Former Nittany Lion sues Penn State over hazing

Former Nittany Lion sues Penn State over hazing

  • Discussion
  • There was a thread on the Premium board.

    The upperclassmen are accused of some pretty sick stuff. Great PR (sarcasm) for a once proud football program still trying to get over the Sandusky scandal. Might see some heads roll including the head coach.

  • You just heard about this?

    Honestly who knows anymore. Half these people are just looking for a quick payday and full of *****.

  • thestilt said... (original post)There was a thread on the Premium board.The upperclassmen are accused of some pretty sick stuff. Great PR (sarcasm) for a once proud football progr...

    A quick fact check will show that this investigation already came up empty in criminal channels, and the accuser has a fairly well-known track record of being a serious problem in the locker room who left the team under disappointing circumstances. He's a legacy kid, expected playing time, couldn't earn any playing time, and transferred. Only several months after his transfer was the allegation made.

    I don't dismiss allegations off hand without evidence. So I'm not saying this kid is lying. But when you accumulate the available data, it's not hard to see why nobody at Penn State is worried.

    It's also a poorly-held secret that after Sandusky, the Penn State administration is very quick to settle/punish if there's even a hint of inpropriety -- regardless of proven guilt. Certain lawyers have taken full advantage -- to include the lawyer that this young man is using. A lawyer that has brought discredited charges against the football program previously.

    Didn't we go through this with the silly Mark Smith allegations against Underwood for a bullying culture?

    This post was edited by NittanyIllinois 10 months ago

  • 619illinibooyah said... (original post)You just heard about this?Honestly who knows anymore. Half these people are just looking for a quick payday and full of *****.

    Yeah, this hit the press in April, and there was a full blown police investigation that found absolutely nothing. Some players did admit to horseplay, so I wouldn't discount the possibility that some kids behaved in a way that the accuser found distasteful. But it's been publicly reported that PSU players underwent polygraphs and passed, and the allegations were found to have no merit.

    The only real question that remains is whether PSU will counter-sue. Many are assuming -- not without good reason -- that PSU will throw the kid some cash to put it to bed. Doubt it'll happen, though, as it's been made pretty clear that many of the players want the university to push hard against this.

    This post was edited by NittanyIllinois 10 months ago

  • NittanyIllinois said... (original post)Yeah, this hit the press in April, and there was a full blown police investigation that found absolutely nothing. Some players did admit to ...

    Not a word I would believe from Penn St administration and AD. "Some players did admit to horseplay" sounds like the Sandusky defense of "slapping around" with the boys.

    Would be great to see Penn St follow-up with threat of lawsuit, and let the chips fall

  • DasIllini said... (original post)Not a word I would believe from Penn St administration and AD. "Some players did admit to horseplay" sounds like the Sandusky defense of ...

    The administration didn't say that. In fact, the PSU administration is notoriously harsh on any hint of inpropriety precisely because of Sandusky. The Centre County police were the ones that concluded that nothing criminal occurred. And this isn't a police department known to give athletes a free pass.

    Based on the fragments that do exist in public, it sounds like one player got into a fight with Humphries, and it probably escalated from horseplay that triggered retaliation. That player was actually suspended for uncited reasons earlier in the season -- now it's probably clear why. The notion that he was virtually gang-raped while the coaches watched was dismissed by police, discredited via polygraphs, and is contrary to absolutely everything known about the accused players and James Franklin (who is known for withdrawing scholarship offers to high-profile recruits who have gotten involved in off-field issues). That's partly James Franklin's personality, but it's also partly a residual impact of the Sandusky affair and the microscope that the administration has put on the football program.

    Hopefully justice is served to whichever party here deserves it.

    This post was edited by NittanyIllinois 10 months ago

  • Nope. The only argument that has final say, so far, no charges were filed. But one polygraph test , one person does not make discredited allegation.

  • DasIllini said... (original post)Nope. The only argument that has final say, so far, no charges were filed. But one polygraph test , one person does not make discredited allegatio...

