Rumor Disney bus driver busted for grooming kids on chat while at work

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
Innocent until proven guilty. Either way, in a right to work state, the mere accusation is enough to get them termed and blacklisted.

Although given Disney's current staffing shortages, possible reassignment to an area where there's 0 guest contact until the trial is over.
Isn’t the common suspended pending investigation a common theme with companies whose staff members are arrested on charges ?
 

larryz

You are ignoring content by this member.
Premium Member
Innocent until proven guilty. Either way, in a right to work state, the mere accusation is enough to get them termed and blacklisted.

Although given Disney's current staffing shortages, possible reassignment to an area where there's 0 guest contact until the trial is over.
a. I would hope Disney would accommodate the employee until legal action is complete.
b. that said, I can't imagine the PCSO would have named names without fairly solid evidence to back up the accusations.
 

Brian

Well-Known Member
possible reassignment to an area where there's 0 guest contact until the trial is over.
Keeping accused pedophiles on the payroll is not a good look when the company is trying to disprove rumors that they are a company full of groomers, no matter how unfounded those rumors may be.

Law enforcement can't bring someone in based on a hunch. There has to be probable cause. That evidence alone should be sufficient for termination of employment. They can certainly have their job back if somehow it comes out during the trial that even the probable cause evidence was inaccurate (for example, they accused the wrong person entirely), but that is highly unlikely.

ETA: Even if someone is found not guilty, it doesn't mean they are entirely innocent either, and the standard for someone losing their job is much lower (and subjective), especially in an at-will state such as Florida, than a criminal conviction.
 

mkt

Disney's Favorite Scumbag
Premium Member
b. that said, I can't imagine the PCSO would have named names without fairly solid evidence to back up the accusations.
As someone who had to deal with the fallout of sharing the same first and last name with another human being that was accused of dumping their baby in a garbage dumpster while they were searching for cocaine to buy, my thoughts are that the police could care less.
 

Brian

Well-Known Member
As someone who had to deal with the fallout of sharing the same first and last name with another human being that was accused of dumping their baby in a garbage dumpster while they were searching for cocaine to buy, my thoughts are that the police could care less.
I understand how difficult that must have been for you to deal with.



Should the state not have pressed charges, because it would likely create fallout for those with the same name?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mkt

Disney's Favorite Scumbag
Premium Member
I understand how difficult that must have been for you to deal with.


Should the state not have pressed charges, because it would likely create fallout for those with the same name?

No, the state should have been, and should still be more cautious in how they parade the accused.

In my case, it nearly cost me the job that ultimately made my career, because this happened while I was going through a lengthy federal background check process. It delayed my start date by a month, while I had to provide additional evidence that I wasn't that person (literally a scan of my passport, but the federal process is nothing if not tedious)
 

Patcheslee

Well-Known Member
As someone who had to deal with the fallout of sharing the same first and last name with another human being that was accused of dumping their baby in a garbage dumpster while they were searching for cocaine to buy, my thoughts are that the police could care less.
Even being related to someone is enough it seems for some departments, had police setting outside my house for 3 days looking for a relative. Threatened with charges, take my kid, etc. Sad thing is I'm the one that turned him in in the first place, last thing I would want is him in my home.
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
Is it that unreasonable to think that those with pedophilic tendencies would want to work at a place like Disney where there are large numbers of children, and parents with their guards down?
Pedophiles have a very difficult time acting on their weakness while driving a bus filled with people and how often are children on a bus by themselves?
 

larryz

You are ignoring content by this member.
Premium Member
Even being related to someone is enough it seems for some departments, had police setting outside my house for 3 days looking for a relative. Threatened with charges, take my kid, etc. Sad thing is I'm the one that turned him in in the first place, last thing I would want is him in my home.
It's a thin line between surveillance and harassment...
 

Patcheslee

Well-Known Member
Pedophiles have a very difficult time acting on their weakness while driving a bus filled with people and how often are children on a bus by themselves?
Given parks allow children to enter parks at 14 without parents, and many parents already have children much younger riding school buses, I wouldn’t think it's rare.
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
Given parks allow children to enter parks at 14 without parents, and many parents already have children much younger riding school buses, I wouldn’t think it's rare.
No, it happens but it is a sad world we live in if it was common. Buses are public, it would be even more rare for a child to be the only one on a bus in a place like WDW. At 14 years old their parent should have taught them what to do in the case of someone attempting anything. Even if a person were inclined to a certain fantasy, acting upon it while others can witness would even be more rare. The foolish idea that someone is "grooming" anyone while driving a publicly used bus has an imagination more corrupt than the people we are talking about.

How do you do that while driving short distances within a short time that anyone is riding a bus in a resort? The law enforcement guy that made with the award winning theatric in that video tried to imply that the guy was pulling the bus over and either "grooming" or Texting while on the clock. Take it from someone that has driven buses. The only time you would have for that is on a lunch break, not while actually driving people around. This guy was a sick individual. People like him are not the majority. There is a bigger problem for that from the "guests" that are sometime packed in like a can of large sardines. Besides all buses these days are tracked constantly on GPS. If they were stopped in a place they shouldn't be, it would be known in real time.

