Penn State and the Clery Act

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

If there was ever a time to use the "Death Penalty" option...this is it. This is not just one cover up, it is YEARS of cover ups. Victim added to victim, because of leadership greed and cowardice as well as a culture that encourages this type of "hero worship."

 

Even now, there is an attitude to minimize the damage to the college culture which is a slap in the face to the victims whose love of football has been forever tainted. Football was the door, and that door should be closed for a season....or two.

 

Honestly, PSU should be volunteering to halt its program until such a time as they have developed new policies, hired new staff, and can move forward as a "new" football program. Give everyone a break and a rest and at the very least honor the scholarships even if the players cannot play. :glare:

 

I can possibly see closing the football program for a time but it seems some in this thread would close the whole school:001_huh:. To me it seems very unfair to close a whole school and hurt the thousands upon thousands of innocent employees and students. This would also hurt the entire town. Another poster said she believes that probably most knew of Sandusky and are therefore complicit in the crime, and I truly find that hard to believe. To me, that is like saying that most Catholics knew of the atrocities committed by some priests which I also do not believe is true (and ftr I think the Church's response to the whole thing has been horrifically inadequate). I believe that it was a powerful circle of a small group people who are responsible for this atrocity at Penn State.

 

ETA: I think your idea about Penn State volunteering to close their football program and re-tooling their policies is a great idea.

Edited July 14, 2012 by priscilla

[swimmermom3]

I think the message should be sent because everyone there at school and the community participated in the atmosphere that allowed the crimes to take place. I live in a college town. I know how the college sports people are revered. Businesses give them freebies when they come in, cops look the other way, locals know that nothing will happen when the college kids get in trouble because it involves people from that school. I also go to college now. There is not a single professor on campus that isn't talked about. I find it really really hard to believe that no one and absolutely no one ever said " he likes kids if you know what I mean" I find it hard to believe that rumors were not circulating. I find it even harder to believe that the type of abuser he was, that there is not a circle of them on campus or in the community. From what I read he was one that didn't believe he was harming and I do believe he had a safe group of similar minded people. My college has the society of swingers. We all know which ones to avoid because they are scoping for the next ones to add to the club. Rumors, yes. Hearsay, yes BUT... They are there. I feel that the same was on Penn State campus.

 

the community needs to feel the sting and punishment. Without the community's reverence and putting Penn State on God status, it would have been much much harder for these things to occur. Are people are going to suffer? Yep, They should. They created the climate that allows Penn State to harbor evil without repercussions. They created the situation that allowed a janitor and assistant coach to know that they could do nothing to stop the rape of kids. The grappling wasn't should I report it but should I take the chance of being the most hated person in town for reporting this? Should I be the one to take on the Penn State community and suffer the repercussions? That needs punishment. That climate needs to be broken, destroyed, and eliminated. And the sting should be felt as far and as wide as the Penn State community reaches. The community created "Penn State" reverence that allowed police to dismiss it and DA to even feel it wasn't something they could stand against. that type of mentality needs to be broken. If innocents are harmed, consider it a small price to pay for the hands off Penn State mentality to have existed in the first place while children were selected from charities associated with Penn State and raped on their campus.

 

While I do not agree that Penn State should be shut down, I do believe the football program needs to be shut down. The problem is larger than four men going to jail and the school paying large fines. That's just too simple, convenient, and forgettable as will be the victims. They will be forgotten.

 

As pointed out above, Jerry Sandusky was an active part of a culture that values football over children and integrity. It takes more than four or five people to create a culture the size and strength of the one that protected Sandusky. Money walked hand in hand with a reverence for football and talked, talked, talked here.

 

At the time Paterno and cronies were looking the other way as children were raped, the Catholic Church was paying out millions of dollars in settlements. Most people working in education or with youth from teachers to Scout leaders were having their fingerprints taken and filing for criminal history registry. School staffs were adding continuing education classes that taught mandatory reporting. Civil Air Patrol and the Boy Scouts were all implementing policies to not have adults alone with a minor. This subject was in the news and on people's minds.

 

Yet, at Penn State Sandusky was sharing a room with a various teenage boys while traveling for championships. The whole country is talking about abuse of power and no one ever had a question or suspicion? My what a polite bunch.

 

People knew. They always know in situations like this. Obviously local police and the DA knew. That means other officials knew. You can put the all measures into place that the commission recommended, but until you do something that abruptly changes that culture, those measures will be pointless. When a significant portion of the Penn State community can still be angry with the young men that were abused, instead of with JoePa, you know there is something wrong with the culture.

 

I guess my other question is what if those young men had all come from "good" families, Penn State alumni families? Would the stout defense of the Penn State football program be the same? Or would that be a game changer?

Edited July 14, 2012 by swimmermom3

[Katy]

There's been a lot of talk since the last time I commented!

 

First of all, this is not like the Catholic church because the Catholic church is not largely funded on federal financial aid.

 

Stopping financial aid, even for one semester, would create consequences for everyone but I would argue that the consequences would be from the more than 20 years of cover ups, not from enforcing the law.

 

There probably were rumors. The first known police report about this was a mother who reported an inappropriate shower to the police in 1991! The kid begged her not to because he wanted continued access to the football program. I have only read the first quarter of the Freeh report, but what I have read makes it quite clear that many many people on that campus KNEW what was going on and did nothing. One janitor was threatened not to come forward after he had witnessed a rape in the showers because PSU would protect its program above all else, and if anyone came forward they would all be fired. Sandusky was warned not to shower with kids many times. He kept getting caught over and over again. Nothing happened.

