MLT on probation?

[nog]

anyone heard this?

 

[RedBirdie]

I don’t see her on the SafeSport or USAG lists. Which isn’t yo say it might not be true, but USAG is usually pretty on top of keeping the suspension list updated.

 

[nog]

According to this she is not suspended or banned, just placed on probation. I can’t find any list publicly accessed of probationary members. They seem to only publish the banned and suspended members

 

[Doug1233]

I’m assuming this is “probation” as a coach instead of the criminal law use of the term…?

 

[irichluck21]

That is interesting that she is “on probation” as MLT was finishing up her coaching career and getting to retire as far as selling her gym and everything.

The statement from the post doesn’t make sense “I recently learned” but the “information” is coming from someone else who heard from someone else at SafeSport.

If this was a SafeSport decision, I don’t see how they could create a consequence if as the poster says none of her athletes have come forward whether it be newer athletes or ones that are in coaching positions that “don’t have the energy or the time to revisit her abusive, manipulative treatment”.

The entire post seems sketchy and vague to me.

While multiple members here were not a fan of MLT and would not be surprised if the accusations were true, I would hesitate to believe this person without further evidence.

 

[RedBirdie]

Probation, as used in the original post, reads to me like USAG’s suspension that allow someone to coach but not be unsupervised; aka, there must always be another adult present.

Now, this probation as described isn’t one I’m aware of USAG using. Allowing someone unfettered access to minors in a USAG member facility but requiring permission to attend USAG events strikes me as nonsensical. Which makes me think this information is wrong, either because something got lost in translation or someone is plain making shit up.

 

[RedBirdie]

While multiple members here were not a fan of MLT and would not be surprised if the accusations were true, I would hesitate to believe this person without further evidence.

Exactly. I believe people when accusations of abuse are made. I believe Alyssa Beckerman. I am skeptical when someone tweets a screenshot from facebook of someone saying “i heard from someone who heard from someone at safesport.” We are so many degrees separated from the actual event at this point .

 

[nog]

That is my assumption as well. That she is on USAG Safesport probation

 

[nog]

Now, this probation as described isn’t one I’m aware of USAG using. Allowing someone unfettered access to minors in a USAG member facility but requiring permission to attend USAG events strikes me as nonsensical. Which makes me think this information is wrong, either because something got lost in translation or someone is plain making shit up.

I have heard of it. I know in the Nyman case it was stated in their ruling and again in mediation to the decision (according to multiple involved in that case) she was given a term of suspension and then probationary time after suspension had concluded (a period of either 2 or 5 yrs, I can’t remember exactly).

 

[nog]

Exactly. I believe people when accusations of abuse are made. I believe Alyssa Beckerman. I am skeptical when someone tweets a screenshot from facebook of someone saying “i heard from someone who heard from someone at safesport.” We are so many degrees separated from the actual event at this point .

I actually took that screenshot post as someone who knew someone that was directly involved in the safesport reporting (that their friend was a claimant) and that this was where her/his information was coming from. Hence the vagueness (that the poster was not hearing it from safesport, that the claimant was being told that by safesport). Admittedly, I may be totally off on my interpretation

 

[irichluck21]

I actually took that screenshot post as someone who knew someone that was directly involved in the safesport reporting (that their friend was a claimant) and that this was where her/his information was coming from. Hence the vagueness (that the poster was not hearing it from safesport, that the claimant was being told that by safesport). Admittedly, I may be totally off on my interpretation

Either way, hearing it from someone who was hearing it from someone at SafeSport is still suspect.

 

[nog]

If this was a SafeSport decision, I don’t see how they could create a consequence if as the poster says none of her athletes have come forward whether it be newer athletes or ones that are in coaching positions that “don’t have the energy or the time to revisit her abusive, manipulative treatment”.

Now I read that as no recent (as in the current or athletes that recently left in last year or so). Which I was interpreting as — they agree that mlt had bad coaching and behavior in the past but that at some point she changed her coaching practices and they were willing to accept that. Talk at SS was saying that had any more recent athletes corroborated bad coaching then SS would’ve given more severe action (suspension maybe)?

That’s just my opinion though, admittedly through a lens of knowing more about the nyman and Haney cases from personal acquaintances

 

[RedBirdie]

I have heard of it. I know in the Nyman case it was stated in their ruling and again in mediation to the decision (according to multiple involved in that case) she was given a term of suspension and then probationary time after suspension had concluded (a period of either 2 or 5 yrs, I can’t remember exactly).

Its not that people aren’t slapped with restrictions (“probation”), its that MLT is not currently on the suspended/restricted list which is public AND the restriction described in the post is nonsensical.

 

[irichluck21]

I don’t see with the current climate in gymnastics that if MLT had any consequence at all from SafeSport, that it would be “behind the scenes” and USAG would not be transparent about it and have MLT on the restricted list.
Given all the changes that USAG has put in place to ensure athlete safety and well-being, not to mention they also just announced mental health visits to support NT members, I doubt USAG would keep something like this a secret. Not to mention that USAG asked MLT to resign as elite development coordinator in 2018 when she contacted Raisman inappropriately.

The story doesn’t add up…yet. Perhaps more information to come will change that.

 

[JoseM]

You mean MLT from CGA, right?

Well, if MLT is on probation, she should profit from this situation by taking the time to rectify and correct herself. She can do it.

José M.

 

[FrolovasDoubleLayout]

While the whole situation may be accurate, I can find it troubling that someone in Safesport would breach confidentiality and put this information out there. It just goes to show that no matter how safe something is deemed to be, is it really?

 

[nog]

I was actually thinking that the poster got the information from a claimant in the mlt case. That SS notified the claimant of the ruling (as they should), and that the claimant then told the poster of the ruling. But I admit that that is just my interpretation

 

[RedBirdie]

MLT is listed as an International Elite Committee rep and was present for the October 1 meeting. Voted and everything. Interpret as you wish.

 

[nog]

probation (they way it’s been explained to me) is simply that. No restrictions on coaching (like supervision or anything). Just that you have been warned, and if another new complaint (as in new in timeline of occurring not newly filed but old in occurring) then you face the possibility of suspension or banning.
I know that there are many who would like to burn MLT at the stake, but I am actually encouraged that none of her more recent (last 5 yrs or so) athletes had bad things to say (at least according to that screenshot, and of the parent that I know who had a kid there a few years ago). The parent that I talked to actually said that MLT was open and honest about her past coaching and that she had made a concerted effort to change her coaching. I may get flamed for this, but if that is all true, and IF she did get probation out of a SS investigation (cause i have no way of knowing if she really is on probation), then I find that encouraging. That SS didn’t just cancel someone who was already changing and learning from past mistakes. I really hope that it all works out

 

[KristyJ]

That would be so very different from the process used elsewhere, though. And though SafeSport has kept the details active investigations under wraps, they haven’t kept the results of their investigations under wraps. What you describe sounds like a warning with no defined criteria, which does not sound like other cases out of SafeSport.