    From what I understand, there was more than one polygraph. And the investigation in April was quite extensive. There's literally nothing that supports his allegation. And his own words when he transferred in November 2018 -- publicly praising the coaching staff, the same staff that allegedly watched and laughed as he was attacked -- are going to hurt his credibility on the issue.

    You're right. One person doesn't make a discredited allegation. And yet, one person also doesn't make a valid allegation. This is why relying on the available evidence rather than what one hopes or assumes to be true is important. I was among those that wanted Sandusky thrown in a pit for eternal damnation, because that's what the evidence gave us.

  • Many wanted the Duke lacrosse scandal to be true because, well, it's Duke and it would be so perfect. Many wanted the allegations against Urban Meyer for bullying at Florida to be true because they hated his smugness. I remember several here were piling on Jaylon Tate and assuming his guilt. I remember some of my NW friends laying into me for BU harassing Mark Smith.

    Might want to let the evidence do the talking.

    This post was edited by RecruitingIsFluid 10 months ago

  • Really, I don't need your lecture of "wanting to believe it's true". I know what it's like to be falsely accused, and only spared by 1000 miles distance from supposed event.

    You're a fine one to talk about accepting accusation without evidence

    This post was edited by DasIllini 10 months ago

  • Ped State got off WAAAYYYY to easy with the Sandusky incident. Yes, Sandusky paid, but the school and Paterno got a slap on the wrist for covering it up. Should have been the death penalty.

    I hope this turns out to be a "make up call"...but I doubt anything will come from it. It's in the culture there..."WE ARE...PED STATE!!!"

  • SFChief said... (original post)Ped State got off WAAAYYYY to easy with the Sandusky incident. Yes, Sandusky paid, but the school and Paterno got a slap on the wrist for covering i...

    Sandusky's guilt is pretty clear -- he can rot in prison for all I care. And it's also clear that certain PSU administrators got what they deserved. But I kindly suggest you consult with the case evidence. Every layer of the legal process found that Paterno acted according to his legal obligations and found no proof that he was involved in covering anything up -- even if he should have acted more aggressively (which he himself admitted, and I agree with -- it will be an unfortunate mark on his legacy). A different story with the AD and prez, however. The evidence from the Sandusky trial and statements from PA state prosecutors are available for public consumption.

    For instance, you might be surprised to learn that the Sandusky prosecutor and deputy AG for the state of PA stated openly that Joe Paterno -- unlike his superiors -- actually came forward with information about Sandusky and behaved truthfully and appropriately throughout. This prosecutor was hardly a pro-PSU football guy, but he and the Office of the Attorney General consistently stated that Paterno acted appropriately and did not engage in any obfuscation.

    "I doubt anything will come from it". Are you already assuming that the allegations are true? Isn't that patently unfair to the kids and coaches who have been alleged to do horrible things that no evidence suggests they actually did? You seem okay with that because, well, it's Penn State and it's their "culture" (ignoring the fact that not a single PSU player now or then had anything to do with Sandusky's crimes, and nobody in this current program was connected to Sandusky in any way).

    Again....kindly recommend you fact-check this.

    This post was edited by NittanyIllinois 10 months ago

  • NittanyIllinois said... (original post)Sandusky's guilt is pretty clear -- he can rot in prison for all I care. And it's also clear that certain PSU administrators got w...

    I doubt anything will come of it, whether it's true or not...because it's Ped State and we've already seen how the program avoided punishment when they so clearly deserved it.

    Paterno knew exactly what was going on. To suggest that a power DI coach doesn't know every aspect of what's going on in his program is folly. Several other coaches stated the same including Barry Switzer: “Having been in this profession a long time and knowing how close coaching staffs are, I knew that this was a secret that was kept secret,” Switzer said. “Everyone on that staff had to have known, the ones that had been around a long time.”

