Penn State trustees file appeal

ESPN ^ | August 6th, 2012 | Don Van Natta

[Third Person]

A Penn State board of trustee member filed an appeal Monday afternoon with the NCAA over sanctions levied against the university after the Jerry Sandusky child sex-abuse scandal.

Three other trustees joined the appeal, which states that the consent decree university president Rodney Erickson signed with the NCAA agreeing to the sanctions is "null and void" because Erickson "lacked the legal authority" to enter into such an agreement without the board's approval.

Trustees and a person with first-hand knowledge of the discussions said the move is a precursor to a federal lawsuit asking a judge to invalidate the sanctions, because trustees expect the NCAA to reject the appeal.

The appeal, sent to the NCAA from attorneys hired by Ryan J. McCombie, a retired Navy SEAL who joined the 32-member board in June, also challenges the NCAA on the following fronts:

• The NCAA did not give Penn State trustees and the university due process when it did not follow its usual investigation and enforcement procedures.

• The consent decree is fundamentally unfair because it relies on the Freeh report, which "contains findings and conclusions not that are contrary to the evidence presented ..."

• The sanctions are "excessive and unreasonable" because they inflict "permanent damage to an entire generation of student-athletes and coaches who were innocent of any wrongdoing during their time on campus ..."

Erickson signed the consent decree late last month with the NCAA after consulting with board chairwoman Karen Peetz and university counsel, but he did not bring the decree to the full board for review or a vote.

The package of sanctions included a $60 million fine, a four-year bowl ban, scholarship losses and the vacating of wins from 1998 through 2011.

[HamiltonJay]

NCAA is a private self regulating body, it has nothing to do with the US Governments legal system, your attempt to equate the two is laughable.

There is NO DOUBT Penn State ACTIVELY covered up Sandusky, you can quibble about WHO exactly was involved and who wasn’t, but there is NO DOUBT, NONE that powerful people within the university CONSPIRED to cover this up.

Here’s the facts that folks that are defending Penn State just don’t want to face...

In 1998 Penn State held an internal investigation into Sandusky after a mother complained her son had been molested in a shower by Sandusky at Penn State. The entire investigation was kept quiet at the time, and when it was through Sandusky suddenly “retires”. PEOPLE AT PENN STATE KNEW, and KNEW by 1998, if not long before WHAT SANDUSKY WAS DOING... those in power consciously decided to COVER THIS UP! It wasn’t arbitrary that the NCAA picked to vacate wins from 1998 on.. they chose that date because it is undeniable, that from that date forward People in power at PENN STATE KNEW what Sandusky was doing, and chose to cover it up. They chose not only to cover it up knowing what he had done, and that he’d keep on doing it, but they continued to let him use their facilities!!

This Penn State is innocent is NONSENSE.. this isn’t a criminal prosecution, its a private governing body that PENN STATE voluntarily CHOSE to belong too.. no one forced Penn State to be part of the NCAA, and the NCAA is under no obligation to meet the legal standards of a criminal prosecution to punish or ban a university from their ranks.

Your argument is a non starter, and frankly foolhearty.

Penn State knew, by 1998 the knew damned well what Sandusky was doing, and instead of turning it over to the authorities, they held an “internal” investigation and brushed it under the rug, so he could keep on doing it for nearly another decade and a half! Who exactly knew, you can debate until the cows come home, but there is absolutely no doubt the powers to be at Penn State knew and conspired to protect their program and one of their own over protecting innocent children. This cover up wasn’t the work of just one person, it was a conspiracy that required very powerful people to happen.

This Penn State is innocent is nonsense, and frankly the NCAA copped out. Penn State should never again ever play a sport under the NCAA banner if they truly believe the PR Like they feed about what College Athletics are about, you can’t get more corrupt than a university who’s leadership knowingly allowed a pedophile to roam its halls and prey on boys rather than do the right thing just to protect their sports program.

