Sport Horse Spotlight

Sandro Hit Standa Eylers

Real Estate Spotlight

Driveway

Sale Spotlight

COTH_without Subscribe
  • Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You�re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the Forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it�details of personal disputes may be better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts, though are not legally obligated to do so, regardless of content.

Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting. Moderators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts unless they have been alerted and have determined that a post, thread or user has violated the Forums� policies. Moderators do not regularly independently monitor the Forums for such violations.

Profanity, outright vulgarity, blatant personal insults or otherwise inappropriate statements will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Users may provide their positive or negative experiences with or opinions of companies, products, individuals, etc.; however, accounts involving allegations of criminal behavior against named individuals or companies MUST be first-hand accounts and may NOT be made anonymously.

If a situation has been reported upon by a reputable news source or addressed by law enforcement or the legal system it is open for discussion, but if an individual wants to make their own claims of criminal behavior against a named party in the course of that discussion, they too must identify themselves by first and last name and the account must be first-person.

Criminal allegations that do not satisfy these requirements, when brought to our attention, may be removed pending satisfaction of these criteria, and we reserve the right to err on the side of caution when making these determinations.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it�s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users� profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses � Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it�s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who�s selling it, it doesn�t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions � Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services � Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products � While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements � Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be �bumped� excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues � Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators� discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the �alert� button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your �Ignore� list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you�d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user�s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 5/9/18)
See more
See less

George Morris on the SS list

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Denali6298 View Post

    I’m wondering, Jonathan has a conviction for child pornography. Most people with convicts are straight up banned. Maybe him being on the suspension list rather than the ban has to do with him singing like a canary about GM? Maybe it won’t be overturned so easily.
    Johnathan who?? Surely I am not the only one who wonders, simply because I do not have time to read as much as some of you apparently do....
    Jeanie
    RIP Sasha, best dog ever, pictured shortly before she died, Death either by euthanasia or natural causes is only the end of the animal inhabiting its body; I believe the spirit lives on.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Denali6298 View Post

      A book written by Susan Faludi filled with scientific studies funded by the government about how women are weak. In a nut shell. The backlash happened in the 80’s. It’s why I’m skeptical about scientific studies that seem bias compared to my own life experiences.
      What?!?!

      Backlash is a non-fiction book on the cultural phenomenon of a backlash against women’s rights following a period of progress. It specifically called out cultural conservatives for suppressing women’s equal and reproductive rights after the women’s movement of the late 60’s and 70’s. It calls out the Reagan justice department for abandoning enforcement of laws protecting workers’ rights. It’s a fantastic book still worth a read.
      A helmet saved my life.

      2017 goal: learn to ride like TheHorseProblem, er, a barn rat!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Bristol Bay View Post

        What?!?!

        Backlash is a non-fiction book on the cultural phenomenon of a backlash against women’s rights following a period of progress. It specifically called out cultural conservatives for suppressing women’s equal and reproductive rights after the women’s movement of the late 60’s and 70’s. It calls out the Reagan justice department for abandoning enforcement of laws protecting workers’ rights. It’s a fantastic book still worth a read.
        Yes. It is. I related it to the “science” being presented. Agree. What I meant was it outline “science” to bolster the backlash to the women’s movement.

        I explained it badly I’m sorry.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by BK6756 View Post

          If you've followed any of the other threads you would see that the rules regarding criminal prosecution are very different than the rule regarding safe sport sanctioning. Criminal prosecution has a statute of limitation (varies depending on the state and the crime), Safe Sport does NOT.
          And thus the inherent problem. SS operates outside the rule of law. It sets itself up as beyond established precedent with the power to destroy the accused based on unproven/unprovable allegations about events decades in the past. The statute of limitations exist for a reason. That SS does not recognize this basis of the law does not make what they do justified. They are able to operate with impunity, without possibility of Supreme Court rulings in the extreme, unless an accused fights back through the court system. Not unlike a shadow government. BTW, I am deeply sympathetic to true victims, but motivations for SS charges can run the gamut from vengence to insult. Where does the authority of SS expose these? How do they prove a crime has been committed years ago? Hearsay? Faulty memories? Don't think so..
          Form follows function, or does function follow form?

          www.clearvisionequine.com

          http://clearvisionequine.blogspot.com

          Comment


          • SS (the code) covers bullying and other non-sexual misconduct. But from what I've seen in the various statements released in recent months, non-sexual complaints are not handled by SS (the Center) but referred to the NGBs.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by sdlbredfan View Post

