Freeh is going down along with Rod and the rest of the crooks. I wish Joe was here to see the whole lot taken away in shackles.
BREAKING: Court orders Freeh documents be released to alumni-elected trustees
- Thread starter ChiTownLion
- Start date
You really have no idea what is about to happen, do you?
Yep. And then Lubrano came onto BWI on the evening of 27-June-2012 floating "trial balloons", trying his best to spin the conclusions that the Freeh Report came to.
lubrano
Post #76
MyFanPage
Add Buddy
IgnoreRe: Curley heard directly from me about my criticisms of Joe from 2000-2004ReplyI have some hypothetical questions for all of you. What if, on a very high level, Joe was aware in 98 of the JS investigation? Furthermore, what if JVP initiated JS's separation months before the 98 investigation began, thus confirming that his decision had nothing to do with the investigation? What if Spanier, Schultz and Curley conferred with legal counsel in 2001 as well as with JVP before deciding on a plan of action? I'd like to know your knee-jerk reactions to these hypothetical situations.
That post existed. That is not the post of one who is looking for "truth." That is the post of one who is looking to "spin."
I've seen nothing over the course of the 40 months between 27-June-2012 and today that make me think Lubrano's motivation is any different.
Yet, he remains the man that many are hitching their wagon to. I don't understand that.
No. I cannot predict the future. I do not have access to a Time Machine.
But I am willing to bet a "beer in heaven" that neither (1) or (2) as listed in my post happens. That is if I make it to heaven. I know you have opinions on THAT particular topic also.
If Freeh never asked anyone "Did the BOT have knowledge of the situation surrounding Sandusky? What were they told? Who was told? When were they told?", I consider that tangible evidence that he was covering up for the BOT.
Because those questions are so obvious that the avoidance of them is a clear indication of someone trying very, very hard not to find the whole truth.
Someone with a history of being non-biased. You mean someone like Dick Thornbourgh
No. I cannot predict the future. I do not have access to a Time Machine.
But I am willing to bet a "beer in heaven" that neither (1) or (2) as listed in my post happens. That is if I make it to heaven. I know you have opinions on THAT particular topic also.
Mich-I'll spell it out for you -you just lost !!
There will be board resignations from old guard BoT members. Mark it down.
EXACTLY! ---- if I'm in the Paterno camp, I bring up the arguments from the Paterno Report ALL THE TIME!
Argue that the Freeh Report didn't prove its conclusions beyond a reasonable doubt (I agree with that), and given such Joe deserves a better fate than a rather heinous label as a child abuse enabler.
That's a better strategy than their current one ------- they're currently playing the 1-in-1,000,000 chance of being able to tangibly show both that the Freeh Report was doctored and/or cooked.
Awwwww somebody needs a hug and isn't going to get one. Waaaaaaaaa.
Thornburgh has a much better reputation then Freeh, and they can easily find more evidence to support the "KING & SPALDING" Report & further discredit the Freeh report.
Saying the report was predetermined would be a cherry on top, but not necessary
No, there's a 1-in-a-1,000,000 shot that both (a) Freeh was told by the BoT what to conclude, and (b) this can be tangibly proven.
You haven't answered my question yet ----- I won't offer you 1-in-a-1,000,000 odds on that (I'm not as rich as folk like Al Lord and Anthony Lubrano, after all). But I'll bet you a "beer in heaven" that I am right on this one? Or am I still not going to heaven?
I'm still not sure of all of that from a criminal perspective, but I do wonder if this decision will have any impact on the Paterno and other lawsuits. In other words will we see an early capitulation on the part of the NCAA; or will Freeh quietly settle with Spanier? Could it perhaps even impact the C/S/S charges? I'm no lawyer, but just throwing that out there.
THIS IS NOT SIMPLY ABOUT TRYING TO CLEAR JOE PATERNO. THIS ABOUT GETTING TO THE TRUTH THAT HAS BEEN KEPT FROM US FOR 4+ YEARS NOW!!!!! ENOUGH WITH THE PATERNO CAMP, PATERNO LOYALIST BULLSHITE. GO BACK TO THE SKUNK BOARD WHERE YOU BELONG. YES I AM YELLING AT YOU!!!!!
Including Paterno in the conversation is how this all started. It is really old and all they have left to deflect the commentary away from the real issues. Four years of arrogance and hubris. The more they try, the more vigorous and rejuvenated is the resolve of those who stand opposed. If the idiots were not so arrogant and hateful they could have diminished the resolve to fight years ago. Honor and clear Paterno. Too late now, morons!
Say what you want. Tonight I would rather be Lubrano than Frazier.
It's not about Paterno dumbass. It's about the collective of "Penn State" KNOWINGLY enabling a pedophile to roam their campus in the name protecting football.
Why are so many so thick?
The absence of material will be as damning as the presence of it.
If there is nothing to support Freeh's "conclusions" then he owes the university a $8.5mn refund and an apology.
Or they could just prove the lack of tangible evidence from Freeh. And we'll get to see how good notes or lack thereof that they took of Jay, Spanier, and others testimony.
And don't kid yourself about tangible proof...if judges & AG prosecutors are dumb enough to email porn, if Ed Ray is dumb enough to answer questions from people he does not know about with answers that contradict the official talking points, if Fresh is lazy enough to let the guy who he cleared in a report to deed Freeh's wife with a 3 million property days after the report, if Frazier is temperamental enough to make his remarks to Cluck, if Eckel is stupid enough to think a cc to lawyer creates privilege for every email, ....then is it a stretch to think that there might not be some suggestive communications that are not very flattering. I don't know but smart and even legally savvy people had made simple blunders when they thought they weren't being watched or when they didn't anticipate the details to be seen or known.
