Interpretive question about the tape

[RF2044]

Okay, so I've watched ESPN's coverage of the tape several times. I'll admit, I listened with disappointment / disbelief the first time--and LF's comments seemed damaging as hell.
Now that I've heard them a few times, I have questions about just how "damaging" this is, and what the tape actually means in terms of Fine's guilt / innocence.

Clearly, the tape destroys Bernie's credibility, and that of his wife. But was there anything that definitively established that Fine committed these acts when Davis was a child? Yes, Laurie had two statements where she referenced boys [paraphrasing]: "you're a man now, but were just a boy then..." and "...he should just go get some gay boys..."

Very damaging on the surface, but calling someone younger a "boy" could also just be a figure of speech. When the tape was made, Laurie Fine was what--in her 50s? To her, someone in their 20s could be a "boy."

Another thing is that pretty clearly the tape establishes a pattern of homosexuality from Bernie. Again, that undermines the out of his credibility, but being a homosexual does not equal him being a pedophile. Where any dates established by the tape that counter that?

Lastly, the sex for $5000 implication is disgusting and paints Bernie as a sociopath--but again, sex between adults isn't illegal.

Not trying to rationalize this--I'm just stepping back from initial impressions and looking at the taped statements through an objective lens after seeing the statements multiple teams.

As bad as it seemed this morning, maybe the tape isn't as bad as it first appeared--at least in terms of what it means for JB, the University, and the program. :noidea: Curious to hear what others think.

 

[dash-30-dash]

that will be the defense in court. Might very well work there. Not in the court of public opinion though.

 

[tptcuse]

It cements the fact that Bernie needs to go and his wife is crazy.

 

[Guinness]

The only thing that makes this tape damning is if you believe the wife is on Bernie's side. Considering the fact she slept with Davis I don't know that I can make that assumption. The tape (imo) has not cleared anything up. It has made everything that much more confusing.

 

[Ghost]

No more benefit of the doubt from me. I'm assuming from here on in that he molested those kids, that she molested those kids, that they were checking the woods around his house on Friday for bodies of the people they killed, and that they were molesting that poor dog as well.

Only one way to go for me from now on - and that's up. What, there weren't dead bodies in the backyard? YES! See how that works?

 

[djcon57]

Okay, so I've watched ESPN's coverage of the tape several times. I'll admit, I listened with disappointment / disbelief the first time--and LF's comments seemed damaging as hell.

Now that I've heard them a few times, I have questions about just how "damaging" this is, and what the tape actually means in terms of Fine's guilt / innocence.

Clearly, the tape destroys Bernie's credibility, and that of his wife. But was there anything that definitively established that Fine committed these acts when Davis was a child? Yes, Laurie had two statements where she referenced boys [paraphrasing]: "you're a man now, but were just a boy then..." and "...he should just go get some gay boys..."

Very damaging on the surface, but calling someone younger a "boy" could also just be a figure of speech. When the tape was made, Laurie Fine was what--in her 50s? To her, someone in their 20s could be a "boy."

Another thing is that pretty clearly the tape establishes a pattern of homosexuality from Bernie. Again, that undermines the **** out of his credibility, but being a homosexual does not automatically equal him being a pedophile.

Lastly, the sex for $5000 implication is disgusting and paints Bernie as a sociopath--but again, sex between adults isn't illegal.

Not trying to rationalize this--I'm just stepping back from initial impressions and looking at the taped statements through an objective lens after seeing the statements multiple teams.

As bad as it seemed this morning, maybe the tape isn't as bad as it first appeared--at least in terms of what it means for JB, the University, and the program. :noidea: Curious to hear what others think.

If the University had this tape and JB heard this tape...I'm speechless that he was not asked to leave or forced to retire. That being said, I agree with your premise...he'd definitely gay. And befriending a young ballboy w/o a father, then jerking him off or whatever, when he turns 18, is pathetic...yet not necessarily illegal.

