Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Deadspin: Legendary Columnist Bill Conlin Resigns Over Forthcoming Philly Inquirer Bombshell

The Philadelphia Inquirer’s top investigative reporter, Nancy Phillips, has written a story containing what we’re told are allegations of child molestation against sportswriter Bill Conlin, a longtime columnist at the rival Daily News. Conlin resigned just moments ago, according to a source at the Daily News.

Conlin, who turns 78 this May, won the Ford C. Frick Award last May. The story supposedly will drop soon (the newspapers publish under a joint-operating agreement, sharing some resources and a website but otherwise competing for the same readers). Conlin has hired an attorney to defend himself against the piece. We’ll have more details on this. For now, we can tell you that Conlin is at his condo in Largo, Fla.

And Bill Conlin’s articles on BTF...

Tripon Posted: December 20, 2011 at 06:47 PM | 283 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: hall of fame, media, obituaries, phillies, rumors, special topics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 3 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3
   201. Morty Causa Posted: December 21, 2011 at 05:38 PM (#4021156)
It's amusing, and a little frightening, to see how the minds of some people will make it about me if making it about Conlin (or Clinton, or Polanksi, etc.) won't suffice and satisfy. The points made exist separate from what Conlin is or what I am. I don't want to be part of your mob--you and your narrow-mindedness knee-jerk judmentalism scares me.
   202. Tripon Posted: December 21, 2011 at 05:41 PM (#4021159)


No, sorry. My point does't have to do with the merits. I'm really not defending Conlin (or Polanski or Hall or Clinton--well, yeah, I am defending Clinton). My point here is limited, and it says a lot about people who want to extend it so feel justification to lynch me.


Then *WHY* are you arguing if you're not going to talk about the merits of the case?
   203. Tom was totally clowned by CW Posted: December 21, 2011 at 05:47 PM (#4021163)
Morty,

I have never seen someone who rushed to judgement as easily as you have here.

Nobody here has advocated lynching or any physical harm coming to Conlin.

There is no danger of the accusations here causing any attacks on a minority class.

If this is a one sided story it is only because Conlin has chosen to let it be that way. I doubt that Conlin has ever been accused of not being able to express his side of any story.

In your defense of Conlin you are doing exactly what you accuse others of doing, making groundless accusations, trying to bury the truth, misrepresenting the facts. The only way the truth comes out in this story is for it to get wider publicity and for Conlin to face his accusers. If you are supporting that then great, if you say the story should go away because Conlin doesn't want to talk, well then sorry, if he chooses not to make a defense then we can make a judgement based on the facts we have.

And if you are going to dispute the facts here then bring some evidence, because this is a credible story with absolutely no one disputing any aspect of it.

I would love to see Conlin face off against his neice, the prosecutor who claims he molested her, on Conlin's show, if he has the balls and is really innocent that is what he should do.
   204. Non-Youkilidian Geometry Posted: December 21, 2011 at 05:58 PM (#4021172)
It's amusing, and a little frightening, to see how the minds of some people will make it about me if making it about Conlin (or Clinton, or Polanksi, etc.) won't suffice and satisfy. The points made exist separate from what Conlin is or what I am. I don't want to be part of your mob--you and your narrow-mindedness knee-jerk judmentalism scares me.

This.

For a place that prides itself on rational evidence-based analysis when it comes to baseball, I was surprised by the number of people rushing to conclusions within hours of a single newspaper report, and disturbed that when Morty suggested that everyone slow down a lot of people responded with personal attacks.

Then *WHY* are you arguing if you're not going to talk about the merits of the case?

Because Morty is making an entirely different point. Conlin may very well turn out to be guilty. Morty's point, if I understood him correctly, was that none of are in a position at this point to fairly decide this question.
   205. Tom was totally clowned by CW Posted: December 21, 2011 at 06:01 PM (#4021176)
Biscuit Pants,

I have known people whose life has been ruined by false accusations, including a family member who spent 7 years in prison because his wife accused him of molesting their kids as part of a really messy divorce, zero evidence but the accusation occurred on a military base, and due process is a bit different in the military. Other than that I have been in the middle of this process many times, running programs for kids for ten years.

And this is not remotely similar to any thing like that. All of the people involved are adults, the stories have all been corroborated, there is no legal process hanging over Conlin at the moment, this not a case of "recovered memory" or anything like that, police did not instigate this investigation.

This all started when one victim realized she was not the only one.

It is one thing to scream about false accusations, it is another to use totally dissimilar stories of false accusations as a "defense" and to attack the victims.

I am ready to hear why you think these accusations are false based on the facts of THIS case. Do you know of a single other case where accusations made by adults turned out to be false, where there was no prosecution and no representation of repressed memories?
   206. Morty Causa Posted: December 21, 2011 at 06:02 PM (#4021178)
If you have ever known someone falsely accused of child molestation you might not be quick to judge. Teachers get falsely accused a lot and it ruins their career. There was a case in Indiana in which the girls admitted to the false accusations rather quickly but the teacher had to move to a new school because of pressure by parents, after the admission by the girls. While I did not know that teacher I did know their sister and hearing it from her really made me take a step back and think before I get worked up. I still get worked up because of the thought of it, but I try and say to myself that they might not have done it.


Truth is hard to know and often ugly when seen.

I'll tell you a story--from my experience as a lawyer. This man's teenage stepdaughter accused him of molesting her. Of course, the marriage went down the tubes. And he was convicted based only on her word, along with of course the appropriate tears and displays of anguish . He was in prison when she had a change of heart, went to the authorities, and told them she had lied. Not only that, but friends of hers at the time of the supposed crimes were willing to testify that she had told them she was going to fabricate accusations against him because she didn't like him, first for being a stepfather, and second for disciplining her like a father. It's really obvious he had been framed. What happened? The standards for post-conviction relief being what they are, he served his time. What do you think his life has been like and is like now? What do you think her life is like because of a system that let her get away with that.

Most people don't think about it, or study, but if they did, they see how easy it is to get people into a lot of trouble with not much effort when it comes to sex crimes. Prophesy to me how people have no reason to lie--but I say someone has a reason to lie in just about every incident there is. And the more powerful they are, the less repercussions there are to lying, the more the tendency. And in sex crimes cases, accusers have a lot of sympathy and are ceded great credibility from the outset. Some people need to get a grip--start, maybe with the Innocence Project. See how sure many of the accusers seemed. Then go on from there.

Truth shouldn't be decided in process similar to being ginned up at a high school pep rally. Save that attitude for sports--that's why sports exist. They shouldn't exist as an analogous paradigm to decide issues like this.
   207. Non-Youkilidian Geometry Posted: December 21, 2011 at 06:04 PM (#4021180)
Nobody here has advocated lynching or any physical harm coming to Conlin.


You apparently missed this:

Short of an extraordinary back story, it looks like someone may need a genital tasing. Or 12 million of them.


I'm sure the original poster was speaking rhetorically, but that's probably the way most lynch mobs start out.
   208. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 21, 2011 at 06:10 PM (#4021186)
I'll tell you a story--from my experience as a lawyer. This man's teenage stepdaughter accused him of molesting her. Of course, the marriage went down the tubes. And he was convicted based only on her word, and of course the appropriate tears and displays of anguish . He was in prison when she had a change of heart, went to the authorities, and told them she had lied. Not only that, but friends of hers at the time of the supposed crimes were willing to testify that she had told them she was going to fabricate accusations against him because she didn't like him, first for being a stepfather, and second for disciplining her like a father. It's really obvious he had been framed. What happened? The standards for post-conviction relief being what they are, he served his time. What you think his life is like? What do you think her life is like because of a system that let her get away with it.


