This is a giant waste of time, I don't want to fool you. I don't know you. I do care about what I have read and it is concerning. I get your point, but I disagree. As long as Swarbrick is not accused by people at Ndnation(most are being careful) I support asking questions. I really hope nothing happens because ND will be in the crosshairs, which I don't want to happen. But I want the questions asked.
Which questions would you liked asked? This is something even NDN really hasn't defined. I'll get to why that is in a second.
Realistically, the absolute worst-case scenario here is if it's proved Swarbrick helped in a cover up of some sort. So let's follow asking that question through:
A) He's way down the ladder of people in the cross-hairs. One of many lawyers. Hasn't been involved in a number of years. As such, he's unlikely to be a part of any deep investigation.
B) As a lawyer, we're unlikely to get straight answers from him, or from others attributing actions to Swarbrick.
Now, for some people that might be unseemly and maybe even unfair--and there's no doubt that NDN is taking issue B above to mean he's guilty. So, let's take it another step.
From everything we know, Swarbrick was involved as one of the lawyers who confronted sexual abuse allegations and helped the USAG put some policies in place. Quite simply all we know at this point is that Swarbrick was part of a group that recommended changes to their handling on the issue---and it's pretty clear as day that Swarbrick and many others were ignored.
If you follow this line of reasoning then this would mean the smoking gun for Swarbrick would be him reversing course from what he was paid to craft as legal counsel AND there's evidence of him doing so. I believe the odds of both of these being true is very, very small.
Back to my point above. NDN knows it's highly unlikely Swarbrick is ever investigated in any real manner but that's what makes this a perfect story for them. Without anyone there to clear his name he'll forever be guilty.
He's guilty ---> Feign proper protocol "just asking questions!" ---> Continue to post as if he's guilty ---> Nothing happens in the media ---> Double down on guilty sentence
Look at the Declan Sullivan accident, for example. There we even had a thorough investigation, the family didn't point fingers, policies were put in place to make sure it never happens again, etc. and yet to this day Swarbrick is roasted by NDN for it most commonly through jokes about the incident. Think they respect the Sullivan family and his memory or does something else take precedent?
Anyone should know this won't be about those poor girls and women who were sexually assaulted. That's the real unfortunate part from this smear campaign.
My best guess is that in the future, once it becomes clear that this large investigation isn't going to be rounding up dozens of lawyers, there will be a pivot towards the empty legal issue but more murky ethical issue that Swarbrick "knew" and failed to act. This will be NDN truth if it's not already.
