What happens this afternoon if AM says nothing happened?

[BUFFALO LION]

What if he says what he said to the Defense Investigator. They were just having a shower and slapping towels.

Rumor is he WANTS to testify which I find interesting.

 

[mn78psu83]

He says what he said to the Defense Investigator. They were just having a shower and slapping towels.

Rumor is he WANTS to testify which I find interesting.

Nothing the night MM was watching "Rudy" or nothing ever?

 

[Phil's Rug]

The media will say...

 

[nits74]

What if he says what he said to the Defense Investigator. They were just having a shower and slapping towels.

Rumor is he WANTS to testify which I find interesting.

Rumors from whom?

 

[lionlurker]

If he says nothing, then we will just have to remain patient. What is known will be revealed at the proper time. Some people will come out looking better, and some will come out looking worse. The sources say you can't know anything further, until they decide when. Otherwise, they will never tell anybody anything else that would have to be hidden away and never shared with anyone, no matter what, and then we'd really be screwed.

 

[mn78psu83]

Rumors from whom?

Al Lindsay? bjf1991 will be reporting live starting at 1:00.

 

[nits74]

If he says nothing, then we will just have to remain patient. What is known will be revealed at the proper time. Some people will come out looking better, and some will come out looking worse. The sources say you can't know anything further, until they decide when. Otherwise, they will never tell anybody anything else that would have to be hidden away and never shared with anyone, no matter what, and then we'd really be screwed.

Yes, and another ancillary question. How's that Freeh Report review by our elected trustees going? We seem to be on a need to know basis only. In a former life I did reviews similar to this for a very large company. No way this should take this long. These people have been basically useless.

 

[KnightWhoSaysNit]

Yes, and another ancillary question. How's that Freeh Report review by our elected trustees going? We seem to be on a need to know basis only. In a former life I did reviews similar to this for a very large company. No way this should take this long. These people have been basically useless.

Lower your expectations. If you think we'll get change from the bottom up then you probably think 9 communists could have changed the ways of Stalin.

 

[BUFFALO LION]

Yes, and another ancillary question. How's that Freeh Report review by our elected trustees going? We seem to be on a need to know basis only. In a former life I did reviews similar to this for a very large company. No way this should take this long. These people have been basically useless.

Apparently, our fearless leaders basically told the Clery people that the Freeh Report wasn't worth the paper it was written on. That's one of the reasons we were fined so heavily. They claim we retracted our previous acceptance of the Report.

 

[nits74]

Lower your expectations. If you think we'll get change from the bottom up then you probably think 9 communists could have changed the ways of Stalin.

I have zero expectations these days. Particularly after the "nine communists" publically hailed the attributes of the chosen leader.

 

[lionlurker]

Tom was right about one thing: as this goes on, some people come out looking a whole lot worse. But it turned out not to be the people we expected.

 

[jerseylion109]

Stop with the cryptic posts..you know nothing just like the rest of us

 

[Woodpecker]

Apparently, our fearless leaders basically told the Clery people that the Freeh Report wasn't worth the paper it was written on. That's one of the reasons we were fined so heavily. They claim we retracted our previous acceptance of the Report.

Do I have this correct: Penn State paid millions for a report that was used to support paying millions in fines and settlements and then had to pay millions because they thought the report was worthless?

 

[lionlurker]

Stop with the cryptic posts..you know nothing just like the rest of us

It's sarcasm, dude. Unless I missed your sarcasm.

I'm parodying posts here from 5 years ago.

 

[NC2017]

What if he says what he said to the Defense Investigator. They were just having a shower and slapping towels.

Rumor is he WANTS to testify which I find interesting.

Somewhere around 1998, the truth became a victim to yellow journalism. It sux hard but that's the national state of affairs we all live in.

 

[DonP74]

Get ready:The boy in the shower is going to testify that nothing happened that night. That will leave Coach Paterno and the administrators off the hook. I never believed Joe did anything wrong in the first place.

 

[Keyser Soze 16801]

Apparently, our fearless leaders basically told the Clery people that the Freeh Report wasn't worth the paper it was written on. That's one of the reasons we were fined so heavily. They claim we retracted our previous acceptance of the Report.

Is this in the Clery document somewhere? If so, what page? Thanks!

