Alberto Salazar BANNED For Life for "Sexual Misconduct"

Nodoubts wrote:

goodest riddance wrote:

Like every other thread on this topic, the lemmings will come out to praise their scumbag cheat of an abusive coach.

Perhaps but my praise for him concerned his running career. Intelligent people possess the ability to analyze with nuance. Alberto was as tenacious a competitor as you will find. Maybe that was his Achilles heel as a coach. The man is obviously far from perfect.

+1- Well said.

I would like to see the details of the investigation that resulted in this decision. Who investigated? Who made the decision? Isn't Safe Sport an independent entity? Who oversees them and their policies? A lot of unanswered questions that need to be addressed.

surveysays wrote:

carmine9 wrote:

I bet he does not agree that he did anything wrong.

The public sure does not know.

Justice dies in secrecy

He’s welcome to share and make his case to win over public opinion.

Maybe his.

Maybe not.

They may have come to some sort of agreement where he got paid out but has to stay silent.

I understand your point but it’s much more than just losing his job.

Plus, this is a quasi government organization.It was created and funded by Congress . It needs to have more transparency imo. 

But we all agree Salazar could coach people individually right?

Paid out by WHOM? A publically traded company? USATF? US Taxpayers?

Who would be paying Alberto to stay silent?

Taro wrote:

The term "sexual misconduct" has no legal definition whatsoever.

It's a meaningless, catch-all term that by connotation puts Salazar in the company of monsters like Larry Nasser and Jerry Sandusky.

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/what-is-sexual-misconduct-exactly-depends-on-who-you-ask

This is horribly unjust, and I truly hope Salazar forces the faceless people behind SafeSport into a real court.

Even the SafeSport website reeks of opacity. It provides NO information about the organization itself or the people behind it. It doesn't even offer an About Us.

Damn shady for an organization whose $23 million budget is underwritten by the taxpayer.

Wikipedia at least names the CEO. Here's her LinkedIn profile:

https://www.linkedin.com/in/ju-riese-colon-9759a34/

Not much background in the law or even sports, it seems.

That does appear to be a long history of making a lot of money "prosecuting" sexual misconduct. Let's be clear, there are lots of dirt bag guys out there. Many make their way into coaching. However, when you get rich leading the charge against them you do open yourself up to questions about motive and ensuring you have a product to keep selling.

Of course I think the Susan Komen Foundation is a nothing but a cash cow for her sister so who am I to pontificate.

umstead wrote:

Paid out by WHOM? A publically traded company? USATF? US Taxpayers?

Who would be paying Alberto to stay silent?

The people who sacked him

How did SafeSport become a secret court to govern PROFESSIONAL coaching conduct with PROFESSIONAL athletes? Seriously. Are they now involved with the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL coaching conduct? Seriously, what is the difference? If his misconduct was with an amateur minor, or any minor, we need to know that.

Carmine, where does the SafeSport money come from? Is this secret due to national security interests?

Bonkers wrote:

OozmaKappa wrote:

The left has made it illegal to state simple facts.

Always amazing how many people don't actually understand freedom of speech. The first amendment protects you from government persecution, not from social consequences.

It's pretty gross the number of people who are ok with what Salazar did. Reminds me what a cesspool these boards are. But yeah, things sure were better back in the day when physically and emotionally abusive coaches and trainers could just take advantage of their athletes and no one would speak up. Remember, Salazar thought Jenny Simpson was too fat, and she was the world champion. This was not about performance.

Yeah you see that a lot when people freak out over cancel culture stuff. When you get lot of outrage and confusion and over someone losing their job for basically being a jerk.

This is like Urban Meyer. A person with an unlikable personality who treats people poorly. Some people just put up with it but it eventually comes back to bite you when you are prickly with enough people.

casual obsever wrote:

I don't know the answer for this, but egregious is the exact wording taking from Safesport. Otherwise it wouldn't have been a lifetime ban.

Noting that a) there was due process and b) the ban was upheld after appeal, should reassure you.

But yes, the lack of transparency is annoying.

Annoying but absolutely necessary to protect the safety and anonymity of the person(s) that he did this to. So far he is not facing criminal charges, so the public has no right to know the details. I can totally understand the victims not wanting the public to know what happened to them. Since it was a small team, we would be able to guess who it was and then they would have to face media, un-welcome attention as well as a large amount of backlash.

Her career is all about protecting children.

If the ban was just specific to coaching children then I’d be willing to trade some public disclosure (but not all of it - we need transparency)  but an out right ban on coaching needs more public disclosure. Private courts essentially funded by Congress is un American.

Either way we need more transparency from the process. It’s not totally equivalent,  but dictatorial regimes are famous for telling us to trust the private justice system set up with no transparency. 

I have to agree. This is total bs. He got what he deserved for the grey area dabbling he did with hormone therapy etc. He served his punishment for that. Fair enough.

But this seems charge and ban is unwarranted and unfair.

Avoidingattention wrote:

[quote]casual obsever wrote:

I don't know the answer for this, but egregious is the exact wording taking from Safesport. Otherwise it wouldn't have been a lifetime ban.

Noting that a) there was due process and b) the ban was upheld after appeal, should reassure you.

But yes, the lack of transparency is annoying.

Annoying but absolutely necessary to protect the safety and anonymity of the person(s) that he did this to.

1. Could be called Victims A, B, etc,

2. You can find videos of Mary Cain and Arie Lambie and probably others criticizing him (no accusations of sexual misconduct)

Conspiracies Are REAL wrote:

Sal fan wrote:

It's pretty clear that race/ethnicity played a role here. Would he have been punished like this if he was white? Would he even have been accused?

Of course Salazar's race and relative lack of wealth played an enormous part SafeSport sticking him to a cross. Compare this to Bill Gates and his pedophilia with Epstein and nothing happens to Gates because he is untouchable. The people in SafeSport are so woke and hypocrites that I bet you they would kick the feet of Bill Gates given the chance.

Are you claiming that safesport has the authority to ban bill gates from coaching?

precisely wejo. How in the world is some secret tribunal in charge of coaching conduct against a PROFESSIONAL adult athlete? Boggles the mind. Unless this has always been about a minor under his tutelage.

Safe Sport does not provide due process. It’s not a court of law. For example, there is no cross examination of witnesses. There is no statute of limitations. The arbitrators do not have law degrees. The accused cannot defend himself.

Here’s a tragic story:

For those arguing about the victims protection. The Jerry Sandusky case provided all information without disclosing identities.

umstead wrote:

Carmine, where does the SafeSport money come from? Is this secret due to national security interests?

No idea.

I think it's safe to assume they do have some money