Potential DL has prior Dom Viol conviction... can he serve?

[Scoutfish]

Oh, I don't blame him either!

 

If the guy was totally innocent..and victim of the first woman I described..well, explaining is like explaining to the wind. No matter what you say, nobody will actually believe. Happens all the time.

 

Not much different than the guy and girl who have been dating 4 years. The guy just turned 18 yesterday who gets caught in bed with the girl who turns 18 in 4 more days.

 

Mom or dad gets mad, calls the cops, he gets arrested, charged and found guilty of statatory rape and spends the rest of his life registered as a sex offender. Because of a chronilogical incident with his 4 year girlfriend!

 

The way I see it, the guy is guilty of nothing, but will have that record the rest of his life. People don't see past the title. They do not bother to listen to the reason why. They just see "SEX OFFENDER".

 

The dad may very well be in that same kind of situation.He may have been defending himself from that wife.

But that could still cause problems in the pack..inocent or not.

 

I Don't blame him for not wanting to re-hash something that nobody else will bother to truely understand at all.

 

 

The other case is that he doesn't want to have somebody find out that something is more serious than how he told it.

 

 

[SctDad]

Since he is not signing as a DL or any other leadership position this is a dead horse. No more discussion and let the man help out where he needs/wants to. There is nothing saying that only registered leaders can help out.

[Gunny2862]

It IS likely that the council would turn him down.

 

OTOH, the COR should have a private brief not just on/with this fellow but on/with each and every applicant. His signature is the one telling Council that the COR thinks this fellow is okay.

 

Then Council can decide it's own level of comfortability not only with this fellow but with each applicant.

If the COR feels strongly enough maybe they have a talk with the DE about the fellow either before or while tuning in this fellows application. If not, well, maybe that is a lack of endorsement - but if that''s the case why would the COR sign the paper at all?

 

There are enough variables here that without meeting the individual in question and getting whatever disclosure he'd be willing to give that we can't and shouldn't say exactly what to do. But if he's willing to submit an app I'd ask him to talk to the COR second, AFTER I had fully signed on and become a believer and not just a Scouter who wants some help or a warm body to fill a DL slot.

[SctDad]

And if he was never approached about being a DL, no one would have ever known the difference. So I think that no one should judge him.

 

I guess there are just some people on this forum that have so many parents and leaders to help that they can pick and choose who they want in their pack.

 

Must be nice.

[nldscout]

all this speculation about what happened is immaterial. Like it or not the man is a convicted domestic abuser criminal. At the very least the CO needs to know. For all you know he may have been a violent man, so far you only have a small part of the story. If he doesn't want to register maybe he is hiding more than he is telling you.

 

Ask your self this. I know that he is a convicted person, do you really want to take responsibility for him not doing it again? and if he does where will you be then?

[SctDad]

nldscout

 

are you willing to take the chances of being charged with defimation of character. YOu have no right to tell anyone. What if he is making it up as a way to keep from being a rgistered leader. where is your evidence that this REALLY happened other than what he has said.

 

Now you CAN say something if you suspect there is abuse in the home. That is a YP issue. But you cannot go off of someones past. True or not, this guy did not sign a volunteer form so what ever is in his record is not to be discussed. Next thing you know, when a parent signs up their kid, there will be an automatic background check to make sure the parent is OK.

[Lisabob]

Sctdad, a few scattered thoughts.

 

I would not be surprised if the last sentence you wrote came true, down the road. Not that I necessarily think it would be smart.

 

Domestic violence is "abuse in the home."

 

He probably wouldn't win a defamation suit, based on what has been written so far, even if the person he told this went out and shouted it from the rooftops. Among other things, one normally needs to show that the false statement was known to be false, and that it was said maliciously with an intent to cause harm. Strangely enough, this fellow may have "defamed" himself, but that would be about it.

 

But this is all beside the point. The guy does not want to put himself or his family through the background check. I don't know if his intentions are noble (he had one bad moment with his ex-wife that he will now regret forever, and doesn't want to relive that) or not (he is a violent man who has you all fooled - it happens!).

 

If I were the pack leadership, I would not spread this information far and wide. Instead, I would remind everybody about youth protection, 2 deep leadership, no 1 on 1 contact. I'd be vigilant about ensuring every leader has current YPT and that parents know about YPT so they can do it too, if they want to. And then I'd leave it be, and trust my other (registered and trained) leaders to pay attention. End of story.

 

 

[SctDad]

Lisabob

 

I agree with you. He would probably not win a deffimation suit. But do you really want that.

 

And yes I hope that no where in the future is there background checks for parents. The program struggles enough as it is.

I have a couple of parents in my pack that are great help. I could not survive a campout without them. Would I risk the repricussions of running a background check just because. No.

 

With that being said, WestCoastScouter, just remember your YP training and continue on with scouting. If he does not want something brought up then let the man be. He already has tto live with his choices and the fact that he may never lead his son through the wonderful world of scouting.

[T2Eagle]

Just to be clear, there can be no defamation here. A criminal conviction is a public record, whether it's violence, sexual predation, or bank robbing. We are all entitled to find out about it and have the right to publish it in almost any way we want.

