Syracuse fires Fine

[Scalito]

Previously investigated by whom? The university? I can't figure out how you blame ESPN when Boeheim never even went to Bernie Fine and asked him about the allegations. That shows me that he had less than any interest in finding out the truth. At a minimum, Boeheim should have asked Fine about it.

How do you know what Boeheim asked Fine back in 2002 when the University investigated the incident? The fact is, unlike Penn State, Syracuse hired an outside investigator to look into allegations that the local police refused to investigate. That investigation might have been helped by ESPN airing the tape that the alleged victim provided them. ESPN failed in its moral obligation, and a potential predator may have harmed others as a result.

 

[upstater]

How do you know what Boeheim asked Fine back in 2002 when the University investigated the incident? The fact is, unlike Penn State, Syracuse hired an outside investigator to look into allegations that the local police refused to investigate. That investigation might have been helped by ESPN airing the tape that the alleged victim provided them. ESPN failed in its moral obligation, and a potential predator may have harmed others as a result.

How do I know? Because Boeheim said it.

Outside investigator, eh? Paid for by SU. You're sure they didn't sweep anything under the rug, right?

 

[Scalito]

How do I know? Because Boeheim said it.

Outside investigator, eh? Paid for by SU. You're sure they didn't sweep anything under the rug, right?

Please provide a link for your assertion. As for your jibe at the outside investigator, how the duck else do you think an institution gets someone to conduct an investigation but to pay them? The police refused to look into it. What else could the school do, but conduct the investigation in house, which people like you would find even more suspect? Must be easy to sit in the bleachers and cynically accuse everyone of being corrupt with no real information.

 

[The Funster]

I would hope that your summary is missing some additional points because that explanation is bullshit. First off, newspapers generally cannot be held liable for accurately reporting third party accusations. Remember all of those successful lawsuits against media corporations that reported false accusations against the Duke lacrosee team members? Me neither. The media is allowed to report accusations of sexual abuse.

Secondly, hearsay is a rule of evidence that has no effect outside the courtroom. Newspapers and ordinary human beings rely on hearsay---meaning an out-of-court statement offered at trial to prove the truth of the matter asserted---all of the time. As they should. Hell, even juries are allowed to consider hearsay statements: there is a whole host of rules governing when hearsay can and cannot be offered into evidence at trial.

The it-was-only-hearsay defense is bullshit, and impressive only to those who understandably don't know what the legal term "hearsay" conotes.

I don't think I missed any points. The whole segment is probably available on WFAN's website if anyone wants to lsiten for themselves. I don't buy the idea that lack of corroboration is a valid reason for not making the tape public and have said so right along.

 

[The Funster]

ESPN didn't need to turn the tape over. They just needed to air it.

The Post-Dispatch had the tape as well. They sat on it as well. According the guy that was on Francesa's show (who works for the P-D) his opinion was that neither the P-D nor ESPN made the tape public because there was no corroboration. Even Davis' stepbrother denied there was abuse when the tape was made. Lang didn't admit the abuse was real until the Sandusky case broke.

I don't buy the corroboration or the hearsay defenses either. However, the fact remains that at that point in time Davis was all alone in his accusation.

 

[ctchamps]

The Post-Dispatch had the tape as well. They sat on it as well. According the guy that was on Francesa's show (who works for the P-D) his opinion was that neither the P-D nor ESPN made the tape public because there was no corroboration. Even Davis' stepbrother denied there was abuse when the tape was made. Lang didn't admit the abuse was real until the Sandusky case broke.

I don't buy the corroboration or the hearsay defenses either. However, the fact remains that at that point in time Davis was all alone in his accusation.

And that is the issue. No one took the extra step.

 

[upstater]

Please provide a link for your assertion. As for your jibe at the outside investigator, how the duck else do you think an institution gets someone to conduct an investigation but to pay them? The police refused to look into it. What else could the school do, but conduct the investigation in house, which people like you would find even more suspect? Must be easy to sit in the bleachers and cynically accuse everyone of being corrupt with no real information.

