Ken Frazier's Face (with due credit to Spike Jones for the original)

When Ken Frazier says Lou Freeh is his ace
We heil (pffft!) heil (pffft!) right in Ken Frazier's face
Not to love Ken Frazier is a great disgrace
So we heil (pffft!) heil (pffft!) right in Ken Frazier's face

When Keith Masser says we own this Trustee space
We heil (pffft!) heil (pffft!) right in Keith Masser's face.
When Mark Emmert says they'll never sue his place
We heil (pffft!) heil (pffft!) right in Mark Emmert's face
When Karen Peetz says Joe Paterno was off base
We heil (pffft!) heil (pffft!) right in der Peetz's face.
Are we not the Bull****-men ?
Pure and simple Bull****-men
Ja we are the Bull****-men (super duper Bull****-men)
Is the NCAA so good?
Would you leave it if you could?
Ja the NCAA is good
We would leave it if we could
We bring Penn State to order
Heil Frazier's world new order!
Everyone of foreign race *
Will love Ken Frazier's face
When we bring to Penn State dis-order

When Ken Frazier says
"You are Mark Emmert's slaves!"
We heil (pffft!) heil (pffft!) and say we are not slaves
While Louis Freeh fibs
And lies and rants and raves
We heil (pffft!) heil (pffft!) and watch how he behaves

When Ken Frazier says Lou Freeh is his ace
We heil (pffft!) heil (pffft!) right in Ken Frazier's face
Not to love Ken Frazier is a great disgrace
So we heil (pffft!) heil (pffft!) right in Ken Frazier's face 
 
* "People that look like you"

Barry Fenchak speaking outside PSU Board of Trustees meeting

Karen Peetz and her Sixty Million Dollar Mouth

Karen Peetz, The Sixty Million Dollar Mouth

There was once a TV series called the Six Million Dollar Man. If Karen Peetz's acceptance of the Freeh Report's findings, in her capacity of Chairwoman, and without authorization by a vote by the Board of Trustees, was the basis the NCAA used to say (falsely) that Penn State accepted the findings, I think it would be fair to call her the Sixty Million Dollar Mouth.

Objective evidence:

(1) http://www.psu.edu/trustees/pdf/standingorders.pdf says very clearly, “Make decisions and instruct the administration collectively as the governing body of the University; it being recognized and understood that unless specifically authorized, no individual Trustee has the authority to act on his or her own on behalf of the University or the Board;”

(2) The Board of Trustees NEVER voted to affirm the Freeh Report’s findings of guilt with regard to Graham Spanier, Joe Paterno, Tim Curley, or Gary Schultz. The Board NEVER voted to authorize any statement to the effect that Penn State was responsible for Jerry Sandusky’s activities in any way, shape, or form. As stated very clearly by Trustee Joel Myers at https://onwardstate.com/2013/03/01/trustee-joel-myers-rips-the-ncaa-and-freeh-report/, “A report can only be accepted or adopted by the Penn State Board of Trustees through a majority vote, which never occurred in the case of the Freeh Report. Contrary to the belief of many, it is important to make clear that the Freeh Report was never accepted nor was it adopted by the Board under the Charter of the University.”

The minutes of the July 2012 Board meeting quote Peetz as follows, emphasis is mine: "As we said yesterday, the Board, as the group that has paramount accountability for overseeing and ensuring the proper functioning and governance of the University, accepts full responsibility for each of the failures that occurred." Trustee Peetz is therefore on record in the minutes as saying that Trustees affirmed the Freeh Report prior to the Board meeting, which means it is impossible for the Board to have approved this action. http://www.psu.edu/trustees/pdf/july2012minutesbot.pdf first page

(3) Trustee Peetz, in her capacity as Chairwoman, nonetheless spoke explicitly on behalf of the Board when she said (http://progress.psu.edu/resource-library/story/a-message-from-bot-chairman-karen-peetz), “The Board of Trustees, as the group that has paramount accountability for overseeing and ensuring the proper functioning and governance of the University, accepts full responsibility for the failures cited in the Freeh Report.”

Peetz added in a subsequent NPR interview (http://www.npr.org/2012/07/13/156706851/paternos-legacy-marred-by-psu-sex-abuse-report): "I think our reaction is that the clarity that's come out of the report would show that 61 years of excellent service that Joe [Paterno] gave to the university is now marred. And we have to step back and say, what does that mean?”

(4) The NCAA used Peetz's (and Kenneth Frazier's) remarks as an excuse to impose the sanctions.
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/Resources/Latest+News/2012/July/21207231

"Because Penn State accepted the Freeh Report factual findings, which the university itself commissioned, the NCAA determined traditional investigative proceedings would be redundant and unnecessary."

