Its okay--it gave me the opportunity to point out what a jackass you are, so I probably would have done it anyway.
What should they have done?
- Thread starter RentechCEO
- Start date
That was a year and a half ago. I think at the time it was still a very hot topic. Now, other than the occassional barbs levied by late night comedians...this story is now old news. Obviously, we can agree to disagree on this.
I think Fink's central point is that there is no "healing" based on lies. only by knowing the truth can the community truly heal.
Believe me, I prefer the truth as well. I'm just not sure that is true. Just like some guys are better off not knowing their wife slept once with another guy.
You'd really just brush the truth under the rug? Let that sink in before you respond
you win, dude. I don't even know how to respond to that post.
Sorry, I have seen it happen. I know a guy whose wife cheated on him. Someone told him...he blew his marriage up. He then went around unhappy for 5 years only to get remarried to the same girl and they are both happy. Sometimes people make errors. I think in their situation...it would had been best for him to never know. Just my opinion.
If, for example, it turns out that there were people in Centre County, such as CYS officials, who did actually receive reports about Sandusky behaving inappropriately around kids, and those people did nothing about it, and they are still in positions today where they make decisions affecting children's lives, you think that it would be better that the people of Centre County don't know about that?
No, I do not. What I am asking is...Would it be better for Penn State's reputation to drop a search for truth...that it most likely will never find?
Your question contains an assumption that is incorrect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
Curious where the evidence of that is. Pretty serious and really makes no sense for her to do as these things do not go aways. Are you sure she just did this on her own or somebody (Spanier) told her not to. Why would she withhold documents that did not indicate her in the crime?
Well let me know when you have found the definitive truth! I believe you will be stonewalled for quite some time.
I'm not. You know very little about this issue, don't underestimate the resolve.
You have asked some awesome questions. The thing about all these questions is that the benefit of more than 3 1/2 years hindsight will in my opinion make it impossible to fairly answer them. The Chaos of the moment is the only true way to discern what posters would or would not have done. The firestorm was like nothing I had ever seen in my life. In retrospect it looks like some mistakes were made but they also were writing the book on this kind of scandal. It all was coming fast and furious for the first time at this kind of level with no template to go to hoping to find out how another University handled something like this in the past. You ask some great questions but I am not sure they can be fairly answered 3 1/2 years later.
Like I stated before, I'm all for the truth coming out. Good or bad...it doesn't really effect my life or my schools reputation. Best of luck!
You are talking about the Freeh report.? Did somebody on the BOT make statements like that?
If what you say is true about BOT members thinking something might have been up with Sandusky as far back as the 90's would it not be reasonable to surmise that people on the football end and for that matter the administration had to have that same knowledge? That would not be good.
At the same time, progress will be about much more than responding to recommendations, but about evaluating the fundamental culture that is Penn State. As we move forward, we will work to rebuild a culture that will be shaped by the highest commitment to academics and athletics — but ultimately, a culture of transparency and accountability that will be defined by the actions of men and women, in all positions across the university, committed to always doing the right thing without fail.
Karen Peetz said that.
http://news.psu.edu/story/147864/2012/07/19/message-bot-chairman-karen-peetz
Karen Peetz said that.
http://news.psu.edu/story/147864/2012/07/19/message-bot-chairman-karen-peetz
Syracuse situation came after Penn St. They had a template and the scope certainly seemed much more limited. I don't think there was a perception that Syracuse knew about him possibly having a problem. Fine never had a trial either.
Great. Gotcha' Thanks for stopping by. See ya'.
There MAY be dimmer bulbs out there than "Pitt is #1".....but I do not believe that there are any who are more determined to prove it.
What was the final outcome in that case. Did they not have enough evidence or what? I can't remember. Is he facing any kind of civil suit?
How would you have handled the situation with Joe? Would he be leading the team out of the tunnel against Nebraska in your scenerio?
It all is. None of the answers here are in real time. When the bullets are coming fast and furious it changes everything. There was plenty of duress during the start of this thing and confusion was rampant.
Maybe not for yo
Explain #1 to me if you will? Don't quite see what you are a saying.
IIRC Fine was never charged. Plus it was alleged that his wife (the one ESPN had a tape of) was having a relationship with the supposed victim she was talking about on the tape.
I read that guy's article and listened to him. He said he initially agreed with Freeh being hired but felt he should have submitted the report to the BOT first and not had the press conference. However, I remember vividly on this board then (yeah I was lurking) that many posters did not want the report to go to the BOT as they didn't trust the BOT and thought they might edit stuff out so Freeh was just given a free hand to release it.
You might be right. I'm glad I did not have to make those calls. I read another article that said PSU had basically two choices; exoneration (fight back) or contrition (say we are sorry and do penance). Maybe that is too simplistic but the article went on to say the PSU did right by not seeking exoneration and are in better shape today than if they had fought. Don't know. It was pretty bad for PSU so I don't know if it would have been worse for PSU had they fought.
What should the BOT have done.
1) Back in April 2011, when Spanier briefly brought up the scandal to the BOT, he should have been pressed. Everyone knows that Spanier ran the show back then.... the BOT was weak and should have demanded answers right then. They could have had half a year to prepare for the onslaught.
2) The BOT should not have called Paterno to fire him. He should not have been fired at all. He and Spanier should have immediately been put on administrative leave with pay (as in, the Monday after the GJ presentment leak).
3) Obviously, the Freeh Report was a disaster. Picking the Freeh Group proved to be a terrible decision so having the internal investigation with another group would have been helpful. Also, the BOT should not allow the new group to present the results to the public before the BOT had a chance to review them. They also should not allow the group to hold a press conference to present the results, but rather merely make the report available for the public to read.
Those moves would have helped a lot, IMO.
well the BoT got the best of us . . . the SITF pre-wrote the report, knew what it would conclude, and couldn't have been happier with the damage it did.
You see, here's the thing. Back in Nov 2011 we had nothing to be contrite about. A FORMER coach and some admins got indicted. JS had his day in kangaroo court and was convicted but The PSU admins still havent even had their day in court yet for crying out loud!! Since when do businesses etc start assuming the guilt of employees when they are indicted??
All the bot had to do in 11/11 was basic PR 101--place all involved persons on leave pending further investigation and adjudication of criminal cases. Then take a neutral stance until that due process is complete and actual facts are learned.Thats it. No need to start throwing people under the bus just to get the media off your backs. Thats a coward move and dereliction of fiduciary duties.
Freeh didnt even have subpoena power and never even interviewed any of the key people re: 98/01 including TC,Shultz, Joe, MM, and Harmon (the freaking UPPD chief of police who is up to his eyeballs in this mess), etc. His report is worthless because of that. Barron even admitted as such a few months ago. The guy was a former federal judge and director of the FBI. He should know better but now hes a paid character assasin so he doesnt give a damn.
There's absolutely no reason these BOT members shouldnt have followed PR 101 unless it was by design. It defies credulity otherwise.
