-
getmyjive11 ●
- 5 stars Rating: 82
6863 votes total - (9842)
- 33 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
PvillePA_Lion
- 5 stars Rating: 95
125 votes total - (278)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
NittanyJames ●
- 4 stars Rating: 75
157 votes total - (145)
- 27 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 4 stars
-
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.
-
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).
-
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).
-
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."
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
getmyjive11 ●
- 5 stars Rating: 82
6863 votes total - (9842)
- 33 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
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.
JettaPSU2001
- 5 stars Rating: 96
2337 votes total - (2310)
- 29 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
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.
-
psubills62
- 5 stars Rating: 93
8003 votes total - (14867)
- 32 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
- This post is for members of Lions247 only. Join now! 30-Day Free Trial












Louis Freeh investigation