WAG Egregious

[LGnyc]

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a3a62ffe4b0b0e5a79e9a4b?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

 

[raenndrops]

OMG!

 

[LGnyc]

This is offensive too.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/20/us/mckayla-maroney-lawsuit/index.html

 

[azara]

What does it take to decertify USAG? This has gone too far. USAG is obviously incapable of making decisions in the interests of its millions of juvenile members. Their environment is irresponsible, deplorable, and frankly entirely unsafe. They've shown no genuine remorse and made no effort to change. It's time for them to be totally dismantled.

What disgusting, cowardly, immoral, awful pieces of slime.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

This s*cks big time. And we can only hope the other inmates will take care of Nassar. Even he knew no point in a trial.

But the reality is this is old news. We all know this cr^p happened. We know he is a vile disgusting person, who abused many. This is not new.

 

[Seeker]

The potential/possibility of him taking pornographic photos of national team/Olympic gymnasts is new information. All the the charges thus far related to pornography have not indicated any of those photos were of gymnasts.

 

[LGnyc]

This s*cks big time. And we can only hope the other inmates will take care of Nassar. Even he knew no point in a trial.

But the reality is this is old news. We all know this cr^p happened. We know he is a vile disgusting person, who abused many. This is not new.

I posted bc I did not know
a) that he had been placed under investigation and still allowed to treat girls. MSU allowed another dozen lives to be destroyed and I’m heartbroken.

b) that MM was pushed to sign a non-disclosure to settle, effectively gagging her. That’s on USAG.

So to me these stories speak more to the failures of the organizations to believe and protect young girls and women. I would argue that too is nothing new but should still be brought into the light.

 

[profmom]

You folks in the US do know that non-disclosure agreements are pretty much the norm for settlements in sexual assault and sexual harassment cases now, right? And that both your state legislatures and Congress have offices that manage settlements and confidentiality agreements relating to alleged wrongful acts committed by your legislators and their staff members?

I looked through the filing quickly. The allegations are indeed appalling. I wonder, though, given the existence of the CA law barring confidentiality/ND agreements in a case of alleged sexual assault against a minor, why Maroney's attorneys would have advised signing in the first place.

MSU looks to me to be in big trouble here, even bigger trouble than USAG.

 

[Seeker]

Yes, @profmom — I know these are common practice. In a general civil case it makes sense. As you stated, the (very) big difference here is what the NDA was about. The signee was a minor at the time of the sexual abuse and the NDA was specifically covering up actions that were classified as a felony (tha I’m not sure he'd been charged with at the time). Aside from just being ethically and morally wrong, pretty sure it’s a no-no to hide a felony behind an NDA.

It is very curious to me why her attorney allowed/supported this (regardless of whose idea it was), but to me this isn’t in the same category as a standard confidentiality agreement.

 

[profmom]

My point about the NDAs is actually much grumpier. I'd guess that there are NDAs involving members of Congress who have harassed and/or assaulted minor pages.

Furthermore, the fact that both Nassar and Sandusky were able to get away with it for so long suggests to me that other universities are still protecting serial sexual assailants right this minute. I understand that part of the thinking behind the Obama-era reforms to Title IX were to make these offices more independent to facilitate stronger investigations, but no matter how independent they are, they are still part of the institution, and all too often their most important function is preventing litigation.

 

[TumbleTimes4]

Her attorney was Gloria Allred that negotiated the non disclosure. She has a reputation for being a stereotypical greedy scumbag willing to take any case to suck as much money as possible. She was only interested in the paycheck, not what was best for McKayla. It’s good to hear McKayla now has a new attorney, one who seems more focused on what’s best for her as a victim.

 

[profmom]

Her attorney was Gloria Allred that negotiated the non disclosure. She has a reputation for being a stereotypical greedy scumbag willing to take any case to suck as much money as possible. She was only interested in the paycheck, not what was best for McKayla. It’s good to hear McKayla now has a new attorney, one who seems more focused on what’s best for her as a victim.

