Two more women denounce Cleveland concertmaster

Two more women denounce Cleveland concertmaster


norman lebrecht

October 07, 2018

The Cleveland Plain Dealer carries a report of alleged sexual misdemeanours against two young female musicians by William Preucil, who was suspended as concertmaster after a Washington Post investigation.

One complainant says he stuck his tongue down her throat, the other that he looked up her skirt. Report here.

The Cleveland Orchestra has set up a commission of inquiry.


  • Doug says:

    There’s even a Wikipedia entry about the Cleveland Orchestra “inquiry”:

  • william osborne says:

    In a key passage in the Plain Dealer article, the two women clearly state what needs to be done:

    “The new rule, they said, has to be transparency. Institutions need to draft detailed policies and establish protocols for responding to allegations. They also need to make sure all students, staff and faculty are aware of those policies, and understand that all allegations will be taken seriously.”

    And early last August, members of the orchestra and the Cleveland Institute of Music expressed similar views after Preucil resigned his teaching position:

    “Colleagues of Preucil’s expressed relief at that news. While declining to speak on the record, fellow teachers and orchestra members said Preucil was right to step down and voiced the desire to move forward and strictly enforce a zero-tolerance policy.”

    Without a strictly enforced zero-tolerance policy the situation remains confused. Institutions cannot credibly claim they have changed, people will not be sure where the lines are drawn, and students and colleagues will remain in danger. The only way forward is a strict enforcement of a zero-tolerance policy. And not just in Cleveland, but in all orchestras and schools of music.

  • Testore says:

    I know this might be impolitic to say, but this has to also make one wonder how many women willingly consented and exchanged sexual favors with William Preucil for a position in the Cleveland Orchestra or other career advancement.

    • Jack says:

      OK, we appoint you our person to wonder such things and assign blame to women for supposedly fostering this atmosphere so he could feel justified in doing what has been alleged..

      But let’s say you are right. Does that give this man license to sexually assault women who clearly did not want this to happen? It would seem to me the answer is pretty obvious.

      • Brettermeier says:

        Leave him alone! He’s just a scared man! 😀

      • Testore says:

        I’m not condoning his behavior at all or anyone who holds a position of power that abuses it. Harvey Weinstein obviously did just that in addition to many others in Hollywood. But it is well known in musical circles (much like in Hollywood), there is a casting couch element in play in certain places.

        A recently retired Concertmaster of a major US orchestra was using his studio/apartment as a place to bed female students. Let’s just say he has a fetish for Asian females.

    • Mark says:

      Testore, you didn’t get the memo ? The females are either pure radiant angelic beings or blessed victims these days …

      All the manipulative b…ches we’ve encountered must have been just a figment of our perverted male imagination.

  • violafan says:

    I hope they kick his ass out of the Cleveland Orchestra.

  • Mark says:

    Oh goody, let’s have more uncorroborated allegations (eye roll). Can they offer any evidence aside from their sob stories ?
    And how the heck did Preucil manage to stick his tongue down her throat – is he a lizard ?

    • violafan says:

      Why do you feel the need to call them “sob stories”. Do you think all these women are in some conspiracy to take down preucil? For what reason?

      Have you considered that these are actually true accounts and your comments are gross and inappropriate?

      • Mark says:

        I am an attorney and do not believe anybody’s accusations, unless I can see clear and convincing evidence.

        I am even less inclined to believe such stories nowadays, given that the accusers are immediately rewarded with a “blessed martyr” status (cf. that silly Christine Ford woman)

        • John says:

          If you are an attorney, which I doubt, I’d never hire you.

        • violafan says:

          “I am an attorney”

          LOL sure you are

        • Brettermeier says:

          “I am an attorney and do not believe anybody’s accusations, unless I can see clear and convincing evidence. ”

          Yeah, you’re not. (Unless I can see clear and convincing evidence. (Which you cannot provide because I’ll never believe you anyways.)) (See what I did here?)

          • Mark says:

            Oh, I cannot tell you how important your opinion is to me, soyboy. Now run along, your feminist mistress is waiting

          • Brettermeier says:

            “Oh, I cannot tell you how important your opinion is to me, soyboy. Now run along, your feminist mistress is waiting”

            Thank you for proving my point. 😉

        • Anson says:

          “If you come forward, I won’t believe you until you provide evidence. If you provide evidence, I and I alone will decide whether that evidence is good enough. If I decide it isn’t, I will deride you, call you names, accuse you of making it up, and generally invite my friends and ideological affiliates to smear you.”

