The swimming community in the Washington area has been rocked by news that a prominent swimming coach, Rick Curl, has been accused for having sexual relations with an underaged girl in the 1980s. The report below details a settlement under which the girl agreed to remain silent about the allegations — allowing Curl to continue to coach and participate in the U.S. Olympic team staff. USA Swimming has issued a statement on the controversy.
Curl is the founder of the Curl Burke swim club and has now taken a leave of action. For full disclosure, three of my four children swim in this area for the Chesterbrook Tiger Sharks which are the Division One champs (which is part of USA Swimming). They have not been part of the Rick Curl program, though it is a well known presence in the area and has many elite swimmers.
Kelley Currin, whose maiden name was Kelley Davies, had decided to break the agreement after decades of silence. She said Curl had sexual relations with her for four years beginning in 1983, when she was 13. At the time, he was 33.
Currin’s parents, Gerald and Pamela Davies, learned of the alleged relationship after reading her diary — soon before she left for the University of Texas on a swimming scholarship in 1987. She says that their lawyer discouraged them from going to the police. I am not sure why any lawyer would give such advice. Indeed, it seems to raise serious ethical issues in light of the serious criminal offense. Moreover, I am unsure why parents would yield to such advice. Putting aside the natural impulse to mete out justice on a personal level, I cannot imagine treating this as a simple civil matter as a parent particularly given the risk of a habitual offender in this category of crime. However, in 1989, the parties reached a non-disclosure agreement under which Curl agreed to compensate the family $150,000 over 11 years for the “pain and suffering experienced by her” if she agreed not to press charges or speak publicly. Paying for an alleged victim not to go to police raises ethical issues.
First, I am skeptical that such an agreement could be enforced on public policy grounds.
Second, it could itself be viewed as a crime. The New York Bar dealt with this question:
A lawyer representing the aggrieved party in a case in which there is potential criminal as well as civil liability should also be cautious when a potential defendant requests a non-reporting agreement because the aggrieved party threatened prosecution before seeking advice of counsel. In such a case, and particularly if the potential defendant remains unrepresented, the lawyer who represents the potential plaintiff/complaining witness must bear in mind that it is a form of extortion, punishable as a felony, to obtain property from a person by instilling in him or her a fear that, if the property is not delivered, the actor or another will accuse some person of a crime or cause criminal charges to be instituted against him. N.Y. Penal Law ss 155.05(2)(e), 155.30(6). It is an affirmative defense to this crime that the accused “reasonably believed the threatened charge to be true and that his sole purpose was to compel or induce the victim to take reasonable action to make good the wrong which was the subject of such threatened charge.” N.Y. Penal Law s 155.15(2). If it is unreasonable to believe that a crime was committed, or if the property sought from the potential defendant has a value in excess of that required to “make good the wrong,” the lawyer representing the potential plaintiff/complaining witness must withdraw the client’s threat. Otherwise, the lawyer risks becoming an accomplice to extortion, and violating DR 7-105(A) as well as DR 1-102(A)(3) (illegal conduct involving moral turpitude) and DR 1- 102(A)(4) (conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation).
Such agreements seem a modern version of “blood money” systems that are still used in some Middle Eastern countries. Historically, a person would be jailed until he paid the family of the victim what they demanded. In this case, the settlement was made to avoid a criminal charge.
The saving grace for the attorney can be the fact that the client is asserting innocence and making no concession of guilt. Thus, the settlement is ostensibly based on the desire to avoid the publicity associated with such claims and not necessarily to avoid legal process.
Curl, who coached Tom Dolan to three medals in the 1996 and 2000 Olympics, recently attended the U.S. Olympic trials in Omaha.
Currin, now 43, says that she simply got fed up with remaining silent even though she agreed to the terms when she was 19. It has been 23 years. She says that their lawyer told them that Andrew Sonner, then the Montgomery County State’s Attorney, told him or her that Curl would get only “a slap on the wrist.” That raises a host of other legal questions. One is whether Sooner was informed of a statutory rape case and did not take action or encourage the charge to be filed. Sooner says he has no memory of the conversation. Another question is the questionable advice: a statutory rape charge against a person with supervision of children usually results in serious punishment. Being a coach in charge of young girls would constitute a major aggravating factor.