[QUOTE="m.knox, post: 857558, member: 3486"]It's not about Paterno dumbass. It's about the collective of "Penn State" KNOWINGLY enabling a pedophile to roam their campus in the name protecting football.
Why are so many so thick?[/QUOTE]
It is for that particular poster. His disdain and abject hate for Joe Paterno and his family knows no bounds.
Why are so many so thick?[/QUOTE]
It is for that particular poster. His disdain and abject hate for Joe Paterno and his family knows no bounds.
For example, 90% of the report is likely from Vicky......
Or that of the 8 billion interviews, only 4 sources were used.....
Plenty can come out demonstrating the lack of objectivity of the Freeh "investigation".....
As I read the court's order, nothing is supposed to be redacted, but it also obligates the alumni elected trustees to keep confidential the information they glean from the materials they get. To be more precise, I think they are only obligated to keep confidential the information they glean from the materials they get that are marked "confidential" or "privileged.". My guess is that the BOT folks will ensure that virtually everything is marked "Confidential and privileged." But anonymous leaks are always a possibility.
Note that the BoT's own statement says that their prior offer was to provide documents that were redacted to delete the names of witnesses and other relevant persons. So it seems patently absurd for the BoT to maintain that what the court ordered it to provide is identical to what it had already offered to provide.
As for the possibility that the BoT might offer less than all of the information and documents obtained by the Freeh investigators, I would not put anything past these scoundrels, except that the penalty for doing so (and violating the court's order) could be severe. Moreover, Freeh's law firm would presumably be very reluctant to take that kind of risk.
Its been said here a multitude of times, all most of us want is the TRUTH, whatever that may look like.
Lol. And it's all true. They are all effing idiots making money off of psu. Psu knows this and they still let them do it, cause they (the board) are all in on it!
MCE outed himself. Everybody on the board at that time knew his real name, where he lived and what he did for a living. He provided the info his self.
They need to pay for the damage they did to Penn State.
Most civil claims settle for pennies on the dollar losses. But civil outcomes may include loss of positions (emeritus, standing trustee, etc).
I don't even know what that would look like anymore. It's a fantasy more than some tangible outcome.
That may be true but if any of the trustees of RE can be found in breach of their duty of loyalty or duty of care known as "piercing the corporate veil" then they will have no protection from PSU and I wouldn't even want to wager a guess as to how many figures would be in their losses - all of which they would be personally liable for.
If those documents say what we think (or rather don't say what they said), I would say there is a chance of the veil being pierced !
Then the spotlight turns to those that supposedly provided oversight, Frazier and that nonstandard indemnity clause he inexplicably gave Freeh. Michy has no clue how critical it is that the Freeh report is completely accurate. With the amount of potential dollars at stake, motives aren't exactly the most important thing.
If Freeh has to pay back any money for breach of contract I wouldn't put it past him to squeal like a little pig to try and minimize his losses.
Not likely. He will get amnesia. If he squeals, it places him at greater risk for losses in his assorted defamation actions.
I am sure there is another tree that will magically jump in his path
Michnitt: I have no interest in engaging in histrionic debate with you or calling you names, but I have to admit that your posts often leave me scratching my head. I don't know anywhere near as much about the Sandusky saga as many of the guys on this Board, but I certainly DO understand how dysfunctional the PSU board of trustees is, and also why its alumni elected members are pissed off with the board majority.No. I cannot predict the future. I do not have access to a Time Machine.
But I am willing to bet a "beer in heaven" that neither (1) or (2) as listed in my post happens. That is if I make it to heaven. I know you have opinions on THAT particular topic also.
If you looked at today's court order, you will note that it cites Title 15, Section 5512 of the Pennsylvania State Code. In case you want to peruse it for yourself, I have included a link whereby you can access it. Here it is:
http://law.onecle.com/pennsylvania/corporations-and-unincorporated-associations/00.055.012.000.html
That statute has its counterpart in the corporation law of every state, and articulates the quite fundamental right of every director of a corporation (for profit or nonprofit) to inspect the books and records of the corporation and access any and all corporate documents or information relevant to his or her duties as a director;. The board majority's giving the "mushroom treatment" to PSU alums is bad enough, but giving it to fellow members of the PSU board of trustees is much more troubling.. I presume you understand that.
Does it not trouble you at all that the PSU board majority has pursued this strategy for several years? That alone should cause even a casual observer of this dispute to question the conduct and motives of the board majority. If the board majority has nothing to hide, then why the continuing efforts to prevent any disclosure at all? I'm not buying that it is to protect the privacy of the witnesses. Moreover, does it not trouble you at all that the NCAA recently distanced itself from the Freeh report, and that the Freeh Report is now widely discredited?
Finally, even if you are absolutely convinced that the Board majority has acted properly all along, you must surely realize that your view is shared by almost no one else on this Board. I would readily concede that you are entitled to your opinion, but I question whether your arguing it so animatedly and repeatedly here is doing you or anyone else much good.
If he says he was just doing what he was told by his bosses on the bot... He is a contractor after all, someone at psu did authorize his contacts with the ncaa and that wasn't in his contract. I wonder if he could get away with it.
Similar threads
