X Penn State President, VP and AD get jail time

[Vespid]

Wow. At the time the scandal was coming to light, I thought there was a very real possibility those in the chain of command were at risk of criminal prosecution. Apparently they were.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/06/0...dministrators-sentenced-in-sandusky-case.html

 

[northgajacket]

Penn State football should have gotten the death penalty.

 

[AE 87]

I'm actually surprised that Sandusky hasn't appealed his conviction based on his 14th amendment rights, Obergefell v Hodges.

 

[Vespid]

Penn State football should have gotten the death penalty.

IMO, I think they got off light. Again, if this had happened at a place with much less pigs at the trough, say a much smaller school like a 1A or 1AA, then they would have gotten the death penalty and very likely lost any accreditation's, possibly ending the school as a viable enterprise. Having said that, had the original offense happened at a place with much less $$ at risk, I think it also likely those in authority would not have covered it up and reported the incident to police, like the pieces of excrement at PSU should have done.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

IMO, I think they got off light. Again, if this had happened at a place with much less pigs at the trough, say a much smaller school like a 1A or 1AA, then they would have gotten the death penalty and very likely lost any accreditation's, possibly ending the school as a viable enterprise. Having said that, had the original offense happened at a place with much less $$ at risk, I think it also likely those in authority would not have covered it up and reported the incident to police, like the pieces of excrement at PSU should have done.

It's just business where "leaders" have to weigh the probability and impact of fines as a business expense. {sarcasm} That is what you are describing to some extent with the varying perception of severity to big versus small economic impact schools.

On the question of severity of punishment, the two months jail time is being appealed. I would expect that will be converted to more community service on appeal or served in several years if appeals fail.

But the sentence of any jail time, whether eventually served or not, is a great deterrent to others. I know in my Government line of work, not going to jail is at the top of the list in considerations.

We all have a price, it's only a question of how much. Mine is very high.

 

[Animal02]

Penn State football should have gotten the death penalty.

Disagree.....the football program was just a backdrop to the real scandal.....that of the administration turning a blind eye to what was going on and allowing Sandusky to continue to use the facilities etc.

 

[Animal02]

It's just business where "leaders" have to weigh the probability and impact of fines as a business expense. {sarcasm} That is what you are describing to some extent with the varying perception of severity to big versus small economic impact schools.

On the question of severity of punishment, the two months jail time is being appealed. I would expect that will be converted to more community service on appeal or served in several years if appeals fail.

But the sentence of any jail time, whether eventually served or not, is a great deterrent to others. I know in my Government line of work, not going to jail is at the top of the list in considerations.

We all have a price, it's only a question of how much. Mine is very high.

I still think the football program and Paterno we're scapegoats for a far bigger and widespread issue. And the administrators are getting off way to light.

 

[northgajacket]

Disagree.....the football program was just a backdrop to the real scandal.....that of the administration turning a blind eye to what was going on and allowing Sandusky to continue to use the facilities etc.

If you think Joe Pa didn't know anything about it then I have some ocean front property in Arizona I could sale to you.

 

[northgajacket]

IMO, I think they got off light. Again, if this had happened at a place with much less pigs at the trough, say a much smaller school like a 1A or 1AA, then they would have gotten the death penalty and very likely lost any accreditation's, possibly ending the school as a viable enterprise. Having said that, had the original offense happened at a place with much less $$ at risk, I think it also likely those in authority would not have covered it up and reported the incident to police, like the pieces of excrement at PSU should have done.

I agree, if it had at somewhere like UMass, FIU, FAU, Idaho, then the NCAA would have thrown the book at them, but because Penn State rakes in the money the NCAA was going to not be harsh on them.

 

[kg01]

Disagree.....the football program was just a backdrop to the real scandal.....that of the administration turning a blind eye to what was going on and allowing Sandusky to continue to use the facilities etc.

I agree that the football program was just a backdrop. However, wouldn't that be even further reason they should've gotten more severe penalties?

Also, considering what happened to these guys, does it stand to reason that Paterno would be inmate #121905 today if he were still alive? I kinda think so and it would've warmed my heart to see it.

 

[Vespid]

Disagree.....the football program was just a backdrop to the real scandal.....that of the administration turning a blind eye to what was going on and allowing Sandusky to continue to use the facilities etc.