 

Every kid at this school could transfer to another program. It would be harder for those in the community and on the staff, but the consequences would not that much different than a small town when factories shut down or relocate overseas. And if that taught the country some serious lessons about NOT ignoring rumors, NOT looking the other way to save your job, and generally NOT trading child rape for your own temporary well being, then so be it. This atmosphere was so evil I cannot imagine any lesser strategy would be appropriate.

 

Athletic departments are not Gods, and they should not have separate rules just for them, and communities should not quietly look the other way while this sort of thing is going on.

[Denise in Florida]

This was the best quote on what should be the bottom line for this situation (emphasis mine):

 

"Shuttering Beaver Stadium for two years would take Penn State football down a peg. It would also punish loads of hard-working athletes who have done nothing wrong' date=' as well as all the fans who live and die with the Nittany Lions. [u']But that will be a far better result than the alternative—allowing a pedophile-sheltering athletic department that was bent on self-preservation to succeed in having itself preserved. [/u]If Penn State football carries on this fall with a new coach and those old white-and-blue uniforms, then the worldviews of Curley and Schultz and Spanier and Paterno will prevail. Though all four men lost their jobs, their mission to protect Penn State football at all costs will win out in the end."

 

THIS is why the football program should be shut down. Period.

 

:iagree: :iagree: The quickest way to restore their reputation would be to shut it down voluntarily rather than wait to be asked.

 

Yes, it is sad for the students, teachers, faculty that were not involved and have been betrayed by the people they trusted.

 

But such a thing does not happen in a vacuum, there must have been some reason they felt that they could sacrifce anyone they wanted in order to protect the football program.

 

This kind of corruption is very rarely isolated. They have taken a great first step by getting this review/report, they need to respond and clean house.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

 

First of all, this is not like the Catholic church because the Catholic church is not largely funded on federal financial aid.

 

The Catholic Church does have tax exempt status.

 

Stopping financial aid, even for one semester, would create consequences for everyone but I would argue that the consequences would be from the more than 20 years of cover ups, not from enforcing the law.

 

So you seriously propose punishing THOUSANDS due to a cover up initiated by 4 people?

 

There probably were rumors. The first known police report about this was a mother who reported an inappropriate shower to the police in 1991! The kid begged her not to because he wanted continued access to the football program. I have only read the first quarter of the Freeh report, but what I have read makes it quite clear that many many people on that campus KNEW what was going on and did nothing. One janitor was threatened not to come forward after he had witnessed a rape in the showers because PSU would protect its program above all else, and if anyone came forward they would all be fired. Sandusky was warned not to shower with kids many times. He kept getting caught over and over again. Nothing happened.

 

You have a few inaccuracies in this part of your post.

--The first police report was in 1998. The matter was investigated, and while red flags should have been raised, it was determined that no crime was committed.

--You are incorrect about the janitor's statement. He never said he was threatened - he did say he was afraid that if he did come forward that he would face the wrath of Paterno. Still an issue, but quite different from what you alleged.

--Sandusky was warned at least once. Claiming he was caught and warned "over and over" again is inaccurate. What did happen was bad enough, so there is no reason to sensationalize and exaggerate.

 

 

Every kid at this school could transfer to another program. It would be harder for those in the community and on the staff, but the consequences would not that much different than a small town when factories shut down or relocate overseas. And if that taught the country some serious lessons about NOT ignoring rumors, NOT looking the other way to save your job, and generally NOT trading child rape for your own temporary well being, then so be it. This atmosphere was so evil I cannot imagine any lesser strategy would be appropriate.

 

Athletic departments are not Gods, and they should not have separate rules just for them, and communities should not quietly look the other way while this sort of thing is going on.

 

Wouldn't punishing the actual perpetrators with jail time and civil suits accomplish the same purpose? Is punishing students, student athletes, and faculty massive overkill when 99.99% of them had no knowledge of what went on or any part the decision making process at any level? You do realize that the majority of students on PSU's campus have arrived after the final investigation of Sandusky had started, right?

You are also making some leaps about how widespread the rumors were. Prior to the GJ investigation, I would wager there were few if any whisperings about Sandusky around the PSU campus. He was not heavily connected to PSU in a manner that would be noticed by the average student. His reputation in the community by many accounts was stellar. There is little to no evidence that anyone looked the other way than a handful of administrators who had personal stakes in keeping the story quiet. So in response we are going tp punish a junior in biology with no financial aid to teach other administrators a lesson? Really? One would think slapping Spanier in prison would send more of a message to a university president than penalizing college students.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

:iagree: :iagree: The quickest way to restore their reputation would be to shut it down voluntarily rather than wait to be asked.

 

Yes, it is sad for the students, teachers, faculty that were not involved and have been betrayed by the people they trusted.

 

But such a thing does not happen in a vacuum, there must have been some reason they felt that they could sacrifce anyone they wanted in order to protect the football program.

 

This kind of corruption is very rarely isolated. They have taken a great first step by getting this review/report, they need to respond and clean house.

 

They have cleaned house. Everyone involved is fired/suspended and under indictment or dead.

 

No one is denying the 4 key administrators acted to protect PSU, the football program, and themselves at the cost of those young boys. However, the current students and student athletes at PSU were in grade school when that decision was made. I simply do not see how punishing some 18-22 year olds for what 45+ year old administrators did in 2001 makes any sense.

