Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I wonder if anyone have heard about this evil man who is disgrace sport doctor MSU in Michigan. 240 female victims of sexual assault since the late 90s to 2016. It been major gak storm here in Michigan. I wonder if people in Europe have heard about this case. Nassar is going to spend a very LONG TIME in prison.

I wonder if anyone has heard the tragedy of darth Plagueis the wise?

His case was reported on the BBC.Yeah we know about the scum

It's been brought up in this thread that started about Harvey Weinstein but morphed into covering all such similar cases.

I watched some of the sentencing videos.

It was an interesting exercise of jurisprudence at it appears more like a live show mini series and was considered such by the press.

The judge did have her moments in decontructing Nassar's commentary - he didn't have a defence as such as he pled and didn't contest the trial.

What was good about the trial was that Nassar was stripped of the psychlogical refuge of denial by negative reinforcement. Normally the judge gets to condemn once, but Nassar was repeatedly condemned over the course of over a week.

What was bad was that the doctrine of 'the victims will have their say' went as far as victims attacking defense council, and also shouting down objections from defense counsel from th visitors gallery. As this was a media show they were tarnished as villains for doing their job of defending Nassar and representing his rights. the senior defense counsel used his time to speak before sentencing to defend not Nassar but Nassars right to have a lawyer and that the legal team were only doing their job. It was also disclosed at the time that during the sentencing hearing the 'baddy' defence counsel had received death threats against their families by irate viewers.

In all of the time he was doing this, did not one parent know about it? If so, shouldn’t they be held accountable for letting this go on?

Relapse wrote:
In all of the time he was doing this, did not one parent know about it? If so, shouldn’t they be held accountable for letting this go on?

Nassar got away with doing what he did so so long because:

1. Some things are too horrible to believe.

2. Do things in plain sight that are too horrible to believe and people will believe that nothing untoward is going on.

3. People with a stellar rep will naturally be believed.

4. People doing odd things casually will not be challenged.


Nassar was brazen enough to sexually assault young girls while their parents were sitting down in the room. He was clever in his manipulation, by abusing with parents present seated but out of LOS of the abuse the victim thinks it must be medicine and the parent is none the wiser.

Some victims did challenge Nassar early but nobody believed them. The problem wasnt so much that they weren't believed, Nassar arranged circumstances so that his crimes would remain plausibly deniable. the problem was that once disbeleived they were no longer recorded and so further victims did not have weight of evidence of repeat complaints to back them up.

Nassar was so credible he convinced the father of a victim, Kyle Stephens, that she was mistaken and he tried to force his daughter to apologise to Nassar. This led to a family breakdown and when the truth was aparent only two decades later the father committed suicide from the shame.

There are a lot of lessons from this case, especially the establishment of the truth, previously sen as not credible, that a person can be a victim of sustained abuse yet be unaware until years later that abuse occured. his might be the legacy the Nassar survivors give us, as this problem is common enough, but all too easily dismissable. After all people will say how could you not know at the time that you were being abused? Here was have a test case to show that that level of grooming conditioning an brainwashing is indeed possible.

It is worthwhile taking a look at the Nassar case for anyone who wants to get a better understanding the human condition, and where the human psyche is more fragile and malleable than most people are aware. Nassar is a classic psychopath, he only mimics human feeling for others, but he mimics them very well. As is common with more intelligent psychopaths their analytical relationship with human emotion makes them extremely good manipulators and liars as the psychological give aways are entirely absent.

Relapse wrote:
In all of the time he was doing this, did not one parent know about it? If so, shouldn’t they be held accountable for letting this go on?

At least once the police were in fact summoned, and he basically said "I'm a doctor, it's medicine", showed them a powerpoint, and no charges were pressed.

If law enforcement professionals charged with investigating sex crimes could be (and were) deceived, it seems a little ridiculous to push responsibility back onto the parents.

