Welcome to our Gymnastics Discussion Community
555,589 messages... 44,515 topics... and 6,778 members
Join for FREE!
Thank you for supporting our sponsors Energym Music & Norberts!

International Elite Maggie Haney suspended

bookworm

Well-Known Member
Gold Membership
Proud Parent
Oct 3, 2009
3,184
On my couch either reading or doing nothing...
Country
USA
Some of those parents should be reported to CPS for what they say they are willing to let their kids be subject to...and they're young so they have no say. Haney needs to be banned for life or she'll never stop....heck, she's suspended EIGHT YEARS and she says she has athletes "waiting for her to coach them" ....there's some serious Jim Jones kool aid drinking going on in that gym.
 

QuietColours

Member
Nov 10, 2008
59
Country
USA
This line at the end is the one that really got me: "The culture has shifted perhaps too far, she said, and she expects the sport, going forward, to be filled with underachievers."

Clearly, she truly has internalized how harsh and abusive coaching techniques are unnecessary and counterproductive to getting results, on top of how much such things hurt the children in question, and fully prioritizes happy, healthy children over high performing athletes. /sarcasm
 

suds

Member
Proud Parent
Jun 26, 2015
138
Country
USA


Haney hired a public-relations firm “to help restore her reputation.” Enter the carefully-choreographed NYT article catering to the court of public opinion. In reality, she did not do herself any favors by revealing more of her true colors.


Regarding parents of gymnasts in abusive coaching environments: Old-school, control-based coaching involves the coach asserting control over the athlete and their parents. In addition, denial can be extremely powerful - especially when reinforced by similar perceptions of other surrounding parents. Clarity of hindsight can eventually yield realizations leading many of these same parents to feel gutted.
Please keep this in mind when discussing these parents.


I do always feel horrible when minors go on the record publicly defending an accused adult. Lacking years to build perspective, children will, by default, label their own personal experience as normal. Children tend to deeply believe that any problem is with themselves, and not with the emotional abuser. Children having some degree of attachment to the abuser is very common. All of this can add up to the child giving a vigorous endorsement of an emotionally abusive adult.


 

txgymfan

Administrator
Staff member
Gold Membership
Coach
Proud Relative
Fan
Sep 4, 2008
3,207
Houston
Country
USA
Sadly, this is so true. I took care of two girls who were abused by their mother. I started immediately after she was removed from the house and she should have gone to jail. After three years, they never understood that they were victims of abuse. The things that woman did made Maggie look like Mary Poppins and they still said they deserved it.

When I met them the eight year old had started copying her mom’s behavior and was already abusing her little sister. It was beyond sad.
 

bookworm

Well-Known Member
Gold Membership
Proud Parent
Oct 3, 2009
3,184
On my couch either reading or doing nothing...
Country
USA

Well, this seems about right.
Are you be facetious? As it "seems about right" because USAG never gets it right on these cases? Between the lowering of Haney's suspension and the vacating of the Azarian trios suspensions, USAG is signaling that they are NOT going to discipline or ban anyone for physical and mental abuse "only" .... what a sad state of affairs for USAG that unless the offender is a sexual predator, it's anything goes.
 

LJL07

Active Member
Proud Parent
Jan 27, 2014
1,648
Country
USA
Are you be facetious? As it "seems about right" because USAG never gets it right on these cases? Between the lowering of Haney's suspension and the vacating of the Azarian trios suspensions, USAG is signaling that they are NOT going to discipline or ban anyone for physical and mental abuse "only" .... what a sad state of affairs for USAG that unless the offender is a sexual predator, it's anything goes.
Oh, I'm being facetious. Of course USAG mismanaged the hearing so naturally the sentence is being reduced really on technicalities because the case was so mishandled. I would love to see how USAG handles this latest debacle. The gyms all continue to rally behind USAG because there just isn't anything else. I guess they tried to start up NGA, but everyone is afraid of change and that organization wasn't being very transparent initially, so the masses all stuck with USAG. And really nothing will ever change.
 

skschlag

Moderator
Staff member
Gold Membership
Proud Parent
Jul 19, 2011
10,660
Region 9
Country
USA
I hate that this has been lowered, but I have read multiple articles. USAG did not lower the suspension, an arbitrator did. I disagree with the decision of the arbitrator that some testimony should not have been allowed. EVERYONE should be allowed to testify in these cases. I did see that USAG is considering resubmitting the testimony of the girls that was determined not allowed in teh first decision, and then the additional testimony that has come forward, looking for a lifetime ban.

Not sure how independent lawsuits affect all of this though. Although, they might get more done than hearings and arbitrators.
 

LJL07

Active Member
Proud Parent
Jan 27, 2014
1,648
Country
USA
I hate that this has been lowered, but I have read multiple articles. USAG did not lower the suspension, an arbitrator did. I disagree with the decision of the arbitrator that some testimony should not have been allowed. EVERYONE should be allowed to testify in these cases. I did see that USAG is considering resubmitting the testimony of the girls that was determined not allowed in teh first decision, and then the additional testimony that has come forward, looking for a lifetime ban.

