What can possibly justify the removal of posts pertaining to facts here? Particularly when what is at stake is the possibility that other people targeted by this predator can finally feel free to speak out. I posted several days ago anonymously after having spoken to enough people to feel very sure that the allegations were true, not giving my name because as a working musician in the same general field I wanted to avoid controversy. Then, after speaking to enough people to be very certain, I posted using my name but my comment never appeared. I have been very moderate in saying what needed saying, and I'm telling anyone who cares that, if they follow the story back to the community of musicians in the Santa Cruz area, or to people who know Gary Atkinson who first made the allegations public (still viewable on the santacraz.com site), you will no longer be in doubt. I don't mind at this point having my name here; neither the perception of me by those who would choose to remain in denial nor the idea that we are besmirching a legacy means a hoot in comparison to the need of this community to look after the harm caused to innocents, however belatedly. Like everyone else, I didn't WANT to believe the truth of someone I knew for nearly 40 years, though not well, and worked with a few times, etc. But the fact is that word has gone out in the musical community that these allegations are true. If you don't want to take my word for it, and don't have access to other people close to the situation, and don't want to believe what people like Atkinson and Daivd Lindley are on record as saying, fine. But there can be no excuse for censuring comments that speak to these things. None whatsoever.

I certainly hope I don't have to stop visiting this site over this. My aim and that of others speaking from being close enough to have a clear view is to help victims. Nothing else matters at this point. If mudcat can't see that much, the waters must be muddy indeed in your world.

Duck Baker