 

[Dick_in_MI]

Okay, so I've watched ESPN's coverage of the tape several times. I'll admit, I listened with disappointment / disbelief the first time--and LF's comments seemed damaging as hell.
Now that I've heard them a few times, I have questions about just how "damaging" this is, and what the tape actually means in terms of Fine's guilt / innocence.

Clearly, the tape destroys Bernie's credibility, and that of his wife. But was there anything that definitively established that Fine committed these acts when Davis was a child? Yes, Laurie had two statements where she referenced boys [paraphrasing]: "you're a man now, but were just a boy then..." and "...he should just go get some gay boys..."

Very damaging on the surface, but calling someone younger a "boy" could also just be a figure of speech. When the tape was made, Laurie Fine was what--in her 50s? To her, someone in their 20s could be a "boy."

Another thing is that pretty clearly the tape establishes a pattern of homosexuality from Bernie. Again, that undermines the **** out of his credibility, but being a homosexual does not equal him being a pedophile. Where any dates established by the tape that counter that?

Lastly, the sex for $5000 implication is disgusting and paints Bernie as a sociopath--but again, sex between adults isn't illegal.

Not trying to rationalize this--I'm just stepping back from initial impressions and looking at the taped statements through an objective lens after seeing the statements multiple teams.

As bad as it seemed this morning, maybe the tape isn't as bad as it first appeared--at least in terms of what it means for JB, the University, and the program. :noidea: Curious to hear what others think.

I'm no lawyer, but it seems like lots of cases are built...and convictions are made...on piles of evidence that have holes individually but added together, well...

 

[jsshap]

Okay, so I've watched ESPN's coverage of the tape several times. I'll admit, I listened with disappointment / disbelief the first time--and LF's comments seemed damaging as hell.
Now that I've heard them a few times, I have questions about just how "damaging" this is, and what the tape actually means in terms of Fine's guilt / innocence.

Clearly, the tape destroys Bernie's credibility, and that of his wife. But was there anything that definitively established that Fine committed these acts when Davis was a child? Yes, Laurie had two statements where she referenced boys [paraphrasing]: "you're a man now, but were just a boy then..." and "...he should just go get some gay boys..."

Very damaging on the surface, but calling someone younger a "boy" could also just be a figure of speech. When the tape was made, Laurie Fine was what--in her 50s? To her, someone in their 20s could be a "boy."

Another thing is that pretty clearly the tape establishes a pattern of homosexuality from Bernie. Again, that undermines the **** out of his credibility, but being a homosexual does not equal him being a pedophile. Where any dates established by the tape that counter that?

Lastly, the sex for $5000 implication is disgusting and paints Bernie as a sociopath--but again, sex between adults isn't illegal.

Not trying to rationalize this--I'm just stepping back from initial impressions and looking at the taped statements through an objective lens after seeing the statements multiple teams.

As bad as it seemed this morning, maybe the tape isn't as bad as it first appeared--at least in terms of what it means for JB, the University, and the program. :noidea: Curious to hear what others think.

I think when the results of the search warrant are known, none of the above will really matter. The 3rd accuser will be proven legitimate, evidence of crimes will have been found in Bernie's house, others likely come forward, and Fine will be prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned. None of that really impacts JB and SU, unless they knew of this tape in 2005. My guess is that JB clearly did not. My guess is that the school likely did not. If they did, then the interpretation you are outlining above is the only possible way this does not blow up the school.

 

[DomeStranger]

Well, she even admitted to Bernie not believing these things. She's talking to Davis and because she feels bad for what she did to him she doesn't feel the need to call him a liar or that she doesn't believe him. She is being nice because she feels guilty and probably is.

Just looking at it from her perspective ...

 

[JOC44]

I'm no lawyer, but it seems like lots of cases are built...and convictions are made...on piles of evidence that have holes individually but added together, well...

This tape isn't even court-worthy evidence. It's at best hearsay from someone saying what she believed but had no first hand knowledge about. Doesn't mean Fine isn't guilty of a crime, or of embarrassing behavior, but I'm underwhelmed by the reports of the tape's contents (other than it proves Fine's wife slept with Davis).