Not sure how independent lawsuits affect all of this though. Although, they might get more done than hearings and arbitrators.
Right. It was the arbitrator. My frustration with USAG is that they apparently didn't follow their own process correctly.
 

bookworm

Well-Known Member
Gold Membership
Proud Parent
Oct 3, 2009
3,184
On my couch either reading or doing nothing...
Country
USA
Right. It was the arbitrator. My frustration with USAG is that they apparently didn't follow their own process correctly.
Well the "arbitrator" may have lowered Haney's suspension but the return of the Azarian trio without any meaningful punishment (or outright ban as they should've gotten) falls solely on USAG as they are "comfortable" with their return....so parents should read that as its meant to be, hope your kids get a kind, caring coach but if not, open season on your kids and please don't contact us because USAG "has a shortage of good coaches".....
 

skschlag

Moderator
Staff member
Gold Membership
Proud Parent
Jul 19, 2011
10,660
Region 9
Country
USA
Well the "arbitrator" may have lowered Haney's suspension but the return of the Azarian trio without any meaningful punishment (or outright ban as they should've gotten) falls solely on USAG as they are "comfortable" with their return....so parents should read that as its meant to be, hope your kids get a kind, caring coach but if not, open season on your kids and please don't contact us because USAG "has a shortage of good coaches".....

Agreed. That is so wrong.
 

LJL07

Active Member
Proud Parent
Jan 27, 2014
1,648
Country
USA
Well the "arbitrator" may have lowered Haney's suspension but the return of the Azarian trio without any meaningful punishment (or outright ban as they should've gotten) falls solely on USAG as they are "comfortable" with their return....so parents should read that as its meant to be, hope your kids get a kind, caring coach but if not, open season on your kids and please don't contact us because USAG "has a shortage of good coaches".....
Oh yes. Absolutely. The arbitrator couldn't have made much of a case for lowering the suspension if USAG didn't suck. Not sure if people are aware of how the attorney for USAG also plays both sides. And he is STILL the attorney. They must not have a lot of takers for the job. I'll just continue to sit over here holding my breath while I wait to be informed about the resolution of our complaint that was filed well over two years ago.
 

LemonLime

Active Member
Proud Parent
Jul 16, 2007
787
@MuggleMom
In addition to McCusker, the other three gymnasts whose accusations were voided by the arbitrator were Cameran Edwards, Zoe Gravier and Skyelar Kerico. They had accused Haney of abuse and bullying that included threats and her cursing at them and calling them degrading things like lazy and emotionally disturbed, forcing them to train despite injuries and screaming at them so much that it damaged their self-esteem and made them scared of her.

In those cases, the arbitrator, in a ruling last week that was disclosed Tuesday by Haney’s lawyer, found that U.S.A. Gymnastics had failed to provide Haney proper notice of the allegations, leaving Haney without the chance to defend herself sufficiently during the hearing held in February and March.


Translating without seeing the opinion...Defendants have the right to know the accusations against them and the facts supporting the allegations in the complaint. Witnesses who may be called at the hearing must be disclosed in advance so defendants have a meaningful right to discover their testimony and defend against it. These are fundamental Constitutional rights. The article attributes USAG counsel failed to provide a complete witness list (or list of people with knowledge, depending on the procedure) and/or their proposed testimony supporting the complaint. As described, this is a first-year attorney mistake. It could have been cured by continuing the hearing and/or submitting a proper witness list.

No, not everyone is allowed to testify at a trial, nor should they be. Only fact or expert witnesses with information relevant to a complaint can provide testimony. Victim impact statements, such as found in the Nasser trial, are an exception to this rule. Think of it this way, if you take cocaine in 2000 and are transformed and become a savior to the community, the only facts relevant to allegations of a 2000 drug offense are what happened during that drug incident. Witnesses to your being a savior after-the-fact get to testify at your sentencing, but not during the fact trial because they were not present in 2000. The law looks to points in time and specific behavior, and generally not to character unless that character proves or disproves an allegation. It is possible USAG counsel took an grossly expansive view of character testimony or was unable to continue to the hearing to add the witnesses that piled on. This isn't Survivor and you can't be blindsided, even if you are Larry Nassar. Either way, it was a mistake.
 

bookworm

Well-Known Member
Gold Membership
Proud Parent
Oct 3, 2009
3,184
On my couch either reading or doing nothing...
Country
USA
I agree with your assessment Lemon Lime ....but I still think Haney is totally guilty of what her gymnasts (Mccusker et al) are accusing her of . It may not hold up in a court of law but the court of public opinion should keep her from ever coaching again . Parents need to open their eyes on her ...
 

MuggleMom

Member
Former Gymnast
Proud Parent
Dec 22, 2016
480
Virginia
Country
USA
It has to be so disheartening to do the right thing and have your voice negated in a technicality. I see how they voided the testimony but it still seems suspect to me that such a high profile case was mishandled. I hope that the civil lawsuits will have a punitive effect on her. I’m not one to wish a person ill ....usually....