Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

On a lighter note:

Mark Emmert’s Wikipedia Page Undergoes Some Timely Edits

http://onwardstate.com/2014/11/11/mark- ... _id=183113" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Warning NSFW image and language.

[Rocco]

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/ ... e&rand=ref~" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;{%22ref%22:%22http://t.co/K2JfFO4jto%22}

The NCAA was guiding Freeh during his investigation.

[relantel]

Apparently that DVN story is just the tip of the iceberg, according to Lubrano.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

From Page 12 of the Freeh Report:

No party interfered with, or attempted to influence, the findings in this report. The Special Investigative Counsel revealed this report and the findings herein to the Board of Trustees and the general public at the same time. No advance copy was provided to the Board or to any other person outside of the Special Investigative Counsel's team, and the work product was not shared with anyone who was not part of the Special Investigative Counsel's team

Oops

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

Jake Corman, the PA Senator suing the NCAA, has been picked to be the PA Senate Majority Leader.

http://cumberlink.com/news/local/govt-a ... 4a101.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Crankshaft]

lol

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

To Shad's post in the PSU football thread:

I agree. If Freeh's independence is in question then his work product is definitely in question and that involves the authenticity of the emails he found, especially since no one outside of Freeh's team has been able to review the actual digital records. The coming depositions and evidence gathering should hopefully shed some light on all of this and hopefully begin to put this saga to rest one way or the other.

[slappybrown]

No, it definitely does not involve the "authenticity of the emails he found." Nothing that was revealed today points in that direction.

That's one that you can't just throw around without direct evidence, which does not exist at this time. Frankly, it undercuts what I presume you are trying to accomplish here, because it puts you firmly in the loon brigade.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

Did I say there was evidence that anything was found? I apologize for not being completely clear but what I meant was that if it is established that Freeh lacked independence then there needs to be a look into the validity of anything from the report. The first thing would be the emails as that is the strongest evidence against Curley, Spanier, Paterno, and Schultz. They may very well be real, but there have already been numerous proven inaccuaracies in the Freeh report. Why should anything be considered trustworthy if there was some nefarious guided-action from the BoT and/or the NCAA? I concede nothing has been proven at this time. That may change in the coming days based on the tweet from PSU Alumni rep BoT Lubrano that what has been released thus far is just the tip of the iceberg.

[slappybrown]

I read your post to suggest that Freeh falsified evidence.

[count2infinity]

That's one that you can't just throw around without direct evidence, which does not exist at this time.

Yeah, who do you think you are, SDD??? Louis Freeh???

[slappybrown]

That's one that you can't just throw around without direct evidence, which does not exist at this time.

Yeah, who do you think you are, SDD??? Louis Freeh???

Shhh, grown ups are talking.

[count2infinity]

I'm not really interested who "all the grownups" agree with. I'm entitled to my opinion and don't have to get on board with group-think. You want to disagree with me that's fine, but if you want resort to that kind nonsense, take it elsewhere and don't respond to replies.

[slappybrown]

I'm not really interested who "all the grownups" agree with. I'm entitled to my opinion and don't have to get on board with group-think. You want to disagree with me that's fine, but if you want resort to that kind nonsense, take it elsewhere and don't respond to replies.

Lol top notch

[Factorial]

ManPullsCollar.png

[columbia]

The NCAA could have saved themselves a lot of trouble and just booted them.
That move probably would have had an 85% approval rating outside of PA.

[Factorial]

Is the thought that there was a conspiracy led by Freeh's office to "get" Penn State?

[Troy Loney]

Is the thought that there was a conspiracy led by Freeh's office to "get" Penn State?

No, that the findings of the freeh report were generated to justify NCAA sanctions.

[Shyster]

PSU alumni, as you can see our "fearless" leaders Rodney Erickson and the BoT at the time decided to send our University and our reputations down a river.

I'm curious; are you a current PSU employee? Did you ever work for PSU? Were you on the PSU football team or part of the football program? if not, how is your personal reputation dependent upon or affected by the reputation of either PSU in general or the PSU football program in particular?

I went to Pitt, both undergrad and for law school. I fail to see how any scandal in Pitt's football program—whether now or back when I was a student—could affect my personal reputation. The only thing I can think of that could have an effect on my personal reputation would be a revelation of some sort of academic scandal that was in my field of study during the time I was there. For example, if it comes out that Pitt Law was inflating grades or offering no-show classes (à la UNC Chapel Hill) during the time I was there, then that would affect me because it would create a question over the bona fides of my own degree and academic performance. But a revelation of some sort of scandal in regard to the dean of the law school or Pitt's chancellor would mean bupkis for my own reputation, because it has nothing to do with me.

