..
Survivor of sexual abuse by paedophile coach Ian King sues Cricket Australia and Cricket ACT
By Russell Jackson
Posted Fri 3 Jun 2022 at 12:30pm
A survivor of childhood sexual abuse by former ACT elite junior cricket coach Ian King is suing Cricket ACT and Cricket Australia for the disastrous fallout of his abuse, lawyers for the man have confirmed.
On Friday, Arnold Thomas and Becker Lawyers issued a writ in Melbourne's Supreme Court, seeking damages and compensation after the man was "robbed" of his childhood and suffered "significant mental health disorders which have impacted his life and career prospects."
A remarkable aspect of the case is the discovery of a police statement given in 2006 by a coaching colleague of King's, who confirmed that Cricket ACT was aware of King's reputation as a sexual abuser when he commenced his decade-long stint coaching ACT junior teams.
In the statement, seen by ABC Sport, former ACT junior coach and team manager Ray Hatch told police: "Within this first year that Ian was with ACTCA, rumours were circulating the Association that Ian liked little boys."
"This information came from the interstate cricket community that Ian had come over from, I think it was Western Australia."
"As a result of these rumours, Richard Done, who was the director of coaching ACTCA at this time, and I kept an eye on Ian's interaction with the young children."
Ian King during his time as a coach of the ACT U17 cricket team in 1992.
In reality, King was a prolific abuser of boys in his elite ACT Under-17 and Under-19 squads in the decade following and is currently serving a 19-year jail sentence for a string of serious sexual offences against boys he mentored in the 1980s and 1990s.
Now the cricket operations director of USA Cricket, Richard Done did not respond to interview requests from ABC Sport.
In the decade before his stint in Canberra, King had also coached elite Western Australian junior representative teams. In the late 1960s, King enjoyed a successful but brief career as a fast bowler in Queensland's Sheffield Shield team and was also a professional boxer.
'His hopes and dreams in cricket were destroyed by this predator'
Arnold Thomas and Becker abuse lawyer Jodie Harris, who is representing the victim, said Cricket ACT (then the ACT Cricket Association) had knowledge of King's previous offending before engaging him in positions where he was in contact with children, including private coaching sessions and visits to the boys' houses.
Harris said the claim against Cricket ACT and Cricket Australia alleged they "failed to protect the boys on a number of fronts", not only failing to carry out proper background checks, but failing to supervise King, failing to warn parents that he was a danger to children and failing to develop "proper policies or procedures to ensure that children placed in his care were protected from his predatory behaviour."
"As a consequence of these failures, our client was exposed to repeated abuse from this predator," Harris said.
"The abuse started when our client was around 13 years old."
Harris said her firm knows of "dozens of others who are considering taking action" over the matter and that historical sexual abuse of children in elite junior cricket is a problem that will not go away.
"Cricket Australia and the various State Associations are going to be forced to face up to their alleged failures to protect children," Harris said.
"The time has come for them to be held to account and for justice and fair compensation to be awarded to the survivors for the terrible damage that was done to them.
"What our client was subjected to as a young boy and the impact it has had on his life is simply heartbreaking. As a consequence of the abuse he experienced, our client was robbed of a normal childhood and upbringing and subsequently suffered significant mental health disorders which have impacted his life and career prospects."
"Cricket should be a safe and enjoyable activity for people, especially children, so to hear that abuse was so prevalent in these organisations is devastating. Our client had dreams of a future in cricket. Those hopes and dreams were destroyed by this predator."
'What is clear is that it's Cricket ACT's responsibility'
In recent years, Cricket Australia has lagged in its response to stories of historical sexual abuse of children in its elite junior pathways.
It was only on December 24, 2021 — in response to an ABC Sport investigation of former Australian Under-19s star Jamie Mitchell's horrific experiences on an overseas tour — that CA made a commitment to join the National Redress Scheme in response to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.
Jamie Mitchell was a cricketing star on the rise in the 1980s, but since returning home from a tour of India and Sri Lanka he has been searching for answers on what happened.
The scheme was set up to offer survivors the chance to seek financial compensation for their abuse without the need for legal action, but payments are capped at $150,000 and survivors cannot make claims against institutions that haven't joined the scheme.
In January, Cricket Australia CEO Nick Hockley told ABC Sport the governing body was "fully committed" to the scheme, adding: "I'm very concerned to make sure that everyone who interacts with cricket is safe and feels safe."
But at that time, Hockley said it was not Cricket Australia's responsibility to compensate survivors of King's sexual abuse in ACT representative squads, despite many of those players competing in national carnivals which were administered by Cricket Australia and part of CA's pathway to senior national selection.