Finally, there is the question of criminal charges after decades of delay. In Virginia, there is no statute of limitations for sexual assault. Given the statement of the alleged victim, it will be interesting to see if prosecutors move to arrest Curl. That would place both his and the Davies’s lawyers in a precarious spot of being called to a grand jury with a host of privilege and ethical issues.
Curl remains featured on his club website and the driving force behind the success of the club. The Curl Burke swim club issued the following statement:
Dear CUBU Families,Coaches, and Staff,
In response to the article that appeared in the Washington Post today, Rick Curl has decided to take a leave of absence effective immediately. Pete Morgan will assume the role of Head Coach of the Curl Burke Swim Club. In addition, Tom Ugast, Director of Operations at CUBU since 2010 will continue to process all management functions on a day to day basis.
Curl Burke Swim Club takes very seriously the health and well being of your children that swim for our Club. All of our coaches value the time they spend with the swimmers. As a Club we follow USA Swimming’s “Safe Sport” program to help ensure the safety and well being of everyone involved in our sport.
In 2010, all of our head site coaches attended the first seminar put on by Potomac Valley Swimming in conjunction with USA Swimming to educate our coaches in athlete protection.
In 2011, under the new policies that were adopted by USA Swimming, Curl Burke adopted a program that includes a code of conduct for our coaches, training in athlete protection, and mandatory background checks of all coaches. We strive to create an atmosphere that is safe and nurturing to all of our swimmers.This article is painful for our Club. If you have any questions or concerns going forward, please contact Tom Ugast.
Source: Washington Post
Isthereanotheranswer: If if if if if.
If all these things, let the big boy put in his papers and make his case. Why should HE be afraid of telling the truth? He should face the same issues in his life as we all face: if we are wrongfully attacked, and we have to defend, then well and good, let us fall back upon the support of our friends, the good will we have built up in our lives, and the rest of it, and let us come out swinging and show the world who we really are.
That’s it. It is not unfair for him to be defensive if he has something to defend, and it is not unfair for him to clear his name if it needs to be cleared.
And then somebody can make a movie out of it. Da da da da da da da — who would write the soundtrack music, do you think?
Malisha: What if he was building a huge business and really did not do what he is being convicted of ! What is the parents were only looking for a big payout on a diary they found of their daughters who may have had a “mad crush” on him. Why did they settle for 150K and no push for police to get involved. “What if that money was paid just to shut them up and only that so that his business would not be ruined”… I don’t believe it played out this way but “what if”…. I guess he could sue her then. Either way someone is getting what is deserved !
Matt, others — by the way my guess is that there were other girls he coached and “did other things with” but in the 23 years that this one did not reveal it, neither did those others. Remember how many people (and what proportion of people) DID NOT REPORT sexual abuse, date rape, child molestation, clergy abuse, etc etc etc etc for years and years and years in our history as a society. In fact, most of the books that have come out about this problem in the last 40 years have commented on or even been titled [some form of] “conspiracy of silence.”
Here’s how it goes: victim feels shame and shock; those to whom victim may speak at first are confused and/or unwilling to believe or deal with it; silence is the option most often chosen.
This is an easy route to take. It used to work 99% of the time; now it probably works 75-80% of the time; how can it be measured when there is no control group.
I bet if you did a huge study of 100,000 people, segregated by age (over 70, over 60, over 50…) you’d find:
The older people in the sample are, the more unreported sexual abuse appears in their personal histories.
23 years might even be the average amount of time it takes to disclose. But who’s counting?
ID707,
Okay, again. Just trying to display some common sense.
You, at this blog, are not my parents, but ….
I read a mention of an alternative. Positive behavior reinforcement (encouragement) instead of focus on repression of negative behavior.
