Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Professional Cycling For the Fans Follow the Tour de France,the Giro de Italia, the Spring Classics, or other professional cycling races? Here's your home...

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-06-14, 12:43 PM   #1
Jed19 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Jed19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,228
Should Brian Holm be given the boot at Omega?

He was found not guilty, but I don't think the seven year old made up the story.

Omega boss stands behind acquitted Brian Holm - VeloNews.com
__________________
Regards,

Jed
Jed19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-14, 05:29 PM   #2
DLBroox
Senior Member
 
DLBroox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miami, FL
Bikes: Bianchi San Jose, Dahon Curve D3, Dahon Mu Uno
Posts: 703
Why do you know the seven year old?
DLBroox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-14, 05:45 PM   #3
Jed19 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Jed19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLBroox View Post
Why do you know the seven year old?
No, I don't know the seven year old, but I don't think a seven year old can make up the details of the case. And holm admitted he had been drinking. If I were a sponsor, I won't want my name/product associated with someone like Holm.
__________________
Regards,

Jed
Jed19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-14, 05:49 PM   #4
bikemig 
Senior Member
 
bikemig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Middle Earth (aka IA)
Bikes: A lot of old bikes and a few new ones
Posts: 9,849
So once an allegation is made by a child, one is guilty regardless of what a court might find?

Other Well-Known Cases | Innocence Lost | FRONTLINE | PBS
bikemig is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-14, 06:15 PM   #5
DLBroox
Senior Member
 
DLBroox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miami, FL
Bikes: Bianchi San Jose, Dahon Curve D3, Dahon Mu Uno
Posts: 703
Ever hear of the McMartin Preschool Case?
DLBroox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-14, 10:30 PM   #6
Jed19 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Jed19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLBroox View Post
Ever hear of the McMartin Preschool Case?
I believe the kid!

Holm was found not guilty b/cos there was not enough evidence to convict. If you are a father like I am, you can see how seven year old can't make up details like he licked my ear and took off my underwear. Kids are different than adults in that at a certain age they just tell the truth without thinking about the ramifications. I was at a party last Friday where an eight year old girl told a fellow guest in front of everybody that "my mom says you are weird, and should stay away from my dad." Everybody laughed nervously, except the lady she was talking to.

And Holm admitted he was drunk!
__________________
Regards,

Jed

Last edited by Jed19; 07-06-14 at 10:38 PM.
Jed19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 02:04 AM   #7
jyl
Senior Member
 
jyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland OR
Bikes: 61 Bianchi Specialissima 71 Peugeot G50 7? P'geot PX10 74 Raleigh GranSport 75 P'geot UO8 78? Raleigh Team Pro 82 P'geot PSV 86 P'geot PX 91 Bridgestone MB0 92 B'stone XO1 97 Rans VRex 92 Cannondale R1000 94 B'stone MB5 97 Vitus 997
Posts: 6,907
Yes, no seven year old has ever made things up.
jyl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 10:38 AM   #8
Jed19 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Jed19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by jyl View Post
Yes, no seven year old has ever made things up.
Not with the kind of details in this case.
__________________
Regards,

Jed
Jed19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 11:21 AM   #9
Keith99
Senior Member
 
Keith99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLBroox View Post
Ever hear of the McMartin Preschool Case?
Which had 100 times as much detail, some corroborated from multiple witnesses. All children, and all led by 'investigators'.

I'd at the least want to see a transcript of the interview with the child before making even a tentative decision.
Keith99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 01:30 PM   #10
achoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 4,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jed19 View Post
Not with the kind of details in this case.
But if they do make up details like that, you'd just assume they're telling the truth.

Circular reasoning.
achoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 01:46 PM   #11
Jed19 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Jed19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by achoo View Post
But if they do make up details like that, you'd just assume they're telling the truth.

Circular reasoning.
No, I am saying a seven year old won't say something like he licked my ear. I don't think a seven year old can construe that particular action as "sexual."

Pedophiles, for the most part, are betting on kids not being believed.
__________________
Regards,

Jed
Jed19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 02:19 PM   #12
gl98115
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Bikes:
Posts: 311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jed19 View Post
Not with the kind of details in this case.
What are the details of the case?

What you linked was a news report referring to unnamed media sources. And Velonews has never been known for their accurate, investigative journalism. They have enough trouble with the results from bike races that they attend.
gl98115 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 02:28 PM   #13
Jed19 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Jed19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by gl98115 View Post
What are the details of the case?

What you linked was a news report referring to unnamed media sources. And Velonews has never been known for their accurate, investigative journalism. They have enough trouble with the results from bike races that they attend.
The details I read was that a friend of his daughter was having a sleepover at his house, Mr. Holm came home intoxicated, licked the seven year old's ear and removed her underwear. He admitted to being drunk, but not the actions mentioned. And I am saying a seven year old does not construe ear-licking as sexual, that is adult territory.

The shame is I am almost positive he'll do it again to another child. These non-convicted types always do.
__________________
Regards,

Jed
Jed19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 02:42 PM   #14
DLBroox
Senior Member
 
DLBroox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miami, FL
Bikes: Bianchi San Jose, Dahon Curve D3, Dahon Mu Uno
Posts: 703
Let's say for argument sake the kid did say that, without context you have no idea if the kid is sexualizing that action anyway. You're the one making that jump.


