Report: PSU disregarded safety and welfare of children/victims

[osdad]

Regarding the current players, PS could immediately petition the NCAA to waive the 1 year sitout rule and could release all players from committments. They could set up a referal office that would actively assist any player in transferring to another school. Alternatively, for those who want to stay, they could exchange an athletic scholarship for an equal academic one.

They could but probably won't.

 

[Luigi59]

"We'll hold in abeyance all of those decisions until we've actually decided what we want to do with the actual charges should there be any. And I don't want to take anything off the table."

NCAA president Mark Emmert has not ruled out drastically punishing Penn State football in the wake of the Jerry Sandusky scandal.

"I've never seen anything as egregious as this in terms of just overall conduct and behavior inside a university and hope never to see it again," Emmert said during the interview. "What the appropriate penalties are, if there are determinations of violations, we'll have to decide.

Still reeling from the content of the Freeh report, Emmert did not dismiss the notion of issuing the so-called "death penalty" against Penn State, asserting that the unprecedented nature of the Sandusky scandal could warrant extreme punishment.

"This is completely different than an impermissible benefits scandal like happened at SMU, or anything else we've dealt with," Emmert said. "This is as systemic a cultural problem as it is a football problem. There have been people that said this wasn't a football scandal.

"Well it was more than a football scandal, much more than a football scandal. It was that but much more. And we'll have to figure out exactly what the right penalties are. I don't know that past precedent makes particularly good sense in this case, because it's really an unprecedented problem."

 

[goaliedad]

Goaliedad

I agree that we both feel that certain members of the BOT and senior leadership should be gone. That is without doubt.
I also firmly believe that the Freeh report is NOT the last word on this. I too still have some reservations concerning it, but probably not for the same reason as you (although who commissioned it is a valid reason). My reasons include:

1. The fact that all testimony was not given under oath. That people sometimes have reasons to lie, especially true if they feel they have to say certain things to keep their job.

2.It has been my experience that internal investigators sometime make curious decisions that just make you ask “why did they do that”.

3.The lack of completeness. They failed to interview certain characters involved in this such as McQueary, Paterno, et al.

As such I do read the report with caution.

I am also mindful that while I believe Penn State will want to settle any lawsuits as quickly as possible, they still may find themselves in litigation. If any evidence that comes out of such trials contradicts what is found in the report, then yes, you would have to question its accuracy and value.
That sums up why I am doubtful that this report is the last word.

I did notice that Penn State Student Association changed the name of their tent camp to Nittneyville.

I'm sure that this won't be the final report on this scandal. Next up, the Paterno Family report. Probably won't be any more reliable, once again consider the bias of the source and the above items you mentioned.

The sad part is that people are buying these "reports" as something other than what they are - someone's opinion who carried out a flawed process and biased by the funder of the process.

IMHO, the first investigation needs to be of the 1998 incident and whether there was undue influence on the state investigation by people in high state office. From the outcome of this (although we will never truly everything given that Joe Pa cannot defend himself), we may very well see that there may have been an ongoing conspiracy to keep Sandusky's actions secret and who may or may not have been in on it.

Those persons would have a presumed motive to cover up the subsequent actions by Sandusky.

There has been a lot of talk about how much Joe Pa knew about the 1998 affair and whether he had any influence on the decision. And as you mention, this not being taken under oath makes it just that - talk.

One thing that is certain, once Sandusky was retired from PSU, Joe Pa was in no official position to stop what Sandusky did. It was the Athletic Department that controlled access to the facilities (although Joe Pa's name is on the building, he doesn't own it). Joe Pa couldn't fire Sandusky, he wasn't an employee anymore.

Now if Joe Pa had influence on the decision to retire Sandusky in 1998, one has to ask if he was aware of the "quality" of the investigation that was(n't) performed (I'd have a hard time believing he could order a faulty investigation). If the law enforcement officials say, "we can't prove it enough to prosecute", you have to ask whether there was a case for firing with cause, or whether retirement was the lawyers' exit to a messy situation.

Rolling the clock forward to the McQueary incident, Joe Pa clearly fumbled the ball following up on his bosses' actions. I'm sure he had regrets there. His hindsight became 20/20. He discovered his feet of clay.

I have found this whole affair an interesting insight into how Americans love to build heros and tear them down. Joe Pa didn't go into coaching to become a hero, but like it or not (probably the latter, as he never was one to seek the limelight) he was made one and now is being torn down like one. He helped create a great and powerful PSU athletic machine and perhaps was caught up in the machine defending itself.