 

[bkmtnittany1]

Do I have this correct: Penn State paid millions for a report that was used to support paying millions in fines and settlements and then had to pay millions because they thought the report was worthless?[/QUOTE

I am glad these morons aren't in charge of my finances....

 

[BUFFALO LION]

Do I have this correct: Penn State paid millions for a report that was used to support paying millions in fines and settlements and then had to pay millions because they thought the report was worthless?

You got it. Just another way to give away over $2 million dollars to another corrupt outside entity. This crap is getting beyond ridiculous.

Whoever contributes another red cent to this legalized extortion ring is absolutely crazy.

 

[Tom McAndrew]

Yes, and another ancillary question. How's that Freeh Report review by our elected trustees going? We seem to be on a need to know basis only. In a former life I did reviews similar to this for a very large company. No way this should take this long. These people have been basically useless.

I continue to be amazed at the statements some people make.

Two simple things:
- the alumni-elected trustees were doing this review during their free time. Most of them still have full-time jobs, as well as BOT tasks, along with family and other restraints on their time. There's no way to fairly compare the time it has taken them to complete the review with people that do this full-time as their job.
- for all you know, the review could have been completed. The alumni-elected trustees can not speak about the review. In time, what they discovered will enter the public sphere, but the process for that to happen will take time.

Personally, I don't waste time getting frustrated or upset over the pace of things over which I have no control over the process.

I have zero expectations these days.

that's just silly

 

[BUFFALO LION]

Is this in the Clery document somewhere? If so, what page? Thanks!

Thank Jimmy. Here you go.

1.
In the DOE report, at page 23:

In regard to Paterno, the University conceded that Paterno was a CSA for Clery Act purposes and, as such, if he had knowledge of a criminal act of child sexual abuse, the University would have been obligated to include the reported incident in the crime statistics reported in the 2002 ASR and provided to the Department. The University further conceded that Paterno testified under oath that he understood what McQueary reported to him regarding Sandusky's interaction with the child in the Lasch Building locker room shower was likely a criminal act. However, the University specifically refused to concede it violated the Clery Act in regard to this or any other Sandusky incident. To come to this conclusion, the University has taken the nuanced position that it does not accept that the statements made by Paterno under oath to the Grand Jury were in fact true; but IF they were true, then the University violated the Clery Act.

In regard to Curley, the University defended his silence and inaction and stands by his failure to contemporaneously report this forcible sex offense. Ultimately, the University argued that it was unclear what exactly Paterno and Curley were told by McQueary at the time, or what they understood his words to mean, so there was no way to know if any of them believed the events reported rose to the level of a Clery-reportable forcible sex offense.

----
Later, at the bottom of p.24:

The Department has closely examined findings contained in the Freeh Report and has conducted its own independent investigation in relation to this matter. Based on this evidence, the Department has reached the same conclusions as the Freeh Report in relation to this incident, and, therefore, is in agreement with the University inasmuch as it accepted the findings of the Freeh Report. With the Department and the University seemingly in agreement regarding the facts of this particular incident, and in agreement that those facts constituted a violation of the Clery Act, for most Universities that would have been the end to the present inquiry—not so for Penn State.

Instead, Penn State has chosen to go another route. In its response to the Department's PRR, the University contradicted its earlier acceptance of the Freeh report findings, and, instead, rejected the findings of the Freeh Report in relation to this incident. Contrary to the Freeh Report's findings, the University asserted that it did not violate the Clery Act in relation to this incident. In doing so, the University offers factual and legal arguments that are at best incongruent and at worst in direct opposition to the findings of the Freeh Report.


---
And a little later, on p.25:

The Department is also disappointed that, given the opportunity to review its own actions in regard to this incident, the University has taken no ownership of its past mistakes.

----
https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/sites/...center/cleryact/pennstate/PSCFPRD10327991.pdf

 

[lionlurker]

Nothing personal, Tom. But it's been 5 years. Some of the people who were here with us at the beginning are already dead. Progress has been glacial in many areas, and recently it appears that we are moving backwards. I'm not sure why this situation is deserving of any more patience.

 

[BUFFALO LION]

I continue to be amazed at the statements some people make.

