OT: Feds investigating possible cover-up at Penn St
As we might have expected, things are getting worse for Penn State, as now there is a Federal investigation into whether Penn St officials covered up Sandusky's crimes. It was reported on NBC Nightly News tonight, and here is the story on Yahoo. The main story (Yahoo):
A federal subpoena related to the child sex abuse scandal involving a former Penn State assistant football coach, sent to the university’s top lawyer earlier this month, sought records of payments made by trustees to the school, or to third parties on the school’s behalf, the university said Friday.
Wow, if University officials not only knew about Sandusky but paid out money to keep it quiet... reprehensible doesn't begin to describe it.
February 24th, 2012 at 7:00 PM ^
If the school paid to cover it up, I know this has nothing to do with the football team now. But a serious punishment needs to be handed down for that. If there is ever a penalty for lack of institutional control it is this.
February 24th, 2012 at 10:48 PM ^
is excessive institutional control. They're investigating payments made by trustees???
February 24th, 2012 at 7:03 PM ^
Wish they were also investing a certain cover-up at ohio state.
February 24th, 2012 at 7:04 PM ^
Accusations against Sandusky go back many, many years. And the world didn't hear about them until 2011. Frankly, if a cover-up is eventually exposed, I can't say I'll be very surprised.
February 25th, 2012 at 8:51 AM ^
There is a big difference between "cover-up" and "denial." Really, all anyone had on Sandusky was unsubstantiated rumors. From the info we have, it appears that none of the alleged victims ever went to the authorities.
I said this before, and I'll say it again: is there anyone here who would want to believe that an old, trusted friend is a child molester? In retrospect, it looks like his friends were wrong about him, but you don't get retrospect in real time, and none of the victims actually came forward in public.
Call me naive, stupid, or both, but if there are unsubstantiated rumors about one of my oldest friends, I am going to believe the friend over the rumors 100 percent of the time.
The last point here: child molesters, like other con artists, are great at hiding from the public and lying to everyone they know. Allegedly, Sandusky engaged in this behavior for something like thirty years and didn't get caught. It's not like the people at PSU were the only ones who got fooled here.
I'm not the least bit happy about any of this, and I still think the media is guilty of murder by proxy in the case of Joe Paterno. The only silver lining here is that, if he is guilty, Sandusky will be put somewhere where he can't do this to another child, ever again. That is probably all of the satisfaction anyone is going to get out of this entire, sad affair.
February 25th, 2012 at 10:54 AM ^
What McQueary reported to Paterno was not rumor; it was his eyewitness account. It went unsubstantiated because Paterno's superiors broke the law by not turning the information over to proper authorities to investigate. Had any proper investigation occurred at that point there is no way Sandusky is able to continue molesting children for years, and certainly no way he is allowed any where near a charity for children. As to others outside the direct loop of McQueary, Paterno, the AD, the president, yeah, sure, I can buy them not realizing what Sandusky was really like. But it wasn't just that Sandusky is a liar and con man, it was that individuals in the chain of command at the university made a decision that was not theirs to make (given everything we know): that there wasn't enough to the story to turn over for independent investigation.
So at least in the information McQueary reported it wasn't an unsubstantiated rumor. It was a witness account of a sexual assault that went unsubstantiated because no one ever bothered to properly investigate it.
February 24th, 2012 at 7:12 PM ^
I never understood why we should be so "happy" with the regents et. al. 's decision (firing Joe Pa etc.), because how are we supposed to think that they didn't know what was going on. If it was such a cover-up, why should we think that these major higher-ups were so clean and responsible. I felt from the get go that thinking the regents should have responsibility was a mistake. It's a big mess over there.
February 24th, 2012 at 7:15 PM ^
I'm not in favor of the death penalty in college athletics under normal circumstances. However, if these new allegations are true I don't know why it could not be considered for all of Penn. St. athletics for a year. Hit them where it hurts. The pocket book. Send a message that this type of behavoir is not only unacceptable, and unetical, but morally reprehensible as well. I understand that would not necessarily by fair to the student athletes. However, you could allow those athletes who choose to transfer. If you think about it in the context of the crimes that the adminstration at Penn St. committed (if these allegations prove to be true) the punishment still doesn't even fit the crime. We are talking about children. Honestly, I think in the Penn St. situation since it involved a coaching icon; I think the victims were somewhat forgotten in a sense. You had ESPN talking about "Joe Pa's Legacy", and everyone seeemed to forget the real victims of this tragic situation. Bottom line is that if the administration was involved in paying to cover this up a very strong message needs to be sent to ensure something like this never happens again.