[Denise in Florida]

They have cleaned house. Everyone involved is fired/suspended and under indictment or dead.

 

No one is denying the 4 key administrators acted to protect PSU, the football program, and themselves at the cost of those young boys. However, the current students and student athletes at PSU were in grade school when that decision was made. I simply do not see how punishing some 18-22 year olds for what 45+ year old administrators did in 2001 makes any sense.

 

I agree about not punishing the students...academics/student aid/etc. should not suffer. But the attitude of 'anything for football' seems quite alive and well if the student protests are an accurate indicator. I am not there, I am not an alumni so I can only respond to what I see on the news. The students went to bat for the team and Paterno not the victims.

 

Academic programs, social groups, student activism should continue but the athletic department needs to show a major 'mea culpa'. There was some reason the men involved felt this was okay, I see no indication that that attitude (culture) has gone away.

 

I have one kid in college and one heading off this fall. We depend on scholarships and foundation money from the schools in order to affort this. I really do understand the hardship...but imo the school needs to stand up and stop relying on the 'long ago, those guys are gone' excuse.

[Harriet Vane]

They have cleaned house. Everyone involved is fired/suspended and under indictment or dead.

 

 

I can promise you that this is absolutely not true. In cases of abuse, there are typically quite a lot of people who knew and suspected and did nothing. I have worked extensively with victims and know this to be true.

 

I'll give just one example. Someone I know I was molested as a child by her stepfather over the course of several years. There were several relatives who suspected "something." There were also several adults that this child confided in. When the case went to court, that child (at that point a teenager) provided a list of 22 people in whom she had confided. More than half of that list were people who were mandated reporters, and all were adults. This is unfortunately normal for cases like this.

 

If you doubt this, spend some time talking to a DCFS caseworker. Or take a good, long look at how this worked in the Catholic Church.

 

There is no doubt in my mind that there were many, many people who knew or suspected who either under-responded or did not respond at all. The people who have been fired at Penn State represent only the tip of the iceberg.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I agree about not punishing the students...academics/student aid/etc. should not suffer. But the attitude of 'anything for football' seems quite alive and well if the student protests are an accurate indicator. I am not there, I am not an alumni so I can only respond to what I see on the news. The students went to bat for the team and Paterno not the victims.

 

In all fairness, they went to bat for Paterno based on what was being said at the time. Remember the PA AG stated that the time that Paterno was not being charged with anything, and based on Paterno's testimony to the grand jury, he claimed to have no knowledge of the 1998 incident, and was certainly playing himself off as not being responsible. Based on his reputation to that point in time, I can see college students rallying behind what they perceived as his mistreatment by the BOT. You did not hear anyone rushing to support Sandusky in any way, shape or form. Or even rushing to the defense of the two administrators indicted at that time.

 

Academic programs, social groups, student activism should continue but the athletic department needs to show a major 'mea culpa'. There was some reason the men involved felt this was okay, I see no indication that that attitude (culture) has gone away.

 

I have one kid in college and one heading off this fall. We depend on scholarships and foundation money from the schools in order to affort this. I really do understand the hardship...but imo the school needs to stand up and stop relying on the 'long ago, those guys are gone' excuse.

 

But it isn't an excuse - it is what happened. PSU will also be subject to civil damages that will be very, very high (depending on what comes out we could see in the hundreds of millions). That is a pretty stiff punishment.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I can promise you that this is absolutely not true. In cases of abuse, there are typically quite a lot of people who knew and suspected and did nothing. I have worked extensively with victims and know this to be true.

 

Suspected is different than "know", and I was referring to PSU administrators only. This is't something that Paterno, Spanier, and company were going to be sharing with others. They were even vague and used coded language in their emails to each other, so they were certainly keeping this under wraps.

 

I'll give just one example. Someone I know I was molested as a child by her stepfather over the course of several years. There were several relatives who suspected "something." There were also several adults that this child confided in. When the case went to court, that child (at that point a teenager) provided a list of 22 people in whom she had confided. More than half of that list were people who were mandated reporters, and all were adults. This is unfortunately normal for cases like this.

 

If you doubt this, spend some time talking to a DCFS caseworker. Or take a good, long look at how this worked in the Catholic Church.

There is no doubt in my mind that there were many, many people who knew or suspected who either under-responded or did not respond at all. The people who have been fired at Penn State represent only the tip of the iceberg.

 

In the context of PSU administrators, no I don't believe that there were dozens more who had reason to suspect anything. Most did not have direct contact with Sandusky or any of the kids, and would not have been in position to be told anything.

We do know that there was a guidance counselor who did not act she should have, and some others related to that same child. The fact these boys were vulnerable and little home support means there were fewer looking out for their interests, and likely fewer who would notice anything suspicious.

Someone mentioned above that Sandusky traveling with the boys should have been a red flag, but he brought them with his wife and children. In context of his role as a mentor with 2nd Mile, that by itself would not raise serious red flags.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I just want to add that although I am defending PSU, I do not like the football program or Joe Paterno. DS was contacted by PSU in his recruiting process, and did not even make the initial cut with us.

[Alicia64]

With all due respect, and I do indeed respect your right to your thoughts and opinions, Penn State's reputation is unharmed.

 

I don't think this is true at all.

 

If there aren't huge consequences for "the suits" they'll continue their crimes.

 

When the University as a whole takes consequences something will change. Powers that be will start thinking twice if their entire house of cards falls down.