The case got a bit of coverage here, when the ruling came down. Almost all crimes stories are local, but sometimes you get a crime of such scale that it gets international attention, and Nassar's certainly fitted that. Then on top of that you have the judge presiding over the case - not the most clean cut, impartial bit of jurisprudence, but ready made for the nightly news.

That said, I'm the only person I know who would know who Nassar was just by hearing the name. It got coverage here so people are aware of the basics, I think, but not any more than that.

 Ouze wrote:

Relapse wrote:
In all of the time he was doing this, did not one parent know about it? If so, shouldn’t they be held accountable for letting this go on?

At least once the police were in fact summoned, and he basically said "I'm a doctor, it's medicine", showed them a powerpoint, and no charges were pressed.

If law enforcement professionals charged with investigating sex crimes could be (and were) deceived, it seems a little ridiculous to push responsibility back onto the parents.

It’s a legitimate question since this had gone on for a long time, and there is no shortage of stories where parents either abused their kids or allowed them to be abused for the sake of fame and fortune.

 sebster wrote:
The case got a bit of coverage here, when the ruling came down. Almost all crimes stories are local, but sometimes you get a crime of such scale that it gets international attention, and Nassar's certainly fitted that. Then on top of that you have the judge presiding over the case - not the most clean cut, impartial bit of jurisprudence, but ready made for the nightly news.

That said, I'm the only person I know who would know who Nassar was just by hearing the name. It got coverage here so people are aware of the basics, I think, but not any more than that.

Recognizion by name isn't helped likely that he's referred in tons of nicknames but not by his real name all that much at least in finnish news. More likely he's referred as "nightmare doctor" or somehting like that.

Relapse wrote:
It’s a legitimate question since this had gone on for a long time, and there is no shortage of stories where parents either abused their kids or allowed them to be abused for the sake of fame and fortune.

No, it is a question that is lacking in any factual basis - there is not one single parent who has even been suggested might have acted as you suggest. And not only does it have no evidence, it doesn't even make sense. Nassar was a well credentialed doctor, but he was still just a doctor. Unlike say, an iconic football coach, there was no concept that falling on the wrong side of Nassar would mean he'd withdraw support that'd stop you getting to the Olympics. No parent would have thought 'oh you better let the doctor keep abusing you, because you need your calf to get better and he's the only doctor in America who can monitor your strained calf muscle'.

It's such a ridiculous claim.

 sebster wrote:

Relapse wrote:
It’s a legitimate question since this had gone on for a long time, and there is no shortage of stories where parents either abused their kids or allowed them to be abused for the sake of fame and fortune.

No, it is a question that is lacking in any factual basis - there is not one single parent who has even been suggested might have acted as you suggest. And not only does it have no evidence, it doesn't even make sense. Nassar was a well credentialed doctor, but he was still just a doctor. Unlike say, an iconic football coach, there was no concept that falling on the wrong side of Nassar would mean he'd withdraw support that'd stop you getting to the Olympics. No parent would have thought 'oh you better let the doctor keep abusing you, because you need your calf to get better and he's the only doctor in America who can monitor your strained calf muscle'.

It's such a ridiculous claim.

I'm not claiming anything, just asking a question if it was not possible in all of that time that not one parent thought something was amiss. It's not a ridiculous thought at all.

Just in case you don't think it possible, a couple of reminders:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/food-thought/201310/the-ugly-side-child-fame-jonbenet-corey-feldman

yeah, was he not the team USA doctor/coach that got jailed by the most scathing judges comments and sent him down for the rest of his life.

yeah he made News in the UK

This answers my own question I asked earlier:

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/blaming-parents-nassar-s-victims-coping-mechanism-it-won-t-ncna840561

 sebster wrote:
The case got a bit of coverage here, when the ruling came down. Almost all crimes stories are local, but sometimes you get a crime of such scale that it gets international attention, and Nassar's certainly fitted that. Then on top of that you have the judge presiding over the case - not the most clean cut, impartial bit of jurisprudence, but ready made for the nightly news.