              Johnathan who?? Surely I am not the only one who wonders, simply because I do not have time to read as much as some of you apparently do....
              Soresi. His full name was mentioned earlier in this thread.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by BITSA View Post

                Where in the flow chart does the alleged perp get interviewed and a chance to present evidence (is it before a sanction is imposed?) and a chance to confront and cross examine?
                Right here:

                https://safesport.org/files/details/109

                But you need to actually read the resolution processes in the code for proof of the second part of your statement regarding interviewing, evidence, and hearings. It begins on page 21, but what you really want to read begins on page 23:

                https://safesport.org/files/details/114

                The parties to an investigation and arbitration are the Center and the Respondent. During the investigation, the Claimant and Respondent will have an opportunity to submit information and relevant evidence, to identify witnesses who may have relevant information, and to submit questions that they believe should be directed by the investigator to
                each other or to any witness.
                Upon issuance of a Decision, a Respondent has five Days to request a hearing before an arbitrator. If Respondent does not make such a request within five Days, the Decision is no longer subject to review, except as permitted herein.
                Don't fall for a girl who fell for a horse just to be number two in her world... ~EFO

                Comment


                • Originally posted by BITSA View Post

                  Where in the flow chart does the alleged perp get interviewed and a chance to present evidence (is it before a sanction is imposed?) and a chance to confront and cross examine?
                  I think the actual policy document is far more useful than the flowchart at answering those questions. Page 21–30 are most germane to the topic at hand. It is certainly not up to the standard of courtroom criminal proceedings (I don't see mention of cross-examination) but it does seem fairly equivalent to the process that I would be subject to at my work, were I accused of sexual misconduct.

                  Relevant quote, from page 23–24:

                  The parties to an investigation and arbitration are the Center and the Respondent. During the investigation, the Claimant and Respondent will have an opportunity to submit information and relevant evidence, to identify witnesses who may have relevant information, and to submit questions that they believe should be directed by the investigator to each other or to any witness.
                  *Edit: whoops, posted the exact same thing as Texarkana at the same time! Sorry to bombard you BITSA.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Texarkana View Post

                    Right, I did say that. Because from other people's stories + Rodriguez's case, it seems that they sometimes DO hand down bans, then reverse their stance in appeals. And lawd knows, GM and his supporters are not going to let this one rest. If they waiver on lesser cases, will they hold their ground on this one? You believe yes, I remain skeptical. That's all.
                    Texarkana

                    The Rodriguez case is not remotely comparable because the ban was based on a “judicial disposition”, as opposed to a SafeSport investigation.
                    Part of Bonnie Navin’s disinformation campaign wrt RG contained the claim that SafeSport had been handing out lifetime bans to “everyone” and “90% were overturned on appeal”. Zero documentation.
                    If there is no documentation to these claims, please stop repeating them.

                    Last edited by YankeeDuchess; Aug. 6, 2019, 07:51 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by boosma47 View Post

                      And thus the inherent problem. SS operates outside the rule of law. It sets itself up as beyond established precedent with the power to destroy the accused based on unproven/unprovable allegations about events decades in the past. The statute of limitations exist for a reason. That SS does not recognize this basis of the law does not make what they do justified. They are able to operate with impunity, without possibility of Supreme Court rulings in the extreme, unless an accused fights back through the court system. Not unlike a shadow government. BTW, I am deeply sympathetic to true victims, but motivations for SS charges can run the gamut from vengence to insult. Where does the authority of SS expose these? How do they prove a crime has been committed years ago? Hearsay? Faulty memories? Don't think so..
                      Have you visited the SS website or read a single post pertaining to how their process works?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by DarkBayUnicorn View Post
                        I think it's important to remember the incredible, unequaled power GHM has wielded in the sport over several decades. And not just on some local circuit. On the US Olympic team. In multimillion-dollar deals. Even in other countries and their programs. I read about GHM's ban in the Toronto Star this morning. It's global sports news.
                        It was on the radio in my city this morning. Not a podcast, or any sort of specialty show focused on sports as a whole (though they were talking about sports in this particular segment)...the regular morning show that normal people listen to.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by sdlbredfan View Post

                          Johnathan who?? Surely I am not the only one who wonders, simply because I do not have time to read as much as some of you apparently do....
                          This would be Jonathan Soresi. He became a student of George Morris at Hunterdon when he was 13, then became George's assistant trainer, specializing in the younger kids and ponies. He's the assistant mentioned in "A Very Young Rider."

