Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

Child molestation in Sox clubhouse during Yawkey era


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
53 replies to this topic

#1 JBill

  • 1917 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 07:13 PM

...Donald Fitzpatrick, the longtime Red Sox clubhouse manager who lured Ogletree and at least a dozen other young, African-American boys into two decades of systemic sexual abuse.

...

One victim, according to a complaint filed by his lawyer two decades later, told Red Sox home clubhouse manager Vince Orlando that Fitzpatrick had abused him for the previous three seasons. Orlando fired the boy. Two sources, who asked not to be identified, said a Red Sox player caught Fitzpatrick sodomizing a boy in the shower, much like then-Penn State graduate assistant Mike McQueary did Sandusky. The player reported the incident to the team but not police. Fitzpatrick kept his job anyway.

And so the monster who tormented boys as young as 4 continued to parade them to his locations of choice: the private room at Chain of Lakes, the Holiday Inn, his Boston-area condo, even Fenway.


Players for years had told young boys -- especially African-Americans -- to stay away from Fitzpatrick. Higher-ups in the organization tried to isolate him from any possible social setting. Jean Yawkey just wouldn't fire him.


The fissure between Ogletree and the rest of the victims widened as the Red Sox's new ownership -- which bought the team after the lawsuit was filed -- negotiated a settlement. When the club paid the $3.15 million May 28, 2003, Ogletree was in a mental institution. He says the previous ownership group had promised him psychiatric care for the rest of his life and reneged.The Red Sox wanted to distance themselves from Fitzpatrick, a position from which they haven't deviated. In a statement released to Yahoo! Sports on Wednesday night, the team said: "The Red Sox have always viewed the actions of Mr. Fitzpatrick to be abhorrent."


Yahoo

A story today from Jeff Passan, it was brought up in the Penn State scandal thread. I have never heard this before, and others were expressing similar shock/surprise.

#2 EddieYost


  • has a special friend in GHoff


  • 4201 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 07:20 PM

Yahoo

A story today from Jeff Passan, it was brought up in the Penn State scandal thread. I have never heard this before, and others were expressing similar shock/surprise.



Wow. I had never heard anything about this.

#3 Rasputin


  • Will outlive SeanBerry


  • 25914 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 07:26 PM

I have vague recollections of it from years ago. I don't understand how Mrs. Yawkey or anyone else can think whatever loyalty they owe these people trumps the rape of a child. I mean, christ, if child rape isn't the worst thing in the history of ever then it's second only to genocide.

#4 Yaz4Ever


  • sucking on the government teat


  • 8081 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 07:28 PM

That was incredibly disturbing. I seem to hate people more each day. I'm not at all religious, but if there is a Hell, I hope there is a special place reserved for the likes of Fitzpatrick and Sandusky.

#5 SumnerH


  • Malt Liquor Picker


  • 14356 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 07:29 PM

I posted a few more links about it over in that thread:


He allegedly also had those kids buying weed for Eck and coke for Oil Can Boyd and Sammy Stewart. Wade Boggs was called to the stand but claimed no knowledge of it until the 1991 outing that led to Fitzpatrick's firing--his denial was pretty plausible given that he let Fitzpatrick look after his own kid alone until that incident:
http://articles.sun-...ubhouse-manager

The Sox wound up settling with 7 victims for $3.15 million in 2002:
http://www.loblawyer...use-lawsuit.cfm

Fitzpatrick's in the 1967 ALCS champions picture from the time:
http://www.fenwayout...dsoxplaque.html

#6 mt8thsw9th


  • anti-SoSHal


  • 13853 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 07:32 PM

I would really love to see the current ownership cut all ties to the Yawkey name, down to having the city restore Yawkey Way to Jersey Street. Such a sad, despicable history the team had for more than half a century, all under Tom Yawkey and his family's watch.

#7 BannedbyNYYFans.com

  • 3094 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 07:41 PM

I mean, christ, if child rape isn't the worst thing in the history of ever then it's second only to genocide.

Agreed. But Lackey and his contract has to be somewhere on the short list as well.