We've seen these outside investigators before and how they work. Go to the Cuse board if you want to learn more about the thoroughness (the lack thereof) and what they have totally missed so far. These outside investigators are in constant CYA mode, that's what they are paid for. If they don't back the interests of their customer, then why the heck hire them? Whatever can be swept under the rug, will be swept under the rug. They are looking for plausible deniability. That's how it works. Don't be naive.

http://syracusefan.com/threads/katz-on-jbs-future.9519/

Andy Katz said that about Boeheim.

You say I'm sitting in the bleachers but it sounds like you stuck your head in the sand.

 

[Scalito]

We've seen these outside investigators before and how they work. Go to the Cuse board if you want to learn more about the thoroughness (the lack thereof) and what they have totally missed so far. These outside investigators are in constant CYA mode, that's what they are paid for. If they don't back the interests of their customer, then why the heck hire them? Whatever can be swept under the rug, will be swept under the rug. They are looking for plausible deniability. That's how it works. Don't be naive.

http://syracusefan.com/threads/katz-on-jbs-future.9519/

Andy Katz said that about Boeheim.

You say I'm sitting in the bleachers but it sounds like you stuck your head in the sand.

To clarify, notwithstanding your assurances, there is no quote from Boeheim stating that he never asked Bernie Fine about the allegations. Only the paraphrase of a paraphrase you found on a message borad. And your confidence that Syracuse swept this thing under the rug is based on nothing but your worldly knowledge that that's just how things are done.

Alas, I cannot accept that outside investigators operate as you assure me that they do because I have participated in them and know from first hand experience that your sweeping statement is ludicrously overbroad.

 

[upstater]

To clarify, notwithstanding your assurances, there is no quote from Boeheim stating that he never asked Bernie Fine about the allegations. Only the paraphrase of a paraphrase you found on a message borad. And your confidence that Syracuse swept this thing under the rug is based on nothing but your worldly knowledge that that's just how things are done.

Alas, I cannot accept that outside investigators operate as you assure me that they do because I have participated in them and know from first hand experience that your sweeping statement is ludicrously overbroad.

I didn't say they swept it under the rug. Not definitely. But you can be sure they are not there to conduct an investigation that turns up criminality. They are there to limit liability for the university. That's their role. That's what they get paid for. They are not a law enforcement substitute. In fact, where they can, they act as a buffer limiting the school's klnowledge to establish plausible deniability. And if they determine there may be funky things afoot that will NEVER be proven in a court of law and that therefore there is no liability, then they will sweep it under the rug.

We already know that they interviewed Laurie Fine about the allegations after Davis named her as a witness. Let's see the report and whether they found her credible.

http://extreme.mobile.msn.com/sports/CBK/article/1116144

You act as though the Katz quotes aren't being recounted everywhere.

 

[Scalito]

I didn't say they swept it under the rug. Not definitely. But you can be sure they are not there to conduct an investigation that turns up criminality. They are there to limit liability for the university. That's their role. That's what they get paid for. They are not a law enforcement substitute. In fact, where they can, they act as a buffer limiting the school's klnowledge to establish plausible deniability. And if they determine there may be funky things afoot that will NEVER be proven in a court of law and that therefore there is no liability, then they will sweep it under the rug.

I don't think your perception of how things operate in these situations is at all accurate. There are two types of scenarios where you bring in an outside investigator. The first is where a scandal has already broken and you hire someone to provide you with cover in the press. You may be right that under those circumstances an "outside investigator" will minimize the amount of past wrongs.

The second is where you are confronted with a potential problem and you hire an investigator to look into it. Under those circumstances, the best way to limit an institution's liability is to conduct a thorough examination and nip any problems in the bud. That sometimes results in self-reporting civil violations and even crimes to the authorities. And if the outside investigator is worth his salt, I guarantee you that it would include a recommendation to an educational institution to fire a potential child abuser.

http://extreme.mobile.msn.com/sports/CBK/article/1116144

You act as though the Katz quotes aren't being recounted everywhere.

