That is likely an awful title given the new developments that come by the day -- especially on a day when it is possible that information re: the search or comments from Laurie Fine may emerge -- but I am going to try my best to stay out of this fray henceforth. I got involved because I have a lot of experience with government and internal investigations and wanted to provide insight where I could. For what its worth, here are my views. After that, I will get back to enjoying the season...including attending the NC State game in a few weeks. I will be the guy in really good seats with my 3 young boys who are very excited to see the Cuse.
1. First and foremost if as it appears children were molested that is the real story and 1000x more important than anything else. My thoughts and prayers to any victims. Anyone who called them clowns, or dumb and dumber, or drug addicts, or whatever -- without 1% of the knowledge JB had -- have more to apologize for then he does,
2. Most maddening to me in all of this is ESPN's failure (and the PS's failure) to alert the authorities or SU that they had an audio tape which, at a minimum, strongly suggested that Bernie Fine had molested and potentially was still molesting children. If you disagree with the implications of the tape, I'd suggest you read the transcript at Syracuse.com, rather than just the excerpts on tv. If the tape was doctored, that would be stunner #1 on a long list of stunners, but it would not really matter in the context of this issue b/c ESPN obviously thinks it is legitimate. If I hear ESPN or a poster on this Board try and justify this inaction one more time by using the standard for when it is appropriate to air a story to the public, I am going to strike myself with a hammer. Really, if you do not think there should be a different standard for deciding when to run a story in the media and when to advise law enforcement of a potential felony of the worst kind, I have no respect for you. All I can conclude is that ESPN did not want to share the tape in case this ever became a big story. That to me is unconscionable. There are some factors which make McQuery's and Paterno's inaction worse than ESPNs, such as the nature of the crime, the age of the victim (and his ability to report himself) and the concreteness of the evidence, but in the end, ESPN and McQuery both had evidence of an awful crime and did little (McQuery) to nothing (ESPN). Both ESPN's VP and Schwartz used the same language yesterday in trying to explain this, saying something like "journalists are not necessarily required to turn over information to authorities..." Clearly, they received some talking points which included this vague "necessarily" language. And their other points make no sense -- for example "we knew the police had already decided not to investigate." Well, that was before this tape was created. Good lord we are talking about potential crimes against children. If there is any chance you have information which might help stop such conduct, you tell the police. Period. I cannot believe even 1 person in 100 disagrees with that point.
3. The question of JB's future has, at least in my mind, been blurred between what should happen and what will happen. It is patently obvious to me that as the facts are currently known -- meaning that w/o any indication that JB knew or should have known of Fine's conduct -- he should not be terminated or discriplined. The question of what will happen is more difficult, because it requires an assessment of factors that are hard to gauge, such as the effect of the perfect storm that is Penn State and a prediction of people (Cantor and BOT) that I do not know. But the notion that JB's 2011 statements, standing alone, are enough to warrant his termination is ridiculous. In fact, those same statements are born out of the very fact that should exonerate him -- that he had no idea this stuff was going on. Thats the irony of all of this -- the statements that may bring him down are the same statements that distinguish this from Paterno and Penn State. Clearly, he and SU are one more stunning development away from this all crumbling -- for example if parents really sent letters to Fine raising concerns and also alerted SU and those concerns were not investigated, then SU (and JB is he was aware) will deserve what follows. Absent that, however, the whole notion that JB committed a terminable offense by questioning the veracity of the accuser is a huge departure from common sense. Because of his position, his comments were ill-advised. Anyone who refuses to acknowledge that has their head in the sand. But just as illogical are those who dismiss the import of the fact that the accusations implicated JB. To use a silly example, say I alleged that everytime I saw the moderators on this Board after an SU game, Bill Orange walked over and poured a beer on my head and called me an idiot and everyone laughed at me. I also claimed that while Bees never saw this happen, there were times when he walked into the room and saw my hair dripping wet and just shrugged his shoulders. When asked for his reaction to my accusations, it would be perfectly normal, if not expected, for Bees to say I am lying and that never happened. Such a reaction would make even more sense if I had made this same claim a few years earlier and, at least as far as Bees knew, no one else had supported my accusations. In a perfect world, Bees would say "I never saw it, but whether Bill Orange actually did that, I do not know so lets allow the process to play out." But in the real world such a reaction is unlikely and unnatural. Again, change the facts to child molestation and the head of the SU program, and JB should have been more measured in his comments, but the fact is that he genuinely believed (as we understand it now) that the part of the allegations re: him were false and naturally concluded that it was all false. Despite that, many on the Board reject the notion that the Davis' implication of JB had anything to do with his reaction, and cite the fact that he did not qualify it and say only that "the part about me is a lie." I dont think that is logical. And the fact that, per Schwartz, Davis now says that he does not know if JB ever knew or suspected that any of this was going on is significant. I would love know why he suggested otherwise, and I cannot help but wonder if that was the product of an effort by Schwartz to broaden the story. But the more important point is that it appears he was, at best, misleading in his comments in suggesting JB knew or suspected this was going on. And that makes Boeheim's reaction all the more understandable. Again, this is particularly true given that these allegations had previously been investigated. What if the 2011 allegations were again investigated and again found to not be sufficiently supported, and then the allegations were made again in 2012? And again in 2013? At any point can JB or anyone else question the veracity of the accusations? If you think the answer is no, I dont think you are living in the real world. If he is fired for this, it will in my view not be because of what he said or did, but because he was caught in a perfect storm of penn state and an accusation that now appears to have at least been partially exaggerated to falsely infer he had knowledge. It would be overstatement to call that tragic, in the context of this story, but it would be really unfortunate and unfair.
