«
»

How Could You

By David

It would be remiss for Swimwatch not to mention the biggest story to affect our team in a very long time. This is how yahoo.com reported the story.

A teenage swimmer has won a legal battle after his parents tried to stop him representing New Zealand because they disapproved of his American Olympic gold medallist girlfriend. Justin Wright, 17, met Rhi Jeffrey, 24, at the West Auckland Aquatic Club, and the pair struck up a romantic relationship, The Herald on Sunday reported today. Jeffrey, who won gold at Athens in 2004, moved to Auckland to try to qualify for next year’s Olympics in London, under her Kiwi coach David Wright.

But Justin’s parents, Paul and Sandy, were not happy about the pair’s relationship, reportedly because of the age difference, and sent emails to club members, demanding the club coach intervene. They even withdrew their consent for Justin to compete at Swimming New Zealand (SNZ) events, and scuppered his chances of qualifying for the Swimming World Cup in November.

But this week Justin won the backing of a court to be a member of SNZ against his parents’ wishes, in what is believed to be a legal first. In Auckland District Court on Thursday Judge Graham Hubble granted permission for Justin to enter into the contract with SNZ. The application was not opposed.

As Justin’s coach, there were two aspects of this case that affected me. First – when Justin’s mother asked me to intervene in the relationship, what were my coaching responsibilities. Second – when Justin’s parents refused to approve his Swimming New Zealand membership and Swimming New Zealand decided to deny him membership, what were my coaching responsibilities.

In the first case I got an email from Justin’s mother asking me to get involved. She argued that I was Rhi’s coach. I had imported Rhi and was her “guardian”. I had a responsibility to provide guidance to a person who was stealing her son from the “cradle”. Rhi, she said, “should come with a Govt. warning”. I decided to seek some advice and made a visit to the Henderson police and called an ex-West Auckland Aquatics Club member, national swimming representative and now prominent Auckland criminal lawyer, Johnny Munro. In both cases I asked, “Is there anything illegal in Rhi and Justin’s relationship?” Was there any aspect of their relationship that should concern me as their coach? In both cases I was told that, no, there was nothing illegal going on and they both viewed this type of thing as a family matter.

I wrote back to Sandy, that’s Justin’s mother, and said that while I understood her feelings, my role as their swim coach did not include getting involved in personal relationships. That would be most improper of any coach. Promoting or terminating personal relationships was the responsibility of family members, guidance councillors and religious providers of pastoral care. It was not in the realm of someone whose role in life was to decide what was meant by a good aerobic build-up.

Sandy, not content with my reply, wrote to the West Auckland Aquatics Club and Auckland Swimming; hoping for a more sympathetic and emotional hearing. Both organizations investigated her allegations. Auckland Swimming even took advice from a child protection professional and found no grounds for disciplinary action. Sandy was sent replies that confirmed the view that this was a personal and family matter.

Sandy should have let the matter drop there, but she was on a mission and wrote to Swimming New Zealand, where she got a sympathetic hearing. The combination of David Wright and Swimwatch and Auckland Swimming and its opposition to Project Vanguard was too much for the Coulter gang to resist. Swimming New Zealand decided that the law preventing youths under eighteen entering into a contract without parental consent was sufficient grounds to decline Justin’s membership and banned him from the organization. Here are the first two paragraphs of their rather officious letter to Claudia Hill, the President of the West Auckland Aquatic Swim Team.

Further to our recent telephone conversation, I am writing to confirm that Justin Wright is no longer a member of Swimming New Zealand, Swimming Auckland or the West Auckland Aquatics swimming club.

As discussed Justin must by law be 18 to sign a contract that includes signing the Swimming New Zealand application form. As his legal guardians, Justin’s parents signed his membership application form on 26 February 2010 and he joined West Wave Aquatics. His parents have subsequently asked West Wave Aquatics to withdraw his membership and the club is obliged to do so.

As is normal with correspondence from Swimming New Zealand this one is full of errors. The most serious in this case is getting the name of our club wrong. They twice refer to us as West Wave Aquatics when in fact we are West Auckland Aquatics. You would think SNZ would know the name of the club that gave swimming athletes such as Herring, Boyle, Munro, Anderson, Steel, Sanders, Hall and Newcombe.

