Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

To Snyder's credit, the Penn State legal team has no problem doing all they can to avoid any repercussions whatsoever for illegal sexual activities.

  • Bob 1

i am an idiot on the internet

Posted
47 minutes ago, bnwtwg said:

To Snyder's credit, the Penn State legal team has no problem doing all they can to avoid any repercussions whatsoever for illegal sexual activities.

Seems more like SOP for a first time offender.

Drowning in data, but thirsting for knowledge

Posted
14 minutes ago, HokieDave87 said:

To be fair did anybody know what the term QV meant before this came out?

That's my point. He says only a serial offender would know what he and Snyder know.

I still don't know what it means. And don't want to, either.

Drowning in data, but thirsting for knowledge

Posted
1 minute ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

That's my point. He says only a serial offender would know what he and Snyder know.

I still don't know what it means. And don't want to, either.

It means quick visit. It was reported shortly after the article broke that it was in Snyder's texts, I'm assuming that's where he learned what it meant as that was the first time I'd ever seen it.

Posted (edited)

This comment reinforces the general sentiment best

image.thumb.jpeg.14417126d09ca9d69616ae546f49a742.jpeg

Edited by bnwtwg
Footer to add this thread is going full Synder
  • Fire 2

i am an idiot on the internet

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, 1032004 said:

Says he’s only pleading guilty to disorderly conduct.  That might get him out of the Safesport issue.

https://www.wkbn.com/sports/olympian-ex-ohio-state-wrestler-kyle-snyder-to-plead-guilty-to-lesser-charge-in-prostitution-case/

Unfortunately it probably won't.  The Safesport Code is pretty clear that (a) solicitation for prostitution is a violation, and (b) pleading to a lesser charge won't preclude them from finding a violation for what you were charged with.  I doubt the public release of information has helped Snyder's cause.

It's utterly ridiculous that the Safesport people have taken it upon themselves to claim jurisdiction over such matters.  There's no victim. They need to worry about conduct where there's an actual victim, and stop sticking their nose into other peoples' bedroom to see what consideration was exchanged between two consenting adults.  We don't need the morals police telling us who can and can't be on the world team.

For an added dose of irony, prostitution itself is *not* a Safesport violation.  Only solicitation. If the woman had paid Kyle to give him head instead of the other way around, he'd have been fine.  

Kyle's only hope is they adjudicate it quickly and let him off with an admonishment.  But the odds of that are basically zero, as Safesport is famous for its foot-dragging and indefensibly slow handling of cases. On top of that, they're in turmoil after firing their CEO a few weeks ago, when it was learned he'd covered up the fact that their investigator was arrested for stealing money from a drug bust (apparently THAT crime is OK), which came out when he was later arrested for rape.  (Details here.) 

Don't count on Safesport getting their act together before the weekend.  Hope Snyder keeps his head up and comes back strong, and Safesport gets the reform it badly needs.  

Edited by BAC
  • Bob 3
Posted
4 hours ago, BAC said:

Unfortunately it probably won't.  The Safesport Code is pretty clear that (a) solicitation for prostitution is a violation, and (b) pleading to a lesser charge won't preclude them from finding a violation for what you were charged with.  I doubt the public release of information has helped Snyder's cause.

It's utterly ridiculous that the Safesport people have taken it upon themselves to claim jurisdiction over such matters.  There's no victim. They need to worry about conduct where there's an actual victim, and stop sticking their nose into other peoples' bedroom to see what consideration was exchanged between two consenting adults.  We don't need the morals police telling us who can and can't be on the world team.

For an added dose of irony, prostitution itself is *not* a Safesport violation.  Only solicitation. If the woman had paid Kyle to give him head instead of the other way around, he'd have been fine.  

Kyle's only hope is they adjudicate it quickly and let him off with an admonishment.  But the odds of that are basically zero, as Safesport is famous for its foot-dragging and indefensibly slow handling of cases. On top of that, they're in turmoil after firing their CEO a few weeks ago, when it was learned he'd covered up the fact that their investigator was arrested for stealing money from a drug bust (apparently THAT crime is OK), which came out when he was later arrested for rape.  (Details here.) 

Don't count on Safesport getting their act together before the weekend.  Hope Snyder keeps his head up and comes back strong, and Safesport gets the reform it badly needs.  

Oh I’m sure SafeSport is probably corrupt, but I’d still be surprised if they can rule on something that has been ruled differently in court.  Not saying I agree, but if all he gets is a disorderly conduct then as far as the courts go he never officially solicited a prostitute.  Pretty sure disorderly conduct is like the least severe crime possible other than a speeding ticket.

Posted
On 5/14/2025 at 8:59 PM, alliseeisgold said:

Do you think God approves of this ?

Does God believe support our brothers all the same, or only the ones we like.

Just the ones we like. 

  • Bob 1
Posted
Quote

The agency has also been criticized for giving coaches light punishments. A 2020 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office discovered that SafeSport only imposed sanctions on 262 of 2,460 cases it “resolved” in a one-year period. Two years later, an investigation from ABC News and ESPN found multiple instances where SafeSport allowed serial sexual abusers to return to coaching without any indication on their records. 

 

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, 1032004 said:

Oh I’m sure SafeSport is probably corrupt, but I’d still be surprised if they can rule on something that has been ruled differently in court.  Not saying I agree, but if all he gets is a disorderly conduct then as far as the courts go he never officially solicited a prostitute.  Pretty sure disorderly conduct is like the least severe crime possible other than a speeding ticket.

I agree that they can't rule on something in a way that conflicts with a judicial ruling, but that's not what happened here.  It isn't like some judge said, "I've looked at the facts Mr. Snyder and I conclude that you are NOT guilty of solicitation, only of disorderly conduct."  Rather the prosecutor just chose to reduce the charges to get a guilty plea.  He was never found not guilty of solicitation.  That gives SafeSport the window they need to investigate the conduct as originally charged.

And, despite my railing against Safesport in the preceding post, I actually do agree that this is what the rule should be, as a general matter.  Imagine for a moment that some youth wrestling coach is charged with sexual abuse of minors.  But there's problems with the prosecution:  maybe the statute of limitations has passed, or the kid is too scared to testify, so the prosecutor, figuring something is better than nothing, accepts a guilty plea for disorderly conduct. Would you, as a wrestling parent, want Safesport to be allowed to look at what the real facts are and make a decision (e.g. a ban) based on those real facts, not the plea?  I'm guessing you would.

Here I'm just annoyed because even accepting that Safesport is allowed to look at original solicitation charge, there's nothing in the charge that is remotely within Safesport's proper purview, as there's no victim, and no conduct showing it's harmful for him to be in the sport. It's just moral judgment, nothing more, and hypocritical moral judgment at that.  Our world team is going to be worse because of their idiocy.

Edited by BAC
  • Bob 1
  • Fire 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...