We have another Rosie Ruiz controversy of someone who took credit for winning a major marathon only to be accused of skipping much of the race. Kendall Schler celebrated her victory at the St. Louis Marathon on April 12th only to have her title taken away after marathon officials discovered that she cheated. Officials say that they believe that she slipped onto the course after the last checkpoint — a conclusion reinforced by the fact that Schler did not register any times on the route. It is interesting that there is no threat of a lawsuit either by the race or by Schler, who would presumably sue in defamation if she had indeed run the race.
It is astonishing to see people like Ruiz in 1979 steal the glory from true athletes at such moments. Another example is Kip Litton, a Michigan dentist, who was found to have cheated in a series of races across the US. It is remarkably cruel because you rob real athletes of their crowning achievement.
One report states that Schler insisted that she removed the tracking device from her running “bib” because she did not want a time for the race. However, putting aside that curious desire, the race officials point out that they could find no photographs to confirm that she ran the entire race in either 2014 or 2015.
The new winner in Missouri was Andrea Karl, a graduate student at St. Louis University. She finished about four minutes after Schler’s supposed win with a time of 2 hours, 54 minutes and 28 seconds. While Karl can now collect the $1,500 for winning, she was denied that thrill of the finish line celebration.
Notably, Schler finished in third in last year’s St. Louis Marathon (which allowed her to qualify for this year’s Boston Marathon) but St. Louis officials say that they cannot find evidence that she ran that entire race. She has now been disqualified.
The most obvious litigation would be a lawsuit by Schler, who notably has been silent. This would be a classic case of defamation against the race organizers if the allegation is untrue. It is not simply a claim that suggestion grossly unethical conduct but potentially criminal conduct. Indeed, it is not clear if Schler claimed the $1,500 which could be treated as criminal fraud.
Then there is the race and Karl. If the allegation is true, Schler ruined a critical part of the marathon and forced the race organizers to extend time and money to prove the fraud. Then there is Karl and her injury.
Notably, Ruiz was not charged or sued — at least not for that incident. In 1982, Ruiz was given a week in jail and five years probation for embezzling $60,000 from a real estate company where she worked. In 1983, she was arrested as part of arrests over a cocaine deal. She was sentenced to three years’ probation.
Returning to Schler, the fact that this was a race with a monetary prize would seem to move this beyond simple bragging or some stunt. It seems to me that there should be more of a sanction than simply being disqualified in such a case. Of course, much like Stolen Valor cases, the public backlash over such alleged dishonesty is a significant punishment in itself. Ironically, for those seeking glory, this type of allegation can haunt them for the rest of their lives as it has Ruiz.
What to you think?
“If you can take the impact on the joints out of it running or climbing is the best cardio workout.”
No doubt true. Fortunately, i have the time to hike relatively long distances over hill and dale. It keeps me in shape and I enjoy it. Plus, years ago I tore a tendon in my Calf Running – Twice! I haven’t ran since, and have no intention to. Hiking, Golf and water sports are enough for my old bones.
Excited about this year. Our rotation is sick.
And Go Blues!! (from the admittedly fair-weather blues fan)
Juris
Go Cards! Lol!
bam bam,
“IF, in fact, she did commit a crime–then, you are agreeing that her behavior should be ignored.”
Again, putting more words into my mouth. I agree that she should not be prosecuted for cheating and that a civil suit against her is a waste of time. Nothing more. Where did I say her behavior should be ignored?
You are relentless. I give up. Uncle! Let’s move on. And the Williams reference was intentionally exaggerated. How ironic that was lost on you.
BTW, Oakville High School here.
I went to Clayton High School. Do you have some snide remarks to make about that? I can hardly wait. Here come the insults. Let ’em rip.
Juris
Your words, not mine:
As to pursuing a criminal charge against this lady, being local, I can assure you the City of St. Louis has much bigger fish to fry.
Not an exaggeration to read your quote as it appears. If you believe that the City of St. Louis has bigger fish to fry, with regard to prosecuting this woman–IF, in fact, she did commit a crime–then, you are agreeing that her behavior should be ignored. Stating that there are bigger fish to fry implies that even if there is a crime, it is so insignificant that the prosecutors would be wasting their precious time in pursuing it.