#8 mabrowndog


  • Ask me about total zone...or paint


  • 37320 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 08:02 PM

I'm sure we're all dying to know who the Sox player was that reported what he saw to team brass.

#9 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11265 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 08:44 PM

I would really love to see the current ownership cut all ties to the Yawkey name, down to having the city restore Yawkey Way to Jersey Street. Such a sad, despicable history the team had for more than half a century, all under Tom Yawkey and his family's watch.

I think that's a very good idea. I mean, the name already stood for racism, now it stands for child molestation (or at least tolerance of same). The Yawkey era is history; let's let go of it.

#10 mabrowndog


  • Ask me about total zone...or paint


  • 37320 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 08:54 PM

It's no longer in the ESPN.com archives, but a message board still has the content of an article on the Fitzpatrick case. It deals with the drug buys some victims said they were asked (forced) to make for players, namely Dennis Eckersley, Oil Can Boyd & Sammy Stewart.

I'll spoiler it below for posterity in case the above link goes dead.

Spoiler




#11 jacklamabe65


  • A New Frontier butt boy


  • 5989 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 09:03 PM

I would really love to see the current ownership cut all ties to the Yawkey name, down to having the city restore Yawkey Way to Jersey Street. Such a sad, despicable history the team had for more than half a century, all under Tom Yawkey and his family's watch.


Amen. The Morse Code on the Wall might as well read, "Racists/Enablers."

#12 Dollar

  • 3095 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 09:07 PM

It's no longer in the ESPN.com archives, but a message board still has the content of an article on the Fitzpatrick case. It deals with the drug buys some victims said they were asked (forced) to make for players, namely Dennis Eckersley, Oil Can Boyd & Sammy Stewart.


In addition to that, here's an old SoSH thread about the topic. I'm surprised there wasn't more discussion of it at the time.

Edited by Dollar, 10 November 2011 - 09:07 PM.


#13 mabrowndog


  • Ask me about total zone...or paint


  • 37320 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 09:11 PM

In addition to that, here's an old SoSH thread about the topic. I'm surprised there wasn't more discussion of it at the time.

Well, it was before the Schilling Chat Room membership explosion, when this place had a smaller population than Petticoat Junction.

#14 mabrowndog


  • Ask me about total zone...or paint


  • 37320 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 09:48 PM

Back in 1991, Scott Olivieri and his dad created Batter's Edge, a revolutionary computer video system using LaserDiscs that replaced VHS tapes. The Sox hired Scott to implement the system exclusively for the club, and he spent that year with the team. In 2003 he wrote a book about his experience, in which he briefly discusses the Fitzpatrick stuff through his 1991 lens. That portion can be seen on GoogleBooks starting on page 35.

It details the circumstances under which Fitzpatrick ultimately lost his job -- when a man (presumably Ogletree, the victim profiled in Passan's article) held up a sign in Anaheim during a Sox game there, claiming Fitzpatrick had sexually abused him as a child. Apparently that was the "outing" that was needed to finally force the team's hand.

He also mentions Joe Cochran, now the head equipment manager for the Sox and then an assistant, as one of three people who'd told Olivieri they'd informed management about the abuse to no avail.

"[Fitzpatrick] was immediately removed from his position after the Anaheim incident, but Joe said it should've never lasted that long. Though he worked over in the visitor's clubhouse, Joe suspected something was going on, told the right people, but the owners did nothing."


Edited by mabrowndog, 10 November 2011 - 09:48 PM.


#15 Hee-Seop's Fable

  • 1264 posts

Posted 10 November 2011 - 11:36 PM

I would really love to see the current ownership cut all ties to the Yawkey name, down to having the city restore Yawkey Way to Jersey Street. Such a sad, despicable history the team had for more than half a century, all under Tom Yawkey and his family's watch.

Such an idea is sure to garner a lot of support. The difficulty is finding a graceful way to justify such a move without highlighting the moral blight the Yawkey regime really was, and without making it look like they are trying to sweep the garbage under the rug. If there ever was a challenge for such PR savvy ownership as the Henry group, this would be way up there on the list.

