0
skydived19006

Rich Winstock Swoop Incident Cover-Up

Recommended Posts

airtwardo

******Is it possible that the reluctance of the USPA to publicly discuss this matter is do to the possibility of them being named in a civil lawsuit?



It's guesswork to speculate about others' state of mind, especially a group of others. That being said, assuming Rich wasn't performing his jump on behalf of the USPA or in the course of his duties with the USPA (and despite the old canard that anyone can try to sue anyone for anything), I see no basis for any liability claim at all against the USPA arising out of this incident.

Out of the incedent are the key words here.

Maybe think a little further out of the box...

Is there maybe something some representatives on the board of directors may have done that could possibly put the organization at risk ?

At risk of USPA liability to the injured person for the injuries she sustained in the incident? No.
(Perhaps that only answers half of what you have in mind.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy9o8

*********Is it possible that the reluctance of the USPA to publicly discuss this matter is do to the possibility of them being named in a civil lawsuit?



It's guesswork to speculate about others' state of mind, especially a group of others. That being said, assuming Rich wasn't performing his jump on behalf of the USPA or in the course of his duties with the USPA (and despite the old canard that anyone can try to sue anyone for anything), I see no basis for any liability claim at all against the USPA arising out of this incident.

Out of the incedent are the key words here.

Maybe think a little further out of the box...

Is there maybe something some representatives on the board of directors may have done that could possibly put the organization at risk ?

At risk of USPA liability to the injured person for the injuries she sustained in the incident? No.
(Perhaps that only answers half of what you have in mind.)


Actually I was thinking more along the lines of intentionally, publicly and maliciously working to destroy someone's reputation within the industry they make a living.

Especially considering it was officially decided twice there wasn't a reason to...

Not saying that's happening, just saying pretty freakin stupid to put the possibility in play - I'd bet after some reflection whoever drew up - have the unknown whistle blower appear out of nowhere plan - is thinking it may not end up coming off so well.

Wanna be mad about poor judgement and unnecessary risk? Find out who made public the private proceedings and incited the campaign of hate & discontent some people so willingly spread across several avenues of social media.

Send them packing for gross unethical behavior by putting the organizations assets at possible risk because of personal vendetta.


Then ask me again why I suggested from the getgo sonething stinks and let's stfu for a while and see what's going on.










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy9o8

***Is it possible that the reluctance of the USPA to publicly discuss this matter is do to the possibility of them being named in a civil lawsuit?



It's guesswork to speculate about others' state of mind, especially a group of others. That being said, assuming Rich wasn't performing his jump on behalf of the USPA or in the course of his duties with the USPA (and despite the old canard that anyone can try to sue anyone for anything), I see no basis for any liability claim at all against the USPA arising out of this incident.

It would seem that if the USPA had (supposedly) ignored previous concerns about a member of it's board (or any member) doing HP landings that put spectators at risk, that could be an issue for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, let's just forget about what Rich did and focus on what someone else might have done in revealing the issue?
This is nothing more than a diversion.
We have a statement from his partner saying swooping this area was something that had been done in the past but he now realized that it shouldn't have been done and won't be done any more. Whether this was a mistake (obviously it was, one way or another) or intentional (which it was, a swoop can always be aborted), this guy is an I-E in many disciplines and the CHAIRMAN of safety and training.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
normiss

Queue the "you don't really know what happened" crowd.
Again.


And the "If you want to know what happened, get on the phone and do your own back-channel investigation, otherwise STFU" crowd.

And the "What's the big deal? He said he was sorry and it won't happen again. Isn't that all you need to know?" crowd.

And the "Somebody else's incident in the past was dealt with this way by USPA, so why you want to treat him different?" crowd.

And the "My anonymous source told me something (that I won't reveal), but it has satisfied me that there is no problem here, so everyone should just move on, OK?" crowd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Divalent

***Queue the "you don't really know what happened" crowd.
Again.


And the "If you want to know what happened, get on the phone and do your own back-channel investigation, otherwise STFU" crowd.

And the "What's the big deal? He said he was sorry and it won't happen again. Isn't that all you need to know?" crowd.

And the "Somebody else's incident in the past was dealt with this way by USPA, so why you want to treat him different?" crowd.

And the "My anonymous source told me something (that I won't reveal), but it has satisfied me that there is no problem here, so everyone should just move on, OK?" crowd.



...and the we don't really need actual proof in an internet trial crowd.



Hey believe whatever makes you feel good - I don't know what exactly happened, I wasn't there. Those I spoke with who were don't seem to agree with what others who say they were there contend.

The unvestigation process suddenly seems to be in doubt with a considerable number of the membership because a conspiracy theory letter was sent out en mass, purportedly by a licensed ex-USPA member that it turns out hasn't jumped in a decade or so...? :o


In the cover up theory we are urged to speak out against the obvious good ole boy private club trying to sweep something under the rug...by another good ole boy private club that seems not to like the newly elected first club. :ph34r:

What's undeniable is something stinks about all this...

Stepping back for a broader view we can choose to condemn the safety chair for being involved in an incident that we're told by 'someone' who knows nothing of the incident, the people or the process... There was gross negligence and it's being covered up.

Or.