February 24th, 2012 at 7:26 PM ^
February 24th, 2012 at 7:27 PM ^
This is about the worst thing I've ever heard of in college sports. Well, one of them at least
February 24th, 2012 at 9:29 PM ^
even Craig James killing 5 hookers while at SMU is tame compared to this. Death penalty to football. I hate to say it but it has to be said. Pull the plug.
February 25th, 2012 at 8:36 AM ^
Craig James' poor hooker victims.
Eh, it is probably in poor taste to joke in this thread. The subject and implications are so serious.
February 24th, 2012 at 7:33 PM ^
In fact, I'll add it to the list of things I've been blasted for.
By the time it is all over and done, Joe Pa's place in this will be minor compared to the univerity and the town. Note - I have also said that Jo Pa should have resigned if that is what it took to keep Sandusky away from his facility, so please don't construe this as me trying to give him a pass.
On some level, even considering the NCAA here leaves me cold. It just trancends athletics. I would consider looking at their accreditation if they had a hand in a cover-up.
February 24th, 2012 at 7:42 PM ^
It would be evidence that the university was part of a conspiracy to allow Sandusky to commit heinous crimes. That's organized crime-type penalties. And my biggest question is where in the family JoePa actually sat.
February 24th, 2012 at 8:04 PM ^
With much of what you say. I think Joe Pa wasn't a high ranking member of this "family" and as LB says, history will show he was not a main culprit in all of this (also not a morale pass for him, but he's taken too much blame imo, that need be directed at people much higher than Joe Pa).
February 24th, 2012 at 7:34 PM ^
February 24th, 2012 at 7:43 PM ^
"Wick Sollers, a lawyer for the Paterno family, told NBC News that federal prosecutors have asked him for all the late coach’s records on Sandusky, who served as an assistant coach and defensive coordinator at Penn State for nearly 30 years until his retirement in 1999. Sollers said he is voluntarily turning over the Paterno’s files on Sandusky without a subpoena and fully cooperating with the probe." (Source: MSNBC)
February 24th, 2012 at 7:57 PM ^
February 24th, 2012 at 7:42 PM ^
if a cover up is indeed proved how can the the state not take matters into it's own hands. While I would feel sorry for the students there the whole university needs to be shut down. Reopen it with a new name and replace everyone at the top.
February 25th, 2012 at 11:33 AM ^
The State of PA has a system of colleges outside of PSU. PSU, Pitt, and Temple are "associated" schools. It's a loophole they have all exploited for funding purposes. They can cry broke to get tax dollars, but they aren't subject to the same audit and accounting processes as State Schools. So they don't have to share revenues back to the state.
It was a big deal when I was there because tuition hikes at State Schools were capped, but the associated schools exempted themselves.
Best of both worlds for them, but I suspect that gravy train may come to a crashing halt with budget problems and scandal.
February 24th, 2012 at 7:44 PM ^
If the trustees are found to have been complicit in this, then... Wow. There are no words to describe how outrageous that would be. They ought to be kicked out of the Big Ten if that's what the investigation uncovers.
February 24th, 2012 at 8:03 PM ^
Up until right now I believed that expelling PSU from the B1G was ridiculous and not even something to be considered. But if this proves to be true then the SMU payoffs were nothing compared to paying to silence those who would stop a child molester.
How on earth could they think they could get away with such a thing? May they all rot in hell.
February 25th, 2012 at 8:42 AM ^
if it plays out that the institution was paying out hush money, etc., then the BIG should very seriously consider expelling Penn State from the conference. I really don't see any other course of action as this is so heineiously against what the BIG stands for.
February 24th, 2012 at 7:56 PM ^
I'm asking because I don't know: is there any evidence that hush money was paid out?