Sorry, but your Katz "quote" doesn't say nearly as much as you think it does. If you are going to assert that Boeheim never asked Fine about the allegations, I am going to demand a quote that clearly states as much. It is too significant for me to infer from vague reports that could be interpreted a hundred different ways.

 

[upstater]

Sorry, but your Katz "quote" doesn't say nearly as much as you think it does. If you are going to assert that Boeheim never asked Fine about the allegations, I am going to demand a quote that clearly states as much. It is too significant for me to infer from vague reports that could be interpreted a hundred different ways.

Go on defending until the very end.

He clearly says these things are beyond his responsibilities as a coach. He created a buffer between himself and the Fine mess. Says so right in the quotes. It's unbelievable that you would deny that.

 

[upstater]

The second is where you are confronted with a potential problem and you hire an investigator to look into it. Under those circumstances, the best way to limit an institution's liability is to conduct a thorough examination and nip any problems in the bud. That sometimes results in self-reporting civil violations and even crimes to the authorities. And if the outside investigator is worth his salt, I guarantee you that it would include a recommendation to an educational institution to fire a potential child abuser.

There's no smoking gun even now, so why fire a potential child abuser? We've seen them kept on everywhere to protect their rights. The investigator will only test the limits of liability and not go beyond.

Anyone who asked Laurie Fine why Davis would name her as a witness on his behalf would have made some immediate realizations about the nature of the case, had they been law enforcement. And even a little light scratching of the surface would have revealed what tens of posters on the Cuse board have said from being around the team. This is about to explode. From Bernie hustling to pimping his wife out to players, lots of posters there seem to know these things. Yet Boeheim didn't. not his responsibility. And the investigators uncovered none of this. And the ex-Cuse chief of police got wind of it too but sadly statutes of limitations had passed--even as the DA claims that's not proper protocol for the sex abuse unit established a decade before the initial allegations. Uh-huh.

 

[Ricky1Moore]

I hope Boeheim survives, I really do, he's class... and right now it appears that all he is guilty of is being overzealous in defending a friend who he obviously thought was innocent (otherwise he NEVER would have been outspoken in his defense).

But I do think that in the end we will find a massive cover up took place (one that didn't include Boeheim)... The Syracuse police chief was a former bball player... and the whole community is very very very VERY supportive of the bball program... My guess is a lot of people will fry for knowingly covering up improprieties in the program... But it won't be Boeheim.... If he had known anything he wouldn't have defended Fine publicly.

 

[Scalito]

Go on defending until the very end.

He clearly says these things are beyond his responsibilities as a coach. He created a buffer between himself and the Fine mess. Says so right in the quotes. It's unbelievable that you would deny that.

So would you be happy if Boeheim had said, "Bernie, did you do this?" and then accepted a "no" answer in reply? I am going to guess not, which is fair enough. But then what else should he do? Fire an assistant based on a mere accusation or allow an outside investigator to do the job the police refuse to do?

I don't know exactly what, if anything, Boeheim asked Bernie Fine and you don't either because the quote you love so much doesn't tell us. So, unless and until more information comes out, I will defend Boeheim against premature condemnations.

 

[Deadrody]

http://extreme.mobile.msn.com/sports/CBK/article/1116144

You act as though the Katz quotes aren't being recounted everywhere.

Sorry, but your Katz "quote" doesn't say nearly as much as you think it does. If you are going to assert that Boeheim never asked Fine about the allegations, I am going to demand a quote that clearly states as much. It is too significant for me to infer from vague reports that could be interpreted a hundred different ways.

One of the things that bugs me about both this case and the Sandusky case is people like Katz - and almost everyone else for that matter - stating matter-of-factly that in this situation they would be absolutely certain to do X, Y, and Z. Katz says he would asbolutely know every detail about the investigations into a guy sitting next to him for 35 years.

Sure, in an objective, devil's advocate way, that might be true.

But that ignores human nature AND the dynamics of human relationships. Boeheim and Fine are supposedly very close friends. First of all, when that kind of allegation comes up, your first inclination is to deny it, to assume it is false. And if your university is going to do their own investigation, great, leave it at that. And when that investigation concludes Fine did nothing wrong, why on Earth would you then need to know every detail of an investigation into allegations you didn't believe in the first place, that ultimately exonerated your friend ? In the real world of dynamic human relationships - YOU DON'T. Its that simple.