Now is not the time for an autobiography.

Ok, kidding. Seriously, though, you'll note the huge difference at play here: in the above case, there was a single accuser. That is simply not the case here. If this were one person coming forward from Conlin's past, or even a couple people, I'd reserve judgment. But there are several people here from different parts of Conlin's life, all with specific stories that align, not all of them victims but confirming the various stories.

Did the reporter make it up?
   209. Tom was totally clowned by CW Posted: December 21, 2011 at 06:15 PM (#4021191)
In case it is not clear, I am not advocating any punishment if Conlin at the moment, I am strongly advocating much broader coverage of this story and much digging into Conlin's life to find if there are other victims, especially more recent ones.

I fully advocate police and/or reporters talk with any child who Conlin even said hello to for the last 15 years. If you have a problem with that then you really don't care about justice. There may not be enough to convict him but I think there is easily enough to start tearing apart his life to see if there are any more secrets, any more victims. Because right now, Conlin doesn't strike me as much of a victim, not as much as the ones in the story.
   210. Morty Causa Posted: December 21, 2011 at 06:22 PM (#4021202)
I won't be Catch-22-ed--put in the position of conceding that my position can only have validity if I act in the same way as those I criticize.
   211. Non-Youkilidian Geometry Posted: December 21, 2011 at 06:28 PM (#4021206)
Do you know of a single other case where accusations made by adults turned out to be false, where there was no prosecution and no representation of repressed memories?

In cases where there is no prosecution it is unusual for the full facts to ever emerge publicly or for allegations to be tested in a way that makes it possible for a third party (like us) to form a reasonable opinion about their truth or falsity.

It is also virtually impossible in most historical allegation cases to ever conclusively prove that an allegation is false. From the perspective of a defence lawyer it is also usually very hard to positively establish why a complainant might make a false complaint. Often the most you can do is raise enough serious questions about the veracity of the complaint to raise a reasonable doubt (or something more). I've seen a substantial number of cases in my practice involving historical allegations by now-adult complainants where the complaint has turned out to be so significantly at odds with the evidence of other witnesses that a court acquitted or the police and prosecution decided not to proceed with the charge. But even in these cases it is usually impossible to state conclusively that the accusations "turned out to be false".
   212. base ball chick Posted: December 21, 2011 at 06:30 PM (#4021208)
i would agre that morty has a point about everyone rushing to judgement without having all the facts (like in the duke lacrosse case)

if

morty had not, more than once, stated that hving sex with young teenage females, (when you are not a young teenage guy) is good, normal and natural. i disremember if he also supported having sex with young teenage boys.
   213. Zonk qualifies as an invasive species Posted: December 21, 2011 at 06:37 PM (#4021220)
For a place that prides itself on rational evidence-based analysis when it comes to baseball, I was surprised by the number of people rushing to conclusions within hours of a single newspaper report, and disturbed that when Morty suggested that everyone slow down a lot of people responded with personal attacks.


Are we talking about the same place? Because the world's biggest idiot/world's smart GM is always proclaimed within moments of any reported trade or FA signing.

But even beyond that --


I'll tell you a story--from my experience as a lawyer. This man's teenage stepdaughter accused him of molesting her. Of course, the marriage went down the tubes. And he was convicted based only on her word, and of course the appropriate tears and displays of anguish . He was in prison when she had a change of heart, went to the authorities, and told them she had lied. Not only that, but friends of hers at the time of the supposed crimes were willing to testify that she had told them she was going to fabricate accusations against him because she didn't like him, first for being a stepfather, and second for disciplining her like a father. It's really obvious he had been framed. What happened? The standards for post-conviction relief being what they are, he served his time. What you think his life is like? What do you think her life is like because of a system that let her get away with it.

Most people don't think about it, or study, but if they did, they see how easy it is to get people into a lot of trouble with not much effort when it comes to sex crimes. Prophesy to me how people have no reason to lie--but I say someone has a reason to lie in just about every incident there is. And the more powerful they are, the less repercussions there are to lying, the more the tendency. And in sex crimes cases, accusers have a lot of sympathy and are ceded great credibility from the outset. Some people need to grip--start, maybe with the Innocence Project. See how sure many of these accusers seemed. Then go on from there.

Truth shouldn't be decided in process similar to being ginned up at a high school pep rally. Save that attitude for sports--that's why they exist. They shouldn't exist as analogous paradigm to decide issues like this.


I think this is just reductio ad absurdum fluffing of this place and its importance in whatever 'process' Conlin will face (and all sings point to the idea that, absent more recent accusations -- there will be no legal process... at least not a criminal one).

This thread isn't a trial, and again - even those that have hurled the more taserific remedies would step back the minute someone suggested it go further than chat board blathering.

Bill Conlin isn't a relatively anonymous stepfather. He's not going to even be tried.

I understand the conceptual construct of 'truth' and 'process' being most important in the seemingly most egregious cases -- but if your aim here is draw attention to the idea that 1)sometimes innocent people are accused falsely of terrible crimes, and as a result 2)people should calm down before jumping to conclusions --- this isn't going to in any way serve that idea.

This isn't a single capricious relative with an axe to grind. It's multiple accusers with no known reason to make something like this up. Given the statute of limitations, it's highly likely we may not get any more than has been reported.

Add this all up and what do you get? A scenario where asking someone to take a closer look and 'wait' is going to lead them to the opposite POV -- that Conlin probably IS guilty of committing horrific crimes, ISN'T going to pay any legal penalty for that, etc.

I understand the larger point in a theoretical vacuum. It's just that this isn't a theoretical vacuum - it's a specific circumstance in which a little digital outrage has absolutely no repercussions for the accused.
   214. , Posted: December 21, 2011 at 06:41 PM (#4021225)
No, sorry. My point does't have to do with the merits. I'm really not defending Conlin (or Polanski or Hall or Clinton--well, yeah, I am defending Clinton). My point here is limited, and it says a lot about people who want to extend it so feel justification to lynch me.


No one wants to lynch you. Some think you're nuts. Others would like to know what the hell you're talking about - up until a few posts ago, you weren't clear at all. You are talking larger philosophy and ideology. Great. The rest of us are talking about this case. Insulting us because you want to talk about a different topic isn't exactly doing great service to Western Civilization, either.

Of course Conlin deserves to have his side heard. But philosophy is all well and good on a discussion board. In the real world people have to make judgements of other people. We do it every day on much flimsier evidence than is present in the Conlin case. You simply can't trust everyone. You're quite right that we should all (yes, including you) be ready to change our opinion of others if new evidence comes to light.

Given your philosophy, how do you decide who to do business with? Who watches your kids? Everyone? No one?

Would you allow Bill Conlin to watch your 8 year old, given what we know?