 

In this case, the cards need to fall and scatter.

 

It's that bad. The cover up was atrocious.

 

It's that bad.

 

Alley

[Harriet Vane]

Suspected is different than "know", and I was referring to PSU administrators only. This is't something that Paterno, Spanier, and company were going to be sharing with others. They were even vague and used coded language in their emails to each other, so they were certainly keeping this under wraps.

 

 

 

In the context of PSU administrators, no I don't believe that there were dozens more who had reason to suspect anything. Most did not have direct contact with Sandusky or any of the kids, and would not have been in position to be told anything.

We do know that there was a guidance counselor who did not act she should have, and some others related to that same child. The fact these boys were vulnerable and little home support means there were fewer looking out for their interests, and likely fewer who would notice anything suspicious.

Someone mentioned above that Sandusky traveling with the boys should have been a red flag, but he brought them with his wife and children. In context of his role as a mentor with 2nd Mile, that by itself would not raise serious red flags.

 

I stand by what I said. There is no doubt in my mind that there were many more who had ample reason to suspect but who under-responded, ignored, or actively covered up. Suspicions do have to be acted on, especially with regard to something like pedophilia. A person does not have to actually witness an event in order to know that something is not right. As the Penn State scandal shows, even those who do have incontrovertible evidence often choose not to respond or to under-respond.

[NittanyJen]

[quote name=Katy;

 

 

Every kid at this school could transfer to another program. It would be harder for those in the community and on the staff' date=' but the consequences would not that much different than a small town when factories shut down or relocate overseas.

 

Again, Penn State assists farmers, children, students, continuing Ed adults, and more across the entire state, country, and globe. With over 1 1/2 dozen campuses, the world campus, cooperative extension, a children's hospital, and more, I think the impact woul be more than shutting down 'a factory.'

 

Athletic departments are not Gods, and they should not have separate rules just for them, and communities should not quietly look the other way while this sort of thing is going on. Your assumptions about the nature of the PSU community seem to stem from reading media reports of it rather than being a part of it. It would be like me trying to wax philosophical about the beliefs and feelings of the African American community after watching the evening news in which only poorly behaving citizens are discussed-- it would be uninformed, inflammatory, and foolish. Your assumptions of what the community knew and how it did or would respond are utterly unfounded. In theory, I have no problem with your statement. In your implication that the entire community knew and looked away, I can only say you possess a very lively imagination.

 

...

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I stand by what I said. There is no doubt in my mind that there were many more who had ample reason to suspect but who under-responded, ignored, or actively covered up. Suspicions do have to be acted on, especially with regard to something like pedophilia. A person does not have to actually witness an event in order to know that something is not right. As the Penn State scandal shows, even those who do have incontrovertible evidence often choose not to respond or to under-respond.

 

I agree, I guess, but I don't agree these other people likely were PSU administrators, which is what matters when discussing the culpability of PSU and its potential sanctions.

 

And I disagree a little as it is likely some had suspicions they didn't act upon, if Sandusky was smooth enough and selected his victims well, it is possible there were no significant red flags missed.

[Katy]

I'm going to ignore comments specifically about me or my judgment.

 

It appears that if the Clery Act is not enforced, the laws may well be changed:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/14/penn-state-scandal-congress_n_1672955.html

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I want to run with the factory analogy someone made...

 

Let's say there are a couple of executives at a company. They learn a former employee may have been seen molesting a child on company property (company picnic or whatever). They decide they don't want to smear the company name, don't report it/cover it up/lie before a grand jury (exactly what PSU admins did), and of course, it is later found out.

 

How would our legal system handle it?

 

--The company execs would be brought up on any and all applicable criminal charges.

--The company would be sued for any civil damages that could be proven.

 

--Would anyone really be calling for the company to be shut down and people thrown out of jobs to teach other executives a lesson? Would we be saying anyone who owned a share of company stock was responsible for allowing this culture to emerge?

Probably not. Some natural consequences to the company would occur due to publicity and the civil judgement, but there would be no outcry to punish the workers to make a point.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

I can promise you that this is absolutely not true. In cases of abuse, there are typically quite a lot of people who knew and suspected and did nothing. I have worked extensively with victims and know this to be true.

 

I'll give just one example. Someone I know I was molested as a child by her stepfather over the course of several years. There were several relatives who suspected "something." There were also several adults that this child confided in. When the case went to court, that child (at that point a teenager) provided a list of 22 people in whom she had confided. More than half of that list were people who were mandated reporters, and all were adults. This is unfortunately normal for cases like this.

 

If you doubt this, spend some time talking to a DCFS caseworker. Or take a good, long look at how this worked in the Catholic Church.

 

There is no doubt in my mind that there were many, many people who knew or suspected who either under-responded or did not respond at all. The people who have been fired at Penn State represent only the tip of the iceberg.

I agree that more may know but it still would be a very, very small percentage of the over 95,000 people at Penn State IMO. I went to Catholic schools for half of my schooling and I never had any idea that anything of atrocities at that time. I daresay the overwhelming majority of Catholics ever knew of these things. I also know people who have gone to school there or or have worked there and they are quite shocked at these horrific events.

Edited July 14, 2012 by priscilla

[Katy]

I want to run with the factory analogy someone made...

 

Let's say there are a couple of executives at a company. They learn a former employee may have been seen molesting a child on company property (company picnic or whatever). They decide they don't want to smear the company name, don't report it/cover it up/lie before a grand jury (exactly what PSU admins did), and of course, it is later found out.

