://www.webcitation.org/66py9kc...hlin-make-first-junior-grand-prix-final/print

This highlights one of the problems. There are so many girls and so few boys who are interested in pairs skating that a male partner is highly prized, to the point of active competition among girl skaters and their parents for the few prime males. I remember seeing an ad on ebay once, placed by a British male pairs skater who was selling himself (for $100,000 + expenses and a free place to live) to any U.S. girl seeking a pairs partner. (Ebay took the ad down after a few days – you can’t sell people on Ebay, not even yourself.)
 
Last edited:

DSQ

Record Breaker
Joined
Apr 14, 2018
Country
United-Kingdom
I would think so too, but the article suggests there are skaters who disagree.
Plus, what was that exact form of "hitting"? I think that's the key.
"Hitting" might have a very wide range. From simple attraction to physical enforcement. With tons of actions in between, ranging from perfectly legal and innocent, through simply inappropriate and going all the way to criminal.
So did John do anything criminal? If yes then there must be some evidence. Simple "me too" is not enough. John cannot be interrogated or verified. Presumption of innocence still stands.
If he didn't do anything criminal, but he was just "inappropriate", whatever that meant in that context of time and situation, then again - it was not criminal, so there is no case.

I have several points in response to this post:

* While you cannot take up a criminal case against an individual that is dead (except in very rare and unusual cases) you can take a civil one. That is what the three women the lawyer in the article wish to do against the estate of John. It is the same thing the two men from the documentary “Finding Neverland” attempted to do to Micheal Jackson unsuccessfully.

* At this point we have very little to no information about the exact and specific charges against him, so speculation is pointless. Mitigating circumstances are very important in all cases but we just don’t know. Hopefully if this all ever gets to trial we can get some concrete information.

* It is very naïve to think that if any person committed a crime that there would always be evidence. What goes on behind closed doors between two people can often be unknowable and leave no trace. Life isn’t as straight forward as we’d like it to be. However of course you cannot be convicted without evidence, usually.

* Whether there is a case or not is something for the courts to decide. If there wasn’t any hope of a successful outcome then it’s unlikely a lawyer would take up the case but that doesn’t mean this action will be successful.
 

eaglehelang

Final Flight
Joined
Sep 15, 2017
So what does John Manly, the lawyer representing the 3 alleged victims, do?
Are they filing civil suit against USFS, John Coughlin's estate?
The victims in taekwando did this.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
So what does John Manly, the lawyer representing the 3 alleged victims, do?
Are they filing civil suit against USFS, John Coughlin's estate?

The victims in taekwando did this.

I doubt that John Coughlin's personal estate is substantial enough to be worth the lawyer's time. In the Larry Nassar case in gymnastics he (same lawyer) sued Michigan State University and received $425,000,000 (to be distributed among the 332 victims, after deducting one-third for legal fees).
 

SnowWhite

Record Breaker
Joined
Nov 30, 2016
Country
Canada
I'd be surprised if that's legal anywhere in the US. Four years is a lot when you're talking about a 15 year old. Imagine if the boy was 15 and the girl 11.

That's legal everywhere in Canada. I don't know about the US. But in Canada, age of consent is 16. 12-13 year olds can consent to people less than 2 years older, and 14-15 year olds can consent to people less than 5 years older.

I'd be surprised if it wasn't legal in at least some places in the US.
 

Sugar Coated

Final Flight
Joined
Apr 20, 2018
Most laws are tied to specific ages. In Pennsylvania, persons under 13 cannot give consent. A person between 13 and 16 may consent with someone not more than four years older. Last time I checked;). ETA: The age of consent is 16, which means at 16, you can consent, period, no matter the age of the partner.

Of course, none of this is relevant here. We don't know the activity, we don't know the state, we don't know whether there is an allegation of consent. Most importantly, no state (I know of) will indict or charge deceased persons.

This is all about Safe Sport, and, at this point, all about organizations and what they knew and didn't know. At least as far as any current investigation would be concerned.

In Wisconsin, individuals under age 18 cannot consent. Even if both individuals are the same age but under 18, then it’s statutory rape. Two 17-year-olds engaging in consensual sex is technically statutory rape for both individuals.