[Hegewisch Dupa]

I heard JoePa was too stupid to figure why Ned Beatty was pig squealing in Deliverance

[allmendream]

NCAA is not a court of law - it is a voluntary association. If they don't want to be a part of it and don't like the way they do things, and especially don't like the judgment for their blatant inactivity and lack of institutional control that allowed for decades long child molestation THEY ARE FREE TO IGNORE THE NCAA.

Ryan McCombie and anyone talking about “due process” is as ignorant as when someone saying private action like a boycott (or criticism) in response to what someone said is a violation of free speech.

Typical of Penn State. Self righteous and ignorant.

[Uncle Chip]

NCAA is a private self regulating body, it has nothing to do with the US Governments legal system, your attempt to equate the two is laughable.

Have you read the NCAA bylaws -- They too are bound by due process clauses which they ignored in this case.

Penn State knew

That's pretty broad. One thing a student learns in school is that institutions don't know things or do things. People in those institutions know things and do things.

[Third Person]

ping

[RinaseaofDs]

Agree completely, however the later bit about reparations is a matter for civil court.

If anything deserved the Death Penalty, this did. The NCAA isn’t going to survive this. They hit SMU with the Death Penalty for far, far less.

The irony? The NCAA did what they did for THE SAME EXACT REASON Paterno covered it up - the money. How could they not see that?

[Uncle Chip]

NCAA is not a court of law - it is a voluntary association.

So the death penalty that they threatened is voluntary as well???

anyone talking about “due process” is as ignorant as....

So then the NCAA doesn't have to abide by their by-laws??? Are they afraid of what a full open investigation would turn up???

[HamiltonJay]

They are an Association, what you seem to be forgetting is that PENN STATE accepted the sanction, Penn State did not appeal or protest, they ACCEPTED IT, so the “due process” clause you are citing is again, not relevant.

And as to it being BROAD, you obviously didn’t read the post, as I made it very clear people in power KNEW and actively covered it up, but again, nice attempt at attempting to deflect.

[allmendream]

Sure - if Pedo State doesn't want to abide by the NCAA sanctions they are free to ignore it - “death penalty” means no playing under NCAA for a limited time - in this case there is ‘life after death’.

Pedo State is free to ignore the NCAA.

Surely you realize why they are not taking that path.

Because then there would be no ‘life after death’ - and they couldn't play any NCAA sanctioned teams until the NCAA decides to let them back in.

Can you cite the relevant NCAA by-laws that you claim they ignored in this case?

[Scoutmaster]

The fact is, McQueary never told Paterno that he witnessed an actual rape. But the old man was creeped out enough by the possibility that his former assistant coach may have done something "inapproriate" that he did indeed send the matter up the chain of command to people who were supposed to look into it further.

Please stop it.

Joe Paterno, in his own Grand Jury testimony, said based on what McQueary told him, Paterno knew Sandusky's acts were "sexual" and "inappropriate."

I don't know why you leave out the 'sexual' part, and then throw in the weasel words "possibility' and 'may have done', other than you're still apologizing for Paterno.

And according to Joe Paterno's own Grand Jury testimony, he didn't send the matter up the ladder to 'people' (plural). Paterno swore under oath that (a) he spoke with only Athletic Director Tim Curley and no one else, and (b) that he did not know if any other official at Penn State became aware of Paterno's report to Curley.

We now know Paterno also met with Gary Schultz from all of the other testimony and documentary evidence. That means both of those statements by Paterno constituted perjury - among other statements made by Paterno before the Grand Jury.

As for your "Sandusky Blitz" ice cream dish? That photo is an internet joke. Although the creamery at PSU served a flavor called "Sandusky Blitz", it didn't consist of two scoops with a suggestive upturned cone. Here's what the Sandusky Blitz was, a flavor and not a suggestive concoction:

[Scoutmaster]

The fact is, McQueary never told Paterno that he witnessed an actual rape. But the old man was creeped out enough by the possibility that his former assistant coach may have done something "inapproriate" that he did indeed send the matter up the chain of command to people who were supposed to look into it further.

Please stop it.