 

How would our legal system handle it?

 

--The company execs would be brought up on any and all applicable criminal charges.

--The company would be sued for any civil damages that could be proven.

 

--Would anyone really be calling for the company to be shut down and people thrown out of jobs to teach other executives a lesson? Would we be saying anyone who owned a share of company stock was responsible for allowing this culture to emerge?

Probably not. Some natural consequences to the company would occur due to publicity and the civil judgement, but there would be no outcry to punish the workers to make a point.

 

If the company was largely funded with government contracts, the public outcry would immediately demand those contracts be pulled. The company would probably be downsized.

 

Public anger would probably lead to many people boycotting whatever product this factory produced, perhaps leading it to close.

 

Pulling federal financial aid, even for one semester, would not close the school permanently.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

If the company was largely funded with government contracts, the public outcry would immediately demand those contracts be pulled. The company would probably be downsized.

 

Public anger would probably lead to many people boycotting whatever product this factory produced, perhaps leading it to close.

 

Pulling federal financial aid, even for one semester, would not close the school permanently.

 

Yes but this would hurt thousands of students who need financial aid and who choose Penn State as a cheaper option as a state school. I think it is unfair to hurt those who are innocent in these matters especially when college costs are quite onerous today to say the least. I would rather see the football program shut down as Juniper proposed.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

 

Pulling federal financial aid, even for one semester, would not close the school permanently.

 

It would, at the minimum, damage the school severely. Numerous students would have to transfer, and faculty would have to be let go. It is likely the majority of incoming students for that year would attend elsewhere.

 

I also disagree about the company example. If this were to occur in almost any other setting, it would be a blip on the radar. The fact that it involves a major football program magnifies what happened, and presents the opportunity for a certain amount of faux outrage.

[Harriet Vane]

It would, at the minimum, damage the school severely. Numerous students would have to transfer, and faculty would have to be let go. It is likely the majority of incoming students for that year would attend elsewhere.

 

I also disagree about the company example. If this were to occur in almost any other setting, it would be a blip on the radar. The fact that it involves a major football program magnifies what happened, and presents the opportunity for a certain amount of faux outrage.

 

And here is where I bow out of what is becoming an illogical and offensive conversation.

 

Child rape, and its coverup, should never be a blip on anyone's radar, no matter what the entity. If it is, that is not a norm to which we should aspire as human beings.

 

"Faux outrage?" Over child rape and its specific and systemic coverup?

 

I'm done. This is where I bow out of the conversation.

[Joanne]

This is an example of *system* and *culture* failure. It's an exaggerated symptom of the undue and perverse emphasis we, as a culture, put on college and professional sports. (In lesser culpability, it is an exaggerated symtpom of the way many people and families deal with the issue of sexual assault of children.)

 

That said, the SPORTS program at PSU should be severely punished, but not the entire school including the current students who weren't even born when this issue began.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

And here is where I bow out of what is becoming an illogical and offensive conversation.

 

Child rape, and its coverup, should never be a blip on anyone's radar, no matter what the entity. If it is, that is not a norm to which we should aspire as human beings.

 

"Faux outrage?" Over child rape and its specific and systemic coverup?

 

I'm done. This is where I bow out of the conversation.

 

But it is. Put this same scenario at a D3 school, and it gets page 7 coverage. I am not saying that is right, but it is true.

 

For the faux outrage - it happens. Heck, you have college football sites talking about this effect on RECRUITING. Some commentators don't care about the kids abused - they care about getting the hits and street cred for being the one to yell the loudest.

 

You are turning this on me, but it is just the reality of the world we face - bigger names = bigger headlines. If you are mad at me, it is because you are not paying attention to what is being said.

[EmilyK]

I want to run with the factory analogy someone made...

 

Let's say there are a couple of executives at a company. They learn a former employee may have been seen molesting a child on company property (company picnic or whatever). They decide they don't want to smear the company name, don't report it/cover it up/lie before a grand jury (exactly what PSU admins did), and of course, it is later found out.

 

How would our legal system handle it?

 

--The company execs would be brought up on any and all applicable criminal charges.

--The company would be sued for any civil damages that could be proven.

 

--Would anyone really be calling for the company to be shut down and people thrown out of jobs to teach other executives a lesson? Would we be saying anyone who owned a share of company stock was responsible for allowing this culture to emerge?

Probably not. Some natural consequences to the company would occur due to publicity and the civil judgement, but there would be no outcry to punish the workers to make a point.

 

I think where this analogy doesn't work is as follows. There was a culture of blind adoration and deference to Joe Pa and football that caused him to be able to dissuade his supposed superiors from reporting, to have people to feel afraid to come forward etc. Penn State had the second most lucrative football program in the country. I think where you and others are diverging is whether this is 4 rogue execs / bad apples, or is this a systemic problem that requires more radical action than just firing/prosecuting the 4.

 

I'm agnostic about what the punishment should be, but I think this is bigger than the 4 execs for the reasons others have stated.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

This is an example of *system* and *culture* failure. It's an exaggerated symptom of the undue and perverse emphasis we, as a culture, put on college and professional sports. (In lesser culpability, it is an exaggerated symtpom of the way many people and families deal with the issue of sexual assault of children.)

 

That said, the SPORTS program at PSU should be severely punished, but not the entire school including the current students who weren't even born when this issue began.