                          In 2006 Soresi was arrested on charges of possession of child pornography, and in 2008 he pled guilty. He is in the sexual offender registry and has a SafeSport ban. The internet says he still teaches riding.

                          Soresi was the Hunterdon assistant trainer from 1977-1983.

                          One article you can read:
                          https://www.chronofhorse.com/article...ng-rider-grows
                          If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by boosma47 View Post

                            And thus the inherent problem. SS operates outside the rule of law. It sets itself up as beyond established precedent with the power to destroy the accused based on unproven/unprovable allegations about events decades in the past. The statute of limitations exist for a reason. That SS does not recognize this basis of the law does not make what they do justified. They are able to operate with impunity, without possibility of Supreme Court rulings in the extreme, unless an accused fights back through the court system. Not unlike a shadow government. BTW, I am deeply sympathetic to true victims, but motivations for SS charges can run the gamut from vengence to insult. Where does the authority of SS expose these? How do they prove a crime has been committed years ago? Hearsay? Faulty memories? Don't think so..
                            The law repeatedly fails to prosecute sexual misconduct.

                            SafeSport uses the same standard of proof as any human resources department would use in a similar employment situation, however, unlike a human resources department, they provide a formal pathway for investigation and arbitration.

                            Claims submitted to SafeSport that result in permanent ineligibility are not those made out of "vengeance" or "insult." Please refer to the SafeSport policies beginning on pg. 20. SafeSport generally cannot even pursue a claim made in an anonymous third-party report and they cannot guarantee anonymity for the claimant. Nearly all information is shared with the respondent throughout the course of the investigation and the respondent has the right to an advisor, as well as the opportunity to provide their own witnesses, questions, and counter-evidence.

                            https://safesport.org/files/details/114

                            The US Center for SafeSport has fielded over 3,000 reports since it started, yet less than 10% of those result in permanent ineligibility for the accused (source: USA Today). The low number of harsh sanctions compared to the number of reports indicates to me that their processes are comprehensive enough to weed through scuttlebutt and false accusations.

                            To your point about statute of limitations: as pointed out upthread, many states have eliminated statute of limitations for sex crimes. I suspect we will see this number of states increase as this issue comes to the forefront:

                            https://www.rainn.org/state-state-gu...es-limitations
                            Don't fall for a girl who fell for a horse just to be number two in her world... ~EFO

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post
                              Texarkana

                              The Rodriguez case is not remotely comparable because the ban was based on a “judicial disposition”, as opposed to a SafeSport investigation.
                              Part of Bonnie Navin’s disinformation campaign wrt RG contained that SafeSport had been handing out lifetime bans to “everyone” and “90% were overturned on appeal”. Zero documentation.
                              If there is no documentation to these claims, please stop repeating them.

                              I did not repeat them. I never once mentioned Bonnie Navin. I never mentioned giving bans to "everyone" or that ridiculous statistic. As a matter of fact, I've shared the one statistic I can verify several times on this thread: that less than 10% of reports result in "permanently ineligible" sanctions.

                              I repeated the Rodriguez case because I think that IS a pertinent example, and one that is publicized. Handing out a ban for "judicial disposition" contrary to what the judicial system revealed is something to question; why would they even go down that road without something more substantial to back it up?

                              But-- my question for YOU is have you ever been involved in a SafeSport investigation? I have not. But in the past three months, I have talked to A LOT of people who have. Their experiences have run the gamut and have been eye-opening. I have been very careful not to say anything publicly that I cannot cite with published facts. But nevertheless, this is why I have questions about how a SafeSport sanction will stand up to a well-organized "attack" with limitless financial and legal resources, like we are about to see.

                              This disagreement is petty, and I'm going to stop responding now because I know we are both in support of SafeSport and I fear that my thoughts are ultimately doing more damage than good. Those against SS misinterpret them and latch on to any sliver of an idea to support their opposition. That is something neither of us want!
                              Don't fall for a girl who fell for a horse just to be number two in her world... ~EFO

