*As a citizen activist, all information has been procured from the public domain*

EXPLORATION OF A TIMELINE

On October 18, 2024 Ivan Desyatov – Team USA Athlete was given that he was ineligible to continue training or compete in his sport of figure skating based on one allegation from one adult foreign skater.  He did not have an opportunity to be heard and gagged from presenting all of the exculpatory evidence he has in his defence … three months later.

Table of Content

Index                                                          4

The case and why we are addressing it                                5-13        

How did this happen ?                                                13

What is SafeSport ?                                                14-20                

The Court Cases                                                20-23                                        

Why Don’t we Like to Talk about this ?                                24-29        

Why this Case ?                                                30-31

Overview of Timeline                                                32-33

Summer 2021                                                34

September 16/21 Skate America Announcement                        35

September 19/21 first post of allegation                                36

September 24/24                                                37

September 26/24         Day of SafeSport report                        38

September 29/24                                                39

September 30/24         and Oct 3/24                                40                                                

October 7 Post                                                41                                

October 10 post and Youtube Video                                42

October 16 Respondent and partner withdraw from competition                43

October 17 The Skating Lesson Posts                                44

October18/24 Suspension Announced + Public Reaction                45-46

October 18 and 19 Complainant named in podcast                        46

The Beginning of incitement                                        47-48        

Role of Influencer Agent                                        49

Role of The Skating Lesson                                        50-52                                        

Public Reaction                                                53-56

Misinformation Spreads                                        57

Speculation of Coordinated Effort                                58

Tik Tok Content Creators                                        59

The Complainant’s Team                                        60

Complainant and Social Media                                        61

# MetooSkating                                                62-63

Influenzz Influencer Agent                                        64

Delphine Bellanger Complainant’s Mother                                65-66

French Lawyer                                                67-68

Wikipedia Edits                                                69-70

r/Figure Skating Subreddit                                        71-73

Print Media – Disinformation Perpetuated                                74-75

Nov 5 French Mediapart Article                                        76-80                                        

English Translation Screenshots Comparison                                81-86

French lawyer blogger for Medipart                                 86-87

No-contact Directive                                                86-87

Complainant’s Team                                                88

Public Reaction to Article                                        89-91

The beginning of Questioning                                        92-97

Complainant address public speculation/Timeline Changes                98-100

Complainant Addresses Influencer Agent Role                        101-102

ISU Release                                                103-106

Reaction to ISU Release                                        107

Complainant Re-addressing Allegation                                108-109

Influencer and Agent addressing commenters                        110

Trauma-informed practice concerns                                111-112

ISU Safe guarding Policy                                        113

Abuse of Process Policy                                        116-119

Suicides related to allegations                                         120

French Law                                                120                                

Complication of French Law/Duke Lacrosse false allegation                121

Support Article from former teammate                                 122

Questions and Queries                                        123-124        

INDEX

US Legislative Authority:                 US Centre for Safe Sport

National Governing Body:                US Figure Skating Federation - USFSF

International Governing Body:        International Skating Union

Respondent:                                 Ivan Desyatov – Russian-born skater for USFSF

Complainant:                                  S.M. -  French citizen skating for Estonian Federation

Complainant Mother’s:                 Delphine Bellanger – French citizen

Influencer agent of Influenzz:                 Felix LaPoussiere – French citizen.

Complainant’s lawyer:                 Nabil Boudi – French lawyer and journalist for Mediapart

Respondent’s Partner:                        Isabella Flores

Figure Skating Gossip Podcaster:        David Leese of “The Skating Lesson”

Media Publication:                        MediaPart: Independent French publication                        

Platforms Involved:                        Reddit r/figureskating

                                        X

                                        Patreon

                                        Instagram

                                        Facebook

                                        Anything Goes Figure Skating Media Site

                                        Golden Skate Media site Forum

                                        FS Universe Media Site Forum

Additional Publications:                 Sports Express Russia,

The Case and Why We are Examining it

This case has played itself out in the public domain and presented a number of outliers and red flags based on what has been shared in the public domain.

DISCLAIMER AND INTENT:

• The group that has put this together has been following the case from its beginning to its status in present day in public forums.
• We do not purport to know what actually occurred as there were only two individuals present at the time of the alleged event.
• Our intent is to address the red flags and outliers that have presented themselves in the public domain in regards to this case and advocate for due process for the respondent.
• We encourage readers to verify all public sources of information and examine all research for themselves.
• Since the initial posting of the first version of the case study online, there have been anonymous sources within the skating community that have come forward with additional information not contained in the French article and in the complainant’s video posts regarding the allegation.  All information provided by the sources remain unverified. It is emphasized to us, however, that allegedly multiple witnesses were present in the context of additional information that have been recently been presented.

Notable features of the SafeSport Case

• The respondent and his ice dance partner withdrew from the first big break of their athletic career the day before it was to begin In October 2024.

The incident was alleged to have occurred ten months prior in Zagreb. Croatia.

The respondent was not given an opportunity to be heard prior to the suspension. This has been a normalized process as outlined by US. Centre for SafeSport Code.

• The respondent was issued a suspension without any of the factors listed below historically considered when considering a suspension.  As in all SafeSport cases, the defendant’s exculpatory evidence was not reviewed nor was he granted the right to be heard:

• Allegation between two adults – no minor involvement.
• One allegation – one single incident.
• No prior history of abuse
• No power imbalance ie. coach-athlete relationship

• The allegation did NOT involve a power imbalance. The complainant and respondent are peers in competition and both adults in a he-said/she-said case.

• The respondent is a vulnerable individual. He is a new immigrant to the United States invited to skate with Team USA. He was orphaned at age 16 and was vulnerable to war conscription prior to immigrating to the United States to train.  At the time of his arrival to the USA, he did not know English and has received little formal training.  At the time of the allegation, he was assessed online by an ESL teacher using the written and verbal evidence available as a level 2 Pre-Intermediate English Speaker and had little to no written English skills. At the time of the allegation, the respondent had only begun to learn English through immersion for 18 months.

• Complainant began an online social media campaign to engage in character assassination of respondent BEFORE THE INCIDENT WAS REPORTED to Safe Sport. The  first video posted regarding the allegation as on September 19th, a week before she reported to SafeSport. She also stated that she had reported it to her federation, however the article stated that the Estonian judge she discussed the allegation with had told the complainant she needed to report to the federation directly as they don’t accept third party reports. This was reported in the French article, an unofficial English screenshot of this part of the article was only found on X and not by the complainant’s PR team.  The complainant stated in first video posted September 19, that no action had been taken. However, complainant had never taken steps to have action taken. She did not go back to Estonian Federation to directly report to them when she was told they didn’t accept third-party reports.  If she indeed filed a complaint with police, she did file in within a jurisdiction that had any capability to investigate due to France’s blocking statute. At the time of her first post, she hadn’t even reported the case to the U.S. Centre for Safe Sport. Why did she take the position of “no one doing anything “ if she hadn’t taken action items she was told to take to have it addressed ?

It is argued, how has this not created a weaponized system detrimental to amateur competitive sport in the U.S.A. ?