Read the link of other cases that Bikemig posted. Take this excerpt for example:
"The case began in April 1985, when a four year-old boy was being examined at a pediatrician's office. The nurse rubbed his back and took his temperature with a rectal thermometer. He did not seem upset, but remarked to her "that's what my teacher does to me at nap time at school." The nurse suspected that he was being abused at the day care center, and immediately reported her suspicions to authorities."

What do you think the teacher did, logically? Rub his back I'm thinking. It's context.

I've looked for the news on this Holm story and there's virtually nothing. So not only have you decided he's guilty, you've already decided he's a pedophile who will do this again. And that he should lose his job. I hope you're never called for jury duty.
DLBroox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 02:52 PM   #15
Jed19 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Jed19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLBroox View Post
Let's say for argument sake the kid did say that, without context you have no idea if the kid is sexualizing that action anyway. You're the one making that jump.


Read the link of other cases that Bikemig posted. Take this excerpt for example:
"The case began in April 1985, when a four year-old boy was being examined at a pediatrician's office. The nurse rubbed his back and took his temperature with a rectal thermometer. He did not seem upset, but remarked to her "that's what my teacher does to me at nap time at school." The nurse suspected that he was being abused at the day care center, and immediately reported her suspicions to authorities."

What do you think the teacher did, logically? Rub his back I'm thinking. It's context.

I've looked for the news on this Holm story and there's virtually nothing. So not only have you decided he's guilty, you've already decided he's a pedophile who will do this again. And that he should lose his job. I hope you're never called for jury duty.
I hope you are right. And I hope you and I are still here when he does it again.
__________________
Regards,

Jed
Jed19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 03:30 PM   #16
achoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 4,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jed19 View Post
No, I am saying a seven year old won't say something like he licked my ear. I don't think a seven year old can construe that particular action as "sexual."

...
And how do you KNOW that a seven-year-old can't make up something like that? Just because your kid(s) never did make up things like that? Or they did and you believed them because you KNEW they couldn't make that up?

Perfectly circular reasoning: it's not made up because it's not made up.
achoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 03:43 PM   #17
Jed19 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Jed19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by achoo View Post
And how do you KNOW that a seven-year-old can't make up something like that? Just because your kid(s) never did make up things like that? Or they did and you believed them because you KNEW they couldn't make that up?

Perfectly circular reasoning: it's not made up because it's not made up.
Are you kidding me? A drunk 51 year old came back home intoxicated, licked the ear of a seven year old, then took off her underwear, and you think the seven year old made up the story?

Mr. Holm was intoxicated, and that alone suggests to me this child was probably molested. You can believe what you want, but I believe the child.

And for the circular reasoning charge, I say nonsense. Just wait till he does it again. Psychologists are of the view that pedophiles that are never caught/treated always keep at it.
__________________
Regards,

Jed

Last edited by Jed19; 07-07-14 at 03:47 PM.
Jed19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 04:01 PM   #18
DLBroox
Senior Member
 
DLBroox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miami, FL
Bikes: Bianchi San Jose, Dahon Curve D3, Dahon Mu Uno
Posts: 703
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jed19 View Post


Mr. Holm was intoxicated, and that alone suggests to me this child was probably molested. You can believe what you want, but I believe the child.



So do all intoxicated people molest children?
DLBroox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 05:05 PM   #19
Jed19 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Jed19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 4,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLBroox View Post
So do all intoxicated people molest children?
Are you serious? An intoxicated man has been accused of sexual molestation by a child. You and I know there are terrible human predators out there, even unexpected ones (what with the catholic church clergy and their enablers), and I am of a firm view that a seven year old can't look at "ear licking" from a drunk as a sexual move, but all that changed when he removed her underwear.

The intoxicated bit probably/in all likelihood impaired his judgement terribly.
__________________
Regards,

Jed
Jed19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-07-14, 06:11 PM   #20
Leinster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Bikes:
Posts: 2,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jed19 View Post
And for the circular reasoning charge, I say nonsense. Just wait till he does it again. Psychologists are of the view that pedophiles that are never caught/treated always keep at it.
Obviously if he does it again, then it changes the matter drastically. And if a previous victim were to come forward, that would also change matters.

But children do make things up, and children can be coaxed/coached/coerced into saying things. I don't know why anyone would want to coach the child to say such things about Holm, any more than I know why Holm would want to do the things the child described. But absent a more compelling case than she said/he said/he admitted he'd had one too many, there doesn't appear to be enough for the Danish court to pursue the matter further.

You can believe the child all you want. I'd say there are some in the Danish legal system who do, too. But in the law, it doesn't matter what you believe, it matters what you can prove.

I don't know if I'd feel comfortable working with Holm, or to leave him alone around my nieces or nephews, but OPQS, who know the guy a lot better than you or I or any of us posting here, are happy to keep him working with their professional all-male cycling team.
Leinster is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:05 AM.