Joe Paterno, in his own Grand Jury testimony, said based on what McQueary told him, Paterno knew Sandusky's acts were "sexual" and "inappropriate."

I don't know why you leave out the 'sexual' part, and then throw in the weasel words "possibility' and 'may have done', other than you're still apologizing for Paterno.

And according to Joe Paterno's own Grand Jury testimony, he didn't send the matter up the ladder to 'people' (plural). Paterno swore under oath that (a) he spoke with only Athletic Director Tim Curley and no one else, and (b) that he did not know if any other official at Penn State became aware of Paterno's report to Curley.

We now know Paterno also met with Gary Schultz from all of the other testimony and documentary evidence. That means both of those statements by Paterno constituted perjury - among other statements made by Paterno before the Grand Jury.

As for your "Sandusky Blitz" ice cream dish? That photo is an internet joke. Although the creamery at PSU served a flavor called "Sandusky Blitz", it didn't consist of two scoops with a suggestive upturned cone. Here's what the Sandusky Blitz was, a flavor and not a suggestive concoction:

[Uncle Chip]

Has the full Board of Trustees voted to accept the NCAA sanctions or just its President Erickson???

[Lancey Howard]

So your point is what, small man? That Paterno and a couple other people are the ONLY ONES who “knew” (cough) that Sandusky was raping young boys even though they didn’t see it with their own two eyeballs? They should have pointed their fingers at a man they’d known for years and yelled , “Child molester!” and then... what? Sandusky would have been “investigated”? He would have been convicted and jailed, even though not a single victim had ever come forward except for one mother in 1998 whose son came home with a wet head? The cops “investigated” that, didn’t they? And where did that end up? (Jail those cops.)Get a clue, small man.

A HUNDRED people had to have been suspicious (or more) of Sandusky. Family, friends, Second Mile associates and benefactors, university donors and alumni, other coaches and players, reporters... What did they do, any of them? (Jail them all.) It takes more than suspicions to point a finger at a man and level the most devastating accusation that can be made.

So take your Paterno lynch mob with its 20/20 hindsight and shove it where the sun don’t shine. Small man.

[Uncle Chip]

<>Joe Paterno, in his own Grand Jury testimony, said based on what McQueary told him, Paterno knew Sandusky’s acts were “sexual” and “inappropriate.”<>

Please stop it. The actual testimony is here:

http://assets.espn.go.com/photo/2011/1107/espn_e_Sandusky-Grand-Jury-Presentment.pdf

It was one incident reported to him by McQueary — not plural. The word “know” or “knew” was never used. He said that McQueary reported seeing Sandusky “fondling and doing something of a sexual nature with a young boy”. The same McQueary who said the opposite the next day to his doctor.

[scottjewell]

As stated due process does not conceal but reveal facts and truths.

Due process is the bedrock of jurisprudence and a part of our Bill of Rights and the crux of the Fifth Amendment.

Not letting anyone off the hook - its the proper way to conduct litigtion and must be adhered to.

Denial of due process is simply not the way to go.

[Scoutmaster]

I'm not certain what you mean about it being only one incident reported; if I implied it was more than one, then I apologize.

What you linked was the Grand Jury Presentment and not Joe Paterno's testimony. The Presentment contains only truncated parts of the testimony. You may find a transcript of Paterno's seven-minute testimony here.

As for my statement that Paterno knew that McQueary had witnessed something sexual, I'd point you to this part of Paterno's testimony:

Q: I think you used the term fondling. Is that the term that you used?

Mr. Paterno: Well, I don’t know what you would call it. Obviously, he was doing something with the youngster. It was a sexual nature.

As for Paterno's testimony that Curley was he only person to whom he talked about what McQueary had said:

Q: To whom or with whom did you share the information that McQueary had given you?

Mr. Paterno: I talked to my immediate boss, our athletic director.

Q: What is that person’s name?

Mr. Paterno: Tim Curley.

Q: How did you contact Mr. Curley?

