Penn State Goings-On

[Ed Anger]

Wisconsin is licking its chops for upcoming year. No Ohio State and Penn State in contention in the Leaders (ugh) Division? 3 trash teams left? Bucky Badger is getting the rape van ready.

Surely with Urban Meyer Brutus will be invincible.

One year with no postseason.

After that, URBAN UBER ALLES.

[Valmy]

That's what it comes down to.  It's a criminal matter, there was criminal activity and there's no reason why the NCAA should be involved in something that isn't their business.  The presumption that somehow the NCAA can hand out justice in this type of matter is silly.

What exactly is not their business?  Their authority seems pretty vague and broad to me.

[grumbler]

This was, I think, a cultural and institutional failure that goes far beyond a head coach and President and AD.  As Ta-Nehisi Coates put it Sandusky and Paterno didn't bring shame on Penn State, but the university shamed itself through a wilful blindness.  I think they need to change the program, the priorities and the culture of the uni.  Sadly there will be people who did nothing wrong who'll be victims of that, but that's nothing new at Penn State.

I made this same argument, based on the same evidence, some pages back, so I'll agree with you that it says a lot about the culture at PSU's athletic department, and it should shame the administration into suspending the program for at least a year, to conduct a review and retrospection before performing a "restart."

Something like a "safety stand down" in the military or at a coal mine, but longer and more introspective.

Not gonna happen, though.  The rot is too deep.

[Rasputin]

 

Mob justice remains an oxymoron. A process in which the NCAA convenes an investigation, does not advise the defendant of the charges, fails to articulate its jurisdiction to address issues which never affected the eligibility of a player to be on the field, and then renders judgment without ever affording the defendant the opportunity to respond to anything, is, by definition, not due process.

When we deny the despicable due process we erode the guaranty that it will be there to protect the innocent. We step closer to mob rule. Group think exacerbated the problems at penn state. The mob remains, on the whole, intemperate, prone to error, and fickle.

We gave himmler and Speer the fundamental right to due process but we gleefully laugh at denying it to penn state. Perhaps this result was the right result but it was not just. Justice comes from a process that insures fundamental fairness --  justice is not and can never be a mere result.

[Valmy]

We gave himmler and Speer the fundamental right to due process but we gleefully laugh at denying it to penn state.

Well the NCAA might have denied it to them.

But why the shock and awe?  What is the difference between this and what the NCAA did to SMU or USC or anybody else?  And I thought they had vague jurisdiction over "institutional control' and 'ethical behavior'.  But I have not read the NCAA charter or whatever it is that is the source of their authority.

And in any case it will be the least of their problems.  The coming Civil Suits are what is going to smash them.

[Barrister]

Mob justice remains an oxymoron. A process in which the NCAA convenes an investigation, does not advise the defendant of the charges, fails to articulate its jurisdiction to address issues which never affected the eligibility of a player to be on the field, and then renders judgment without ever affording the defendant the opportunity to respond to anything, is, by definition, not due process.

When we deny the despicable due process we erode the guaranty that it will be there to protect the innocent. We step closer to mob rule. Group think exacerbated the problems at penn state. The mob remains, on the whole, intemperate, prone to error, and fickle.

We gave himmler and Speer the fundamental right to due process but we gleefully laugh at denying it to penn state. Perhaps this result was the right result but it was not just. Justice comes from a process that insures fundamental fairness --  justice is not and can never be a mere result.

I'm pretty sure PSU knew "what the charges" were.  It's jurisdiction has been spelled out.  The ability to "respond to charges" is a part of the court process, but is not necessarily a part of every disciplinary action.  If you're caught stealing from your employer you generally don't get a chance to plead your case before you're fired.

[MadImmortalMan]

The coming Civil Suits are what is going to smash them.

Definitely. Now that there is evidence for it I'm sure every lawyer in PA is calling the victims.

[Darth Wagtaros]

This was, I think, a cultural and institutional failure that goes far beyond a head coach and President and AD.  As Ta-Nehisi Coates put it Sandusky and Paterno didn't bring shame on Penn State, but the university shamed itself through a wilful blindness.  I think they need to change the program, the priorities and the culture of the uni.  Sadly there will be people who did nothing wrong who'll be victims of that, but that's nothing new at Penn State.

I made this same argument, based on the same evidence, some pages back, so I'll agree with you that it says a lot about the culture at PSU's athletic department, and it should shame the administration into suspending the program for at least a year, to conduct a review and retrospection before performing a "restart."

Something like a "safety stand down" in the military or at a coal mine, but longer and more introspective.

Not gonna happen, though.  The rot is too deep.

It'll more likely just create a feeling of victimization and anger.

