The statement seems tone deaf, and insensitive to the alleged victims. Because it was issued by an organization of which I have been a member since 2009, I feel compelled to publicly distance myself from it, and make clear that it does not represent me.And Big League Stew has a blog post up about the statement:
"O'Connell seems to be saying that because Conlin hasn't been accused of molesting children (including relatives) while also writing about baseball, it's irrelevant to the Spink Award and (presumably) whether the honor can be revoked. He wasn't accused of doing anything untoward in a press box, or a clubhouse, or on the field, so who cares? Conlin could have been accused of treason, murder, war crimes — you name it — and it would not matter because none of it fits the description of a baseball writer's job. John Wayne Gacy might have raped and murdered all of those boys, but don't let that muddle his accomplishments as a clown painter.
O'Connell presumably wants to believe Conlin is innocent, and that the BBWAA didn't reward a monster. Perhaps a "no comment" might lead some to infer that the BBWAA thinks Conlin is guilty. But "no comment" would have been more prudent than saying, basically, that being accused of child molestation is irrelevant. O'Connell is kidding himself; if this news had broken before the Spink vote happened in 2011, it wouldn't have had "no bearing" on how the electorate voted."
Ironically it may have been the Penn State scandal that indirectly led to the public allegations against Conlin, as at least one of the victims cited Penn State as motivation in coming forward, however late. Conlin faces no legal jeopardy; the statue of limitations on the crimes alleged has long expired.Are statute of limitations retroactive? That is, if you commit a crime, and the statute of limitations expires, and then it's revealed that you did it, and then the statute of limitations expires can you then be convicted?
Barbara Healey remembers it well.Not to pick on Mrs. Healey, but this is why the statute of limitations should not be dependent on the parent's willingness to press charges. The victims are the children but the system places all hope of justice in the hands of these adults who are not the victims.
"Kevin just came into the room crying. It was unusual to see a boy crying," she said. "He told me Mr. Conlin molested him."
She told her son not to tell his father - "his father had a terrible temper," she said - and forbade him to return to the Conlin home.
But she continued to allow her daughter Karen to spend time with Conlin's younger son, Peter. "I thought he was just interested in boys," she said of Conlin.
A few years later, Barbara Healey said, she was shocked to learn that her daughter had been molested as well.
I fail to see what good comes out of these allegations 30+ years after the fact. Even if true, he's not even going to jail.What possible benefit is there in continuing to keep them secret? Even if he doesn't go to jail, he still got fired. His life is still ruined. So why not do it? If the goal is to harm pedophiles as much as legally possible (up to a reasonable jail sentence, I don't think they should be executed here) then clearly revealing the abuse is a net benefit, even if he doesn't go to jail.
Among the very best things about the exposure of the Penn State abominations and the apparently unending series of aftershocks, are the sleepless nights child molesters all over the country are having thinking they might be next.Yeah, plus that.
I first found out the Inquirer was working on a piece about Bill Monday. I read a draft of the piece this afternoon. It bears repeating all the necessary caveats, of course: at present, these are allegations. Bill has not been proven guilty or even charged with anything.
That said, I have to say the story made my stomach turn. I can't shake the disgust and rage I felt after reading the allegations in the piece, nor can I stop thinking about the victims.
I have known Bill Conlin since 1990, and before that, I knew him as a legendary voice on the page. I simply do not know how to reconcile what I've read with the man I know. I spoke to him today. He offered to retire and I immediately accepted. I knew I'd never be comfortable running his byline again.
For a long time today, we struggled with how to best acknowledge this story without knowing the facts or reporting on it ourselves. It is a strange and sad time in the newsroom, and we will do our best to cover this as if it were any other high-profile figure in Philadelphia. But of course it is not just another high-profile figure in Philadelphia.
...
When I spoke with my stunned staff today, I found myself uncharacteristically at a loss for words. But then the reporters and editors among us started speaking up. They wanted to report this story. It was, for me, an oddly inspiring moment.
They reminded me: This is what we do. We hold people accountable, and we've done that with everyone from mayors to Jerry Sandusky. Now we just may have to do it with one of our own.