Its the same for people who say if they had been McQueary, they are absolutely certain they would have attacked Sandusky and pulled him off that kid. And I say, you simply do not know that. Finding two people engaged in that kind of intimate behavior is immediately disconcerting, no matter WHO it is. You are never supposed to just walk in on something like that. And then you are faced with the fact that what you are seeing is disturbing. Do you even believe what you are seeing ? To say you KNOW exactly how you would react is simply not true. You may think you know, you may HOPE you know, but until you are faced with it, you don't know.

 

[upstater]

So would you be happy if Boeheim had said, "Bernie, did you do this?" and then accepted a "no" answer in reply? I am going to guess not, which is fair enough. But then what else should he do? Fire an assistant based on a mere accusation or allow an outside investigator to do the job the police refuse to do?

I don't know exactly what if anything Boeheim asked Bernie Fine and you don't either because the quote you love so much doesn't tell us. So, unless and until more information comes out, I will defend Boeheim against premature condemnations.

Some curiosity, any! Whatsoever. An interest in the truth. Establishing institutional buffers when something like this is uncovered is the wrong move. And this is precisely what Paterno did. McQueary comes into the room, starts talking about Sandusky and a kid, and instead of interrogate McQueary about all the details, he throws up his hands and and says, "Say no more." All he does is tell McQueary to report to the man in charge of campus police.

 

[Scalito]

And even a little light scratching of the surface would have revealed what tens of posters on the Cuse board have said from being around the team. This is about to explode. From Bernie hustling to pimping his wife out to players, lots of posters there seem to know these things. Yet Boeheim didn't.

Forgive me if I wait for more than rumors swirling on the internet.

 

[Deadrody]

Oh and for the love of all that's holy, the Syracuse newspaper is the POST-STANDARD.

Sometimes lovingly referred to as the SUB-standard.

 

[upstater]

One of the things that bugs me about both this case and the Sandusky case is people like Katz - and almost everyone else for that matter - stating matter-of-factly that in this situation they would be absolutely certain to do X, Y, and Z. Katz says he would asbolutely know every detail about the investigations into a guy sitting next to him for 35 years.

Sure, in an objective, devil's advocate way, that might be true.

But that ignores human nature AND the dynamics of human relationships. Boeheim and Fine are supposedly very close friends. First of all, when that kind of allegation comes up, your first inclination is to deny it, to assume it is false. And if your university is going to do their own investigation, great, leave it at that. And when that investigation concludes Fine did nothing wrong, why on Earth would you then need to know every detail of an investigation into allegations you didn't believe in the first place, that ultimately exonerated your friend ? In the real world of dynamic human relationships - YOU DON'T. Its that simple.

Its the same for people who say if they had been McQueary, they are absolutely certain they would have attacked Sandusky and pulled him off that kid. And I say, you simply do not know that. Finding two people engaged in that kind of intimate behavior is immediately disconcerting, no matter WHO it is. You are never supposed to just walk in on something like that. And then you are faced with the fact that what you are seeing is disturbing. Do you even believe what you are seeing ? To say you KNOW exactly how you would react is simply not true. You may think you know, you may HOPE you know, but until you are faced with it, you don't know.

The vast majority of Cuse fans claim the two are not friends.
If they were, I could see your point. Boeheim was being loyal. The flipside, however, is that Boeheim is also Fine' superior, and he represents the university. Friendship and loyalty counts for something, but in that situation, you have additional responsibilities. What bugs me about it is that people go out of their way to insulate themselves in case of future evidence, and Boeheim is insulated by virtue of his ignorance. Averting your eyes when supposed investigations exonerate people may get you into trouble.

I give the example of a principal at a school behaving as Boeheim did. If they tried to establish plausible deniability and then accused the victim of lying, they'd be out on their ear.

 

[upstater]

Forgive me if I wait for more than rumors swirling on the internet.