This is an outright lie because only Karen Peetz, along with Kenneth "people that look like you" Frazier accepted the findings. This means, in turn, that Peetz and Frazier, and also their colleagues, were derelict for failing to notify the NCAA that Penn State had never accepted the findings.

Joke for the Day
Q: Why did Egypt get ten plagues, and Penn State get Karen Peetz and Kenneth Frazier?
A: The Pharaoh had first choice.

Deb Beidel's Presentation for the Board of Trustees, September 19 2014

Thanks to all of who took the time to write to me regarding your concerns about the number of alumni trustees and the issue of a PSAA presence on the BOT. There was mention in the governance subcommittee yesterday about an "organized effort" to keep PSAA from having a seat - I guess that was us. I was able to speak during that meeting and did use that stack of papers effectively. There is still a chance to keep the board from getting bigger and save our representation. Stay tuned
The public comment period at the main meeting was totally controlled by filling seats with non-governance topics. It was, to say the least, a cheerleading session. But here is what I would have said if I could have said it:
I am one very loyal and proud Alumna. In early November 2011, I fired off one or two angry emails. So I apologize for any incivility on my part.
I address my next remarks only to the trustees present in November 2011. It is 2014 and we have not forgotten. Nor should we. The approach to this entire incident isreminiscent of what business always does when there is a public relations crisis. Lawyers gather, there is a settlement, and as one drug company announced: without admitting guilt or innocence, we agreed to the settlement because it's in the best interest of the company and current shareholders
But there was a gross miscalculation - alumni are not shareholders. Our concerns are not about money or profit. Perhaps one reason for our unbridled passion is that we are one of the few universities where alumni elect trustees. Alumni who cannot afford to endow chairs or have buildings named for them, or perhaps make any financial contribution, still have a voice at Penn State. You see, we are stakeholders, not shareholders.
To all the trustees not part of these original decisions, thank you for agreeing to serve Penn State. Please understand that anger and incivility arise when legitimate pleas are ignored. These are emails and letters recently written by alumni to the board and the administration. Each one from a different person who took the time to write. No one is rioting or causing destruction. They are simply asking to be heard. Yet, every previous attempt has been rebuffed or undermined.
We are told that we might never know the truth. No one can compromise on truth and maintain their integrity. Certainly, there are many perspectives and views - but there is only one truth. Perhaps we will not find all the answers. But does that mean we quit looking? Does that mean we give up and instead accept the half-truths, obfuscation and falsehoods that characterized the Freeh report?
I do know one truth. "When we stood at childhood's gate" - Penn State taught us not just facts, but Honor, Integrity, Loyalty, and Justice. You are the University trustees - persons appointed to administer the affairs of an institution. What greater affair could there be than repudiating these falsehoods and restoring Penn State's integrity? For many alumni, there is no moving on until this is made right.
To quote Martin Luther King
On some positions, Cowardice asks the question Is it safe? Expediency asks the question Is it politic? And Vanity asks the question Is it popular? But Conscience asks the question Is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must do it because Conscience tells him it is right.
Now is that time. Please listen to Conscience. Please make this right. For all of us.

Thank You, 11/9/2011 Board of Trustees

To: Penn State Trustees

cc: alumni networking

There is a picture circulating online from the Rutgers tailgate party last night that shows a large male stick figure standing behind a smaller one, with his hand on the smaller one’s head, and with his hips forward in an obvious sexually suggestive position. The caption “Penn State” is on the picture. In addition, a Penn State alumnus reported, “Some guy got in my wife’s face calling her a rapist lover, and he bets she rapes little kids.” The alumnus also alleges that he was physically assaulted with a thrown beer can.

While it in no way excuses the conduct of the Rutgers fans involved, they would probably have not thought of it had the 11/9/2011 Board of Trustees’ incompetence, panic, and rush to judgment not admitted falsely on Penn State’s behalf that Penn State was somehow responsible for Jerry Sandusky’s activities. Then, in July 2012, Kenneth Frazier and Karen Peetz—the latter in her capacity as Chairwoman—affirmed Louis Freeh’s findings that Penn State had allowed Jerry Sandusky to do what he did. Both Trustees did this without authorization by a vote by the Board, and both made derogatory remarks about Penn State employees (Paterno, and in Frazier’s case, Spanier, Curley, and Schultz) when they did it.

I think, therefore, that it is appropriate for the Penn State community to recognize Mr. Frazier, Ms. Peetz, and every other member of the 11/9/2011 Board of Trustees, including Governor Corbett and Rodney Erickson, but with the honorable exception of Alvin Clemens, for the caption “Penn State” on a sexually suggestive image of an adult male standing behind a boy, and accusations of pedophilia directed at the wife of a Penn State alumnus.