That said, I'm the only person I know who would know who Nassar was just by hearing the name. It got coverage here so people are aware of the basics, I think, but not any more than that.

Take another, deeper, look at the case sebster.
I am glad I am not the only one here who noticed something irregular about the handling of the sentencing hearing. And I am not taking about unusual, that was to be expected with this case, but irregular in terms of jurisprudence. I think the trial heads US jurisprudence into unsafe waters, the fact that defence counsel get death threats says a lot, yet the press has overlooked all that.

Nassar is also interesting himself. I bet that there will be a lot of psychologists making appointments to study him while he is in isolation in federal prison. There are a lot of case studies and papers to be made out of that man. He is very much a Lecteresque figure just without the dangerous persona.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 sebster wrote:

Relapse wrote:
It’s a legitimate question since this had gone on for a long time, and there is no shortage of stories where parents either abused their kids or allowed them to be abused for the sake of fame and fortune.

No, it is a question that is lacking in any factual basis - there is not one single parent who has even been suggested might have acted as you suggest. And not only does it have no evidence, it doesn't even make sense. Nassar was a well credentialed doctor, but he was still just a doctor. Unlike say, an iconic football coach, there was no concept that falling on the wrong side of Nassar would mean he'd withdraw support that'd stop you getting to the Olympics. No parent would have thought 'oh you better let the doctor keep abusing you, because you need your calf to get better and he's the only doctor in America who can monitor your strained calf muscle'.

It's such a ridiculous claim.

Ironically there is a bit of that going on, but it doesnt involve the parents at all.

I remember videos back in the 80's smuggled out of the Eastern blok, now admittedly it was used for propaganda purposes in the cold war, but the best propaganda is an uncomfortable truth. The video showed young preteen girls being trained as gymnasts, with painful stretching exercises. The girls were screaming in the video and clearly wanted the treatment to stop. Now a point to add in here, there was no allegation of sexual abuse, just stretching and suppleness exercises which were very painful being exercised on very young girls.
The video was shown as a reason as to why the Eastern blok produces all the best gymnasts, because to train an Olympic level gymnast you need to start with a very young girl and basically physically abuse her (the stretching exercises until she can do what the human body normally cannot do. This involves painful abuse that could not be done in the west because of our care of children, but in the Communist states such sensibilities are irrelevant in the pursuit of medals. It was a powerful message and seen as true, because for the womens teams especially there was no way the West could compete under ethical training of willing adults, because we are unprepared to torment kids. It is different for mens gymnastics as boys can start at an older age and can properly volunteer, but girls have to start at a very young age to have any chance of being successful internationally, and are often better performers as children.

Nearly all top level atheletes have to suffer for their sport to be any good at it. Shooting medals might be the 'laziest' in terms of psyhical grief However gymnastics is fairly unique amongst sports in that it bends the bounds of human locomotion, it is also inherently painful. An Olympic swimmer swims faster, a jumper jumps further, a runner runs faster, all do what the human body is made to do naturally. However an Olympic gymnast can do things that the human body is not made for, Aly Raisman's floor routine that won here the gold was believed to be literally impossible until she managed it.

How was it done?

I asked myself tis question many times of the last few years, maybe the Americans had a new technique they made in secret and understandably kept confidential. Possible sporting science is developing all the time, records are progressively being broken and people achieve more. The Nassar case opened it all up. Sadly the magic medal winning ingredient in women's gymnastics is still child abuse. Now I am not crediting Nassar in any way, this has nothing to do with him. In fact the abuse he perpetrated he was able to get away with because he took advantage of the abuse system inhernent to the training regimen. This was especially true at the Karolyi ranch, where Nassar gave treats to young girls who were denied them by brutal coaches, in order to groom them to abuse them sexually.
While about Nassar the sentencing hearing from victims revealed much about the training methods of Karolyi ranch. Young Olympic hopefuls were completely separated from the parents and brutalised repeatedly by the staff (of which ironically only Nassar played 'Mr Nice' to the girls).
It appears that to make an Olympic team the USOC and USAG imported the methodologies of the Soviet era to make medal winners.