This was much longer than intended so I will leave out any other thoughts.
1. First and foremost if as it appears children were molested that is the real story and 1000x more important than anything else. My thoughts and prayers to any victims. Anyone who called them clowns, or dumb and dumber, or drug addicts, or whatever -- without 1% of the knowledge JB had -- have more to apologize for then he does,
2. Most maddening to me in all of this is ESPN's failure (and the PS's failure) to alert the authorities or SU that they had an audio tape which, at a minimum, strongly suggested that Bernie Fine had molested and potentially was still molesting children. If you disagree with the implications of the tape, I'd suggest you read the transcript at Syracuse.com, rather than just the excerpts on tv. If the tape was doctored, that would be stunner #1 on a long list of stunners, but it would not really matter in the context of this issue b/c ESPN obviously thinks it is legitimate. If I hear ESPN or a poster on this Board try and justify this inaction one more time by using the standard for when it is appropriate to air a story to the public, I am going to strike myself with a hammer. Really, if you do not think there should be a different standard for deciding when to run a story in the media and when to advise law enforcement of a potential felony of the worst kind, I have no respect for you. All I can conclude is that ESPN did not want to share the tape in case this ever became a big story. That to me is unconscionable. There are some factors which make McQuery's and Paterno's inaction worse than ESPNs, such as the nature of the crime, the age of the victim (and his ability to report himself) and the concreteness of the evidence, but in the end, ESPN and McQuery both had evidence of an awful crime and did little (McQuery) to nothing (ESPN). Both ESPN's VP and Schwartz used the same language yesterday in trying to explain this, saying something like "journalists are not necessarily required to turn over information to authorities..." Clearly, they received some talking points which included this vague "necessarily" language. And their other points make no sense -- for example "we knew the police had already decided not to investigate." Well, that was before this tape was created. Good lord we are talking about potential crimes against children. If there is any chance you have information which might help stop such conduct, you tell the police. Period. I cannot believe even 1 person in 100 disagrees with that point.
3. The question of JB's future has, at least in my mind, been blurred between what should happen and what will happen. It is patently obvious to me that as the facts are currently known -- meaning that w/o any indication that JB knew or should have known of Fine's conduct -- he should not be terminated or discriplined. The question of what will happen is more difficult, because it requires an assessment of factors that are hard to gauge, such as the effect of the perfect storm that is Penn State and a prediction of people (Cantor and BOT) that I do not know. But the notion that JB's 2011 statements, standing alone, are enough to warrant his termination is ridiculous. In fact, those same statements are born out of the very fact that should exonerate him -- that he had no idea this stuff was going on. Thats the irony of all of this -- the statements that may bring him down are the same statements that distinguish this from Paterno and Penn State. Clearly, he and SU are one more stunning development away from this all crumbling -- for example if parents really sent letters to Fine raising concerns and also alerted SU and those concerns were not investigated, then SU (and JB is he was aware) will deserve what follows. Absent that, however, the whole notion that JB committed a terminable offense by questioning the veracity of the accuser is a huge departure from common sense. Because of his position, his comments were ill-advised. Anyone who refuses to acknowledge that has their head in the sand. But just as illogical are those who dismiss the import of the fact that the accusations implicated JB. To use a silly example, say I alleged that everytime I saw the moderators on this Board after an SU game, Bill Orange walked over and poured a beer on my head and called me an idiot and everyone laughed at me. I also claimed that while Bees never saw this happen, there were times when he walked into the room and saw my hair dripping wet and just shrugged his shoulders. When asked for his reaction to my accusations, it would be perfectly normal, if not expected, for Bees to say I am lying and that never happened. Such a reaction would make even more sense if I had made this same claim a few years earlier and, at least as far as Bees knew, no one else had supported my accusations. In a perfect world, Bees would say "I never saw it, but whether Bill Orange actually did that, I do not know so lets allow the process to play out." But in the real world such a reaction is unlikely and unnatural. Again, change the facts to child molestation and the head of the SU program, and JB should have been more measured in his comments, but the fact is that he genuinely believed (as we understand it now) that the part of the allegations re: him were false and naturally concluded that it was all false. Despite that, many on the Board reject the notion that the Davis' implication of JB had anything to do with his reaction, and cite the fact that he did not qualify it and say only that "the part about me is a lie." I dont think that is logical. And the fact that, per Schwartz, Davis now says that he does not know if JB ever knew or suspected that any of this was going on is significant. I would love know why he suggested otherwise, and I cannot help but wonder if that was the product of an effort by Schwartz to broaden the story. But the more important point is that it appears he was, at best, misleading in his comments in suggesting JB knew or suspected this was going on. And that makes Boeheim's reaction all the more understandable. Again, this is particularly true given that these allegations had previously been investigated. What if the 2011 allegations were again investigated and again found to not be sufficiently supported, and then the allegations were made again in 2012? And again in 2013? At any point can JB or anyone else question the veracity of the accusations? If you think the answer is no, I dont think you are living in the real world. If he is fired for this, it will in my view not be because of what he said or did, but because he was caught in a perfect storm of penn state and an accusation that now appears to have at least been partially exaggerated to falsely infer he had knowledge. It would be overstatement to call that tragic, in the context of this story, but it would be really unfortunate and unfair.
This was much longer than intended so I will leave out any other thoughts.
