Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials

[tifosi77]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... tate-erred

But the former Penn State assistant coach and quarterback also delivered some unexpected testimony: that the late Hall of Fame coach had told him over the years that "Old Main screwed up" -- referring to university administrators -- in how it responded to McQueary's allegation against Sandusky.

Pressed by defense lawyers on his discussions of the subject, McQueary brought up a specific exchange at football practice in the hours before Paterno's firing on Nov. 9, 2011 -- four days after Sandusky's arrest.

He recalled the head coach saying the school would come down hard on McQueary and try to make him a scapegoat. Paterno also advised McQueary not to trust the administration or then-university counsel Cynthia Baldwin, the former assistant testified.

I find this extremely interesting for some reason

The allegation, or that we're we're nearly two years into the public aspect of this case before McQueary made this assertion?

[shafnutz05]

The latter. I just find that to be a very interesting tidbit, and I find it a bit weird that McQueary didn't clear this during the Freeh investigation.

[relantel]

I think it quite telling that the OAG is not pursuing to prove what was in the original presentment re McQueary, but has backed it down to trying to prove molestation, which even that is tenuous. McQueary's constant shifting story is going to make it all the more harder to prove perjury, and the tenuous stretch of law to try to get failure to report (why is Raykovich not charged as well as a mandated reporter?), since the law in 2001 C/S/S were not mandated reporters, while Raykovich was, by holding the men to a standard enacted into law in 2007 saying they should have then reported 2001?


I got the impression that Tom Harmon perjured himself today. (After all, he is the one that labeled the 1998 report as an "administrative" action instead of "criminal")

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

Three interesting tweets from those covering the trial that weren't covered by the ESPN article.

@MikeDawsonCDT
Defense attorneys were trying to see who else #McQueary told about the 2001 incident, but prosecution objected.

Not sure why the prosecution would object here.

@MikeDawsonCDT
Prosecution also objects when Curley atty questioned #McQueary about when he met with police investigators.

Looks like the defense is going to show that McQuery's story changed after he met with investigators.

@DailyCollegian
McQueary: “No one ever gave me any instructions not to talk.”

Sounds like a conspiracy to me.

[MWB]

So is McQ believable or not? Seems to be not believable based on what has come out so far.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

I don't find him very believable. But I find it funny that media sources like ESPN will leave out McQuery saying that no one told him not to talk but will jump all over him saying he had conversations with Paterno and Joe said Sandusky was a "sick guy".

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

Did anyone else see this come out a couple days ago:

http://notpsu.blogspot.com/2013/07/repo ... ecial.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Basically, the janitor story Freeh referred to during his press conference couldn't have occurred on the date as presented by the prosecution and the Freeh report as the janitor that saw the incident wasn't even with PSU on the date it occurred. Granted that the website I linked to has a very Pro-Paterno, Pro-PSU slant, I find it interesting that something that was so easy to investigate was missed or at worst deliberately ignored by the Freeh investigation and the prosecution.

[tifosi77]

If you read the Freeh report in any detail, such an omission would not seem as surprising.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

If you read the Freeh report in any detail, such an omission would not seem as surprising.

I've read the whole thing so I know exactly what you are saying.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

This is a good read about the OAG's missteps in the investigation as well as the inconsistencies in McQuery's testimony. http://sanduskyreports.com/report3.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Jump to page 30 for the investigation of what McQuery saw.

[count2infinity]

If you read the Freeh report in any detail, such an omission would not seem as surprising.

That's the thing that I think bothers me most. The NCAA took the Freeh report as gospel truth and did little to no investigation for themselves.

[relantel]

If you read the Freeh report in any detail, such an omission would not seem as surprising.

That's the thing that I think bothers me most. The NCAA took the Freeh report as gospel truth and did little to no investigation for themselves.

fixt.

What's worse is there is evidence of collaboration between the Freeh team and prosecutors during their process, and one reason they didn't bother with any exculpatory evidence so as not to harm the prosecution. Ray Blehar has been all over this aspect of it, from missing exhibits to a lack of a catalog of interviews and documents.

[shmenguin]

The Freeh report was an independent audit of what happened. Under this premise, I don't know why the school would have commissioned their own, separate audit. Seems like a redundant exercise.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

The Freeh report was an independent audit of what happened. Under this premise, I don't know why the school would have commissioned their own, separate audit. Seems like a redundant exercise.

It's not the school, but the NCAA that should have done their own investigation, or at least vetted the findings from the Freeh report if they were to rely on the report. Also, the independence of the Freeh team is completely in question with the amount of interaction the Freeh team had with the AOG as relantel alluded to in his post above.

[Pitt87]

The Freeh report was an independent audit of what happened. Under this premise, I don't know why the school would have commissioned their own, separate audit. Seems like a redundant exercise.