I think my wife would have shot him in the face actually. But she worked with kids in victim services and is as touchy feely as Genghis Khan on the subject. She's had some epic rants about it.

Bet big bucks this is the tip of the iceberg.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Khiraly ranch is now being investigated in Texas.

 Orlanth wrote:

 sebster wrote:
The case got a bit of coverage here, when the ruling came down. Almost all crimes stories are local, but sometimes you get a crime of such scale that it gets international attention, and Nassar's certainly fitted that. Then on top of that you have the judge presiding over the case - not the most clean cut, impartial bit of jurisprudence, but ready made for the nightly news.

That said, I'm the only person I know who would know who Nassar was just by hearing the name. It got coverage here so people are aware of the basics, I think, but not any more than that.

Take another, deeper, look at the case sebster.
I am glad I am not the only one here who noticed something irregular about the handling of the sentencing hearing. And I am not taking about unusual, that was to be expected with this case, but irregular in terms of jurisprudence. I think the trial heads US jurisprudence into unsafe waters, the fact that defence counsel get death threats says a lot, yet the press has overlooked all that.

Nassar is also interesting himself. I bet that there will be a lot of psychologists making appointments to study him while he is in isolation in federal prison. There are a lot of case studies and papers to be made out of that man. He is very much a Lecteresque figure just without the dangerous persona.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 sebster wrote:

Relapse wrote:
It’s a legitimate question since this had gone on for a long time, and there is no shortage of stories where parents either abused their kids or allowed them to be abused for the sake of fame and fortune.

No, it is a question that is lacking in any factual basis - there is not one single parent who has even been suggested might have acted as you suggest. And not only does it have no evidence, it doesn't even make sense. Nassar was a well credentialed doctor, but he was still just a doctor. Unlike say, an iconic football coach, there was no concept that falling on the wrong side of Nassar would mean he'd withdraw support that'd stop you getting to the Olympics. No parent would have thought 'oh you better let the doctor keep abusing you, because you need your calf to get better and he's the only doctor in America who can monitor your strained calf muscle'.

It's such a ridiculous claim.

Ironically there is a bit of that going on, but it doesnt involve the parents at all.

I remember videos back in the 80's smuggled out of the Eastern blok, now admittedly it was used for propaganda purposes in the cold war, but the best propaganda is an uncomfortable truth. The video showed young preteen girls being trained as gymnasts, with painful stretching exercises. The girls were screaming in the video and clearly wanted the treatment to stop. Now a point to add in here, there was no allegation of sexual abuse, just stretching and suppleness exercises which were very painful being exercised on very young girls.
The video was shown as a reason as to why the Eastern blok produces all the best gymnasts, because to train an Olympic level gymnast you need to start with a very young girl and basically physically abuse her (the stretching exercises until she can do what the human body normally cannot do. This involves painful abuse that could not be done in the west because of our care of children, but in the Communist states such sensibilities are irrelevant in the pursuit of medals. It was a powerful message and seen as true, because for the womens teams especially there was no way the West could compete under ethical training of willing adults, because we are unprepared to torment kids. It is different for mens gymnastics as boys can start at an older age and can properly volunteer, but girls have to start at a very young age to have any chance of being successful internationally, and are often better performers as children.

Nearly all top level atheletes have to suffer for their sport to be any good at it. Shooting medals might be the 'laziest' in terms of psyhical grief However gymnastics is fairly unique amongst sports in that it bends the bounds of human locomotion, it is also inherently painful. An Olympic swimmer swims faster, a jumper jumps further, a runner runs faster, all do what the human body is made to do naturally. However an Olympic gymnast can do things that the human body is not made for, Aly Raisman's floor routine that won here the gold was believed to be literally impossible until she managed it.

How was it done?