• On the day of the announcement of the suspension, the complainant, an influencer agency from France named Influenzz, and her mother on the X platform began an aggressive online media smear campaign.  The respondent’s fan accounts and figure skating bloggers were contacted by an unknown source and officially linked the respondent to the complainant the day after the suspension announcement. The PR team was confirmed via comments by the complainant’s influencer team on December 9, 2024 on her Instagram profile. Why was the complainant able to engage in abuse of process prior to the SafeSport complaint ?

• The respondent was called a rapist, received threats and calls for deportation in a widespread, global media smear campaign, before being heard. Why has the respondent been subject to character assassination with no means of defence or mechanism to stop it lieu of the U.S. Centre for SafeSport Code ?

• On November 5, 24 a French publication by the name of Mediapart published an article detailing the allegation and publicly naming the respondent.  The article was published in French without an official English translation and there were unofficial English translations provided by a series of screenshot that were disseminated via social media, skating bloggers, the complainant and her PR team. The English translation contained a number of mistranslations which misrepresented certain aspects of the allegation. If the complaint was reported on September 26 and the suspension was initiated on October 18, and the influencer agent admitted the article was in the works several weeks before the November 5th publication date, was the personally translated French-to-English article with the mistranslations sent to U.S. Centre for SafeSport or SafeSkate as a means to immediately initiate suspension as evidence? An article from a foreign publication in which the complainant’s lawer is a regular writing contributor to ? Conflict of interest ?  

In the November 5th article, a witness named Holly was named present near the time of the alleged incident. Why did the article not interview this witness or mention reaching out to her for comment ?

• In the November 5th article, the complainant disclosed that she has memory issues and cognitive after-effects as a result of a traumatic brain injury. Does this affect reliability of self-recall ? Especially in lieu of testimony of taking a “powerful sleeping pill” while allegedly being reported as “extremely intoxicated in front of multiple witnesses.”

• The November 5th article was published by a publication in France that the complainant’s lawyer is a regular writing contributor to, exposing a conflict of interest.

• In the November 5th article, it was mentioned that a police report was filed in April and the “investigation is ongoing” in screenshots of the unofficial English translations provided in a series of screenshots by complainant, her mother and sent to numerous skating bloggers. However,  in the French article behind a paywall, it simply states a “complaint was filed”. This was later corroborated by influencer agent Felix Lapoussiere under complainant’s Dec 9, 24 grid post in the comments. If the incident happened in Croatia, why was the report filed in France ? France has a blocking statute that doesn’t permit the exchange of information and evidence cross-jurisdictionally. https://www.iadclaw.org/defensecounseljournal/the-french-blocking-statute-and-cross-border-discovery/

• The complainant’s influencer agent, Felix Lapoussiere, revealed on December 9, 24 that the article was written several weeks before being published.  Going by the influencer agent’s comments , then the article would have been in production before the time of suspension. How has this not facilitated foreign interference of a TEAM USA Athlete ?

• It has been shared that a number of complaints have been made to U.S. Centre for SafeSport, SafeSkate and the International Skating Union by a concerned fan base regarding the abuse of process and denigration by complainant’s PR team that has taken place prior to the respondent being heard and investigated.  The response by the U.S. Centre for SafeSport was that the complainant’s behaviour is outside the scope of US SafeSport jurisdiction and therefore the centre is unable to address it. Reports to the International Skating Union regarding the violating the SafeSport denigration safeguard and online harassment to their safeguarding officer have not been responded to. 

Why is the U.S. Centre for SafeSport accepting complaints outside their jurisdiction if they cannot ensure a fair investigation devoid of abuses of process by their own Code of Ethics?

• It was later revealed by anonymous sources that the complainant and the respondent were former roommates at a summer training camp in Belarus in 2021. The summer camp videos featuring both the complainant and the respondent were featured in the complainant’s Instagram highlights. Featured in accompanying Vimeo link.

• The complainant has changed the timeline of events and altered the story several times on her Instagram and X accounts.  

• The complainant has a history of mental illness, self-reported since the age of 9 and a history of Traumatic Brain Injury since September of 2022.  She states that she has “memory issues” in the French article. How can complainant be certain of her memory recall in lieu of memory issues, TBI and intoxicated state ? In article, complainant notes that she “does not remember what happened ?” and basing recall on text conversation.

• Complainant posted Instagram story at time of alleged incident tagging the respondent. The story was featured in highlights until September 2024. It was deleted at the same time as the complainant’s first video post about the allegation.

• The context of the situation appears to be a he-said/she-said between two adults.  Could this a case of whomever is the first to share the story wins in the public eye – which seems highly influential in determining suspensions and rulings?

• The Bill passed that grants funding and authority to the U.S. Centre for SafeSport was initially designed to protect minors participating in amateur sport from all forms of abuse in sport. Is Safesport designed to police interactions between adults outside of sport in their private lives, not engaged in a power dynamic or in the context of training or competing.  Does this have anything to do with a culture in a sport or does SafeSport maintain power over athlete’s personal interactions ?  Wouldn’t this be more appropriate in the hands of law enforcement ?

• If intake took the complainant’s report on September 26, 24 and the suspension was only handed down on October 18, 24 just prior to the Senior Grand Prix Competition, is it reasonable to speculate that the article from French media

1. Self-admittedly from the complainant’s PR team translated to English in the form of screen shots was being worked on “several weeks” before publication November 5.
2. Srom a publication company in which the complainant’s disclosed lawyer is a regular contributor to demonstrating a conflict of interest

 Was the English translation of the article shared with Safe Sport the reason why a suspension was suddenly handed down despite no minor invovlement, he-said/she-said, no power imbalance, no prior history, no pattern of abuse, two adults.

Was their any vetting done of the article ? Was this the influential factor alone ? Was their any fact-checking agains the only official French version of the article behind a paywall ?

Were any conflicts-of-interests determined at that time ?

Did U.S. Centre for Safe Sport consider that taking in a foreign article regarding an unproven allegation prior to any form of invesrtigation – is an abuse of process in itself  ? That it violates their own Code of Ethics?

Did U.S. Centre for SafeSport consider that denying respondents due process causing harm to amateur athletes in the form of online reputation damage leading to potential mental health harms and a history of respondents committing suicide ?  That runs counter to their mission objective ?

• The complainant bases her allegation on a texting conversation that she reported to the Mediapart article and likely shared with SafeSport with complaint. Does not take into account that respondent was only a year into speaking English by immersion and had little to no English written skills. It is reasonable to speculate that the respondent used a translation application to communicate in writing. The respondent is Russian knowing little English, the complainant is French and English as a second-language.  Safesport has only looked at the complainant’s screenshot and pending investigation has not verified the respondent’s digital exculpatory evidence of the alleged screenshots to determine if there is missing contexts or deleted information. This is a normalized process for U.S. SafeSport per their U.S. Centre for SafeSport Code. If the screenshot was considered solid evidence, why would all of the factors above not be taken into consideration in weighing the merit of evidence in its full context?

• Complainant stated in the article that she couldn’t compete due to the alleged incident and Ivan Desyatov was able to continue to compete.  Complainant did go on to compete in Worlds Championships in 2024.  Herself and her ice dance partner were trying to secure funding for further training throughout the summer, however, were unable to secure enough funds to continue their training program and competition.

New whistleblower update: January 2025 Since the initial posting of the document, there have been three anonymous sources that have reached out with alleged information. This information has not been verified.

• The complainant and the respondent lived together for a summer in 2021 in Belarus along with several other skaters for a training camp.

