Robert Griffith Found Not Guilty Of Molestation Charges

Former swim coach Robert Griffith has been found not guilty of molestation charges filed against him in Florida.

Griffith was arrested in January of 2015 and charged with lewd and lascivious molestation of a child under the age of 12.

According to mypanhandle.com, Griffith was visiting friends in a home on the beach in Panama City Beach. One person at the house was a mother who brought her 7-year-old son. During the night, all of the adults were in the garage and the boy was inside, trying to sleep on a couch when prosecutors say Griffith went inside to talk with the boy.

The boy claims that Griffith touched him on his genitals. Griffith and his attorney’s argue that Griffith touched the boy on his chest, and that “no person in their right mind would do something like that to a child with 5 other adults close by,” per mypanhandle.com.

Griffith was a former swim coach with the Panama City Swim Team, but was banned by USA Swimming in April of 2015 after his arrest.

A jury found Griffith “not guilty” in June. We asked USA Swimming whether Griffith would remain on the banned list, but our request for comment has not been returned.

USA Swimming has previously said that its National Board of Review process is not dependent on the criminal process, meaning Griffith could remain banned if USA Swimming’s National Board of Review determines or has determined that his conduct still violated the organization’s code of conduct.

8
Leave a Reply

Subscribe
Notify of

8 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
G.I.N.A
7 years ago

Avoid ALL.children. Many single mothers are desperate for adult company & bring their uninvited kids along to adult get togethers. There is a certain tolerance but it puts everyone in danger .

Guys head for that door .

Markster
7 years ago

I think it’s absolutely sick if he doesn’t get unbanned by USA swimming. I understand how serious sexual misconduct must be treated but it’s statistically impossible for every single criminal accusation to be true. The ones that are found to be innocent should be treated as such. The instant one coach is suspected his career is automatically ruined and that is not fair in the slightest. If he was found innocent in trial by a grand jury who the hell are USA swimmimg to say they know better.

completelyconquered
Reply to  Markster
7 years ago

If you got the lawyers you can go up against USA Swimming. How many swim coaches can afford lawyers to do that though?

Maria Lopez
Reply to  completelyconquered
7 years ago

That is a bunch of hogwash! A person not found guilty is not guilty and therefore by default innocent. A suspicion is not enough for this man to loose his job. Enough with the paranoia…

BarryA
Reply to  Markster
7 years ago

He wasn’t found innocent, he was found not guilty. It only means the prosecutors could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had committed the alleged crime. He still could be guilty, but perhaps there was not sufficient evidence or the child’s testimony was unreliable.

USA Swimming’s National Board of Review also has a lower standard than a criminal court. And according to SwimSwam’s previous report, they only needed a pending charge “304.3.6 Conviction of, imposition of a deferred sentence for, or any plea of guilty or no contest at any time, past or present, or the existence of any pending charges”.

It does not seem fair, but the rules apparently allow someone to be banned just… Read more »

Gramps
Reply to  BarryA
7 years ago

You don’t get found innocent. You are innocent until proven guilty, and he was found not guilty.

BarryA
Reply to  Gramps
7 years ago

“found innocent” is in reference to OP.

In criminal court, you are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Being found not guilty only means that the prosecutors failed to meet their burden of proof at that time. It does not mean that you were proven innocent, nor that you are in fact innocent. That would be irrational. The finding is only dispositive of the court case, not the USAS NBOR case.

CBswims
Reply to  Markster
7 years ago

On a level I agree, but the burden of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt”, and we’ve all seen good lawyers do their best to defend their clients… and we’ve seen juries do some very dumbfounding things.

If a civil trial went forward (where the burden of proof is much lower) and he was found not guilty, then I’d be more apt to say reverse his ban. As is, it’s his livelihood vs. the lives of many, many kids. It’s an easy decision for me.

About Jared Anderson

Jared Anderson

Jared Anderson swam for nearly twenty years. Then, Jared Anderson stopped swimming and started writing about swimming. He's not sick of swimming yet. Swimming might be sick of him, though. Jared was a YMCA and high school swimmer in northern Minnesota, and spent his college years swimming breaststroke and occasionally pretending …

Read More »