NY Times reports Alberto Salazar was banned by SafeSport for allegedly sexually assaulting an athlete twice while giving massage

Bio Domerr wrote:

allegedly

I don't know if it's fair to call it an allegation when he's been convicted of it.

Manbearpig15 wrote:

Since we did this for Shelby....

Is there any possible legitimate massage technique that said allegations could be a credible reason for putting a finger in the pooper or front-butt?

If you seriously want to know more about that topic, it was discussed at length in regards to the Larry Nassar case. There are reasons why penetrating someone in a medical context may be legitimate, but there is absolutely no scenario under which Salazar could have done so legitimately.

shelbo900 wrote:

Galen Rupp Fan wrote:

So the report says the arbitrator rejected SafeSport's fat shaming claim saying it was within athletic context. Doesn't this torpedo everything Mary Cain has been publicly spewing about for years on NYT and social media. And Mary Cain's entire lawsuit against Salazar and Nike is for the fat shaming, having the SafeSport arbitrator reject her accusation kind of kills any credibility Mary Cain has against Salazar.

that is what you took from all this?

Yes because if SafeSport had evidence of sexual assault, why didn't they report it to the police and have a real court judge the evidence instead of all this he said she said that no one can verify for what is a criminal matter that they don't have authority to rule?

Mary Cain's fat shaming claiming being rejected is the verifiable story here because Cain has publicly given out every last detail for years and still got rejected by the arbitrator. So what leg does she have to stand on for her lawsuit against Nike and Salazar?

serena wrote:

talent evaluator wrote:

That was over 6 years ago. I don't think it is related to the latest rounds of sexual misconduct allegations.

That was over for you. That was not over. You have no understanding of this. It is never over.

The reuters article was over 6 years old. I made no comment on whether anything was "over".

fada tyme wrote:

As myself and others in the thread have asked, don't you think it might not have been a bad idea to pass this information to law enforcement if true and even if SafeSport didn't have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt?

I do not know if this was ever reported to law enforcement. Someone could try public record requesting that info from law enforcement, but since we don't know for sure where the abuse happened, a lack of report to local PD does not mean no report was filed.

There are lots of reason why a report of this nature would not lead to criminal charges...

- May not have been a crime in the jurisdiction it took place.

- It is a crime but the prosecutor is not confident they can prove it happened beyond a reasonable doubt, so they decline to file charges.

- It is a crime, but the statute of limitations has since passed and charges cannot be filed.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

The Ghost of Randy Savage wrote:

It sounds like the NYT has seen the ruling but will not print details out of respect for the victim(s). Another outlet, likely a British publication, will probably publish those details in the coming days without qualms. I agree with stan the corgi, if Salazar doesn't fight in court, then the accusations are likely true.

Word to the wise...have a freakin' third party LMT work on your athletes!

In regard to these new allegations, why would Salazar want to spend a fortune in legal fees to try to prove a negative?

Maybe he's not the one footing the bill

Galen Rupp Fan wrote:

shelbo900 wrote:

that is what you took from all this?

Yes because if SafeSport had evidence of sexual assault, why didn't they report it to the police and have a real court judge the evidence instead of all this he said she said that no one can verify for what is a criminal matter that they don't have authority to rule?

Mary Cain's fat shaming claiming being rejected is the verifiable story here because Cain has publicly given out every last detail for years and still got rejected by the arbitrator. So what leg does she have to stand on for her lawsuit against Nike and Salazar?

I also want to add that a real court has authority to punish someone for purjury or lieing to the court. SafeSport does not have authority to jail someone for purjury. If it was sexual assault, SafeSport is the wrong one to judge since it now becomes a criminal matter.

Galen Rupp Fan wrote:

shelbo900 wrote:

that is what you took from all this?

Yes because if SafeSport had evidence of sexual assault, why didn't they report it to the police and have a real court judge the evidence instead of all this he said she said that no one can verify for what is a criminal matter that they don't have authority to rule?

Mary Cain's fat shaming claiming being rejected is the verifiable story here because Cain has publicly given out every last detail for years and still got rejected by the arbitrator. So what leg does she have to stand on for her lawsuit against Nike and Salazar?

Statute of Limitations would have likely prevented criminal prosecution by the time Safe Sport was involved.

From the NYT today:

Salazar was first put on SafeSport’s temporarily barred list in January 2020. He was permanently suspended in July 2021, with the listed reasons being both emotional and sexual misconduct.

He asked for an arbitration hearing, which was heard by video conference over three days at the beginning of December by an arbitrator from JAMS, a dispute resolution company. Both Salazar and SafeSport were allowed to present evidence and witnesses, and cross-examine each other’s witnesses. The standard of evidence used in SafeSport hearings is preponderance of evidence, similar to civil cases in the United States and a lower threshold than the standard used in U.S. criminal cases, in which guilt is established if the evidence goes beyond a reasonable doubt.

SafeSport issued a notice of findings that included four violations of the SafeSport code, three of which were sustained by the arbitrator and one which was not, resulting in Salazar’s permanent ineligibility.

From SS Code: Note the paragraph about Claimants and Respondents ability to discuss the incident....

The SafeCode says:

S. Confidentiality – Release/Use of Materials

The Center’s decisions, investigation reports, and other

work product are confidential under 36 USC

§ 220541(f)(4)(C). The following documents or

evidence related to the response and resolution process

must remain confidential, in that they may not be

disclosed outside of the proceedings, except as may be

required by law or authorized by the Center: the Notice

of Decision; the Investigation Report and any documents

or evidence attached thereto, including interview

statements of a Claimant, Respondent, or other

witnesses; any audio recordings or transcripts of those

recordings created as part of the investigative process;

all documents or evidence submitted to or prepared by

the arbitrator, including any hearing transcripts.

Violation of this provision, including by an advisor for

an involvedparty, may constitute an Abuse of Process.

While the physical documentation must remain

confidential, the relevant NGB or the USOPC, or its

affiliates may disclose the outcome of the matter,

including the Summary of Decision, to those parties or

organizations with a need to know so that the outcome

can be properly effectuated or understood.

Additionally, subject to the Abuse of Process provision

(including the prohibition on identifying a Claimant), the

Center does not impose any restrictions on a Claimant’s

or Respondent’s ability to discuss the incident, their

participation in the Center’s process, or the outcome of

that process.

If any person or entity misrepresents the process, the

underlying facts, or the outcome of a matter, the Center

reserves the right to publicly correct the record.

serena wrote:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-athletics-salazar-goucher-idUSKCN0P810C20150628

In the above article Kara says that it will come out why there is trouble between Alberto and Adam. It has now come out people. I do not need to say anymore.

I applaud the women who shared this information. They may have prevented an alleged sexual predator from harming more people.

serena wrote:

Galen Rupp Fan wrote:

Yes because if SafeSport had evidence of sexual assault, why didn't they report it to the police and have a real court judge the evidence instead of all this he said she said that no one can verify for what is a criminal matter that they don't have authority to rule?

Mary Cain's fat shaming claiming being rejected is the verifiable story here because Cain has publicly given out every last detail for years and still got rejected by the arbitrator. So what leg does she have to stand on for her lawsuit against Nike and Salazar?

Statute of Limitations would have likely prevented criminal prosecution by the time Safe Sport was involved.

What statue of limitations? SafeSport gives itself unlimited powers so there is no statute of limitations and regular courts investigate sexual assault cases from decades ago like in the Boy Scouts and Catholic Church.

The fact that SafeSport didn't do the proper thing and turn the case over to the real courts that judge it by proper merits indicates all SafeSport had to go on was a he said she said.

How do you know a separate criminal case is not ongoing?