I asked myself tis question many times of the last few years, maybe the Americans had a new technique they made in secret and understandably kept confidential. Possible sporting science is developing all the time, records are progressively being broken and people achieve more. The Nassar case opened it all up. Sadly the magic medal winning ingredient in women's gymnastics is still child abuse. Now I am not crediting Nassar in any way, this has nothing to do with him. In fact the abuse he perpetrated he was able to get away with because he took advantage of the abuse system inhernent to the training regimen. This was especially true at the Karolyi ranch, where Nassar gave treats to young girls who were denied them by brutal coaches, in order to groom them to abuse them sexually.
While about Nassar the sentencing hearing from victims revealed much about the training methods of Karolyi ranch. Young Olympic hopefuls were completely separated from the parents and brutalised repeatedly by the staff (of which ironically only Nassar played 'Mr Nice' to the girls).
It appears that to make an Olympic team the USOC and USAG imported the methodologies of the Soviet era to make medal winners.

China are notorious for such practices. They have many many hopefuls in training at a very young age, hundreds and hundreds of them.

By time done you have a few elite athletes, and they tend not to be as worried about burning people out.as other nations..

Olympic level sports will always demand immense sacrafices to achieve such skills and levels.

Not condoning abuse

, but if you want olympics gold, it's never going to be a easy path, and you will likely do abit of damage to body along the way.

Its pretty horrible, to see people as a commodity and basically distill your way down and sort off weaker athletes till you end with a few Olympic grade competition standard.

 jhe90 wrote:

, but if you want olympics gold, it's never going to be a easy path, and you will likely do abit of damage to body along the way.

Its pretty horrible, to see people as a commodity and basically distill your way down and sort off weaker athletes till you end with a few Olympic grade competition standard.

And as to why it's allowed/acceptable/tolerated: The sad truth is, and always has been, that many parents live through their children's achievements. They'll make the sacrifices, they'll look the other way, because their child is an Olympic hopeful/competitor/medalist, and your child isn't.

 Frazzled wrote:
I think my wife would have shot him in the face actually. But she worked with kids in victim services and is as touchy feely as Genghis Khan on the subject. She's had some epic rants about it.

Nassar is a national embarassment because he was a paediatrician. He places all work with children under a new cloud. The ramifications will be severe.
Not only is there the anger at the betrayal of young lives, now people working with kids will have to accept extra safeguards, this means people working with kids will be treated as if they were a potential Nassar. I can see this getting grating quickly.

Nassar abused in plain sight, with parents or guardians present so it will require two sets of trained staff to prevent the same happening again. I can see this being a heavy burden on less well funded sporting venues and clinics who cant afford two trained nurses in the room at all times when working on children. I can see it being a professional insult on genuine medical professionals who can no longer be trusted to be alone with children because of this one douchebag.

Nassar groomed meticulously managing to hoodwink away layers of active protection. So one of the lessons to be learned will be a new level of suspicion on anyone working with children. If an honest coach or assistant can be hoodwinked, or a father so convinced of Nassar's lies that he grew actively estranged from his abused daughter then mistrust must be sown in the medical and care professions in order to protect children.

Nassar worked with enablers who protected him. So any confirmed case in the future might tarnish those around them. If someone is a coworker with an abuser, might they be an enable also?

Yes I can see anyone working in this field being very angry at what Nassar has done. People like him will be difficult to guard against, and in attempting to do so honest relationships will have to change and less well funded venues might not be able to keep up with the costs. Double manning trained medical staff will not be cheap.

Then you add on whatever anger is there on the victims behalf.....

My sympathies.

 Frazzled wrote:

Bet big bucks this is the tip of the iceberg.

Sandusky was the tip of the iceberg. Nassar is part of the slide as victims get listened to and journalists get digging. Its has been heading international too Bennell was convicted again as the renewed or in the Us case overdue interest in rooting out peadophiles from sports continues.

 Frazzled wrote:

The Khiraly ranch is now being investigated in Texas.