#16 Unbearable Lightness

  • 95 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 05:38 AM

I would really love to see the current ownership cut all ties to the Yawkey name, down to having the city restore Yawkey Way to Jersey Street. Such a sad, despicable history the team had for more than half a century, all under Tom Yawkey and his family's watch.

That would be a good start. There are also plenty other Yawkey reminders around Boston.

#17 Gene Conleys Plane Ticket

  • 3189 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 08:47 AM

It's weird that I don't remember this at all, but under the Yawkey ownership, none of it surprises me. For decades, Yawkey and his successors ran the club as the epitome of an old (white) boy network. Every time we start complaining here about the current owners, I remember what it used to be like and count my blessings that the Yawkeys are gone. I would be very happy if their whole memory and legacy was purged Soviet-style from Red Sox history.

#18 bakahump

  • 4732 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 08:59 AM

And the off season just gets better.

I would love to know how Harrington is doing today. What do you do about the Molester Enabler Trust....I mean Yawkey Trust. Can you disband it? Should you? Can it be liable, Catholic Church style, for the damage over the years to these Children? Can the Sox themselves as an entity even with new ownership be held responsible?


What a tragically sad cluster.

I am so sick of baseball right now.

#19 lexrageorge

  • 3015 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 09:32 AM

And the off season just gets better.

I would love to know how Harrington is doing today. What do you do about the Molester Enabler Trust....I mean Yawkey Trust. Can you disband it? Should you? Can it be liable, Catholic Church style, for the damage over the years to these Children? Can the Sox themselves as an entity even with new ownership be held responsible?


What a tragically sad cluster.

I am so sick of baseball right now.



Why should they? Seriously. The new ownership settled the case, and had nothing to do at all with Fitzpatrick. Yes, the story is a sad story, and noone should excuse the actions of the Yawkey Trust here. But blaming the new ownership is like blaming people alive today for the actions of their ancestors.

#20 Yaz4Ever


  • sucking on the government teat


  • 8081 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 09:40 AM

I wouldn't be surprised to see a substantial donation be made toward a child abuse/molestation group from the Red Sox Foundation soon. Current ownership has no responsibility, IMHO, to financially compensate anyone, but they certainly don't want to see the name of their franchise soiled any more than it has been.

#21 bakahump

  • 4732 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 11:28 AM

Why should they? Seriously. The new ownership settled the case, and had nothing to do at all with Fitzpatrick. Yes, the story is a sad story, and noone should excuse the actions of the Yawkey Trust here. But blaming the new ownership is like blaming people alive today for the actions of their ancestors.

Oh I agree....but reread that for a second...

But blaming the new ownership is like blaming people alive today for the actions of their ancestors.


Also I am not sure how the Catholic Church precedent compared. Many of the priest who perpetrated the abuse where dead or retired, and many of their supervisors/church leadership where similarly totally different when the church settled.

What if a new owners took over a company that was later accused of dumping toxic waste previous to the new ownership?


I am not a lawyer....and I am not advocating that the Sox be sold and Fenway salted over. I was just curious if there was any precedents for the Sox as a brand being libel.

#22 mt8thsw9th


  • anti-SoSHal


  • 13853 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 11:51 AM

Why should they? Seriously. The new ownership settled the case, and had nothing to do at all with Fitzpatrick. Yes, the story is a sad story, and noone should excuse the actions of the Yawkey Trust here. But blaming the new ownership is like blaming people alive today for the actions of their ancestors.


He was asking if they were liable for the damages, which wouldn't have been a question if he read the first post.

What if a new owners took over a company that was later accused of dumping toxic waste previous to the new ownership?


Of course. If this was not the case, companies would just make a paper transaction to change ownership any time they had potential litigation to absolve themselves from the repercussions. That's like asking if new owners aren't liable for the previous owners' debt, no?

Edited by mt8thsw9th, 11 November 2011 - 11:51 AM.


