Cheating on the course

[Deleted member 21258]

I don't agree with the actions the committee have made, but wonder if they are trying to get others/someone else to come forward to confirm other times it may have happened.

Dangerous games to play tho....

 

[Wolf]

Agree. The witness will know what they saw, but if the culprit just flatly denies it, I suspect they would need a second witness or they can't really take action against him as it's one v one.

Exactly which makes the chairman's email stating the person should come forward to admit their guilt nothing but ammunition for the potential cheat to use against the club. Especially of the guy wanted to take it further and take action against the club. Proving something one a 1v1 basis hard to do but having email proof of what your being told you've done which you can dispute regardless of guilt or not that's just perfect ammo

 

[Orikoru]

I don't agree with the actions the committee have made, but wonder if they are trying to get others/someone else to come forward to confirm other times it may have happened.

Dangerous games to play tho....

Imagine it, a proper Spartacus moment as about 15 people come forward proclaiming to be the cheat.

 

[Wolf]

The guy may well be guilty, but for the club to publicly state they will not offer any fair hearing to determine that guilt, it gives the 'cheat' all the ammunition he might need to use 'offense as the best defense' and deflect from whether he's guilty or not. The Chairman as already determined it

Absolutely... Guilty or not they have to prove it, so if its one word v another they cannot do that. The email basically proves regardless of what he says he's a guilty cheating no good scoundrel. He can use that to go on the offensive against the club, should've just sent him an invite to meeting letter.

 

[Orikoru]

Absolutely... Guilty or not they have to prove it, so if its one word v another they cannot do that. The email basically proves regardless of what he says he's a guilty cheating no good scoundrel. He can use that to go on the offensive against the club, should've just sent him an invite to meeting letter.

Yeah. BritishShooting can correct me if I'm wrong here, but it sounds like the chap reporting the crime is a close friend of the chairman, hence he has taken his word as gospel. Guilty until proven innocent.

 

[Wolf]

Yeah. BritishShooting can correct me if I'm wrong here, but it sounds like the chap reporting the crime is a close friend of the chairman, hence he has taken his word as gospel. Guilty until proven innocent.

If that is true which is possible that makes it even worse and puts the chairman's position in a precarious position, would be further proof of if your face fits...

As for the other bit in this case thanks to the chairman's email it would be a case of guilty regardless of innonence proven or otherwise.

 

[Slab]

Absolutely... Guilty or not they have to prove it, so if its one word v another they cannot do that. The email basically proves regardless of what he says he's a guilty cheating no good scoundrel. He can use that to go on the offensive against the club, should've just sent him an invite to meeting letter.

Yup all he has to say is something like;

‘I am led to understand I am the individual referred to in the emails. However the club have made their position of predetermining my ‘guilt’ very clear to the members prior to ever speaking with me. Knowing that I cannot now be provided any opportunity of a fair hearing they have removed any & all ability for me to prove that innocence. See you in court’

and if he is guilty of cheating it would be a real shame that he may not be held properly accountable for it

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

The letter makes not good reading, and I am uncomfortable with the thought that this would be put out to all members without the accused having been summonsed by the committee to explain himself. This is no business of the wider membership. We all make mistakes and have moments of squinty-thinking - and if we refuse to come forward we need to be summonsed...and we might then express regret and apologise. And that should remain behind closed doors of the committee room.

 

[Wolf]

Yup all he has to say is something like;

‘I am led to understand I am the individual referred to in the emails. However the club have made their position of predetermining my ‘guilt’ very clear to the members prior to ever speaking with me. Knowing that I cannot now be provided any opportunity of a fair hearing they have removed any & all ability for me to prove that innocence. See you in court’

and if he is guilty of cheating it would be a real shame that he may not be held properly accountable for it

Again I agree. The guilt of the matter imo is now an irrelevant part of the overall situation. Proving he's guilty in 1 v 1 debate would be hard anyway, but now he can do exactly as you've said with proof of his character being questioned openly and at the club as well as tongues will be wagging. He now has all he needs for a comfortable little law suit.

 

[Britishshooting]

Yeah. BritishShooting can correct me if I'm wrong here, but it sounds like the chap reporting the crime is a close friend of the chairman, hence he has taken his word as gospel. Guilty until proven innocent.

Not sure on who made the original accusations, I didn't play that day so have no idea who played when so can't say either way unfortunately.

It's definitely been dealt with incorrectly in my eyes, glad the general consensus seems to agree with that. Unfortunately this club seems to over step the line on many such occasions similarly with juniors all in which could lead to a legal outcome.

I had to interject when a senior founder member was berating a young junior for some pathetically minor infraction that he blew all out of proportion. I know its a completely different subject matter but I don't think people understand the full picture these days with how easy it is to put your club in a very compromising situation.

I've offered to step into assisting with the junior organising as a complete dinosaur (who organised myself as juniors) is still leading the way currently. He's a lovely bloke and back when I was a lad was the sort of figure you needed and my parents were happy for him to give me some tough love. These days unfortunately such a role model can get a club into trouble if the parents decide to take matters further if there kid comes home upset.

They are strange times we live in but we have to move with them, something the committee at said club doesn't quite understand as of yet and tends to deal with all issues in an open/public manor which is not suitable nor professional.

 

[howbow88]

BritishShooting - posting this all up is a good ruse, but you're not fooling anyone. Just admit it that it was you

 

[Crazyface]

Sound to me like you know what you're doing. You should be running the place.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Frankly I think it is shocking that the committee have chosen to deal with this in such an open public manner. As has been said previously, it would be no issue for the rest of the club membership to determine who was being talked about so the guys name is "public knowledge" before he even has been given a chance to provide his own side of the story...even if his version of events is indefensible he should be able to give it before being publicly outed.