• The complainant stated that she took a “powerful sleeping pill” and that the respondent should have known what she took and the effects of taking a sleeping pill. How has she verified that the respondent knew what she took ? They had not seen each other since the training camp which took place prior to the complainant’s brain injury. What would the effect of mixing a sleeping pill with large amounts of alcohol based on allegation of “extreme intoxication in front of multiple witnesses” have on cognition and accuracy of memory recall ?

• There were allegedly a number of witnesses present that evening with one source coming forward stating the complainant was “extremely intoxicated in front of a lot of us” the evening of the alleged event. This alleged detail has been left out of the Mediapart article and all videos that complainant has posted about the event. Why was this detail left out of the complainant’s multiple online/print media testimonies? 

• It is reasonable to speculate that the respondent was left as the sole caretaker to ensure the complainant remained safe as she was left alone in that state in her room – likely to ensure the complainant did not aspirate or go into respiratory depression due to alcohol intoxication. There have many notable examples of young individuals who have tragically passed away when left alone without supervision in a highly intoxicated state. While we recognize that we do not know what occurred at that time, it is reasonable to speculate that in this context, it is what a good friend would do. 

• There have been questions regarding whether the respondent is being treated in an unprecedented fashion in regard to this allegation because he is vulnerable, a new immigrant and of Russian Slavic race. It has been well documented in studies that false allegations become more common in the context of discrimination.  Is the client being Russian a factor in being denied U.S. Bill of Rights because of discrimination ? https://drive.proton.me/urls/7VERMQZ16C#8uXFegZwbmfo Gross, Possley, Otterbourg, Stephens, Paredes, O’Brien (2022)

• To this day, the respondent is still under suspension without a timeline. He has been barred from ‘all rinks in the United States”. His ice dance partner and himself have been unable to train together and compete.  As a result, his career has been devastated long-term as ice dancing assignments are placed based on the previous year’s performance levels and standings.

 All this has taken place, before the respondent has been heard or released a statement. 

How did this Happen ?

In addition to the 5th and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibit federal and state governments from depriving any person of "life, liberty, or property" without due process, amateur athletes in the United States are protected by the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act of 1978. This legislation offers protections similar to those enjoyed by professional athletes through their unions and by employees under labor laws.

The Ted Stevens Act guarantees amateur athletes the right to be heard before they are declared ineligible to participate in their sport. In essence, it ensures their right to a pre-determination hearing—commonly referred to as procedural due process—prior to any suspension.

                Until 2018……..

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title36/subtitle2/partB/chapter2205&edition=prelim The Ted Stevens Act of 1978 with all recent amendments.

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-5/

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-14/

What is SafeSport ? 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/534

https://uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm?volume=134&page=944

https://uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm?volume=134&page=947

The Safe Sport Code

https://uscenterforsafesport.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/SafeSportCode2021_040121_V3.pdf

The U.S. Centre for SafeSport is a non-profit organization established in 2018 in response to the revelations of widespread sexual abuse of minor athletes in U.S. Gymnastics. Created under a bill passed by Congress, the organization was granted exclusive authority through the Ted Stevens Act to protect minor athletes in amateur sports from sexual abuse. They have maintained they are considered independent from being a government or state actor – that they are a private entity. SafeSport's mission includes establishing a system and clear pathways for individuals to report abuse. An honourable and important mission.

A formalized process for investigating allegations was created as part of SafeSport's mandate under the U.S. Centre for SafeSport Code of Ethics. However, significant concerns have been raised about the fairness and transparency of these processes in that the organization does not follow procedural due process. Athletes accused of misconduct could be suspended and listed on a public database without being herd ie. Pre-determination hearing foundational to due process often waiting months or years for an investigation to conclude.

“In other words, “liberty” is implicated and procedural due process is required when government actions threatens an employee’s good name, reputation, honor or integrity.” McNeil v Butz 480 F.2d,314, 319 (4th cir.1973. (citing Bd. Of Regents v.Roth 408 U.S. 564 573, 92, S Ct. 2701, 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972) Wisconsin v. Constantineau, 400 UI.S. 433, 437, 91, S.Ct. 507, 27 L. Ed. 2d 515 (1971) Wieman V. Updergraff, 344 U.S. 183, 73, S. Ct 21597, L.Ed. 216 (1952)

In 2020, a second amendment to the law emphasized the importance of procedural due process. Despite this, SafeSport made minimal adjustments to its policies.  Crucially, did NOT include - the right to be heard ie. Pre-determination hearing -prior to being declared ineligible to participate in their sport A.K.A Livelihood and Liberty in their process. Critics argue that this violates the principles of procedural due process and is in conflict with the Ted Stevens Act designed to protect amateur athletes. This is currently being argued in federal court.  Amateur athletes stand out as being in a class of their own in terms of the only individuals in the US that are denied this fundamental right to be heard before damage to their livelihood and liberty and being named in a public database -  counter to what basic citizenship, professional athletes and all employees are provided.

To this day, SafeSport has been accused of restricting the scope of issues on which the accused can be heard. The organization continues to suspend individuals and place their names on public databases upon receiving a complaint, without first granting the accused an opportunity to be heard prior. This practice has been criticized as unfair and harmful, as it denies individuals the chance to protect their reputations and livelihoods before facing public scrutiny and is in violation of US. Constitution, the Rule of Law and U.S. Bill of Rights. In addition, it is a lost opportunity to address allegations that should not be escalated if given meritable context from respondent and further wastes time and resources that could be better spent on substantiated claims that require further escalation. 

Legal precedent strongly supports the importance of procedural due process. In McNeil v. Butz, the court stated that liberty is implicated, and due process is required when government actions threaten an individual's reputation or integrity. Similarly, in Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill, the Supreme Court affirmed that any deprivation of life, liberty, or property must be preceded by notice and an opportunity for a hearing appropriate to the case.

Despite these principles, SafeSport’s defense attorneys have consistently argued that:

1. Congress granted SafeSport exclusive authority to handle cases involving sexual misconduct in sports.
2. Due process is subjective and not strictly defined.
3. SafeSport is independent from the government and thus not subject to the same legal standards as state or government actors.
4. The organization is immune from litigation unless malice can be proven.
5. Insistence that the lack of transparency and independence from the government are essential, and that the ends of the denial of a pre-determination hearing justify the means.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/534

Critics contend that SafeSport's policies allow it to operate without transparency or accountability, depriving accused individuals of fundamental protections afforded in both criminal and civil legal systems. SafeSport can suspend individuals, place their names on public databases, and delay investigations for extended periods—all without providing the accused a chance to be a heard in the form of a pre-determination hearing.

By comparison, even athletes subject to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) rules and individuals accused of criminal misconduct are granted the right to be heard before facing penalties that could affect their livelihoods. As are employees, under a Loudermill hearing. SafeSport, however, wields significant power as a private entity authorized by Congress, raising questions about the balance between protecting victims and ensuring the rights of the accused.

Congress intended procedural due process – it is written right into the bill. That would include the right to be heard before being denied the right to liberty and livelihood – yet this was never folded into the Safe Sport Code even after the 2020 amendment, in violation of the Ted Stevens Act of 1978.

It is noted that an agency that was established under a bill to protect amateur athletes from all forms of abuse, is causing real harm to amateur athletes by exposing them to reputation damage in the form of online hate and bullying and denigration by assuming their guilt before they have a right to be heard.