Could he have said NO and stopped it? Quite possibly, although once again we don't know how much he had to do with the 1998 stuff. Yes, he could have smeared Sandusky publicly after Sandusky was let off. That may have led to he and the University being sued and the program being destroyed without necessarily changing the outcome (I don't think anyone was thinking that Sandusky would continue doing this stuff on the side after being retired for doing it the first time). This is the biggest mistake - underestimating the pedophile. He wouldn't be the first. Let's hope others learn.

 

[Luigi59]

One thing that is certain, once Sandusky was retired from PSU, Joe Pa was in no official position to stop what Sandusky did.

"for certain"?

I would disagree vehemently. So would one of my business partners, who graduated from Penn State, as did his wife, and his son, and currently has a daughter attending. Not to mention his father in law being a very respected professor there for many years. And his wife's family who all live in State College.

They know, as does anyone even remotely associated with Penn State - Joe Paterno controlled EVERYTHING that happened in that football program.

Everything.

If he didn't want someone using those facilities, all he needed to do was wave his finger, and they were gone. Paterno had power over all the poeple there, even those who were supposedly his bosses.

He looked the other way, enabling another decade of children to be raped under his watch, in his facilities, by a man who still had a valid PSU id card and access to all football facilities. A man who brought those children to practices, to games, down to the sidelines even. Without Paterno of the football program stopping him. Disgusting.

And they want to keep a statue of this man there? Even more disgusting.

In November 2004, four of Penn State's leaders, including then-president Graham Spanier, sat down at Joe Paterno's kitchen table on a Sunday morning. The men asked the iconic coach to retire. Paterno said no, and that was that.

That same month, seven members of Penn State's board of trustees proposed sweeping reforms that would have strengthened the board's oversight power of Spanier and other campus leaders, including Paterno, according to documents obtained this week by "Outside the Lines." The group told the full board, "Decisions scrutinized with the benefit of hindsight need to withstand the test of being informed decisions."

But the board never took a vote on the proposal. Spanier and then-board chairwoman Cynthia Baldwin considered the reforms -- and, just as Paterno had done, said no, three current trustees say.

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...ate-nittany-lions-trustees-passed-reform-2004

A classic case of the tail wagging the dog.

And clearly fitting the NCAA definition of "lack of institutional control."

 

[bruno]

Interesting blog in the Post's Religion and Ethics last weekend:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...o-a-scapegoat/2012/07/13/gJQAShvRiW_blog.html

There was also an interesting question and answer session with Rabbi Hirschfield on the same topic- from the transcript of that:

Q.Black and white
"Wow, this is a tough subject for an ethics chat. The case itself seems clearly black and white (that Sandusky is guilty of a heinous crime and that some of his colleagues, including Paterno, were involved in covering them up). I think one question here is, what is the ethical role of the press? Obviously, now that an official report has been released, many in the press are condemning Paterno and the PSU administration in the harshest terms. Are they simply jumping on the bandwagon? Should the role of the press be to broadcast their own outrage or simply report the facts, ma'am, and let the public come to their own emotional conclusions? Some even argue that the media should have been more outraged when the story first broke, while Paterno was still alive. Since I generally agree with what is being written about these horrible crimes, my emotional reaction is to be totally on board with all the media and public outrage. However, I know an emotional reaction is not equivalent to ethical responsibility. "

A.Brad Hirschfield :

"I don't know who you are, but you are genuinely wise and I thank you for your comments. In fact, the over-easy plunge into the outrage pool is just what I want to avoid.The piling on approach you point out is actually an easy way for people to feel morally superior and a bit safer because they have identified, and hopefully "killed" the monster in the story. Of course, punishments are in order here, but that is not the most important thing.

The ethical response to this situation is to ask with regard to what issues are we shutting our own eyes? Who should we be standing up for, but are not? Where have we confused love and loyalty with blind obedience and excuse-making? Using events in the lives of others to invite ourselves to ask the questions which those others should have asked -- that's the ethical response."

– July 13, 2012 11:47 AM

Very timely observation. Earlier one of the posters on this thread articulated that

"Penn State will never be remembered for anything but this scandal until they take drastic actions that further the care, treatment, reparations, and remuneration of the victims."