·         If the Board had done its job on 11/9/2011, this would probably not have happened. (I say “probably” because there are irrational people in the world whom no amount of facts will persuade.)

·         If Trustees Peetz and Frazier had not violated the Board’s Standing Orders in July 2012, this would probably not have happened.

·         If the Board had acted quickly to repudiate Peetz’s and Frazier’s statements in July 2012, this would probably not have happened.

·         If the Board had not been passively-aggressively derelict in its fiduciary duty for the subsequent two years, this may or may not have happened depending on the effectiveness of the corrective actions taken.

·         Al Clemens, however, repudiated openly the Board’s past mistakes, thus making him a role model for character, integrity, and taking responsibility whom today’s Penn State students would do well to emulate.

Now, to recap where we are today,

·         The Commonwealth Court opined on 4/09/2014 that (1) the NCAA sanctions are of questionable legitimacy and (2) the Board was derelict in its fiduciary duty for not challenging them.

·         The NCAA’s own document on sexual abuse casts serious doubts on the judgment, and possibly the integrity and character, of Governor Corbett, State Police Commissioner Frank Noonan, Mark Emmert, various 11/9/2011 BOT members, Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP), Buzz Bissinger, and Dan Bernstein, all of whom condemned Coach Paterno for not “doing more.”*

·         Judge Leete’s ruling that the Paterno lawsuit can go forward also casts doubts on the legitimacy of the NCAA sanctions.

The roll call vote on Al Lord’s resolution to reexamine, and probably repudiate, the Freeh Report will show unequivocally whether individual Trustees are putting the well-being of Penn State foremost or, as stated by Senator Yudichak, “Commonwealth Court opinion questions the validity of the NCAA consent decree, so why are the majority trustees embracing a flawed, indefensible verdict against Penn State? Further proof personal agendas, not a Penn State agenda, are driving board decisions.”

*  From page 4 of "Addressing Sexual Assault and Interpersonal Violence."

“Cooperate with but not manage, direct, control or interfere with college or university investigations into allegations of sexual violence ensuring that investigations involving student-athletes and athletics department staff are managed in the same manner as all other students and staff on campus.”

From Page 13

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS

Athletics departments are held to the same federal requirements of all institutional staff and departments when it comes to education and reporting requirements. Athletics staff members are required to report any suspected or alleged sexual violence or harassment immediately to appropriate campus offices for resolution; the athletics department is not the appropriate staff to adjudicate a reported case of sexual assault.

Paterno Family: Magdeburgize the NCAA

Noting that the NCAA's own regulations say openly that Paterno did the right thing in 2001,

Sent on 09/09/2014:

To: Penn State Trustees, President Barron

cc: Senators Yudichak, Dinniman, Corman, Wick Sollers (Paterno family attorney), alumni networking

This policy publication (http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Sexual-Violence-Prevention.pdf) shows unequivocally that:

·         The NCAA was dishonest when it imposed its sanctions on Penn State, and perhaps to the extent that it is not fit to regulate college athletics.

o   I cannot give legal advice, but I think the NCAA dug its own grave when it released "Addressing Sexual Assault and Interpersonal Violence." I encourage Senator Corman and the Paterno family to press their lawsuits à outrance to compel the NCAA to return Penn State’s money, Coach Paterno’s victories, and also compensatory and maybe punitive damages—punitive being appropriate for willful dishonesty as opposed to a mere mistake—for lost bowl game revenue and harm to Penn State’s reputation.

o   Add to this evidence the fact that either Rodney Erickson and Mark Emmert, or else NCAA officials Ed Ray and Ameen Najjar, lied about the death penalty threat.* Another alternative is, of course, that other NCAA members lied to Ray and Najjar about the death penalty never being on the table, but the bottom line is that we have two stories whose veracity is mutually exclusive. A court of law will probably take a very dim view of a situation involving $60 million in which somebody has told a falsehood.

o   The NCAA also is on record as lying about Penn State’s acceptance of the Freeh Report’s findings, when it knows fully well that the Trustees never studied, let alone voted to approve, these findings.

·         The 11/9/2011 Board of Trustees was incompetent, and failed to exercise basic diligence, when it fired Coach Paterno (and probably President Spanier, but the NCAA document proves this unequivocally only with respect to Paterno).