Cases evolve, and, again, you're right that we should all be ready for new information to come to light. But in the here and now, we have several credible witnesses, corroboration and Conlin's refusal to talk. A trial is out of the question on these allegations (unless he's molested these same people since 1996 (when they weren't children)). He could, if he chose, come out on his doorstep and say, "I didn't do it. I'm innocent," or he could say, "Everything they said is true," and the legal ramifications would be the same. But he's not talking. He's got an absolute right not to talk and neither I, nor anyone else here, is advocating sending him to jail if he doesn't. But in assessing who Bill Conlin is, if nothing changes, I think it's highly likely - likely enough for public opinion at any rate - that he's guilty. If you don't, that's fine. But don't expect me to trust you with my kids or my money.


As for the adversarial process, I agree with you, with one caveat. You can't protect yourself by refusing to participate in that process. If Bill Conlin never utters a public word about these charges, we can't simply throw up our hands and say, "Ah, well, he's not guilty." When someone accuses you of something, the adversarial process has begun. You either defend yourself or you're conceding.

Again, if you can find anyone here doing what you claim we're doing - rushing to judgement, ready to imprison or harm* Conlin right this instant - then I agree with you, those folks would be in the wrong. Forming an opinion with information is what people do. Certainly it's early. Certainly we should all be willing to hear Conlin's case.

* Yeah, the taser comment, if serious, is too far. And, if not serious, I grant that that kind of thing can lead to unfortunate outcomes.
   215. Morty Causa Posted: December 21, 2011 at 06:48 PM (#4021233)
morty had not, more than once, stated that hving sex with young teenage females, (when you are not a young teenage guy) is good, normal and natural. i disremember if he also supported having sex with young teenage boys.


A guinea hen recalled that she had once seen somebody who looked very much like the gander throw something that looked a great deal like a bomb.
   216. , Posted: December 21, 2011 at 06:51 PM (#4021240)
Jesus. Are you high right now, Morty?
   217. Morty Causa Posted: December 21, 2011 at 07:05 PM (#4021260)
Firs and always has been the innuendo and even imputation that I'm a child molester, then that I can only be high--you know, I'm not responsible for those who don't read what I link or can't track it, but your inability or indifference is not going to force me to wallow in the same rancid orgiastic mindfuck that some of you have displayed. That's all there is to it. You may not trust me with your children. I wouldn't even trust some of you to wash my car and not steal the change from the tray, the way you try to sandbag the argument on the slightest pretext..
   218. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 21, 2011 at 07:30 PM (#4021286)
I am strongly advocating much broader coverage of this story and much digging into Conlin's life to find if there are other victims, especially more recent ones.

As I recall, Conlin has infamously bragged of owning a condo in the Dominican. If I was a Philly news reporter, I'd be booking a flight to the D.R. rather than Florida.
   219. , Posted: December 21, 2011 at 07:35 PM (#4021290)
Morty, I was referring only to 215 on the "are you high" question.

You have a fair larger point that is well nigh meaningless in the specific case being discussed. There is no orgiastic mindfuck except in your world where "Sure looks like he's guilty" in conversation translates to "Lynch him!". You think we don't get you and we may well not. But it sure as hell is true that you don't get us.


But, again, I ask, what would it take for you to think the man guilty? Not a generic man, but this man. Can it only be through a trial? I, at least, seriously only ask out of curiousity. I don't think you're a bad guy, just foolish as I read it right now. But that is mainly because you are holding to broad philosophical tenets and you resort to insult when questioned.

So, one last time: what would you like to see, specifically, here in the case of Conlin?
   220. Matt Garza smells it deep (Mr. Tapeworm) Posted: December 21, 2011 at 07:41 PM (#4021296)
I wouldn't even trust some of you to wash my car and not steal the change from the tray,


He is right, in that I would totally steal the change from the tray in his car. I would wash the car first, though, so I'm not all bad.
   221. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 21, 2011 at 07:50 PM (#4021307)
Truth shouldn't be decided in process similar to being ginned up at a high school pep rally.


It should be decided in court. Unfortunately, due to the statute of limitations, that's not a possibility here. As such, we have to go with the less-than-ideal court of public opinion, because it's all that's available to us.
   222. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: December 21, 2011 at 07:58 PM (#4021317)
Nobody here has advocated lynching or any physical harm coming to Conlin.


ValueArb did, in response to my inevitably doomed attempt to suggest a difference in the scale of the crimes attributed to Conlin and Sandusky. Then I stopped reading the thread until now.
   223. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 21, 2011 at 08:02 PM (#4021322)
Would you allow Bill Conlin to watch your 8 year old, given what we know?

Depends. Is it legal for an 8 year old to use a machine gun in self-defense?
   224. Tripon Posted: December 21, 2011 at 08:06 PM (#4021325)
It technically legal for any 8 year old to commit murder. We have no statue that can determine a just penalty for a child so young.
   225. Swoboda is freedom Posted: December 21, 2011 at 08:22 PM (#4021346)
We have no statue that can determine a just penalty for a child so young.

Having Conlin be your babysitter? But then we are back to square 1.
   226. a bebop a rebop Posted: December 21, 2011 at 08:25 PM (#4021349)
216: 215 is Monty referring to the link in his own 183 to defend himself against the allegations in 212.
   227. Tripon Posted: December 21, 2011 at 08:32 PM (#4021357)
226. a bebop a rebop Posted: December 21, 2011 at 03:25 PM (#4021349)
216: 215 is Monty referring to the link in his own 183 to defend himself against the allegations in 212.


He's not doing a good job of it.
   228. Jarrod HypnerotomachiaPoliphili (TeddyF.Ballgame) Posted: December 21, 2011 at 09:09 PM (#4021396)
Yep. Just happened here in Phoenix, at a big Jesuit HS. Short version:
1. Two former students, now adult, tell the school a current teacher molested them.
2. Admin approaches teacher, who says enough to get fired.
3. Admin tells police, as it is legally bound to do.
4. Former students refuse to cooperate with police.
5. Investigation is on hold, because with no victim there's no crime.


Late to the lynching party, but just saw this. Wow. I went to that school during the period when these incidents (allegedly) occurred. Hadn't heard a word about it. Glad I never did take Calc in high school.
   229. Guapo Posted: December 21, 2011 at 09:13 PM (#4021402)
Is it legal for an 8 year old to use a machine gun in self-defense?


the law is very strick about that kind of stuff but I may have to do an execption this time...
   230. Guapo Posted: December 21, 2011 at 09:19 PM (#4021411)
Would you allow Bill Conlin to watch your 8 year old, given what we know?


I would never leave my son alone in the presence of someone who voted for Juan Gonzalez but not Tim Raines for the Hall of Fame.
   231. Lassus Posted: December 21, 2011 at 10:30 PM (#4021472)
In case anyone cares, the infamous Mel Hall thread.
   232. Zonk qualifies as an invasive species Posted: December 21, 2011 at 10:45 PM (#4021484)
Deadspin has a story about discussions and e-mail exchanges between Conlin & DS just before the story broke... I guess it's not "Conlin's side" -- but it's likely as close we're gonna get, and I gotta say -- it makes things lot worse for Conlin. The exchanges do not present a man outraged and flabbergasted about untrue accusations -- they present a man careening from excuse to conspiracy theory to anger about the alleged victims bringing it up so many years later to martydom.