But more interesting is SNZ’s sudden conversion to the word of the law. This is the organization that without any care for due process or honesty, changed the minutes of an Annual Meeting, suspended Tracy Freil without a hearing and threatened to suspend Toni Jeffs for accepting sponsorship from a nightclub. But because it’s David Wright and Swimwatch, because Justin swims for Auckland, the law suddenly becomes all important. Justin can pay the price while Swimming New Zealand plays politics with one of their more talented members. They really are a bunch of creeps.

Well the law can work both sides of the fence. We were fortunate to find a good lawyer, Jeremy Sutton, who took Justin’s case to the Auckland District Court. Justice Hubble took less time than it takes Justin to swim 100 meters butterfly to find in Justin’s favour. Auckland’s best 17 year old butterfly swimmer was back in the Winter Championships. Was Justin right to take his case to the court? Of course he was – he won didn’t he?

Justin’s case is an example of two things; a mother who should have taken the time to consider the long term consequences of her crusade and a national sporting organization who should learn from the vastly superior management skills shown by its regional and club administrators. Not everybody agrees of course. One Auckland administrator was wandering around the pool last weekend muttering about, “history repeating itself”. Undoubtedly that was a reference to the high profile period swimming had during the Toni Jeffs era. I do hope there are no domestic skeletons in that administrator’s closet. Another woman accosted me with the name of this story – “how could you?” Well, dear lady, the reason I could is because the law of the land said it was the right thing to do and because I thought Justin winning a silver and two bronze medals at the Auckland Winter Championships was a good way to spend his weekend. But I guess none of that matters much to the likes of you.

It’s off the serious point of this post, but I have to tell you that some of the talkback and internet comments have been hilarious. One well meaning listener asked for divine help, “Lust blinds the truth. Godly love is true love. How many people know that love?” Of course Justin’s 100 butterfly was seen by others as the end of the world, “The Judge who allowed this just took another block from what little foundation we have left of any morality and decency in our nation.” I even read that, “Shagging an older woman obviously improves your swimming – go for it boy!!” I think that might be taking these events too far. And finally Justin’s request for permission to swim was seen by one prophet as, “Just a pity the judicial system in this country is so corrupt.” There is nothing it seems as strange as folk.

This entry was posted on Monday, July 4th, 2011 at 10:43 pm and is filed under New Zealand . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

  • Bahaha, “how could you.”

    These idiots think that you’re the judge and / or the author of New Zealand law.

    It was wonderful to see both Rhi and Justin’s times from the Winter Championships over the weekend. It takes character to swim as well as they did after what they went through, and amongst tutting disapproval. They are undoubtedly made of sterner stuff than the majority of the folks who believe they should not have been able to compete.

  • Sensible Swimming

    I left the pool at West Wave one evening last week after a session of the Auckland Winter Championships and watched some of the feral local layabouts smoking dope and generally intimidating all and sundry who walked by. Inside the pool some of the finest young people in New Zealand were demonstrating the results of their hard work and discipline – with all they could be doing in and around Auckland on a Thursday or Friday evening these young athletes were showing the results of disciplined lives.

    What you are describing above is very obviously a sad family tragedy. That it is now being played out publicly is obviously from your explanation because our governing body seems to think that somehow it is better to send kids out onto the trash heap of life rather than have them participate in our sport which would be great if it weren’t for their own gross failures and negligence. With everything going on (or not!) in swimming you would think that the people you call the ‘Coulter Gang’ would have better things to do than trying to stop a talented youngster from swimming.

    I agree with you David – you are undoubtedly a better swim coach than you are a social worker and it is your first responsibility to do your job as a swim coach and leave the pastoral care to families. Judging by what I saw outside the pool at West Wave on the weekend there is plenty for the social workers of West Auckland still to do – they will not be put out of their jobs anytime soon, but there are some who should be.

