FRSO Tallahasee Cover-Up

Preface #

The document on the following pages was initially submitted by two members of the Tallahassee district of FRSO, [Victim] and [Supporter], to be published internally before our next national meeting. It details the need for a new policy on handling sexual assault, and in an example, details how the three comrades pictured all took part in covering up for serial rapist Michael Sampson. This document was carefully written, studied, and unanimously supported by the district. Despite this, FRSO leadership refused to share the document, and then chose to target, harass, and expel the members who wrote the document.

We don’t know what the next steps are, but what we do know is that we won’t get there without all the facts being shared. We wanted to keep this internal, and spent weeks of principled struggle to try and make that happen, yet FRSO leadership has decided to do another cover-up.

We were told that the truth would make members become “disillusioned” with the organization, and that it would do more harm than good. We disagree. We trust the members, and we know that leadership is trying to cover for their own mistakes. We know that without addressing this issue at the heart of our struggle, we will fail to reach the future we all believe in.

Addressing Liberalism: The Need for a New Approach to Sexual Assault Allegations #

In Combat Liberalism, Mao wrote, “To let things slide for the sake of peace and friendship when a person has clearly gone wrong, and refrain from principled argument because he is an old acquaintance, a fellow townsman, a schoolmate, a close friend, a loved one, an old colleague or old subordinate. Or to touch on the matter lightly instead of going into it thoroughly, so as to keep on good terms. The result is that both the organization and the individual are harmed. This is one type of liberalism.”

It has become clear that our organization takes a liberal approach when it comes to sexual assault allegations, and if it is not addressed, it will eat away at our structure from the inside. We don’t write this lightly, and given the recent and historic attempts by wreckers to wield sexual assault against us, we recognize the sensitivity of this topic. It is in fact for this very reason we see the importance of addressing this problem now.

We are a rapidly growing organization, and with rapid growth comes an inevitable increase in bad actors. It is no mystery that we live in a capitalist world where rape culture and misogyny are deeply entrenched, and however nice it might be to imagine otherwise, it is a fact that sexual assault will occur within our membership.

We are also a communist organization, and that means our approach to sexual assault allegations should match that reality. Our members are deeply rooted in vulnerable populations, and, as seen in Dolores Huerta’s case, there is extreme pressure on organizers to “put the movement first.”

Unlike the capitalist society in which we operate, we can no longer wait for a victim to push for action; we must take that action ourselves. It is not acceptable to know a member of our organization is credibly accused of sexual assault and simply allow them to continue because the victim doesn’t want to do anything about it. That is liberalism. We are not a bourgeois institution, and our approach to allegations should not mirror theirs. Police victims, newly recruited organizers, and minority populations are incredibly vulnerable to pressure from “important people” in the organization. While victims should be willing to push for change and have the full support to do so, it would be idealistic to assume that will be the case. Instead, we need to show in practice that we will take action against credible allegations as a matter of policy, not simply as a matter of choice. If someone is accused of rape or sexual assault, but the victim does not want to “punish” them, it is still the responsibility of the organization to hold the accused accountable.

With these points in mind, we propose that our organization adopt a default policy of taking action against any credible sexual assault allegations. We cannot allow members, particularly those in positions of “importance,” to continue to work within the organization without a proven effort to address what they’ve done. In some cases, this will mean stepping down or stepping back, and in others, it will mean being removed from the organization entirely. This same principle should be applied in mass work. While we don’t have control over every action of a mass organization, we should work to ensure action is taken whenever possible, and when not, work as individuals to inform members about the dangerous person. It is our duty as communists to combat liberalism in our work, and it is our duty as people to see that abusers are not kept in a position of power.

Response to Expected Criticism #

The first and most obvious criticism of this argument is that our organization has an existing sexual assault policy. This policy, however, falls short. In theory, it fails because it relies on victim interpretation, and in practice, it fails because it relies on the desire to take action. Looking at the categorization of possible behaviors, far too much is left to interpretation.

