The University's "leadership" will now try to "distance themselves" from Louis Freeh's. They will engage in the "finger pointing" that was predicted last year. Just watch as the rats try to say "but but but... We trusted Louis. We all thought he was a brilliant and wise man. We NEVER would have hired him if we thought he was a mercenary hatchet man". Lol. Just get out the popcorn while the rats try to divert attention to a fellow rat. Lmao
Next Up....
- Thread starter bjf1984
- Start date
I expect they will continue down the road that has already started
they will say the report is not complete and that it is not useful moving forward. I hope GS can get one of them to admit they tailored the report to match the firings. In any case, Frazier, Masser, Tomalis and Peetz will be squirming in thext year or two.
they will say the report is not complete and that it is not useful moving forward. I hope GS can get one of them to admit they tailored the report to match the firings. In any case, Frazier, Masser, Tomalis and Peetz will be squirming in thext year or two.
Re: I expect they will continue down the road that has already started
Agree. They will continue to talk about the recommendations in the Freeh report but claim they did not accept all of the conclusions Freeh presented. Of course we all know this is total BS.
Agree. They will continue to talk about the recommendations in the Freeh report but claim they did not accept all of the conclusions Freeh presented. Of course we all know this is total BS.
What if Freeh, on the stand, admits that he just did what he was told to do
by the BOT? What does he care, he's indemnified anyhow. He would then take them down, with him. And they will be unable to hide, then.
by the BOT? What does he care, he's indemnified anyhow. He would then take them down, with him. And they will be unable to hide, then.
Freeh won't do that,,,
Freeh was set up from the beginning as a potential "fall guy". That is part and parcel of why you hire a hatchet man ( rather than do the job yourself). It is why he was financially indemnified from the get go. Freeh doesn't care..... That's his job - for which he is paid handsomely. "Just another day at the office" for old Louis!
The LAST thing he would do is turn on the BOT........ THAT would be bad for future business
This post was edited on 3/18 7:38 PM by bjf1984
Freeh was set up from the beginning as a potential "fall guy". That is part and parcel of why you hire a hatchet man ( rather than do the job yourself). It is why he was financially indemnified from the get go. Freeh doesn't care..... That's his job - for which he is paid handsomely. "Just another day at the office" for old Louis!
The LAST thing he would do is turn on the BOT........ THAT would be bad for future business
This post was edited on 3/18 7:38 PM by bjf1984
Re: I expect they will continue down the road that has already started
Yep...there's no way at least Frazier and Peetz will be able to squirm out of the "we didn't accept the conclusions"...all one has to do to disprove that claim is play them this video where Frazier singles out C/S/S by NAME for "not putting the welfare of children first" and Peetz states "The BOT accepts full responsibility for the failures cited in the Freeh report".
Frazier is the only accountable one for Freeh being part of this
the vast majority of the BOT had no clue what to do in Nov 2011. Frazier and his legal background gave the BOT the cover to let Frazier handle "the matter". Frazier did the corporate slash and burn strategy, which was convenient to him. Unfortunately, his convenience came with a large cost to anyone with true passion for Penn St and what it stood for.
the vast majority of the BOT had no clue what to do in Nov 2011. Frazier and his legal background gave the BOT the cover to let Frazier handle "the matter". Frazier did the corporate slash and burn strategy, which was convenient to him. Unfortunately, his convenience came with a large cost to anyone with true passion for Penn St and what it stood for.
The worst is seeing Masser talk at these board meetings like he
is helping penn state. He won't listen to dissenters, he's obviously pissed when the alumni elected reps disagree with him, and he has his head on a swivel to look at the BOT lawyers sitting in the crowd for yea/nay before he makes any statements. I hope he loses the farm over this.
is helping penn state. He won't listen to dissenters, he's obviously pissed when the alumni elected reps disagree with him, and he has his head on a swivel to look at the BOT lawyers sitting in the crowd for yea/nay before he makes any statements. I hope he loses the farm over this.
I would not want Graham Spanier coming after me with guns blazing. He has the right "friends" I'm sure.
Yeah, a few people are probably not real comfortable about now. He didn't just go from being the most powerful person at one of the most powerful institutions of its kind as well as in all of academia to some powerless scrub. This is going to be crazy.
Yeah, a few people are probably not real comfortable about now. He didn't just go from being the most powerful person at one of the most powerful institutions of its kind as well as in all of academia to some powerless scrub. This is going to be crazy.
Understand what you are saying Frank.....
and it is a very valid point (I would think that from a legal standpoint, it would be ESPECIALLY valid and germane).
That being said....it should also be noted that EVERY ONE of those trustees had a fiduciary obligation to be ENGAGED in the issues at hand. Yes, I know that many (if not most) of them were not engaged....most certainly not to the degree that Frazier was.....or at any level near that which would be considered appropriate to their fiduciary responsibilities.
But that is part of the deal when one is entrusted to sit in governance.....to act as an agent for a group of stakeholders. It is a serious duty - and should not be entered into lightly.
If not held accountable by the courts, ALL of these guys should be held accountable by "us".....at least.
and it is a very valid point (I would think that from a legal standpoint, it would be ESPECIALLY valid and germane).
That being said....it should also be noted that EVERY ONE of those trustees had a fiduciary obligation to be ENGAGED in the issues at hand. Yes, I know that many (if not most) of them were not engaged....most certainly not to the degree that Frazier was.....or at any level near that which would be considered appropriate to their fiduciary responsibilities.
But that is part of the deal when one is entrusted to sit in governance.....to act as an agent for a group of stakeholders. It is a serious duty - and should not be entered into lightly.
If not held accountable by the courts, ALL of these guys should be held accountable by "us".....at least.
Similar threads
