Olympic figure skater, coaches being investigated for allegations

[DSQ]

According to people directly involved with the case, people who have had private conversations with her and evidence that I have personally viewed, she knew about the incident in December of 2017.

Yeah I saw the post on Twitter.

Brennan is a journalist with professional standards and that person is just an anonymous poster on a forum.

My position has not changed.

I’m waiting for the Safe Sport report and I hope those responsible are thoroughly punished. Until then we’re all just spreading unsubstantiated rumours.

 

[Harriet]

You seem quite certain about all this stuff. Apparently, at today, no police officer, no State attorney, no judge or other legal authority in US has charged Morgan on anything.

No criminal charges have been laid against Cipres because the victim, at the age of 13, declined to press them, and has not changed her mind since. This has been clearly stated in Brennan's reporting.

 

[el henry]

Thanks to everyone for replying. I don’t think we will change each other’s mind on the importance of the “not rape” quote (which to me is impossible to personally evaluate without more) but folks can have honestly held differences of opinion.

I know that Christine would have followed journalistic conventions and I am not doubting her on that score at all. I think that is important and more valuable to me than “Secret Sources” or conjecture.

I’m not connecting the dots, but maybe that’s me. At least I’m not posting with no reading comprehension at 1 a.m. again

 

[DSQ]

No criminal charges have been laid against Cipres because the victim, at the age of 13, declined to press them, and has not changed her mind since. This has been clearly stated in Brennan's reporting.

I was under the impression from the first article the police were now involved?

Let me check.

EDIT: You are correct. This is just a Safe Sport investigation.

 

[Moxiejan]

Totally agree.
We are less than a week before US Championships starts, and we know nothing about any SafeSport measure against Zimmermann and Fontana, if, of, course, necessary.

Exactly how would this be Brennan’s fault? If SafeSport hasn’t taken any measures, she can’t report more than what she already has.
I think today’s TV/Twitter punditry has given rise to the notion that she could just report on rumors. Or get access to SafeSport documents that haven’t been released. Or whatever.

 

[okokok1777]

Yeah I saw the post on Twitter.

Brennan is a journalist with professional standards and that person is just an anonymous poster on a forum.

My position has not changed.

I’m waiting for the Safe Sport report and I hope those responsible are thoroughly punished. Until then we’re all just spreading unsubstantiated rumours.

Note: I appreciate that you are waiting to hear more of the evidence & the conclusion of the SafeSport investigation. I'm always supportive of people waiting to hear more of the evidence before forming an opinion.

I'm a bit confused by the latter part of your post - I haven't spread any unsubstantiated rumors. That is why I specifically stated that "According to people directly involved with the case" and "evidence that I have personally viewed". I'm not relying on the account shared by the anonymous poster.

 

[el henry]

I'm a bit confused by the latter part of your post - I haven't spread any unsubstantiated rumors. That is why I specifically stated that "According to people directly involved with the case" and "evidence that I have personally viewed". I'm not relying on the account shared by the anonymous poster.

I am sorry, I do not mean to sound harsh. But Christine Brennan, for example, specified “an account that appeared to be Morgan’s verified account” and “four persons at the AAC conference” and I wasn’t even comfortable with that.

My comfort level increases with details, that’s just me

 

[okokok1777]

I am sorry, I do not mean to sound harsh. But Christine Brennan, for example, specified “an account that appeared to be Morgan’s verified account” and “four persons at the AAC conference” and I wasn’t even comfortable with that.

My comfort level increases with details, that’s just me

No need to apologize - you do not sound harsh and I appreciate the honesty I also think your position is quite understandable. At the end of the day, this is the internet and people have the right to believe whatever they want to believe. Due to the nature of my job, I've spoken to many investigative journalists (including Christine) and they would not be able to successfully complete their jobs if they didn't offer anonymity. Generally speaking, people are more honest when their name is not attached since they aren't as fearful of retaliation.

 

[Skater Boy]

No criminal charges have been laid against Cipres because the victim, at the age of 13, declined to press them, and has not changed her mind since. This has been clearly stated in Brennan's reporting.