 

 

Then why do cover ups happen at schools? Why did they happen in churches? Boy scouts? Why are they still going on in orthodox Jewish communities? In families?

It isn't about sports - it is, as always, about power/money/reputation/playing CYA.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I think where this analogy doesn't work is as follows. There was a culture of blind adoration and deference to Joe Pa and football that caused him to be able to dissuade his supposed superiors from reporting, to have people to feel afraid to come forward etc. Penn State had the second most lucrative football program in the country. I think where you and others are diverging is whether this is 4 rogue execs / bad apples, or is this a systemic problem that requires more radical action than just firing/prosecuting the 4.

 

Ah, but we don't know what role Paterno played exactly. We know he was involved, but the majority of the email conversations did not involve him or mention his name. Spanier himself knew better, and even mentioned the repercussions if they were found out...and did it anyway.

 

Blaming it on the culture is the easy way out. Spanier, Paterno, and company made a decision based on money. So yes, they were protecting the PSU brand, but no more so than churches did when they covered their scandals. Same for the Boy Scouts and others.

 

No one can really show a systemic breakdown unless they can demonstrate numerous other parties at PSU knew and turned a blind eye. So far, no one has done that.

[Joanne]

Then why do cover ups happen at schools? Why did they happen in churches? Boy scouts? Why are they still going on in orthodox Jewish communities? In families?

It isn't about sports - it is, as always, about power/money/reputation/playing CYA.

 

Did you read the NEXT sentence?

 

THIS cover up is due to the dynamic about sexual assault of children that was an a premier college sports program. THAT IS WHY IT IS ABOUT SPORTS. Without the sports mechanism/program, Sandusky would have been a predator in another setting.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Did you read the NEXT sentence?

 

THIS cover up is due to the dynamic about sexual assault of children that was an a premier college sports program. THAT IS WHY IT IS ABOUT SPORTS. Without the sports mechanism/program, Sandusky would have been a predator in another setting.

 

My point is it is about money and power, the sports program was simply an avenue for the money.

Saying it is because of a sports culture when it occurs in numerous settings doesn't make sense.

[Audrey]

I can possibly see closing the football program for a time but it seems some in this thread would close the whole school:001_huh:. To me it seems very unfair to close a whole school and hurt the thousands upon thousands of innocent employees and students. This would also hurt the entire town. Another poster said she believes that probably most knew of Sandusky and are therefore complicit in the crime, and I truly find that hard to believe. To me, that is like saying that most Catholics knew of the atrocities committed by some priests which I also do not believe is true (and ftr I think the Church's response to the whole thing has been horrifically inadequate). I believe that it was a powerful circle of a small group people who are responsible for this atrocity at Penn State.

 

ETA: I think your idea about Penn State volunteering to close their football program and re-tooling their policies is a great idea.

 

Just to clarify my position, since you referenced it... I mean to close the entire football program down for good. I was not intending to say to close the whole school although in re-reading my post I see how it implies that.

 

The sports "death penalty" is supposed to be for repeated infractions. I think that (at least) 10 raped boys qualified as repeated.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Just to clarify my position, since you referenced it... I mean to close the entire football program down for good. I was not intending to say to close the whole school although in re-reading my post I see how it implies that.

 

The sports "death penalty" is supposed to be for repeated infractions. I think that (at least) 10 raped boys qualified as repeated.

 

PSU has never had a major infraction, so no, the "Death Penalty" clause cannot be invoked.

The NCAA is still determining if they can even levy sanctions. A letter of inquiry has been sent to PSU, and their response will determine the next step.

[Juniper]

PSU has never had a major infraction, so no, the "Death Penalty" clause cannot be invoked.

The NCAA is still determining if they can even levy sanctions. A letter of inquiry has been sent to PSU, and their response will determine the next step.

 

Not getting caught all those years ago or in the years since, should not be an argument for leniency.

 

The pattern is there.

[Audrey]

PSU has never had a major infraction, so no, the "Death Penalty" clause cannot be invoked.

The NCAA is still determining if they can even levy sanctions. A letter of inquiry has been sent to PSU, and their response will determine the next step.

 

 

Well, then... how about if they start with major infraction #1 = raped boy #1 and go from there. :glare:

 

Really, I see that you are trying to push buttons here in your supposed devil's advocacy of PSU, but considering that the (now convicted, no longer alleged) crime is rape of children, I find your arguments quite irrelevant, and I'm quite done with you.

 

Have a nice day.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Not getting caught all those years ago or in the years since, should not be an argument for leniency.

 

The pattern is there.

 

It isn't an argument for leniency - it is spelled out in the NCAA bylaws.

 

To have the "Death Penalty" on the table, a school must be a repeat violator within a specific period of time (5 years maybe?), and only violations uncovered AND sanctioned PRIOR to the current investigation can be considered to be "repeated".

In other words, if you pay players or give them cars for 10 years and are caught, that is not a repeat offense when it is discovered. If you are caught doing so, given sanctions, and then get caught again with 5 years, a school can be eligible for steeper sanctions up to and including the "Death Penalty".

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Well, then... how about if they start with major infraction #1 = raped boy #1 and go from there.

 

They can't by their own bylaws.

 

Really, I see that you are trying to push buttons here in your supposed devil's advocacy of PSU, but considering that the (now convicted, no longer alleged) crime is rape of children, I find your arguments quite irrelevant, and I'm quite done with you.