·         Kenneth Frazier and Karen Peetz exhibited defective judgment when Frazier falsely accused Paterno of failing to protect children and Peetz said Paterno’s service had been marred, and also caused enormous harm to Penn State by affirming the Freeh Report’s findings in violation of the Board’s Standing Orders. The NCAA used their statements as an excuse to impose the sanctions.

o   This, President Barron, is why you are short at least three years’ worth of the money you said would cover unmet student needs.

o   The Peetz-controlled, and then Masser-controlled, Board was derelict in its fiduciary duty (the opinion expressed by the Commonwealth Court on April 9, 2014) for failing to challenge the NCAA sanctions. The Masser-controlled board continued this dereliction with its vote in August to continue to go along with the sanctions, as described by Senator Yudichak: “Commonwealth Court opinion questions the validity of the NCAA consent decree, so why are the majority trustees embracing a flawed, indefensible verdict against Penn State? Further proof personal agendas, not a Penn State agenda, are driving board decisions.”

·         Louis Freeh was dishonest when he condemned Paterno for not violating the NCAA rules shown below.

·         Governor Corbett was dishonest and/or incompetent when he said Paterno should have done more. Alumni of both parties will take what Kenneth Frazier called “corrective action, employment action” with regard to Mr. Corbett this November.

·         Media personalities like Buzz Bissinger and Dan Bernstein who condemned Paterno should be writing for the newspapers one sees in supermarket checkout lines, or else appearing on very late night talk radio with the likes of Jeff Rense.

From page 4 of "Addressing Sexual Assault and Interpersonal Violence."

“Cooperate with but not manage, direct, control or interfere with college or university investigations into allegations of sexual violence ensuring that investigations involving student-athletes and athletics department staff are managed in the same manner as all other students and staff on campus.”

Another alumnus directed me to page 13 (numbered page, it’s the 17^th page of the NCAA document cited below)

LEGAL REQUIREMENTS

Athletics departments are held to the same federal requirements of all institutional staff and departments when it comes to education and reporting requirements. Athletics staff members are required to report any suspected or alleged sexual violence or harassment immediately to appropriate campus offices for resolution; the athletics department is not the appropriate staff to adjudicate a reported case of sexual assault.

It should be quite clear that the NCAA’s recent conciliatory behavior (removal of a handful of sanctions it never had any right to impose, and giving in to Senator Corman on the issue of the $60 million remaining in the Commonwealth) is the behavior of somebody who grabs food from a pack of hungry lions, and then realizes he cannot run fast enough. Tossing the lions a few scraps of their own property is not going to buy them off, and I do not think Senator Corman or the Paterno family should allow the NCAA to buy them off with a few scraps either.** I think the NCAA is terrified of seeing the inside of a courtroom, having to testify under oath (e.g. regarding the death penalty threat), and having to defend the disparity between its own written policies and its enforcement actions. I and other alumni would enjoy that because it is quite likely that the NCAA might not survive as an organization, but it might be better for the NCAA to put this matter behind it by returning Penn State’s money, Coach Paterno’s victories, compensation for the lost bowl game revenue, and a public apology for actions it had no right to take (again, that’s the Commonwealth Court’s view) in the first place.

* As reported by the Reading Eagle,

Oregon State president Ed Ray, president of the NCAA's executive committee, has told at least two publications that the committee never threatened Penn State with a four-year death penalty.

…Ray, who stood alongside Emmert at the NCAA press conference July 23 in Indianapolis, told ESPN later that day that an "overwhelming" majority of the executive committee, which includes presidents and chancellors from Divisions I, II and III, and the Division I executive board were against imposing a death penalty on Penn State football.

** On Cooling the Mark Out

Some Aspects of Adaptation to Failure

Erving Goffman

Sometimes, however, a mark [victim of criminal fraud] is not quite prepared to accept his loss as a gain in experience and to say and do nothing about his venture. He may feel moved to complain to the police or to chase after the operators. In the terminology of the trade, the mark may squawk, beef, or come through. From the operators' point of view, this kind of behaviour is bad for business. It gives the members of the mob a bad reputation with such police as have not yet been fixed and with marks who have not yet been taken. In order to avoid this adverse publicity, an additional phase is sometimes added at the end of the play. It is called cooling the mark out. After the blowoff has occurred, one of the operators stays with the mark and makes an effort to keep the anger of the mark within manageable and sensible proportions. The operator stays behind his team‑mates in the capacity of what might be called a cooler and exercises upon the mark the art of consolation. An attempt is made to define the situation for the mark in a way that makes it easy for him to accept the inevitable and quietly go home. The mark is given instruction in the philosophy of taking a loss.

There are, in fact, scammers who think people can be pacified in exactly this manner. I recall reading about an identity thief who was pursued by her victim, the latter with a camera-equipped cell phone to call police. The identity thief screamed at the pursuer, “Why won’t you leave me alone?” or something to that effect. If the NCAA is under the same delusion, somebody (e.g. Paterno family and other plaintiffs) needs to come down on it like a ton of bricks to educate it to the contrary, even if the education proves fatal to the NCAA as an organization.