          Yes, I’m really scratching my head as to why any accuser would be reluctant to step forward.

      • Bruce says:

        There are people (and not a small number) who saw the surveillance video of Ray Rice punching out his fiancee in a hotel, and called it self-defense because she had slapped his face a moment before.

        There are people who say that what Larry Nassar did to all those gymnasts wasn’t really rape because he “only” used his fingers.

        If there was security-camera video of whatever happened to these women, showing that it happened the way they said, there are people who would say that her failure to instantly knee him in the crotch and/or pepper-spray him constitutes non-resistance, and therefore consent.

        On top of that, they enjoy making women, and people who think women are complete human beings, angry and consider it a worthy use of their time.

        Probably best to disregard such people (although it can be useful to know about them).

      • Sue says:

        I guess the girl has cried wolf a thousand times too many. Femi-nazis, many of them. That or Snowflakery. The age of narcissism. Its all about meeeeeeee.

        • Alan says:

          Wow, Sue, your comments continue to astonish me.
          A matter of curiosity: do you live with other people or by yourself, all alone?
          (I’m talking about actual real people, not imaginary ones.)
          I’m sure many of us would like to know.

          • Herr Doktor says:

            My best guess about “Sue” is that “she” is someone who is extremely unhappy in life, and that her life has not played out as she thought/hoped/wanted. And rather than look closely at herself and her decisions, it’s because of the Feminazis, the Libtards, and everyone else. While of course preaching a philosophy of self-responsibility.

            I’ve personally known Sues of the world, and most typically, at the center of their unhappiness is an unwillingness to face themselves, be honest with themselves, and to work to heal themselves. They express their anger at everyone else. That is, except for the true source. This is not to minimize the trauma that has happened in the past–in the people I’ve known, the trauma is real and quite devastating. It’s how they DEALT with the trauma which is what makes someone turn into a Sue, or into someone much healthier.

          • Thomasina says:

            I can’t recall which thread it was, but she said that her husband was a victim of violence by their neighbor woman and they had to move because the police didn’t do anything.

        • Sharon says:

          As a psychiatric nurse I know that when it comes to sexual abuse it SHOULD be about “me”, oneself and one’s own feelings relating to the trauma. We may forget what others say or even exactly what they do but we will never forget how others made us feel

          Verbalizing feelings is not the entire solution to dealing with trauma but it is an important step. More than 50 years of studies have shown that “keeping the stiff upper lip” is psychologically unhealthy and causes people to become angry, lash out at others, or have other dysfunctional behaviors (like addictions). Furthermore those who can recognize and verbalize their own pain frequently grow from the experience and are more compassionate towards others than those who equate getting upset with immaturity or selfishness.

          I admire disciplined people but I love compassionate people (not that the two qualities necessarily have to be incompatible). Fragile snowflakes are beautiful, together create beautiful environments, and when they melt are not destroyed but turn into the water which nurtures other life. Too paraphrase Mother Teresa, how can we say that we have too many snowflakes? That’s like saying we have too many flowers.

        • jaypee says:

          @ sue

          “The age of narcissism. Its all about meeeeeeee.”

          Wow… And yet you voted for cretin donald… who, as we all know, is a model of altruism and modesty…

          Do you -and dog- have any pride left?

      • Karl says:

        Women often lie to take down a womanizer because they feel rejected when the man moves on to another woman. That explains why so many complaints come years after the alleged abuse. I don’t believe anything anyone says either. People lie all the time. That’s why we need due process. And we are not getting that with this metoo McCarthyism.

    • william osborne says:

      In civil cases such as this, the legal standard is a preponderance of evidence. Multiple credible complainants could be considered a preponderance of evidence, and would be viewed as a form of corroboration. In fact, even one credible complaint of egregious sexual misbehavior backed by additional circumstantial evidence could be legally viewed as grounds for a firing.

      The complaints seem credible. If Preucil disagrees, he can file a lawsuit against the orchestra thus assuring yet another level of due process.