Two simple things:
- the alumni-elected trustees were doing this review during their free time. Most of them still have full-time jobs, as well as BOT tasks, along with family and other restraints on their time. There's no way to fairly compare the time it has taken them to complete the review with people that do this full-time as their job.
- for all you know, the review could have been completed. The alumni-elected trustees can not speak about the review. In time, what they discovered will enter the public sphere, but the process for that to happen will take time.



Personally, I don't waste time getting frustrated or upset over the pace of things over which I have no control over the process.



that's just silly

I fully support our ELECTED Trustees. And others doing the dirty work like Dem. They are going above and beyond. In fact, I have no idea where we would be without them carrying the heavy load on all this stuff. In my opinion, people like Anthony Lubrano are an absolute God send.

 

[Psychedelic_MackDaddy]

Nothing personal, Tom. But it's been 5 years. Some of the people who were here with us at the beginning are already dead. Progress has been glacial in many areas, and recently it appears that we are moving backwards. I'm not sure why this situation is deserving of any more patience.

America's involvement in WWII = 3.67 years

Medical school = 4 years

Time to review a meaningless Freeh report = 4 years and counting...

 

[Tom McAndrew]

Nothing personal, Tom. But it's been 5 years. Some of the people who were here with us at the beginning are already dead. Progress has been glacial in many areas, and recently it appears that we are moving backwards. I'm not sure why this situation is deserving of any more patience.

I don't take it personally, as I have absolutely no control over any part of the process.

I've talked to many of the players in the process, as well as a number of lawyers outside of the process. None of them can believe that it's taken so long.

The length of time to complete the Freeh Report documentation review is rather speedy when compared with the C/S/S situations, or the Paterno Family lawsuit. For understandable reasons, folks tend to lump all of it into one thing, and get frustrated at the pace.

 

[Psychedelic_MackDaddy]

I don't take it personally, as I have absolutely no control over any part of the process.

I've talked to many of the players in the process, as well as a number of lawyers outside of the process. None of them can believe that it's taken so long.

The length of time to complete the Freeh Report documentation review is rather speedy when compared with the C/S/S situations, or the Paterno Family lawsuit. For understandable reasons, folks tend to lump all of it into one thing, and get frustrated at the pace.

I'm frustrated that people are frustrated at the frustration.

It's frustrating!

 

[Mister Magoo]

Do I have this correct: Penn State paid millions for a report that was used to support paying millions in fines and settlements and then had to pay millions because they thought the report was worthless?

 

[lionlurker]

The problem with the pace is that as the narrative hardens over time like cement, even the truth will not be enough to loosen it up. This is why I think in retrospect a more proactive approach could have been more helpful.

I dunno. I don't know the details, or the players, as well as some here do. But to see the BOT not suffer for their actions, and even see them getting away with new rules that are frankly un-American and disrespectful to everyone involved with nary a peep from anyone, and to see the innocent continually smeared by the media with no pushback from the institution, well, it's difficult to take.

 

[Tom McAndrew]

America's involvement in WWII = 3.67 years

Medical school = 4 years

Time to review a meaningless Freeh report = 4 years and counting...

Amusing, but factually incorrect. The Freeh report has been reviewed by many since it was released. PS4RS did a very good review of it within a few months of it being released.

The issue here is the review of the Freeh Documentation by the alumni-elected trustees. They had to sue to get access to the documentation. Once that was granted, they had to go through lengthy delays over how the documentation would be provided to them. The alumni-elected trustees did not get access to electronic copies of the documentation until earlier this year, so the review in question has taken months, not years.

 

[Psychedelic_MackDaddy]

Amusing, but factually incorrect. The Freeh report has been reviewed by many since it was released. PS4RS did a very good review of it within a few months of it being released.

The issue here is the review of the Freeh Documentation by the alumni-elected trustees. They had to sue to get access to the documentation. Once that was granted, they had to go through lengthy delays over how the documentation would be provided to them. The alumni-elected trustees did not get access to electronic copies of the documentation until earlier this year, so the review in question has taken months, not years.

Forgot one:

Number of days to write the Constitution of the United States = 116 days
---->(Not a typo, people - 116 DAYS - to write the Constitution of the United States)

 

[BlueBand]

Forgot one:

Number of days to write the Constitution of the United States = 116 days
---->(Not a typo, people - 116 DAYS - to write the Constitution of the United States)

And perhaps if they had taken a little longer, we wouldn't be arguing over what some of it means.