July 23, 2012

Penn State and the Mob that Cries for Blood

by @KilroyFSU

I am compelled to write this post to address some of the overwrought and ill-thought out bluster that has been said and written since the Jerry Sandusky situation broke. Specifically, my concern is with the NCAA taking action and the people who applaud the NCAA’s overreach.

Let me begin by establishing that I have no interest in or connection to the Pennsylvania State University, other than being a fan of college football. I have attended two games at Beaver Stadium, both against the University of Akron, once in 1999 and once in the mid-2000s. I attended as a student and later as an alumnus of Penn State’s opponent. I was a Florida State Seminole as an undergrad until I transferred to Akron during my sophomore year. I am not a fan or alumnus of Penn State and I am not motivated by the fact that the university involved was Penn State. I would feel the same if the school had been Louisiana-Lafayette, Utah, or Florida. The issue is not the school involved but the legal and moral impetus behind the punishment.

I should also dispatch with the unfortunately necessary caveats regarding Jerry Sandusky and the administration of Penn State. The underlying acts were absolutely evil and the administrators that covered for Sandusky and allowed the continuing abuse should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Any disapproval with the NCAA and its response should not be taken as being soft on sexual abusers and those that enable them. Obviously.


That being said, it seems clear to me that anybody who believes in justice and due process of law should be deeply troubled by recent news that NCAA president Mark Emmert is going to impose punishment against Penn State University on his own, bypassing the process agreed to by member institutions. It is unclear under what authority the Board of Directors or Executive Committee can vest this power on a single man, but it is an unprecedented move on the part of an organization that has long been criticized for handing down seemingly arbitrary punishments.

In order to protect member institutions, the NCAA typically follows a process that includes an NCAA investigation and provides a report of its findings and allegations to the institution, which is given 90 days to respond. None of that is happening in this case. Instead, the NCAA is relying on the Freeh report and not allowing Penn State to respond. Again, while I am by no means an expert on the NCAA and its bylaws, I have not been able to find any justification for the NCAA taking this unprecedented step.

Why is this important? Penn State’s guilt is clear. (More on this later. I’ll stipulate to this point for the time being though.) Nobody has offered a serious rebuttal of any important facts contained within the Freeh report. So why shouldn’t the NCAA save the time and money that would be spent on a separate investigation and advance the process? Even if that were a reasonable thing to do, I have found nothing in the bylaws that allows the NCAA to arbitrarily depart from the normal procedures and deny due process to an offending institution. This is an extremely troubling precedent to set. But in order to adequately explain why, it is necessary to back up a bit.

Consent of the Governed

Under what authority does the NCAA have to punish Penn State? This may sound like a rather unimportant point, one that we don’t even consider in most discussions relating to NCAA infractions. We take for granted that the NCAA has jurisdiction to punish member institutions for violation of its rules, but why does it? Put simply, the NCAA may punish its members because its members give it the authority to do so. In exchange for the member institutions’ consent, the NCAA provides due process before a punishment is administered. The parallels with civil society are obvious. We consent to be punished for violating the laws of the land in exchange for being represented in the government and for the guarantee that if a violation is committed, the state will follow certain rules in prosecution. These rules are known as due process, and they are so fundamental in our system of government that we rarely consider them. Yet, in order to punish us for violating society’s rules, we accept – in fact we demand – that the state follow these rules, even when the guilt of the defendant is not in doubt. The state bears the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The state may not coerce a defendant into a confession. The defendant is entitled to confront witnesses against him. Etc, etc, etc.

In criminal prosecutions, it is not enough to assert that somebody else has proven the state’s case. The state has the burden to prove its case. The defendant must be given an opportunity to respond to the state’s case. If requested by a defendant, a jury, not the president or governor, must convict the defendant. The NCAA provides its member institutions similar rights, in exchange for the member institution’s consent to be governed by the NCAA, including punishment. What, then, gives the NCAA the authority to deny Penn State due process in this case? Even the most evil criminal defendants are afforded due process, even when guilt is clear. Why should Penn State not have the same right in this case, when it is clear that NCAA procedures and precedent afford them such rights?

Jurisdiction

Equally egregious, it is not clear that the NCAA has proper jurisdiction to punish Penn State. The allegations in the Freeh report are awful and demonstrate no less than evil on the part of Jerry Sandusky and at best, calloused indifference on the part of the Penn State administrators that chose to conceal the allegations when they came to their attention. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has convicted Sandusky for his acts and he will spend the rest of his life in prison. Hopefully, it will pursue charges against any administrators that enabled abuse after they found out, if the law allows for such charges.

