Guelph Implodes

Man Above Board wrote:

Man Overboard wrote:

I believe in the (quaint?) notion of Due Process.

I disagree with the notion that DST should have been removed on the basis of a 'he said/she said' in the absence of hard independent corroborating evidence.

I also believe that SB should not have been removed for expressing his personal opinion.

Both were/are entitled to plead their cases before an independent tribunal, imo.

Who is talking about the basis of a "he said/she said"?

Wasn't there an investigation by the University in 2006, resulting in a suspension.

So they say. The athletes said he wasn't missing for 4 weeks. If he was under suspension, would not his boss make sure he did not come into work?

go away wrote:

That is at best a disingenuous accounting of that thread. Boyd made repeated personal attacks and direct/indirect accusations about people’s involvement in the coverup (his allegation, with no direct evidence to support). He claims he is being professional and even, something that almost all would dispute. His own assistant coach counsels him to back down and listen to people’s comments. He showed no real interest in hearing anyone and repeatedly fixated on removing titles. Really the same activity as on trackie, it’s all about him and what he wants.

And on trackie he swears at people, attacks them, and generally bullies people. Not at all shocking that he was fired for this behaviour.

Then he followed up by publicity insulting his A.D. and claiming that he (Boyd) didn’t do anything wrong.

I can just see Doyle watching all of this thinking to himself “I wonder how much stock I should’ve put in to all of Boyd‘s accusations of a corrupt Guelph cover-up, now that I’m seeing his total lack of perspective, and general obsession with ruining Guelph”.

The “everyone at Guelph knew and intentionally engaged in a corrupt and damaging cover-up in a relentless pursuit of CIAU glory (whatever that is worth)”, narrative looks a little different when you remove the voice of Boyd and his crew.

It almost makes you wonder if this wasn’t just a dime a dozen case of an articulate and charming(?) coach who managed to convincingly lie to his family, friends, university and governing body, and given the fact that no victim come forward with evidence or complaints (all that was out there was rumour and hearsay), the story simply went away. But that’s not as sexy of a story, it doesn’t get any one their Ronan farrow moment.

More info.

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/university-of-guelph_ca_5e4effb7c5b629695f57c444

Man Overboard wrote:

Both were/are entitled to plead their cases before an independent tribunal, imo.

You referred to "both" DST and SB in this. Reasonable people, for example one of the brojos, have said that DST had his opportunity to reply and didn't. But - with a suspension and investigation from AC pending and an article with near-criminal allegations, any decent lawyer would tell him to say nothing. They would be hoping for a fair and objective independent investigation.

Such an investigation should follow some simple rules. Noone who has a pre-existing view should be part of the investigation. No comments or statements should be issued during the investigation. And noone who is a friend or family member of any of the principal people who are the subjects should be involved in the investigation. This is "confict of interest" 101.

Unfortunately, Athletics Canada failed on all three of these basic rules. Kate Van Buskirk co-authored the apology that was issued the Monday following the Saturday article by Doyle. She is also a member of the Athletics Canada Athletes Council and connected to the suspension notice on DST.

Kate Van Buskirk is a former teammate and good friend of Megan Brown. Google them and you will see how they dressed alike to run, gave speeches and signed autographs together. Kate is supportive of Megan and I am sure she is a good friend.

These are the things that make her exactly the wrong person to be leading Athletics Canada's investigation and comments on DST. Canada should think about how governance will be done in such cases.

I have sympathy for Megan Brown's hardships and negative experiences. I would like to see a real investigation and finding of fact done by a truly objective body. Whatever results follow, there should be accountability. But what is happening right now does not even come close to that. Right now, the knives are out for DST and I doubt that these issues will get much traction. I hope that they will over time. Canada should have governance that is fair and objective.

SB's case is simpler and sort of a footnote to this thread. His employer told him that he could not both coach and comment in public in the way he had done. He agrees that he received a "final warning". He chose public commentary over coaching. That is all. If he wants to raise a labour dispute about this he is free to do so.

Royal Canadian Athletics Farce wrote:

SB's case is simpler and sort of a footnote to this thread. His employer told him that he could not both coach and comment in public in the way he had done. He agrees that he received a "final warning". He chose public commentary over coaching. That is all. If he wants to raise a labour dispute about this he is free to do so.

I would guess he is a contractor rather than employee (just guessing though). If so, it is even easier for the university to terminate at will.

AC has a group of lawyers/judges that lead the commissioners office(check the website). Kate is part of the athlete council and would have no involvement in leading the investigation.

"AC has a group of lawyers/judges that lead the commissioners office(check the website). Kate is part of the athlete council and would have no involvement in leading the investigation."

Did you read the release that she co-authored on the subject? It was during an investigation. Did you read her comments to journalists, including Doyle? Do you know what her connection is to the suspension notice? If there is a denial that she was involved, I would love to see it.