The denial of civil liberties and the right to be heard has tragically resulted in suicides among the respondents. Addressing these suicides, U.S. Center for SafeSport spokesperson Dan Hill stated that "the hearing is the key" to being heard. However, merely offering a hearing is not the same as conducting a pre-determination hearing. The individuals who ended their lives were deprived of this right. Their names were published in the database, exposing them to online hate and speculation while they were barred from participating in their sport. Due to their deaths, SafeSport administratively closed the investigation, leaving their families and friends without the opportunity to see it completed.

.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/2019/03/28/former-figure-skaters-family-blamed-suicide-false-accusation/3300924002/

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title36/subtitle2/partB/chapter2205&edition=prelim

e

Title 36 is currently being debated in congress at this time.  The proposal is for less due process Not more due process and oversight.  There is an oversight committee however it seems to be have been served mainly for financial accountability and to address funding issues rather than review the constitutional issues that is brought up by critics. https://energycommerce.house.gov/posts/chairs-rodgers-and-griffith-announce-oversight-hearing-on-u-s-center-for-safe-sport-1

https://ross.house.gov/2024/12/u-s-bill-would-up-safesport-funding-seek-faster-investigations

The Court Cases – Trying to re-establish procedural due process

https://athletesforequity.org/newstestimonials/

A four-year case that is being escalated to federal court.  The plantiffs – U.S. Centre for SafeSport seem to have exhausted every legal manoeuvre with motions to dismiss.

https://drive.proton.me/urls/NDWC5YA3NC#bBSdpTR8FfJK

Case 3:24-cv-00030-RSB-JCH Document 1 Filed 04/28/24 Page 1 of 39 Pageid#: 1

https://drive.proton.me/urls/TC9AX3A68M#SBPfc2QZAFx0Case 3:24-cv-00030-JHY-JCH Document 45 Filed 09/13/24 Page 1 of 19 Pageid#: 527

https://drive.proton.me/urls/FDEMDGXMFW#xnPwDN8pwhzV

American Arbitration Association Case Number: 01-20-0015-8031

https://jusmundi.com/en/document/other/en-u-s-center-for-safesport-v-respondent-u-s-center-for-safesports-response-to-petitioners-motion-to-vacate-arbitration-award-monday-29th-january-2024

https://athletesforequity.org/newstestimonials/

Why don’t we like to talk about this ?  It’s uncomfortable to talk about the potential for false allegations.

Advocating for procedural fairness DOES NOT mean being indifferent to stopping abuse. Many of us are parents with children in amateur sports, and we all share a common goal: protecting minors and athletes from all forms of harm. However, the conversation has become polarized, often reducing complex issues to ideological binaries. Those who call for due process are too often labeled "abuse apologists," silenced, and vilified. This stifles meaningful dialogue, even when the intention is merely to acknowledge that "there are two sides to every story and address potential unintended harms from not following due process that might run counter to the mission objective of U.S. Centre for SafeSport.

Rooted in the principles of the U.S. Constitution and informed by historical examples of injustice, we believe that all allegations of abuse must be met with procedural fairness and a right to be heard before individuals are declared ineligible to participate in sports. Circumventing due process not only undermines justice but also opens the door to false allegations, character assassination, sabotage, and the unwarranted destruction of lives and careers.  SafeSport has opened the door to complainants from foreign competition with no jurisdiction or ability to regulate if abuse of processes occur resulting in damage to the respondent’s reputation and career throughout the investigation. What is to stop countries from taking out the competition of rival countries in World Sport and Olympic competition with a falsified piece of evidence, knowing that the respondent won’t be heard prior to a suspension?

Studies estimate that 2–10% of abuse allegations may be false, for reasons ranging from mental illness to retaliation, sabotage, or jealousy. If the U.S. Center for SafeSport handles roughly 6,000 cases annually, this means 120 to 600 cases could involve false claims. Without fair investigations, athletes risk suspension based on incomplete evidence or mere accusations, resulting in devastating miscarriages of justice. Months or years of delays can erode reputations, training opportunities, and entire careers—even if the allegations are ultimately disproven.

The problem is exacerbated by SafeSport’s jurisdictional limitations, especially when complaints from foreign competitors lead to public character attacks before formal investigations begin. Such scenarios undermine SafeSport’s mission to protect athletes and instead weaponize its processes, causing emotional and mental harm to the very individuals it aims to safeguard.

The consequences of denying respondents their right to be heard are not theoretical. Two athletes have tragically taken their own lives after their reputations were irreparably damaged by unproven accusations. In these cases, the investigations closed posthumously, leaving families and friends in anguish, forever uncertain of their innocence or guilt. A SafeSport representative later explained that the athletes could have requested a hearing for $3,000—an option rendered meaningless after their public and professional lives were destroyed by unvetted accusations.

This system, while designed to protect, has unintentionally created backlogs and inefficiencies, compounding harm to those caught in its net. Granting respondents their constitutional right to due process, as guaranteed by the Ted Stevens Act of 1978, would not only uphold justice but also improve efficiency by resolving many disputes before they escalate into prolonged and costly investigations. Professional athletes are spared this ordeal due to the economic stakes in their careers, but amateur athletes—who rely on local funding and unpaid training—are left especially vulnerable to reputational and financial devastation.

Denying procedural fairness undermines the very foundation of justice and human rights. History repeatedly shows us the consequences when we society falls victim to circumventing important steps in due process for “the greater good.”  In safeguarding amateur athletes from abuse, we must also ensure we do not trample on the rights of those falsely accused. The ends cannot justify the means.

`

Studies:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321912085_Purported_False_Allegations_of_Rape_Child_Abuse_and_Non-Sexual_Violence_Nature_Characteristics_and_Implications

https://pure-oai.bham.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/220628815/Tak_et_al_2024_-_Good_use_non-use_and_misuse_-_Safe_sport_reporting_systems_in_context.pdf

https://wt.ca/safe-sport-disputes-and-issues-of-procedural-fairness/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321912085_Purported_False_Allegations_of_Rape_Child_Abuse_and_Non-Sexual_Violence_Nature_Characteristics_and_Implications

https://pure-oai.bham.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/220628815/Tak_et_al_2024_-_Good_use_non-use_and_misuse_-_Safe_sport_reporting_systems_in_context.pdf

https://wt.ca/safe-sport-disputes-and-issues-of-procedural-fairness/

`

Why This Case ?

https://www.tumblr.com/bvdomination

The complainant had several choices to address this allegation. She decided to hire a media team and lawyer who started to paint a narrative in the media before she reported to any legislative authority with any means to investigate. Her and her media team continued a relentless media campaign on social platforms and foreign media against the respondent for two months while the respondent was gagged by SafeSport to defend himself.  As a result, there is a tremendous amount of content to display. This is content that the complainant presented for public display and consumption on her own volition before any investigation had taken place.  And it is organized in a timeline for the reader to consume at their interest and convenience.