That said, the NCAA appears to be inserting itself into a situation where it has no jurisdiction in order to satisfy a blood-thirsty mob of fans and sports reporters. With the repeated caveat that I am not an expert on NCAA bylaws, I can find no rule that was broken by anybody at Penn State. The most commonly cited bylaws justifying NCAA action seem to be those related to honesty and sportsmanship and the oft-cited but consistently misunderstood Lack of Institutional Control. While I have neither the time nor the expertise to break down each potential bylaw violation, it seems to me to be a huge stretch and completely unprecedented to apply an NCAA bylaw to a criminal or civil law violation that had little to do with athletics at Penn State, other than that the perpetrators were employed by the athletic department. Ohio University professor David Ridpath, considered one of the nation’s foremost experts on NCAA compliance issues has been quoted as saying "I don't think this is an area that the NCAA can encroach in. If they do, then they've opened themselves up to really being much more of a different governing body."

Furthermore, Mark Jones, a collegiate sports attorney for the nation’s top NCAA compliance firm, Ice Miller in Indianapolis, has worked with the NCAA for 18 years and was managing director of enforcement when he left in 2004. Jones has been quoted as saying, "It's really hard to know what an allegation in this particular case would look like. For unethical conduct, traditionally that's a finding that's made that impacts an individual. It's not as much an institutional violation. By and large, institutional control has been finding when an institution has had some underlying problem that has been an NCAA rules violation in the operating bylaws that impact competitive equity on some level."

That provides the next rationale that is often heard. Surely Penn State’s situation demonstrated a lack of institutional control, no? Well, no, not really, for two reasons. Number one, as Mark Jones said above, a finding of lack of institutional control depends on some underlying bylaw violation. Much like the General Welfare Clause of the Constitution cannot act independently of some other enumerated power that would allow Congress to act, a finding of lack of institutional control requires some other underlying violation.

More importantly, the lack of institutional control penalty is found where the school has not implemented proper policies and procedures to comply with NCAA rules. The NCAA has promulgated no rule regarding either the commission or reporting of child sexual abuse, and for good reasons. That is a matter for civil enforcement, not NCAA enforcement. Any policy regarding the commission of a crime or reporting thereof are under the jurisdiction of the school and the state, and perhaps even the federal Department of Education, but not the NCAA. For the NCAA to find a lack of institutional control here would be a vast and unprecedented expansion of that rule that is not supported by the bylaws existing at the time of the alleged violation. This is nothing less than an ex post facto law, which in a criminal context has been prohibited as far back as the Magna Carta.

One final point to consider, doesn’t a conspiracy to cover up a violation demonstrate too much institutional control than a lack thereof? Just something to consider.

I would be thrilled if fans and pundits would at least have the discussion of whether the NCAA has proper grounds to intervene here. I don’t think there’s much of an argument that the NCAA has proper jurisdiction, but it is at least a discussion worth having. Unfortunately, most people and pundits don’t even seek to justify NCAA action. It appears to be enough that they want to see Penn State punished. Whether the punishment is appropriate or legitimate seems to not much matter to the masses, who would rather wave pitchforks and torches than discuss due process and justice.

Who Does This Punish?

As of my writing this, any punishment remains speculative. By the time you are reading this, it will be known. Whatever the nature of the punishment, consider the question above. Who does the punishment actually punish? What, exactly, is Penn State University? Can the University itself be punished? Does the University have feelings? Remorse? Isn’t the University nothing more than the people associated with it? The Board of Trustees? The Administration? The Students? The Alumni? All of the above? If there is a significant monetary penalty, who would pay it? Some reports suggest that PSU will be fined $60 million. Who will pay for that? Taxpayers? Students? The endowment fund (which will result in a budget crisis for the entire university in the short term and billions of dollars in lost interest in the long term)? Will any of the wrongdoers feel even a tiny sting from such a punishment, or will the tens of thousands of innocent students, or the millions of Pennsylvania taxpayers? Will the football program be harmed? Should it, considering that current coaches and student athletes had nothing to do with the situation? Will non-revenue sports be punished, ultimately, since football is the athletic department’s primary revenue producer?

Yes, this is a problem with NCAA punishments, generally, which consistently seem to punish subsequent players and coaches rather than the actual wrongdoers, but the punishment seems especially unjust in this case, considering the potential long term damage done to the university and the athletics programs. Who will be harmed by this unjust NCAA overreach into an area where it has – at best – extremely thin basis for jurisdiction and where it has denied due process to the school? Jerry Sandusky will spend the rest of his life in prison. Any administrators that knew about the abuse and didn’t report it have been purged from the university. Hopefully they will be properly prosecuted as well. However, those bad actors have been replaced by innocents. Why the rush to punish people who had nothing to do with the crime? Penn State as an institution cannot be punished. The punishment will fall on real people, all of whom had nothing to do with the Sandusky situation. Is that justice?

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Great article. Too many fans are blinded by anger. This is a very scary NCAA ruling.

Anonymous said...

I think the NCAA has no authority and I further find the NCAA's version of justice to be as twisted and perverted as Jerry Sandusky sexual orientation.