It's not the school, but the NCAA that should have done their own investigation, or at least vetted the findings from the Freeh report if they were to rely on the report. Also, the independence of the Freeh team is completely in question with the amount of interaction the Freeh team had with the AOG as relantel alluded to in his post above.

What does the NCAA have to investigate? Penn State's administration avoided a 'death penalty', which Penn Staters everywhere should be thankful for.

Frankly, the mismanagement of the abuses of children by Penn State adminstrators are criminal in nature, and the NCAA has statuatory authority to impose penalties on programs as they choose. Nothing that has happened to Penn State has been extraordinary, and the penalties have allowed Penn State football to move on.

[count2infinity]

1. The Penn State administrators actions were certainly criminal, thus why they are currently being tried in a criminal court outside the scope of the NCAA and what they have done.
2. The penalties levied on Penn State by the NCAA have been widely viewed as extraordinary by a large number of prominent figures across the nation, especially following the Sandusky trial when more facts about the situation came to light. To claim they should be thankful for not getting the death penalty, imo, is simply ignorance.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

What does the NCAA have to investigate?

Prior to imposing charges, the NCAA should have investigated the actual extent PSU administrators were involved in the "mismanagement" of the Sandusky allegation as stated by McQuery. That didn't happen. Instead the NCAA relied on the Freeh report without any attempt to validate any of the facts within the Freeh report on their own.

The end result has been that the NCAA levied extraordinary penalties on PSU based on a limited and inaccurrate report that they probably never even bothered to completely read let alone even perform a limited analysis of.

[newarenanow]

This is still going on?

[Pitt87]

What does the NCAA have to investigate?

Prior to imposing charges, the NCAA should have investigated the actual extent PSU administrators were involved in the "mismanagement" of the Sandusky allegation as stated by McQuery. That didn't happen. Instead the NCAA relied on the Freeh report without any attempt to validate any of the facts within the Freeh report on their own.

The end result has been that the NCAA levied extraordinary penalties on PSU based on a limited and inaccurrate report that they probably never even bothered to completely read let alone even perform a limited analysis of.

They are not extraordinary, and they were not 'levied'; Penn State accepted their penalty. It was the right thing to do, regardless of the veracity of the report, because Penn State is guilty of harboring a rapist. Had the NCAA dug deeper, it could be found to be guilty of harboring MULTIPLE rapists, as the allegations seem to indicate.

[ulf]

This is still going on?

Honestly it's like everytime it's out of mind, someone says something or commissions some study and it's back in the headlines.

[shmenguin]

If the Freeh report was so easily tainted, I don't know why you'd think whatever the NCAA came up with would be any different. Again, it would have just been a waste of time and resources to hire some firm to produce the same results.

[count2infinity]

They are not extraordinary, and they were not 'levied'; Penn State accepted their penalty. It was the right thing to do, regardless of the veracity of the report, because Penn State is guilty of harboring a rapist. Had the NCAA dug deeper, it could be found to be guilty of harboring MULTIPLE rapists, as the allegations seem to indicate.

Penn State did not accept the penalty. The president alone accepted the penalty with much scrutiny from the BOT, the rest of the university, and the community.

Multiple rapists? What are you talking about?

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

They were extraordinary since the NCAA never before had levied penalties on a University based on potential criminal misconduct of university employees.

I realize it was their "right" as they can do whatever they want based on how the bylaws are written, but based on the situation being one that the NCAA never encountered before they should have taken a more prudent approach based on the effect the penalties would have not only on the University but the Penn State community and Penn State's opponents, the possibility that the information they were relying on was faulty, incomplete, and/or biased, and the fact that whatever measures that were implemented would be considered potential precendent for any future criminal matter.

As for PSU accepting the penalties, they were threatened with the "death penalty" if they didn't accept the penalties given.

[relantel]

What does the NCAA have to investigate?

Prior to imposing charges, the NCAA should have investigated the actual extent PSU administrators were involved in the "mismanagement" of the Sandusky allegation as stated by McQuery. That didn't happen. Instead the NCAA relied on the Freeh report without any attempt to validate any of the facts within the Freeh report on their own.

The end result has been that the NCAA levied extraordinary penalties on PSU based on a limited and inaccurrate report that they probably never even bothered to completely read let alone even perform a limited analysis of.

They are not extraordinary, and they were not 'levied'; Penn State accepted their penalty. It was the right thing to do, regardless of the veracity of the report, because Penn State is guilty of harboring a rapist. Had the NCAA dug deeper, it could be found to be guilty of harboring MULTIPLE rapists, as the allegations seem to indicate.

If this is your standard, then similar penalties ought to be meted out at Syracuse and Michigan and Montana among others.

The reality is that the NCAA has no business being involved in criminal matters that had nothing to do with athletics, other than by association. To act, without any regard for its own rules and due process, on a matter it had no business being in should give every AD of every member institution pause. It may even prove to be the tipping point that will find the NCAA replaced.

[shafnutz05]

Multiple rapists? What the?