#23 bakahump

  • 4732 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 12:02 PM

Sorry for the confusion. I thought Ogletree was the molester. I see now that he was the victim and that the sox settled the allegation. I was confused (not a rare occurance) as I thought that the victim was only now coming forward and asking for damages.

If I am understanding correctly now....there has been no new victims coming forward?

#24 SumnerH


  • Malt Liquor Picker


  • 14356 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 12:10 PM

Sorry for the confusion. I thought Ogletree was the molester. I see now that he was the victim and that the sox settled the allegation. I was confused (not a rare occurance) as I thought that the victim was only now coming forward and asking for damages.

If I am understanding correctly now....there has been no new victims coming forward?


That's correct. AFAIK, the 2002-2003 settlement was the last action in this case. We're discussing it now because it came up in the Penn State/Sandusky thread and lots of people hadn't heard about it until then, but there's no new news.

#25 richgedman'sghost

  • 440 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 12:11 PM

And the off season just gets better.

I would love to know how Harrington is doing today. What do you do about the Molester Enabler Trust....I mean Yawkey Trust. Can you disband it? Should you? Can it be liable, Catholic Church style, for the damage over the years to these Children? Can the Sox themselves as an entity even with new ownership be held responsible?


What a tragically sad cluster.

I am so sick of baseball right now.

Why should the current ownership do anything? They settled the case. Maybe you should reread the other posts before posting. I do agree with the idea of changing the name of Yawkey Way. Perhaps it could be called Fenway Drive or something. Also the Red Sox Foundation could make a donation to the approaite charity. In a related matter, I never understood why Tom Yawkey got in the Hall of Fame in the first place. If ever there was a candidate who should be removed, he would top the list.

#26 JimBoSox9


  • will you be my friend?


  • 12269 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 12:18 PM

Question for the majority in the PSU thread who wanted to line McQueary up against a wall and shoot him. It seems like Cochran plays largely the same role in this story (saw/knew of a problem, reported to superiors, took no action after nothing came of it, got promoted). What should happen to him, and, if the answer is 'not much', explain what you see as the differences in the two situations.

#27 lexrageorge

  • 3015 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 12:19 PM

Why should the current ownership do anything? They settled the case. Maybe you should reread the other posts before posting. I do agree with the idea of changing the name of Yawkey Way. Perhaps it could be called Fenway Drive or something. Also the Red Sox Foundation could make a donation to the approaite charity. In a related matter, I never understood why Tom Yawkey got in the Hall of Fame in the first place. If ever there was a candidate who should be removed, he would top the list.



I'll be the first to admit that Tom Yawkey was an extremely flawed character, but to put a couple of things in perspective:

He bought the team and the park when the park was in shambles and the team nearly bankrupt, and he put a lot of his own $$ into the team. I hate the racial history, but the Yankees and other AL teams weren't a whole lot better in that regard in the 1950's and 60's either. If we removed every HoF'er who discriminated on the basis of race at one point in their lives, their would be a lot fewer plaques to view.

It's also not clear that Tom Yawkey was even alive when the Fitzpatrick incident happened, or if he even knew about it if he was.

#28 Kremlin Watcher

  • 2590 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 12:20 PM

Things like this make it hard to be rational. Should I burn my Sox jerseys because I have unequivocally condemned Penn State for the same crimes? Should I feel smugly confident that since this all happened in the distant past, we should just blame the bad guy and move on? Should the organization suffer more than a measly three million dollars for twenty years of child sex torture? Just does not compute, any of it.

The Sox should do something. Even if this ownership group had nothing to do with this, they should do something. Sponsor a charity. Have a day dedicated to victims of abuse. Something to recognize the problem and make more of us aware that we need to pay attention to it because it really does happen and it is preventable.

#29 lexrageorge

  • 3015 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 12:27 PM

Things like this make it hard to be rational. Should I burn my Sox jerseys because I have unequivocally condemned Penn State for the same crimes? Should I feel smugly confident that since this all happened in the distant past, we should just blame the bad guy and move on? Should the organization suffer more than a measly three million dollars for twenty years of child sex torture? Just does not compute, any of it.