February 24th, 2012 at 8:13 PM ^
The subpoena (PDF) specifically asks for
"Names, addresses of all board members and any payments by said board members to Penn State University or to third parties on behalf of Penn State University" (emphasis mine)
Presumably what they are looking for is evidence for hush money, which is what NBC thinks. Or do any lawyers on the board have other ideas about what the point of looking at the money trail would be?
February 24th, 2012 at 8:43 PM ^
Board members of Sandusky's charity, or the PSU trustees? There is a very big difference. I can't see why trustees would be paying money to PSU on behalf of PSU . . .
Most likely, they are connecting dots between the administration, Paterno, et al and Sandusky. From there, they may try to show a "cover-up", and prior knowledge of Sandusky's abuse while still providing Sandusky access to kids at the school facilities.
From what I recall, this was pretty clearly the case from newspaper reports.
February 24th, 2012 at 8:59 PM ^
or more specifically, to Cynthia Baldwin, PSU's general counsel. So they are asking for any evidence that Penn St has for money that the trustees gave (a) to Penn St or (b) to third parties on behalf of Penn St. Here is the list of the trustees. Some of them are presumably very wealthy and routinely give money to the University.
February 24th, 2012 at 9:19 PM ^
This is a more coherent statement than what was in yahoo (at least as above).
UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. -- Penn State received a subpoena on Feb. 2 from the U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Pennsylvania requesting certain information from 1998 to the present about Penn State, Graham Spanier, Tim Curley, Gary Schultz, Jerry Sandusky and the Second Mile organization, as well as any records of any payments by Board of Trustees members to the University or to third parties on the University's behalf.
The subpoena also seeks reporting requirements of employers and staff relating to allegations of misconduct by staff or individuals associated with the University. The subpoena also seeks the preservation of emails, computer histories, and hard drives. Because of the volume of information requested, the U.S Attorney Peter Smith has extended the original Feb. 29 deadline for compliance.
I wonder how much the feds are really interested, as opposed to placing a little more pressure on Sandusky to plead guilty. He knows he will bring a shitstorm on the university of no comparison if proofs are put on the record about how much the university knew and when it knew it in comparison to how long he was permitted to use the facillities.
February 24th, 2012 at 9:43 PM ^
I wonder if the U.S. Attorneys are looking into the possiblity that there were past settlements of threatened legal claims. That's another, fancier, way of describing "hush money" in the minds of some people, I know, but as a litigator I truly don't think of it the same way.
Tony Soprano, raching into his pocket for a roll of bills is hush money.
A claimant, represented by an attorney, dealing with University attorneys, handling everything privately in lieu of an actual case filing, and signing a release and settlement agreement, leaving a paper trail (and a Board-approved settlement amount) all of which might be subjected to a subpoena if it exists is harder to frame as "hush money."
No matter what, all the feds have to ask for is anything relating to "payments."
February 24th, 2012 at 10:57 PM ^
When you reach the point of negotiating a settlement with a potential claimant in a child abuse case you have long passed the point of suspicion that would require a report to the authorities.
February 25th, 2012 at 10:42 AM ^
It is a matter of statute law that you must report it. I wasn't excusing anyone.
February 24th, 2012 at 11:25 PM ^
In looking at the wording of the subpoena itself, it looks like the feds have suspicions of one or more trustees making payments to third parties, though, presumably to children or parents of children who have accused Sandusky. So rather than acting directly as legal counsel for the university, they may have been acting as individuals to shield the university in some way. I'm no lawyer and at this point we are doing a whole lot of speculating on these monetary aspects of the case, but, even if this latest round doesn't lead to new charges or convictions, it still keeps the story in the news and PSU in a bad light.
Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch. /s
February 25th, 2012 at 12:35 PM ^
I never bothered to look at .pdf's of the subpoenas themselves. It could be; still, I always thought that Trustees were too cheap to dig into their own pockets for anything. Anyway, for most of my life, Penn State was never part of our Conference and I still have trouble thinking of them as part of it.
February 24th, 2012 at 8:09 PM ^
February 25th, 2012 at 12:20 PM ^
Yes, I realize that there are things to investigate and pursue, but I'm not seeing new evidence, just more speculation.
So the answer is that the government wants more material to sift through to make sure that they have uncovered every bit of wrongdoing.
As a former prosecutor we'd call this an "investigation"; as a defense lawyer, it'd be a "fishing expedition."
