Jump to content

OT: Simone Biles, other medalists seek $1B-plus from FBI over botched Nassar probe


Recommended Posts

https://nypost.com/2022/06/08/simone-biles-other-medalists-seek-1b-plus-over-nassar-probe/

More than 90 women and girls — including Olympic stars Simone Biles, McKayla Maroney and Aly Raisman — filed tort claims Wednesday against the FBI, seeking more than $1 billion in damages for failing to stop sexual abuse by sicko sports doctor Larry Nassar.

The claimants also include Maggie Nichols, a former national champion gymnast at Oklahoma who along with Biles, Maroney and Raisman first reported Nassar’s abuse in 2015, according to California law firm Manly, Stewart & Finaldi.

The FBI received “credible complaints” from numerous sources in July 2015, allowing the bureau to “immediately end” Nassar’s rampant abuse, but the agency declined to interview gymnasts who wanted to meet with agents, the law firm said in a statement Wednesday.

By failing to transfer the complaints to Lansing, Michigan, where Nassar continued to abuse young girls, the now-convicted sexual abuser was able to continue his “predatory behavior” and assault roughly 90 young women and girls between July 2015 and September 2016, attorneys claim.

“The FBI knew that Larry Nassar was a danger to children when his abuse of me was first reported in September of 2015,” Nichols said in a statement Wednesday. “For 421 days they worked with USA Gymnastics and USOPC to hide this information from the public and allowed Nassar to continue molesting young women and girls. It is time for the FBI to be held accountable.”

larry-nassar-simone-biles-fbi-10.thumb.jpg.baee94e5be4a9102ef723ded5083f83c.jpglarry-nassar-simone-biles-fbi-01.thumb.jpg.62614fb933f49beb37b9d7b376f629d6.jpg

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Thumb Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They didn't just fail to protect they covered it up.  There are members of the FBI who should be in jail for lying to the Inspector General about what went on.  They got their pensions the taxpayers will get screwed and of course the victims were victimized by a predator and the Justice system.   Terrible all around.  

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People should lose their job, if not got to jail for negligence or dereliction of duty, and reforms in procedure should be made. It's tragic that this happened to them, they should get their pound of flesh from those that did this to them or maybe turned a blind eye, but the public treasury shouldn't be a piggy bank for governmental incompetence. That simply leads to less resources available for the public at large, and does nothing to the incompetent people and poor policies that potentially enabled the behavior by not putting a stop to it.

  • Upvote 3
  • Post of the Week 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

this ain't the fbi of efrem zimbalist jr. or elliot ness anymore.  these guys have got too much power and basically do as they please.  for them not to have investigated nassar more thoroughly is just plain wrong.  can't say i want these girls to get that much money but it would be nice to see some these fbi types locked up.

  • Upvote 2
  • Post of the Week 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Spoot-Face said:

Are you referring to me, or the guy who read an article about sexual assault going ignored for up to a year, needlessly exposing more victims, those victims demanding accountability, and his first thought is "damn, what is this going to cost me?"

Because I know which one is more childish.

You think the point I raised was "childish"?  I call it "moral hazard".  If the FBI had to pay (e.g. losing jobs, pensions, going to jail, etc) for the FBI's mistakes (or crimes or incompetency, etc), then you could be sure they'd be far more likely to do a better job.

There's nothing childish, whatsoever, about that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Spoot-Face said:

Are you referring to me, or the guy who read an article about sexual assault going ignored for up to a year, needlessly exposing more victims, those victims demanding accountability, and his first thought is "damn, what is this going to cost me?"

Because I know which one is more childish.

I give the user you responded to the benefit of the doubt that he has a simple moral compass.  And you know that was his first thought how?  You assume, but regardless he posted a point that probably would be overlooked by many.

And yes I know what is and isn't childish.  Virtue signaling is childish.

  • Post of the Week 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

You think the point I raised was "childish"?  I call it "moral hazard".  If the FBI had to pay (e.g. losing jobs, pensions, going to jail, etc) for the FBI's mistakes (or crimes or incompetency, etc), then you could be sure they'd be far more likely to do a better job.

There's nothing childish, whatsoever, about that point.

The bold would've been a much better way to make your point than how it initially sounded.

And I said "more childish" in relation to my post, only in response to other poster who introduced the term. I wouldn't have said so otherwise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Darnold's Forehead said:

I give the user you responded to the benefit of the doubt that he has a simple moral compass.  And you know that was his first thought how?  You assume, but regardless he posted a point that probably would be overlooked by many.

And yes I know what is and isn't childish.  Virtue signaling is childish.

It was literally his first post, lol. That's kinda how this forum thing works. (Yes, I'm using the word literally.)

And he has since reframed his point more succinctly. 

The term "virtue signaling" is one of those overused buzzword terms that people so love to use, lmao.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Spoot-Face said:

The bold would've been a much better way to make your point than how it initially sounded.

And I said "more childish" in relation to my post, only in response to other poster who introduced the term. I wouldn't have said so otherwise. 

Going forward, I'll try to remember to baby my comments up for you.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Spoot-Face said:

The term "virtue signaling" is one of those overused buzzword terms that people so love to use, lmao.

It's an overused buzzword because it is the year 2022 and social media dominates society.  Been on twitter lately (hopefully not)?  You rebut a statement by seeming to take a morale highground.  It's pretty standard procedure all over the internet.

1 hour ago, Spoot-Face said:

I'm well aware that was your main takeaway from this.

In essence you thought to defeat his simple point regarding tax payers by "reminding" him he prioritizes $$ over sexual abuse victims (i.e. what a scumbag would prioritize).

This is virtue signaling (or whatever buzzword makes you happy) and is apparent everywhere.  "Anyone who reads article A and expresses a single thought that isn't thought A should be morally put in place by me, the moral arbiter."

Now someone lock this read so we can move on to the next (3) soon-to-be locked OT threads.

  • Post of the Week 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TuscanyTile2 said:

Going forward, I'll try to remember to baby my comments up for you.  

Don't be so thinned skin, man.

My original post was supposed to be more a small dick joke about Nassar than anything. I'm really shocked it's gone this far, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Darnold's Forehead said:

It's an overused buzzword because it is the year 2022 and social media dominates society.  Been on twitter lately (hopefully not)?  You rebut a statement by seeming to take a morale highground.  It's pretty standard procedure all over the internet.

In essence you thought to defeat his simple point regarding tax payers by "reminding" him he prioritizes $$ over sexual abuse victims (i.e. what a scumbag would prioritize).

This is virtue signaling (or whatever buzzword makes you happy) and is apparent everywhere.  "Anyone who reads article A and expresses a single thought that isn't thought A should be morally put in place by me, the moral arbiter."

Now someone lock this read so we can move on to the next (3) soon-to-be locked OT threads.

You've obviously put more thought into this than I.

People get bent out of shape so easily these days, lol.

This is silly, and I'm not going any further. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...