    As our dear friends in Swimming New Zealand are so keen on getting rid of people, perhaps they could start by getting rid of the people that Mr Ineson has told them so vividly have b******d up the sport – in case they missed it or cannot read that report Mr Ineson clearly stated that the sport has been failed systemically and that the General Manager of Performance of Pathways, the CEO and the Chairman of the Board are responsible for those failures. They have done more to bring the sport into disrepute than your young lad Justin could ever do in a full lifetime of youthful indulgence.

    If there were any honour at all every one of these gutless and spineless individuals so clearly identified by Ineson (and several others who by association also must accept responsibility) would have fallen on their own swords – instead they take aim at a 17 year old who by the sounds of it just wants to stay off the streets and swim.

    Hopefully one day Justin and his parents will be reconciled and this family will be able to take pride in the good things their son is accomplishing – with equal hope perhaps one day soon swimming will be reconciled and the people who have failed the sport so badly will be gone. Only when they and their nefarious lies, spin and incompetence are consigned to the past will we be able to look to a better and brighter future. That could happen tomorrow if your Coulter Gang genuinely wanted to help the sport – but it wont because they lack any semblance of integrity – instead it looks like they will have to be flushed from the sewers like the festering amoeba they have become.

    The gravest travesty which will occur soon will be if these failures are still clinging to power when our athletes leave for Shanghai in the next week or two – that would send the loudest message possible to our athletes that our sports governing body is giving them the royal two fingered salute and that SNZ is prepared to consign their hopes and aspirations to a destiny of institutional failure – in this those who govern and manage our sport nationally are failing in their constitutional duty – they must be removed before they do more damage to our sport.

  • Paul

    It sounds to me like Justin’s parents have been playing all the wrong cards and Justin has left the table. Its unfortunate when a child grows up sooner than a parent had hoped. However, this is the time that is the most critical. As during this time a child learns whether or not his parents are trustworthy and have his best interests at heart. It saddens me to say that it seems as though Justin’s parents would have wanted him all for themselves for much much longer than 17 years and “whatever” outsider came in threatening that, would be eliminated.
    I had the privilege of seeing both Justin and Rhi swim over the weekend at the Auckland Winter Championships. Apart from the media unfortunately getting hold of this story, they both looked amazing in the pool and on pool deck. They both were all smiles and very encouraging of each other before their races. I even saw alot of West Auckland Aquatics Supporters who had come to cheer them both on for Sundays finals.

    I’m sure we haven’t heard the end of this love story.
    All the best Rhi and Justin, your futures are looking very bright from where I’m standing.

    Paul

  • Chris

    Ah ha – I thought so, hence my earlier comment (pasted here in case you didn’t read it):

    ” … clearly there is a another story not being reported here David? Would I be right in suggesting that Mike Byrne is telling more porkies? Call me suspicious, but it seems anytime Mike Byrne opens his mouth, lies, half-truths and spin have a habit of tumbling out.”

    OMG – so Byrne & SNZ decided to try and get one over you then? What a pathetic bunch. I take it that had SNZ decided not to indulge the parents and become complicite in their campaign, and in effect using this for their own purposes, this would never have gone to court, and I and the rest of NZ would be none the wiser?

    I remember years ago when we had a situation where a young swimmer (who was at a local boarding school at the time) wanted to join the club, and the question was raised then as to whether they could do it on their own behalf or whether we would need to get a letter from the parents. It took no more than a few minutes to go through SNZ’s constitution and determine that, in fact, there was no age constraint in the constitution as it related to membership and although the membership form has a clause requiring parental consent if under 18, it is in fact unconstitutional.

    You see David, with a bit of a legal hat on, anyone under 18 can sign a contract (including employment contracts, insurance policies, tenancy agreements, wills etc) but it may not be enforceable (unless you are married, or it can be proved that it was fair and reasonable). However, there is a difference between a contract being enforceable and a contract having legal efficacy or validity. So while a contract maybe unenforceable, it is still valid. So it could be argued that your young swimmer, having signed his own club membership and registration (made contractual with the payment of his fee) has entered into a valid contract. Clearly the regional association had no problem with it, and so you are left with SNZ’s constitution which is silent on the subject of age, therefore making its membership form unconstitutional.

