Penn St., Sandusky and Joe Paterno

[rickshaw]

allright allready

The day the sanctions story broke, last Monday, I did a google search and spent about 20 minutes reading. Reuters, Christian Science Monitor, etc etc. Every single lame objection to sanctions was addressed. All the background and implications were discussed. All the heart rending emotions of JoePa / PSU football worshipers were expressed. All the questions were asked, all the answers given. IF you really want to know.

Go. Do likewise. Educate yourselves before regurgitating the same Old stuff from last Monday's press.

Bottom Line: The NCAA acted to impose serious sanctions. Penn State, the offending institution AGREED to accept the sanctions. Mayne they all know more than you do.

 

[gregod]

There has been a lot of discussion about the appropriate punishment for Penn State and their football program.

As someone who hates American football and has no connection with Penn State whatsoever, I still cannot help but feel that the penalty meted out by the NCAA punishes those who had nothing to do with this scandal. The lost scholarships punish those who would have otherwise been able to attend the school and the lost revenue will hurt other sports at the school because football often pays for those programs.

On the other hand, I cannot help thinking that if I were a Penn State student or alum, I would have wanted the death penalty for the football team. The best way to remove the stigma that the football program has brought to the school is not to clean house, which likely would still leave behind the same culture that allowed the crimes to happen, but to completely excise the cancer that is the football program.

 

[gregod]

{snip}

Bottom Line: The NCAA acted to impose serious sanctions. Penn State, the offending institution AGREED to accept the sanctions. Mayne they all know more than you do.

Wouldn't the civil penalties that the university will surely have to pay out be much better than the sanctions imposed by a private organization on a public university? The NCAA is a wealthy private organization whose numerous board members draw salaries ranging from $400,000 to over a million dollars a year.

I think that money would be much better spent on restitution to the victims.

 

[US Patent Exploding Cyclist]

... they all know more than you do.

You're probably right, and as I said I have no issues with sanctions being handed down by the NCAA. I will always have an issue with scholarship reduction as a sanction, in any case, as pointed out previously. Force the school to give the scholarships to students (not student athletes) and actually do something to promote academics. (just my opinion)

I think the NCAA needed to act at some point, I don't like that they acted prior to criminal/civil cases being closed. And I have a big problem with the lack of investigation/due process prior to the sanctions. There are procedures that need to be followed in these situations, and in this case they weren't. The NCAA based all of their decisions off of the Freeh Report, without their own investigation. The Freeh Report has already been ammended twice, although minor, still not a good thing if that is what the NCAA is basing their decision on. Not to mention Spanier is calling out the Freeh Report for factual inaccuracies in regards to his involvement.

These people may know more than me, but I am willing to bet they don't have all of the facts yet. This is why I say wait.

Freeh Report updated

Spanier

 

[Steve H.]

I did not see this. I know it was 45 counts of which Sandusky was convicted.

Sorry, I should have said potential victims to be 45 additional. Here is a link to an article about three additional accusers from the 1970's:
http://content.usatoday.com/communi...ndusky-sexual-abuse-from-1970s/1#.UBFXN442HP0
There was also the accuser who was on television and his adopted son Matt Sandusky.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I think a lot of people are failing to understand what the role the Board of Trustees is. Most people seem to believe they are merely figureheads who meet once a month or so over coffee or golf and look at accounting numbers from time to time.

While trustee Steve Garber did resign, I think this entire debacle has shown just how out of touch they were with the people they hired, entrusted and oversaw. It shows how gullible they were, and how easy their lives had become. Some feel they all should have resigned.

It is my belief that one of the reasons for the punishment the NCAA handed out is to make certain this doesn't happen again, hopefully ever. And one of the groups punished in this are the remaining trustees. So, while I understand the argument of punishing those who did the crime, I don't believe this ruling is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Not at all. It's also to hopefully send a message to numerous other college institutions that have fostered the same system of privilege and immunity that PSU had, plus local security and law enforcement, The very system that Sandusky took advantage of, and essentially received help doing so from Curly, Shultz and Paterno. And I believe this is why Erickson, Peetz and O'Brien all accepted the decision.

 

[rickshaw]

What the NCAA wants to achieve

This CS Monitor article, I feell says it very well.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Sports...-NCAA-aims-to-end-mindset-that-led-to-tragedy


"...in the NCAA’s view, what happened at Penn State necessitated an even graver response than the death penalty.

“Imposing the death penalty does not address the cultural, systemic, and leadership failures at Penn State. Instead, our approach demands that they become an exemplary NCAA member by eradicating the mindset that led to this tragedy,” the NCAA says on a page devoted to the Penn State sanctions.