What touching is classified as “of a sexual nature?” Is something only rape if the victim calls it that by name? We should, whenever possible, take an objective approach to sexual assault allegations, including assessing the facts rather than relying solely on the victim’s personal interpretation. If a victim describes all the traits of being raped, but then ends their description by stating, “I don’t really know if I wanna call it rape,” the material reality of the act remains the same. The issue also arises that there is no policy to handle not taking action. When someone comes forward and reports sexual assault to a single individual, they are forced to trust that the person will actually take action. While we cannot be dogmatic in our approach to investigation, neither can we take a subjective approach to clearly stated facts.

The second criticism we expect is the issue at the heart of most sexual assault allegations: The victim should be put first, and it should be up to them to decide what justice looks like. Putting the decision for action on the victim is liberalism, plain and simple. Allowing the accused to go without action based on the victim’s feelings will almost always result in no action. This is shown quite clearly in practice, as with Dolores Huerta, millions of people around the world, and who knows how many of our organization.

If practice is the ultimate criterion of truth, we must show in practice our commitment to justice for victims of sexual assault, and only through that practice will other victims have the support necessary to seek justice. It has been shown time and again that when action is taken against an abuser, particularly an abuser in power, more victims are empowered to come forward. We cannot hope to create the ideal victim through theoretical policy, or allow our personal connection to the victim or the accused to cloud the need for action, but must instead open the gates to action through practice.

We believe in this organization and in the correctness of Marxism-Leninism. We have made great theoretical strides in many areas of our work, but in doing so, have neglected the work of internal policy. To once again quote Mao, “Liberalism is extremely harmful in a revolutionary collective. It is a corrosive which eats away unity, undermines cohesion, causes apathy and creates dissension. It robs the revolutionary ranks of compact organization and strict discipline, prevents policies from being carried through and alienates the Party organizations from the masses which the Party leads. It is an extremely bad tendency.”

It is an absolute necessity that we root out liberalism and craft a policy for sexual assault that is fit for the communist party we want to become. We expect there will be debate, and there will certainly be welcome additions or edits. There is no perfect policy, but this will hopefully start the discussion about how we can make a good one.

Going Forward: Updates to the Policy #

Mandated Reporting #

If anyone within the organization becomes aware of allegations of sexual assault, violence, harassment, or exploitative relationships, it must be immediately reported to the appropriate bodies, or if they are the appropriate body, action must be taken as per mandated action. An investigation must take place immediately per the rules, and if the accused refuses to participate in the process, they must be expelled immediately. In the event that allegations are not reported to the appropriate body by the member who learns of them, or in the event an investigation is not undertaken by the appropriate body and action taken as per mandated action, the member or appropriate body would receive the following actions against them. This action would be taken after an investigation following the same rules as for allegations:

First-time offense for allegations below those classified as rape or sexual assault:

• 6 month suspension
• The member must complete a study covering the full policy on allegations of sexual assault, violence, harassment, or exploitative relationships, and complete a written self-criticism of their actions

First-time offense for allegations classified as rape or sexual assault:

• Expulsion should be considered, particularly for those in positions of leadership, or who demonstrated clear intention or negligence in their lack of action
• Minimum 1 year suspension, with reinstatement based on demonstrating real steps taken to address the offense (e.g. therapy, study, self-criticism)
• The member must complete a study covering the full policy on allegations of sexual assault, violence, harassment, or exploitative relationships, and complete a written self-criticism of their actions

Second-time offense for allegations below those classified as rape or sexual assault:

• Minimum 1 year suspension, with reinstatement based on demonstrating real steps taken to address the negligence (e.g. therapy, study, self-criticism)

Second-time offense for allegations classified as rape or sexual assault:

• Mandatory expulsion

Mandated Action #

The policy must make it blatantly clear that for allegations of sexual assault, violence, harassment, or exploitative relationships, an investigation must take place, and appropriate action must be taken against the accused in the case of a credible allegation. It must also be mandatory that the investigation include an assessment of the victim’s safety.

Third-Party Accountability #

The investigation should include the investigator, the victim, and a third party, starting with the victim’s choice, via phone or in person. This third-party accountability ensures the victim feels supported throughout the process. In addition, a third party can serve as a witness to verify whether certain language is communicated, whether certain requests are made, and can help limit the potential for cover-ups.