Overview of Timeline

Summer 2021 – Figure Skating Training Camp in Belarus 

The following information is presented in the context of presenting a previous amicable relationship between the complainant and the respondent in Belarus and Russia.  The athletes trained with the Zhulin Ice Dance Team in Russia. Complainant and respondent were roommates with several other figure skaters in Belarus in the summer of 2021 at a training camp.

https://vimeo.com/1044071465/4d39c18d8f

https://www.instagram.com/solenemazingue_?igsh=aGtzaG91eTlxc284

SEPTEMBER 16, 24

Team USA Ice dance couple Isabella Flores and Ivan Desyatov were publicly announced as being granted host spots as competitors at their first Senior Grand Prix competition called Skate America. The Skate America Grand Prix takes place in mid-October in Texas. It was a major milestone for the athletes and marked an important goal that they had spent two years in intensive training for.

Sep 16, 24 is the same day that French publication Mediapart stated that complainant had posted her first Instagram Reel describing an alleged sexual assault. 

Translated screen shot featured on complainant Instagram stories on November 5, 24

SEPTEMBER 19, 2024

1st Instagram Reel – “I won’t Stay Silent” – REEL POST FROM COMPLAINANT

https://www.instagram.com/solenemazingue_/profilecard/?igsh=YTFqejZ3N2UybTRo

 VIDEO https://vimeo.com/1038050599/91acb40e3b

VIDEO POSTED ON ON ANYTHING GOES ON  -X 

– *SINCE DELETED *

Direction to refer to influence agency Influenzzz @influenzzz

hello@influenzaa.fr 

SEPTEMBER 24, 2024

2nd Instagram Reel – “Everything was Going Well in My Life.. Until”

https://www.instagram.com/solenemazingue_/profilecard/?igsh=YTFqejZ3N2UybTRo

  VIDEO https://vimeo.com/1038050599/91acb40e3b

SEPTEMBER 26, 24 – day of SafeSport Complaint

3rd Instagram Reel “Thanks But the Fight Goes On.” 

+

Report of allegation to US Centre for Safe Sport

        (2.3)  Instagram Reel Post https://vimeo.com/1038051370/0cbb6796f4   

(2.0)                                        (2.1)                                        (2.2)

“Thanks But the Fight Goes On.” 

 (2.4)  https://youtu.be/j2fDFJo0ilI -   Posted the day of the Safe Sport complaint.

SEPTEMBER 29, 24

Complainant Instagram Reel Post – “2 Years” 

https://vimeo.com/user231938886/download/1038141722/40c59ae620 -

 (2.5)                             (2.6)                             (2.7)

Complainant X Channel – Two Videos Posted

SEPTEMBER 30, 24

Complainant Instagram Post – “Thank You, Me” 

https://www.instagram.com/solenemazingue_/profilecard/?igsh=YTFqejZ3N2UybTRo

  (3.0)                                        (3.1)

OCTOBER 3, 2024

Complainant X Account – “Thanks But the Fight Goes On.” 

https://x.com/solenemazingue/status/1841953264989802757?s=42

OCTOBER 7, 24

Complainant Instagram Reel Post – “Turning Pain Into Strength” 

OCTOBER 10, 2024

Complainant Instagram Reel Post – “Happiness” 

 https://www.instagram.com/reel/DA8xQPPudNG/?igsh=MWtwY2t3d2s2Z3EyNw==   

Complainant Youtube Post discussing Allegation

https://youtube.com/@solenemazingue_?si=bbtTZpid_gIFxn6N 

https://vimeo.com/1038052019/711bfec66d - Video 1.14   

OCTOBER 16, 2024

Respondent and Partner Respond from First Major Competition

Isabella Flores Instagram Post

https://www.instagram.com/isabellaflores_/profilecard/?igsh=NXVsMTlseXFyN3ho

ANNOUNCMENT OF WITHDRAWL OF ISABELLA FLORES AND IVAN DESYATOV – US FIGURE SKATER

FROM SKATE AMERICA GRAND PRIX IN ALLEN, TEXAS – ONE DAY PRIOR TO COMPETITION.

OCTOBER 17/24

“The Skating Lesson”        By David Leese

Figure Skating Gossip Blogger – X, Facebook, Patreon.

X: https://x.com/skatinglesson?s=11

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/share/17oKa3euA2/?mibextid=LQQJ4d

OCTOBER 18, 2024

TEMPORARY SUSPENSION ANNOUNCED by US Centre for SafeSport

• US Centre for Safe Sport
• USFSF – United States Figure Skating Federation
• The Skating Lesson by David Leese – X – Facebook
• Philip Hersh – X – Facebook
• Golden Skate -  X
• Anything Goes  – X – had previous reported on it on Sep 19 and re-posted on X by7 Delphine Bellanger – complainant’s mother
  FS Universe
• Reddit Thread

Heavy engagement due to news of withdrawl and Grand Prix competition coverage on social media. Announcement of Suspension widely disseminated by users on:

Reddit

• Facebook
• X
• Instagram
• Tumblr
• Golden Skate Forum
• Anything Goes Media Site

(4.6)

OCTOBER 18/24 INTO OCTOBER 19/24

THE BEGINNING OF THE INCITEMENT OF:

• GLOBAL PUBLIC CYBERBULLYING                                    
• DENIGRATION
• HARASSMENT
• DOXXING
• CHARACTER ASSASSINATION
• THREATS OF VIOLENCE
• LASTING HARMFUL LABELS
• #’s ASSOCIATING THE RESPONDENT AS A RAPIST
• ASSUMPTION OF GUILT
• CALLS FOR DEPORTATION
• CALLS FOR THE END OF CAREER
• GLOBAL DISINFORMATION

• Complainant begins #Metoo Skating Campaign on day of Announcement of Temporary Suspension – Instagram and X.
• 16 multiple frame – professionally procured posts.
• Engagement with survivors and victims via Story application from Oct 18 – Nov 21 8-32 story posts per day for 35 days. 
• David Leese of The Skating Lessons publicly names complainant associated to the allegation on the members only podcast.
• Complainant begins to detail allegation. The public begin to link the complainant’s story to the respondent.

https://vimeo.com/1038051683/5af8049bb6

https://vimeo.com/1038188175/317c0d96a4

   The Skating Lesson – TSL Live – Patreon – Members Only Podcast (5.2)

October 19/2024 – David Leese disclosed he had reached out to three journalists regarding the allegation rumour. Disclosed complainant’s name tying complainant to the respondent’s publicized temporary suspension. Disclosed he is a Wikipedia editor. 

https://vimeo.com/1037537036/dd6c5510f3(5.3)

ROLE OF THE INFLUENZER AGENT

Influenzzz – Paris, France

https://influenzzz.fr/

Founder: Felix Lapoussiere

        Aka Felix Ladusque

@felix_lapoussiere  - Instagram  https://www.instagram.com/influenzzz?igsh=cXk2dXprYXY4YmEw   

Named as Felix Ladusque in Mediapart article (Nov5/24) on unofficial English in screenshots disseminated on social media.

The Role of David Leese – The Skating Lesson on X, Facebook and Patreon

Cluster (5.8)

Doxxing of Marriage Application on County Records by The Skating Lesson – 1st mention

On October 19/24 on X and Facebook

https://x.com/skatinglesson/status/1847462977181540526?s=42

Disseminated Widely on all platforms.

The Skating Lesson Patreon – members only podcast

Skate America – October 19/24

https://x.com/skatinglesson/status/1847391760957190450?s=42

https://vimeo.com/1037537036/dd6c5510f3?share=copy  Patreon Podcast Oct 19/24

Click to Listen

David Leese discussed the allegation, stated there rumours circulating “all year”. Named the complainant. Discussed” I alerted three journalists about what was going to come out this week with Ivan Desyatov, two of them were on it.” 