Pretty accurate. It seems hard to see how increasingly strident and frequent exhibitions of written outrage accomplishes that though. Some of you may wish to make sure that you haven't fallen into the condition that Rabbi Hirschfield is commenting on in the blog.

This whole scandal should be pointing out what is all too common in organizations everywhere- an unwillingness to admit and take responsibility for flaws in people and the organization that potentially make it "look bad". You see it all too often in business (apparently nobody did anything really wrong on either the Business side of things or on the government regulatory and response side of the Deepwater explosion) , the military (the death of Pat Tillman for example was nothing more than the Army being unwilling to admit that a tragic error had occurred), politics (For sure- it seems to be the modus operandi) and academia as well as in personal relationships ('that can't be right- I know them well- they are good people- I talked with them - things aren't what it looks like so it's OK"). It's a huge issue - far bigger than just this scandal and in society overall. Until we have a culture that accepts personal and organizational responsibility for failures , this is just another case of people and organizations protecting their own short sighted interests at the expense of the larger issue.

 

[-Bull-]

Goaliedad, I'll also have to disagree. Football coaches control everything related to them in the athletic department, especially at large schools. They control who has access to their facilities and at what times, who can stand on their sidelines during games. Everything.

Even if, by some rare chance, JoePa couldn't keep the molester out of his facilities, all he would have to have done was tell someone of what was going on. That's what gets me, he did nothing. He even admitted it before he died. He was more focused on keeping his image and that of Penn State clean and securing that luxury box for his family for the next 25 years. That is why this "hero" is being torn down.

 

[Luigi59]

PSU has 6 billion dollar endowment. Use it to pay the whining cab driver. Or tell him to move. Just like when a factory closes. Boo hoo, welcome to the world.

Actions has consequences. Sometimes the innocent suffer when the guilty get punished. Happens all the time. Poor argument IMHO.

To let PSU go unpunished would be unforgivable and a slap in the face of every victim.

To let them continue their football program would be disgusting.

I hope a 3-year ban will be imposed, but I'm sure the NCAA doesn't have the guts to go more than 1 year.

Unprecedented actions deserves unprecedented punishments.

 

[goaliedad]

Goaliedad, I'll also have to disagree. Football coaches control everything related to them in the athletic department, especially at large schools. They control who has access to their facilities and at what times, who can stand on their sidelines during games. Everything.

Even if, by some rare chance, JoePa couldn't keep the molester out of his facilities, all he would have to have done was tell someone of what was going on. That's what gets me, he did nothing. He even admitted it before he died. He was more focused on keeping his image and that of Penn State clean and securing that luxury box for his family for the next 25 years. That is why this "hero" is being torn down.

I'm not sure what University you work at, but where I collect my paycheck (every much the equivalent athletically of PSU) the coaches get first call on facilities for their programs and camps. And yes, they do say who is in the facility when it is their time. Otherwise, the University has revenue to generate. Summer is filled with camps - some run by coaches under the University Brand - others independent of the University.

I'm not sure if Joe Pa was worried about his image - after that many years - even when he suffered several sub-par years, he kept the same persona. His personal brand was about character and long-term relationships - with coaches and players.

If Joe Pa had a fault, it wasn't worrying about his brand, but believing ALL the people around him had the same character. I don't think he wanted to believe that Sandusky was doing bad things. And I think there were others up the food chain who didn't understand that character thing either. They were blinded by the success and failed to see what built the success and then when confronted by something threatening the PSU Brand, failed to realize that character demands that you follow through the process (i.e. make sure Sandusky is THOROUGHLY investigated in 1998).

Joe Pa's image had plenty of strength to survive the 1998 Sandusky affair if they treated it properly. You kick out the bad actor, do right by the victims, tighten up your oversight procedures and demonstrate that no man is above the law. Given Joe Pa's frumpy image (apologies to PSU fans), he knows that not only would it have been the right thing, but would actually have been another teachable moment for his players.

I suspect that it was those above him who didn't understand this and put the kabash on the investigation because they didn't get it that you can survive these kinds of things and actually come out stronger if you man up.

Once those bad actors above him did this and gave Sandusky the gold watch and all the other perks of a PSU athletics retiree (including the access to use PSU facilities for his own purposes), that is where Joe Pa was put in a tough situation. I highly doubt he could have called out the folks investigating the situation (who thought they were doing Joe Pa a favor). He didn't have much choice at that point except to go along with the fact that Sandusky was now a retiree. He didn't have the goods to publicly call Sandusky a pedophile (talk about costing your brand through law suits) because someone else had screwed that up already.