If I understand correctly, in PA if the age difference was more than 4 years (4 years and 1 month) then it is statutory rape. Which may be significant if coaches and governing bodies were aware of the relationship, they are mandatory reporters.
 

el henry

Go have some cake. And come back with jollity.
Record Breaker
Joined
Mar 3, 2014
Country
United-States
....
* Whether there is a case or not is something for the courts to decide. If there wasn’t any hope of a successful outcome then it’s unlikely a lawyer would take up the case but that doesn’t mean this action will be successful.

One minor quibble with this part of the post.

Many lawyers do and will file suits with no hope of a successful outcome. Sad to say, but true;)

My initial readings of the lawyer for this skater are not favorable, but that is based solely on newspaper accounts and I could be completely wrong.
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Which may be significant if coaches and governing bodies were aware of the relationship, they are mandatory reporters.

I think that this would have to be the basis for any continuing legal action. "What did the USFSA know and when did they know it." There may also be an argument along the lines, "even if you didn't know, you should have." Or "it was your legal responsibility to take reasonable steps to guard against this sort of thing and you didn't."

el henry said:
Many lawyers do and will file suits with no hope of a successful outcome. Sad to say, but true.

Maybe he took it pro bono. :)

But seriously, this latest news does provide one piece of information that we didn't know before. In the original announcements by Safesport there were 4 episodes, three of them with girls who were minors at the time. Now the tally has apparently expanded to 10. (Or has it?)
 

ice coverage

avatar credit: @miyan5605
Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
... In the original announcements by Safesport there were 4 episodes, three of them with girls who were minors at the time. Now the tally has apparently expanded to 10. (Or has it?)

Are you referring to reporting by Brennan re the number of allegations?

IIRC, SafeSport never has made any "announcement" as to the number of allegations.

Just trying to make a general point (not specific to this topic) that there is a big difference between a journalist's enterprise reporting vs. an announcement by an entity.
 

drivingmissdaisy

Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 17, 2010
Are you are referring to reporting by Brennan re the number of allegations?

I think 10 is just the number stated by the alleged victim on Facebook. The four might have just been those willing to have their allegations investigated, whereas there might be others who don't want to take part in any investigation for whatever reason (i.e. they want to move on with their lives, they don't want to be victim shamed and be labeled "unstable", etc.)
 
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
The four might have just been those willing to have their allegations investigated...

In the case of the original complaint -- or at least, the first we heard about it -- the matter was brought to the attention of SafeSport by a third party. We don't even know whether anyone (until now) actually made any allegations or was "willing" to have the issue investigated. I think that SafeSport's mandate requires them to open an investigation anyway, regardless of the wishes of any of the principals. (?)
 

ice coverage

avatar credit: @miyan5605
Record Breaker
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
I think 10 is just the number stated by the alleged victim on Facebook. ...

In hindsight, I should have quoted just the first sentence from Mathman, because my point has nothing to do with the ten.

... In the original announcements by Safesport there were 4 episodes, three of them with girls who were minors at the time. …

An analogous example of my point is:

Thanks to the efforts of its own journalists, a U.S. newspaper recently was able to publish its own reporting on information in the tax returns of a major elected official. ;)

Which is very different from the elected official making "announcements" of any information in his tax returns.
The official did not "announce" anything. He famously/infamously has been unwilling to release information from his tax returns.​

Similarly, my point is that Safe Sport never has made "announcements" re the number of allegations.

ETA:
The number of allegations never even was in a quote from SafeSport -- plus the number of allegations never even was attributed to an unnamed source specifically from SafeSport.
From Brennan's Jan 20 article: "John Coughlin … was facing three reports of sexual misconduct against him, two of them involving minors, according to a person with knowledge of the situation who was not authorized to talk publicly about the matter."
Brennan's Mar 4 article in Mathman's post below (which has a hyperlink to the earlier article) takes care to say again (emphasis added): "USA TODAY Sports has reported that Coughlin was facing three reports of sexual misconduct against him, two of them involving minors, according to a person with knowledge of the situation who was not authorized to talk publicly about the matter."​

I hope that this post makes my point clear. I do not want to hijack the thread.

(I wanted to make this general point because in other unrelated GS threads, I have seen other examples :( of conflating "reporting" with "announcements". For the topic in this thread, I think it is particularly important to stay clear on who said [or did not say] what.)
 
Top