How was David Leese alerted to the upcoming suspension prior to it being announced on the database? He posted about “ a criminal investigation related to the withdrawl of the respondent on October 17, 24

Please note Delphine Bellanger- mother of complainant re-posting a number of hateful comments on X.

Public Reaction

• Disinformation Cyberbullying. Harassment. Denigration Xenophobic comments, Threats and wishes of Harm, Public Doxxing – SMALL SAMPLE 600 + Screenshots of denigration.

• Platforms Involved: Reddit, X, Instagram, Golden Skate Forum, FS Universe Site, Anything Goes Figure Skating Media Site, Facebook, Tik Tok, Tumblr

WARNING: TRIGGER ALERT – VIEWER DISCRETION ADVISED

THE NEXT PAGE CONTAINS SLURS, BIGOTRY, THREATS AND DENIGRATING LANGUAGE

Cluster (6.5)

(6.6)

Note Complainant’s Mother Reposting

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DCBhjG1CyzS/?igsh=MTd2bDVpZG96aWYzcg==

MISINFORMATION SPREADS

Speculation of a coordinated effort on October 18, 24.

Comments regarding complainant contacting Respondent/Ice Dance Partner’s Fan Pages

Content Creators on Tik Tok Posting serial content on the allegation.

The Role of Complainant’s Team

1. Complainant and social media Platforms – Launch of # MeToo Skating and Instagram Account.

2. Influenzer Agent – Influenzzz Felix LaPoussiere

3. Mother- Delphine Bellanger and social media platforms

4. Complainant’s Legal Representation in France – Nabil Boudi

5. Independent French Publication – Mediapart

Complainant and Social media Platforms

Launch of # MeTooSkating and Instagram Account

`

# MeTooSkating Instagram Site

https://www.instagram.com/metooskating?igsh=MTBld3RyNGJoYnNnMg==

# MeToo Skating Disclosure Forms

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeWgKhBzrjCowRXOudXQuk1rXrsey3oL-IPcilz29ak_q6jWA/viewform

Complainant starts to ask for engagement from her followers, asking for testimonies. She posts disclosures of abuse on Instagram stories, including minors and one that identifies herself as an 11-year old.

It is not clear what occurs once the form is completed, other than the testimony is posted.

There is no listing of abuse help line, crisis lines, the safe sport online complaint form, or kid help phones.

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeWgKhBzrjCowRXOudXQuk1rXrsey3oL-IPcilz29ak_q6jWA/viewform

Influenzzz

Influencer Agent

https://influenzzz.fr/

Felix Lapoussiere – Paris, France

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CsmNuR4se3Z/?igsh=YXRka2t3NWRrbHll

Delphine Bellanger

Complainant’s Mother

                Began Posting Heavily on X

https://x.com/delphinedo21?s=11

https://vimeo.com/1038387386/8730fe3bd7 - X Scroll Video

X Account – 385 Posts, Reposts and Replies between September 19 to November 28, 2024

127 reposts and posts on November 5/24 – Publication Date of French Independent Publication – Mediapart.

November 6/24 : #Ivandesyatovrapist  comment * liked * by complainant’ mother on Delphine Bellanger’s Instagram

French Lawyer

Nabil Boudi

https://avocat-nabilboudi.com/

Contributor to French publication Mediapart – the same publication that published complainant’s allegation and publicly naming respondent.

Disclosure of a lawyer

• Blogger for Mediapart – the same publication that featured the article that named the respondent and details of the allegation.

Posted the Mediapart Article on his X account on November 5, 24

Lawyer named as Nabil Boudi was @ mentioned by Influencer Agent Felix Lapoussiere on Complainant’s Instagram. The laywer posted this story the following day – as above, “I’m not paying, I’m not working lawyer responded.

 English Translation: The designated team organized to assist.

Wikipedia Edits

Respondent – Ivan Desyatov’s Wikipedia Page Edits

        Redditor: LyraMusica discloses the Wikipedia edit on Reddit thread.

• David Leese of Skating Lesson mentioned being a Wikipedia Editor on October 19, 24 podcast,

r/FigureSkating Subreddit 

• Online bullying and labelling of respondent as a rapist consistently throughout threads.

• Consistent deleting and harassment of users having conversations about not jumpint to conclusions and the consideration of due process before labelling.

• Lock of threads and shutting down of discussion regarding respondent’s potential innocence until proven guilty.

• Banning, Muting and Blocking users who are defending respondent.

• Complaints being submitted to Reddit regarding potential gatekeeping of information by the moderators of r/FigureSkating Subreddit.  Moderators refuse to answer questions posed by users requesting answers regarding this behaviour.

Threads Posted on Reddit in 9 weeks following suspension announcement with hundreds of comments:

• Desyatov Suspended by Safeport
• Solene Mazingue revelaed her sexual offender to be Ivan Desyatov and discussed the lack of support from Marie-France Dubreuil.
• The ISU Council suspended Deyatov and Sorensen from all ISU activities.
• Desyatov will face trial over alleged unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor (source: Dmitry Kuznetsov from sport-express-ru.) * article later retracted due to misinformation, however the thread on Reddit stayed up.
• Ivan Desyatov has been issued a “No Contact Directive from SafeSport
• Support for Solene
• French ice dancer Solene Mazingue recounts the night she was sexually assaultd by fellow skater.
• Can Vanuya skate recreationally ?

Potential GateKeeping and Attempt to Control Narrative Behaviour by Moderators

Denigrating Comments Left on Threads.  Users calling out bullying muted or regularly having comments deleted. Users bullied and name-called off threads.

Foreign Print Media – Articles in Estonia, Russia and France

   Ukrainian Publication Obozrevatel.com

  Russian Publication Russian Sports Express

                                        Deleted shortly after publication 

Disinformation Perpetuated

Misinformation Spread in the form of abuse involving minors which was false.

November 5, 24

Mediapart Article- Behind paywall

https://www.mediapart.fr/                           

No official English translation available on publication site. Information translated to public in unofficial capacity. Screenshots posted to complainant’s Instagram and X account, The Skating Lesson X account, Delphine Bellanger, the lawyer Nabil Boudi Instagram stories and the influencer agent X sites.

• Deceptive Translation to
  English – Missing English screenshots by complainant

• New information shared with public

• Complainant is quoted sharing specific Details shared regarding the allegation.

• Influencer agent is quoted.

• Publicly names Respondent

• States went to French police in April 2023.

OFFICIAL ARTICLE FROM PAID SITE

Le journal MEDIAPART est édité par la Société Editrice de Mediapart - 127 avenue Ledru-Rollin, 75011 Paris. RCS Paris 500 631 932. Numéro de CPPAP : 1224Y90071 - Directeur de la publication : Carine Fouteau

Respondent is officially named in article.  Unofficial

Copy and Pasted Directly from Site.

Available for purchase: https://www.mediapart.fr/

Après avoir pris son médicament, Solène se souvient que Holly et Ivan quittent la chambre avant qu’elle ne s’endorme.

