Tuesday, March 6, 2012

The Boston Red Sox sex scandal

Let me see if I have this right. Some former Red Sox clubhouse manager has been accused by several former bat boys (now men) of molesting them.

Most of the incidents supposedly took place in Florida at the Sox' spring training facility, but some might have actually taken place in Fenway Park. Well, OK. As a sick story might go -- I get it so far.

Then the wheels come off. Donald Fitzpatrick, the accused, was employed by the Red Sox from 1971-1991. No one has accused Fitzpatrick of any wrong-doing after 1991, 21 years ago. Whether or not he actually molested those young men is unknown, but the statute of limitations on any and all of those possible crimes has long since expired.

And just one more small detail. Fitzpatrick's been dead since 2005. Yet, 7 years later, these former bat boys are coming out of the woodwork seeking millions in damages from the Red Sox. Well, good luck prosecuting Fitzpatrick, let alone affording him his rights to a defense.

Think that's crazy? It gets worse. Two of the recent accusers apparently claim Fitzpatrick molested them when they were working for the Baltimore Orioles, in their OWN clubhouse, again, over 20 years ago. No pun intended, but it would take a lot of balls to walk into the opposing team's clubhouse and start sexually abusing batboys. If the batboys were there, the players, the coaches, the trainers, and even the manager couldn't have been far away. How could he have pulled that off without being seen?

This is where it gets really insane. The current owners of the Red Sox bought the club in 2002, a full 11 years after the last incident supposedly occurred.  Now people want to hold THEM responsible for what a dead guy might have done over a decade before they came on the scene?

Don't get me wrong. I consider serial child molesting one of the worst crimes imaginable and, as far as I'm concerned, they can take people proven to have done such a thing and have them drawn and quartered in the public square. Indeed, if that really happened to those young boys back then, I have the utmost sympathy for them and hope they can somehow get past that nightmare to go on and live long, fruitful lives.

But something doesn't smell right. Where the hell have they been for 21 years? That means most of these guys are likely 30ish nowadays.

I'm no lawyer, but I just can't see how the current owners of the Red Sox could possibly owe anybody anything regarding these allegations.

As a comparison, in a similar time frame, I bought my house in 1992. If people were to start saying a since deceased serial killer lived here before me, and the authorities began digging up skeletons in my back yard -- would I be held responsible, and have to pay exorbitant sums of money to their surviving relatives?

Of course not.

So what's the difference?

This is crazy.


  1. Once again, John, you are correct. I also think sex crimes, especially against children, are heinous at best. But, why wait until 7 years after the death of the accused. Because given the deep pockets of the Ball clubs mentioned, they will settle out of court for a substantial sum of money just to keep bad press out of their Clubs. Sorry system we have that would even allow such unsubstantiated claims.
    The Princess

  2. TP. I agree with your take on another round of possible out of court settlements (the current owners already did it once before, in 2003, I think), but disagree about the PR aspect. Whether there's any actual substance to the allegations or not -- the story's going to be aired publicly, which normally results in a presumption of guilt, even before any facts are in, from the masses of the knee-jerk vigilantes that seem to be everywhere these days. A few million here or there is chump change to major league owners, but by giving it up, I think they add fuel to the fire they're trying to put out. In other words, by being willing to "settle", people perceive them as being guilty of SOMETHING. Which only creates more bad PR, and the gives the media another shot at them. I think they should just stone-wall it and refuse to cough up a dime. For that matter, they should let it be known that if any attorney drags them into court on a frivolous case, they will pursue that attorney for "costs". That might make the ambulance chasers think twice. Thanks for the comment. If it please Your Highness, I have a throne too. It has something to do with reading Sports Illustrated and that's all I'm going to say. LOL

  3. A couple of more things John. First they do settle to cut their losses and to cut short the bad press. If they held out, the bad press could go on for years, if you pay up it is short lived and old news. The old saying goes "Out of sight, out of Mind" Second, anyone capable of even a minor amount of thought process, can not possibly believe that the new owners are guilty of anything except putting up with someone wanting something for nothing.

    The Princess