Last edited:
FC: Judge gives NCAA permission to file new response in Paterno lawsuit(updated w/ new NCAA filing)
- Thread starter LundyPSU
- Start date
Remember when Paul Kelly said that this could take "a couple of years" to get to trial? Well, we're past a couple already (the article I read was from June 3, 2013). Patience folks. The stakes are big here.
I would think this is a good thing from the Paternos' POV. From the article:
"The NCAA’s filing defends the quality of the Freeh report and the legality of the now-lifted consent decree with Penn State, as well as accusing the Paterno estate of trying to rehash allegations the court has already dismissed."
The NCAA will go on-the-record (as it is) regarding the "quality of the Freeh Report" and the legality of the "consent decree." Considering this will be a 175-page report, there would be a lot of stuff for the Paternos' to respond to.
I don't know ---- I always thought the NCAA's basic position should be "why the hell are you suing us as regards the quality of the Freeh Report. Penn State University is the entity which accepted this report. Penn State University is the entity which used that as a response to the questions we asked. If it is not of high quality, go ask them and Louis Freeh as regards that. We're not the correct entity to be suing, your beef is really not with us."
I've always said that the Paternos are suing the wrong folk (the NCAA as opposed to Penn State). They're only suing the NCAA instead of Penn State because that is better from a PR POV.
By the time this gets resolved, Emmert will be long gone, probably on his own accord, and nobody will care. That's all the NCAA is trying to do. Stall the inevitable & mount costs for the paternos.
It's bad in that it take some considerable time to sort through the filing. It's a delaying tactic for the NCAA, pure and simple, which is pretty much the only real strategy they have left; delay, delay, delay and pray for a miracle. As for damaging the Paternos position it really means nothing. It just delays the inevitable for a good bit longer.
This was already discussed in detail before with respect to the NCAA and what they are doing. NCAA has money as no object in this case. THere was an article I read a few months ago that the NCAA legal bill was something like 5X normal last year. Emmert and the power brokers in NCAA cannot have the Paterno lawsuit goto trial or there will be bad things happening to them. So they hire expensive lawyers and tell them to use every tactic possible to delay this trial in perpetuity in hopes that the Paterno's run out of money or that by the time it goes to trial, they have retired. THis is unusual in the sense there is not many organizations that are OK paying multi-million dollar lawyer bills to delay a trial by years with no recourse like the NCAA is willing to do.
Tim Cohane vs. the NCAA is in its 11th year. He recently lost another appeal.
LINK: Cohane loses again.
If you believe some of the folk here ----- the Board of Trustees TOLD Louis Freeh to frame Joe Paterno. In part, to cover up sins committed by the Board of Trustees.
If that's true, it certainly seems like there are legal grounds for the Paterno Estate to sue Penn State.
Of course, you need some tangible proof that this framing occurred. That's the challenge (and something the likes of John Ziegler don't necessarily like to address): there is a lot of talk about this "framing" having occurred, but little in terms of tangible proof.
NCAA response filed today
http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/med...ER TO PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT.pdf
http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/med...ER TO PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT.pdf
I'm sure Mark Emmert never thought his grandstanding would result in this. He is dying a slow death and it couldn't happen to a nicer fellow. Same goes for Freeh and Corbett.
Great point. This hasn't gone well for them. Some may point out that all three were incompetent and deceitful before the events of 2011, but they have been exposed.
You wrongly presume that the NCAA did not have a hand in the drafting of the Freeh Report.
There is already email evidence that the BoT, BigTen, and NCAA were all involved with each other and Freeh.
Its almost irrelevant what the Paterno attorney fees will be since they will be paid by the NCAA when it is all said and done.
Ok Mich......So, let's assume you are correct.
FWIW, my guess is the "Framing of Paterno" angle is a relatively minor role-player in this whole show anyway......so let's take that completely off of the table.
Why, then, do the powers that be at PSU spend hundreds of millions of dollars to prevent anyone from looking behind the curtain?
We know - from Masser's own sworn deposition - that the Scoundrels engaged Freeh in the hope that:
“My expectation was that Penn State's own internal investigation (Freeh Report)……would prevent the NCAA (and other organizations) from doing their investigation”
and
”We were trying to keep them from doing their own investigation.”
and
”The Freeh Group investigation would hopefully prevent other organizations from doing their own investigations”.
What was so important to these people that they would gladly spend hundreds of millions of dollars (that they had a fiduciary obligation to safeguard) and allow PSU's reputation to be galvanized as:
Penn State had a "culture in which a football program was held in higher esteem than the values of the institution, the values of the NCAA, the values of higher education, and disturbingly, the values of human decency…….that allowed Sandusky’s serial child sexual abuse”
and
And that Penn State “disregard(ed) the safety and welfare of Sandusky’s child victims….Empowered Sandusky to attract potential victims….In order to avoid the consequences of bad publicity, concealed critical facts relating to Sandusky’s child abuse…granting (Sandusky) license to bring boys to campus facilities for grooming”
Why would these upstanding citizens take such actions? And then form a blockade to prevent ANYONE from searching for the truth?