I'm no more a psychiatrist than I am an attorney -- but I know if I were accused of a heinous act that I knew I was innocent of, my only response would be a mixture of utter shock and outright, upanddown the line denial... So -- whatever, maybe I'm back in lynchmob mode but the tidbits of this exchange sound more like a man who is pissed that he's been caught when he thought he was thisclose to just taking it to his grave.
   233. a bebop a rebop Posted: December 21, 2011 at 10:49 PM (#4021487)
He's not doing a good job of it.

Well, he really shouldn't have to defend himself against allegations of child molestation. I haven't read the thread to which 212 refers, but seriously?
   234. CrosbyBird Posted: December 21, 2011 at 11:01 PM (#4021491)
And I say that the fact that you've reached that conclusion at this point is putrid.

I have to agree with this. Concluding that Conlin is guilty is not reasonable behavior. Strongly suspecting guilt is pretty reasonable under the circumstances. I think he's guilty the same way I'd think anyone accused by 4 separate people is probably guilty.

I think Morty's problem is with the apparent certainty that some people have (and if I'm reading him correctly, I share that concern). There have been false accusations of child molestation, and it's not impossible that these are false (even though it is very unlikely). This is a serious enough issue that we can afford to wait for a little more information before reaching a definite conclusion, especially since the delay costs us nothing except some immediate self-righteousness.
   235. SouthSideRyan Posted: December 21, 2011 at 11:03 PM (#4021493)
[233]I'd run a Ctrl+F on "Morty" in that thread. It's not pretty.
   236. Joe Bivens, Slack Rumped Rutabaga Head Posted: December 21, 2011 at 11:09 PM (#4021495)
I have no problem with Morty's "larger issue" approach. It appears Conlin is guilty, given that he resigned without making any public comment, but I suppose it's possible he's not guilty. Unlikely that he's not guilty, but possible.

Now on to the Hall thread.
   237. Zonk qualifies as an invasive species Posted: December 21, 2011 at 11:11 PM (#4021498)
I think Morty's problem is with the apparent certainty that some people have (and if I'm reading him correctly, I share that concern). There have been false accusations of child molestation, and it's not impossible that these are false (even though it is very unlikely). This is a serious enough issue that we can afford to wait for a little more information before reaching a definite conclusion, especially since the delay costs us nothing except some immediate self-righteousness.


I get all this - but I keep coming back to WTF cares what a bunch of people, all of whom should probably be working anyway, say on a baseball message board?

I understand the lesson, I just think that this is perhaps the worst 'teachable moment' about that lesson. That's not a demand to grab a torch and join the digital mob, it's just the idea that the circumstances here don't lend themselves to anyone stepping back to think about not rushing to conclusions, joining mobs, whatever.
   238. a bebop a rebop Posted: December 21, 2011 at 11:16 PM (#4021502)
If I write any defense of Morty here I'm sure I'll get labeled a child molester too. But I'll say that in any case I'm sympathetic with his position of being very slow to pull out the tar and feathers.
   239. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: December 21, 2011 at 11:16 PM (#4021503)
And in sex crimes cases, accusers have a lot of sympathy and are ceded great credibility from the outset.


In the real world, it's the other way around. Accusers are routinely thought to be either a) liars, b) people who 'asked for it', and/or c) contemptible and polluted for allowing themselves to be molested or for 'dragging the accused's name through the muck'. Look at how some of the Sandusky accusers have been treated.
   240. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 21, 2011 at 11:28 PM (#4021508)
Yeah, victims of sexual assault are very commonly blamed for the assault. The push to believe the victim arises in great part from reflections on the experiences of people who were doubly victimized - first by a criminal assailant and then by various victim-blaming members of the community and media.

Anyway, in the meta-topic, most of the infamous Mel Hall thread was the fallout from posts #55 and #57, which, whatever else they might be, have nothing to do with condemning the "rush to judgment".
   241. Tom was totally clowned by CW Posted: December 21, 2011 at 11:44 PM (#4021514)
Leaving aside what people have said here, I find it curious that unlike the Sandusky case the initial story has not been followed by a bunch of quotes of people saying "OMG, he would never do that" whether it is friends, neighbors, coworkers or family.

I doubt this provides any kind of light on his guilt or innocence but rather reflects what a thoroughly unlikeable man he apparently was, and how few people were close to him.

His boss wrote about it:
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.


How far from defending him can you get?

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.


Does that sound like a bunch of coworkers standing by someone they respected?
   242. The Non-Catching Molina (sjs1959) Posted: December 22, 2011 at 12:07 AM (#4021518)
To try and reduce this down, I believe that while we may have serious suspicions, we will never actually KNOW whether Conlin is guilty or not, since the alleged events happened 40 years ago and beyond the statute of limitations in Pennsylvania.

What happens if the accusers bring CIVIL suits, though?
   243. Srul Itza Posted: December 22, 2011 at 12:26 AM (#4021528)
we will never actually KNOW whether Conlin is guilty or not, since the alleged events happened 40 years ago and beyond the statute of limitations in Pennsylvania.


Even if there is a trial, we will never "KNOW". What 12 people decide, based on the evidence they are allowed to hear, and swayed by eloquent counsel and their own prejudices, has consequences, but that does not make it the truth.

The innocent have been convicted and the guilty have been set free, and people have confessed to things they did not do, for a variety of reasons.

Even the verdict of history gets re-written on a regular basis.


What happens if the accusers bring CIVIL suits, though?


There are civil statutes of limitation, just like there are criminal statutes of limitation, .
   244. Srul Itza Posted: December 22, 2011 at 12:45 AM (#4021538)
Following up, the fact that even a jury verdict is not necessarily determinative is, in part, what makes the position that we should not draw any conclusions, seem so much nonsense. We are never going to have perfect knowledge with respect to events so remote from us, but the same is true for many aspects of life. We still manage to get on with our lives, because we all draw conclusions based on the evidence at hand, and our personal knowledge and experience.

That conclusion may be "I don't have enough information to make a decision", but it still a conclusion. Each of us may have a different threshold as to the amount of information we deem sufficient to draw a conclusion, and whether we choose to withhold making a decision will depend on the gravity of the decision, the consequences of reaching it, and the likelihood of obtaining more information in a timely fashion, as we go along. As more evidence becomes available, those conclusions may be modified or may be more firmly held.

Consider the Conlin situation: We do not know Conlin, we will probably never meet him, our opinion of him matters little to him or anyone else, and we are not sitting in judgment on him. Reaching a conclusion on the likelihood of the charges against him being true is a matter of personal choice, having little or no real world effect.

We do not know if will ever receive any more information, and unless claims of post-1996 offenses are made, we will not see anything like a courtroom vetting.

The information we do have comes not from a single juvenile victim, nor is it attached to a claim for money damages, nor from "recovered memory" or any of the other indicia of questionable charges. It comes from four or more separate adults who claim to have been victimized as children and from other adults who claim to have been informed about it when it happened. The reports are not in themselves of behavior so outlandish (e.g., satanic rituals) as to inherently create doubt. It is reported by a reputable paper and a reporter of excellent reputation. The response of the accused was not to stay and fight, or to issue a strong denial, but to retire immediately.

Unless and until other information comes to light, this is sufficient for me to draw a conclusion that he did it. If other information comes to light, I am prepared to modify my opinion -- as if that would matter to anyone, anyway.
   245. spike Posted: December 22, 2011 at 01:49 AM (#4021559)
Accusers are routinely thought to be either a) liars, b) people who 'asked for it', and/or c) contemptible and polluted for allowing themselves to be molested or for 'dragging the accused's name through the muck'.

