Pavao
Contributor
- Messages
- 769
- Reaction score
- 450
I thought those allegations were investigated by the CDS 2 years ago and dismissed?
Sent via
So, I understand 0 (zero) investigating was done, all that was done was wait for the complaint to provide with names?May 2013 a formal, written complaint was sent to the training chairman. He assigned a committee to investigate. The complainant could not provide the identities of anyone who witnessed the alleged violations. All we had was hearsay.
The "case" stayed open and active for a couple of months and the investigating committee never was provided with the names of the students or any witnesses. The complainant kept promising us those names, but we never got them. The "case" was closed.
I get your point, but at the same time, doesn't all complaints start off as "hearsay" or "rumors", hence the need for an investigation, otherwise it would be the agencies just expelling any instructor anytime anyone makes a complaint.What I have an issue with allegations like this is that one person making claims doesn't mean it ever even happened. It could have occurred and it could just be some one with a personal axe to grind. This is my biggest concern when balancing addressing a real violation that needs action against someone's reputation. It should not be based upon hearsay and rumors.
Sent via
We shouldn't need to hope, the investigating bodies should be unbiased to handle these situations, if they receive a complaint already believing it's hearsay/rumor or truth, then there's no need to investigate, they'd have the verdict even before the investigation starts.We can hope it's not just axe-grindy politics, can't we??
All they can ask of witnesses is to alert them of POSSIBLE violations, yes, only the possibility it might have happened, sure it would be great if they can provide the hard evidence, but isn't that asking too much? Isn't collecting evidence something the investigators job to do?
Imagine this, person calls 911 and says there's a body laying on the floor he can kinda see through a window, he peeked because he heard a noise he thinks it's a gun shot, there was some loud noises and then it stopped, 911 operator tells him unless he can provide the name of the "deceased", the gun, video evidence of the killer shooting, a confession from the killer and 3 other independent eye witnesses to testify they saw the shooting, then they can't/won't do anything about it.
Come on!!!