Anytime a report is made, there should be a third party there. If someone comes to a member with a report and the member does not already have a third party, a third party that the victim wants should be found before any additional steps are taken. If the victim does not have a third party, the member receiving the report must find a comrade to serve as the third party.

Victim Safety and Advocacy #

We recognize that while action must be taken, the victim’s safety and support must also be fully considered. Before, during, and after an investigation, all efforts should be taken to support the victim, including the below actions as a minimum, and with additional support available should the need arise.

1) Referral to victim advocacy services

The members conducting the investigation should refer victims to victim advocacy services. These professionals understand the complex nature of sexual assault, violence, harassment, or exploitative relationships, and can assist the victim in working through the contradictory or self-sabotaging behaviors found in victims.

2) Safety support

Should it be found during the investigation that the victim is in danger of physical harm or other related risks from the accused, steps should be taken to fully minimize that risk, up to and including relocation.

3) Victim anonymity

While it is impossible to guarantee victim anonymity, all efforts should be taken to maximize it. Given that in many cases the accused will likely be able to figure out the victim’s identity based on details in the investigation, the victim should also be fully informed of any investigation or action being taken.

4) Follow-up

The victim should be followed-up with throughout the investigation process and afterwards. The member conducting an investigation should keep the victim informed, and should make and follow a plan to check in with the victim on a regular basis for at least six months.

Age Gap Relationships #

We don’t seek to blatantly condemn age gap relationships, nor take a dogmatic approach to assessing whether a relationship is “problematic.” We do however need to update our guidance on investigating and taking action for age gap relationships that involve material differences in power, life experience, or safety for a member of the relationship. For example, it is clearly unacceptable for an experienced member in their late 20s to be dating or hooking up with a college student who got involved in organizing just a month ago. When such a relationship presents itself, even if it appears acceptable on the surface, an investigation must be conducted. There is no possible way to define all coercive or exploitative relationships, but without investigation, we cannot merely default to accepting a relationship as safe.

Update the cadre study to include a chapter on Romantic and Sexual Relationships as a Communist, and a Mandatory Study of the updated Policy.

The cadre study should be updated to include a chapter on Romantic and Sexual Relationships as a Communist. We suggest that Sexual Relations and the Class Struggle by Alexandra Kollontai be included in this section, and welcome any additional suggestions. Additionally, after completing the cadre study, but before taking part in the internal organization, new cadre must study the updated “Policy on Handling Allegations of Sexual Harassment and Sexual Violence in the Organization.” Once the new policy is published, a study must also be completed by all current cadre members under either their district or unit leadership.

A Practical Example of What Not to Do #

Sometime in 2017, [Victim] revealed to a member of the Central Committee, Chrisley Carpio, that Michael Sampson sexually assaulted her. [Victim] told Chrisley she did not want to come forward because she wanted to “protect the movement,” and she was afraid it would come out and ruin FRSO’s reputation. As far as [Victim] was aware, Chrisley did not report the incident to anyone else, and she assumed it was later forgotten. People may not think this is a cover-up, but it is. Using this “victim-first” approach allows abusers to continue operating as abusers because most victims do not want to take action. They are often afraid of backlash or lack of support, and this is an example of why we need mandated action.

Years later, another leadership member, Sydney Loving, called and asked about Michael Sampson, and [Victim] said the same thing: she did not want an investigation because he had “apologized.” This is why we need mandated action. The problem with Michael Sampson is that he had a long history of sexual predation, but never once was he held accountable. As early as 2012, FRSO members knew that Michael Sampson would sexually harass young women (he was 23 and they were between 18 and 19 years old). It was treated as male chauvinism and something that would be simply addressed through criticism. He, along with other men, would continually try to sexually engage with young women who had just joined the movement. Many of these women were drunk and high. Michael Sampson’s transgressions become such a problem that several women in the organization beat him up for his constant predatory behavior. It was clearly not enough. We did not have a sexual assault policy at that time, but if we were to apply it retroactively to just the incidents mentioned above, he would have been expelled.

Michael Sampson also sexually assaulted [Victim] in 2012. She did not recognize it as rape until recently because she had normalized his behavior for over 14 years, just as many people in the organization did.