    And this is the part where wisdom, common sense and decency should have kicked in on the part of SNZ. They should have said that given the personal circumstances of the young man, being kicked out of home, now living apart from his parents, and having a new membership with his club on his own behalf, we will waiver the parental consent clause. And sorry, Mum and Dad, while we sympathise, we will not become involved in a personal dispute.

    But of course, we are talking about our dysfunctional national sporting body here after all!! By foolishly involving themselves in what is nothing more than family drama, they are happy to play games with people’s lives in order to score political points. Their problem is that they are not good at playing the game, and by raising the stakes and losing they come off far worse. (BTW – did they ever try to ban Rhi from swimming as well?)

    This is of course typical bully-boy Byrne. He has no brain, no common sense, poor judgment, bad leadership skills (as confirmed by the review) and yet again, caught telling a whole load of porkies by trying to suggest that it was the constitution and that they had no choice, which is bollocks!

  • Thank you Chris. I didn’t realize that contract detail. SNZ need to get that sorted out. Oh, I forgot they can’t. They are all too busy saving their jobs and trying to take over what the Regions do so obviously very much better.

  • molly

    …what a sad bunch you all are. Taking the moral high ground can often be a dangerous place and blaming the gang of 3 for the troubles of world only tells me that the unethical issues of the Jeffs era are alive and well. Interesting that suddenly the coach is only interested in the what happens in the water, but happy to find lawyers to work his own outcomes without consideration of the impact on the whole development of this school boy and his family.

  • Molly, the relationship is legal under New Zealand law, and the justice system has approved Justin to swim. Justice Hubble interpreted the law; none of the people commenting here made the law. You may also want to read Chris’s comments about the constitutionality of SNZ’s clauses regarding the membership of people under the age of 18.

    This isn’t about morals or ethics. It’s about what’s legal.

    Regarding a legal versus ethical / moral question: if everyone here or the judge decided that legally, Justin should be allowed to compete, but that they disapproved morally and therefore Justin should be disallowed from competing, that sets a lot of bad precedents.

    Just because you don’t like the law or its interpretation, you can’t circumvent it for your own ideals. Imagine if every quandary was settled legally by a select few’s interpretation of morality, instead of by legality.

    Justin is within the law both in his relationship and his desire to swim in New Zealand competitions.

    There are laws I don’t like, and that I think aren’t morally justified, but I’m still now allowed to break them. In the UK, I think that I should be able to carry pepper spray if I go running early in the morning in London, but I can’t because it’s against the law. In this case, the law says that Justin’s okay, so he’s okay. If you feel badly enough about the law or the SNZ constitution / rules, you know where to start lobbying.

  • Rhi Jeffrey

    Thanks David. Sadly, what the media is reporting right now (while it is the truth) is a little misleading. Most people throughout the world who have read the story think he has divorced his parents. While that would be nice in this case, it was just SNZ he had the legal tiff with. Chris, I think Sandy tried to get me banned from SNZ but I don’t think they could find any grounds to do it on. The whole situation only came to this because a psycho mother couldn’t just let the chips fall where they may. Funny enough, the only thing people have been commenting on is how ugly I am. My 25.5, 55.5, and 2:00 weren’t too ugly this weekend.

    Also, it should be noted that one specific coach in general (who is on the Auckland Swimming Board mind you) was picking on Justin as he was going up to swim. These are the kinds of people you have working for our sport? Shame. Shame a million times.

  • Chris

    Molly, Molly, Molly – I think you are missing the point.

    I hadn’t made any comment about the rights, wrongs, appropriateness or otherwise of a young relationship. Why? Because this is a blog site about swimming and not talkback radio or the mainstream media that has focussed on the more sensational headlines. Predictably, every aspect of this story as it relates to the universal questions surrounding parental control, youthful rebellion, individual rights and responsibilities has been picked over and commented on, and no doubt will continue to be so. I suspect that you are assuming that this relationship was encouraged in some way by coach and/or club, hence your inferences. That I cannot answer, but I am sure David will.