The main difference between the two sets of penalties, then, is in terms of the “corrective” levies required by the NCAA on Monday. Penn State’s sanctions do not only extract their pound of flesh from the athletic program – they take aim at the concept of the football program within the university.

In fact, the Penn State case revealed an awareness by Emmert and the NCAA about a problem with the role of sports on college campuses in general.

“One of the grave dangers stemming from our love of sports,” he said, “can be the sports can become too big to fail – indeed, too big to challenge.”

And that culture is something the death penalty simply can’t fix.

As cycling geeks we see the same thing in our own sport. The cult of hero worship. Athletes who become too big to challenge. The NCAA wants to begin a cultural change in college sports.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

A good friend and former co-worker who grew up in Pennsylvania called today, and he brought up the topic of Paterno. OFC, he is a strong PSU supporter. He made a statement showing one misconception that still exists out there about the laws concerning child protection. He said, "The Paterno cover-ups occurred before laws were changed regarding reporting of child abuse". That is so not true. Laws about reporting suspected abuse have been in place since the 1960's (LINK, see quote below from source). Degree'd educators receive training on this subject.

MANDATORY REPORTING OF ABUSE AND ITS IMPACT ON LAWYERS’ ETHICS AND ON THEIR USE OF EXPERTS

Background

All fifty (50) states, and the District of Columbia, have enacted laws that require the reporting of suspected child abuse. The statutes, with varied requirements, were enacted so that states could qualify for federal grant funding pursuant to the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act. This legislation can be traced back to efforts by the United States Department of Health Education and Welfare in 1963.

Since 1963, the statutes have been expanded both as to those who must report and the circumstances that give rise to a reportable incident. Civil and criminal liability has also been included in some of the state statutes.

So, why Don’t Some People Report Child Abuse and Neglect?

Among the most frequently identified reasons for not reporting are lack of knowledge about child abuse and neglect and lack of familiarity with state reporting laws. Other reasons people don’t report include:
• Choosing instead to effectively intervene independent of the formal system.
• Fear or unwillingness to get involved.
• Fear that a report will make matters worse.
• Reluctance to risk angering the family.
• Concern that making a report will negatively impact an existing relationship with the child or others.
• Belief that someone else will speak up and do something.

Although these feelings are understandable and it can be frightening to respond to suspected child abuse and neglect, the consequences of not reporting your worries to child welfare professionals could be seriously detrimental to a child’s safety. (LINK)

Sometimes a big stick is required to get the message across.

 

[ChrisE]

This CS Monitor article, I feell says it very well.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Sports...-NCAA-aims-to-end-mindset-that-led-to-tragedy


"...in the NCAA’s view, what happened at Penn State necessitated an even graver response than the death penalty.

“Imposing the death penalty does not address the cultural, systemic, and leadership failures at Penn State. Instead, our approach demands that they become an exemplary NCAA member by eradicating the mindset that led to this tragedy,” the NCAA says on a page devoted to the Penn State sanctions.

The main difference between the two sets of penalties, then, is in terms of the “corrective” levies required by the NCAA on Monday. Penn State’s sanctions do not only extract their pound of flesh from the athletic program – they take aim at the concept of the football program within the university.

In fact, the Penn State case revealed an awareness by Emmert and the NCAA about a problem with the role of sports on college campuses in general.

“One of the grave dangers stemming from our love of sports,” he said, “can be the sports can become too big to fail – indeed, too big to challenge.”

And that culture is something the death penalty simply can’t fix.
.

What a crock. "NCAA says...", yeah, stenographers lap up what "officials" tell them without critical thinking or analysis. Does Judith Miller work for this online rag? The media in this country are mostly worthless.

Where is the chart showing this punishment is worse than that death penalty? Where is the proof that death penalty does not change culture?

That's right, there is none. This is just PR propaganda tossed at a stenographer, sure to make it in print, to cut off the question I for example have been asking.

Why couldn't there be both? The death penalty for say a year, then 2 or 3 years of similar sanctions they have now? Would that year of death penalty dilute the effectiveness of the remaining years?

 

[rhubroma]

What a crock. "NCAA says...", yeah, stenographers lap up what "officials" tell them without critical thinking or analysis. Does Judith Miller work for this online rag? The media in this country are mostly worthless.

Where is the chart showing this punishment is worse than that death penalty? Where is the proof that death penalty does not change culture?

That's right, there is none. This is just PR propaganda tossed at a stenographer, sure to make it in print, to cut off the question I for example have been asking.

Why couldn't there be both? The death penalty for say a year, then 2 or 3 years of similar sanctions they have now? Would that year of death penalty dilute the effectiveness of the remaining years?

But how can we think that all that money and all that hypocrisy doesn't lead to this?