Yes, swirling rumors that have been reported on the Cuse site for two weeks now, and every single time they are correct.

1. Davis
2. Tomaselli
3. the tape of Laurie Fine
4. A new 4th victim mentioned today by child advocacy group's.
5. Police chief Duval was informed.

They are 5 for 5.

Let's see how they do in the future with these rumors:

6. Secret Service found letters written from parents accusing Fine of molesting their children
7. Fine's wife was being passed around to players (and no one knew!!!!!)
8. Child on a computer

 

[huskymania]

I am just glad UCONN doesn't have to deal with what Penn State and Syracuse will have to deal with. I think Boeheim is a good man and a respectable person and its unfortunate it had to happen to his program.

 

[freescooter]

Some curiosity, any! Whatsoever. An interest in the truth. Establishing institutional buffers when something like this is uncovered is the wrong move. And this is precisely what Paterno did. McQueary comes into the room, starts talking about Sandusky and a kid, and instead of interrogate McQueary about all the details, he throws up his hands and and says, "Say no more." All he does is tell McQueary to report to the man in charge of campus police.

I am with you, upstater. it is what people in authority love to do in these ugly situations...Boeheim did his best Sgt shultz impression (I know nothing...Nothing) but mainly because he didn't want to know about something so ugly...

 

[ctchamps]

I am with you, upstater. it is what people in authority love to do in these ugly situations...Boeheim did his best Sgt shultz impression (I know nothing...Nothing) but mainly because he didn't want to know about something so ugly...

It may be a desire not to learn about ugly truths or there can be other purposes behind the reluctance.

When my wife was teaching, she suspected physical abuse towards one of her students. She reported this to her principal. He was reluctant to do anything about it. She suspected he was afraid that if her suspicions were incorrect the school could be in for a lawsuit, and if that were to happen his aspirations to become a superintendent would be in jeopardy.

He was faced with a dilemma. If she reported it to authorities without his approval and the suspicions were founded he would have been in more trouble than if he sent in the report himself and the suspicions were unfounded. So he reluctantly forwarded the necessary paperwork. Her suspicions proved accurate. Instead of thanking my wife for helping a child, the principal never forgave her for putting him in that position.

 

[upstater]

It may be a desire not to learn about ugly truths or there can be other purposes behind the reluctance.

When my wife was teaching, she suspected physical abuse towards one of her students. She reported this to her principal. He was reluctant to do anything about it. She suspected he was afraid that if her suspicions were incorrect the school could be in for a lawsuit, and if that were to happen his aspirations to become a superintendent would be in jeopardy.

He was faced with a dilemma. If she reported it to authorities without his approval and the suspicions were founded he would have been in more trouble than if he sent in the report himself and the suspicions were unfounded. So he reluctantly forwarded the necessary paperwork. Her suspicions proved accurate. Instead of thanking my wife for helping a child, the principal never forgave her for putting him in that position.

This is precisely why what's going on right now may eventually create a system which will avoid such tensions.

 

[freescooter]

It may be a desire not to learn about ugly truths or there can be other purposes behind the reluctance.

When my wife was teaching, she suspected physical abuse towards one of her students. She reported this to her principal. He was reluctant to do anything about it. She suspected he was afraid that if her suspicions were incorrect the school could be in for a lawsuit, and if that were to happen his aspirations to become a superintendent would be in jeopardy.

He was faced with a dilemma. If she reported it to authorities without his approval and the suspicions were founded he would have been in more trouble than if he sent in the report himself and the suspicions were unfounded. So he reluctantly forwarded the necessary paperwork. Her suspicions proved accurate. Instead of thanking my wife for helping a child, the principal never forgave her for putting him in that position.

That is precisely what Boehiem and Paterno are doing. They both wanted to protect their programs and likely their legacies. And that was the most important thing. It was exactly the same thinking on th epart of Catholic bishops too. Frankly, I give Joe Paterno a bit more leeway, but only a bit, due to his age. 84 year old men come from a very different generation where this type of thing wasn't discussed and was more likely to be swept under the rug. So I would be willing to allow that thinking may have been part of his reluctance.