JmmyW said:
Anyone want to take bets on whether or not PSU gets nailed for "violations" related to victims that either don't exist or never testified at trial?
Federal investigators' findings in Sandusky case near release
- Thread starter step.eng69
- Start date
Anyone want to take bets on whether or not PSU gets nailed for "violations" related to victims that either don't exist or never testified at trial?
No kidding, and many schools will get hammered. The Feds are investigating numerous schools.
That's the problem and why I'm angry once again at the ignorance of The Trib and Debra Erdley. Can they really be this dumb? What are they pretending it's about "Sandusky" for?
IMHO the 98 one was not a complaint about a sexual assault, and was not determined by all the child pros in PA to be a sexual assault. Neither was 2001. There was no campus crime report because PA child services said there wasn't a crime.
From the Clery Act: "(3) Each institution participating in any program under this title shall make timely reports to the campus community on crimes considered to be a threat to other students and employees described in paragraph (1)(F) that are reported to campus security or local law police agencies. Such reports shall be provided to students and employees in a manner that is timely and that will aid in the prevention of similar occurrences."
Even in the broadest interpretation, there was no imminent threat to any students or employees.
"Andrea Dimaggio" and her comment section buddies can pretend all day long that the Clery Act applied, but it didn't.
Last edited:
Nah, not really. But go ahead and smear CSS and JVP while leaving the rest of the administration as blameless, if it pleases you.
I don't see how the Cleary Investigation affects the C/S/S criminal cases, unless ED in its final report cites incriminating evidence that the OAG doesn't have, which isn't likely at this point.
ED may say that PSU has done an exemplary job cleaning up its act in light of Sandusky revelations, but that won't prevent ED from fining and criticizing Penn State for being out of Cleary compliance before the GJP leaked. It's true that other universities were just as negligent as PSU pre-Sandusky, but with the Scandal's light shining on Penn State, ED can hardly let PSU's Cleary violations pass unfined or uncited. It will not be a good day for PSU when ED announces the fine, but given we're in a Presidential election--and one that generates headlines on a daily basis--the impending Cleary fine will cycle out of the news in a day or three.
ED may say that PSU has done an exemplary job cleaning up its act in light of Sandusky revelations, but that won't prevent ED from fining and criticizing Penn State for being out of Cleary compliance before the GJP leaked. It's true that other universities were just as negligent as PSU pre-Sandusky, but with the Scandal's light shining on Penn State, ED can hardly let PSU's Cleary violations pass unfined or uncited. It will not be a good day for PSU when ED announces the fine, but given we're in a Presidential election--and one that generates headlines on a daily basis--the impending Cleary fine will cycle out of the news in a day or three.
Or in PSU's case, appealed so that they can be increased.
Christine Brennan is probably writing her article right now.
No Clery guidelines were in place at the time. That's clearly a football/Paterno issue
. Headlines will trumpet "Paterno violated Clery Act".
Odds are PSU requested electronic draft so that they could insert 'Paterno' every 10th word?
I corrected your typos.roxine care$ about the kid$.
The results of this investigation should be cute. Are the three 'amigos' at fault for delay and cover-up
Federal investigators' findings in Sandusky case near release
Former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky arrives at the Centre County Courthouse for an appeals hearing about whether he was improperly convicted four years ago, in Bellefonte, Pa. Friday, Aug. 12, 2016.
Photo by AP
Nearly five years after they began scouring Penn State records, federal investigators are close to releasing findings about the university's adherence to campus-safety laws in the years leading up to the Jerry Sandusky child sexual abuse scandal.
Officials with the U.S. Department of Education “hope to have something to release on this in the next 10-14 days,” a spokesman told the Tribune-Review about the sweeping investigation of security measures implemented on the University Park campus before allegations of the former assistant football coach molesting boys broke publicly in November 2011.
A jury in June 2012 convicted Sandusky of sexually abusing 10 boys in and around Penn State facilities between 1998 and 2009. Federal investigators want to determine whether Penn State complied with the Clery Campus Safety and Security Act, a 1990 law that, among other things, requires colleges to establish policies and procedures for reporting crime and to issue timely warnings of danger on and around campuses.
Their goal: to determine whether allegations against Sandusky were reported as required and included in campus crime reports.
Ultimately, many wonder whether that might have halted the abuse years before 32 men came forward, claiming to have been victimized as youths by the former coach. To date, the school and its insurers have paid $93 million to settle their claims.
The Department of Education forwarded preliminary findings of its Clery investigation to Penn State in July 2013, and the investigation remains open as Sandusky appeals his criminal conviction, charges still loom against three top university administrators accused of failing to report allegations and at least five civil suits remain active.
Quick action commended
Penn State will not discuss any of its Clery responses until the Education Department releases its review, said Lawrence Lokman, the school's vice president for strategic communications.
But Penn State acted quickly after the scandal broke to beef up its campus safety program. Within weeks, the school hired a Clery compliance officer and instituted wide-ranging training programs for mandated reporters.
“Penn State, to the best of my knowledge, still has the most robust training and collection process in the country, and that is a direct result of Sandusky and the Clery investigation. And I give them credit for that,” said S. Daniel Carter, a campus safety consultant who has worked on Clery issues since the law's inception and testified before Congress.
Such comments bear witness to Penn State's efforts.
“We aspire to be a leader in Clery Act compliance and have significantly strengthened our programs since 2011,” Lokman said. “The university has multiple initiatives focused on fighting sexual assault and misconduct, including mandatory employee training and a universal hot line. We regularly review and analyze best practices, and incorporate our learnings into our operations and practices.”