On second thought.....forget it!
I remember that time - several months ago - when you TRIED to fit that thinking cap onto your head.
It refused to take.
No use asking you to try again.
Sorry.
How does suing the NCAA help to answer that question?
Conversely, how would suing Louis Freeh and Penn State University help answer that question?
Graham Spanier is suing the right entities. The Paterno estate is not. They're making the "easier play" of suing the NCAA. And hoping that this "back door lawsuit" gets results without the risk of a headline of "Paterno heirs sue University that employed their father for 50+ years."
Now, maybe this does work. But I continue to say ----- the Paterno estate should "walk the walk" and directly sue Penn State. It's more direct and also more intellectually honest.
The NCAA specifically named Joe Paterno in the consent decree. Mark Emmert's spiteful grandstanding earned the NCAA this lawsuit. The Paternos are suing the right parties.
The tangible proof that this framing occurred will be found in the results of the discovery process in their lawsuit against the NCAA. In absence of that, what are the Paternos legal grounds for suing Penn State?
You have to first gain legal standing before gaining the legal right to rummage through the BoT's panties drawer (i.e., all of the Freeh Report materials, including notes, e-mails, and all communications between all involved in its production) and that's what the NCAA lawsuit is really all about.
And, FWIW, since it's the board who TOLD Louis Freeh to frame Joe it'll be that board, not PSU, that will be in their crosshairs once the NCAA lawsuit has achieved a suitable and satisfactory conclusion (which doesn't necessarily mean it will conclude in outright victory). The Paternos have always tried to separate the university from their enemies on the board and have only gone after PSU when legal requirements necessitated it.
How about being "intellectually honest" and either:
Addressing the question: "Why would these upstanding citizens take such actions? And then form a blockade to prevent ANYONE from searching for the truth?"
Or, failing that, at least have the "honesty" to not respond at all......rather than with just another irrelevant and unrelated diversion to the question?
Forget it.
Sorry.
It must cause you too much pain.
The NCAA only named Joe Paterno in the consent decree because:
(1) the Freeh Report named Joe Paterno and alleged that Joe Paterno was guilty of participating in a cover-up, and
(2) Penn State University accepted said report and basically told the NCAA "hey, those questions you asked us back in November 2011? The Freeh Report is our answer."
Now --- let's talk about JAY Paterno. An individual mentioned zero times in either the Freeh Report or the Consent Decree.
I find it worth mentioning that in paragraph 151 of today's filing, the NCAA says "the NCAA specifically denies that the consent decree contained a finding regarding Jay Paterno", and "the NCAA is unaware of any evidence to substantiate the allegation that the Consent Decree was the proximate cause of his failure to receive an employment offer at the referenced institutions, and "if relevant, proof at trial is demanded."
TL;DR version of the above paragraph: the burden of proof is back on Jay Paterno. Good luck Jay.
Also --- paragraph 148 is good for a laugh. Check it out.
Because accepting the Freeh Report --- AFTER it became the news story of the day on that Thursday in July and everybody in America was talking about it --- was the 100% correct play.
You gotta look at things from where they stood at 12 Noon on Thursday 12-July-2012. From that perspective, they made the right play.
Things became REAL bad for Penn State in the days immediately following PSU accepting the Freeh Report. There is no doubt about that. However, let's not lose site of this --- things would have been multiples WORSE if we had fought the report. Rightly or wrongly, the general public was in no mood for such debate. They were in no mood for Penn State saying "yeah, we paid $6.5 million for this report, but we don't accept what it says." The death penalty may have actually occurred --- unilaterally --- if we had actively fought. The right move was eating the "shit sandwich" as it is and moving on.
Where the BOT really screwed up is this: the Freeh Report should have been for internal consumption only. It should have never seen the light of day. If Freeh said that was unacceptable to him, you don't take on his services. There are/were other potential suppliers.
The real mistake by PSU BOT members was made in November 2011, in the weeks immediately following this story blowing up. November 2011. Not July 2012.
Last edited:
LOL.
"If the thinkin' cap don't fit........you must remain a Mich Nitt Wit"
I'm not a revisionist historian --- the world was what it was at 12 Noon on 12-July-2012. And I don't attempt to re-write the way that it was.
You can only play the cards as they stood at that time.
Fighting the NCAA in July 2012 would have been suicide. S-U-I-C-I-D-E.
They would never have applied the "death penalty" because through amicus if not by the BoT an injunction would've been sought.
Yep. That was the first and only moment in the history of time. NOTHING happened before that moment......or since.
Alas. Like teaching a fish to climb a tree.
Yep. That was the first and only moment in the history of time. NOTHING happened before that moment......or since.
Alas. Like teaching a fish to climb a tree.
Alas. I never claimed "12 Noon 12-July-2012 was the first and only moment in the history of time." I already said the BOT made a huge mistake in November 2011.
Latest posts
-
-
-
Basketball NitBits: Penn State hoops trending well for SEC transfer
- Latest: interrobang