That being said, I suspect Joe Pa knew deep down that Sandusky had a problem. Now does he spend his life trying to catch this guy doing something wrong, or does he concentrate on his life's work? Clearly he continued on with his coaching, but when McQueary comes to him with the subsequent accusation, he is put back into the picture again. And this is where he goes wrong. Taking McQueary up the food chain was the correct first move, but he failed to follow up. Why? Nobody truly knows. Perhaps he had figured out that the machine above him was more powerful than an 80+ year old man. Perhaps he was getting weak of will to fight in his old age.

These clearly were failings that we all focus on. However, I think his greater failing was having too much faith in those working for him (Sandusky) and those up the food chain who didn't understand that his program was about character. He dealt with his share of athletes who made mistakes over the years, but didn't look for those same faults in those working with and above him.

 

[-Bull-]

I go to a large SEC institution. Maybe it's just us, but the coaches down here control everything, regardless of in season or not. Then again, profits in this league are astronomical for athletics, so our schools don't ever hurt for cash, so the only camps being held are the ones run by the coaches. (my schools football program was ranked being worth $92 million, just to give you an idea)

This is all perspective of this league, you're university appears to be different.

 

[goaliedad]

I go to a large SEC institution. Maybe it's just us, but the coaches down here control everything, regardless of in season or not. Then again, profits in this league are astronomical for athletics, so our schools don't ever hurt for cash, so the only camps being held are the ones run by the coaches. (my schools football program was ranked being worth $92 million, just to give you an idea)

This is all perspective of this league, you're university appears to be different.

Check your PM for my reply.

 

[Luigi59]

You actually used the words “whining cab driver", and "Boo hoo, welcome to the world". Thankfully it appears that I have more compassion than you do.

You have compassion for the institution at the heart of the matter, yes.

For the victims, sorry, haven't seen it.

Maybe if those who are wishing to cheer on the Nittany Lions this football season and genuflect at the foot of the JoePa statue had to watch the games with one of Sandusky's victims instead of Joe The Cabdriver, they might change their minds.

Factories close all the time. The local cab drivers either get a new job, or move. The factory doesn't owe them an income after it closes, and neither does PSU or the NCAA owe them anything if the actions of PSU cause themselves to be penalized.

As for your statement that "Sometimes the innocent suffer when the guilty get punished." wow, is all that I can say. We as a nation have actually gone out of our way to insure that the innocent does not suffer when the guilty get punished. We also go out of our way to compensate the innocent when they do suffer.

Tell me how the employees of an Wall Street embezzler, say the owner of a huge investment company, who is convicted and jailed (and no longer allowed to be a brokerage or have a seat on the exchange), tell me about the families of the employees, the children of the employees, the guy who sells them suits, they local car salesman, etc - we should somehow allow the guilty institution to stay in business because of all the innocents who may suffer if they are punished?

Puh-lease.

Now for your comments about a $6 billion endowment? According to every report I have read it is nowhere near that amount. Wishing to give you the benefit of the doubt, please tell me where or how you are getting that figure.

It was in a blog, not sure of the course, but I'll retract it and use your figure of $1.7 billion.

One Thousand Seven Hundred Million dollars.

Does my original statement change at all due to the revised endowment amount?

Not at all. If PSU is worried about the local cabdriver (more it seems, then the victims of Sandusky) let them contribute $10 million each day to the local Chanmber of Commerce, $10 million cash for each missed a home game, and let the CoC distribute it

What's that gonna cost them, $60 or $70 million?

Wow, they would now only have One Thousand Six Hundred Thirty Million left.

 

[scoutpilot]

Tell me how the employees of an Wall Street embezzler, say the owner of a huge investment company, who is convicted and jailed (and no longer allowed to be a brokerage or have a seat on the exchange), tell me about the families of the employees, the children of the employees, the guy who sells them suits, they local car salesman, etc - we should somehow allow the guilty institution to stay in business because of all the innocents who may suffer if they are punished?

Puh-lease.

You have to admit, tpg, the man has a point there.

 

[billyb]

There is no need for the football program to be banned. If PSU really wanted to do get on the right path, the entire school leadership (to include the board) would resign immediately. PSU should also set up an endowment to give a free college education to every victim and all of their direct decedents. PSU should also start the largest foundation in the world to prevent child abuse.