While I am not a fan of Allred's, this is a fairly serious mischaracterization of her motivations. Whatever one might say about her current attorney, John Manly, he certainly knows this field well, having built his career doing plaintiff-side litigation. But this is probably beginning to take us beyond the topic at hand.

 

[mommyof1]

Given the CA Code of Civil Procedure prohibition on NDNs in cases involving a minor victim, wouldn't Maroney have a cause of action against Allred for legal malpractice? I don't know how encouraging a minor client to sign an agreement that violates state law constitutes skillful and competent representation.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

While I am not a fan of Allred's, this is a fairly serious mischaracterization of her motivations. Whatever one might say about her current attorney, John Manly, he certainly knows this field well, having built his career doing plaintiff-side litigation. But this is probably beginning to take us beyond the topic at hand.

JMO but I think tumbletimes4 summed her up pretty well.

 

[mommyof1]

Typo above, meant NDAs.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

Given the CA Code of Civil Procedure prohibition on NDNs in cases involving a minor victim, wouldn't Maroney have a cause of action against Allred for legal malpractice? I don't know how encouraging a minor client to sign an agreement that violates state law constitutes skillful and competent representation.

I think the gray area or perhaps the question is.... How old was she when she signed the NDA vs how old she was when the assault(s) happened.

While she may have been a minor at the time of the assault, if she signed it I assume she was of legal age.

 

[mommyof1]

I think the gray area or perhaps the question is.... How old was she when she signed the NDA vs how old she was when the assault(s) happened.

What is relevant is the victim's age when the assault occurred. It also looks as if the victim's age doesn't matter if the offense could be prosecuted as a felony, but I didn't look up the particulars as to what constitutes a felony in CA.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

I posted bc I did not know
a) that he had been placed under investigation and still allowed to treat girls. MSU allowed another dozen lives to be destroyed and I’m heartbroken.

b) that MM was pushed to sign a non-disclosure to settle, effectively gagging her. That’s on USAG.

So to me these stories speak more to the failures of the organizations to believe and protect young girls and women. I would argue that too is nothing new but should still be brought into the light.

That it happened at all speaks to the failure. That more of what actually happened is being disclosed doesn't change it. It is part of the same story. That the SOB pleaded guilty and didn't even bother with a trial tells me they had a boatload more on him then we had heard. That wasn't a news flash to me. When his plea broke, I told my husband, they must of had a cr&p load of proof on him.

The organization is about protecting the organization first, be it USAG, NCAA, your kids school, your employer..... They protect themselves first.
Seriously HR's job is to protect the organization first. And as profmom says, don't get me started on the government employees, that my taxes support, whole nother thread.

 

[Deleted member 18037]

What is relevant is the victim's age when the assault occurred. It also looks as if the victim's age doesn't matter if the offense could be prosecuted as a felony, but I didn't look up the particulars as to what constitutes a felony in CA.

I wasn't talking about the actual assault.

The question pertains to the signing of the NDA. Its pretty clear cut an NDA is not valid if the person is a minor. In other words the minors guardian/parent can't sign an NDA.

But an NDA signed when a the person signing it is an adult. She was of legal age when she signed the NDA. Is it then valid? I guess we would need an attorney, particularly one familiar with the CA law as it pertains to NDAs to answer the question.

 

[profmom]

The agreement was signed recently; Maroney was an adult.

When a civil lawsuit seeking damages is filed, the incentive is to throw out every possible allegation and frame it in the best light possible for your client. Of course it is in Maroney's interest as a client to blame USAG entirely for forcing the confidentiality agreement. If Manly can get it voided as against public policy, that also enables Maroney to avoid the liquidated damages. Manly is simultaneously making legal arguments and arguing in the court of public opinion. And I am sure he is operating under a standard contingency fee arrangement.

USAG will contest his narrative formally when they file a response brief and it looks like their gambit will be to blame Allred and to claim that the NDA as it is written does not violate the law. I don't really see any way to say which side has more of the truth on this piece of the dispute with the information we have available now. Given that none of us have seen the NDA, I think it's foolish to speculate about what it may or may not say.

Nassar was caught by the FBI on child pornography charges. Possession basically makes the offense. It's easy to nail someone with a hard drive full of pictures.