Actually something I try to practice as self-help. Not always do I remember it at crucial junctions.
Just a higher/deeper(?) level version of “replace bad habits with good new ones”.
Matt Johnson,
You promised me: “I did not attack anybody. I will refrain” on a previous thread. You are attacking now by playing the stubborn child again. Don’t play the child. You are attacking by replying cryptical, nonsensical, and poorly developing your points. Get it?
Your, implied point of a contract 23 years ago must be honored and a questionable unproven case of no more sex crimes by the coach DOES NOT hold water.
Malisha went to elaborate efforts to show first others here what was what, and more to help you understand it.
During hers and others attempts to enlighten you (and attack you in some cases–but that is how some do here), you have stood fast with your little boy defiance.
Listen to me please:
1 You can not buy from a private person the state’r right to make justice deals.
2.The state’s right has no time limit.
And the ethics of contract violation on YOUR scale of ethics may be given, and argued if anyone is willing to take the discussion. But is not legally relevant here.
It was an illegal contract, and thus not a contract. But that is another matter.
I have supported you in some matters and found good in some things you have written when you were “sober” as I have called it. Now you prompt other reactions from me.
OS properly make the point that any response to you is a form of enabling (my interpretation), and cites Skinner’s solution of not responding. I have apparently been adjudged worthy of this treatment. But it is you I am talking about now.
Ask yourself why you WANT to be stubborn. Disruptive. Obtuse. And reply such as: “Umm, what?”
Ask yourself if you don’t want to get help in finding where these impulses or life tactics come from and why you need to use them.
You make rather rapid transitions from one mode to aother which is beyond my understanding. If fact all of it is beyond my kin.
You have mentioned that “it” had led to you getting fired. Looking for more? What are you wanting to do here? Are you re-fighting that battle again here? Hoping to win here? A therapist might know. Ask OS for help in selecting a therapist of the type you need.. He just might do so
Do something about it—–for your sake.
Get locked up with a lamp. Please let me out.
raff, agree completely. Seems we have a small handful of commenters who are almost continually intent on derailing discussions with outrageous comments or total non-sequiturs. I just choose to ignore. The great behavioral psychologist, B.F.Skinner, identified the Law of Extinction. Extinction is the lack of any consequence following a behavior. When a behavior is treated as inconsequential, producing neither favorable nor unfavorable consequences or responses, it will occur with decreasing frequency until the targeted behavior stops altogether. In other words, do not reward undesirable behavior with either positive or negative reinforcement. In layman’s terms, ignoring is the best policy when dealing with annoying people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_%28psychology%29
Saw a movie on the LMN network. Three girls. Two of them ended up dead. The only one that was left alive was the one that had to spend twelve years in a shrink ward.
Malisha,
I wish you wouldn’t beat around the bush and tell us hat you really think!:)
Elsie,
Well said.
BarkinDog, if you wanna hump some b*tch and she either wants it or doesn’t kick your balls hard enough to make you stop, that’s generally considered OK because the law of the pack is supplemented by the fact that puppies don’t give off the “hey handsome!” smell until their time.
But we have a different kinda pack going here, even though as you point out two legs is baaaaaaaaad. We have some curs who haven’t grown up proper and nobody fixed them right. They go by something other than the proper signals from Mother Nature; they go by something perverted and we, as a pack, pretend we don’t allow it. If they start f*cking with a puppy we’re supposed to get real b*tchy about it, and we wrote that down, in case some of the doags caint remember.
So among us, we have some piles of sh*t folks occasionally step in. We also don’t need to pretend we don’t smell it, when that happens.
Juss sayin…
Malisha,
So now, she reveals it, 23 years later. Who cares how much later it is! It was destructive to hide it, 23 years ago. What do we know about this guy’s conduct with other swimmers training with him? What do we know about what would have happened, had the truth come out when it should have come out?
=========
Does the Leading USA Swimming Coach have a history of that kind of conduct? It was 23 years ago. Are there any other accusations in the last 23 years?
