Syracuse fires Fine

[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.