Some time ago, I sent the Board of Trustees an E-mail that proved that the entire Board, as constituted in March 2012, not only scapegoated Joe Paterno, but then lied about it. This could conceivably (not legal advice) be cause for a lawsuit by the Paterno Estate against Penn State for the same reasons the estate is suing the NCAA (damage to the commercial value of Joe Paterno's name). It also, of course, exposes every Board holdover from March 2012 as grossly unqualified to be a Trustee of Penn State, or indeed anything else.
The evidence cited was at http://progress.psu.edu/resource-li...board-of-trustees-concerning-nov.-9-decisions. Penn State, for whatever reason, took down this page some time this year, and after I sent the E-mail in question. For somebody at the University to delete a "Report of the Board of Trustees" would require the same kind of pure terror that led somebody with an IP address traceable to the Merck Corporation to try to delete a Wikipedia entry about Kenneth Frazier's racist tirade at a public Board meeting in March 2013. Somebody at Penn State is terrified at the implications of what was on this Web page, and with good reason.
However, a Google keyword search uncovered the same material at http://giveto.psu.edu/s/1218/2014/i...id=15638&calpgid=61&pgid=252&ecid=3519&crid=0, which is still online. (I downloaded the entire page in case it also disappears). Here is what the Board (March 2012) told the Penn State community, and the public, about the circumstances of Coach Paterno's dismissal.
Here, however, is what Keith Masser said in his unwilling deposition in the Corman-NCAA lawsuit. It is hardly surprising that Mr. Masser and his colleagues bent over backward to derail this lawsuit in every way possible.
http://onwardstate.com/2015/01/19/board-chairman-still-thinks-paterno-wasnt-fired/
“The decision to remove Coach Paterno had nothing to do with what he had known, what he hadn’t done. It was based upon the distraction of having him on the sidelines would have caused the university and the current football team harm. It had nothing to do with what Coach Paterno had done, or hadn’t done.”]
Kenneth Frazier's deposition, while not as explicit, also admits that Paterno was fired for public relations purposes. If Paterno was not fired for anything he had or had not done, he was not fired for "failure of leadership." This means the entire Board not only scapegoated Paterno, it also lied about the circumstances of his dismissal to and on behalf of the organization to which it owed a fiduciary duty. This is the kind of character defect that disqualifies a would-be leader from commanding the trust, respect, or confidence of peers, subordinates, and superiors. It is the kind of dishonesty that can result in letters being written to soldiers' families, and/or the loss of costly equipment. The lie told or supported by Kenneth Frazier, Keith Masser, Karen Peetz, Keith Eckel, John Surma, Rodney Erickson (ex officio Board member), Tom Corbett, Anne Riley, Paul Suhey, Joel Myers, Stephanie Deviney, Steve Garban (resigned in July 2012), and their colleagues similarly went beyond denigration of Coach Paterno's memory to incalculable damage to Penn State's reputation.
Every single Trustee who was a party to the March 2012 statement—that's the "tolerate those who do" aspect of the USMA Honor Code—with the sole honorable exception who later repudiated his role in Paterno's dismissal, must therefore be regarded as ethically capable of lying to organizational stakeholders both at and outside of Penn State. In addition, nobody who scapegoats any subordinate, whether that subordinate is the coach of the Nittany Lions or an entry-level worker who pushes a broom, is qualified to supervise even one subordinate let alone a corporation or a University.
The key takeaway, though, is that Penn State deleted the Web page that I cited to demonstrate that the entire Board not only scapegoated Joe Paterno, but then lied about it. This shows that people in Old Main and the Trustee Board Room are terrified of the implications of these two pieces of evidence--the Board's statement of March 2012, and Keith Masser's and Kenneth Frazier's depositions to the effect that Paterno was fired for no reason other than public relations--and that means we need to circulate this evidence as widely as possible.
Here, by the way, is Kenny "people that look like you" Frazier's testimony:
http://av.pasenategop.com/ncaa/discovery/depositions/ken-frazier/transcripts/frazier.pdf
Q. Were you in favor of the decision not to allow Coach Paterno to coach out the rest of the season.
A. Ultimately, I was in favor of that.
Q. Initially, did you have some reservations?
A. I did.
Q. Just explain your thought process and how you became in favor of that decision.
A. Just as I said in the case of Mr. Curly, my initial feeling was, when I first heard about this, that the facts had not been established and we needed to be careful to make sure we understood the facts. As I was in -- in that 48-hour time period read the grand jury presentment, I reached the conclusion that given what had become public about the issues leading up to the presentment and given what was said in the presentment itself about Coach Paterno's testimony and about what the graduate student said to Coach Paterno, I felt that it would not send the right message if Coach Paterno was able to lead the football team out onto the field of play under those circumstances.
So I didn't change my mind on the question of whether we had established all the key facts that related to Coach Paterno's involvement and/or responsibility. But I had reached the conclusion that, from the standpoint of what the University's values would be interpreted to be by the broader public, that what was known was sufficiently serious as it relates to child sexual abuse that it would send the wrong message about our values as a University if Coach Paterno were allowed to coach as though none of this had ever happened.
GUESS WHAT, KENNY; THAT AIN'T "FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP." FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP IS WHEN THE CEO OF THE MERCK CORPORATION SCAPEGOATS A SUBORDINATE, AND THEN DEFAMES HIM BY LATER SAYING HE WAS FIRED FOR FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP.