Again, this doesn't mean he is innocent, or that he should remain on staff. But I just don't see this as explosive as others do (except in a prurient sense).

 

[liljoe]

Only one way to go for me from now on - and that's up. What, there weren't dead bodies in the backyard? YES! See how that works?

Now THAT is comical genius! Gave me a good chuckle.

 

[HoustonCuse]

The biggest, and really only, question about this tape is: It existed in 2005 when BSK did their investigation. So what does their report say about it and how did they dismiss this thing? I believe whatever investigation they did would be on the level and Cantor was chancellor at that time so it's not like there would have been some kind of coverup. At least I find that nearly impossible to believe. So on what basis was it thrown out in both 2003 (by the PS and ESPN) and in 2005 by BSK and Univ?

 

[orangenirvana]

Davis could have and should have asked her something more incriminating like "You knew I was only 15 years old when Fine was abusing me - why didn't you stop it?"

At this point it's easy to believe Fine did this when Davis was under 18 but we don't know for sure that is the case.

As for the program...there is so much more that we need to know to have any idea what is going to happen to Boeheim and the basketball program.

 

[alliedp]

I think we've reached the point in the conversation where everyone involved... from JB, the SU administration and the authorities... had better ask themselves the question: "What did I know and when did I know it?" If saying the answer out loud makes them uneasy then it's a good bet the next couple of days-weeks-months are not going to be very fun for them. If you can honestly answer that you never knew anything and you still don't have a clue what's really going on then there's a good chance of reasonable escape. I am afraid it has become a matter of damage control and ignorance, in this instance, is bliss.

 

[RF2044]

This tape isn't even court-worthy evidence. It's at best hearsay from someone saying what she believed but had no first hand knowledge about. Doesn't mean Fine isn't guilty of a crime, or of embarrassing behavior, but I'm underwhelmed by the reports of the tape's contents (other than it proves Fine's wife slept with Davis).

Again, this doesn't mean he is innocent, or that he should remain on staff. But I just don't see this as explosive as others do (except in a prurient sense).

Agreed--my initial impression was that this was smoking gun-esque. Listening subsequently, I'm not sure that it is as bad as I first thought--despite how bizarre all the new dirt is.

Also agree--the above statement is not an indictment of whether the content of the tape is true, or commentary on whether Bernie is innocent versus guilty, etc.

 

[Cuseregular]

stop overanalyizing and come from it in the common sense perspective with out the SU connection. The totality of it all is damning.

 

[DomeStranger]

Davis could have and should have asked her something more incriminating like "You knew I was only 15 years old when Fine was abusing me - why didn't you stop it?"

At this point it's easy to believe Fine did this when Davis was under 18 but we don't know for sure that is the case.

As for the program...there is so much more that we need to know to have any idea what is going to happen to Boeheim and the basketball program.

Exactly ... especially if the tape was aimed at setting him up.

 

[RF2044]

stop overanalyizing and come from it in the common sense perspective with out the SU connection. The totality of it all is damning.

Again--the issue I raise is whether anything from the tape establishes that Fine is a pedophile who sexually victimized children. I don't dispute that the tape commentary is off the wall--but Laurie Fine having an affair with an 18 year old and Bernie being a closet gay man, while "damning" for the Fine's credibility, doesn't equate to Bernie being a pedophile.

The man has to go, and he needs to resign immediately--but I'm not sure that this tape is "damning" for JB or the University like it originally appeared.

 

[jsshap]

Agreed--my initial impression was that this was smoking gun-esque. Listening subsequently, I'm not sure that it is as bad as I first thought--despite how bizarre all the new dirt is.

Also agree--the above statement is not an indictment of whether the content of the tape is true, or commentary on whether Bernie is innocent versus guilty, etc.

The statements about what Bernie said in response to Laurie's comments are "court worthy"

 

[kingottoiii]

It is sad that being gay and being a molester of boys is getting intertwined here. People in the gay community must hate that Sandusky is getting grouped in with them. Which is what makes this case so weird. If Bernie is a child molester then he wouldn't be having relations with adult gay men (Davis post 18 or anyone else). And if Bernie is gay, he wouldn't be interested in young boys (Davis <18 or anyone else). He certainly wouldn't go out looking for "some gay boys" either.