February 24th, 2012 at 8:05 PM ^
If the feds are doing this it's time for smaller government.
February 24th, 2012 at 8:40 PM ^
February 24th, 2012 at 11:14 PM ^
February 24th, 2012 at 8:24 PM ^
They are screwed. Not we think OSU is screwed cos of the crap they pulled, but this is some legit, media raving, never going away no matter how long it takes, madness. If something has been found to be a cover-up, then I don;t care who they hire, the whole institution is jacked for a long long time. I had thought this would be what ND went through with that rape accusation a few years back when that local girl died and had wriiten that the football players did it to her. That investigation was crap and even after an ND player texted her to "not mess with the football team", that was swept uder the rug. This isn't. Its way too huge, and there is no longer any "internal" investigations going...this is national. I don't know how exactly how I should feel about this other than hurt for the victims involved. I mean, I am no Penn State fan, but I didn't hate them either.
February 24th, 2012 at 9:03 PM ^
February 24th, 2012 at 9:18 PM ^
If you could more or less ask for everything related to the central figures in the Sandusky scnadal and beyond, then that's basically what they want. I must say that it wouldn't be stunned if there wasn't some coverup at some level anyway - it seems only reasonable to think that there was given how long this went on. It certainly seems that many people went out of their way to not do the right thing for many years.
I will say, I don't see how the B1G keeps them in the conference if it comes to light that there was a cover-up as pervasive as the scope of the subpoena might suggest (i.e., that it includes executive decision-makers, people far more powerful than Joe Paterno in the school as a whole), at least not if it wants to hold true to the memorandum it sent to the school back in December that basically reinforced the idea that misbehavior at one school in the conference affects all schools in the conference.
February 24th, 2012 at 9:45 PM ^
Looking more and more like the late-Coach Paterno was the fall guy.
February 24th, 2012 at 9:48 PM ^
It's always struck me as an unbelievable coincidence that the shit hit the fan right after - literally days after - JoePa set the win record.
February 24th, 2012 at 11:18 PM ^
advocate for a second here. Maybe I don't understand the inner workings of college sports as deeply as I think, or maybe I don't understand the NCAA rulebook much. However, if an administration knows of a major scandal like this, covers it up, possibly paying people to shut up, but no players of any athletic team were involved, why should the athletic department suffer? The coaches and assistants that were involved have been dismissed. Why should all those athletes suffer punishment for an athletic department's coverup of something that had nothing to do with athletics? Honestly, I feel that it would be a major injustice to the players at PSU if some kind of NCAA punishment gets handed down. This, in my mind, seems to be a federal case involving a scumbag that couldn't keep his hands, or anything else for that matter, to himself. No players were caught in misconduct, no coaches or staff or boosters were handing out improper benefits, no recruits were getting paid to go there. The team, as it were, was not involved in an "athletic department scandal." Why does everyone feel the team should suffer?
February 24th, 2012 at 11:21 PM ^
February 24th, 2012 at 11:23 PM ^
double post.
February 25th, 2012 at 9:15 AM ^
I agreed with Bo when he was livid that the school presidents snuck Penn St into the Big Ten, as they never even mentioned or asked the AD's input.... and Penn St frankly isnt in the Midwest, where something like this at a true Big Ten school, is highly doubtful to happen with the core values here. It is reflecting poorly on the Big Ten and they should seriously boot them, as they never belonged in the first place. Those of you sob sisters who disagree here, who will say "its not the players fault" etc... haven't fully grasped this whole thing yet.
February 25th, 2012 at 10:22 AM ^
It's really got nothing to do with the players or even the athletic department really. It is the whole institution that is corrupt because it comes from the top down.
The angle that I am still curious about were the rumours that Sandusky was "pimping" some of the young boys out. If some of those connections led to the some of the perverts in Washington DC then I don't think it is a stretch to imagine that the whole thing be cast as a Penn State problem. Let Happy Valley take the fall.
And as far as Paterno is concerned; you know for all of his supposed power in Happy Valley he seemed awfully emasculated with his involvement in this scandal. I can't help but wonder if powers beyond him told him to just keep his mouth shut and play dumb.
At any rate, good riddance Penn State.