Interesting to point that out because all along it was being led or suggested they were still investigating or hadn't. Howeer, it is not the complainant who lays the charge it is the policing agency or prosecutorial team. The complainant is a witness whose evidence is reviewed if it meets the threshold for conviction. of a crime. Of course if he/she is unwillig to provide a statement and there is no other or limited evidence to obtain a conviction the policing agency and or prosecutorial team cannot proceed with the charges (or at l east should not as there is no reasonable likelihood of conviction and the police cannot probably sear an information (charges) in good faith as there is now admissible or available evidence present (no statement).

 

[DSQ]

Note: I appreciate that you are waiting to hear more of the evidence & the conclusion of the SafeSport investigation. I'm always supportive of people waiting to hear more of the evidence before forming an opinion.

I'm a bit confused by the latter part of your post - I haven't spread any unsubstantiated rumors. That is why I specifically stated that "According to people directly involved with the case" and "evidence that I have personally viewed". I'm not relying on the account shared by the anonymous poster.

Fair enough! I hope you do understand that, while I’m sure you’re trying to do the right thing, in this case I don’t know you so I can’t take your word on this serious matter.

I will say that if you feel you have important information to contribute rather than posting here perhaps contact Brennan and I can be included in future articles? If Vanessa did indeed know I think it might be something the journalist may feel can be included in her next article.

I hope I’ve not come across as rude or that I’m defending Morgan’s alleged actions.

 

[okokok1777]

Fair enough! I hope you do understand that, while I’m sure you’re trying to do the right thing, in this case I don’t know you so I can’t take your word on this serious matter.

I will say that if you feel you have important information to contribute rather than posting here perhaps contact Brennan and I can be included in future articles? If Vanessa did indeed know I think it might be something the journalist may feel can be included in her next article.

I hope I’ve not come across as rude or that I’m defending Morgan’s alleged actions.

Not at all - you've been more than fair and courteous And don't worry - I've been sharing any pertinent information I have with all of the appropriate channels. There are reasons that the articles are being released the way they are but, if all goes according to plan, the public will be made aware of the rest of the information soon enough.

 

[karne]

And the quote is *that* important how?

Really? REALLY? I can't believe I actually have to explain this, but the quote is important because it shows the evil pervasive culture in figure skating. Because it shows that Ashley would not have been believe and in fact is still not believed.

I’m not being dense, I’m truly wanting to know.

You're having a hard time convincing me of that right now.

I am sorry, I do not mean to sound harsh. But Christine Brennan, for example, specified “an account that appeared to be Morgan’s verified account” and “four persons at the AAC conference” and I wasn’t even comfortable with that.

You claim to be involved with legal work and you're playing dumb on this?! COME ON! YOU KNOW WHY!

 

[ribbit]

I’m sorry if I wasn’t clear. The anonymous skater was reacting to Ashley’s story (after USA Today published it) but made the comments to USA Today in an interview.

No, *I'm* sorry--I quoted you because I was replying to el henry's reply to you, and because your comment provided the context for her comment, which I was suggesting might have been a misunderstanding. You were perfectly clear!

 

[el henry]

Really? REALLY? I can't believe I actually have to explain this, but the quote is important because it shows the evil pervasive culture in figure skating. Because it shows that Ashley would not have been believe and in fact is still not believed.



You're having a hard time convincing me of that right now.



You claim to be involved with legal work and you're playing dumb on this?! COME ON! YOU KNOW WHY!

I’m sorry, I think we may be talking past each other instead of communicating. It is exactly my background that makes me want more details to come to a conclusion. Of course, I do know why journalists offer confidentiality. It is my assessment of whether this information was important enough to offer that,

A retired pairs skater talking about his view of “misunderstandings” in skating and an unidentified senior man reacting to Ashley’s story. To me, it’s not important enough to offer confidentiality. To me, those two statements do not prove a culture of silence or the other terms used. For me. They obviously do for other people, so in that sense, maybe Christine was right.