 

You have a problem, someone who is spending time with your scouts has told you he has a criminal record and does not want to undergo a background check. Maybe he "only" beat up his wife, or maybe he beat up a kid, or maybe something even worse, you don't know. You shouldn't make the decision that it's OK for him to be around, you should bring this to your COR and your scouting professionals. Let them make the call.

 

At a minimum you should at least try to do a determined internet search so you can get the facts. The information is out there and it's not a secret.

[Scoutfish]

 

 

Some people read between the lines. Your making up lines that don'texist!

I never once said I knew his ex wife. I described a scenario ( from personal experince I witnesed) where a woman attacked a man because he did not do something. All he did was push her aside in self defende. THAT'S ALL! She told everybody that he beat her. Yep! Bona fide dram queen.

 

As for the guy himself: If he is in a position that he wants to help my son, and he has a criminal record which is a public record for assault, then you bet your butt I have every right as a parent who's son is in that pack to know about it.

 

The guy says it was just the ex wife and that was all, well how do you know for sure? If he down plays it that it was not a bigger tghing, then why be so concerned witha criminal check? If he laid everything on the table, the criminal check will have no surprises!

 

Yet, he expects you to believe his word as is...but if you need to do the check..just forget it.

 

Sorry, he's hiding something. That something might not be much, but apparently, it's enough that he doesn't want the pack, CO or other leaders to know.

 

 

 

Yeah, there are several problems here: What you consider no big deal, and what I consider no big deal are different.

 

Look at another scenario here: The catholic church didn't think it was abig deal when their priests were molesting all those boys. They also decided it was no problem. I guess you couls ask how that was hiding a secret too!

 

Now, there is an ideal world we want to live in, and there is the real world where people downplay lots of really bad stuff.

 

This guy may have ben in the situation I "decribed" and may be the victemm of a hostile / agressive woman. Might be all there is.

 

But it might not be all there is either.

 

So even if the CO, COR and CC decide it's okay, they OWE it to the pack's parents to let them know what and why they ok'd it!

 

PERIOD!

 

Now personally, I'd like to think that the guy probably is guilty of just being a human. I do not know one person who can claim they never did anything stupid or something they regretted later. I am willing to bet that the guy falls into this catagory. I know people can get arrested for assault based on calling somebody a name too.

I bet the guy is probably a great guy.

 

But I will not bet your childs health or safety on it.

[SctDad]

Gunny, I got your PM, Mine is not working. I will try again later.

 

This issue was brought on by someone asking him to be a DL. INstead of dancing around the subject like most parents, he was honest. Does that account for nothing.

 

If he was never asked, no one would ever know about it. Not the CM, not the CO, not the IH. NO ONE. That is the way it should be left. The only thing you are gonna do is ruin scouting for this boy because you don't like the man for a mistake that he made, even though he has paid his dues.

 

Lighten up folks. I guess if you really wanted to have it this way, anyone who has ever gotten a speeding ticket should not drive scouts, because they did it once, so it HAS to be a problem.(This message has been edited by SctDad)

[Eamonn]

I of course don't know this fellow.

 

Still I keep coming back to the question "Why do we have background checks?"

I think we have them to protect the kids we serve.

If we are going to look for loop holes or ways to get around them. - Why Bother?

Some CO's are now having anyone and everyone who interacts with the youth they serve be checked out. I'm all for it.

While this fellow could well be the nicest guy in the world? If however he fails to pass a background check or refuses to take one?

I'd be happy to err on the side of safety.

I spend 40 hours a week in jail with convicted criminals. Many of these seem like nice enough fellows, but even though I might like a good many of them, I know for my own safety that it would be wrong to trust them.

Ea.

[nldscout]

If you deal with people that have demestic violence records you know that in 95% of the cases these people claims its always the other persons fault that something happened.

 

You might think he is a nice guy, but nice guys do not have violet criminal records.

 

I see them enough in court to know I would not trust someone around my kid without knowing the whole story.

[SctDad]

Obviously a judge did not find him such a violent person, or he would have got more than probation.

 

I also have to say that I hope no one in this situation ever joins your pack, because branding him with your scarlet letters will turn him off of scouts all together and probably ruin the boys chances of enjoying our great organization.

 

But then again, anyone that has EVER been arrested for anything I guess is not allowed in a lot of packs. Guess your packs have no probelm when they have to turn people away.

 

I also guess no one believes in mistakes or paying ones dues. This man made his mistake, took his punishment, and just wants to put it behind him.(This message has been edited by SctDad)

[Basementdweller]

This will not end well, I am going to bet that you will lose someone, either the recruited den leader or the self righteous who will not have their son exposed to a potential threat.

 

We have lost families over background checks, "Sure I will be a den leader, why do you need my Social Security number? Background check, why do you need to do that? Ok, I will fill it out and bring back to the next meeting".

 

That is the last time you ever see them or their son.

 

 

I would drop the entire issue and let him remain ACTIVE DAD.