 

[Dick_in_MI]

This tape isn't even court-worthy evidence. It's at best hearsay from someone saying what she believed but had no first hand knowledge about. Doesn't mean Fine isn't guilty of a crime, or of embarrassing behavior, but I'm underwhelmed by the reports of the tape's contents (other than it proves Fine's wife slept with Davis).

Again, this doesn't mean he is innocent, or that he should remain on staff. But I just don't see this as explosive as others do (except in a prurient sense).

Question JOC, because I'm not an attorney and I think you might be...even though it isn't a smoking gun, might it not be viewed as part of a pile of evidence that could mount up and tip the scales? Also, isn't it true that you don't really have to prove anything, you merely need to convince the jury?

I was only on jury duty once...years ago while still living in Syracuse. Much of the jury was made up of retirees, an elderly ex-legal secretary whom the lawyers loved but who was actually clueless in the jury room, and a handful of folks who couldn't get out of jury duty. I actually wanted to be on the jury due to a combination of civic duty and being interested in the process. I came away totally shocked at how the folks on the panel could be swayed by skillful counsel as much as by the evidence. We were a hung jury and Judge Cunningham merely dismissed us. I left the courthouse determined to never put my fate in the hands of people who may or may not be able to really reach the correct conclusion.

 

[AZOrange]

This tape isn't even court-worthy evidence. It's at best hearsay from someone saying what she believed but had no first hand knowledge about. Doesn't mean Fine isn't guilty of a crime, or of embarrassing behavior, but I'm underwhelmed by the reports of the tape's contents (other than it proves Fine's wife slept with Davis).

Again, this doesn't mean he is innocent, or that he should remain on staff. But I just don't see this as explosive as others do (except in a prurient sense).

I dont either.

 

[JOC44]

Dick:

Good question. Basically, if there was a hypothetical trial of Fine, this tape would be highly, highly unlikely to be admissible. The rules of evidence don't allow testimony from persons on matters for which they lack first-hand knowledge. So Laurie Fne's suspicions, beliefs, and opinions are legally irrelevant. Moreover, her statements are basically hearsay. And to the extent she says on the tape what Bernie supposedly told her, that would be hearsay -- an out of court statement by LF as to what BF supposedly said to her. Now, in a hypothetical trial, LF might be able to come into court and say what BF said to her. But LF and/or BF might have a privilege to prevent her from testifying. Regardless, the tape itself would likely be inadmissible hearsay.

If the question whether LF and Davis had sexual relations were a relevant issue in a case in which LF was a party, her admissions on that issue would not be hearsay. Similarly, if BF had been the one on the phone, his statements would not be hearsay in a case where he is a party.

 

[Ghost]

Agreed--my initial impression was that this was smoking gun-esque. Listening subsequently, I'm not sure that it is as bad as I first thought--despite how bizarre all the new dirt is.

Also agree--the above statement is not an indictment of whether the content of the tape is true, or commentary on whether Bernie is innocent versus guilty, etc.

I'm not going back on my "assuming the worst" thing, but if we're playing the what's strange about the tape game it is odd that she so pointedly references that he has a reached a point where he no longer believes he did it or knows he did it or whatever she said (he's living in denial). Like they were making sure to get that out there - oh, yes, he's going to deny it and he's going to believe he really didn't do it!!

 

[AZOrange]

I'm not going back on my "assuming the worst" thing, but if we're playing the what's strange about the tape game it is odd that she so pointedly references that he has a reached a point where he no longer believes he did it or knows he did it or whatever she said (he's living in denial). Like they were making sure to get that out there - oh, yes, he's going to deny it and he's going to believe he really didn't do it!!

Agree. The tape sounds very scripted. They are talking about the fact that Davis was molested by LF's husband, yet no one is even remotely emotional about it.