Matt J: About the right to contract away, in a private contract, the state’s right and responsibility to enforce its laws, here is what I meant.
A guy commits statutory rape against a 13-year-old girl.
The guy does not want the “People of the Commonwealth of Virginia” to have and exercise THEIR RIGHT to punish him for that crime, which their elected officials have decided is a punishable felony.
So the guy buys the proposed “complaining witness”‘s right and obligation to testify against him in a court of law — for $150,000.00
Thus, something that belonged to the People of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the right to enforce its laws and to compel citizens to give sworn testimony as material witnesses to crimes they have witnessed) is sold by one person (presumably the parents of the complaining witness) to another person (the alleged perpetrator of the statutory rape) and the Commonwealth was not a party to the agreement.
NOT O.K.
If a hit-man for the Mafia were to kill somebody.
And the dead man’s family were to accept $1 Million for their agreement not to testify against their decedent’s killer.
Would that be OK?
I suggest that it would NOT because although the Mafiosi and the decedent’s relatives might be pleased with their private deal, they sold the right of the state to effectively outlaw murder.
Matt J, when this contract was made, the girl might not have been thinking about what it would really mean, to her, to other girls who trained, to other girls who were in other situations where they got exploited, to other young people who were in situations where they were exploited, on and on and on. Who knows what she was thinking when this contract was made. But she chose later to repudiate the contract and to reveal what happened. I’m not sure I know why, but who cares. To hide the fact of the violation was, regardless of the reasons for that choice to hide it, basically an act that hurt our whole society. IF THESE THINGS ARE REVEALED right away, firmly, openly, with the full force of indignation that they should engender, we are ALL better for it. If the first alter boy who was molested by the first priest had been able to reveal it right away and for there never to have been a period of everyone hiding things like this, how much better off everyone would have been.
So now, she reveals it, 23 years later. Who cares how much later it is! It was destructive to hide it, 23 years ago. What do we know about this guy’s conduct with other swimmers training with him? What do we know about what would have happened, had the truth come out when it should have come out?
That’s what I mean.
The contract was destructive.
In point of fact children and other powerless people are exploited and abused constantly, and very rarely have a chance to reveal anything about it, and have plenty of reasons to just shut up and “suck it up” and most of them do not even get compensation for their silence.
It is destructive, and it has a corrosive effect on our society, and good for this woman that she revealed this, even though 23 years later, and let the chips fall where they may.
I didn’t mean to be so confusing. I’ve been unable to write coherently ever since listening to Sean Hannity for more than 30 seconds, about a week ago; some day soon I hope to be able to realign my brain cells.
Malisha, yep you is right, once again. Unlike Matt, I completely understood what you were saying.
Elsi: what would one expect from a dog? they hump everything, no conscience about it.
Elsie DL,
I think you have made the same discovery as most of the regulars on this blog. Agree. 🙄
mespo,
Accusing a 13 year old of knowing what she was doing when the much older coach was having sex with her? Barking dog, a comment like this makes me never want to read your comments again. Yuck.
Still waiting, as I’ve been with some recent cases of rape and violence ,for somebody to make a link to ‘men’ and no, not all men of course. My mother’s rule #1 to her sons: if I ever hear you abuse(d) an underage girl in any way, I will make sure to personally castrate you. A bit harsh? So is life for so many girls and boys suffering from violation.
Malisha,
This girl — now a woman — is wise to reveal the criminal conduct that led to this very dirty piece of “legal” destruction. It is a social problem of the greatest magnitude and if we don’t deal with it every whichway, it will continue to make our society into a complex pack of filthy lies.
=================
Um, what?
Malisha,
A person is only allowed to get that benefit — not to be prosecuted — by making a deal with the people that benefit COMES FROM. That “people” is the state. The state would be destroyed if criminals could privately pay for the right to contract away prosecutorial power. Think of it. A mafia-hit-man could pay for the right to kill somebody and have their family be unable to testify against him.
===============
Um, what?