|
Home > Archive > Chess politics > January 2007 > Decision of Ethics Committee on Complaint by Grant Perks
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Decision of Ethics Committee on Complaint by Grant Perks
|
|
| samsloan 2007-01-30, 8:26 pm |
| Decision of Ethics Committee on Complaint by Grant Perks
377 Huse Rd. #23
Manchester, NH 03103
January 10, 2007
U.S. Chess Federation
Attn. Pat Knight
P.O. Box 3967
Crossville, TN 38557
Dear Pat:
The USCF Ethics Committee has considered the complaint by Grant Perks
against Sam Sloan. By a vote of 8-1, the Committee finds that some of
the statements cited by Mr. Perks in his complaint constitute a
violation of the Code of Ethics. By a further vote of 9-0, the
Committee recommends that Mr. Sloan receive a reprimand.
The statements cited by Mr. Perks fell into three general categories:
(1) charges that Perks was fired from his position at USCF, (2)
charges that Perks and Ernest Schlich were employees of USCF and thus
ineligible to be candidates in the Executive Board election of 2005
and (3) charges that Perks and Beatriz Marinello committed crimes
during the course of their duties at USCF.
The principle of free speech must be given great respect. However, the
Committee majority concluded than there must be a limit to what is
permitted in civilized discourse, even on a public forum during an
election campaign. The majority concluded that while the statements in
categories (1) and (2) do not cross this threshold, the category (3)
statements do. Accusations of criminal activity are inherently
inflammatory and harmful to the reputation of the accused and the
majority finds that Mr. Sloan made these charges with a reckless
disregard for their truth or falsehood.
By a vote of 9-0, the Committee agrees that this letter fairly
represents its position.
Sincerely,
Hal Terrie (2006-07 Ethics Committee Chair)
| |
| samsloan 2007-01-30, 8:26 pm |
| The scumbags at the Ethics Committee are out to get me. This jerk Hal=20
Terrie caved in big time.
Sam Sloan
On 27 Jan, 10:00, "samsloan" <samhsl...@gmail.com> wrote:
quote:
> Decision of Ethics Committee on Complaint by Grant Perks
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 377 Huse Rd. #23
quote:
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 Manchester, NH 03103
quote:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 January 10, 2007
quote:
>
> U.S. Chess Federation
> Attn. Pat Knight
> P.O. Box 3967
> Crossville, TN 38557
>
> Dear Pat:
>
> The USCF Ethics Committee has considered the complaint by Grant Perks
> against Sam Sloan. By a vote of 8-1, the Committee finds that some of
> the statements cited by Mr. Perks in his complaint constitute a
> violation of the Code of Ethics. By a further vote of 9-0, the
> Committee recommends that Mr. Sloan receive a reprimand.
>
> The statements cited by Mr. Perks fell into three general categories:
> (1) charges that Perks was fired from his position at USCF, (2)
> charges that Perks and Ernest Schlich were employees of USCF and thus
> ineligible to be candidates in the Executive Board election of 2005
> and (3) charges that Perks and Beatriz Marinello committed crimes
> during the course of their duties at USCF.
>
> The principle of free speech must be given great respect. However, the
> Committee majority concluded than there must be a limit to what is
> permitted in civilized discourse, even on a public forum during an
> election campaign. The majority concluded that while the statements in
> categories (1) and (2) do not cross this threshold, the category (3)
> statements do. Accusations of criminal activity are inherently
> inflammatory and harmful to the reputation of the accused and the
> majority finds that Mr. Sloan made these charges with a reckless
> disregard for their truth or falsehood.
>
> By a vote of 9-0, the Committee agrees that this letter fairly
> represents its position.
>
> Sincerely,
> Hal Terrie (2006-07 Ethics Committee Chair)
| |
| samsloan 2007-01-30, 8:26 pm |
| Grant Perks is a criminal. He helped this dyke Beatriz Marinello steal=20
nearly $19,000 from the USCF. They should go to jail for what they=20
did. Hal Terrie can't do anything to me. He's a loser and I'm a board=20
member. I'll challenge this decision all the way.
Sam Sloan
On 27 Jan, 10:00, "samsloan" <samhsl...@gmail.com> wrote:
quote:
> Decision of Ethics Committee on Complaint by Grant Perks
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 377 Huse Rd. #23
quote:
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 Manchester, NH 03103
quote:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 January 10, 2007
quote:
>
> U.S. Chess Federation
> Attn. Pat Knight
> P.O. Box 3967
> Crossville, TN 38557
>
> Dear Pat:
>
> The USCF Ethics Committee has considered the complaint by Grant Perks
> against Sam Sloan. By a vote of 8-1, the Committee finds that some of
> the statements cited by Mr. Perks in his complaint constitute a
> violation of the Code of Ethics. By a further vote of 9-0, the
> Committee recommends that Mr. Sloan receive a reprimand.
>
> The statements cited by Mr. Perks fell into three general categories:
> (1) charges that Perks was fired from his position at USCF, (2)
> charges that Perks and Ernest Schlich were employees of USCF and thus
> ineligible to be candidates in the Executive Board election of 2005
> and (3) charges that Perks and Beatriz Marinello committed crimes
> during the course of their duties at USCF.
>
> The principle of free speech must be given great respect. However, the
> Committee majority concluded than there must be a limit to what is
> permitted in civilized discourse, even on a public forum during an
> election campaign. The majority concluded that while the statements in
> categories (1) and (2) do not cross this threshold, the category (3)
> statements do. Accusations of criminal activity are inherently
> inflammatory and harmful to the reputation of the accused and the
> majority finds that Mr. Sloan made these charges with a reckless
> disregard for their truth or falsehood.
>
> By a vote of 9-0, the Committee agrees that this letter fairly
> represents its position.
>
> Sincerely,
> Hal Terrie (2006-07 Ethics Committee Chair)
|
| |
|
|