3+ page rebuttal from Louie. Impressive... and still gets 1998 wrong and further regurgitates the janitor nonsense.
A9 report out in the open
- Thread starter TenerHallTerror
- Start date
That statement was likely written before his intital report was even released.
Wow. This post kind of reinforces my experiences with folks from the ranks of higher education.
bwifan
Well-Known Member
Amazing how Louie was able to put a 3 page rebuttal together so quickly.... it's not as if he knew at some point people would trash his entire report of opinion and little facts and he better have a rebuttal to put out quickly
."Why can't the research be accommodated in existing facilities?" A) we don't have that equipment or B) we have it, but it's being fully utilized. Takes a scientist to comprehend those answers, right. Or maybe you scientists can't be bothered by answering that sort of question.
You don't ask the same questions in every situation, but I guess you needed someone to explain that to you.
And I understand the "build it and they will come" come scenario. But before you're given a shitload of money to take to the table, you'd better have a damned good track record of making your point.
I have to get my outrage and spittle up.
It is reasonable to conclude that the Freeh report was bought and paid for so that certain BOT members could protect themselves from being balls deep in The Second Mile.
It is reasonable to conclude that the Freeh report was bought and paid for so that certain BOT members could protect themselves from being balls deep in The Second Mile.
Which part do you object to? That you don't know as much as I do about something I've studied my entire life?
I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with Art, but I am in this case. Spanier deserved to be fired for failing to give the board in May 2011 (date ?) an intelligent risk assessment of the Sandusky Grand Jury proceedings. How many University employees were interviewed by the Grand Jury? That alone should have set off fire alarms. A PR crisis team and a small, discrete crew of outside investigators should have been hired the day Spanier became aware of the Grand Jury investigation.
It is also damning of the BoT that no one challenged Spanier's and Baldwin's risk assessment. This was either shocking naivete (perhaps the worst form of stupidity) or willful negligence.
The Freeh report should be called the BOT-OAG-NCAA-B10-ESPN-Penn Live report.
I'm glad you aren't in academia. Let's put it that way.[/QUOTE]
I'm curious....why is it, that with academia knowing so much about everything, that they haven't figured out a way to manage tuition increases in line with general inflation vs. the pace it's at now?
I'm glad you aren't in academia. Let's put it that way.[/QUOTE]
Me, too. Couldn't afford the pay cut.
It is also dated February 6th...
Problem is the GJ itself.
McQueary’s statements to the grand jury impeached the testimony of Curly and Schultz and also former Penn State President Graham Spanier. Spanier tried to downplay Sandusky’s apparent crimes by testifying to the grand jury that Sandusky’s rape on campus property was inconsequential and simply made a staff member “uncomfortable.”
Based on McQueary’s testimony, the grand jury was able to pierce the veil of secrecy that Penn State tried to create to protect itself. Although serious questions remain as to what happened between McQueary’s report in 2002 and his testimony to the grand jury, without his testimony the apparent lies of Curley, Schultz, and Graham would not have been contradicted.
The NWC is extremely troubled by the evidence of a culture at Penn State conducive to cover-up. The grand jury report described another instance of sexual abuse that was witnessed by James Calhoun, a janitor at Penn State. Fellow employees described that Calhoun was so disturbed by what he witnessed that he was “crying” and “shaking,” and they feared that he might have a heart attack. The report explains that the employees expressed concern that if they reported the incident, “they might lose their jobs.” Calhoun did tell his immediate supervisor, who simply told him where he could report it, if he chose to do so. Calhoun did not file a report. This is a strong indication of a culture at Penn State that discouraged employees from blowing the whistle.
Most Americans are apathetic to whistleblower rights and the problems that confront employees who have the courage to speak up until the misconduct hits them. The child sex abuse scandal at Penn State is disturbing, but sadly not unique.
The vast majority of people who witness misconduct never report it outside their chain of command, and only 2% of people who witness misconduct take their complaints to any outside source, let alone the police. Some say that child abuse is different, and that one should report directly to the police, but scandals such as those in the Catholic Church and the FBI have repeatedly shown that child abuse is not immune to the chilling effect culture that is pervasive in our society.
In one telling example, the NWC helped former 25-year FBI veteran Agent Jane Turner when she blew the whistle on the FBI’s failure to investigate documented child abuse cases. The FBI failed to prosecute the rape of a 3-year old boy and a serial child molester who was a local celebrity. When Ms. Turner came forward, there was no public outcry. Even though she eventually won her case, her career was destroyed. Her experience demonstrates how hard it is to blow the whistle on child sex abuses cases that negatively affect powerful institutions.
In Jane Turner’s case every manager that covered up the rape of a 3-year old boy was protected and promoted within the system. Our repeated requests for accountability for the child sex crimes program were ignored despite four letters sent to the Attorney General, Department of Justice Inspector General and the FBI Director.
There is no federal law protecting whistleblowers who report violations of child sex crimes. These employees are left to hunt for state laws that provide protection, if any such protections exist at all. There are a surprising number of areas that are “no man’s land” for whistleblowers. For instance, there is no federal law to protect nurses and doctors who uncover evidence of sexual abuse of their patients.