We can condemn the secret squirrel brigade that for some undisclosed reason sees fit to ignore the established rules of the process and discount the findings of it publicly in a manner which negated the safeguards and like it or not - does put OUR organization squarely in front of a moving bus.

Or.

We can condemn the whole freakin' thing because no matter what you wish to believe, clearly this isn't the way things are supposed to work...which begs the obvious question, what else is going on behind the curtain for reasons OTHER than the promotion & protection of our sport?

Mull around for a bit if all of this bullshit is enough of a concern for US to address formally and logically, without emotion... Because truly we deserve the quality of leadership we demand.

Any way you look at this situation - whichever 'camp' you side with, it's pretty clear personal agenda took precedence over the organizations priority.

Who knows how much time and money was and is being wasted...other important issues being ignored -

If in fact that bothers ya, make yourself heard and i don't mean bitching on the internet...

If nothing else, keep what's best for the organization...YOUR organization, in mind the next time you vote.

Are you making a choice for leadership experience and ability or a popularity contest based on name recognition?

Ideally we get the leadership we demand - unfortunately it appears we have the leadership we deserve!

And hey gang ~ THATS on US. :|










~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nobody seems to have the balls to simply step up and say what happened. We all just keep going round, and round and fucking round - talking about talking, talking about not talking, talking about what didn't happen, talking about what might be said in some undefined future (yeah, right), but not talking about what happened.

A pitiful circle-jerk. I have lost all hope that the truth will ever out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No skin in the game. A factual report absent any emotion would probably kill this. Not an investigation but just an, X happened and Y was the result. Then people on both sides could stop speculating.

Lack of a response is worse than any response.

Bad news never gets better with time
Propblast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
propblast

The key statement I took away from that was


"I couldn't see exactly"

"what part of the building/grass/tent he went over but was clearly near the spectator area. He came next to the tent and was pretty low, he ended up hitting a picnic table first which he broke his femur on and then bounced off and hit Tyfani."

Selective quotes, without context, can be very misleading
This is the paradox of skydiving. We do something very dangerous, expose ourselves to a totally unnecesary risk, and then spend our time trying to make it safer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
normiss

Agreed.
Unsure why it's being ignored as well.



Well, the problem is: we've subsequently had people post and essentially say that whatever had previously been posted about what happened... well, that isn't what happened. Which brings us back to square one, which is: then what did happen? Which hasn't been answered. And, apparently, never will be. Lots of talk, lots of rabbits out of the hat. No answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm betting the partner DZO who admits this was a normal landing practice that we have heard exactly what happened.
Regularly.

Which is precisely why he shouldn't be involved in safety IMO.

Whatever, I'm wasting my efforts trying to be safety focused.
It just gets me attacked.

Stay safe folks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

because a conspiracy theory letter was sent out en mass, purportedly by a licensed ex-USPA member that it turns out hasn't jumped in a decade or so...?



I thought the reason you didn't want to post your conversation about what actually happened was because you don't want to speculate over 2nd or 3rd hand information?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was just checking out USPA's BOD meeting agenda's, especially the Safety and Training Committee, and while I realize that none of the discussion items listed have anything to do with this non-event ;), it should be interesting to see what new BSR's and procedural changes come about. In any case, this should be a real interesting BOD meeting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure would! Will any general members show up and try to bring this incident up? And how will the board respond? :P

Earlier in this thread, somebody mentioned that Rich did in fact resign his position. I don't know if it's true or not, but if it is, then that's good enough for me.
"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chuckakers

***He did and Sherry did not accept his resignation. :S:S:S:S



I still can't figure out how that works.

Rich: "Sherry, I'm resigning."

Sherry: "I won't accept your resignation."

Rich: "Ok, I quit."

End of story

Under Bylaws Article III, the resignation of any USPA Director's resignation shall be tendered to the BOD. (No provision for approval or rejection, either by the President or the BOD. Also no express provision for the resignation to necessarily need to be in writing.)

Under Article IV, the resignation of any officer shall be tendered to the BOD and may be voted on by the BOD at any regular or special meeting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stayhigh

Sherry should be in the same boat.

Time for a impeachment

Fire both of them, and put Jay Stokes back in,,, atleast this guy still jumps and still teaches, and still setting records.



Under Article III, a Director may be "removed for cause by a two-thirds vote of the members present at any BOD meeting" provided there has been advance notice in the meeting's agenda.
That appears to be the only means to involuntarily remove a Director.

There appears to be no provision for involuntarily removing an officer from office only; in order to do so, the officer would have to be impeached and removed as a Director by the BOD as per above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andy9o8

******He did and Sherry did not accept his resignation. :S:S:S:S



I still can't figure out how that works.

Rich: "Sherry, I'm resigning."

Sherry: "I won't accept your resignation."

Rich: "Ok, I quit."

End of story

Under Bylaws Article III, the resignation of any USPA Director's resignation shall be tendered to the BOD. (No provision for approval or rejection, either by the President or the BOD. Also no express provision for the resignation to necessarily need to be in writing.)

Under Article IV, the resignation of any officer shall be tendered to the BOD and may be voted on by the BOD at any regular or special meeting.

Unless what he was resigning was his cmmt chairmanship. In which case, Sherry, as President is the sole arbiter. Under the by-laws the President has all authority on appointing or removing cmmt chairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0