    However, the real story for the swimming community unfortunately relates to our national body and the procession of bad decision-making. The fact that you and I are even commenting on this story is because SNZ exercised poor judgment (yet again) in getting involved in this drama in the first place. When Mike Byrne is trying to suggest in the paper that SNZ had no choice, he is lying. It seems to me that all along this process they had choice – it is because they chose to exercise that choice badly, forcing a court appearance (thus putting it into the public domain) that we even know about this story.

    Why it got on the front page is beyond me. However, just doing a quick check through – the lead reporter is a court reporter. The article is obviously quoting from court documents, and the secondary reporter is the same one that has been a thorn in SNZ’s side ever since the Comm Games last year. Add to the mix, Olympic gold medallist and sex, and it is an irresistable combination.

    At issue as far as I am concerned is the inane thought processes that result in such stupidity. Just looking at the extract of their letter to WAQ’s club president: “… Justin Wright is no longer a member of Swimming New Zealand, Swimming Auckland or the West Auckland Aquatics swimming club”. What the ….. ??? They have no right to determine who can and who can’t be a member of a club. As a competitive swimmer they can withdraw his right to compete in a SNZ affiliated meet, such as a regional meet where results are ratified by the national body, but a club’s sovereignty is effected from the bottom up. They can have whoever they want. A club determines membership (whether competitive or non-competitive) which is then approved (or not) by the regional and then the national body. And as far as the statement “… Justin must by law be 18 to sign a contract …”, that is just plain garbage (as I stated above). I don’t know who writes these letters, but they claim to take legal advice. All I can say is that they should get their money back if that is the case. Having said that, in just checking through to see who their lawyer is – surprise, surprise! It is some budget-shop, one man band, called “the Affordable Lawyer”. OMG. The moment they were served papers for a court hearing their lawyer should have advised them to back-off as it was always going to end badly for them.

    But Molly, I can guarantee something. Mike Byrne and SNZ don’t care about swimmers. They don’t care about Justin or Rhi, or WAQ, most certainly not David. And you know what? They clearly do not care about Justin’s parents because if they did they should never have involved themselves in this in the first place. They have allowed these good people (despite the fact that I disagree completely with their motives and methods) to be ridiculed in the press. No-one deserves that. And for what? For their own political purposes.

    And that is the real issue here, and it is quite appropriate to be commenting on it in this forum.

  • chhill

    Chris, you are spot on. SNZ was asked several times to exercise discretion in this case, especially as the guy is only 3 months off turning 18 FGS. There was no constitutional basis for their demand to deregister Justin or demand that he be removed from the club. There is nothing in the WAQ/ASA/SNZ or even Fina constitution that says you have to be 18 to register or get parental consent…The demand to kick him out of the club was downright insulting to both Justin and the club, and an attempt to walk all over the club’s own constitutional rights. This is clearly about SNZ attempting to flex some muscle while their reputation as a national sporting organisation is kaputt. I seriousy question their motivation and would also hope they have better things to do with their time than pick on a talented swimmer whom they should be supporting in his chosen sport especially when he is experiencing personal difficult circumstances. Maybe they thought it would be an amusing distraction from the real problems at HQ? Or just too irresistible to wade into something juicy and have a go at David/WAQ at the same time? I seriously hope these people heading up the organisation do the decent thing and move on so that the sport can get back to focussing on what’s important.
    Incidentally there was no divorce, just a very simple application to be allowed to sign a contract as a minor. Poorly constructed article with heaps of inaccuracies lifted mostly from the court papers and taken out of context – but nice photo….Not really worthy of a front page

  • This is an awesome story! I love the line, “Rhi, she said, “should come with a Govt. warning”” She is dangerous …. a dangerously fast swimmer. Zing!

  • Chris

    Hey guys

    You’ve made SwimNews!

  • Chris

    Oops, hang on!

    You’ve also made Swimming World. And they have a link to Swimwatch. Hooray! Its about time the rest of the swimming world get to see how poxy Swimming New Zealand is. Brilliant!