Unfortunately, we live in a society where loyalty to one’s employer is placed above the public interest, even in the most horrendous circumstances. Until there is a culture change, crimes such as those that occurred at Penn State will continue to remain a secret from law enforcement.
To be fair he was probably tipped off to the leak coming. After all, it was heralded on this very board before that.
Why would someone on our side be publicly tipping Freeh?
I'm curious....why is it, that with academia knowing so much about everything, that they haven't figured out a way to manage tuition increases in line with general inflation vs. the pace it's at now?[/QUOTE]
Because they don’t want to. A university is not a business and chooses to run themselves for other purposes with other goals and objectives. It is generally not in their interests to cut costs. By the way most businesses don’t manage their costs to the inflation rate either.
I just finished reading the executive summary/findings and thought the authors ignored some incontrovertible facts which led them to reach some faulty conclusions.
I thought the findings listed in the executive summary were dubious and/or couched in a manner that characterized a finding to be something other than a finding. For example.
Finding 1 states:
"We found no support for the Freeh report's conclusion that Joe Paterno Graham Spanier, Tim Curley, or Gary Shultz knew that Sandusky had harmed children."
Maybe I'm missing something so help me out but didn't MM meet with JVP and tell him what he saw in the locker room and then didn't JVP carry it to TC who later met with MM and GS to verify/discuss the matter? And then didn't JVP subsequently testify to the Grand Jury that what was described to him was of a "sexual nature"? These are all established facts. Wouldn't this contradict the author's finding?
Finding 2 states:
"We found no support for the Freeh's report conclusion that Penn State's culture was responsible for allowing Sandusky to harm children."
Again help me out here but did TC and GS not report the locker room incident to the police or child services and then later plead guilty to child endangerment charges? Wasn't Spanier convicted in court of the same charges? Board chairman Steve Garban even resigned when the crap hit the fan. If that's not an insular culture issue at the highest executive and Board levels than what is it?
Findings 3 and 4 states:
The Independence of the Freeh report APPEARS to be fatally compromised by collaboration by three independent parties....
The NCAA, Governor Corbett, and the Penn State Board of Trustees APPEARS to have had their own conflicts of interest.
Whenever someone uses the term APPEARS they're usually grasping at straws for nothing more than political reasons one way or the other.The Freeh report was either compromised or it wasn't, or one or more of the parties were conflicted or they weren't. It's a binary choice. The authors haven't proved one way or the other if there were any bonafide conflicts or compromises, thus including this in the report is irrelevant and unwarranted in light of what they set out to do which was to determine if sufficient evidence existed for Freeh to base his opinions.
IMO, the A9 report is even more flawed than the Freeh report.
I thought the findings listed in the executive summary were dubious and/or couched in a manner that characterized a finding to be something other than a finding. For example.
Finding 1 states:
"We found no support for the Freeh report's conclusion that Joe Paterno Graham Spanier, Tim Curley, or Gary Shultz knew that Sandusky had harmed children."
Maybe I'm missing something so help me out but didn't MM meet with JVP and tell him what he saw in the locker room and then didn't JVP carry it to TC who later met with MM and GS to verify/discuss the matter? And then didn't JVP subsequently testify to the Grand Jury that what was described to him was of a "sexual nature"? These are all established facts. Wouldn't this contradict the author's finding?
Finding 2 states:
"We found no support for the Freeh's report conclusion that Penn State's culture was responsible for allowing Sandusky to harm children."
Again help me out here but did TC and GS not report the locker room incident to the police or child services and then later plead guilty to child endangerment charges? Wasn't Spanier convicted in court of the same charges? Board chairman Steve Garban even resigned when the crap hit the fan. If that's not an insular culture issue at the highest executive and Board levels than what is it?
Findings 3 and 4 states:
The Independence of the Freeh report APPEARS to be fatally compromised by collaboration by three independent parties....
The NCAA, Governor Corbett, and the Penn State Board of Trustees APPEARS to have had their own conflicts of interest.
Whenever someone uses the term APPEARS they're usually grasping at straws for nothing more than political reasons one way or the other.The Freeh report was either compromised or it wasn't, or one or more of the parties were conflicted or they weren't. It's a binary choice. The authors haven't proved one way or the other if there were any bonafide conflicts or compromises, thus including this in the report is irrelevant and unwarranted in light of what they set out to do which was to determine if sufficient evidence existed for Freeh to base his opinions.
IMO, the A9 report is even more flawed than the Freeh report.
Last edited:
I think it is reasonable to assume that the Freeh Report is a pile of steaming excrement.
MY GOD....when will this "grasping at straws..." to support criminal activities created and orchestrated by Rouge PA government officials STOP!!
Partial truths and modified "could have beens" are STILL being used to support a GJP that is one lie after another.
The repeated use of "...harming children..." as proof that Penn State CONTINUOUSLY covered-up for Sandusky and became a "culture" for this kind of behavior is TOTAL BS - constructed to coverup the fact that the State created a fictitious case which met its own internal agenda. It now appears this agenda includes theft of funds and more.