I would add d) gold diggers.
   246. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: December 22, 2011 at 02:19 AM (#4021565)
Re 244 my somewhat less well reasoned conclusion is that Morty is a self aggrandizing pompous blowhard who is merely playing the "let's not jump to conclusion" reasonable man card as a way of asserting moral superiority over the unwashed hordes calling for the heads of roman polansky or Conlin.

Why do I say that?
Look at this thread look at all his posts
The repeated meme is essentially "I am the thoughtful voice of reason you are a howling mob with pitchforks I am sane you are not"

He has made this thread about himself
   247. Athletic Supporter is USDA certified lean Posted: December 22, 2011 at 02:41 AM (#4021574)
Guys, it's just child molestation, it's not like Conlin caused global warming or anything.
   248. Textbook Editor Posted: December 22, 2011 at 02:54 AM (#4021578)
I would never leave my son alone in the presence of someone who voted for Juan Gonzalez but not Tim Raines for the Hall of Fame.


I'd just like to pause and say this line made me laugh.
   249. CrosbyBird Posted: December 22, 2011 at 03:15 AM (#4021588)
In the real world, it's the other way around. Accusers are routinely thought to be either a) liars, b) people who 'asked for it', and/or c) contemptible and polluted for allowing themselves to be molested or for 'dragging the accused's name through the muck'. Look at how some of the Sandusky accusers have been treated.

I know this is true, but it's so opposite from my personal experience when children are involved. I cannot remember the last child molestation case I heard about where you could find anyone outside of close friends or family saying anything more defendant-supportive than "I really hope it isn't true, but it looks bad" or "let's get the full story before we cut his balls off." I would hope that if someone who knew me at all heard that I was accused of molesting a child that it would be hard to accept, and the person would give me the benefit of the doubt.

I definitely see "victim-blaming" when there the pre-assault behavior was such that most reasonable people would expect a sexual encounter. "I went to the basketball player's hotel room, hours after meeting him, just the two of us. I never expected that he would be interested in having intercourse, and none of my behavior should have led him to believe that I would consent. It was very warm, and that's why I took all of my clothes off." (I shouldn't have to say this, but I want to make it clear that there's never a point where you can't withdraw consent, and once consent is withdrawn, the only reasonable action is to stop.) When an accuser acts like there weren't, at the very least, some conflicting signals, it is something that I find to be suspicious, and that makes me less likely to accept the truth of the accusations.

The Kobe Bryant case is a great example where I didn't think the victim was a liar or golddigger, nor that she deserved to be raped, but I also can take Bryant at his word that he believed the sex to be consensual. I think that's a very fair (and not anti-victim) standard for anyone: good-faith belief in consent that would be shared by a reasonable person.
   250. Srul Itza Posted: December 22, 2011 at 03:52 AM (#4021607)
He has made this thread about himself


Well, morty is as morty does. This is nothing new.

But there are others who have supported the position of let's wait and see. I just can't figure out what they expect to see that will be new or different, unless others step forward to claim the same action was taken.

Now, if the 10 page apology letter still exists, that would be interesting.
   251. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 22, 2011 at 04:13 AM (#4021617)
But there are others who have supported the position of let's wait and see. I just can't figure out what they expect to see that will be new or different,


I can't either.
   252. CrosbyBird Posted: December 22, 2011 at 04:17 AM (#4021622)
But there are others who have supported the position of let's wait and see. I just can't figure out what they expect to see that will be new or different, unless others step forward to claim the same action was taken.

There's still time, I suppose, for Conlin to deny the allegations. That might be new, useful information.
   253. Biscuit_pants Posted: December 22, 2011 at 04:34 AM (#4021624)
I am ready to hear why you think these accusations are false based on the facts of THIS case.
I am not ready to go there. I am just stating why I am more reluctant to jump on the he did it bandwagon. I am also not jumping on any he did nothing bandwagon.
   254. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: December 22, 2011 at 04:42 AM (#4021627)
I think he's guilty the same way I'd think anyone accused by 4 separate people is probably guilty.

Not only do you have 4 separate accusers, but you have other alleged victims who refused to come forward (but whose emails the reporter saw). The added fact of victims who wouldn't come forward, if true, lends more credibility to the story. If it's a hoax, it's a very elaborate one.

I certainly agree with those who say that we should reserve absolute judgment until we hear Conlin's response, but it doesn't look good for him.
   255. Tripon Posted: December 22, 2011 at 06:41 AM (#4021659)


There's still time, I suppose, for Conlin to deny the allegations. That might be new, useful information.


Read this. Its about the best of a Conlin rebuttal, or Colin's side of the story you are going to get. If you still can't make your decision on how you feel about this, unfortunately, I don't think Conlin will say anymore, unless he pulls off a bizarre interview like Jerry Sandusky did with Bob Costas.
   256. CrosbyBird Posted: December 22, 2011 at 06:58 AM (#4021663)
Thanks, Tripon. That's at least something remotely resembling what someone wrongfully accused might do. It has the right amount of anger, freak-out, and lack of clarity to be at least remotely believable. It could just as likely be a guilty man scrambling to fix the unfixable.

Eventually, I think something will come out of this. If Conlin is guilty, I can't imagine that there aren't more recent victims. Are there really people who are serial molesters and then suddenly fix themselves for 40 years?
   257. Monty Posted: December 22, 2011 at 07:00 AM (#4021665)
If you still can't make your decision on how you feel about this, unfortunately, I don't think Conlin will say anymore, unless he pulls off a bizarre interview like Jerry Sandusky did with Bob Costas.


I think Conlin's best move at this point is to vanish off the face of the earth. Don't answer the phone even to say "No comment." Go to that condo in the Dominican and hope everyone forgets he even exists. Even if he's innocent, it's probably impossible for him to prove.
   258. Tom was totally clowned by CW Posted: December 22, 2011 at 07:32 AM (#4021669)
I'm thinking that there are probably more reporters around Conlin's Dominican condo than his Florida one. If there are any recent victims then they are most likely going to be found there. Unfortunately given the culture it will be hard to get any victims to come forward, and the credibilty of anyone claiming to be a victim is several orders of magnitude more suspect than those victims from the original story.
   259. PerroX Posted: December 22, 2011 at 08:01 AM (#4021674)
Even if there is a trial, we will never "KNOW". What 12 people decide, based on the evidence they are allowed to hear, and swayed by eloquent counsel and their own prejudices, has consequences, but that does not make it the truth.

The innocent have been convicted and the guilty have been set free, and people have confessed to things they did not do, for a variety of reasons.


I sat on a criminal jury a couple of weeks ago. I think the guilty verdict reasonable given evidence and testimony, but you never know for sure. The process definitely propels you to a conclusion you may not have made sitting at home with full resources and evidence. And I don't trust that anyone voluntarily waives their rights. That still bothers me.
   260. Something Other Posted: December 22, 2011 at 11:12 AM (#4021678)
124. Morty Causa Posted: December 20, 2011 at 06:58 PM (#4020684)

One-sided tailored account? More like vivid first person testimony from victims of crimes.