Six-figure fines
Just what may be at stake for Penn State in the ongoing federal investigation remains unclear.
Federal records show the Education Department has never invoked the law's ultimate sanction of prohibiting a school from participating in federal student-aid programs.
The Clery Act, however, does allow fines of up to $27,500 for any violation at Penn State. The period under review spans 1998 to 2011.
“How many violations they may find is unknowable,” Carter said.
Penn State likely has spent the past three years answering issues referenced in the 2013 preliminary report, he said.
The department imposed six-figure fines against at least 11 schools over the past 16 years, a 2014 report showed. The Eastern Michigan University paid a record fine of $350,000 in 2008 for failing for 10 weeks to report a coed's death as a rape-murder.
For years, it was an open secret that compliance with the law's annual reporting requirements varied dramatically from one college to the next.
Experts in campus policing and security said that has changed over the past five years — due in part to publicity surrounding high-profile cases such as the Sandusky scandal and enhanced compliance efforts by the federal government.
“There has been a complete evolution from it being a statistical report of crimes that comes out of a police department to an all-encompassing report on policies and reports from all resources across campus,” said Randy Burba, president of the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Agencies. “Campuses are much more taking the committee approach and making sure all departments are working together to comply with regulations and have an accurate and timely report produced every year.”
The Department of Education has beefed up its outreach to college law enforcement agencies, said Burba, chief of public safety at Chapman University in Orange, Calif.
At the same time, Carter said the agency added resources when it restructured in 2011 and that investigations have increased.
“The Clery Act compliance division has been as busy as they ever have been,” Carter said, adding that complex cases like Penn State's can require years to resolve.
Debra Erdley is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach her at 412-320-7996 or
Hold the phone! It wasn't Genaro and apologies were made... (Google Search fail-he came up for a Bellefonte byline and that info is 3 years old). When I find the name that belongs here I'll let you know... AP loves to hide who writes this stuff.
Plus this is another article not the Clery one. This is the "AP" version of the MMQ v PSU Whistleblower trial date announcement. You wouldn't know that from the headline OR almost the entire article... smh
http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/347...ate-Abuse/id-89f0c02eef274bc0a1319e4129bcb703
Plus this is another article not the Clery one. This is the "AP" version of the MMQ v PSU Whistleblower trial date announcement. You wouldn't know that from the headline OR almost the entire article... smh
http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/347...ate-Abuse/id-89f0c02eef274bc0a1319e4129bcb703
Last edited:
That crap about McQueray is also in the Trib, it's sprayed everywhere and is a bunch of inaccurate, misleading bullshit.
That's why you go after AP, because THEY write it and put it on the wire, and the whole WORLD copies this garbage.
I would have liked instead to read a story stating this:
Nearly five years after they began scouring Second Mile records, federal investigators are close to releasing findings about the charity's adherence to mandated child protection procedures in the years leading up to their Founder & Executive Director's multi-count indictment for child sexual abuse of charity clients.
Understand that Penn State theoretically could be found to have done nothing wrong in regards to Sandusky as it relates to Cleary, yet the Feds find numerous other examples of violations that are unrelated. The investigation goes well beyond Sandusky.
But even if that is the case, I'm sure the media will not explain it, and imply if not outright say it's related.
But even if that is the case, I'm sure the media will not explain it, and imply if not outright say it's related.
When the university wonders why donations are down, I hope they have a big mirror in the room.
Sorry, that's not going to happen. You guys don't understand the Clery Act - which is what the Feds are investigating. One of the big problems is that Penn State, and virtually every other college pre-Sandusky, were only paying lip service to the Clery Act. There were a ton of things that were supposed to occur to bring schools into compliance with the act, but they were being ignored pretty much everywhere (so PSU very definitely wasn't adhering to the law that was in place at the time). You can bet your bottom dollar that the Feds are going to find tons of things that Penn State hadn't done properly at the time - but they will also likely report that pretty much all of them have been fixed. What is up in the air is how many of those will be fineable? Chances are pretty good that they'll go ahead and levy a hefty fine even though the issues have been fixed (that's consistent with the way that Clery Act violations have been handled at other schools).
Lets see....Spanky was vetted by the Feds for security clearance in 2012 or 2013. Will the ED's of Feds find that he was incompetent to report in disclosing
Yes my dear Wendy, I would also like to read the statement you posted....It ain't happening, something is terribly wrong with the protection as American citizens we are to be given.
There was a reporter, I forget his name, who wrote a book on how organized crime was structured and operated. When he looked at government, it was set up exactly the same way.
Isn't it the case with the Cleary Act that schools must record and report all suspected crimes, i.e., all complaints of crimes reported to them, regardless of whether subsequent investigation determines that prosecution is not viable? If that's the case, should we assume that McQueary's report of the Lasch incident will be subject to fine by ED.
Correct. This is part of the reason why PSU now sends out text messages for every assault that gets reported to them.
Incorrect. There was no imminent threat to any student or employee as cited above.
Section 3 still applies. No Student or Employee was in any imminent danger.
In addition to Victims 2 and 8 who didn't testify but who other witnesses saw abused in PSU showers, Victims 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 testified that they were molested in the Penn State showers in the Lasch Building and/or the East Building.
I swear, the Tom McAndrew Board does exist in an alternate universe.
http://deadspin.com/5889777/eight-o...ictims-claim-they-were-molested-on-psu-campus