The Sox should do something. Even if this ownership group had nothing to do with this, they should do something. Sponsor a charity. Have a day dedicated to victims of abuse. Something to recognize the problem and make more of us aware that we need to pay attention to it because it really does happen and it is preventable.



The key difference is that the culpable folks at Penn State were still at Penn State until this week. The culpable folks with the Red Sox are long gone from the scene. Blaming the current owners would be like blaming the next president of PSU.

I agree with the charity comments, etc., however.

#30 Kremlin Watcher

  • 2590 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 12:41 PM

The key difference is that the culpable folks at Penn State were still at Penn State until this week. The culpable folks with the Red Sox are long gone from the scene. Blaming the current owners would be like blaming the next president of PSU.

I get that and am not blaming Henry et al for anything. But it is hard to read that article and not think that the Red Sox organization skated on this. Three million bucks for destroying those lives? But at the same time, I don't have any solutions. I'm just angry. I need to stop fixating on this and do something positive or it will eat me up.

#31 mr_smith02

  • 1628 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 02:50 PM

This is very difficult for me, as have the blaring headlines coming out of Penn State been. Reading this article knocked me for a loop and brought forth so many emotions. I do not want to get too heavy on an internet fan site, but from 1978-80 I was sexually abused and emotionally manipulated by an uncle. Unlike Olgetree, the Red Sox were a constant, a distraction, a refuge and a release from nightmares and pain for me during that time. And, unlike Olgetree my path did not lead to prison or mental institutions, and for years I have credited close friends from that time, an incredible counseling experience in my 30s, and when I was still very young and dealing with it all...the Red Sox, for allowing me to land on my feet and find healthy ways to handle it all. Still, these have been difficult days as I recount my experiences and feel a deep and knowing empathy for the Winter Haven seven and each of Sandusky's innocent victims.

I pray for them all...and am honestly disturbed that my beloved Sox were involved in any way whatsoever with any of this.

Edited by mr_smith02, 11 November 2011 - 03:58 PM.


#32 CaptainLaddie


  • dj paul pfieffer


  • 22580 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 03:46 PM

I am so sick of baseball right now.

You should probably take some time off from this website.

#33 Bernard Gilkey baby

  • 522 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 04:11 PM

This is very difficult for me, as have the blaring headlines coming out of Penn State been. Reading this article knocked me for a loop and brought forth so many emotions. I do not want to get too heavy on an internet fan site, but from 1978-80 I was sexually abused and emotionally manipulated by an uncle. Unlike Olgetree, the Red Sox were a constant, a distraction, a refuge and a release from nightmares and pain for me during that time. And, unlike Olgetree my path did not lead to prison or mental institutions, and for years I have credited close friends from that time, an incredible counseling experience in my 30s, and when I was still very young a dealing with it all...the Red Sox for allowing me to land on my feet and find healthy ways to handle it all. Still, these have been difficult days as I recount my experiences and feel a deep and knowing empathy for the Winter Haven seven and each of Sandusky's innocent victims.

I pray for them all...and am honestly disturbed that my beloved Sox were involved in any way whatsoever with any of this.



That's not an easy thing to share and that in of itself speaks to an emotionally healthy recovery. The current headlines are swirling up tons of emotion and this must be a difficult time for you. Peace will return. The Red Sox organization had something of a complicated past; but even so, that's just the organization. It's the heroic and talented players, the incredible games and playoff runs, and the electricity of being a Sox fan that was your refuge. That can never be taken away from you.

#34 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11265 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 05:21 PM

That's not an easy thing to share and that in of itself speaks to an emotionally healthy recovery. The current headlines are swirling up tons of emotion and this must be a difficult time for you. Peace will return. The Red Sox organization had something of a complicated past; but even so, that's just the organization. It's the heroic and talented players, the incredible games and playoff runs, and the electricity of being a Sox fan that was your refuge. That can never be taken away from you.

[applause]

To speak to what bakahump said earlier about being sick of baseball--let's remember this *isn't* about baseball, any more than the Catholic abuse scandal was about religion. It's about a trusted public institution betraying that trust.