 

Nope. I think PSU should be on the hook for major civil judgements, and that those engaged in the cover up should face prison. I don't believe that new rules should be created to punishment thousands of people who had nothing to do with the cover up, or that the current NCAA bylaws should be ignored.

 

The fact is that PSU is not a repeat offender under the NCAA rules. They just aren't.

 

I have no love for PSU as I stated earlier, and my brief interactions with former D-Coordinator Tom Bradley were unpleasant at best.

 

I don't like the school, but I don't believe we need to punish students, student athletes, and faculty for the crimes of others. Call me crazy.

[Joanne]

My point is it is about money and power, the sports program was simply an avenue for the money.

Saying it is because of a sports culture when it occurs in numerous settings doesn't make sense.

 

Wrong. This reason THIS cover up and under response happened is directly tied to sports culture.

 

The reason the Roman Catholic cover up happened is directly related to that church culture.

[Joanne]

They can't by their own bylaws.

 

 

 

Nope. I think PSU should be on the hook for major civil judgements, and that those engaged in the cover up should face prison. I don't believe that new rules should be created to punishment thousands of people who had nothing to do with the cover up, or that the current NCAA bylaws should be ignored.

 

The fact is that PSU is not a repeat offender under the NCAA rules. They just aren't.

 

I have no love for PSU as I stated earlier, and my brief interactions with former D-Coordinator Tom Bradley were unpleasant at best.

 

I don't like the school, but I don't believe we need to punish students, student athletes, and faculty for the crimes of others. Call me crazy.

 

No, I won't call you crazy. You didn't even read my posts deeply enough to get beyond your reaction to my statements about sports culture to see that I don't believe the school should be punished, just the sports department.

 

You aren't crazy, but your approach to this is not logical.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Wrong. This reason THIS cover up and under response happened is directly tied to sports culture.

 

The reason the Roman Catholic cover up happened is directly related to that church culture.

 

The overriding principles in both cases were power, money, and self protection.

 

You do know that in all of the emails released, there was no mention of protecting the football program, right?

[ChocolateReignRemix]

No, I won't call you crazy. You didn't even read my posts deeply enough to get beyond your reaction to my statements about sports culture to see that I don't believe the school should be punished, just the sports department.

 

You aren't crazy, but your approach to this is not logical.

 

And who is being punished exactly in the sports department? Can you name one person part of the decision making process that caused this in 2001 who is still there?

But you have no issue punishing a junior on the swim team in response to what Spanier and Paterno decided in 2001? That isn't logical.

[Joanne]

Well, then... how about if they start with major infraction #1 = raped boy #1 and go from there. :glare:

 

Really, I see that you are trying to push buttons here in your supposed devil's advocacy of PSU, but considering that the (now convicted, no longer alleged) crime is rape of children, I find your arguments quite irrelevant, and I'm quite done with you.

 

Have a nice day.

 

:iagree: :auto:

[Juniper]

It isn't an argument for leniency - it is spelled out in the NCAA bylaws.

 

To have the "Death Penalty" on the table, a school must be a repeat violator within a specific period of time (5 years maybe?), and only violations uncovered AND sanctioned PRIOR to the current investigation can be considered to be "repeated".

In other words, if you pay players or give them cars for 10 years and are caught, that is not a repeat offense when it is discovered. If you are caught doing so, given sanctions, and then get caught again with 5 years, a school can be eligible for steeper sanctions up to and including the "Death Penalty".

 

I understand that. It is also clear that there are two types of discussion going on here. You are talking in very clear "facts of the case" lawyer lingo....I get that. But the law is not, unto itself, the only and best route of recovery for this situation.

 

The legal should be followed to a "T" and recompenses made. That will not heal the community as a whole, a university, or as a football program. That is just what HAS to be done.

 

Then beyond that healing needs to take place. This is something the University and the NCAA is going to have to look into at a greater degree. I "get" that this part of the conversation is not your cuppa, that is fine, but it is still a reality.

 

Unfortunately, the legal system holding the universities hands to the fire is not representation that the university have reformed or repented. It is just the consequences of the past misdeeds and has no bearing on the future, nor is it an idication that things are now right.

 

So, basically we seem to conversing past each other. I understand the legal and NCAA consequences as a given. They are only the punishment, not a part of the restoration.

 

The question that is worth discussing is, "How do you rehabilitate a university, community and football program after this?" Pressing on as if nothing has happened is NOT the answer.

[Juniper]

The overriding principles in both cases were power, money, and self protection.

 

You do know that in all of the emails released, there was no mention of protecting the football program, right?

 

Again, too literal. Where do you suppose the vast majority of the power and money that is being protected comes from?

 

If the football program was not worth protecting for the perpetrators....why is it worth protecting now?

 

It is worth it, because it is the seat of power.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I understand that. It is also clear that there are two types of discussion going on here. You are talking in very clear "facts of the case" lawyer lingo....I get that. But the law is not, unto itself, the only and best route of recovery for this situation.

 

The legal should be followed to a "T" and recompenses made. That will not heal the community as a whole, a university, or as a football program. That is just what HAS to be done.

 

Then beyond that healing needs to take place. This is something the University and the NCAA is going to have to look into at a greater degree. I "get" that this part of the conversation is not your cuppa, that is fine, but it is still a reality.

 

Unfortunately, the legal system holding the universities hands to the fire is not representation that the university have reformed or repented. It is just the consequences of the past misdeeds and has no bearing on the future, nor is it an idication that things are now right.