While I can't find intelligent all those who rely on the charts, on the statistics. They are an alibi to not think critically. These football programs are a perversion. Where is there some damn conscience of humanity? Whenever machismo, profit, patriotism and, in this case, Catholicism, get in the way, these things are bound to happen.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Why couldn't there be both? The death penalty for say a year, then 2 or 3 years of similar sanctions they have now? Would that year of death penalty dilute the effectiveness of the remaining years?

If you dig up some articles, the NCAA group that was reviewing the situation and making recommendations to Emmert, a few of these people were suggesting the death penalty, up to a couple of years, and some were seeking fines in the range of $100m. So you are not alone in your opinion.

During the process a negotiation then took place between current PSU president Erickson, NCAA chief Emmert and others. A compromise of sorts was talked through, and approved by trustee president Peetz, with the NCAA agreeing to the $60m plus stripping post-season play and scholarships, and PSU agreeing to not contest the NCAA's ruling, or take any of the issues to court. Thus closing the book on the matter.

For those who still think PSU doesn't deserve this, they still have an out. They could choose to leave the NCAA and Big Ten. No one is forcing the school to part of either organization. Of course they're not going to do that because they realize there is still a great deal of money to be made, especially in the long term, but in the short term as well, by staying.

 

[Steve H.]

And the hits keep coming: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...connected-university-report-article-1.1134125

 

[Steve H.]

redacted 1998 police report: http://www.scribd.com/doc/86851676/Redacted-Police-Report

 

[Steve H.]

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/10/jerry_sandusky_victims_address.html
Hopefully more of the same comes for Curley, Shultz and Spanier.
I understand there is an ongoing investigation into The Second Mile.

 

[Merckx index]

More allegations against Joe Paterno have surfaced, these from way back in the early 70s, outside the scope of the original investigation. One emerged in testimony associated with a lawsuit between Penn State and an insurance company over who should pay the millions to Sandusky’s victims. The man said that he was molested by Sandusky, reported it to Paterno, and nothing happened.

The testimony as reported was somewhat vague. But then another man stepped forward with a more detailed story:

The other has spoken to CNN, in great detail, explaining how he was a troubled young kid in 1971 when he was raped in a Penn State bathroom by Jerry Sandusky. Then, he says, his complaint about it was ignored by Paterno.

He has never before spoken publicly about the abuse, or what happened afterward, but he did confide in a friend in the 1970s, and that friend has also verified his story to CNN.

In addition, a Pennsylvania State Trooper, a longtime friend of this man, also confirmed to CNN that days after Sandusky's initial arrest in November 2011, he told the trooper his story.

Victim A was already a troubled kid. During a church sleepover the year before, he said he was molested by a local priest. When he tried to report it, he was thrown out of the church. He was living with foster parents when Sandusky attacked him.

He found himself on the phone with two men from Penn State.

"I tell them what happened -- well, I couldn't get it out of me that I was -- I can't even tell it to this day. It's just degrading -- that I was raped," he said.

"I told the story up to a certain point. I told them that he grabbed me and that I got the hell out of there."

He insisted that he "made it very clear" it was a sexual attack.

"I made it clear there were things done to me that I just can't believe could have been done to me and I couldn't escape. I said, 'I'm very upset and scared and I couldn't believe I let my guard down.' They listened to me. And then all hell broke loose.

"They were asking me my motive, why I would say this about someone who has done so many good things."

They accused him of making it up. "'Stop this right now! We'll call the authorities,'" he said they told him.

Victim A says he couldn't think. "I just wanted to get off the phone."

The men on the phone had introduced themselves as Jim and Joe, he said. He had no idea who Jim was, and can't, to this day, say for sure.

"There was no question in my mind who Joe was," he said. "I've heard that voice a million times. It was Joe Paterno."

In the past year or so, life has become more difficult for Victim A. He's had a heart attack and several other health scares. The stress, he says, is overwhelming -- especially because he feels like people in State College care more about Paterno than the victims. He has lost friends.

One of them, a former pro player who used to take him to Super Bowls, told him he didn't want him hanging around his football friends anymore, and humiliated him at a party.

"He taped something to my ass and called it Sandusky's hole," he said. "It's absolutely horrible what he did to me. He's hurt me about as much as I've been hurt."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/06/us/jerry-sandusky-victims-paterno-penn-state/index.html?sr=twCNN050616jerry-sandusky-victims-paterno-penn-state0957PMStoryGalPhoto&linkId=24234146

 

[the delgados]

I really hope all those studying higher education have taken a look back and feel embarrassed about worshiping at the altar of Joe Pa-- or whatever they called him.
Watching university students camp out in front of his home in support despite the glaring amount of evidence was truly one of those wtf moments.