      • Mark says:

        Multiple complaints do not constitute evidence. Even if preponderance of evidence is the standard used, mere accusations aren’t sufficient. Furthermore, several federal judges in the US (most recently in New Mexico) have ruled that given the severe consequences to the accused in such cases, a higher evidentiary standard is required.

        • Former CIM says:

          I was at CIM at the time of these allegations. The allegations are 100% credible. Trust me—there are many, many women who have similar stories about Mr Preucil that have not gone public. I know many of them personally, and have known of these allegations for years. I applaud these women for their bravery.

        • Robert Holmén says:

          Witness and victim statements ARE evidence.

          That’s what causes an investigation. Someone says something happened. Then the investigators look to find other people who witnessed or have other relevant information.

          Most trials would go nowhere without witness and victim testimony.

      • Zeus says:

        Except there is no evidence, just complaints. Seriously how did he manage to stick his tongue into her throat? And to look under the skirt?? Did he crawl on the floor on the street? Or on stage?

        “If Preucil disagrees, he can file a lawsuit…”

        WILLIAM OSBOURNE. I say you stole money from me but…I dont have any CCTV, no fingerprints, but I am sure that you stole money! So I am accusing you and saying you are a thief and should be punished!!
        In what world do YOU have to prove to me that you did not do it? If I don’t have any evidence. Why do you even need to bother?

        • violafan says:

          “And to look under the skirt?? Did he crawl on the floor on the street? Or on stage?”

          Did you even read the article?

          When everyone says your dead, it’s time to lie down. There are SO many stories regarding Preucil and his inappropriate behavior. This is just the tip of the iceberg.

          But I guess you (probably a rape apologist) won’t be satisfied unless you have 1080p video footage of the encounters.

        • Brettermeier says:

          If the accused walks free

          + and it doesn’t affect you, it’s fake news and lies. (Dr. Ford)
          + and it does affect you, it’s cover-ups and a conspiracy against you and your family. (Your daughters)

          And people really wonder why I don’t like (most) people. Pathetic bunch.

          • Mark says:

            Nothing is more pathetic than a feminist man (aka eunuch)

          • Brettermeier says:

            “Nothing is more pathetic than a feminist man (aka eunuch)”

            , said the guy who leaves his balls at the keyboard when he leaves the door.

            Now please, continue your trolling without me. Good day, sir.

      • Karl says:

        Multiple credible complainants could be considered a preponderance of evidence? Not really. If it was that easy a few people could get together and agree to lie about someone in order to win a lawsuit.

        • Bill says:

          Do you happen to have Bill Cosby’s new address handy?

          • Karl says:

            Cosby could very well have that overturned. The judge violated a longstanding precedent on rules of evidence admissibility. Look up the law- People v. Molineux. That decision was notable in its impact on the rules of admissibility of evidence. Over one hundred years later, Judge Rosenblatt of the New York Appeals Court stated that the Molineux decision was a “landmark case” which led to the precedent that:

            a criminal case should be tried on the facts and not on the basis of a defendant’s propensity to commit the crime charged. It is axiomatic that propensity evidence invites a jury to misfocus, if not base its verdict, on a defendant’s prior crimes rather than on the evidence (or lack of evidence) relating to the case before it. We have repeated this theme throughout the last century.

            – from Jonakait, Randolph N. (2002). “People v. Molineux and Other Crime Evidence: One Hundred Years and Counting”. American Journal of Criminal Law. 30 (1): 1–43.

    • anon says:

      If a guy grabbed your crotch in a men’s room, and you were alone, what would constitute evidence for you that a jury should believe you?

      (Assuming you didn’t enjoy it, of course, or didn’t provoke it by your choice of trousers, or asked for it by the suggestive way you walked.)

  • Old Man in the Midwest says:

    “the other that he looked up her skirt”

    Defendant’s Lawyer: “Madam, do you state that the defendant Mr Preucil, dropped his pencil from the music stand to purposely look up your skirt?”

    Witness: “Yes that is correct”

    Defendant’s Lawyer: “Why on earth would he do that?”

    Witness: “Perhaps to see my knickers?”

    Defendant’s Lawyer: “Well was he able to see your knickers after doing said act?”

    Witness: “No.”

    Defendant’s Lawyer: “Well why not?”

    Witness: “I tricked him. I wasn’t wearing any….”