Some PSU Talk

I don’t mean to excuse Penn State University in any way but what it did was exhibit the same organizational behavior that we see all the time. It is no different than the Catholic Church protecting its pedophile priests, the New Orleans Saints covering up their bounty program, (all the defensive players at least knew and do you really believe the owners and everyone in management didn’t), and the NFL itself justifying collusion and the lack of integrity in Saints bounty program investigation. In the end all the Saints players are going to get off, because as bad as the bounty program was, Roger Goodell and the NFL are worse. But Penn State did was what almost all organizations do: they put the organization first and they closed ranks.

As to the punishment for Penn State it is the University not the football program that deserves the most punishment. Yes the pedophile criminal was in the program and Paterno did partake in the cover-up. But they did not violate recruiting or scholarship rules. Rather the whole University power structure was involved. One also must believe that some phone calls were lobbed in to powerful people (for example members of the Board of Trustees) for which we have no record. Most of the punishment should be imposed at the University level. Though some punishment at the football program level might be appropriate. Disgorgement of football revenue from the University for a couple of years sounds good to me. The punishment has got to be big enough so Universities will consider the effect of potential penalties when they are putting the University first – as they always will.

Re: What did Joe Know in 1998 and When did He Know it?

T-Law:

Not to cut to fine a line here, but I think the “conventional wisdom” emerging in the media reports about what JoPa knew in 1998 may be more harsh than the investigative report actually supports.

According to the report, none of the principals spoke to Louis Freeh and his investigators. Paterno has died and the remainder are in serious legal trouble.

So Freeh’s report relies only contemporaneous notes and emails — and, consequently, his interpretation of what those notes and emails mean.
______________

Before going to the substance, just a couple of quick thoughts about the process and the evidence.

1. Anyone who’s ever taken notes of a meeting and looked back at them after a substantial passage of time would have to agree that the notes sometimes can be less the clear and even ambiguous — especially if the author is unavailable to discuss them. Also, notes, by their very nature, are incomplete.

2. Louie Freeh and his firm are being paid by the University. Speaking as someone who’s
done internal investigations for large corporations, the goal
generally is getting the facts to a target audience such as the US Justice Department, the Securities and Exchange Commission, Congress, and — occasionally — the general public.

Though left unspoken by the client, the investigating counsel knows the client wants all the facts out, but so that they’re presented — emphasized — in the best light given the purpose of the investigation.

The typical investigation usually reveals “renegade” employees and suggests a handful of new procedures to prevent the same problem from occurring. Generally, though, problems that require full-throttled investigations by outside counsel do not happen again.

______________

A review of Freeh’s report on the evidence regarding what happened in 1998 shows that the higher-ups at PSU knew about *allegations* against Sandusky. JoPa was made aware of the allegations against a guy he considered his friend. Emails and notes show JoPa followed up periodically by asking high level administrators the status of the Sandusky situation.

Eventually, the DA’s office refused to press charges. (An evaluation of the 11 year-old victim, right or wrong, left the DA’s office with enough doubts that no charges were filed.)

And JoPa learned that no charges would be filed. At that point, I think a fair conclusion — from the incomplete record of notes and emails — is that Paterno’s concerns about Sandusky’s conduct were allayed.
____________

I’m not saying that is *actually* what happened. And I’m not part of the JoPa fantasy team.

I’m just offering a cautionary note about the foundation for Freeh’s conclusions. Based on the evidence regarding the 1998 incident, I’d argue It’s not an unfair
interpretation of the evidence through the eyes of a guy getting his
information 2nd and 3rd hand from the PSU administration.

And there may be subsequent evidence that shows JoPa knew or turned a blind eye.
_____________

Regardless, as an institution Penn State failed these kids.

After today’s report was released, you have to bring down the statue. At least for now. He is the symbol of what happened as an enabler. For the near future, you won’t be able to say JoePa without thinking of the scandal. It needs to come down.

I agree that the death penalty is way too harsh. But beyond that, just about anything should be on the table.
Remember, there will be civil suits as you mentioned but the NCAA will also be named, not just PSU.
Should the statue come down? Tough one. But if you were to see a picture or statue of him, do you think of this trajedy or do you think of the great football years?

The analogy to the Catholic Church is not a good one. Pedophilia was occurring in every major diocese and was being covered up by bishops in each of these diocese with complicity by the entire clergy who knew these types of atrocities were occuring within their ranks. I know. I went to school with the man who became the biggest child molestor in the Philadelphia clergy and he too was being molested while in school. To make this stick, every dean of every school at PSU would have to been aware of Pedophilia occurring whithin his department with the complicity of the faculty. Clearly not the case. Paterno was the Head Football Coach. He reported what the knew to his superiors and left it in their hands. The fact that the DA investigated the charges and found them without merit is a very important piece as far as Paterno’s culpability. To say that an entire University is responsible for the act of a single individual is collective guilt and is a violation of the individual rights of every student, employee and faculty member of the University. It takes the heinious acts of a sick individual and compounds them a thoudsand fold. Let criminal and civil penalties be handled through the courts. All other punishments are reactions to public outcry.