[crazy canuck]

Mob justice remains an oxymoron. A process in which the NCAA convenes an investigation, does not advise the defendant of the charges, fails to articulate its jurisdiction to address issues which never affected the eligibility of a player to be on the field, and then renders judgment without ever affording the defendant the opportunity to respond to anything, is, by definition, not due process.

When we deny the despicable due process we erode the guaranty that it will be there to protect the innocent. We step closer to mob rule. Group think exacerbated the problems at penn state. The mob remains, on the whole, intemperate, prone to error, and fickle.

We gave himmler and Speer the fundamental right to due process but we gleefully laugh at denying it to penn state. Perhaps this result was the right result but it was not just. Justice comes from a process that insures fundamental fairness --  justice is not and can never be a mere result.

I'm pretty sure PSU knew "what the charges" were.  It's jurisdiction has been spelled out.  The ability to "respond to charges" is a part of the court process, but is not necessarily a part of every disciplinary action.  If you're caught stealing from your employer you generally don't get a chance to plead your case before you're fired.

BB, a fundamental tenant of administrative law is procedural fairness.  I agree with our distinguished southern gent that it was denied in this case.

Your example of an employers contractual right to fire for cause is problematic in an number of ways.  First, it is not an administrative decision akin to the one made here.  Second, and taking us off topic, if an employer does fire for cause without the employee getting a chance to explain they are just asking for a world of hurt in the form of damages and likely punative damages.

[sbr]

The NCAA based its punishments on the Freeh report.  That report was done by PSU and PSU accepted all of its findings.  Would PSU then come back and say that those things are now not true?

[Valmy]

BB, a fundamental tenant of administrative law is procedural fairness.  I agree with our distinguished southern gent that it was denied in this case.

But NCAA punishments have always had these qualities.  Why was it only denied in this particular case?

[crazy canuck]

BB, a fundamental tenant of administrative law is procedural fairness.  I agree with our distinguished southern gent that it was denied in this case.

But NCAA punishments have always had these qualities.  Why was it only denied in this particular case?

I am not familiar with other cases Valmy.  If this how things are regularly done then there is a fairly considerable systemic problem.

[alfred russel]

BB, a fundamental tenant of administrative law is procedural fairness.  I agree with our distinguished southern gent that it was denied in this case.

Your example of an employers contractual right to fire for cause is problematic in an number of ways.  First, it is not an administrative decision akin to the one made here.  Second, and taking us off topic, if an employer does fire for cause without the employee getting a chance to explain they are just asking for a world of hurt in the form of damages and likely punative damages.

Why does everything need to be based on a legal process? I think the process is, in general, time consuming, expensive, and often unjust. A group of colleges get together to compete in sports, one of them apparently tolerates raping boys in its showers to keep a competitive edge--why do you need a lengthy process with a bunch of lawyers for the rest of them to say, "if you want to keep competing with us, you need to do x,y, and z"?

[Valmy]

I am not familiar with other cases Valmy.  If this how things are regularly done then there is a fairly considerable systemic problem.

Wait you are claiming the process is unfair in this particular case when you have no knowledge of how the process normally works?  Surely that would be important if you are going to declare one instance unfair.

[crazy canuck]

BB, a fundamental tenant of administrative law is procedural fairness.  I agree with our distinguished southern gent that it was denied in this case.

Your example of an employers contractual right to fire for cause is problematic in an number of ways.  First, it is not an administrative decision akin to the one made here.  Second, and taking us off topic, if an employer does fire for cause without the employee getting a chance to explain they are just asking for a world of hurt in the form of damages and likely punative damages.

Why does everything need to be based on a legal process? I think the process is, in general, time consuming, expensive, and often unjust. A group of colleges get together to compete in sports, one of them apparently tolerates raping boys in its showers to keep a competitive edge--why do you need a lengthy process with a bunch of lawyers for the rest of them to say, "if you want to keep competing with us, you need to do x,y, and z"?

It is easy to ignore due process when one wishes to achieve a quick decision that would meet the approval of the vast majority.  Due process is hard.  It is also the most just process we have been able to devise.  If you want quick and expedient by all means ignore due process.  If you want good sound decision making you do so at your peril.

Based on what Valmy said, it seems this is not the first time.  I surmise from that fact that the NCAA proceeds in this way because it can.  That does not make it right. 

The other issue your question raises is an interesting one and that is to what extent should a domestic administrative process (ie one that does not derive its authority from statute) be required to comply with fundamental principles of procedural fairness.  Its a good question.  From a legal point of view a suppose the answer is there is no way to force them (going back to my observation that they ignore procedural fairness because they can) but if a domestic administrative body wishes to make good decisions then, again, they ignore procedural fairness at their peril and perhaps the members who make up the NCAA might be concerned about that.