[count2infinity]

I'm sort of confused here... what possible motive would Freeh have to coordinate with NCAA? Wasn't he being paid by PSU to do the report?

[Factorial]

As a two time PSU grad, I don't feel like my personal reputation has been damaged. I guess people who feel their reputation is based on football may feel differently.

[columbia]

As a two time PSU grad, I don't feel like my personal reputation has been damaged. I guess people who feel their reputation is based on football may feel differently.

Walk down the street in Chicago (or wherever) wearing a Penn State sweatshirt. I can guarantee you that - unconsciously - the first thing that most will think of is of the scandal. That's not fair to the alumni, but it exists. Would they consciously judge you? I would hope not, but you know that also exists (in small numbers).

[Troy Loney]

The NCAA could have saved themselves a lot of trouble and just booted them.
That move probably would have had an 85% approval rating outside of PA.

Doubt it though. There is way too much money at stake for psu to not fight that decision through every level of the courts. And based on the freeh stuff, NCAA was grasping for a reason to take action.

It's really just am awful thing, the guilt of the principals is likely impossible to prove, and the only hopeful outcome is that psu does the necessary soul searching to discover how this could have happened. But football sanctions are pretty silly, psu's punishment was settled in court with the civil trials.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

PSU alumni, as you can see our "fearless" leaders Rodney Erickson and the BoT at the time decided to send our University and our reputations down a river.

I'm curious; are you a current PSU employee? Did you ever work for PSU? Were you on the PSU football team or part of the football program? if not, how is your personal reputation dependent upon or affected by the reputation of either PSU in general or the PSU football program in particular?

I went to Pitt, both undergrad and for law school. I fail to see how any scandal in Pitt's football program—whether now or back when I was a student—could affect my personal reputation. The only thing I can think of that could have an effect on my personal reputation would be a revelation of some sort of academic scandal that was in my field of study during the time I was there. For example, if it comes out that Pitt Law was inflating grades or offering no-show classes (à la UNC Chapel Hill) during the time I was there, then that would affect me because it would create a question over the bona fides of my own degree and academic performance. But a revelation of some sort of scandal in regard to the dean of the law school or Pitt's chancellor would mean bupkis for my own reputation, because it has nothing to do with me.

Prior to the scandal, our reputation was of succeeding on the football field while graduating our players, maintaining a high standard of education, and doing things the right way. The consent decree states the following:

the University maintained a "culture of reverence for the football program that is ingrained at all levels of the campus community"

That makes it sound like we as a community allowed Sandusky to occur because we wanted football to succeed. This runs completely counter to what the actual culture was at Penn State as the teachers, staff, students, and fans worked towards ensuring that the "Success with honor" mantra was upheld and followed. Remind you that there has been no evidence of boosters paying athletes, offering no-show classes, buying cars, tattoos, prostitutes, etc for recruits or players, things that would have been much easier to do and would have led to success in football. I wasn't in anyway connected to the football team other than I worked on the security team for the Blue-White Spring practice once, but the language above says we were responsible just by being part of the PSU community and being a fan of the football team.

[tifosi77]

PSU alumni, as you can see our "fearless" leaders Rodney Erickson and the BoT at the time decided to send our University and our reputations down a river.

I'm curious; are you a current PSU employee? Did you ever work for PSU? Were you on the PSU football team or part of the football program? if not, how is your personal reputation dependent upon or affected by the reputation of either PSU in general or the PSU football program in particular?

I went to PSU between '91 and '96, and worked at the rink over parts of four years ending in '97. Which means there's a strong possibility, if not likelihood, that I knew at least one of the victims. (#4, I believe; Sandusky bought him ice hockey lessons, which was what I did there) I also had frequent interactions with Sandusky and Paterno and the whole football coaching staff, as their offices were the second floor of our building.

The fact that I had no personal involvement in these matters is irrelevant to far too many people. When I wear PS branded clothes, I get the dirty looks. I get the sneers. I had one woman confront me in line at the grocery store accusing me of supporting child rape. Because I wore my PS Hockey hat, I was a pedophile by proxy. Sweet. It was rampant in the months right after the grand jury thing, to the point that went on about a seven or eight month PSU hiatus. But years after the fact it's not completely gone. When I meet new people (just started a new job six weeks ago, so there's been a lot of that going on) and talk turns to college, people occasionally still shift back and forth on their feet and cross their arms or look at the ceiling and adjust their posture as soon as they hear 'Penn State'.

We're all tainted goods now, in the eyes of many. Clearly, these people are fools. But that, more than anything, is why I'm am still keenly interested in the ultimate resolution of this case. Because even tho I did not have an interest in the criminal acts, I am deeply vested in the outcome.