La suite figure dans une plainte pour viol déposée au commissariat de Saint-Germain-en-Laye. « Vers 3 heures du matin, je me suis réveillée parce que je sentais qu’il y avait quelque chose à l’intérieur de moi. Le temps de reprendre mes esprits et j’ai remarqué qu’il y avait au moins deux doigts à l’intérieur de mon vagin. »

Elle aurait alors immédiatement reconnu Ivan, nu à ses côtés, grâce à l’un de ses tatouages. Selon des échanges consultés par Mediapart, Solène s’enferme dans la salle de bain. À 3 h 31, Ivan lui demande si elle va bien. Solène ne répond pas. Quand elle ressort de la pièce une heure plus tard, le danseur sur glace a quitté la chambre.

Le lendemain, Ivan Desyatov – qui n’a pas répondu aux questions de Mediapart – et Solène échangent sur les réseaux sociaux. « Pourquoi étais-tu dans mon lit ? », interroge Solène. « Ta porte était fermée, mais pas à clé. Et j’avais la flemme de repartir dans ma chambre », répond Ivan, qui tente d’abord de minimiser les faits. Solène insiste. « Je me souviens que tes mains sont descendues. Dis-moi juste la vérité. » Ivan finit par avouer : « Je l’ai fait. Et après tu t’es réveillée [...]. Je suis désolé. » Il propose ensuite, à 19 heures, de retrouver Solène pour échanger. Ce qu’elle refuse.

Un témoignage oublié

Après cette nuit, Solène se confie à Emili Arm, ancienne athlète estonienne aujourd’hui juge, qui dit avoir « fait remonter les informations à la fédération ». Si elle est toujours licenciée à la fédération française, Solène concourt depuis plusieurs années sous la bannière estonienne, la nationalité de son partenaire sportif Marko Jevgeni Gaidajenko. Dans le cas de la danse en duo, les deux athlètes doivent représenter la même nation.

À la suite de ces confidences, Solène s’étonne cependant « de n’avoir aucune nouvelle ». La fédération estonienne de sport de glace explique aujourd’hui que n’ayant pas été contactée directement par Solène concernant l’agression, mais « par une tierce personne », elle « n’a pas une vision complète de l’affaire et n’a pas contacté d’autres organismes sportifs sans son autorisation ». *****on verification stated Estonian judge was not contacted by Solene, but by a third party. English screen shot of this detail in the article was not posted to social media.

En plus d’Emili Arm, Solène s’est confiée à sa mère Delphine, mais aussi à son entraîneur ainsi qu’à Marie-France Dubreuil, une des entraîneuses principales de la Ice Academy of Montreal.

Par message, la mère de Solène rappelle la gravité de la situation à Marie-France Dubreuil. « On va dénoncer à Skate Safe et aux dirigeants de l’équipe USA », réplique l’entraîneuse. Sur sa page internet, Skate Safe, programme fédéral américain chargé notamment de recueillir les témoignages et alertes concernant des violences sexistes et sexuelles, rappelle que « tous les participants adultes (entraîneurs/instructeurs, athlètes, officiels, bénévoles, dirigeants de clubs et de programmes, etc.) sont tenus de signaler tout soupçon de maltraitance d’enfant et/ou d’inconduite sexuelle à l’U.S. Center for SafeSport et aux forces de l’ordre locales ».

Marie-France Dubreuil a-t-elle effectué ce signalement ? Questionnée à ce propos, elle n’a pas répondu à nos questions. « Notre charte de valeurs ainsi que notre engagement envers la procédure régulière, le fair-play et la création d’un environnement sûr pour l’ensemble de nos patineurs et notre personnel guident nos actions. Nous demandons à tous nos patineurs et notre personnel de respecter le code de conduite auquel ils s’engagent en rejoignant l’école », explique pour sa part Jamal Othman, directeur général de la Ice Academy of Montreal.

Selon nos informations, le seul signalement adressé à l’U.S. Center for SafeSport concernant Solène Mazingue est daté du 26 septembre et a été envoyé par Solène Mazingue elle-même. « C’est hyper décevant, déplore aujourd’hui Delphine, la maman de Solène. L’académie savait qu’elle avait déjà eu un très grave accident, qu’elle prenait des médicaments, ils auraient dû être particulièrement vigilants. »

Une prise de parole forcée

En l’absence de soutien, Solène dépose plainte en avril 2024 au commissariat de Saint-Germain-en-Laye pour viol commis sur une personne vulnérable : « Ivan ne pouvait pas ignorer les séquelles dont je souffre et il savait que je prenais des médicaments pour dormir. » Contacté, le parquet de Versailles (Yvelines) indique que le dossier est toujours en cours.

Le 16 septembre 2024, elle évoque pour la première fois publiquement cette affaire via une vidéo publiée sur son compte Instagram, où elle est suivie par 90 000 personnes. Si les messages de soutien affluent en commentaires, aucune réaction officielle n’a été depuis publiée ni par la fédération française – dont certains membres ont contacté Solène en privé –, ni par la fédération estonienne, ni par la fédération internationale. Dix jours plus tard, Solène adresse un signalement auprès de SafeSport.

« Je fais des cauchemars et lorsque je sors dans la rue, j’ai toujours une sorte de sensation que quelqu’un me suit. »

Solène Mazingue

« Il a fallu que Solène se mette en danger de s’exposer publiquement pour que les instances réagissent, alors qu’Ivan continuait à concourir à l’international », analyse Félix Lapoussière, cofondateur d’une agence d’influence qui gère l’image de Solène.

Ivan Desyatov, qui poursuivait depuis cette soirée du 9 décembre sa carrière, a lui été temporairement suspendu le 18 octobre par SafeSport pour comportement inapproprié. Contactés, ni la fédération américaine ni SafeSport n’ont souhaité commenter.

Depuis plusieurs mois, Solène a mis sa carrière entre parenthèses. « Ça a été très difficile pour elle de ne recevoir aucun soutien. Dans le sport de haut niveau, la logique veut que tu laisses tes problèmes à la maison et que tu sois à 100 % physiquement et mentalement », analyse son petit-ami Mathieu.

English Screenshots – Comparison between French and English.

Unofficial English Translation of Article        

No English version of the article exists.

In French article, the influencer is named by his actual name, Felix  Lapoussiere. In the English, he is named as Felix Ladusque.

Disclosure to police. States filed a complaint. In English translation – states dropped a report at the police station.

In French article this word used is “Dossier”.

Dossier means file in French in this context, not case.

The French article does not say case, it uses the “dossier” meaning file.  In French article, says file is with the prosecutor’s office. This does not mean that the prosecutor has started an investigation, likely due to jurisdictional limitations.

Wrong Date: She publicly mentioned the affair on September 19, not September 16, 

Translated - The situation continued with complaint dropped off at the police station.  

 Missing Paragraph – Found only on by private user on twitter.

Solene stated she went authorities in December 2023.

Public Learns Date of SafeSport Report per Complainant as September 26,24

****First Video of allegation – September 19,24 – claiming negligence 

Posted on Anything Goes X page – September 19,24

Re-tweeted on X – September 19

Report on Safe Sport Filed Septembe 26, 24 after first video shared on September 19,24 Sep 26 – posted first video stating Thanks, but the fight continues.  States in video, “the situation remain stagnant. “

 Respondent Already suspended SafeSport, could not defend discuss the case under SafeSport Code of Ethics.

