Spanier pleads innocence to BOT

[rrlbees]

Letter to BOT

 

[Orangepace]

They all should burn.. why would they try to save face now? Let the facts be what they are and otherwise, commenting or issuing a public letter just keeps this thing alive in the media.

 

[djcon57]

"My comment that we could be vulnerable for not reporting it further relates specifically and only to Tim’s concern about the possibility that Jerry would not accept our directive and repeat the practice."

OHHHH...ok.

This guy needs to be put in jail.

 

[orange79]

I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!

 

[djcon57]

"My comment that we could be vulnerable for not reporting it further relates specifically and only to Tim’s concern about the possibility that Jerry would not accept our directive and repeat the practice."

OHHHH...ok.

This guy needs to be put in jail.

Just one more thought I had..he goes "Were that the outcome of his discussion I would have worried that we did not enlist more help in enforcing such a directive."

You know what would have helped enforcing your directive? TURNING THE CASE IN TO THE POLICE, then you wouldn't have had to be worried, you liar.

 

[OrangePA]

Letter to BOT

If the issue was sent to the police, the Child Welfare people, the Centre County YSC and the DA's office in 1998 - and the case was not prosecuted - how can Penn State be assigned fault as of that date?

Why should wins from 1998 to 2001 be taken away?

Should not the NCAA have taken action as of 2001?

I think I agree with Spanier on this issue - I see no inaction or cover up in 1998.

I presume that you do.

Explain that part of it to me because I'm having trouble with it.

 

[rrlbees]

If the issue was sent to the police, the Child Welfare people, the Centre County YSC and the DA's office in 1998 - and the case was not prosecuted - how can Penn State be assigned fault as of that date?

Why should wins from 1998 to 2001 be taken away?

Should not the NCAA have taken action as of 2001?

I think I agree with Spanier on this issue - I see no inaction or cover up in 1998.

I presume that you do.

Explain that part of it to me because I'm having trouble with it.

Because PedSt played a role in keeping it drone being prosecuted.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[Orangello]

 

[Stern]

Because PedSt played a role in keeping it drone being prosecuted.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Exactly! Spanier is covering his rear end for the upcoming trials and when he is on the stand.

 

[OrangePA]

Because PedSt played a role in keeping it drone being prosecuted.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Is that what Freeh concluded?

 

[rrlbees]

Is that what Freeh concluded?

Who cares what Freeh did or dis not report. You probably didn't even read the testimony yet about the accusations in the 80's which he was found guilty of nor the new accusations going back to the 70's.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[OrangePA]

Who cares what Freeh did or dis not report. You probably didn't even read the testimony yet about the accusations in the 80's which he was found guilty of nor the new accusations going back to the 70's.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

N0.

I have not read the testimony yet.

But, the allegation in 1998 was reported.

I don't remember anybody indicating that PSU influenced the DA's decision.

That's where I am stuck.