That's the whole crux of the matter in my view. A blind eye was turned BECAUSE it originated within the football program. Say for instance, a janitor witnessed the rape of a minor by a professor in a campus facility, and reported it to his supervisor. IMO, the police would have been called immediately. This points with laser focus at lack of institutional control, an administration compromising its ethics and values for the benefit of one of it's athletic programs. As to whether or not they should have gotten the death penalty, I'm not sure, I thought the original penalties were about right. I thought the lessening of penalties after appeal was inappropriate considering the nature of the offenses. The university President, VP and AD where criminally indicted and convicted over it for goodness sake.

 

[Animal02]

That's the whole crux of the matter in my view. A blind eye was turned BECAUSE it originated within the football program. Say for instance, a janitor witnessed the rape of a minor by a professor in a campus facility, and reported it to his supervisor. IMO, the police would have been called immediately. This points with laser focus at lack of institutional control, an administration compromising its ethics and values for the benefit of one of it's athletic programs. As to whether or not they should have gotten the death penalty, I'm not sure, I thought the original penalties were about right. I thought the lessening of penalties after appeal was inappropriate considering the nature of the offenses. The university President, VP and AD where criminally indicted and convicted over it for goodness sake.

Except it had nothing to do with the football program except for Sandusky being able to use the facilities..... something the head coach objected to and was over ruled. This was not about the football program getting an unfair benefit. This was about a group of individuals using the draw of the football program for their own benefit.

 

[Animal02]

I agree that the football program was just a backdrop. However, wouldn't that be even further reason they should've gotten more severe penalties?

Also, considering what happened to these guys, does it stand to reason that Paterno would be inmate #121905 today if he were still alive? I kinda think so and it would've warmed my heart to see it.

Nope.....the football program received no competitive advantage.
As for Paterno, he likely would have been cleared as he did EXACTLY as he was supposed to do. Universities have protocols that have to be followed. He did. The ones about to serve time are the ones that failed to follow through.

 

[Animal02]

If you think Joe Pa didn't know anything about it then I have some ocean front property in Arizona I could sale to you.

Which is why he tried to prevent Sandusky from using the facilities....which was over ruled.

 

[kg01]

Nope.....the football program received no competitive advantage.
As for Paterno, he likely would have been cleared as he did EXACTLY as he was supposed to do. Universities have protocols that have to be followed. He did. The ones about to serve time are the ones that failed to follow through.

Whoa, whoa, whoa .... wait a minute, let's back up a bit. I should've prefaced my comment to say that I think Paterno knew about the abuse for decades before he was forced to act by the assistant coach walking in the shower on Sandusky and the kid.

I'm of the belief that there's no way Sandusky hid the abuse from Paterno so, IMO, no Paterno did not do the right thing in any way shape or form.

When asked, Paterno said STTE that back in his day, they didn't speak of such things. Not exactly a strong stance if you ask me. In fact, many people of his ilk knew of those things and just let them go because they didn't want to think about it.

 

[RonJohn]

That's the whole crux of the matter in my view. A blind eye was turned BECAUSE it originated within the football program. Say for instance, a janitor witnessed the rape of a minor by a professor in a campus facility, and reported it to his supervisor. IMO, the police would have been called immediately. This points with laser focus at lack of institutional control, an administration compromising its ethics and values for the benefit of one of it's athletic programs. As to whether or not they should have gotten the death penalty, I'm not sure, I thought the original penalties were about right. I thought the lessening of penalties after appeal was inappropriate considering the nature of the offenses. The university President, VP and AD where criminally indicted and convicted over it for goodness sake.

The NCAA "Lack of Institutional Control" findings are based on controls to abide by NCAA rules. It isn't a catch-all phrase for anything that the NCAA or the public in general doesn't like. If a school does not have a procedure to instruct boosters, monitor athlete employment, or report violations, the NCAA can charge a school with this. If a school fails to follow the procedures that they have in place, then the NCAA can charge with this.

In the Penn State case, I don't know of anything that happened that would have broken any NCAA rules. Laws were definitely broken by Sandusky, and by the administrators and coaches that didn't report the offenses to legal authorities as required by law in Pennsylvania. In my opinion, three months in prison is nowhere near enough penalty for basically hiding this conduct and thereby allowing it to continue. In my opinion, no athletics based rules were broken and the athletics program shouldn't be punished by athletics bodies(I would not have had any issue with the Big10 evicting them to disassociate themselves). However, the individual people who allowed this activity to continue should spend a very long time in prison.

In the cases of Louisville and Baylor, a case could be made that recruiting and/or impermissible benefits violations occurred. In the Louisville case, it is quite possible that some of the athletics staff should have been charged with crimes. In the Baylor case, I would say some of them should have definitely been charged with crimes and sent to prison.