The evidence cited was at http://progress.psu.edu/resource-li...board-of-trustees-concerning-nov.-9-decisions. Penn State, for whatever reason, took down this page some time this year, and after I sent the E-mail in question. For somebody at the University to delete a "Report of the Board of Trustees" would require the same kind of pure terror that led somebody with an IP address traceable to the Merck Corporation to try to delete a Wikipedia entry about Kenneth Frazier's racist tirade at a public Board meeting in March 2013. Somebody at Penn State is terrified at the implications of what was on this Web page, and with good reason.
However, a Google keyword search uncovered the same material at http://giveto.psu.edu/s/1218/2014/i...id=15638&calpgid=61&pgid=252&ecid=3519&crid=0, which is still online. (I downloaded the entire page in case it also disappears). Here is what the Board (March 2012) told the Penn State community, and the public, about the circumstances of Coach Paterno's dismissal.
"While Coach Paterno did his legal duty by reporting that information the next day, Sunday, March 3, to his immediate superior, the then Penn State Athletic Director Tim Curley, the Board reasonably inferred that he did not call police. We determined that his decision to do his minimum legal duty and not to do more to follow up constituted a failure of leadership by Coach Paterno. …At about 9 pm, we unanimously made the difficult decision that Coach Paterno’s failure of leadership required his removal as football coach."
Here, however, is what Keith Masser said in his unwilling deposition in the Corman-NCAA lawsuit. It is hardly surprising that Mr. Masser and his colleagues bent over backward to derail this lawsuit in every way possible.
http://onwardstate.com/2015/01/19/board-chairman-still-thinks-paterno-wasnt-fired/
“The decision to remove Coach Paterno had nothing to do with what he had known, what he hadn’t done. It was based upon the distraction of having him on the sidelines would have caused the university and the current football team harm. It had nothing to do with what Coach Paterno had done, or hadn’t done.”]
Kenneth Frazier's deposition, while not as explicit, also admits that Paterno was fired for public relations purposes. If Paterno was not fired for anything he had or had not done, he was not fired for "failure of leadership." This means the entire Board not only scapegoated Paterno, it also lied about the circumstances of his dismissal to and on behalf of the organization to which it owed a fiduciary duty. This is the kind of character defect that disqualifies a would-be leader from commanding the trust, respect, or confidence of peers, subordinates, and superiors. It is the kind of dishonesty that can result in letters being written to soldiers' families, and/or the loss of costly equipment. The lie told or supported by Kenneth Frazier, Keith Masser, Karen Peetz, Keith Eckel, John Surma, Rodney Erickson (ex officio Board member), Tom Corbett, Anne Riley, Paul Suhey, Joel Myers, Stephanie Deviney, Steve Garban (resigned in July 2012), and their colleagues similarly went beyond denigration of Coach Paterno's memory to incalculable damage to Penn State's reputation.
Every single Trustee who was a party to the March 2012 statement—that's the "tolerate those who do" aspect of the USMA Honor Code—with the sole honorable exception who later repudiated his role in Paterno's dismissal, must therefore be regarded as ethically capable of lying to organizational stakeholders both at and outside of Penn State. In addition, nobody who scapegoats any subordinate, whether that subordinate is the coach of the Nittany Lions or an entry-level worker who pushes a broom, is qualified to supervise even one subordinate let alone a corporation or a University.
The key takeaway, though, is that Penn State deleted the Web page that I cited to demonstrate that the entire Board not only scapegoated Joe Paterno, but then lied about it. This shows that people in Old Main and the Trustee Board Room are terrified of the implications of these two pieces of evidence--the Board's statement of March 2012, and Keith Masser's and Kenneth Frazier's depositions to the effect that Paterno was fired for no reason other than public relations--and that means we need to circulate this evidence as widely as possible.
Here, by the way, is Kenny "people that look like you" Frazier's testimony:
http://av.pasenategop.com/ncaa/discovery/depositions/ken-frazier/transcripts/frazier.pdf
Q. Were you in favor of the decision not to allow Coach Paterno to coach out the rest of the season.
A. Ultimately, I was in favor of that.
Q. Initially, did you have some reservations?
A. I did.
Q. Just explain your thought process and how you became in favor of that decision.
A. Just as I said in the case of Mr. Curly, my initial feeling was, when I first heard about this, that the facts had not been established and we needed to be careful to make sure we understood the facts. As I was in -- in that 48-hour time period read the grand jury presentment, I reached the conclusion that given what had become public about the issues leading up to the presentment and given what was said in the presentment itself about Coach Paterno's testimony and about what the graduate student said to Coach Paterno, I felt that it would not send the right message if Coach Paterno was able to lead the football team out onto the field of play under those circumstances.
So I didn't change my mind on the question of whether we had established all the key facts that related to Coach Paterno's involvement and/or responsibility. But I had reached the conclusion that, from the standpoint of what the University's values would be interpreted to be by the broader public, that what was known was sufficiently serious as it relates to child sexual abuse that it would send the wrong message about our values as a University if Coach Paterno were allowed to coach as though none of this had ever happened.
GUESS WHAT, KENNY; THAT AIN'T "FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP." FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP IS WHEN THE CEO OF THE MERCK CORPORATION SCAPEGOATS A SUBORDINATE, AND THEN DEFAMES HIM BY LATER SAYING HE WAS FIRED FOR FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP.