The committee should have written to the bloke directly, inviting him to explain his actions.

However...with the fact that the person wasn't challenged at the time, and there were presumably no other witnesses, it could quite easily come down to one persons word against the others....if the guy denies that the offence ever took place then it would be a struggle to determine an appropriate sanction to apply.

Surely he has provided his own side of the story; he only took 5 shots to complete that par 5 and he signed his own witness statement.

 

[rulefan]

With such flimsy evidence (one word against another) the club would be well advised not to publish a name.
With this now being high profile I could imagine a leak from a committee meeting.
Lawsuits can be expensive

 

[Wolf]

Surely he has provided his own side of the story; he only took 5 shots to complete that par 5 and he signed his own witness statement.

Doesn't matter what his card says until he has been offered a right of reply to the accusation made. Guilty or not he has this right, he could even potentially say it simply didn't happen and if its one word v another they can't prove either way without being impartial and taking sides regardless of what the scorecard shows and what the other guy knows he saw.

 

[Twire]

The problem I have with the chairman going public.... and the subsequent email from the accuser, is that it has probably tainted half a dozen people. You don't have to be a detective to work out which group or couple of groups the alleged cheat was in. If he is not named then the rest are tainted , I wouldn't be happy if I was in one of those groups.

It should have been dealt with internally, invite the guy in and ask for his side of the story.

Very unprofessional by the golf club.

 

[Wolf]

Just thinking about this more I can imagine the meeting if it were to take place now would be something like :

Committee/Chairman: can you describe the series of events on that hole?
Accused : hit my tee shot, played my 2nd shot, played 3rd shot, 2 putted for a par
Accusor: no you didn't you used a leather wedge then using your club gave yourself a better lie
Committee/Chairman: what have you to say against these accusations and the fact you signed for a now wrong score thus cheating the field
Accused: That didn't happen he's lying clearly go it in for me,
Accusor it did happen you cheated this is what you did (describes again the incident)
Accused: no that didn't happen at all you're making it up what's your problem with me, and are the chairman and committee who have no evidence of this going to take this man's word over mine when he clearly has a personal issue with me

If in that scenario happens they cannot rule he has has cheated even if he has because there is no other witness & the scorecard becomes inconsequential evidence as the accused has given a version of events. There is then a case of being made guilty before his right of reply and the guilt by association of other playing because of the email and its wording. Whatever happens here on in the club does not come out it this very well regardless even if the guy is guilty of cheating..

I've paraphrased a lot there but it's essentially what's likely to happen and the chairman has now caused issues with any likely meeting or worse action against the club with his ridiculous email

 

[Blue in Munich]

Doesn't matter what his card says until he has been offered a right of reply to the accusation made. Guilty or not he has this right, he could even potentially say it simply didn't happen and if its one word v another they can't prove either way without being impartial and taking sides regardless of what the scorecard shows and what the other guy knows he saw.

It very much matters what the card says because if it had shown no score then the issue should have stopped there. I haven’t disagreed that he has a right of reply or that it has been potentially handled badly, I merely pointed out that he has said that he completed that hole in 5 shots in keeping with the rules of golf by signing for that score, and that is fundamental to the issue.

 

[Orikoru]

Just thinking about this more I can imagine the meeting if it were to take place now would be something like :

Committee/Chairman: can you describe the series of events on that hole?
Accused : hit my tee shot, played my 2nd shot, played 3rd shot, 2 putted for a par
Accusor: no you didn't you used a leather wedge then using your club gave yourself a better lie
Committee/Chairman: what have you to say against these accusations and the fact you signed for a now wrong score thus cheating the field
Accused: That didn't happen he's lying clearly go it in for me,
Accusor it did happen you cheated this is what you did (describes again the incident)
Accused: no that didn't happen at all you're making it up what's your problem with me, and are the chairman and committee who have no evidence of this going to take this man's word over mine when he clearly has a personal issue with me

If in that scenario happens they cannot rule he has has chested even if he has because there is no other witness & the scorecard becomes inconsequential evidence as the accused has given a version of events. There is then a case of being made guilty before his right of reply and the guilt by association of other playing because eif the email and its wording. Whatever happens here on in the club does not come out it this very well regardless of the guy being guilty of cheating..

I've paraphrased a lot there but it's essentially what's likely to happen and the chairman has now caused issues with nay likely meeting or worse action against the club with his ridiculous ema

In short the club have dug themselves a massive hole by sending this email out. Seems a bit schoolteacher-like, "if you own up and apologise all will be forgiven". But it doesn't really work like that. All they've done is back the culprit into a corner. Speaking to him directly would have been more sensible, just say we've had an anonymous tip-off that you did this that and the other and want to hear your side of the story or explanation.

 

[Wolf]

It very much matters what the card says because if it had shown no score then the issue should have stopped there. I haven’t disagreed that he has a right of reply or that it has been potentially handled badly, I merely pointed out that he has said that he completed that hole in 5 shots in keeping with the rules of golf by signing for that score, and that is fundamental to the issue.

Not saying you have BIM, I'm just pointing out that regardless what the card says of the player in question gives an answer to his score the card become irrelevant because its then the word of the Accusor against the accused and that simply wouldn't be enough to pass sentence so to speak without taking a side. They can't say to him he has signed a wrong score or use the card without further proof or another witness.

You are right if it showed no score definitely no case, but even with it if the guy gives an account of his score and denies the allegation without taking sides the club cannot judge him, and if they take sides he can thanks to the email that effectively tells him he cheated use that against the club that he was hauled in as guilty before chance to speak thus meaning they took sides and not a fair trial so to speak