NCAA punishment = Criminals no punishment
NCAA punishment = the innocent be dammed
NCAA punishment = a violation of NCAA due process by laws
NCAA punishment = a platform for the current NCAA president to gain fame and further his political career

Penn State has been nothing more than an outstanding member of their community and country for what 200 years?

And now the criminal acts of one employee and several administrators equal them being an evil institution.

I have news for the beautiful people who think this is justified. Bad acts from individuals are everywhere and anywhere. The devil is probably busy in your back yard as I type...

Paul said...

I've got no problem with the NCAA taking action against Penn State. Penn State had obviously gotten its priorities out of whack, and I wouldn't have opposed suspending the football program entirely so that they could step back and get some perspective.

What does bother me, though, is that Penn State will have to vacate a decade's worth of wins. This seems like a pretty arbitrary punishment in that Penn State's transgressions had nothing to do with anything going on on the field. They weren't cheating to win games, and as such they shouldn't have to give up wins just so the NCAA doesn't have to have Paterno's name on the top of the all-time win list.

Anonymous said...

This is not a governing agency. This is a private organization that Penn State can chose to leave at any time if they wish. They have chosen not to do so and have to take the discipline as meted out by those whom they recognize as authoritative figures. If there was a problem with this there could be lawsuits that can be filed, complaints that can be launched and many other avenues that Penn State could have chosen to fight this decision. They did none of the above. That shows me that they realize their complicity in this situation and have taken their medicine as hard as it may be to swallow. As far as fans overt and, according to you, "unnecessary" anger: if this were one situation where Jo Pa missed this may have been an overly harsh punishment. As it is, we are discussing a situation where once one layer of the onion was peeled another showed up, and so on and so forth. This is a situation not where an assistant coach was guilty of the actual crime but where the coaching staff, the college superiors and even city law enforcement did not follow through on this hideous and uncontrolled situation simply because the culture of football had become a cult in Penn State. Frankly, a decade long ban would have been the beginning of the punishment had it been me and then an order for the university to review it's sick dependence on a sport for their identity. - David Fields residentfan2@yahoo.com

Anonymous said...

DHT practically binds to the receptor sites on the scalp and eventually disrupt the growth of new hair lumigan cost It also features the patented semi-closed loop system which means it can maintain an accurate and constant temperature
I have this theory that green beans are the ultimate weight-loss vegetable cymbalta price Nor does it indicate something is wrong with the individual or that there ever was: depression is often a condition resulting from events outside of someone's
As mentioned beforehand you have to keep the plan strictly - that is to eat exactly the portions of the specific foods at the specified meals Viagra for women pills Once these are a regular part of your diet, you'll start seeing results
This is exactly what the FPFL workouts are designed to do: help your body improve its internal hormonal balance iressa price But they need to be taken in properly timed designs
While this might be nice for some people, rowers who use ergo rowing machines to train don't like this feature and hence they always use the concept two rowing machines Famvir ISO certification is the highest standard achievable by a laboratory or factory which means that prolab products meet the highest possible standards of pharmaceutical manufacturing

Anonymous said...

If you are looking for the perfect place to spend your next vacations which is inherently far away from this monotonous city life then therefore are various tourist locations in the world which will offer you complete solace and tranquility and make sure that you have a wonderful time with friends and family. Foreclosed properties are houses that are reclaimed by lending agencies when the previous owners have failed to repay their loans. media2 vpn va. Policies require a main member and dependents can be added onto the main member's policy. There are specialized accessory kits available in the market for all models and brands of cars., vpn uk support. Installing or adding a toy box, cabinet or other storage unit that makes clean up a breeze is a good way to encourage frequent picking up of toys without making a hefty cleaning job part of the play ritual. vpn draytek mac

Anonymous said...

One can make a small change in the everyday diet and get rid of this problem permanently viagra online It pertains to correct supplement usage But do you honestly think that cheap skincare creams and lotions can possibly contain the best ingredients available? And not just the best ingredients, but EFFECTIVE amounts of these ingredients? Of course not cialis 3) You're balding and don't like that look

Anonymous said...

So whenever possible always print the most number of color brochures that fit into your budget. For example, egg yolks may be added to bread or even pasta., ssl vpn client vista. Second, focus like a laser. vpn 442 client error

Anonymous said...

Great golf and spa vacations can vary greatly in the amount of time away from quick overnight jaunts to long, leisurely treks that include plenty of entertainment off the links. Call +61 (03) 8398 1100 or visit http://www. deluxe access keyboard. More so, using these methods calls for some experience in choosing and bidding on keywords. These featured services can make your entertainment experience very exclusive and highly extensive as well., merits of peer to peer. These are the teeth that are referred to as the social six teeth in that they are ones that are going to be easily noticed by anyone. stardock virtual

Anonymous said...

Early on you had to create your own colors by mixing powdered color with pure cocoa butter. weblogic application server .. If you want to quit, you can leave whenever you want. snqs socks