Mr. Paterno: I believe I did it by phone. As I recall, I called him and I said, hey, we got a problem, and I explained the problem to him.

Notice no reference to talking with any other party.

The fact that Paterno was clearly stating the Curley was the only person to whom he spoke is amplified by the subsequent exchange:

Q: You indicated that your report was made directly to Tim Curley. Do you know of that report being made to anyone else that was a university official?

Mr. Paterno: No, because I figured that Tim would handle it appropriately.

So Paterno is testifying under oath that he didn't know that Schultz knew about the Sandusky shower incident.

And you're mixed up about "McQueary who said the opposite the next day to his doctor." The doctor was Jonathan Dranov, M.D. John McQueary, Mike's father, called Dranov to the McQueary household the night of the incident to help them decide what to do. Dranov, the medical director of a clinic to which Sue and Joe Paterno had donated over $1 million, advised Mike to talk to Paterno rather than to call the police.

At trial, Dranov testified for the defense. However, he didn't say that Mike told him he didn't see anything sexual. He testified that the asked Mike three times whether Mike saw actual sexual penetration and that each time, Mike would start describing the experience, and when he got to the rhythmic slapping sounds, he would break down and couldn't continue discussing what he saw. Dranov said he had known Mike since he was a boy and had never seen him break down before.

So McQueary never told Dranov he saw sexual penetration - but he never told him he didn't.

[Third Person]

The point is that a few very powerful men knew they had a big problem with Sandusky yet the continued to let him into their facilities with young boys.

The point is that a few very powerful men chose football and money over the lives of innocent "wet-headed" children.

Now who are the small men?

[HamiltonJay]

NCAA doesn’t require the “BOARD OF TRUSTEES” to accept them. Its not the NCAA’s responsibility to enforce the chain of command within the Penn State University environment.

Desperate idiotic nonsense. Penn State has gotten off easy, and far easier than it should. Penn State wants to fight amongst themselves and create even more bad press trying to defend the indefensible, let this idiot and his friends keep playing games.

[Uncle Chip]

The fact that Paterno was clearly stating the Curley was the only person to whom he spoke is amplified by the subsequent exchange:

Q: You indicated that your report was made directly to Tim Curley. Do you know of that report being made to anyone else that was a university official?

Mr. Paterno: No, because I figured that Tim would handle it appropriately.

So then why is that perjury??? He's saying that he didn't make that report to anyone else but Tim Curley who he expected to do the right thing with it.

It turns out that Curley, Schultz, and McQueary met a week or so later. So then Schultz finds out but not from Paterno. Who is to say that Paterno was privy to that meeting or knew what was said at it. He wasn't there. The report that Curley and Schultz acted upon was the report that was given at that meeting with the three of them.

[Scoutmaster]

I believe that many other people had to have had suspicions about Sandusky, not just at The Second Mile (which requires a thorough investigation), but at Penn State and in the greater Penn State community.

But let's go to the 1998 investigation. You're aware, I assume, that two psychologists interviewed Sandusky as part of the investigation and that the Penn State psychologist stated in his report that Sandusky had the tendencies of a pedophile?

You also aware, I assume, that the Penn State police didn't turn that psychological report over to child welfare worker on the case, so that she made her recommendation not to prosecute based on the other report, which didn't find tendencies of a pedophile, and that the child worker has since stated that she would never have recommended dropping the case had she seen the damning report?

You're also aware, I assume, that there was no genital contact with that victim in 1998? Can you imagine trying to convict the acting defensive coordinator of PSU football (22+ years tenure) and long-time assistant coach (33+ years tenure) in Happy Valley because he showered with a boy? When at least two other PSU coaches were willing to testify at Sandusky's trial that showering with kids was normal?

Sometimes you don't prosecute cases because you know you can't win them.

You're alway aware, I assume, that Centre County DA Ray Gricar's nephew says that Gricar always had a sour taste in him mouth for PSU after the 1998 Sandusky case, because he felt that PSU and PSU football had stonewalled the investigation?

1998 wasn't simple.