                              Comment


                              • Why is this Safe Sport issue such a topic for argument? How many of us are in favor of molestation of children by adults? If so, raise your hand. Safe Sport is not a criminal prosecution so the constitutional protections do not apply. It is an administrative process gifted to USEF by the national group governing Olympic etc sports. It is going to reach back and grab some people who got away with molestation and rape because they did and at the time it was not really possible for their victims to object openly and survive the experience. In the 1970's John and Greta Rideout in Oregon made marital rape a crime. In the 1970s people a husband could not be charged with rape of your wife because she had no right to object to sex with her husband. It was followed by the recognition that date rape was a crime and we are still struggling with how many women have to testify before a famous person can be recognized for what they are: a rapist, e.g. Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, the list goes on and on. We are either against the harm done to children by adults or we are not. If you are not, then there's really nothing anyone can say to you, just as there is nothing to be said to neo nazi groups, KKK members and their ilk. Believe what you like but things are changing and yes, it is bringing illustrious careers to an end, but that's not a bad thing because those person did terrible harm to a child and paid nothing. I did read the procedures for Safe Sport and they give minimal due process to the accused. It is not the government doing this and they won't go to jail, so minimal due process is more than their victim got. For pete's sake, this is making me want to weep.
                                kenyagirl

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by poltroon View Post

                                  This would be Jonathan Soresi. He became a student of George Morris at Hunterdon when he was 13, then became George's assistant trainer, specializing in the younger kids and ponies. He's the assistant mentioned in "A Very Young Rider."

                                  In 2006 Soresi was arrested on charges of possession of child pornography, and in 2008 he pled guilty. He is in the sexual offender registry and has a SafeSport ban. The internet says he still teaches riding.

                                  Soresi was the Hunterdon assistant trainer from 1977-1983.

                                  One article you can read:
                                  https://www.chronofhorse.com/article...ng-rider-grows

                                  What an incredibly sad footnote to a beloved childhood classic that's already tarnished. Obviously, a tiny drop in a sea of tragedy, but still shaking my head.
                                  Check out the latest Fortune's Fool novel, Courage to the Sticking Place!

                                  Comment


                                  • There is quite a bit of fb activity today on. Interesting to see the names coming forward in support. I’m so sad for the victims in this awful situation.

                                    there is now a fb group called “ I stand for George “, I think it was started by Candice King.

                                    Gemini Brittany Pledger started a post on her page proposing that usef club majority members bring about a class action lawsuit against usef for being forced to sign away constitutional rights to due process as requirement for membership. She goes on to say membership needs to stand together for the “ Father” of our sport. She implies that George is God & that “ He literally wrote the equestrian bible”.

                                    Someone commented about already contacting a few lawyers.

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by Escada View Post
                                      Davignport - From Mary Phelps personal FB page

                                      "Robert Dover speaks. Thank you for standing up and taking a stand. Safe Sport needs an overhaul - period."
                                      Did he delete it? I don’t see it on that link.

                                      Comment


                                      • SMDH. This is not going to be a fun ride for our sport.
                                        If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put that thing in your mouth, particularly if the thing is cats. - Lemony Snicket

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by Alterforme View Post
                                          There is quite a bit of fb activity today on. Interesting to see the names coming forward in support. I’m so sad for the victims in this awful situation.

                                          there is now a fb group called “ I stand for George “, I think it was started by Candice King.

                                          Gemini Brittany Pledger started a post on her page proposing that usef club majority members bring about a class action lawsuit against usef for being forced to sign away constitutional rights to due process as requirement for membership. She goes on to say membership needs to stand together for the “ Father” of our sport. She implies that George is God & that “ He literally wrote the equestrian bible”.

                                          Someone commented about already contacting a few lawyers.
                                          And so it begins. My apologies ahead of time if my comments are a bit more blunt than usual. My patience has worn very thin since I read some of the reactions to Ashley Wagner's article (I didn't even know she was a survivor before it was announced and I've been looking into the JC case for months).

                                          It boggles my mind that so many people will spread misinformation, victim blame and try to disband an organization because somebody that they like/respect is banned. Especially when they have NO idea what led to that decision being made.

                                          Thank you poltroon for posting my previous comments. I would suggest anyone who believes that SafeSport will hand out a lifetime ban without an investigation to read them ASAP.

                                          Looking at GM's statement, it seems like he's trying to imply that he was banned due to one survivor from about 50 years ago. This is not true. If he decides to go forward with the appeals process, the details of the case will definitely go public (you can find the JAMS document of Colin Burns case for an example of what they release). I'm pretty sure they will become public before that though the media.

                                          Posts on the internet don't go away. Especially when you are a big name in your sector. I'm already imagining what people will say as more information comes out (or if they'll just ignore it and pretend that they didn't say anything).

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X