Online Now 644

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

On this Board 469
Record: 4947 (7/23/2012)

Online now 811
Record: 7381 (3/13/2012)

Boards ▾

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

Ticket Exchange

Buy, sell and swap tickets

Reply

Louis Freeh investigation

  • Has there been any date given as to when the Louis Freeh report will be published? It would be good to get the facts on the table sooner than later, whether they are damning or not to Penn State. This trial by innuendo and supposition is painful.

    This post was edited by Prad on 7/2/2012 at 10:19 PM

    Prad

  • There is no set date, but I've seen several people think that it will be at the end of July.

    getmyjive11

  • At this rate, the date should be leaked any day now.

    signature image

    Follow me on Twitter @rayraycotto

    RWC5113

  • RWC5113 said...

    At this rate, the date should be leaked any day now.

    haha, touche.

    signature image

    PSUjosh11

  • Prad said...

    Has there been any date given as to when the Louis Freeh report will be published? It would be good to get the facts on the table sooner than later, whether they are damning or not to Penn State. This trial by innuendo and supposition is painful.

    As soon as Corbett and the rest of the BOT put their final edits to it....

    PvillePA_Lion

  • "Since the Freeh Group was hired seven months ago, it has conducted many interviews with administrators, trustees and faculty members, nine of which were interviewed by the Chronicle.

    Based on these interviews, it is clear investigators are focusing on what happened inside of Penn State's administrative building, Old Main. It is in Old Main where prosecutors believe to be a "secret file" on Sandusky, held by former Interim Senior Vice President for Finance and Business Gary Schultz and containing e-mails between former Athletic Director Tim Curley and Schultz that would refute what the two administrators told a grand jury that was investigating Sandusky.

    Curley and Schultz are charged with perjury and failure to report suspected abuse after former assistant football coach Mike McQueary told them about an incident involving Sandusky and a young boy in February 2001.

    The Freeh Group is also focusing the investigation into if former Penn State President Graham Spanier and former Penn State general council Wendell V. Courtney intervened with Penn State's judicial policies to protect student athletes who had "disciplinary cases." The Chronicle reports that in e-mails provided to them by one of the people they interviewed, there were steps describing how Spanier and Courtney did such acts.

    According to other interviews conducted by the Chronicle, Freeh investigators said they found it "problematic that some of Penn State's top officials had resisted adopting certain practices that other athletic departments adhere to, including establishing a separate campus athletic board." This brought up investigators' questions about Penn State's NCAA compliance efforts.

    Penn State originally had only three compliance officers, when many universities had nearly three times as many, according to the Chronicle report. After Freeh recommended increasing its staff, Penn State posted a new compliance position, according to the report."

    signature image signature image signature image

    tdiddy

  • Rodney Erickson was quoted as saying it should be released by end of July...

    NittanyJames

  • tdiddy said...

    The Freeh Group is also focusing the investigation into if former Penn State President Graham Spanier and former Penn State general council Wendell V. Courtney intervened with Penn State's judicial policies to protect student athletes who had "disciplinary cases." The Chronicle reports that in e-mails provided to them by one of the people they interviewed, there were steps describing how Spanier and Courtney did such acts.

    Diddy, the quoted paragraph really scares me. If you dig deep enough you will find problems of this nature (and definitely worse) at any athletic powerhouse. Therefore, I think it's very unfair that they may be punished for anything outside of the Sandusky handling. They are investigating because of the Sandusky issue and anything separate should not be made public (they should be warned internally). I'd be very, very annoyed if we get in trouble for separate issues when that's not the cause of the investigation. No Sandusky, no dig to the bottom (problems are problems, but dig like that everywhere then).

    PSUatw

  • PSUatw said...

    Diddy, the quoted paragraph really scares me. If you dig deep enough you will find problems of this nature (and definitely worse) at any athletic powerhouse. Therefore, I think it's very unfair that they may be punished for anything outside of the Sandusky handling. They are investigating because of the Sandusky issue and anything separate should not be made public (they should be warned internally). I'd be very, very annoyed if we get in trouble for separate issues when that's not the cause of the investigation. No Sandusky, no dig to the bottom (problems are problems, but dig like that everywhere then).

    That's what happens with investigations like this though. You open up the doors and other, underlying issues arise. In this case, some potentially devastating ones.

    signature image

    PSUjosh11

  • PSUatw said...

    Diddy, the quoted paragraph really scares me. If you dig deep enough you will find problems of this nature (and definitely worse) at any athletic powerhouse. Therefore, I think it's very unfair that they may be punished for anything outside of the Sandusky handling. They are investigating because of the Sandusky issue and anything separate should not be made public (they should be warned internally). I'd be very, very annoyed if we get in trouble for separate issues when that's not the cause of the investigation. No Sandusky, no dig to the bottom (problems are problems, but dig like that everywhere then).

    Freeh was sanctioned to study PSU's Admin from top to bottom. He was sequestered because of the Sandusky case, but his investigation is not exclusive to the Sandusky case.