Sometime around 2015, when Michael was in Washington DC, he also sexually harassed another young woman who was not in the organization but was friendly to people in the group. She did not want to come forward either. The current District Organizer for DC, who had not yet joined the organization, was aware of this. They never took action, even after joining. [Victim] learned about the incident in DC when in 2025, she told them that she was sexually assaulted by Michael. The DO still never took action.

Intentional or not, this is another example of a cover-up. Again, the same applies in 2024, when [Victim] told Delilah Pierre, the District Organizer in Tallahassee, about Michael sexually assaulting her. Delilah took no action.

Since [Victim] joined the organizing movement in 2012, for the last 14 years, Michael Sampson’s behavior was continually covered up by various members of the organization. Whether intentional or not, members hid behind a lack of support from the victim and did not do their due diligence to remove Michael from the organization. Let us reiterate: If a victim comes forward with allegations, it is not the victim’s responsibility to ensure that an investigation is carried out.

It wasn’t until the fifth time that [Victim] came forward, in late March 2026, after Dolores Huerta named her abuser, Caesar Chavez, that any action was taken. Finally, after [Victim] spoke again with Sydney, this time with a second witness on the call, Michael Sampson was investigated and removed from the organization.

## Addressing the Past

[Victim] was failed by multiple members of this organization. She does not know what the repercussions of the previous cover-up should be. She is, frankly, in a very biased position because she was let down by people she trusted and looked up to. People she still considers her friends. If it were up to her, she would rather move on without repercussions for the four people she told. What we have reiterated throughout this piece, however, is that victims are not in a position to unilaterally determine how an investigation proceeds. There is no organizational policy for cover-ups, so in that sense, no one did anything against policy. However, there was an ethical failing on all levels of the organization.

We want to reiterate that cover-ups do not have to be intentional.

• If a victim comes forward about an allegation and you do not report it because they don’t want an investigation, that is a cover-up.
• If you know someone is a serial sexual harasser and you individually talk to the abuser without reporting it to a higher up, that is a cover-up.
• If you decide to individually cut ties with someone for their inappropriate behavior but don’t report it to a higher body, that is a cover-up.
• If someone in your mass group has credible allegations of sexual assault, and you do not inform the rest of your mass group, that is a cover-up.

Rape Culture is Everywhere #

This document is not to say that rape culture is unique to FRSO. Quite the opposite. Rape culture is the dominant culture, and as a communist organization, it is our job to root it out in practice.

Just recently, Tallahassee members learned that a potential political candidate, Max Herrle, with whom our mass organizations had close ties, was exposed as a serial rapist. We wanted to share this with the public, but the National Leadership advised that we not say anything because it could bring FRSO’s own reputation for sexual assault to light. We weren’t told we couldn’t do it; we were just discouraged. This is rape culture in action. Despite this, we exposed the political candidate for rape, and in the process, several more women came forward about how the predator sexually harassed and attempted to sexually assault them, as well as another woman who revealed that there was a sexual abuser in another group we frequently work with. Most of these victims did not want to take action.

This is a problem that is rampant not just in FRSO, but in organizing spaces in general, and in society as a whole. [Victim]’s example of the historic organizational culture in Tallahassee is just one, and there are likely other cities, especially with mostly college students, going through the same thing.

Rape culture, particularly around college campuses, enables older men to prey on young women who have just joined the movement and who have little life experience.

Sexual abusers use organizing spaces as a way to “hook up” with young women when, in reality, the “hook up” is non-consensual. They use communism, feminism, and sex-positive language to manipulate young women who are, let’s be honest, really children, girls who only recently graduated high school.

It is inappropriate and wrong to use activism to hook up with people. If you want a genuine relationship with someone, that is fine. However, time and time again, men (and some women) have used activism as a hunting ground to go after vulnerable people. If a woman just joined an organization, men should not be clamoring over themselves to have sex with that person. It is objectifying and wrong. It’s ridiculous that this has to be said, but women are people, not sex objects. We must hold ourselves to the standards not just of good people, but of good communists, and we must rip out liberal tendencies root and stem.

Communists are not ordinary people. Everyone in this organization has chosen to dedicate their life to the fight for a better world, and that fight needs to cover all aspects of our organization. We know the struggle will be hard, and the road will be difficult. That has never stopped us before, and we know it won’t stop us now.