I once complained to Disney when they had, maybe they still do, a policy of shutting of the interior lights in the buses at night between stops. Talk about opportunity for some sicko to have a good time. That we don't think about but a guy that is driving a 10 ton vehicle though traffic while being expected, by the passengers, to entertain them, isn't going to have time to do anything else.

This guy was sick and I'm sure we all come in contact with people everyday that are not well, that doesn't mean they are an immediate danger nor that anyone would ever know what was possible no matter how many background checks were done. We don't expect that from a CM, but that is part of our fantasy that Pixie Dust will prevent it. I lived for years in a city that only had half the population as the employee count at WDW. And that isn't even taking into account the 10's of thousands of guests on any given day. There are only two things we can do. One is to stay in our homes and hide in a locked shelter or inform and train our children of any age about what to do to prevent that from happening and mostly pay attention to what is going on around you. That would prevent many of the problems.
 

cranbiz

Well-Known Member
Lights are turned off for safety reasons at night.

Honestly, there is little time for monkey business in a normal bus trip and usually you have people on the bus. Is it possible, yes, anything is possible. Are there safeguards, yes there are. With the MIMs system, the ops center has a GPS location on every bus and knows when one stops, especially in an unusual location. There are procedures put in operation if a bus is in the wrong place or stopped for more than a minute or so in an unusual location.

This driver certainly appears to have a problem, however to draw the conclusion that he could enact on his issue while actively driving is fallacy.
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
Lights are turned off for safety reasons at night.

Honestly, there is little time for monkey business in a normal bus trip and usually you have people on the bus. Is it possible, yes, anything is possible. Are there safeguards, yes there are. With the MIMs system, the ops center has a GPS location on every bus and knows when one stops, especially in an unusual location. There are procedures put in operation if a bus is in the wrong place or stopped for more than a minute or so in an unusual location.

This driver certainly appears to have a problem, however to draw the conclusion that he could enact on his issue while actively driving is fallacy.
One persons safety is another person nightmare. I drove municipal buses for many years and we never shut off the inside lights. There was way to many things that could happen in the dark, especially if people are standing. in the aisles. The only problem for the driver is the back glare on the lower part of the windshield, but it takes no time at all for eyes to adjust and it becomes invisible with no problems at all. That is just a debatable excuse.
 

cranbiz

Well-Known Member
One persons safety is another person nightmare. I drove municipal buses for many years and we never shut off the inside lights. There was way to many things that could happen in the dark, especially if people are standing. in the aisles. The only problem for the driver is the back glare on the lower part of the windshield, but it takes no time at all for eyes to adjust and it becomes invisible with no problems at all. That is just a debatable excuse.
I don't disagree with the one person's safety is another person's nightmare. I do disagree with running interior lights at night on a bus. The few times I ran with them (EPCOT cast shuttle was one) it was an issue and adjusting to the glare didn't happen. Might be different on a different type of bus though, I will give you that.

There is also a difference from WDW clientele than Municipal clientele.

Policy for Disney Transport was no lights, It is certainly your right to complain but the bus policy was created a long time ago and works. If night time guest safety is felt to be compromised by the policy makers, it would be changed. Not the first time it would have happened.
 

Smiley/OCD

Well-Known Member
Keeping accused pedophiles on the payroll is not a good look when the company is trying to disprove rumors that they are a company full of groomers, no matter how unfounded those rumors may be.

Law enforcement can't bring someone in based on a hunch. There has to be probable cause. That evidence alone should be sufficient for termination of employment. They can certainly have their job back if somehow it comes out during the trial that even the probable cause evidence was inaccurate (for example, they accused the wrong person entirely), but that is highly unlikely.

ETA: Even if someone is found not guilty, it doesn't mean they are entirely innocent either, and the standard for someone losing their job is much lower (and subjective), especially in an at-will state such as Florida, than a criminal conviction.
That is why, in many cases, the employee is suspended w/o pay until further investigation determines further actions…as a employer, it’s a CYA action.
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
I don't disagree with the one person's safety is another person's nightmare. I do disagree with running interior lights at night on a bus. The few times I ran with them (EPCOT cast shuttle was one) it was an issue and adjusting to the glare didn't happen. Might be different on a different type of bus though, I will give you that.

There is also a difference from WDW clientele than Municipal clientele.

Policy for Disney Transport was no lights, It is certainly your right to complain but the bus policy was created a long time ago and works. If night time guest safety is felt to be compromised by the policy makers, it would be changed. Not the first time it would have happened.
Sorry but I saw hundreds of drivers including myself adjust to it and it was never a safety factor. The only exception we ever made was if there was a blizzard outside and we then asked the passengers if they minded if we shut them off to help with visibility, but we were almost never running at capacity or above at night. So the risk for problems for passengers was a lot smaller then at a place called Disney. Also WDW was never known to have many major snow storms. Disney never got into the busing business until at least 1971, the company I worked for was founded in 1920.
 

TrojanUSC

Well-Known Member
There's no evidence this guy was actually doing anything to Disney guests. He is accused of engaging with a law enforcement officer posing as a child online. There are a lot of moral, ethical and legal issues with these To Catch a Predator type stings. Obviously, if guilty, he should be punished and no longer work at Disney, but I think people trying to extrapolate this into a larger issue are grasping at straws.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Top Bottom