    However, remember that the NCAA's statute of limitations on cases of player eligibility is 4 years. PSU received first notice from the NCAA in Nov 2011, which places the violation period at anything post Nov 2007. Wendell Courtney left his position in 2008, so there is a short window of possibility in Freeh's report which would be potentially subject to NCAA jurisdiction. Could a similar agreement have been made between Spanier and current legal counsel? Sure, but unless Freeh's report stretches that far (doubtful), the NCAA would need to conduct its own investigation on more recent events.

    In my opinion, it is the NCAA's hope that PSU self imposes penalties after the Freeh report and legal cases conclude, which alleviates their multiple dilemmas with statutes and precedents. But until the full contents of the report are revealed, no one is quite sure the severity of what we're facing.

    signature image signature image signature image

    tdiddy

  • According to other interviews conducted by the Chronicle, Freeh investigators said they found it "problematic that some of Penn State's top officials had resisted adopting certain practices that other athletic departments adhere to, including establishing a separate campus athletic board." This brought up investigators' questions about Penn State's NCAA compliance efforts.

    Penn State originally had only three compliance officers, when many universities had nearly three times as many, according to the Chronicle report. After Freeh recommended increasing its staff, Penn State posted a new compliance position, according to the report."

    Question about this part. Was PSU required to adopt these measures or was it just that most other schools did it so PSU should have to? Basically, was PSU not in compliance w/ NCAA rules?

    PSUJT0409

  • tdiddy said...

    Freeh was sanctioned to study PSU's Admin from top to bottom. He was sequestered because of the Sandusky case, but his investigation is not exclusive to the Sandusky case.

    However, remember that the NCAA's statute of limitations on cases of player eligibility is 4 years. PSU received first notice from the NCAA in Nov 2011, which places the violation period at anything post Nov 2007. Wendell Courtney left his position in 2008, so there is a short window of possibility in Freeh's report which would be potentially subject to NCAA jurisdiction. Could a similar agreement have been made between Spanier and current legal counsel? Sure, but unless Freeh's report stretches that far (doubtful), the NCAA would need to conduct its own investigation on more recent events.

    In my opinion, it is the NCAA's hope that PSU self imposes penalties after the Freeh report and legal cases conclude, which alleviates their multiple dilemmas with statutes and precedents. But until the full contents of the report are revealed, no one is quite sure the severity of what we're facing.

    Thank you very much Diddy. That was very helpful, particularly the statute of limitations portion (I read something about that but had forgotten).

    When was the Scirrotto incident? (seems like it would be right around that time because he was a senior in the '08 season). They would very likely find bad stuff surrounding that incident. My cousin, who is a marine and very trustworthy, was in the apartment (what I heard, and the reasons for why it took place, were not very good). If that falls under the statute of limitations it would not be very good.

    PSUatw

  • PSUatw said...

    Thank you very much Diddy. That was very helpful, particularly the statute of limitations portion (I read something about that but had forgotten).

    When was the Scirrotto incident? (seems like it would be right around that time because he was a senior in the '08 season). They would very likely find bad stuff surrounding that incident. My cousin, who is a marine and very trustworthy, was in the apartment (what I heard, and the reasons for why it took place, were not very good). If that falls under the statute of limitations it would not be very good.

    Here's the full article. It describes the 2007 apartment incident in detail, but that would likely fall just outside the statute. Regardless, someone will probably choose to investigate more recent cases.

    Records Raise More Questions About What Penn State Officials Knew - Administration - The Chronicle of Higher Education

    http://chronicle.com/article/Records-Raise-More-Questions/132725/

    chronicle.com
    signature image signature image signature image

    tdiddy

  • PSUatw said...

    Thank you very much Diddy. That was very helpful, particularly the statute of limitations portion (I read something about that but had forgotten).

    When was the Scirrotto incident? (seems like it would be right around that time because he was a senior in the '08 season). They would very likely find bad stuff surrounding that incident. My cousin, who is a marine and very trustworthy, was in the apartment (what I heard, and the reasons for why it took place, were not very good). If that falls under the statute of limitations it would not be very good.

    April 2007 was the melee.. The court cases occurred that summer..

    BaltLions24

  • PSUatw said...

    Thank you very much Diddy. That was very helpful, particularly the statute of limitations portion (I read something about that but had forgotten).

    When was the Scirrotto incident? (seems like it would be right around that time because he was a senior in the '08 season). They would very likely find bad stuff surrounding that incident. My cousin, who is a marine and very trustworthy, was in the apartment (what I heard, and the reasons for why it took place, were not very good). If that falls under the statute of limitations it would not be very good.

    The apartment assaults took place in the spring of 2007.

    getmyjive11

  • RWC5113 said...

    At this rate, the date should be leaked any day now.

    The report will come out after they have sufficiently shaped public opinion by leaking snippets of findings. I suspect more leaks will come out until they get to where they want to be.

    danmcc

  • tdiddy said...

    However, remember that the NCAA's statute of limitations on cases of player eligibility is 4 years. PSU received first notice from the NCAA in Nov 2011, which places the violation period at anything post Nov 2007. Wendell Courtney left his position in 2008, so there is a short window of possibility in Freeh's report which would be potentially subject to NCAA jurisdiction.