  French user asks why the article switches to the verb tense “Au Conditionnel” when describing the confession screenshots. 

English verb tense in article written in past tense.

    Confession is referred to in the hypothetical. ? Was journalist not given screenshots ?

French Lawyer – Blogger for MediaPart

Posts article on his Instagram Stories

Nabil Boudi

.  
Alleged lawyer posted article in Instagram Stories account.

Nabil Boudi lawyer – is a blog writer with Medipart.

The publication that published the artifcle.

No-Contact Directive issued on November 4 -  Day before publication release 

No-Contact Directive update on database re-tweeted on Delphine Bellanger X page

Widely disseminated by complainant’s team, posted on lawyer’s page. Disseminated throughout all platforms and the Skating Lesson.

Mediapart mentions respondent refused comment. Could not issue comment after Safe Sport suspension under their guidelines.

No-contact Directive – further direction from Safe Sport regarding unable to comment or defend against allegation.

Complainant’s Team

Begins aggressively publicizing article

Delphine Bellanger – posts 127 times on X on November 5th, day of publication

Article Initiates Another
Round of Speculation, Bullying and Denigration

Provides validation for individuals for individuals on the fenced regarding presumption of guilt. Individuals consider it an official source of verified information.

The beginning of questioning

https://vimeo.com/1038569369/8291ac5d34https://vimeo.com/1038569369/8291ac5d34

Complainant Addressing Public Speculation

Timeline alterations

Original Timeline: Sep 19,24

Did not tell anyone for weeks. Spoke with friends and then disclosed to coaches in late December 2023. No action until then. Conflicts with later statements

Timeline Change based on Article: Nov 5/24

• Told Estonian Judge right away. Estonian judge stated Estonian federation does not accept third-party reports. Complainant did not follow-up==.

• Reported to SafeSport on Sep 26, 24 – after original video on September 19,24.

• Reported to French police in April 2024.

Timeline Change based on updated timeline on Instagram Post: Nov 13/24

https://www.instagram.com/p/DCUaScUuzXR/?igsh=dm50ZWE3b3Z5OWww

Timeline Change based on updated timeline on Instagram Post: Dec 6/24 

Complainant Addressing the Role of the Influencer Agent

After users expressing concern about influencer agent role in publicizing sexual assault for monetization purposes

NOVEMBER 28, 24

ISU Statement Release regarding Internationally based Temporary Suspension

https://www.isu.org/news/isu-statement-isu-code-of-ethics-2024-update-and-consequent-interim-suspensions/

• Amendment regarding Reciprocity

• Updated Language and Safeguards regarding cyberbullying.

• Respondent’s name mentioned in same paragraph as a skater whose investigation has been completed related to inappropriate sexual conduct with a minor and who had consequences of a 6-year suspension,

• Public begins to conflate the two skaters mentioned regarding the suspensions. Pendentent is associated with the individual who was found guilty and suspended long-term.

• Some commenters begin to suspect foul play.

`

Most Reactions to ISU Statement

Complainant Re-Addressing the Allegation again December 6/24

        https://www.instagram.com/p/DDXciOjO2Ry/?igsh=d3Jiem93M3d1cTFt

• Discusses Timelime Again.
• Does not address not speaking with any proper authority in December
• No mention of Police Investigation in April 2024 as reported in Mediapart Article.

December 9, 24

Influencer Agent and Complainant’s Mother begin to engage with commenters with questions.

t

DISREGARD FOR TRAUMA-INFORMED TRAINING REQUIRED FOR ACCEPTING DISCLOSURES

Potential harm caused by not having safe framework in encouraging victims to come forward with history of abuse.

https://institute.crisisprevention.com/LP7-CPI-Branded.html/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=gen-tofu-branded-a-search&gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAAD_ZQa1R11AyTzfYvMBUI0LViRt2Q

ISU SafeGuarding Policy

Incidents that Transpired seem to be in violation with ISU Safeguarding policy.

https://www.isu.org/news/safeguarding-in-practice/

https://www.isu.org/news/isu-statement-isu-code-of-ethics-2024-update-and-consequent-interim-suspensions/

Abuse of Process – Unable to address due internationalism and foreign interference

Abuse of Process – Revision added to US Centre for SafeSport in July 2024.  

https://uscenterforsafesport.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/2024-Code-Noteworthy-Revisions.-FINAL_Accessible-06.17.24.pdf

Delays and Stonewalling to the respondent has previously ended in tragedy and violation of due process constitutional laws

http://www.globetrottingbyphiliphersh.com/home/2019/1/22/the-john-coughlin-story-tragic-for-all-involved-should-lead-to-more-than-finger-pointing

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/2019/01/19/former-us-skating-champion-john-coughlin-found-dead-after-suspension/2623792002/

Complications and Exacerbations due to Difference between French and USA Laws and Journalistic Standards

• French blocking Statute – prevention of sharing evidence and information with foreign authorities, especially the United States.

• Lax Disclosure Laws in France

• Freedom of the Press much more robust – less penalties or less pursuit of defamation suits due to low penalties.

• France is a standout for lack of defamation and disclosure laws.

Recent Articles Regarding Case Involving False Allegation of Duke Lacrosse students in 2006

https://youtu.be/mqt9OX-oAtU

https://youtu.be/2emaL4DHgOE

Support From a Former Skater and Coach in article by Sports Express Russia

Questions and Queries based on public presentation of events?

• When was the allegation disclosed ?

• It has been said in timelines by the complainant.

• That didn’t tell anyone for several weeks
• Went to the hospital immediately after.
• Told an Estonian Judge

• Why didn’t complainant follow-up with federation if told by Estonian judge who she allegedly disclosed the event, told her that the federation doesn’t accept third party reports?

• Why file a report in France, if event happened in Croatia ?

• Why leave out screenshot of English translation related to Estonian federation requiring third party report ?

• Why stating no action taken, if complainant didn’t take any action with out legal jurisdictional authority?

• Why was this picture deleted from the complainant’s Instagram stories.’ `

• What was the justification of immediate suspension for the allegation, considering no minors involved and one incident ? This is unprecedented.

• It has been disclosed that a number of skaters went out for supper then were hanging out in hotel rooms all evening.

• Was their drugs or alcohol consumed ?
• Who was partaking?

• It has been said that the complainant took a sleeping pill ?

• How would the respondent be aware of the medication and it’s effects ?

        Did the respondent witness her taking it

• It has been stated that texts were exchanged ?

• What consideration is there for the fact that both complainant and respondent have English skills as a second language.  One with French Language and one with Russian Language.

• Respondent started to learn English for 18 months.  Still very early skill level English speaker as demonstrated by March 2024 exclusive Instagram post.
• 

• Why did the complainant file a complaint with French authorities and not Croatian authorities who have the ability jurisdictionally to investigate?
  
• Why did the complainant not file an online report with SafeSport before stating negligence and made a video online before reporting officially to SafeSport on Sep 26.

• Why was the last name of the influencer agent changed from Felix Lapoussiere to Felix Ladusque in the English translation but not the original French official publication,

• Did the complainant lawyer write the article and sent to SafeSport, and response with immediate temporary suspension ?

• Did SafeSport confirm a criminal investigation in France and not just a filing of complaint that hasn’t been escalated due to filing out of jurisdictional power?

A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.

                                                                Thomas Paine