I called it the "rape and escape" clause for that is what it is: A clause that allows a pedophile coach who is under investigation to terminate that investigation and avoid that "black bullet point" on their resume that USA Swimming has summarily banned them for life.
This "Rape and Escape" clause was even admitted to and published in Swimming World.
From the Swimming World:
"... USA Swimming countered in its letter stating that it had no jurisdiction over the case because it happened before USA Swimming's existence, and also that the coach is no longer a member of USA Swimming and is also no longer under its jurisdiction. ..."
Obviously this is a de facto admission when you look directly at what the USA Swimming rules state.
From a well informed reader - who pointed me to these two rules:
"... An argument could be made that the "rape and escape" dodge should not work. Rule 304.3.7(ii) addresses "any other adult participating in any capacity... (whether such adult is a member or not)" with regards to sexual conduct.
This is a mandatory report under Article 306.1 and Article 306.4 states "Neither civil nor criminal statutes of limitation apply to reports of cases of sexual abuse."
By these rules we believe that NBAC's report was mandatory and it doesn't matter if this was 37 years or 37 minutes ago.
In terms of the appropriate action if date is not important, USA Swimming must investigate this and act on findings under the "Prospective Member" aspect of Article 304.2.
I looked up what Rule 306.4 states and it was pretty specific:
Neither civil nor criminal statutes of limitation apply to reports of cases of sexual abuse:
What Does Rule 304.3.7 state:
304.3.7(ii) = Any sexual conduct, advance, or other inappropriate sexual oriented behavior or action directed towards an athlete by (i) a coach member or other non-athlete member, or (ii) any other adult participating in any capacity whatsoever in the affairs or activities of USA Swimming (whether such adult is a member or not). Any nonconsensual physical sexual conduct, or pattern of other sexual harassment in connection or incidental to a USA Swimming-related activity by any person participating in the affairs or activities of USA Swimming (Whether such person is a member or not) directed toward any member or other person participating in the affairs or activities of USA Swimming.
From another informed reader:
"... FYI: you wrote: Note, if a coach is prosecuted for a sex crime and convicted in a court of law or a judgement is rendered against the coach in a civil court, I believe this coach would automatically be placed on the banned list.
Tony, recall that Norm Havercroft had that civil judgment in San Jose, early 2000. He was never put on the banned list allowing him access to Jancy Thompson.
Also, recall that Erick Lans back some 20 years ago settled a civil suit, actually USA Swimming did, sued for Lans' molestation crimes. He is nowhere to be found on the list even though he was criminally convicted. Somewhere we called Chuck on this and they came up with same lame excuse, he was not a member. He was not a member yet he was allowed to coach and they paid out. ..."
There was a preponderance of printed evidence that USA Swimming is not trustworthy and the above quotes in Swimming World especially when contrasted with their own rules resonates that feeling even more. Chuck Wielgus should have "fallen on his sword" and left USA Swimming thereby taking all the shame and disgrace with him thereby allowing a new Executive Director the breathing space to do the right things. Instead the policies still favor a select few while the shadow of mistrust will haunt them till they remove the old guard.
I am unimpressed with the USA Swimming board of directors for lacking the spine and the courage to do what is right. In no other sport would such malfeasance be tolerated.
This post is dedicated to my readers, especially the ones that school me and make this blog better!