"Since 1891, Pennsylvania has subscribed to the theory of employment at will. Thus, as the court noted in Stumpp v. Stroudsburg Municipal Authority 540 Pa. 391, 396 (1995), "as a general rule, employees are at-will, absent a contract, and may be terminated at any time, for any reason or for no reason."I would assume that the "offer to retire" is an admission of guilt.
Delmoi, see Stogner v. California.Interesting. It was a 5/4 decision in favor of not extending the limit retroactively, with the liberal judges voting against extension, while Kennedy, Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas voting for extension. I suppose had that gone through it would be possible to prosecute anyone at any time so long as the legislature was willing to extend the statute of limitations retroactively.
How about "You're fired effective immediately, security will be here in a moment to escort you out and your personal belongings will be shipped to you" instead?Just for allegations? Don't you think it would be better to investigate to see if the allegations are credible first?
PA's an "at-will" state, if he didn't have a contract with the paper:Aren't most newspapers unionized? Plus, it's likely that someone who had been with the paper that long probably would have a contract.
The offer to retire immediately pretty much covers that, in my eyes. If the allegations were false, wouldn't he fight them rather than take the easy way out regarding his employer?No? I mean, he says he's going to 'fight' the allegations, but if he was innocent close to retirement, why not just do it and save everyone the trouble?
In the US, not since 2003.
a jury must be convinced of guilt 'beyond a shadow of a doubt.'
"I honestly do not want to be involved with whatever you guys are going to do," one female relative wrote to Blanchet in a Facebook message last year. "I don't even think about my past anymore. It is behind me. My family and I are done with it.There have been volumes and volumes written about child victims of sexual abuse, and the reasons why it might take them so long to process trauma, and/or feel the need to step forward. There are a lot of factors involved, and very few of them are ever based in logic.
She said Blanchet's renewed focus on the assaults was "interfering with the peace and life I built for me and my family. . . . I am hurting now, so no more updates."
One of the girls from Whitman School Road also declined to participate, in part, she said, to protect her elderly parents.
"I feel that they have done their part in honoring the wishes of the rest of the families involved by keeping the secret away from the other spouses for whatever the reasons may have been," she wrote in an e-mail to Blanchet, Healey, and her other childhood friend. "The decisions made many years ago were the consensus of the families involved and took into consideration the effects on all, including the Conlin family.
"In today's world, things might have been handled differently, but that's hindsight, and we are willing to live with it," the woman wrote.
I don’t think victims should have to keep secrets if they don’t want to, but the idea of prosecuting someone for a 30 year old crime based on the testimony of someone who was a kid at the time is pretty scary. That’s why they have limitations, not because it isn’t important anymore.It's more then that, though. According to the report these kids told people at the time, and those people did nothing. So it's multiple kids, and their parents were quoted explaining why they didn't report it to the police or anyone else at the time. So it would have to be a lot of people in a conspiracy together, who had been close friends with him decades ago (close enough to him to cover up child molesting, if it happened)
Conlin deserves the right to a fair trial. So do his accusers. Neither of them are going to get that. The only thing left is for them to be allowed to have their say, and for him to be allowed to respond to them.Hmm, is it really true that the victim of a crime 'deserves' to have the person they receive get a 'fair prosecution'? Prosecutors use discretion all the time to decide what cases not to pursue.
We're in the USA, not some developing country and this guy was just a sports writer, not a celebrity or pontiff. Are you seriously telling me that in the past three decades, none of these victims were able to confide in an authority figure who could do something about it?"Were able too" != "Wanted too". Even if they could have said something, they might have simply not wanted to. For some people, there could be a huge stigma associated with it. Read null terminated's suicide note for an example of how people could feel. The feelings caused by being molested end up driving to kill himself, but he never felt comfortable telling anyone because he didn't want anyone to know.
Here's Bill Conlin's chummy back-and-forth with A.J. Daulerio, Deadspin/Gawker editor and admitted Conlin fan, before the story broke.--
So what do you recommend? Suicide? A pre-empt? What? And who lets it out, and why? Washing their hands of my blood and letting somebody else open my veins?Most inappropriate "Sent from my iPad" ever.
Sent from my iPad
« Older One teacher's approach to preventing gender bullyi... | Humble & Fred do a podcast... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Renoroc at 7:25 AM on December 21, 2011