I’d like to personally thank Pennsylvania media outlets who petitioned the court to open records in the Penn State vs. Pennsylvania Manufactures’ Association court case.
While the documents revealed nothing verifiable about knowledge of Sandusky’s crimes, they did shed light on some crucial information about the Penn State board of trustees and how they’ve been operating behind their iron curtain.
First, it is quite astonishing that Penn State attorneys actually argued against the veracity of the conclusions of the Freeh report given that, to date, any attempts by alumni or community members to challenge the report have been met with staunch rebuke. In fact, former trustee Ken Frazier chastised one alumnus, stating “The fact of the matter is, those documents say what they say and no amount of hand waving can ever change what those documents say.”
How is it possible that Penn State could accept the Freeh report “for purposes of the consent decree,” which cost Penn State $60 million and punished innocent athletes, but refute it when attempting to reclaim $93 million from the insurer?
Also revealed in the document release was the revelation that the committee assigned to handle the Sandusky settlements, headed by Ira Lubert, did little to no vetting of the claims. No one at Penn State has been convicted of any crime that would make the university liable. Nevertheless, more money was paid out to 32 claimants than was paid by the Archdiocese of Boston for crimes committed against 500 victims.
Something doesn’t add up.
Linda Berkland, Marysville, Ohio