    The Sandusky case wasn't even this first issue. There was an ESPN special on him covering up actions of his football players prior (odd that I can't seem to find it now). He was about winning and nothing else and there was a huge coverup to protect him, of which he was a part. It's no coincidence that Ped State broke the news right after that SOB broke his record against Illinois (with help from the refs).

    I think he died of guilt...

    This post was edited by SFChief 10 months ago

  • SFChief said... (original post)I doubt anything will come of it, whether it's true or not...because it's Ped State and we've already seen how the program avoided pu...

    You know the history between Joe Paterno and Barry Switzer, right? Quoting Barry Switzer on this is like getting John Calipari's opinion on John Chaney. Paterno blew the lid open on Switzer's cheating back in the 1980s, and was very public about it. Plus, for every Switzer that slammed Paterno, there was a laundry list of coaches that defended him.

    You really should read the case files on this. For the record, I used to hold the very same thoughts as you, and I stopped following Penn State football for many years after the scandal broke. But as time went on and I actually read the legal files and testimonials, my opinion on Paterno changed pretty significantly.

    There are facts available for one's perusal online. Actual legal evidence.

    And regardless of one's view on Paterno, none of that has any bearing on James Franklin and his program or his kids who have by and large been excellent reprsentatives of the university. If you're hoping for a scandal here, prepare to be disappointed.

    This post was edited by NittanyIllinois 10 months ago

  • I'll never forget the 1994 game in Champaign. Blew the 21-0 lead of course, but we were the only defense all year that made that Penn St offense sweat. Made a convincing case for being the best defense in the country by holding that Penn St offense to 35 points. To this day, they talk about that game as their one scare in that 12-0 season. Also remember Penn St scoring 56 points in the first half in Champaign in 2005, and Paterno made sure to call nothing but runs in the second half to avoid embarrassing Zook. He had a great talk with Zook after that game to keep his spirits up. 2 years later, Benn and company beat them in their return to Champaign. Zook and Paterno were very close after that.

    I knew somebody close to that program. Said those around the program were genuinely shocked when the Sandusky thing hit because nobody would ever guess Sandusky had that dark side. You hear that about sexual predators a lot -- the perfectly decent guy next door that nobody would imagine being a monster. Apparently Paterno was upset after hearing Sandusky showering with a kid, and reported it to authorities. But the AD sat on it, and that was the end of it. He said that in Paterno's final day or two, he expressed regret that he didn't do more, and he made the mistake of assuming that Sandusky's showering was merely inappropriate behavior but not criminal. He admitted it was a mistake in judgment. A classic case of assuming the best about somebody, but allowing that to cloud judgment. I think Coach K probably said it best when he said that Paterno made a mistake, but it was not the mistake that many in the press alleged (cover up). Based on what I know, I think that's probably true.

    They deserved that probation, even if the players had nothing to do with it. NCAA has to send a message.

  • Said it best?

    July 12, 2016

    "In the deposition from 2014 released Tuesday morning, a man called John Doe 150 in the documents testified that Mr. Sandusky touched him inappropriately in a shower room in 1976, when he was 14 and attending a football camp.

    The accuser said that he cried out when Mr. Sandusky penetrated him with a finger, a cry loud enough for other campers to hear, and that he later reported Mr. Sandusky’s inappropriate behavior to adults at the camp. The next day, the accuser said, he sought out Mr. Paterno and described the encounter in the hallway of a football office building as Mr. Paterno was on his way to a meeting.

    “Is it accurate that Coach Paterno quickly said to you, I don’t want to hear about any of that kind of stuff, I have a football season to worry about?” a lawyer for the insurer asked the accuser, according to the deposition.

    “Specifically, yes,” the man replied.

    Mr. Paterno then walked away, the man said"

    Coach K is a great basketball coach, but him calling it a "mistake" should offend a decent person's sensibilities.

    That all I will say...

    This post was edited by DasIllini 10 months ago

  • DasIllini said... (original post)Said it best?July 12, 2016"In the deposition from 2014 released Tuesday morning, a man called John Doe 150 in the documents testified that Mr...