"I think what is clear is that it's Cricket ACT's responsibility," Hockley said in January.
"We work closely with our members on these issues but it is, ultimately, their responsibility."
Survivors of Ian King's abuse left 'penniless' in compensation fight
That "responsibility", Cricket Australia said, rests with Cricket ACT as a result of CA's "reverse umbrella" corporate structure, in which CA is owned by the state and territory associations and not vice versa.
But the reality of Australian cricket's power structure and finances is something close to the opposite. Under CA's "member distribution" process, in which it doles out the benefits of cricket's TV rights billions, up to $130 million is handed out to the state and territory associations every year.
Cricket ACT's 2020-21 annual report revealed that Cricket Australia had provided it with funding of more than $2.2 million, to go with ACT government grants of $567,000. Due to what Cricket ACT described as "tight fiscal controls and careful management of expenditure", it posted an operating profit of $670,922.
Yet Cricket ACT has not joined the National Redress Scheme. In March 2021, survivors of King's abuse told The Canberra Times they'd been left "penniless" in their quest for compensation, with up to 15 survivors unsuccessfully applying to Cricket ACT.
In a statement issued at the time, Cricket ACT recognised "the devastating and lasting impact that child sex abuse can have on the lives of survivors and their loved ones", but as yet, it has not budged in its stance and not a single survivor has been compensated for their abuse.
Asked in January if Cricket Australia's hands-off approach to King's offending would meet community expectations of the sport's peak body, Nick Hockley said: "It's something we'll continue to work [on] and discuss with Cricket ACT to make sure that they're supported in this matter."
At the time, Hockley also conceded that CA might need to take the lead from the AFL's concussion fund and carve out a portion of its sizeable TV rights revenue to support the survivors of childhood sexual abuse.
"I think it's something we need to continue to look at and how the sport responds in the most appropriate manner," Hockley said.
For much, much more on this story please go to: Jamie Mitchell's dream
US judge dismisses rape lawsuit against football star
Cristiano Ronaldo, in Vegas
Published: June 11, 2022 22:51
AP
Cristiano Ronaldo is returning to Manchester United
Image Credit: AFP
Las Vegas: A Nevada woman has lost her bid in a US court to force international soccer star Cristiano Ronaldo to pay millions of dollars more than the $375,000 in hush money she received after claiming he raped her in Las Vegas in 2009.
US District Judge Jennifer Dorsey in Las Vegas kicked the case out of court on Friday to punish the woman's attorney, Leslie Mark Stovall, for "bad-faith conduct" and the use of leaked and stolen documents detailing attorney-client discussions between Ronaldo and his lawyers. Dorsey said that tainted the case beyond redemption.
Dorsey said in her 42-page order that dismissing a case outright with no option to file it again is a severe sanction, but said Ronaldo had been harmed by Stovall's conduct.
"Bad-faith conduct"
"I find that the procurement and continued use of these documents was bad faith, and simply disqualifying Stovall will not cure the prejudice to Ronaldo because the misappropriated documents and their confidential contents have been woven into the very fabric of (plaintiff Kathryn) Mayorga's claims," the ruling said. "Harsh sanctions are merited."
Stovall did not immediately respond Saturday to telephone and email messages. Text messages to associate Larissa Drohobyczer were not answered. They could appeal the decision to the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
Ronaldo's attorney in Las Vegas, Peter Christiansen, was traveling and was not immediately reachable for comment.
The Associated Press generally does not name people who say they are victims of sexual assault, but Mayorga gave consent through Stovall and Drohobyczer to make her name public.
Dorsey had signaled earlier this year that she was ready to end the case after Stovall failed to meet a procedural deadline in his bid for more than $25 million in damages based on allegations that Ronaldo or his associates violated a 2010 confidentiality agreement by letting reports about it appear in European publications in 2017.
Mayorga's civil lawsuit
Mayorga's civil lawsuit - filed in 2018 in state court and moved in 2019 to federal court - alleged that Ronaldo or his associates violated the confidentiality agreement before the German news outlet Der Spiegel published an article titled "Cristiano Ronaldo's Secret" based on documents obtained from "whistleblower portal Football Leaks."
Ronaldo's legal team blamed the reports on electronic data leaks of documents hacked from law firms and other entities in Europe and put up for sale. Christiansen alleged also that information was altered or fabricated.
Christiansen and attorney Kendelee Works in Las Vegas successfully fought since the case emerged in 2018 to prevent the pact from disclosure.