Your idea of "no involvement" is different from mine, and I think, most people's. She has been the public face of this thing as much or more than anyone else from AC.

Royal Canadian Athletics Farce wrote:

"AC has a group of lawyers/judges that lead the commissioners office(check the website). Kate is part of the athlete council and would have no involvement in leading the investigation."

Did you read the release that she co-authored on the subject? It was during an investigation. Did you read her comments to journalists, including Doyle? Do you know what her connection is to the suspension notice? If there is a denial that she was involved, I would love to see it.

Your idea of "no involvement" is different from mine, and I think, most people's. She has been the public face of this thing as much or more than anyone else from AC.

She has no connection to leading the investigation. Read the suspension notice from the AC website, it’s authorized by Dr Frank Fowlie, one of the commissioners.

Why would anyone issue a denial, since the athletes council is not involved in any way in leading the investigation led by Dr Fowlie of the independent commissioners office. No staff at AC are involved in leading the investigation, since it is run independently from the organization -

This is really interesting. You write very fast responses with detailed knowledge, and yet deflect with a question rather than providing answers. My curiosity grows stronger about what is going on here. It smells bad. Let’s be clear. Someone does not have to be leading an investigation in order to have a conflict of interest. When a governing body says it will have no further involvement, it’s not acceptable for a Director to issue a statement. When that Director has a close friendship with one of the principal people involved, and the statement is on behalf of her friend, this obviously stinks of bias.

So, we agree that on Jan 21st, AC issued the notice of suspension. Neither of us has any statement from AC regarding whether, or in what capacity, KVB was involved.

Let’s look at followon events. I will put links at the end so that it is supported but the flow is concise and clear. We do not know the date, but Doyle asks for responses from DST. With the suspension/investigation and story allegations, DST lawyers up. Then

1) Feb 8th - Globe drops the Doyle story (link at end).

2) Athletics Canada drops a response also on Feb 8th (link at end). It states “As the investigation into Mr. Scott-Thomas is an active investigation at this time, Athletics Canada will have no further involvement until such time as the independent Commissioner’s Office issues its findings and any recommended actions.”

3) Feb 9th, KVB, a Director of Athletics Canada, contradictory to the AC statement on Feb 8th, absolutely gets involved. She co-authors an apology to her good friend MB, issued from the Athletics Canada Athletes Council (link at end). She posts is from her personal Twitter account and it is released via several media sites. There is no mention of her friendship with MB

4) Feb 10th - Globe reports AC letter that KVB co-authored. No mention of personal relationship (link at end).

5) Feb 12th - KVB gives interview to CBC along with another AC director, Jennifer Brown (link below). No mention of her conflict of interest, again.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-athlete-breaks-silence-about-sexual-misconduct-of-university-of-guelph/

https://athletics.ca/athletics-canada-statement-regarding-dave-scott-thomas-globe-and-mail-article/

https://twitter.com/K8VBeast/status/1226899273146499073

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-athletics-canada-athlete-council-condemns-handling-of-allegations/

https://www.cbc.ca/sports/olympics/summer/trackandfield/kate-van-buskirk-jennifer-brown-scott-thomas-response-1.5461945

So your basic point is that you don’t think the independent commissioner is actually independent? Why don’t you contact him and ask what involvement KvB has? His bio reads as a very respected mediator and lawyer with a significant professional reputation. Sounds like your calling out his integrity...

Athletics Canada is a governing body of sport paid for by Canadian taxpayer's dollars. Possibly you don't care if a rogue Director makes public statements about people in an ongoing investigation on behalf of her friend. I think that anyone who cares about the future of Canadian governance of sport will care.

We don't know how much KVB has been involved in shaping the AC narrative and documentation. We have some sense that she has been shaping public perception. But then, there are unnamed sources in Doyle's article that claim to have detailed knowledge of AC. How much has she been tilting the scales?

It's bad when someone tries to put out a biased narrative. It is unprofessional conduct when a member of a governing body has a conflict of interest and acts on behalf of a friend. If there is a conflict between two people, should it be swayed by the fact that one has a friend at AC?

You seem to know a lot about AC, and seem to want to minimize the fact that a Director went against the public statement by the head of AC that AC would not be involved. I wonder why that is.

I don't know if this was posted already:

On behalf of the Captains of the University of Guelph Track and Field Team,

This has been a difficult year for our team, our coaches and the Guelph Track and Field community as a whole. Since October, our team has worked through uncertainty and frustrations, in turn yielding to shock, anger and most of all sadness. Although individuals have been affected differently, no team member has emerged unscathed.

The recent Globe and Mail article detailing the actions of our former coach, Dave Scott-Thomas, was deeply troubling and impactful upon us; as community members, as students and as athletes. The conduct of our former coach was abhorrent and inexcusable, as were the failings of multiple institutions to protect athletes. That so many details outlined in the article were unknown to so many of us only makes it worse.