 

So, basically we seem to conversing past each other. I understand the legal and NCAA consequences as a given. They are only the punishment, not a part of the restoration.

 

The question that is worth discussing is, "How do you rehabilitate a university, community and football program after this?" Pressing on as if nothing has happened is NOT the answer.

 

 

Good post, and it clarifies where we differ.

 

I don't see a football program or university committing a crime here. I do see 4 people who committed a crime (or at least covered one up) for various reasons. Considering 3 of them were at the top of their positions, and have been removed, I am not sure what else can be done to show "the university" has changed. I am not certain "the university" has to change. The BOT seems to have taken this seriously, made the correct decisions so far, and commissioned an independent investigation that pulled no punches. Probably the only mistake they made was firing Paterno before the evidence was clear that he was involved, which lead to some jumping (I think) incorrectly to his defense.

I just don't see the evidence that the moral failings of those 4 people corrupted thousands of others.

 

Regarding the NCAA, they have to look at it from within the scope of their bylaws. They may stretch the ethics clause as needed, but they can't create new rules out of nowhere.

[EmilyK]

Good post, and it clarifies where we differ.

 

I don't see a football program or university committing a crime here. I do see 4 people who committed a crime (or at least covered one up) for various reasons. Considering 3 of them were at the top of their positions, and have been removed, I am not sure what else can be done to show "the university" has changed. I am not certain "the university" has to change. The BOT seems to have taken this seriously, made the correct decisions so far, and commissioned an independent investigation that pulled no punches. Probably the only mistake they made was firing Paterno before the evidence was clear that he was involved, which lead to some jumping (I think) incorrectly to his defense.

I just don't see the evidence that the moral failings of those 4 people corrupted thousands of others.

 

Regarding the NCAA, they have to look at it from within the scope of their bylaws. They may stretch the ethics clause as needed, but they can't create new rules out of nowhere.

 

I think it is clear from what I have read that the BOT was too deferential and was not active enough in pursuing their fiduciary duties.

 

Juniper's clarification was good. I'm a lawyer and I'm interested in who can be legally liable, certainly. But it is a larger question too -- same with the Catholic Church, in my opinion.

[Denise in Florida]

I stand by what I said. There is no doubt in my mind that there were many more who had ample reason to suspect but who under-responded, ignored, or actively covered up. Suspicions do have to be acted on, especially with regard to something like pedophilia. A person does not have to actually witness an event in order to know that something is not right. As the Penn State scandal shows, even those who do have incontrovertible evidence often choose not to respond or to under-respond.

 

:iagree::iagree: It is not that easy to keep secrets like this. Even if other people did not know the details they had to have known something was going on under the surface.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I think it is clear from what I have read that the BOT was too deferential and was not active enough in pursuing their fiduciary duties.

 

In what way?

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Just to clarify my position, since you referenced it... I mean to close the entire football program down for good. I was not intending to say to close the whole school although in re-reading my post I see how it implies that.

 

The sports "death penalty" is supposed to be for repeated infractions. I think that (at least) 10 raped boys qualified as repeated.

 

:iagree:I see no problem closing the football program down as long as they honor the scholarships of those currently attending.

 

 

Honestly I do not care for football at all nor do I like the whole party culture surrounding it. I am hoping ds never takes a liking to it as well. My main concern is fairness to all of those not involved. I remember in my early childhood, the whole class being punished for a few bad apples, and I always believed since then that doing such a thing is wrong.

Edited July 14, 2012 by priscilla
spelling

[ChocolateReignRemix]

:iagree:I see no problem closing the football program down as long as they honor the scholarships of those currently attending.

 

 

Honestly I do not care for football at all nor do I like the whole party culture surrounding it. I am hoping ds never take a liking it as well. My main concern is fairness to all of those not involved. I remember in my early childhood, the whole class being punished for a few bad apples, and I always believed since then that doing such a thing is wrong.

 

Closing the football program will cause them to close a large portion of the athletic program.

 

As I keep saying, none of the current coaches or players were even at PSU in 2001. Why should they be punished to that exteme?

 

And I hate to break the news to those who want to see that happen, but I am fairly certain it will not.

[Kathryn]

I understand that. It is also clear that there are two types of discussion going on here. You are talking in very clear "facts of the case" lawyer lingo....I get that. But the law is not, unto itself, the only and best route of recovery for this situation.

 

The legal should be followed to a "T" and recompenses made. That will not heal the community as a whole, a university, or as a football program. That is just what HAS to be done.

 

Then beyond that healing needs to take place. This is something the University and the NCAA is going to have to look into at a greater degree. I "get" that this part of the conversation is not your cuppa, that is fine, but it is still a reality.

 

Unfortunately, the legal system holding the universities hands to the fire is not representation that the university have reformed or repented. It is just the consequences of the past misdeeds and has no bearing on the future, nor is it an idication that things are now right.

 

So, basically we seem to conversing past each other. I understand the legal and NCAA consequences as a given. They are only the punishment, not a part of the restoration.

 

The question that is worth discussing is, "How do you rehabilitate a university, community and football program after this?" Pressing on as if nothing has happened is NOT the answer.

 

Great post.

[5kidsforME]

Really??? Reputation unharmed???

 

 

 

 

 

Anyone that thinks that Penn States reputation is unharmed is deluding themselves. The only explanation for it is that they are surrounding themselves with like-minded people and are insulating themselves from reality.