Mayorga is a former model and teacher who lives in the Las Vegas area. Her lawsuit said she met Ronaldo at a nightclub and went with him and other people to his hotel suite, where she alleged he assaulted her in a bedroom. She was 25 at the time. He was 24.
Ronaldo's legal team does not dispute Ronaldo met Mayorga and they had sex in June 2009, but maintained it was consensual and not rape.
Mayorga went to Las Vegas police at the time, but the investigation was dropped because Mayorga neither identified her alleged attacker by name nor said where the incident took place, police and prosecutors said.
Ronaldo, now 37, is one of the most highly paid and recognizable sports stars in the world. He plays for the English Premier League club Manchester United and has captained the national team of his home country, Portugal. He spent several recent years playing in Italy for the Turin-based club Juventus.
Las Vegas police reopened their rape investigation after Mayorga's lawsuit was filed, but Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson decided in 2019 not to pursue criminal charges.
Wolfson, the elected public prosecutor in Las Vegas, said too much time had passed and evidence failed to show that Mayorga's accusation could be proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
Hush-money settlement
Stovall maintained that Mayorga didn't break the hush-money settlement. Her lawsuit sought to void it, accusing Ronaldo and reputation-protection "fixers" of conspiracy, defamation, breach of contract, coercion and fraud. In documents filed last year, Stovall tallied damages at $25 million plus attorney fees.
The attorney argued that Mayorga had learning disabilities as a child and was so pressured by Ronaldo's attorneys and representatives that she was in no condition to consent to dropping her criminal complaint and accepting the $375,000 in August 2010.
Dorsey followed recommendations from US Magistrate Judge Daniel Albregts, who handled preliminary and procedural rulings in the case, that it be dismissed for bad faith, "inappropriate conduct" by Stovall and reliance on the leaked and stolen confidential documents.
"There is no possible way for this case to proceed where the court cannot tell what arguments and testimony are based on these privileged documents," Albregts said in an October 2021 report to Dorsey.
Stovall "acted in bad faith by asking for, receiving, and using the Football Leaks documents to prosecute Mayorga's case," Albregts wrote. He blamed Stovall for "audacious," "impertinent" and "abusive" attempts to make the confidentiality agreement public through legal maneuvers and the court record and recommended to Dorsey that she reject Stovall's claim that Mayorga lacked the mental capacity to sign the 2010 agreement.
The 9th Circuit ruled early this year that it would be up to Dorsey to decide that question.
It was not immediately clear in Dorsey's ruling whether the public might still get a look at the Las Vegas police report compiled about Ronaldo after Mayorga filed her lawsuit in 2018.
Albregts said in March that denying the New York Times access to what police collected "would almost certainly raise the `specter of government censorship."' He recommended that Dorsey transfer to a state court the newspaper's open-records request for documents.
A protective order that Dorsey imposed to prevent the release of the 2010 agreement doesn't apply to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, Albregts found, and "does not bar LVMPD from disseminating its criminal investigative file."
Attorney Margaret McLetchie, representing the newspaper, did not immediately respond Saturday to a message about that case.
Hmmmm. Is this the end, or not?
British police charge Kevin Spacey over alleged sex crimes
Actor due in court on Thursday
[File: Brian Snyder/Reuters]
13 Jun 2022
Al Jazeera
British police say they have charged Oscar-winning actor Kevin Spacey over historic allegations of sex offences, with the actor due in court on Thursday.
Prosecutors last month authorised the charges to be brought against Spacey, 62, on four counts of sexual assault against three men, and a further charge of causing a person to engage in penetrative sexual activity without consent.
Police said the alleged assaults had taken place between March 2005 and April 2013 – four in the capital, London and one in Gloucestershire. They involved one man who is now in his 40s and two men now in their 30s.
“He is due to appear at Westminster Magistrates Court at 10am (09:00 GMT) on Thursday, 16 June,” London’s Metropolitan Police said, confirming Spacey had been charged on the five counts authorised by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) following his arrest.
Spacey willing to defend himself
Spacey, who won Academy Awards for The Usual Suspects and American Beauty in the 1990s, has said he is willing to defend himself in the UK and is confident any trial will prove his innocence.
Once one of Hollywood’s biggest stars, Spacey has largely disappeared from public view since being accused of sexual misconduct five years ago.
In November 2017, London’s Old Vic theatre said it had received 20 separate allegations of inappropriate conduct by Spacey from 20 men who came into contact with him at the theatre, or in connection with it, between 1995 and 2013.
He was dropped from the TV show House of Cards and removed from the movie All the Money in the World after the accusations of sexual misconduct came to light.
No comments:
Post a Comment