We feel terrible for our past and current teammates and friends who have suffered and are forever appreciative of their courage in coming forward.

Although this season has brought extraordinary challenges, it has also brought our team closer together. While it is a sad truth that for some teammates, the win-at-all-cost mentality described in the Globe and Mail bore painful resemblance to their experiences of seasons past, it is equally true that such a mentality is not representative of the current team culture or leadership. We are committed to a culture that is intolerant of abusive behaviour and an environment where we support each other athletically, academically and as people. A team culture strengthened by a coaching and IST staff, who not only support our athletic endeavours, but whom we trust completely to hold the well-being of student-athletes as their highest priority.

Furthermore, while we share the larger community's outrage over the ineffectiveness of the 2006 investigation, the support we have received from the current Athletic Department as well as the University of Guelph has not gone unnoticed. The effort made this year to ensure the safety and well-being of team members, past and present, has been evident and genuine. Likewise, the transparency provided to us by Scott McRoberts and the Athletic Department has made clear that the current institution is not the same as it was in 2006.

As we prepare for championship season, there is no question that this team does not belong to the legacy of our former coach. Our team is not imploding. It is comprised of dedicated athletes and coaches who have overcome challenges and emerged more unified for it. We will continue to support each other as we represent our school and ourselves with pride and resolve. This season marks the beginning of a new era for Guelph Track and Field, and our best is yet to come.

The Team Captains

Guelph Gryphons Track and Field '19/'20

Wow, this is painful. Carry on without me.

And if you want to know my secret source, I posted the link above. Took about 5min to read the section on safesport. Might want to try it.

What Canadians need is a really, real independent commissioner to investigate the independent commissioner and assorted narrative shapers of the alleged interactions between a 38 year old male and a seventeen year old female and others.

Sociopathy.

Better Help:

" Criteria and Features of Personality Disorder

The DSM- 5 includes APD under the heading of Personality Disorders. Impairments in both self and interpersonal personalities are present as well as pathological traits. Symptoms tend to begin in adolescence or early adulthood and continue over many years. Some symptoms someone with Antisocial Personality Disorder may exhibit are:

Being very charming or witty in order to manipulate someone or get what they want.

Exudes a sense of superiority or arrogance.

Impulsive and prone to taking risks or engaging in dangerous behavior with little regard to how it may affect others.

Lack of empathy or feelings towards others or a situation.

May display hostile, aggressive behavior, or become violent.

Being dishonest or lying to people.

No regard or care for what is right or wrong.

Being irresponsible.

Inability to maintain healthy relationships.

Lack of regard for rules or societal norms.

When someone is consistently exhibiting these symptoms, and there is cause for concern, you may wonder what's going on and seek medical help. After an initial conversation and a physical evaluation, the doctor may refer the patient to a mental health professional who will look at the following things in order to render a diagnosis of APD.

Significant impairments in self (identity or self-direction) and interpersonal (empathy or intimacy) functioning.

One or more pathological personality traits.

The impairments in personality are stable across time and consistent in situations.

The personality impairments are not better understood as a normative part of a developmental stage or social environment.

Substance use or a medical condition is not the only cause. "

"So your basic point is that you don’t think the independent commissioner is actually independent?"

Nope - what I wrote about was problems with that actions of Kate Van Buskirk and AC Directors. Nothing to say that the Commissioner has any issues. It is interesting that you have deflected and/or misinterpreted what I wrote on every response...

The Commissioner's statement on Deb 8th included "As the investigation into Mr. Scott-Thomas is an active investigation at this time, Athletics Canada will have no further involvement until such time as the independent Commissioner’s Office issues its findings and any recommended actions."

Kate Van Buskirk, a Director at AC, ignored the Commissioner's guidance and went ahead as co-author of a statement from AC - on behalf of her friend and teammate, Megan Brown. She then did a set of media interviews. At no point that I saw in any of those things did she point out her personal involvement. I included links to support all of this before, it takes a lot of space so I won't repeat but it's there in previous long post if you want to see proof.

What I do see clearly is that any claim that Athletics Canada has been unbiased is laughable. Too bad, this is an important situation and I hate to see it so badly mishandled. I wonder whether the truth will ever be unambiguously known. It would be great if AC could clarify the nature of KVB's involvement in the suspension statement, if any. There are other things AC could clarify as well, since they have put out so many biased statements.

I will keep looking around to see what else there may be that I can find. If anyone else is interested, perhaps we can find a way to save and share info. My sole objective is to work out as much as possible, what actually happened, in the original event and the investigations, governance, and reporting that have followed.

So in summary...he aint doin no time cause there aint no crime

Armchair lawyer still thinks it’s legal fir coaches to have sex with 17 year old athletes. Jimmy, you’re a joke.