<p>“I would just note that even all these revelations from the Freeh report don’t necessarily mean that people other than Sandusky committed crimes–except, I think, for perjury”</p>
<p>Well, they are guilty of lying to the press, not reporting, active cover up, harboring a pedophile, and some possibly obstruction of justice and perjury.</p>
<p>My question is valid. How should spanier and the rest be dealt with if the laws aren’t there in order to make them legally culpable. </p>
<p>I think changing the name of the ticket camp thing, whichnis bizarre anyway, is just like putting lipstick on a pig. It’s see we care we are changing the name!!! We are still going to go games, we are still going to support this sick program that did nothing tom protect children butnin fact facilitated child abuse, we are going to not demand full accountability and honesty from our college, no we can’t do that, but we will spend days camped out to get tickets to games.</p>
<p>Until that mentality changes and until Penn state and the vast majoritynof Pennsylvania Tate students, staff, alum step up and say tell us the truth and take full responsibility and don’t keep making excuses amd paterno family, just shut up already, then yes, the entire school needs to answer for the deeds of those they revered and worshipped. But seems they just are annoyed.</p>
<p>I agree MomofWildChild…I was thinking that through last night…it could be a legal stand-off. The University and the legal implications of their actions and the NCAA and the legal implications of “their” actions. Right now I’m siding on the side that they won’t cancel the football season…at least this year… because neither side can move to make changes fast enough and understand the legal ramifications of a quick decision.</p>
<p>“I doubt if PSU is a “person” for the purposes of the Mann Act, and I think it unlikely that the University “knowingly” transported anybody across state lines. It might work for Sandusky himself, though.”</p>
<p>If JoePa (or anyone else) knew that about Professor Emeritus Sandusky’s transgressions, and paid for the travel (hotel or transportation) across state lines, might they be co-conspirators under the Mann Act, or subject to the RICO statute?</p>
<p>They may not be able to get it all together in time to make a decision, I agree. However with the time crunch being an issue, they(Penn State itself) may just to decide a suspension due to not being able to come to a final decision. What a position they are in. Based on past responses at Penn State, they have to figure out the crowd response to having a season and the response to not having a season. Not going to be pretty.</p>
<p>PAterno was negotiating his so called retirement package for 5.5 million dollars while testifying in front of the grand jury.</p>
<p>Once the board of trustees found out they wanted to not honor the secret deal, but his family threatened to sue them so they backed down.</p>
<p>I say, should have et them sue.</p>
<p>What a bunch of weeklings</p>
<p>
I think it might be possible if individuals actually conspired–I still don’t think it very likely at all that PSU itself could have any criminal liability. Paterno’s dead, so he can’t be held criminally liable for anything. I assume there will be plenty of civil suits with all kinds of theories. For those, PSU is certainly vulnerable.</p>
<p>SInce the administration at Penn State did nothing, when they knew, what comes of the insurance issue? Can an insurance company deny any payments when PennState is sued, since they did not protect themselves?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I think the chances of Penn State on its own suspending football, or canceling even one game, are very, very low. The school is buried so deeply under so many decades of football-think that not playing football is inconceivable to them. Like I said earlier, they can’t imagine the place without it.</p>
<p>Football games or seasons will get canceled only if it is imposed on Penn State by some outside agency.</p>
<p>How can the NCAA justify giving the “death penatly” to SMU for recruiting violations and not to PSU for officials sanctioning child molesters? What world to we live in?</p>
<p>I say let them play–just not on TV. Indeed, let them play in a bowl game–just not on TV. That’s what I think NCAA should do.</p>
<p>kayf, from what I’ve read, NCAA rules don’t allow the death penalty except for recurring violations after an official warning.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’d have to read up on NCAA but from the little I know the NCAA typically handles college competition and player issues. And that is the 2 second elevator description of what the NCAA does. It was my understanding that there hasn’t been much that implicated the football players at Penn State and there is an ongoing criminal investigation that covers anything in the coaching staff and college administration. The SMU story clearly fell under NCAA regulations as it involved recruiting of athletes.</p>
<p>Considering the NCAA prez says the death penalty is an a valid option, seems proof warnings aren’t needed, from what I have read today. He also said is indeed unprecedented and shows it was as systemic a cultural problem as a football problem, it was a football problem it was that but much more…</p>
<p>Oh and the students said they changed the name not to make a statement about paterno, but more the idea that there will likely be more then just one coach in then future, so naming it after a coach was impractical. And put the focus on the team…uh huh</p>
<p>Oh and spanner says the facts in the fresh report aren’t accurate. And the truth will come out. Well, then, tell the truth already, law case or not. If it’s true and you did nothing wring spaienr, curly and moe, then speak out.</p>
<p>Hunt, the SMU case did involve a school on probation. The NCAA bylaws indicate that they can take action for things like personal honor, lack of institutional control. One should not need a warning not to tolerate child molestors. Recruiting violations may involve actions by outsiders or less than clear regulations, and a warning may be a first appropriate step.</p>
<p>The NCAA usually waits to see what sanctions the university imposes on itself before deciding whether to bring down the hammer with heavier, NCAA-imposed sanctions. NCAA President Mark Emmert’s signal that the “death penalty” for Penn State’s football program is “not off the table,” coupled with his statements indicating that he sees the Penn State scandal as unprecedented in character and magnitude, far worse than anything the NCAA has ever dealt with in the past, is going to put an awful lot of pressure on Penn State to self-impose the “death penalty” by shutting down football for one or more years, lest the NCAA decide the university is not sufficiently penitent and ban Penn State football for an even longer period.</p>
<p>I think this may actually happen. It will blow a hole a mile wide in the university’s athletic budget and compromise its ability to compete in other sports as well. But the way Penn State students and fans are lining up for tickets as if nothing had happened is really disquieting. It suggests the football-first culture at Penn State has not absorbed the horrific lessons here. Someone–the interim president, the Trustees, or the NCAA–has got to muster up the guts to just shut the danged thing down, and send them all to a corner to think about it for a few years. Otherwise, it just remains a runaway freight train, heading for another disaster.</p>
<p>
If you were accused of serious wrongdoing, and your lawyer was telling you not to talk to the press, what would you do?..</p>
<p>Following on what bclintonk and Seahorsesrock reported, here is more of what the NCAA President Mark Emmert said:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
I hear what you’re saying…it’s just sickening to hear the constant unaccountability from everyone involved, from Sandusky to Spanier. Don’t say anything at all if you can’t man up because your lawyer’s telling you not to.</p>
<p>I also understand the Freeh report made assumptions that may not hold up in a court of law. It’s just absurd for anyone of reason to believe none of these guys knew what was going on all those years. Apparently, Freeh is a man of reason.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I think this may actually happen.<<</p>
<p>I don’t. The school can’t even muster up the courage to take down the statue or rename the library. Where are they going get guts enough to cancel an actual football game, much less an entire season? I think they will stay in hunker-down mode, hoping if they drag their feet long enough it will all blow over.</p>
<p>Can the university OR the NCAA even move fast enough to shut down the program, deal with getting the players who are already on campus practicing into other programs and jigger the schedule in the next 4 weeks? I don’t think so, my guess is the compromise would be if the desire is to “punish” the university using the football program is to cancel next year’s season or as Hunt suggests hit them in the TV and other revenue streams.</p>