#35 ossie schreckengost

  • 2482 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 07:40 PM

I would really love to see the current ownership cut all ties to the Yawkey name, down to having the city restore Yawkey Way to Jersey Street. Such a sad, despicable history the team had for more than half a century, all under Tom Yawkey and his family's watch.


the sox´s despicable history won´t go away, that way. you can rename "yawkey way" the "robinson way", and the boston red sox´racism still won´t go away. we could rename it "pumpsie green way", and that racism still won´t go away.

of course the sox could cut all ties to the old regime (the new regime did it all but in name the day they took over), but we still will remain the boston red sox. and rightfully so.

the sox´ history is not a grab bag. we are in for an inch, we were in for a mile. warts and racism and pedophilia and all.

the new contemporary red sox will not be made of "cutting the ties with the past", they will have to be made of a common understanding of what this enterprise is all about, now.

#36 Savin Hillbilly


  • SoSH Member


  • 11265 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 07:57 PM

the sox´s despicable history won´t go away, that way. you can rename "yawkey way" the "robinson way", and the boston red sox´racism still won´t go away. we could rename it "pumpsie green way", and that racism still won´t go away.

It's not about making it go away. It's about recognizing that it is not worthy of honor, and acting on that recognition. By this logic, the Southern states should continue flying Confederate flags everywhere because taking them down won't make slavery go away.

#37 Kull


  • wannabe merloni


  • 1143 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 09:59 PM

I wouldn't be surprised to see a substantial donation be made toward a child abuse/molestation group from the Red Sox Foundation soon. Current ownership has no responsibility, IMHO, to financially compensate anyone, but they certainly don't want to see the name of their franchise soiled any more than it has been.


I would be surprised. The media would latch onto that in a second as a way to keep the story going and widen the aperture. I agree it would be a nice gesture, but much later is the time to do it. And it's not like they don't have "helping the kids cred" already. The current leadership really amped up the focus on the Jimmy Fund, far beyond the comparatively smaller contributions of their predecessors.

#38 Yaz4Ever


  • sucking on the government teat


  • 8081 posts

Posted 11 November 2011 - 10:27 PM

I would be surprised. The media would latch onto that in a second as a way to keep the story going and widen the aperture. I agree it would be a nice gesture, but much later is the time to do it. And it's not like they don't have "helping the kids cred" already. The current leadership really amped up the focus on the Jimmy Fund, far beyond the comparatively smaller contributions of their predecessors.


I agree, but I think it would also be important to show their concern about issues such as crimes against kids. Even if it's solely a way to untarnish their brand from a selfish, profit-driven POV. Worst case, the media latches onto it but it also brings money and attention to a serious cause. In all seriousness, becoming public during the Penn State chaos it would keep some of the attention off the Sox and more on the issue at hand.

Regardless, I'm sickened by this story and the Sandusky stuff, but I also know it happens everyday in many places. If MLB and the Sox, in particular, can successfully do commercials to bring attention to the plight of gay teens (which I think was good of them), I guess they could use some of that same energy on this issue as well - not that I think it's their responsibility, just a good thing to do.

#39 mr_smith02

  • 1628 posts

Posted 12 November 2011 - 11:53 AM

That's not an easy thing to share and that in of itself speaks to an emotionally healthy recovery. The current headlines are swirling up tons of emotion and this must be a difficult time for you. Peace will return. The Red Sox organization had something of a complicated past; but even so, that's just the organization. It's the heroic and talented players, the incredible games and playoff runs, and the electricity of being a Sox fan that was your refuge. That can never be taken away from you.


This is very true and exactly the feeling I have about the Sox during my darkest days. It is strange to think that, during nearly the same time period, there were others out there who probably associated the Sox with everything that is wrong in this world because of Fitzpatrick. It is all very sad.

#40 biollante


  • SoSH Member


  • 7800 posts

Posted 13 November 2011 - 06:38 AM

It happens in schools, it happens in sports, it happens in churches, it happens in families,it happens everywhere. Only until recently was it exposed as much.
May the exposure continue and may the abuse end.