They don’t for me because I can’t go to court with dribs and drabs. Here’s two new quotes, your Honor, and here’s a US Pairs guy from 10 years ago and a French pairs guy two years ago, which you knew about for some time now, but trust me, there will be more, and trust me, I’ll come back with it when there is, and trust me, I’ll tie it all together then.

I’m only trying to explain now why I reacted the way I did. I’m not saying anyone else should react that way. And I think I will leave the subject because I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything.

Except for Christine to find out more about Gordie:dev2:

 

[CherylDee]

I’m sorry, I think we may be talking past each other instead of communicating. It is exactly my background that makes me want more details to come to a conclusion. Of course, I do know why journalists offer confidentiality. It is my assessment of whether this information was important enough to offer that,

A retired pairs skater talking about his view of “misunderstandings” in skating and an unidentified senior man reacting to Ashley’s story. To me, it’s not important enough to offer confidentiality. To me, those two statements do not prove a culture of silence or the other terms used. For me. They obviously do for other people, so in that sense, maybe Christine was right.

They don’t for me because I can’t go to court with dribs and drabs. Here’s two new quotes, your Honor, and here’s a US Pairs guy from 10 years ago and a French pairs guy two years ago, which you knew about for some time now, but trust me, there will be more, and trust me, I’ll come back with it when there is, and trust me, I’ll tie it all together then.

I’m only trying to explain now why I reacted the way I did. I’m not saying anyone else should react that way. And I think I will leave the subject because I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything.

Except for Christine to find out more about Gordie:dev2:

Color me super impressed @el henry! I am totally with you.

 

[CherylDee]

Generally speaking, people are more honest when their name is not attached since they aren't as fearful of retaliation.

I'm not so sure about this assertion. With the promise of anonymity there is a greater chance of embellishment, hearsay, gossip and unverifiable statements. But when providing statements that are from verifiable facts and information that can be proven and tracked there's no need for anonymity because of legal protections and ramifications against retaliation. So chances are when someone provides information and they can be quoted, their statements are likely more honest and trustworthy than those who speak on the grounds of anonymity.

 

[okokok1777]

I'm not so sure about this assertion. With the promise of anonymity there is a greater chance of embellishment, hearsay, gossip and unverifiable statements. But when providing statements that are from verifiable facts and information that can be proven and tracked there's no need for anonymity because of legal protections and ramifications against retaliation. So chances are when someone provides information and they can be quoted, their statements are likely more honest and trustworthy than those who speak on the grounds of anonymity.

I'm not sure if I agree with you in this context. For major news publications (such as USA Today), there is a very strict vetting process for information. Information coming from anonymous sources are verified under the same strict guidelines as information coming from named sources. In the case of the anonymous male skater, the comments were opinions. I highly doubt that they would have shared those opinions had their name been attached to the article.

 

[CherylDee]

I'm not sure if I agree with you in this context....In the case of the anonymous male skater, the comments were opinions. I highly doubt that they would have shared those opinions had their name been attached to the article.

In that event, you are correct...opinions are not substantiated facts and therefore carry no weight. In the context of this article, I guess I see no other purpose for providing this skater's opinion is for innuendo, gossip, and smears. Of course, this is only my opinion.

 

[karne]

But when providing statements that are from verifiable facts and information that can be proven and tracked there's no need for anonymity because of legal protections and ramifications against retaliation.

What?

The male skater would not have allowed the quote without anonymity because he most surely would have lost funding, opportunities, and support for that attitude. Not to mention the avalanche of boos that would have followed him around at Nationals. And all of that is allowed to happen.

 

[ribbit]

In that event, you are correct...opinions are not substantiated facts and therefore carry no weight. In the context of this article, I guess I see no other purpose for providing this skater's opinion is for innuendo, gossip, and smears. Of course, this is only my opinion.

The quotation is included as an example of the attitudes toward sexual assault that Ashley is working to change, and as evidence that well-established figures in the sport do hold them. That's a perfectly legitimate purpose both to print it and to include it despite the inability to attribute it.