    "The State rests, your Honor."

  • DasIllini said... (original post)Said it best?July 12, 2016"In the deposition from 2014 released Tuesday morning, a man called John Doe 150 in the documents testified that Mr...

    It's very possible that happened. We know for certain that many allegations were almost certainly true -- some were corroborated.

    But the two allegations from the 1970s were the ones that many agree didn't really measure up. The 1971 allegation was riddled with bizarre claims (the kid was raped by both Sandusky -- who drugged him first -- and a Catholic priest, and his foster parents refused to call the police), and this 1976 allegation was made only after Paterno died and the scandal had already blown up and resulted in compensation to victims. Nobody was able to corroborate the claims, and even the university -- which was very pro-settlement, stated factual concerns about that particular allegation. Also noteworthy that the victim refused to testify under oath in court. Claimed to be too traumatized, and perhaps that's true. But there's reasonable doubt.

    Neither the NCAA nor the State of PA investigations found any abuse in the 1970s. Again, not saying it didn't happen, but the only allegations came very late in the game and were uncorroborated.

    There's plenty of evidence linking Sandusky to abuse, and enough circumstantial evidence to suggest Joe didn't do enough. But that doesn't mean every allegation should be taken at face value without proper investigation. We've seen this in politics many times.

    This post was edited by NittanyIllinois 10 months ago

  • But my only point here is that none of the Sandusky scandal has any bearing on the kids who were accused of this behavior by Isaiah Humphries. This notion that "oh well, it's Penn State, this happens there" is silly, and it's a good thing our legal system holds a higher standard prior to convicting.

    I've had close family members victimized sexually. And I've had a family member falsely accused. Holding off our conclusions until the evidence speaks is the only appropriate response to these kinds of things.

    Anyway, no more from me on this topic. Off to watch us hopefully beat those idiots at Iowa.

    This post was edited by NittanyIllinois 10 months ago

  • NittanyIllinois said... (original post)But the two allegations from the 1970s were the ones that many agree didn't really measure up. The 1971 allegation was riddled with biz...

    It really isn't worth the broadband to reply, but:

    The 2014 depo finding was taken almost 2.5 years after Joe Paterno's death, and released in 2016. It did not involve settlement money for John Doe150 and had nothing to gain from lying. He was testifying as third party in Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association Insurance vs Penn St and John Doe A. "The information that became public in May and was sketched in fuller color Tuesday (July 8, 2016) might never have seen the light of day had Penn State not elected to sue its insurer in 2013 over reimbursement"

    As for 1971 allegation, given the history of Sandusy and Catholic Church on sexual abuse, the bizarreness would be for me to believe the allegation is bizarre.

    I was lectured on wanting to believe something is true. I think this is good time for the contrapostive. If Joe Paterno was caught screwing a chicken, some would claim he's was just smoothing ruffled feathers.

    This post was edited by DasIllini 10 months ago

  • DasIllini said... (original post)It really isn't worth the broadband to reply, but: The 2014 depo finding was taken almost 2.5 years after Joe Paterno's death, and relea...

    I do appreciate that you're citing research on this, which is more than what I get from most on this topic. The 1971 case has a lot of issues, though. But, I'll leave that for another day.

    All I'll say is that nothing matters more than evidence when it comes to serious allegations like this. If a shred of evidence surfaces showing that Micah Parsons or Jesse Luketa or Yetur Gross-Matos or Damion Barber assaulted Isaiah Humphries in front of the team and the coaching staff, I'll be the first to demand their dismissal. I only speak for myself -- not other Penn State fans.

    This post was edited by NittanyIllinois 10 months ago

  • NittanyIllinois said... (original post)A quick fact check will show that this investigation already came up empty in criminal channels, and the accuser has a fairly well-known tra...

    Yeah poor Mark Smith was made to run on a tredmill, oh the agony! These are hazing allegations, apples to oranges from what Smith whinned about.