It's still one-sided. You believe everything that moves you, that calls to your psyche, is reality?

You have a choice here, either you are saying that these adults fabricated this so their family could go through hell. Or that the reporter is misrepresenting the facts.


No, that's isn't the only choice. I can wait. There's are reasons to do so. There are reasons, as good citizens and good fellows, we are urged by state and church to do so. Placing imprimatur on a process where nothing but allegation and a one-sided presentation is sufficient, is an totalitarian ideal--and I'm surprised at how people here so easily and quickly jump on that bandwagon.
I broadly agree with Morty here, and more specifically with Biscuit pants in 200. I've seen far too many examples of reportorial indifference to truth and mischaracterization if not outright falsification of statements to believe a given reporter is necessarily credible. I've seen far too many examples of people jumping on a hate bandwagon for no more reason than it did something for their psyches to begin to believe that four people feel a certain way means something definitely happened. I've heard a number of accusations of rape or molestation that were simply made up, or so utterly misconstrued what very probably happened, or what the "victim" later stated actually happened, as to merit their being called fictional. I've seen gangs of people ignore quotes right in front of them, literally in front of them, and simply make words mean what they wanted them to mean, and proceed--violently--on that basis.

Anyone who believes Conlin is clearly guilty because four people may have said he is doesn't spend all that much time around people.

Not only do you have 4 separate accusers, but you have other alleged victims who refused to come forward (but whose emails the reporter saw). The added fact of victims who wouldn't come forward, if true, lends more credibility to the story. If it's a hoax, it's a very elaborate one.
This is what I mean. What you could have is a reporter who is either wrong, or who has been fooled, quite possibly by a single person. Is that likely? Probably not, but your conclusion, that an elaborate hoax is required, is simply wrong.

***

That Conlin resigned is meaningless. He was very likely given the choice of either resigning or departing some other way. Resigning may have been the best of poor options.

All that said, none of this doesn't mean that I wouldn't bet that Conlin is innocent. The accusations don't have that made-up flavor. Based on TFA, it sure sounds like he's guilty of something, and I wouldn't let my child anywhere near him. At the same time, the worst allegation I'm aware of is the account of a seven year old from forty years ago. I know adults who are certain that their parents spanking them once or twice constitutes irrefutable proof that their parents are child abusers. This is very, very difficult territory and anyone who's certain of x or y at this point probably shouldn't be.

edit: the woman who says her son said Conlin abused him, but that she nevertheless continued to let her daughters go to Conlin's house because she thought he was only interested in boys DOES need to have her head examined.
   261. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: December 22, 2011 at 11:49 AM (#4021680)
It technically legal for any 8 year old to commit murder. We have no statue that can determine a just penalty for a child so young.

Oh sure, NOW you tell me.
   262. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 22, 2011 at 01:44 PM (#4021702)
People who claim to have reasonable doubts about Conlin: ask yourself if a reporter could have written this story about you from ANY point in your life, where friends, neighbors, family members said that you were a child molestor, providing specific facts that broadly aligned with each other -- and it is all just a pack of lies, falsehoods, and mistakes.

Please with this.
   263. Ron J Posted: December 22, 2011 at 02:26 PM (#4021721)
#262 Ray, it's been brought up several times. Fells Day Care.

Yeah. Outlier case, but I've seen how stories change over time to broadly align (not in abuse cases to be sure, never been close to anything like a full blown abuse accusation) -- particularly if there's been discussion about it over time.

For the reasons that have been mentioned in the thread, I don't think that's terribly likely, but I absolutely hate the way you've been arguing this matter and I'm not a member of the RayHaters Guild.
   264. SoSH U at work Posted: December 22, 2011 at 02:54 PM (#4021755)
I'm not a member of the RayHaters Guild.


Ron J is not, and never has been, a member in good standing.

####, now I'm in trouble.
   265. Zonk qualifies as an invasive species Posted: December 22, 2011 at 02:58 PM (#4021762)
Thanks, Tripon. That's at least something remotely resembling what someone wrongfully accused might do. It has the right amount of anger, freak-out, and lack of clarity to be at least remotely believable. It could just as likely be a guilty man scrambling to fix the unfixable.


Weird - I had the exact opposite thought. I read it as a man flailing about in a "Dammit, I thought I'd outlive these awful things I did ever coming to light."

I mean - what really struck me was that, at least according to the 'reporting' (such as it is on Deadspin) - Conlin doesn't really seem to deny it outright. He calls his niece (one of the accusers) a "liar" (and a "beayatch") - but that's as close as it comes. It seems to be all about 'it was so long ago', 'family feuds', and 'they drank my vodka at my wife's funeral!'

I guess, if it were me falsely accused of something heinous like this... I just think I'd be too shocked to be thinking about going after my accusers that early in the game, as Conlin seems mostly concerned with. Maybe once we got into the meat of my defense, I start feeling a bit vindictive and wanting an ounce of flesh for putting me through this hell.

But this was essentially a 2nd hand telling of Conlin's initial reaction -- my only reaction at that point would be unequivocal, no-doubt-about-it, there's nothing that could even be misconstrued or misinterpreted, utter and complete denials...

I wouldn't be baking odd conspiracy theories or at least at that point, trying to ascribe motive to my accusers... I'd be screaming at the top of my lungs "I DID NOT DO THIS TERRIBLE THING!"

I'm sure everyone -- both guilty and innocent -- reacts to such horrific accusations differently, but I'm having a hard time seeing how someone innocent of such awful charges doesn't spend 90% of any discussions, interviews, or e-mail exchanges saying "You have to believe me, I swear on my wife's grave, on everything holy, on Mike Schmidt's mustache -- I did not do this thing."

Conlin just seemed oddly preoccupied with everything but proclaiming his innocence.
   266. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 22, 2011 at 03:09 PM (#4021771)
Fells Day Care
I think this was handled in Srul's #244 - the behavior alleged does not have the outlandish tint of children producing stories for adults that was a hallmark of the Fells case. Further, the Fells case was driven by prosecutorial overreach and badly handled questioning of children, whereas in the Conlin case this information was provided by multiple adult sources to the police, and there is no prosecution due to the statute of limitations.

I agree with Srul (and Ray) that the preponderance of evidence points to Conlin's guilt. It's certainly possible he's innocent, and I would oppose mob justice or whatever, but the evidence that we have overwhelmingly weighs against Conlin, and I'm confident in saying I think he's guilty.
   267. Guapo Posted: December 22, 2011 at 03:39 PM (#4021803)
These are telling quotes, I think, from the Deadspin article (all Conlin's words)

I don't wish to do anything that could blow up in my face should they decide not to run the story. I am a lot bigger to the Daily News than Sandusky ever was to Penn State. But I don't have 19 years of heinous molestations involving children in my care that were covered up at many institutional levels. My daughter used to babysit Carlton's and McCarver's kids in spring training. Kalas' kids and my sons are still close. They were home-schooled by the same spring training tutor.


If you were falsely accused of molesting someone, would you: (a) flatly deny all charges against you; or (b) attempt to compare yourself favorably to Jerry Sandusky?


If the piece this beatch writes paints me as a Jekyll-Hyde without identifying the "accusers," their names need to be out there next to mine—since they bought houses from my wife, drank my vodka the night of her viewing and decided after 40 years it was Sandusky Time to come out.


