Penn State fighting to retain secrecy in Sandusky case

Submitted by mGrowOld on December 1st, 2011 at 7:30 PM

Just when I think I can't possibly have a lower opinion of PSU they go and lower it again.  Penn State officials are fighting to retain privacy in the Sandusky case and are denying lawmakers requests for information to aid in the investigation.  Instead of helping those trying to put Sandusky behind bars for life, Penn State is withholding information that could assist in the case against him.  And the really sickening thing (to me anyways) is that it might work as Pennsylvania laws give special privacy privileges to universities not enjoyed by anyone else.

They make me sick.

http://start.toshiba.com/news/read.php?rip_id=%3CD9RBVNHG0%40news.ap.org%3E&ps=1011

 

Comments

Elmer

December 1st, 2011 at 7:37 PM ^

I'm guessing they feel like Sandusky will be put away for life either way and now are trying to limit the damage against the university in civil cases.  Sad all the way around.

 

909Dewey

December 1st, 2011 at 7:40 PM ^

When you think that what operated there was a child rape syndicate and that it functioned for maybe two decades - I am sure there are some very interested parties, other than Penn State officials, fighting to retain secrecy in the Sandusky case. This was an abuse of power to the highest degree.

hart20

December 1st, 2011 at 7:45 PM ^

Anyone in the AD who was there when Sandusky was there and is still employed there today needs to be fired. I'm glad Joe Pa got fired. What he and everyone else has done to protect Sandusky is disgusting.

justingoblue

December 1st, 2011 at 7:54 PM ^

Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't this coverup only last as long as it takes to get a civil suit in court? It's not like they can go all Natalie Portman (mmmmmm, no) to a subpoena.

maizenbluedevil

December 1st, 2011 at 10:57 PM ^

And what kid would want to go there, at this point?  I wouldn't be surprised at all if their number of applications this year was like 25% of what it was last year, and there were tons of transfers.  I mean who in their right mind would want to continue to be associated with that school?  For years to come, anytime someone sees "Penn State" they're going to think "child molestation."  Anyone considering going to school there would have to realize this and be seriously deterred by it.

This is something that could end up permanently destroying the future of the university.  Not the athletics program, but the whole university.  

stetgor

December 1st, 2011 at 7:59 PM ^

and everything centered on Joe Pa so quickly, I thought it was potentially very misguided.  Not anymore.  I appreciate poster Elmer's comment about protecting against civil liability but in my mind anything done at this point impedes an investigation about CHILD ABUSE for god's sake and is an absolute slap in the face to those abused and their families.  I hope they learn all there is to know and all responsible burn in hell.  Regaring PSU, I have lost all respect and and am completely disgusted with the whole damn place.

 

BiSB

December 1st, 2011 at 8:01 PM ^

This stuff will have to be disclosed in the inevitable (huge, epic, and fully justified) civil suit. Until that happens, I wouldn't expect Penn State to be forthcoming with anything (on a related note: Dear Jerry Sandusky's Lawyer: see how Penn State's lawyers told them to shut the hell up? Yeah, that's way, way smarter).

Penn State also has a long-running battle to keep themselves outside the reach of the disclosure law, so this is probably their fear of giving any ground on that front.

mGrowOld

December 1st, 2011 at 8:12 PM ^

Perhaps not surprising but certainly not exactly a steller move in the battle to regain any of their prior reputation.  One would think they would adopt a policy of complete transparancy and not tride to hide anything.

My mind reels at what must be contained in the information they are trying to withhold.

Steve in PA

December 1st, 2011 at 9:46 PM ^

If they've truly cleaned house then why not do a document dump?  Anyone that was remotely involved should no longer be there at this point.  And if they are, they can't be for long.

I think this goes back to the fights they used to have over state funding.  When it benefitted them for state money they wanted to be a state school, but in matters of privacy and transparency they would have epic battles to keep the books closed.

 

BlueDragon

December 1st, 2011 at 8:38 PM ^

 

before crying Nittany Lion logos start showing up in the internet's normal output of gifs and lols.
So much for Big Ten exceptionalism.  So far two Legendary with a capital L programs have stonewalled like their lives depended on it in the face of recent criminal and NCAA investigations, and largely gotten away with it.

BlueDragon

December 1st, 2011 at 8:41 PM ^

Penn State and the other three "state-related universities" — Pitt, Lincoln and Temple — together are collecting $560 million in state government subsidies this year. Unlike similar institutions in most other states, they function independently and do not have to produce the records required of state government agencies.

"You would think at least now they should understand why they should be bending over backwards in being more forthcoming in releasing information," said state Rep. Eugene DePasquale. The York County Democrat has signed up 31 co-sponsors for a bill he will introduce Monday to put the four schools completely under the Right-to-Know Law.

Other lawmakers "think this is a no-brainer," DePasquale said. "It should have been done years ago."

kmd

December 1st, 2011 at 9:39 PM ^

I'm no 10th amendment expert, but can't the federal government do something to overturn Pennsylvania's privacy laws (assuming the State of Pennsylvania doesn't do it themselves)? I feel like this is one of those situations where even if technically the state has the right to decide, the federal government can impose their will by effectively denying funding to schools that don't comply (technically they "reward" the schools that do comply, but it's functionally the same as punishing the ones that don't). It's hard to believe they'd let that law stand on the books, especially considering the main person pushing to get it passed is central in the coverup.

93Grad

December 1st, 2011 at 11:14 PM ^

between providing information to the police/DA's office and providing it to the press?  I have no problem witholding information from the latter when there is an ongoing investigation.

MGoSteelers

December 2nd, 2011 at 12:35 AM ^

This entire, sad scandal is out of the scope of any one person or small group of people at Penn State anymore.  It is now just suits against suits in the court room.  Both parties pay a team of lawyers to win, or in Penn State's case, lose with as little damage as possible.  I hate it as much as everyone, but it's the world we live in today.

hennesbe

December 2nd, 2011 at 10:23 AM ^

It certainly appears that Penn St has been in coverup mode for years and it includes the board and everyone with any authority at the university.  They do not meet the standards of the Big Ten or any other conference for that matter and should be expelled.