    This is key. I bet they don't have anything more recent. What year to they get rid of that disciplinary witch who was complaining about JoePa back in November?

    signature image signature image signature image

    JettaPSU2001

  • JettaPSU2001 said...

    This is key. I bet they don't have anything more recent. What year to they get rid of that disciplinary witch who was complaining about JoePa back in November?

    2007. Here is the exact statute from the NCAA bylaws. The potentially problematic exemptions for PSU would be B and C.

    Statute of Limitations 32.6.3:

    Allegations included in a notice of allegations shall be limited to possible violations occurring not earlier than four years before the date the notice of inquiry is provided to the institution or the date the institution notifies (or, if earlier, should have notified) the enforcement staff of its inquiries into the matter. However, the following shall not be subject to the four-year limitation:

    (a) Allegations involving violations affecting the eligibility of a current student-athlete;

    (b) Allegations in a case in which information is developed to indicate a pattern of willful violations on the part of the institution or individual involved, which began before but continued into the four-year period; and

    (c) Allegations that indicate a blatant disregard for the Association's fundamental recruiting, extra-benefit, academic or ethical-conduct regulations or that involve an effort to conceal the occurrence of the violation. In such cases, the enforcement staff shall have a one-year period after the date information concerning the matter becomes available to the NCAA to investigate and submit to the institution a notice of allegations concerning the matter.

    signature image signature image signature image

    tdiddy

  • tdiddy said...

    2007. Here is the exact statute from the NCAA bylaws. The potentially problematic exemptions for PSU would be B and C.

    Statute of Limitations 32.6.3:

    Allegations included in a notice of allegations shall be limited to possible violations occurring not earlier than four years before the date the notice of inquiry is provided to the institution or the date the institution notifies (or, if earlier, should have notified) the enforcement staff of its inquiries into the matter. However, the following shall not be subject to the four-year limitation:

    (a) Allegations involving violations affecting the eligibility of a current student-athlete;

    (b) Allegations in a case in which information is developed to indicate a pattern of willful violations on the part of the institution or individual involved, which began before but continued into the four-year period; and

    (c) Allegations that indicate a blatant disregard for the Association's fundamental recruiting, extra-benefit, academic or ethical-conduct regulations or that involve an effort to conceal the occurrence of the violation. In such cases, the enforcement staff shall have a one-year period after the date information concerning the matter becomes available to the NCAA to investigate and submit to the institution a notice of allegations concerning the matter.

    for part "B" to be in play they would need some recent things to go off of to bring that back into play. I believe part "C" would be our issue.

    PSU12

  • JettaPSU2001 said...

    This is key. I bet they don't have anything more recent. What year to they get rid of that disciplinary witch who was complaining about JoePa back in November?

    Was just about to post this.
    We all know it's Vicky Triponey who is saying this stuff. She was fired in September 2007.
    Didn't she want to suspend Paul Poz for an entire semester over prank phone calls?
    That bitch was crazy.

    signature image

    Follow me on Twitter @rayraycotto

    RWC5113

  • The issue we could face is the idea that the NCAA is going to want to make a statement.... So something minor like prank calls could become the "reason" we get nailed. So the punishment is meant for a different crime.

    signature image signature image signature image

    PENN STATE FOREVER

    philafan

  • philafan said...

    The issue we could face is the idea that the NCAA is going to want to make a statement.... So something minor like prank calls could become the "reason" we get nailed. So the punishment is meant for a different crime.

    Just because they want to make a statement doesn't mean it's in their best interest to do so.

    signature image

    psubills62

  • philafan said...

    The issue we could face is the idea that the NCAA is going to want to make a statement.... So something minor like prank calls could become the "reason" we get nailed. So the punishment is meant for a different crime.

    IMO, The NCAA will prefer that PSU makes its own statement. Freeh's investigation will be exponentially more thorough and effective than anything the NCAA could conduct. He will find things that the NCAA never would've found. There isn't much that the NCAA would be able to add to its contents. Based on the severity of the results, PSU must give serious consideration to self imposing appropriate penalties, and moving forward ASAP. The NCAA doesn't want this situation to overshadow its season either. I believe all parties will be content to settle the matter ASAP.

    signature image signature image signature image

    tdiddy

  • RWC5113 said...

    Was just about to post this. We all know it's Vicky Triponey who is saying this stuff. She was fired in September 2007. Didn't she want to suspend Paul Poz for an entire semester over prank phone calls? That bitch was crazy.

    Vicky Triponey is a crazy bitch with a vendetta that started a long time ago.

    Reference:

    Safeguard Old State — Preserving the Rights & Traditions of Penn Staters. » The Vicky Triponey Timeline of Terror

    Safeguard Old State is a non-profit advocacy group fighting for the rights and traditions of Penn Staters in State College, Pa.

    safeguardoldstate.org

    The Heel

  • This post is for members of Lions247 only. Join now! 30-Day Free Trial

    PSUGeddy