 

[northgajacket]

Which is why he tried to prevent Sandusky from using the facilities....which was over ruled.

Bull****

He didn't go to the police, he cared more about the team than a child's welfare. PERIOD.

 

[Vespid]

The NCAA "Lack of Institutional Control" findings are based on controls to abide by NCAA rules. It isn't a catch-all phrase for anything that the NCAA or the public in general doesn't like. If a school does not have a procedure to instruct boosters, monitor athlete employment, or report violations, the NCAA can charge a school with this. If a school fails to follow the procedures that they have in place, then the NCAA can charge with this.

In the Penn State case, I don't know of anything that happened that would have broken any NCAA rules. Laws were definitely broken by Sandusky, and by the administrators and coaches that didn't report the offenses to legal authorities as required by law in Pennsylvania. In my opinion, three months in prison is nowhere near enough penalty for basically hiding this conduct and thereby allowing it to continue. In my opinion, no athletics based rules were broken and the athletics program shouldn't be punished by athletics bodies(I would not have had any issue with the Big10 evicting them to disassociate themselves). However, the individual people who allowed this activity to continue should spend a very long time in prison.

In the cases of Louisville and Baylor, a case could be made that recruiting and/or impermissible benefits violations occurred. In the Louisville case, it is quite possible that some of the athletics staff should have been charged with crimes. In the Baylor case, I would say some of them should have definitely been charged with crimes and sent to prison.

Well, the NCAA disagrees with your interpretation. Count 1 in the findings and conclusions of the NCAA criminal jury in regards to the case stated that not only was there inadequate controls, in some instances they were non-existent. The following is verbatim from the Binding Consent Decree Imposed by the NCAA, which was accepted and signed by Penn State.

" 1. A failure to value and uphold institutional integrity demonstrated by inadequate, and in some cases non-existent, controls and oversight surrounding the athletics program of the University, such as those controls prescribed by Articles 2.1 (The Principle of Institutional Control), 6.01.1 (Institutional Control) and 6.4 (Responsibility for Actions of Outside Entities) of the NCAA Constitution. "

The FREEH report, a mere 267 pages and the BINDING CONSENT DECREE are readily available on the net. If you look at the major key findings and the time line of key supporting facts in the report, which is only a few pages for each, and compare those with the responsibilities spelled out in the NCAA's Constitution and Bylaws Articles as referenced in Count 1, it's pretty clear, at least to me, NCAA rules were not only broken but ignored by the school. And I agree with you, three months in Jail is a little short for Spanier, Shultz and Curley.

 

[Animal02]

Whoa, whoa, whoa .... wait a minute, let's back up a bit. I should've prefaced my comment to say that I think Paterno knew about the abuse for decades before he was forced to act by the assistant coach walking in the shower on Sandusky and the kid.

I'm of the belief that there's no way Sandusky hid the abuse from Paterno so, IMO, no Paterno did not do the right thing in any way shape or form.

When asked, Paterno said STTE that back in his day, they didn't speak of such things. Not exactly a strong stance if you ask me. In fact, many people of his ilk knew of those things and just let them go because they didn't want to think about it.

Back in the day, there was a guy involved at DramaTech, we had our suspicions, some would say they knew, but there was no real evidence. Paterno got rid of Sandusky as best he could. It was the University that kept letting him stay around.

 

[Animal02]

Well, the NCAA disagrees with your interpretation. Count 1 in the findings and conclusions of the NCAA criminal jury in regards to the case stated that not only was there inadequate controls, in some instances they were non-existent. The following is verbatim from the Binding Consent Decree Imposed by the NCAA, which was accepted and signed by Penn State.

" 1. A failure to value and uphold institutional integrity demonstrated by inadequate, and in some cases non-existent, controls and oversight surrounding the athletics program of the University, such as those controls prescribed by Articles 2.1 (The Principle of Institutional Control), 6.01.1 (Institutional Control) and 6.4 (Responsibility for Actions of Outside Entities) of the NCAA Constitution. "

The FREEH report, a mere 267 pages and the BINDING CONSENT DECREE are readily available on the net. If you look at the major key findings and the time line of key supporting facts in the report, which is only a few pages for each, and compare those with the responsibilities spelled out in the NCAA's Constitution and Bylaws Articles as referenced in Count 1, it's pretty clear, at least to me, NCAA rules were not only broken but ignored by the school. And I agree with you, three months in Jail is a little short for Spanier, Shultz and Curley.

You can put all you faith in the Free report. I read enough to take that report with a huge grain of salt and a bug question mark regarding his agenda.