Good. But I think they will draw brick walls. The Karolyi ranch venue shares some responsibility for Nassar, but the abuse there suffered in general was onlyvlightly mentioned. It happened, it was brutal and it was pervasive. The bottom line is that unless coaches inflict pain on little girls those children wont be good enough to win Olympic medals in gymnastics. Society has yet to have discourse on this, and likely never will.
AFAIK the UK and most of Europe has long given up on trying to dominate in this sport on ethical grounds. Gymnastics can be good sport and is popular, but the highest level of capability comes at a heavy price that only a person old enough to consent should be subjected to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

, but if you want olympics gold, it's never going to be a easy path, and you will likely do abit of damage to body along the way.

Its pretty horrible, to see people as a commodity and basically distill your way down and sort off weaker athletes till you end with a few Olympic grade competition standard.

And as to why it's allowed/acceptable/tolerated: The sad truth is, and always has been, that many parents live through their children's achievements. They'll make the sacrifices, they'll look the other way, because their child is an Olympic hopeful/competitor/medalist, and your child isn't.

To be fair, the sacrifices to make an Olympian are themselves (normally) worth it.
Pushing a gifted child further so they can pursue sporting glory is not of itself an abuse. Far from it, as you need to build in the self confidence to win. It is also a reasonable step towards a better future.

However illegal drugs go too far, and the suppleness exercises inflicted on young girls that make an Olympic female gymnast are a step too far also.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

, but if you want olympics gold, it's never going to be a easy path, and you will likely do abit of damage to body along the way.

Its pretty horrible, to see people as a commodity and basically distill your way down and sort off weaker athletes till you end with a few Olympic grade competition standard.

And as to why it's allowed/acceptable/tolerated: The sad truth is, and always has been, that many parents live through their children's achievements. They'll make the sacrifices, they'll look the other way, because their child is an Olympic hopeful/competitor/medalist, and your child isn't.

Theres a reason China, Russia etx where pretty dominent in the sport. That and there seeming willingness to dope athletes.

Ballet, is also meant to be pretty brutal in way it trains some of the elite dancers. The Culture is not limited to the gymnastic world.

Maybe not as bad, but any dance dysaplines seems to stray towards a more darker aspect than other sports.

I think it’s okay to draw a distinction between a sport being physically demanding and brutal on a body, and someone in power abusing the same athletes for personal gratification.

Football scrambles players brains from a young age and causes ligament and joint damage with some athletes requiring major surgery before they graduate high school. Parents being willing to let their kids subject themselves to that kind of damage is not the same as Sandusky fething the athletes.

 jhe90 wrote:

Ballet, is also meant to be pretty brutal in way it trains some of the elite dancers. The Culture is not limited to the gymnastic world.

Ballet is different, its painful to train on points, but long gone are the days when girls were forced into ballet from a young age to satisfy their parents.
Prima ballerina can be achieved when a girl starts above and age to consent to this training, and child ballerinas are discouraged nowadays.

Ballet involves some suffering, but its high art and those into it tend to be enthusiastic about it. Lots of girls in particular would want to be ballerinas and stay when they find out the personal costs in comfort. Unlike an athelete there is also a longer career in ballet. and ex ballerinas are in general better cared for than atheletes who tend to get discarded. There is a lot of work in ballet beyond being on stage an matrue ballerinas can still get stage roles in less demanding positions also. There is no general chorus in an gymnastic team or in most professional sports for that matter, if you cant get a coaching or a commentators job its just back to the jobcentre with you.

 Orlanth wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:

Ballet, is also meant to be pretty brutal in way it trains some of the elite dancers. The Culture is not limited to the gymnastic world.

Ballet is different, its painful to train on points, but long gone are the days when girls were forced into ballet from a young age to satisfy their parents.
Prima ballerina can be achieved when a girl starts above and age to consent to this training, and child ballerinas are discouraged nowadays.