That would make me think that they saw the error of their ways.

 

[Pima]

I worry that those oppose to the death penalty are following too closely in Joe Pa's footsteps. Loyalty to PSU comes first, mankind and society comes second.

TPG,

If I was connected to PSU at all, I would be thrilled if the death penalty was only a yr.

Sorry, but I think most posters here would agree that NCAA should invoke this penalty. Many may have felt differently 6 months ago, but once those emails came out, and the 1998 incident too, they lost any hope that people could believe Joe Pa knew nothing.

Joe Pa now looks like Sgt Schultz from Hogan's Heroes...I know nossing!

God rest his soul, and it is truly sad to see that everything he ever worked for, everything that he said about character will forever live with an asterisk next to his name.

If the penalty does occur, it will become a symbol to every coach out there that you don't want to have a Joe Pa legacy.

You have to ask yourself if Pitt had this occur (14 yrs @8 children that we know of, including his own adopted child), would you say the same thing? If yes, why? Are you going to say the emails and the handwritten notes were taken out of context? Are you going to say that the victims lifetime of emotional pain is not worth 1 yr at least of the financial pain to the college? Wouldn't you want it to do exactly as I stated, serve as a warning to every coach out there not to look the other way?

I think that is what you are not addressing when reading why people are demanding for the penalty. NCAA doesn't do this, it is like telling your teenager, do it again, and you will be grounded, but when they do it again, all you do is say is; do it again and you will be grounded. The teenager learns you never back up your threats with actions.

OBTW TPG where do you stand with the death penalty for FAMU marching band?

 

[BigBear]

To those who are clamoring for the NCAA death sentence, let's take a minute to think this through:
1. The football program is, as someone called it, "the golden calf." At almost every Division 1 university, football is the only sport that makes money for the school. even the other popular sports - basketball, baseball, lacrosse (in some areas) - cost the schools money to pay for travel, equipment, coaches, fields, etc. This money comes from the football program. If you kill Penn State's football program for the next 5 to 10 years, you will effectively be killing many of it's other sports programs, in additiion to massively increasing tuition. So how many thousands of children will that now negatively impact?
2. An active and renewed Penn State football team is in a much better position to reach out to the community to make sure this does not happen again. Remember Mike Vick? after serving his prison sentence, he became an advocate against dog fighting. His continued success in the NFL makes him a much more influential role model than he would be if he received a permanent ban from the league.

 

[EDelahanty]

Better to apply the death sentence to the NCAA.

 

[usna1985]

If you kill Penn State's football program for the next 5 to 10 years, you will effectively be killing many of it's other sports programs, in additiion to massively increasing tuition. So how many thousands of children will that now negatively impact?

These "children" -- who are actually adults, unlike the true children abused by Sandusky -- can attend any one of the hundred other Division I colleges and universities in this country and play their sports. Or go to the hundreds of Division II and III schools. PSU isn't the only school in the country or even the state. Part of the issue is those who seem to think it is.

 

[Luigi59]

The Joe Paterno statue was removed Sunday morning from its pedestal outside Beaver Stadium, and it will be stored in an unnamed "secure location," Penn State president Rodney Erickson announced. Erickson also said the Paterno name will remain on the university's library.

How appropriate. Paterno's name remains on a building where "silence" is expected.

 

[bruno]

"Two sources with knowledge of the Penn State penalties said NCAA president Mark Emmert will announce Monday that he is personally sanctioning Penn State after receiving approval from the association’s Division I Board of directors, which is comprised of 22 college presidents and chancellors. One source told Yahoo! Sports Emmert’s sanctions will include a “multiple-year” bowl ban and “crippling” scholarship losses. Penn State will not receive the "death penalty"

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf-...ggering--penalties-from-sandusky-scandal.html

 

[breadcrumbs]

These "children" -- who are actually adults, unlike the true children abused by Sandusky -- can attend any one of the hundred other Division I colleges and universities in this country and play their sports. Or go to the hundreds of Division II and III schools. PSU isn't the only school in the country or even the state. Part of the issue is those who seem to think it is.

Preach it Sister!

PDB88- PSU admin weren't thinking about future "children" attending on scholarship or full freight tuition, when they covered up for sicko sandusky now were they? Were they concerned with their beloved football program only? Yep! In fact, NO ONE was thinking of any child, victim or otherwise.

I am sickened by the continued defense of anything P<ervert>SU!!!!!