Again, "decided after 40 years it was Sandusky time to come out" sounds almost like a confession. Almost.
   268. Guapo Posted: December 22, 2011 at 03:42 PM (#4021807)
I'm not sure if this was posted upthread, but a fifth alleged victim of Conlin has come forward.

Link
   269. Textbook Editor Posted: December 22, 2011 at 03:46 PM (#4021817)
   270. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: December 22, 2011 at 03:49 PM (#4021823)
I'm not sure if this was posted upthread, but a fifth alleged victim of Conlin has come forward.

it's now six (and counting?)
   271. , Posted: December 22, 2011 at 03:50 PM (#4021825)
But there are others who have supported the position of let's wait and see. I just can't figure out what they expect to see that will be new or different, unless others step forward to claim the same action was taken.

There's still time, I suppose, for Conlin to deny the allegations. That might be new, useful information.


I think this is absolutely true. And he has, in my opinion, a little time. Stating that we know how we'd react if these allegations were made about us is a stretch. People, especially 78 year old blowhards, react strangely to stress. I can not well imagine how I'd react if my dean called me in to tell me someone was accusing me of something like this. Fear, anger, shock, analysis all mixed into one.

However, if fairly soon after (scale of days, say) retaining council and settling down a bit, I couldn't come out and say, "I didn't do it," then, well, I'm probably guilty of something. This should be pretty simple: Bill Conlin, taking no questions, addressing a camera to say, "I didn't do these things." He may not be able to prove it, of course, but if he does that, then, of course, he deserves the benefit of the doubt. If he can't, then something is up.
   272. Morty Causa Posted: December 22, 2011 at 04:26 PM (#4021868)
‘“Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!”’

I have not defended Conlin and I will not defend Conlin. That would only attenuate and divert from my point. My point, which I made clear from the very beginning, had to do with posters and posts here, and with the public in general that was acting just like those posters here, not with Conlin's guilt or innocence.

If he's smart, but of course he's not, he'd keep his mouth shut. Before DNA testing, there was a saying (it’s repeated in Ball Four): no man wins a paternity case. That dictum still applies to these sorts of cases. As many have made clear here, the subtext clearly demonstrates that the real standard is a "damned if he does, damned if he doesn't".

There are a certain species of crimes of a sexual nature where mere naked allegations, undelved into and untested, is all that suffices for a certain type of mind, and it’s part of all and any of our minds. It ends up deciding that we don't need to slow down and take this slowly, let's just string him up. The important thing is that we’re all in this together. There are instances everywhere of this sort of attitude. It’s a bonding thing, and if there is to be a supervening system, that inclination has to be curbed.

Children (or women), however special we think they are, cannot be hold special place in a justice system (I’m not referring to a legal system only). REPEAT after me: They are not any more inclined to tell the truth (or to lie) than anyone else. That has to be the presumption. If you can’t hack that, excuse yourself from the adult dinner table. The sex crimes area may be the diciest area not only of the law but of the greater society that has to do with mores and taboos and the censure arising from that. Talking loosely about happenings like this is not so much about seeking truth but about the participants in this orgy of moral one-upmanship solidifying that they belong to this superior tribe. And, ooo, it feels so good to belong. Read Shirley Jackson's The Lottery.

I note that those who were prone to the sawed-off shot gun approach have suddenly become cooler and more rational in their arguments. I wonder, what happened? I guess it's their better nature--no? No. Some of us here decided to call them on it. That's what always needs to be done when Blood Lust Oktoberfest gets rolling--and it always rolls unless there's an opposition. If you can't take that, opposition, you're just a ####### little Nazi at heart--oh, did I really say that? Thread closed.

Child Molestation Cases

Day Care Cases
   273. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 22, 2011 at 04:29 PM (#4021871)
For the reasons that have been mentioned in the thread, I don't think that's terribly likely, but I absolutely hate the way you've been arguing this matter and I'm not a member of the RayHaters Guild.


That's fair enough. Perhaps I'm going about this wrong, but let me re-state my thinking so that it's clear how I formed my conclusion:

I have essentially concluded that Conlin is guilty, because, with the several accusers or people with information, from children at the time, to the adults involved, I simply cannot see a path to his innocence. Not in the world we live in. If this were a movie, yes, they could all be lying or mistaken or conspiring against him (for what purpose I cannot conceive). But not as things actually stand now. (Mind you, I am open to changing my mind on this, if exculpatory evidence comes in.)

My conclusion is driven in significant part by the stories of the *adults* at the time who confronted Conlin. Let's assume all of the children were mistaken or manipulated - which even given the fact that they were children seems a stretch, but, fine. (ALL of them just totally off base? Manipulated? By whom? Who was the central figure manipulating them?). What was Conlin's reaction when confronted?

* He admitted to a parent that he had "only touched the girl's leg."
* He wrote a 10 page letter of apology to one of the victims.
* A father confronted him about it and he didn't admit it, but also didn't deny it or say much.

Are these all lies?

Let's turn to the children. It's not like the children were all part of the same pre-school, such that a common party could have coerced them into telling a story. There's no overzealous prosecutor here, or any prosecutor at all. There was no overzealous prosecutor or single person at the time questioning the children and in a position to manipulate the children's stories, either out of a sincere belief that Conlin was guilty or for some other crusade-y reason. It's not like the children were all 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 -- they range from 7-12. I imagine it's easier to manipulate a child into tell a story at 5 as opposed to 12 -- one guy was 12 at the time, which is 7th grade age. Was he mistaken or unable to perceive that Conlin didn't actually "fondle his genitals"? Was he lying? Manipulated? By whom?

To go further: It's not like all of the people involved were all accusing Conlin together; there were clusters of children/adults with similar stories, some of the clusters not knowing about the other clusters for years. It's not like anyone here has a clear motive to lie or make this up. They're all in different walks of life now, and are prosecutors, constructions workers, retirees, etc. It's not like there are crazy stories here from the time, such as satanic rituals. It's not like there are civil suits here where people are seeking money; indeed, civil suits based on facts from 40 years ago are time-barred.

What are the odds that all of this is one big series of lies or mistakes, or that it's one massive conspiracy theory? 1 in 1,000? 1 in 100,000? 1 in a million? If it's even 1 in 100 I believe I am well on solid ground to conclude that he is guilty.
   274. ray james Posted: December 22, 2011 at 04:39 PM (#4021890)
LINDA STELLA said that she was just a girl when Bill Conlin pulled her onto his lap and began "flexing his leg muscles" during a family birthday party at his house in South Jersey. She leaped off his lap and looked back. She felt confused when she saw the wet spot at the crotch of his white pants.


Good lord.
   275. , Posted: December 22, 2011 at 04:50 PM (#4021908)
I note that those who were prone to the sawed-off shot gun approach have suddenly become cooler and more rational in their arguments. I wonder, what happened? I guess it's their better nature--no? No. Some of us here decided to call them on it.

No, you imagined that we wanted to string him up either out of confusion or because it let you act the part of hero. And with that, I conclude the others are right, your posts are about you and your "larger points", which are, in the moment, BS - the moment being THIS case, not Western Civilization or a second year law class. You're a good poster when you stick to baseball and I hope to enjoy baseball conversations with you far into the future. But in this issue, I find your intellect superficial and your distance inhuman.
   276. ray james Posted: December 22, 2011 at 04:53 PM (#4021910)
Both times she didn't think Conlin was home because she didn't see his car. But as Stella left the bedroom of Conlin's daughter, Conlin suddenly emerged from his bedroom, gripped her by the hand and pulled her into his room, she said.

