Jump to content


Penn State Scandal Thread


Eric the Red

Recommended Posts

They should probably keep the words "Penn State" off the uniform for another 5 years or so. In fact they should temporarily change their colors to look like a school they don't like.

here is the thing, someday children will see film of psu's glory days and they will wonder and ask why the uniforms will be changed. it will have to be explained to them, that will be unpleasant. these new uniforms will still be a reminder of what is going one right now (and the past ~8 months) because they are a glaring example of how they are running from something.

Link to comment

In the Ruins of a Blue and White Empire

BY LUKE DITTRICH, June 5, 2012, 12:00 AM, Esquire Magazine

 

<snip>

 

According to the grand-jury indictment, the first time Jerry Sandusky was investigated on suspicions of sexual abuse was back in 1998. On May 13 and 19 of that year, detectives from the Penn State and municipal police departments hid in the home of the mother of an alleged victim and listened in on conversations she had with Sandusky, conversations in which Sandusky admitted that his genitals might have touched her son, and that he felt terrible about it, saying "I wish I were dead." Then, on June 1, they interviewed Sandusky in person. Shortly afterward, for unclear reasons, the case was dropped.

 

Would Joe Paterno have been told about that investigation? Would any Penn State police officers or administrators have informed Joe Paterno that they were investigating his heir apparent on suspicion of heinous crimes?

 

We don't know.

LINK

 

Sort of a long article from a couple months back that I just got around to reading. Esquire interviewed Jay Paterno for the article. There's some pretty good stuff in it. I just can't understand how this scandal was covered up for over a decade. Aren't there any investigative journalists in America any more?

  • Fire 1
Link to comment

So, when does Hackenberg decommit?

 

I say by the end of September

Yeah, I'll be surprised to see him stick it out. He can go nearly anywhere in the country. But you just never know. He could end up a Nitany Lion.

Link to comment

So, when does Hackenberg decommit?

 

I say by the end of September

Yeah, I'll be surprised to see him stick it out. He can go nearly anywhere in the country. But you just never know. He could end up a Nitany Lion.

Would love for him to stick it out!! Stanton vs. Hackenberg for 3 or 4 years is very intriguing!!!

Not if they don't have an OL to protect him.

Link to comment

Didn't see this above, but it appears that they're now going after Penn State's academic accreditation:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2...tion/index.html

 

The organization that grants academic accreditation to Penn State has warned the school that it is in danger of losing that crucial status in the wake of the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal, the university announced this week.

 

 

Were the commission to pull Penn State's accreditation -- which it has not done -- the school would face the loss of eligibility for federal student aid programs, guaranteed student loans, federal research grants and could lose eligibility for state aid, commission spokesman Richard Pockrass said in July.

 

If they succeed in doing this, then the football penalties are rendered moot--Penn State likely won't be able to operate any longer without all of that aid money flowing to students, and they'll shut down or severely downsize Penn State's academic offerings.

 

And of course, non-essentials like athletics would be some of the first things to go.

 

I don't think this will come to fruition, but if more nastiness comes from the FBI investigation and the rumors surrounding the Second Mile finances are true/come to light...then I'd say all bets are off.

Link to comment

Just saw this show up today--if this is true, this does put Penn State's current leadership in a very unfavorable light yet again, IMO:

NBC News

 

While Penn State continues to pay the legal expenses of former university officials Gary Shultz and Tim Curley, it is not footing the bills for a key witness against Jerry Sandusky at his child sex abuse trial, Mike McQueary, NBC News has learned.

 

 

A Penn State spokesman cited university bylaws in explaining why the legal bills of both Curley and Schultz are being covered. “(Employees)shall be entitled as of right to be indemnified by the University against expenses (including counsel fees) and any liability (including judgments, fines, penalties, excise taxes and amounts paid in settlement),” they read.

 

But Penn State is not obligated to pay legal fees for McQueary, and has not done so, the spokesman said.

 

Typically, if they were an employee at the time, one would think they would be covered normally, yes? This smacks of being very petty and revengeful on the part of Penn State.

 

Perhaps we should hope the University loses their accreditation after all?

Link to comment

Just saw this show up today--if this is true, this does put Penn State's current leadership in a very unfavorable light yet again, IMO:

NBC News

 

While Penn State continues to pay the legal expenses of former university officials Gary Shultz and Tim Curley, it is not footing the bills for a key witness against Jerry Sandusky at his child sex abuse trial, Mike McQueary, NBC News has learned.

 

 

A Penn State spokesman cited university bylaws in explaining why the legal bills of both Curley and Schultz are being covered. “(Employees)shall be entitled as of right to be indemnified by the University against expenses (including counsel fees) and any liability (including judgments, fines, penalties, excise taxes and amounts paid in settlement),” they read.

 

But Penn State is not obligated to pay legal fees for McQueary, and has not done so, the spokesman said.

 

Typically, if they were an employee at the time, one would think they would be covered normally, yes? This smacks of being very petty and revengeful on the part of Penn State.

 

Perhaps we should hope the University loses their accreditation after all?

 

Pretty standard to pay for the legal defense of officers being prosecuted for actions performed in the course of the their employment. Orgs do that because a conviction will cost the organization big time. McCreary is not under indictment so he does not need legal defense.

 

It used to be the lawyers were for the prosecution and defense. Nowadays the witnesses get lawyers because everything's illegal, and everybody can be sued by somebody because nobody does what anybody should have done.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...