Ballet involves some suffering, but its high art and those into it tend to be enthusiastic about it. Lots of girls in particular would want to be ballerinas and stay when they find out the personal costs in comfort. Unlike an athelete there is also a longer career in ballet. and ex ballerinas are in general better cared for than atheletes who tend to get discarded. There is a lot of work in ballet beyond being on stage an matrue ballerinas can still get stage roles in less demanding positions also. There is no general chorus in an gymnastic team or in most professional sports for that matter, if you cant get a coaching or a commentators job its just back to the jobcentre with you.

true, i guess its cleaned up its image somewhat.

Maybe the old ways might go in nations like Russia, China etc but they are for good or bad, they seem to support the child start approach.

Well in Russia getting into ballet was a shrewd move, it was so in the soviet era and is still true now. Russia isn't hot on social mobility and ballet is a good career.

 Orlanth wrote:
Well in Russia getting into ballet was a shrewd move, it was so in the soviet era and is still true now. Russia isn't hot on social mobility and ballet is a good career.

True. Or a way out Russia.

Anyone who can pass there ballet schools, and get some good shows under them will be able to try and get a position abroad, if your skilled ernough, people may offer you opertunity to work beyond your homeland and maybe even start a new life in new lands.

Relapse wrote:
I'm not claiming anything, just asking a question if it was not possible in all of that time that not one parent thought something was amiss. It's not a ridiculous thought at all.

Just in case you don't think it possible, a couple of reminders:

That some people have exploited their children doesn't mean it is reasonable, or decent, to raise that issue any time someone has their child abused. There is no evidence for your claim at all, not even anything that is even suggestive of it. There isn't even any coherent motives - Nassar's skillset is not so rare that another doctor with sports medicine couldn't have replaced him, and any payout with be substantial from just one instance of abuse, so there is simply no coherent motive for a parent to see this happen to their kid and then let it happen again.

Might as well suggest Nassar was possessed by the Devil to do this. There's as much evidence for it, and at least we'd have a coherent motive for the devil, so it's actually a lot more plausible than your 'parents knew but let it happen' crap.

DEZOAT wrote:
I wonder if anyone have heard about this evil man who is disgrace sport doctor MSU in Michigan. 240 female victims of sexual assault since the late 90s to 2016. It been major gak storm here in Michigan. I wonder if people in Europe have heard about this case. Nassar is going to spend a very LONG TIME in prison.

As you can see, yes we have. Sometimes you need to dig a little into some threads because they start to encompass the general subject instead of its original posting.

Also, sometimes, things don't need to be talked about because...well, you try to justify his actions.

Being from Michigan myself this is bad for MSU.

All you had to do to see how far this news reached is to just do some searching on the major news sites.

I first learned of this inhuman trash when it transpired that one of his victims was the face of the Not Impressed meme.
So she's famously a victim of grooming and abuse, a silly international meme, and oh yeah, an Olympic medalist. Imagine training your whole life to learn that being an Olympic medalist is only the 3rd most notorious thing about you.

 sebster wrote:

Relapse wrote:
I'm not claiming anything, just asking a question if it was not possible in all of that time that not one parent thought something was amiss. It's not a ridiculous thought at all.

Just in case you don't think it possible, a couple of reminders:

That some people have exploited their children doesn't mean it is reasonable, or decent, to raise that issue any time someone has their child abused. There is no evidence for your claim at all, not even anything that is even suggestive of it. There isn't even any coherent motives - Nassar's skillset is not so rare that another doctor with sports medicine couldn't have replaced him, and any payout with be substantial from just one instance of abuse, so there is simply no coherent motive for a parent to see this happen to their kid and then let it happen again.

Might as well suggest Nassar was possessed by the Devil to do this. There's as much evidence for it, and at least we'd have a coherent motive for the devil, so it's actually a lot more plausible than your 'parents knew but let it happen' crap.

Get over yourself. I posted earlier in the thread I could see how he got away with it and no one the wiser. Even posted a link for it.
My original question came from personal experience with people that had their children abused and they tried to cover it up.