#41 mabrowndog


  • Ask me about total zone...or paint


  • 37320 posts

Posted 05 December 2011 - 05:37 PM

Two more victims have come forward, alleging Fitzpatrick abused them as kids. They're the 9th and 10th victims on record, but the first two to claim such abuse occurred at Fenway (the others were molested at the club's Winter Haven, FL training facility). They're each seeking $5 million from the Sox.

Globe

On Aug. 22, 1991, Sox clubhouse manager Donald Fitzpatrick asked 16-year-old Charles Crawford to report early from his Dorchester home to Fenway Park.

Crawford, a student at St. Sebastian's School in Needham, treasured his summer job with the Sox. He rubbed elbows with some of the franchise's greatest players: Roger Clemens, Wade Boggs, Ted Williams.

Crawford said he arrived early that day to help pack for the team's departure for the West Coast. That night, he alleges, Fitzpatrick sexually assaulted him in the clubhouse restroom.

His accusation - and that of a second man who, like Crawford, was a teenage clubhouse attendant in the 1990s - is the latest chapter in a sex abuse scandal many believed had been relegated to the Red Sox's past. The allegations mark the first time that Fitzpatrick is accused of assaulting boys in the Sox clubhouse - other cases involved spring training - and come at a time of heightened awareness of the issue in the sports world.

The men notified Sox executives last week they are seeking $5 million each in damages. They said there were no witnesses to their alleged abuse, and they did not discuss it with each other until recently. Medical records show Crawford reported the alleged abuse to Norwood Hospital counselor in 2006. Fitzpatrick died in 2005 at age 76.

The Globe does not identify alleged victims of sexual abuse, but Crawford consented to go public. He maintains the Sox were at fault. "I've held one of Boston's darkest secrets all these years, knowing people would have been blown out of their seats if they knew what the Red Sox let happen to me,'' he said.

In 1991, the Sox paid $100,000 to a former clubhouse attendant after he displayed a sign at a televised game against the Angels in Anaheim that said, "Donald Fitzpatrick sexually assaulted me.'' The incident is alleged to have occurred on the first leg of the West Coast trip for which Crawford said he helped Fitzpatrick prepare.

Fitzpatrick remained with the team for about two weeks after the Anaheim incident. Sox officials said then that Fitzpatrick elected to take an indefinite leave of absence. He never returned.

Crawford said he decided to come forward because he felt empowered by Senator Scott Brown's revelation in February that he was sexually abused as a child more than 40 years ago at a Cape Cod summer camp.

Social Security records show Crawford earned $1,260 for working 30 days - $42 a day - for the Red Sox in the summer of '91. He said he got the job from the other alleged victim, who also grew up in Boston and commuted to St. Sebastian's.

The other man, who is 37, married with children, and working in public education, said he landed the job with help from former state Senator Dianne Wilkerson, who is serving a 3 1/2-year federal prison sentence on an unrelated bribery conviction. The man said he was traveling with the Sox during the 1991 allegation in Anaheim.

After that incident came to light, he said, he waited for team officials to ask him and other teenage attendants if Fitzpatrick had ever acted inappropriately with them. "No one from the team pulled us aside afterward and said, 'I just want to make sure you're OK,' '' he said. "It seemed like they just wanted to move on to the next chapter in Red Sox history. Unfortunately, this is part of that history.''


The bold is yet another revelation of dark and sordid secrets kept under a shameful Yawkey ownership. Seriously, fuck them and their "legacy" in Boston and with this club.

#42 AB in DC

  • 221 posts

Posted 05 March 2012 - 02:27 PM

Apparently, not just in Fenway, either.

http://www.boston.co...rows/?page=full

Eight more men have made sexual abuse allegations against former Red Sox clubhouse manager Donald J. Fitzpatrick, in what has become the worst sexual abuse scandal in Major League Baseball history.