Get your insults straight, at least. Brian Williams fabricated a story involving gunfire. I merely read what you wrote. Not my fault if you can’t seem to recall your own wording.
Phonics, get hooked on it.
BTW, bam bam, what parts of the metro do you reside? Or better yet, a response to the classic “What high school did you go to” question would suffice.
Reisling, was I correct to capitalize “what” in the quotation above? Should I have included a question mark within?
Reisling, not at all. I am often accused of the same thing by my assistants. But I consider this a somewhat informal forum here.
bam bam, we seem to disagree on whether the real winner (or any one else) should sue this lady or whether the City should prosecute her for a crime (assuming one has been committed, which I do not see one – again, the reports I have seen she did not receive any prize money).
Now, though,all of the sudden my comments have become some master theory that “necessitate[s] not prosecuting felonies consisting of $1,500.00 or less.”
For Christ’s sake, quit with the exaggerations. You make Brian Williams look like a saint.
@riesling
Its OK. FWIW, I did the “a” on purpose, and the “this here” and the “perusiating” and the “Gal Reporter.” And, you are right. Quite often, the grammar and spelling am atrocious here. Plus, have noticed how many people today say “lie-berry” instead of “li-bRary.” Even respectable news casters and talking heads. Or is that “speaking” heads???
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Juris
Being local myself, I don’t see a problem with prosecuting her if the facts of this case justify it. Your theory would necessitate not prosecuting felonies consisting of $1,500.00 or less. I can assure you, that is not the case.
Sorry, Squeeks. I just got done re-perusiating your comment….it´s very cute. Forget my “an” reprimand… Anyway, I hope you and Juris don´t think I´m an insufferable grammar nazi, cuz I ain´t. I just love language like some people on this blog love dogs. I hate to see it be abused and tortured!
bam bam – you equate my opinion that the consequences of bad publicity this alleged perp will receive is enough to accomplish my sense of justice with a belief that it is also enough to deter her from skirting rules in the future. As I pointed out, I believe the former, not the latter. The two concepts are not the same.
As to pursuing a criminal charge against this lady, being local, I can assure you the City of St. Louis has much bigger fish to fry.
Riesling, no argument from me on that one. I don’t hold it against the Prof though. He is a very busy man. BTW, I will not be offended if you feel the need to point out my grammatical flaws.
Squeeky, my dear, ….. an online book – please!!! 🙂
rcocean
We live next to the Atlantic and well into my 60’s I have found the perfect run. The top of the beach near the dunes is almost always flat, so there is no running on an angle. The soft sand is many times more absorbent than the best running shoe. When the body comes down there is no impact and every muscle from the toe to the hips works equally. You don’t tend to fall forward but work like climbing. A few miles, several times a week takes away all joint pains. The muscles work and support the joints.
If you can take the impact on the joints out of it running or climbing is the best cardio workout.
The next move is a kayak to work the upper body.
The problem with exercise is that the older you get the less enthusiastic you get to do it for its own sake. It needs to be worth something else like biking, rowing, hiking, etc., something to look forward to.
@Riesling
Coincidentally, I read this here thing yesterday when I was perusiating a online book: 😎
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/37925/37925-h/37925-h.htm
Squeeky Fromm
Gal Reporter
Juris, seriously, the entire article is a grammatical nightmare.
Juris
Your quote:
The alleged perpetrator will be punished enough by the public, as she should be if the allegations are true.
That is how I reached the conclusion that you believe that the public shame, from this occurrence, would be enough to discourage Schler from ever doing this again. I gave the example of the other person, Ruiz, who despite two publicly known contacts with the court system, for serious offenses, did not appear to be fazed by that accompanying shame and later attempted another scam involving a race.
I don’t know what the “punishment” for Schler should be, since insufficient facts are available to declare that there is no possible criminal conduct involved. Even if Shler did not keep the money, did she ever attempt to claim it? Did she receive it and then give it back? That might rise to the level of criminal fraud, which is beyond what you deem to be a merely civil suit.
@Juris
Thank you!!! I am glad that you enjoy them!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Reisling, while I like to take pride in trying to always educate myself in English grammar, I am going to say this particular instance is “just you.”
…would be futile and cost way more money than will ever be collected from her [under] the most favorable of outcomes.
Squeeky, your Irish poem skills are top-notch.