Harming children was not even part of MM's 2001 - REPEAT 2001 - conversations with ANYONE!!!!!!
CRIMINALS at the state lev el still stay free - 7+ years later.
So, Freeh just lambasted the report and its authors and PSU isn't standing behind it. So, time to move on again.
I wish one of Freeh's boys, someone who was interviewed, an old guard BOT would have the guts to speak out, but that ain't likely to happen. Too many vested interests in this game.
I wish one of Freeh's boys, someone who was interviewed, an old guard BOT would have the guts to speak out, but that ain't likely to happen. Too many vested interests in this game.
If anyone in the media cared, they would seek a comment from barren.
I knew Penn State was in trouble when Corbett injected himself into the mix and assigned his goon Ron Tomalis to oversee the situation (a.k.a. make sure everyone complied so that their narrative was adopted by the media and public).
“Appears” is the proper method of making an observation in a written document without the false pretense of appearing to know something that is unknowable. In this instance one might also use, “the evidence strongly suggests.”
Hugh Laurie said:
We’ve never heard Joe’s statement to verify its accuracy. He also qualifies it twice with statements like “I don’t know what you would call it”. We also have EVERYONE else that MM talked to saying that he never said he saw anything sexual… that includes his father.
Hugh Laurie said:
MM didn’t report the locker room incident to the police or child services, he turned it into an administrative matter. The PSU admins reported the watered down hearsay to the person who was responsible for both Sandusky and the alleged victim (who is on the record saying no abuse occurred). Sandusky’s boss at the second mile was trained to handle the situation, and did nothing. Sounds like the culture of the second mile was responsible or allowing Sandusky to harm children.
After being held hostage for years, TC and GS plead guilty because they were promised no jail time, and got screwed by the commonwealth. Spanier was convicted of the same bogus charge, and will likely win on appeal.
Hugh Laurie said:
Honestly, focusing on the word “appears” comes across like grasping at straws.
Corbett was a genius.
When Corbett left the attorney general's office in 2011, he appointed Linda Kelly (R) to serve as his replacement for the remainder of his term, ending in January 2013. When Kelly was sworn in on May 24, 2011, she assumed leadership of the state's high profile investigation into former Penn State football coach and eventual convicted sex-offender Jerry Sandusky, who was charged with 45 counts of sexual abuse committed between 1994 and 2009.
Originating during Corbett's tenure as attorney general in late 2009, the case's revelations about Sandusky reverberated far beyond the boundaries of Penn State's campus, inciting an onslaught of emotional pleas to the state to deliver swift justice, so to begin the healing process. Despite the mounting pressure from the public and press to advance the investigation to trial as quickly as possible, the Pennsylvania attorney general's office, which oversaw the case, proceeded with caution instead of urgency. The case spent two years in controversial gestation under Corbett - and then Kelly - before charges were brought against Sandusky in November 2011.[27] After a stage of suspended grief, Sandusky's victims and betrayed fans got the pace they wanted, with the case going from grand jury presentment to trial in a short seven months.[28]
On June 22, 2012, a jury convicted Sandusky of 45 out of the 48 counts of sex abuse for which he was indicted, including 25 felonies and 20 misdemeanors. After the verdict was delivered, Kelly said she was confident Sandusky received a fair trial, notwithstanding the hurried pace of the proceedings, and the defense's request for a mistrial following the prosecution's exposure of an erroneously incriminating interview Sandusky did with Bob Costas - "The commonwealth expects to prevail on any appeal, and as far as the timing, the judge made it clear from the beginning to all the parties that he intended to move this case along quickly," Kelly said on CNN.[29] Defense Attorney Joe Amendola tried to withdraw from the case on account of the trial's unusually expeditious time-frame. Echoing Kelly's defense of the trial's sprint to conclusion, and the dismissed mistrial, Corbett said that he expected these issues to manifest in future appeals, but ultimately, the jury's decision was informed by the "compelling testimony of these now young men who were young boys who suffered at the hands of this pedophile.”[30] Despite Corbett's repeated assurances that the attorney general's office did everything properly in handling the case, suspicions remained about his performance overseeing the case as attorney general, and his continued involvement as governor. Whether or not the handing of the case should be reviewed further was a dominant issue in the 2012 attorney general race. Both major party candidates, David Freed (R) and Kathleen Kane (D), said they would review the office's, and Corbett's, performance leading the Sandusky investigation if elected.
How can we be outstanding if we built a culture that placed football over the welfare of children?
It's interesting in this unredacted version we find out Fina thought Schultz and Belcher were having an affair. There was nothing to support that other than he felt Belcher was lying therefore it must have been to cover up for her lover. That's the mentality Fina brought into his "investigation". I guess that's understandable given the types of emails he got his jollies from.
I don't think that 3+ page rebuttal includes one sentence about the independence of his investigation.
Alice Pope is an academic and not a politician. She appears to be educated in the proper use of the word “appears” in a scholarly report.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
FB Recruiting Penn State to welcome regional safety committed elsewhere to town this weekend- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley
-
-