The eight men, including two former batboys for the Baltimore Orioles, have come forward since two former Sox clubhouse attendants accused Fitzpatrick in December of sexually abusing them as teenagers at Fenway Park. The allegations, when added to similar allegations levied decades ago, bring to 20 the number of men who have accused Fitzpatrick of molesting them between the 1960s and 1990s.

...

The Baltimore accusers have no criminal record or history of making similar allegations. Social Security records show they worked for the Orioles during the time of the alleged incidents. Both served as batboys for the visiting teams at Memorial Stadium.


Edited by AB in DC, 05 March 2012 - 02:29 PM.


#43 TheRooster

  • 1767 posts

Posted 05 March 2012 - 05:59 PM

Did Fitzpatrick and McCormick (the guy Manny had his run in with) overlap?

Edited by TheRooster, 05 March 2012 - 06:01 PM.


#44 RoDaddy

  • 1251 posts

Posted 08 March 2012 - 10:31 PM

I really don't understand why so little press has been given to this. It's now being called the "worst sexual abuse scandal in MLB history", and it happened with one of it's marquee teams. Isn't that enough for front page news and a top billing on the national news? I mean, Penn State is big, but not as big as the Boston Red Sox. Without doubt, the fact that this happened quite a while back is one reason, but still doesn't seem to be nearly enough to keep this out of the national spotlight. And it wasn't that long ago, since many of us followed the Sox when he was in the clubhouse.

Edited by RoDaddy, 08 March 2012 - 10:32 PM.


#45 pedros hairstylist


  • Allison?


  • PipPipPip
  • 5577 posts

Posted 08 March 2012 - 10:48 PM

Because all the alleged "bad actors" are long dead and not famous and referred to as "national treasures" like Joe Paterno?

#46 AZBlue

  • 1544 posts

Posted 10 March 2012 - 11:57 AM

I would really love to see the current ownership cut all ties to the Yawkey name, down to having the city restore Yawkey Way to Jersey Street. Such a sad, despicable history the team had for more than half a century, all under Tom Yawkey and his family's watch.


Vile racism was institutionalized by Yawkey. His wife protected a child molester.....I agree, take the name down. Take down the Morse code. Return the name of the street to Jersey Street, or, at least, change the street name to Bigot Street or Molester Protector Way.

(Fixed spelling of Morse. Thanks.)

Edited by AZBlue, 10 March 2012 - 10:45 PM.


#47 jacklamabe65


  • A New Frontier butt boy


  • 5989 posts

Posted 10 March 2012 - 01:56 PM

Vile racism was institutionalized by Yawkey. His wife protected a child molester.....I agree, take the name down. Take down the Morris code. Return the name of the street to Jersey Street, or, at least, change the street name to Bigot Street or Molester Protector Way.


Robinson and Mays Way would have a lovely ring to it. Revenge is best served cold.

#48 ookami7m

  • 4165 posts

Posted 10 March 2012 - 03:46 PM

Vile racism was institutionalized by Yawkey. His wife protected a child molester.....I agree, take the name down. Take down the Morris code. Return the name of the street to Jersey Street, or, at least, change the street name to Bigot Street or Molester Protector Way.


Who is Morris and what does his code have to do with anything?

If every sports team cut ties with racist or bigoted pasts there wouldn't be much history in sports. Yes those things are bad, yes they happened, and yes I know he meant Morse code. But can't change the past, only work to improve the future

#49 Rasputin


  • Will outlive SeanBerry


  • 25914 posts

Posted 10 March 2012 - 04:14 PM

Who is Morris and what does his code have to do with anything?

If every sports team cut ties with racist or bigoted pasts there wouldn't be much history in sports. Yes those things are bad, yes they happened, and yes I know he meant Morse code. But can't change the past, only work to improve the future


And the question is whether continuing to honor racists and pederast enablers is improving the future. It's hard to say it is. I'd rather remove the taint.

#50 TheRooster

  • 1767 posts

Posted 10 March 2012 - 08:05 PM

And the question is whether continuing to honor racists and pederast enablers is improving the future. It's hard to say it is. I'd rather remove the taint.


Agreed. Let's put it this way: who would complain if they changed the name of the street?