Brian Eley

[Roger Lancaster]

There is a 3rd loose end: what should the ECF do as an organisation about Eley? Many of us think that the ECF should produce a report on what happened so that all chess players and organisers can learn from it. This is what the BBC did in the case of Savile. While the ECF doesn't have the resources of the BBC it could do what it is feasible within its own resources. Justin wrote to the ECF (see above) and the current board doesn't want to do anything. There is the option of raising the matter through a motion to the ECF Council but that requires sufficient requisitionists to get the support of their organisations to do this. A report wouldn't have to name individuals (particularly the victims, but also ECF officials who dealt with the case), the point is to draw the necessary lessons.

What budget would you propose allocating to preparation of this report, Mike? It sounds to me like a sizable piece of work.

[Stewart Reuben]

Mike, if you are volunteering to do the work, that would be a great leap forward.

[John Upham]

Mike, if you are volunteering to do the work, that would be a great leap forward.

Stewart,

Are you representing the BCF/ECF with your kind offer?

[Roger Lancaster]

Mike, if you are volunteering to do the work, that would be a great leap forward.

Stewart,
Are you representing the BCF/ECF with your kind offer?

I think Stewart was actually wondering whether Mike was about to make a kind offer.

[John Upham]

Mike, if you are volunteering to do the work, that would be a great leap forward.

Stewart,
Are you representing the BCF/ECF with your kind offer?

I think Stewart was actually wondering whether Mike was about to make a kind offer.

I felt it was kind of Stewart to suggest Mike should work for free.

[Mike Gunn]

I would do this* for free if the ECF were to ask me.

*Interview/ take statements from those involved and still alive and produce an anonymised report.

[Roger Lancaster]

I would do this* for free if the ECF were to ask me.

*Interview/ take statements from those involved and still alive and produce an anonymised report.

Good of you to clarify and to offer. Obviously it's a sensitive matter and I don't know your credentials for undertaking that work but I imagine that members of the ECF board, who will be better informed in this regard, will consider your offer carefully.

[Nick Ivell]

I don't imagine anything will ever happen.

[MJMcCready]

I suspect so, and even if that were not the case, I very much doubt whether the ECF realize how collaborative the project needs to be let alone realize how limited they are in what they themselves can do.

[Kevin Thurlow]

It is very good of Mike to offer, but as he has been on the B/ECF Board, I don't think he should do it. Yes, it would be free, but if he concluded completely honestly that no B/ECF officials were at fault, then everone would scream "cover up". And let's face it, any guilty people would continue to lie. An independent enquiry (by people with no connection to chess) might give people more confidence in the result. At this late date, how could the enquiry achieve anything? The only people who could would be police, but they weren't bothered when there was a realistic chance of arresting Eley, who might just have named some accessories...

[MJMcCready]

That sounds about right. We could ask for more testimonies by those who were his victims for want of a better term. Some have already been documented on line already but it certainly is the case that some just do not want to talk about that person. But more testimonies alone would be some achievement, as they may link or connect others or if not at the very least shed further light on what he did. I think if people saw or read the testimonies of others they may be more encouraged to speak up themselves.

[Roger Lancaster]

Just one question over the idea of "an independent enquiry (by people with no connection to chess)" being the small matter of cost, since there's no reason to believe these people would work gratis. What figure do the enquiry enthusiasts have in mind by way of budget?

[MJMcCready]

A low five figure sum at most I suspect.

[MJMcCready]

I don't think it's a good idea to ask people with no connection to chess to work on this. Of course they must be paid for what they do but there are many involved with chess -myself included- who would help as much as possible and not charge one penny.

[Roger Lancaster]

I don't think it's a good idea to ask people with no connection to chess to work on this. Of course they must be paid for what they do but there are many involved with chess -myself included- who would help as much as possible and not charge one penny.

I think the problem here is that anyone involved with chess is liable, even if they are otherwise generally credible, to be perceived as starting with opinions one way or another which detract from his/her objectivity - and there's no point commissioning a report where those who disagree with its conclusions are likely to say "Well, s/he would say that, wouldn't s/he". That doesn't give closure. If you can find someone in the chess world who's prepared to work for free and whose conclusions would be universally accepted then fine but he or she is, in my opinion, a rare animal.