"I didn't know what to do," she said. "He didn't say a word. He just pushed me on the bed.

"He stuck his hand down my pants and he was rubbing me there and rubbing me on my breasts. I got up and I ran out."

She never returned.

When Stella got married for the first time, in 1983, she struggled to be intimate with her then-husband, she said. "I just couldn't stop crying during and after sex," she said.


This is really heartbreaking.
   277. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 22, 2011 at 04:54 PM (#4021911)
Morty, I have talked about the specific facts of this case, which you are unwilling to do. I have talked about how the specific facts of this case differ from some of the problem cases of the past where people were wrongfully accused.

It's fine for you to talk about generalizations and principles that should guide us, e.g. that children have been manipulated to tell stories in the past; but unless you apply those principles specifically to the facts of this case, you're saying nothing at all.
   278. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: December 22, 2011 at 05:01 PM (#4021920)
As it is the case that I am not a court of law I feel perfectly justified in assigning Bill Conlin to the same "guilty by preponderance of publicly available evidence, barring substantial counter-evidence on his part" bucket into which I've dropped both Jerry Sandusky and O.J. Simpson. All of this caterwauling for process is unbecoming.
   279. Ray (CTL) Posted: December 22, 2011 at 05:10 PM (#4021935)
What strikes me in reading the initial story -- I presume the reporter didn't just make it all up -- is that at the time these events were happening, you had normal parents, in a normal walk of life, trying to deal with the situation as best they could. Wives got together and discussed it amongst each other; some of the husbands weren't told for fear that they would literally kill Conlin; one husband they thought (and were correct) could keep his cool was appointed to speak to Conlin. They were trying to deal with the situation as best they could. There doesn't seem to have been any motive at all to falsely accuse him. They were even concerned for his safety.
   280. Guapo Posted: December 22, 2011 at 05:28 PM (#4021955)
They were even concerned for his safety.


But apparently not the kids' safety. At least not the kids that weren't living in their houses.
   281. Zonk qualifies as an invasive species Posted: December 22, 2011 at 05:58 PM (#4021983)
Interesting little tidbit from the story on the 6th accuser linked above --

McLaughlin said that his law firm agreed to provide the women with legal advice on a pro-bono basis, and the women have no interest in money or fame. McLaughlin said that the women have no plans to file a civil suit; under current law, they would be barred from doing so, anyway.


So - we already know (again, absent an allegation more recent) there won't be criminal charges, now -- if this is correct -- no civil litigation either.

I'm still not prepared to do anything but call Conlin a despicable, waste of flesh jackass digitally...

But I guess I'd put it to Morty and the "wait for the facts" folks --

What happens now?

It appears that there won't be any legal punishment and it seems that unless Conlin is particularly interested in some sort of public faux-trial, he's not going to be judged in anything except the court of public opinion.

Does that at all change how the court of public opinion should be reacting?

Unless we've now got a 6 accuser conspiracy to sully Conlin's good name -- it seems to me that dragging his good name through the mud well and good actually becomes the best available option.

Beyond that -- I think I actually have a different opinion on the BBWAA Spinks Award and his "HoF" status.

Given that he won't be facing criminal or it looks like, civil prosecution -- I think they SHOULD revoke the award.... not because of the sacredness of it or the HoF -- but simply because Conlin values it. I'm actually not any sort of an old testament guy when it comes to crime and punishment and I believe our prison and punishment system should be weighted towards rehabilitation.

But in this case, what else is there to do?

I still opposed mob justice and such... but he's not going to face the criminal or legal justice system.

I have no idea how you can set up a scenario to "try" him since the legal system isn't available, but he needs to face some sort of accounting for his alleged actions -- and since we apparently have no criminal or civil punitive actions available --

I say take his Spinks award and publicly burn the sucker.
   282. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: December 22, 2011 at 06:06 PM (#4021993)
So - we already know (again, absent an allegation more recent) there won't be criminal charges, now -- if this is correct -- no civil litigation either.

I'm still not prepared to do anything but call Conlin a despicable, waste of flesh jackass digitally...

But I guess I'd put it to Morty and the "wait for the facts" folks --

What happens now?

It appears that there won't be any legal punishment and it seems that unless Conlin is particularly interested in some sort of public faux-trial, he's not going to be judged in anything except the court of public opinion.

Does that at all change how the court of public opinion should be reacting?

Unless we've now got a 6 accuser conspiracy to sully Conlin's good name -- it seems to me that dragging his good name through the mud well and good actually becomes the best available option.

Beyond that -- I think I actually have a different opinion on the BBWAA Spinks Award and his "HoF" status.

Given that he won't be facing criminal or it looks like, civil prosecution -- I think they SHOULD revoke the award.... not because of the sacredness of it or the HoF -- but simply because Conlin values it. I'm actually not any sort of an old testament guy when it comes to crime and punishment and I believe our prison and punishment system should be weighted towards rehabilitation.

But in this case, what else is there to do?

I still opposed mob justice and such... but he's not going to face the criminal or legal justice system.

I have no idea how you can set up a scenario to "try" him since the legal system isn't available, but he needs to face some sort of accounting for his alleged actions -- and since we apparently have no criminal or civil punitive actions available --

I say take his Spinks award and publicly burn the sucker.


Best Plaschke column ever
   283. , Posted: January 10, 2014 at 09:09 AM (#4635531)
Good.
Page 3 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Brian
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Newsblog2018 Cy Young Award winners | MLB.com
(6 - 10:33am, Nov 15)
Last: TJ

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (November 2018)
(271 - 10:32am, Nov 15)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogSale of Baseball Prospectus
(84 - 10:31am, Nov 15)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogPirates acquire three players in trade with Tribe
(1 - 10:28am, Nov 15)
Last: Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 11-15-2018
(1 - 10:24am, Nov 15)
Last: Jefferson Manship (Dan Lee)

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(2264 - 10:17am, Nov 15)
Last: jmurph

NewsblogZack Greinke trade makes sense for these teams
(21 - 10:15am, Nov 15)
Last: BrianBrianson

Hall of MeritMock 2018 Today’s Game Hall of Fame Ballot
(42 - 10:02am, Nov 15)
Last: DL from MN

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (2018-19 season begins!)
(1203 - 9:24am, Nov 15)
Last: J. Sosa

NewsblogManny Machado: Yankees owner Hal Steinbrenner wants 'essential' chat
(3 - 8:23am, Nov 15)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogMike Elias Orioles general manager | MLB.com
(17 - 8:21am, Nov 15)
Last: The Duke

NewsblogTime running out for officials to reach stadium deal with Rays
(6 - 8:19am, Nov 15)
Last: Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle

NewsblogAtlanta/Southeast BBTF meet up
(68 - 10:32pm, Nov 14)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogProspects who stood out in Arizona Fall League
(2 - 10:13pm, Nov 14)
Last: shoewizard

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 11-14-2018
(23 - 9:49pm, Nov 14)
Last: Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant

Page rendered in 0.7278 seconds
46 querie(s) executed