Punishing the Innocent
A man commits a crime. A serious crime. An unforgivable crime. The man is tried and convicted by the legal system and is given what will amount to be life in prison. The victims are in court trying to get monetary reward for the crime committed against them. So far so good.
Then enters the NCAA. It puzzles me as to why they are even involved. Do we have three judicial systems in this country? I thought the NFL being a second judicial system was enough. Frankly, I could care less whether Penn State ever wins another football game since I am not a Penn State fan. But I don't really understand what part the football players or the students or the faculty have to do with this crime. On what basis are they being punished and how can this punishment be done outside our own established legal system? Why do we need to generate hundreds or thousands more victims of this crime? Is this some kind of sacrificial offering in hopes the 'Gods', whoever they might be in this case ( I guess the public), will be placated?
I have been to Penn State. It is in the middle of nowheres and it's football program may have been it's biggest attraction. It is a state university. Why don't we punish the state too then for allowing this crime to occur in their state at one of their universities? Maybe Pennsylvanians should lose the right to vote for X number of years and pay a huge fine to the United States Treasury. It also occurred in our own country. Maybe all of us should have to pay a fine of some sort just like the taxpayers of Pennsylvania. Fine the University? Isn't that fining the people of Pennsylvania and the parents who pay money for their kids to go there?
"Well look", some might say, "we need to teach Penn State University that behavior like this will not be tolerated. Some officials at the University covered up this crime." Okay, then why is it not our established legal system that meters out any punishment to them? Let's be real here. The NCAA is just trying to create an image of such an angelic and just operation. I grant they are certainly entitled to try to create any image they want, but I don't think they should be granted the powers given to our legal system. "Look", some might say, "if this action by the NCAA puts a stop to covering up this sort of thing, then what they did is a good thing." So, if such a coverup by such a serious crime occurs again, does Penn State get it's money back, it's lost students, it's lost football program back again? I thought the NCAA was about athletics, not University governance outside sports. As usual with these powerful sport authorities, it's all about image, seldom about fairness or justice.
I could understand universities setting up committees to find ways to better stop any coverups. Anyone who has ever worked at a University knows nothing has changed outside of these fines and punishments to Penn State. Absolutely nothing. A student is emotionally disturbed and potentially dangerous to others, a coach is suspected of behaving inappropriately with kids, a faculty member is sexually coming on to students, whatever. So in any such cases maybe a faculty member mentions this to their Chairperson. That is what they are supposed to do. If they take it on themselves to handle, they are going to be held accountable for the subsequent commotion. Now the Chairperson is not going to stick their neck out either for the same reason, no University wants a Chairperson who lets their department be embroiled in such nasty scandals. So it goes to the Dean, then the Vice-President then the President---who, with no one left to pass the buck, passes it back down to a lesser administrator. They will probably turn it over to the campus police. The campus police get gold stars for keeping any kind of crimes on campus under the radar. Just like the NCAA, image is everything. In a case as shocking as the Sandusky case, the campus police may turn it over to the regular police, which they did, and the regular police notify the attorney general, which they did, and the the attorney general investigates, and after conferring with University officials, decides there is not enough evidence to go to court. Even if there might be, the State Attorney general is under all sorts of political pressure to not open a can of worms if, based on the evidence at hand, the case is weak. Of course the Attorney General could look for more evidence but he likes his job so he decides not to.
Most everyone would agree there are specific individuals in this chain which deserve to be punished albeit there would be differences of opinions as to who deserves punishment. Certainly the Attorney General does, and all the others can state they reported the problem to exactly the person to whom they were suppose to report the problem. It will be exactly what happens to these university and state officials in our legal system which impacts on how others handle situations like this in the future. The NCAA actions mean exactly nothing except for the damage done to innocent football players, the taxpayers of Pennsylvania, the ability of Penn State to attract students, etc.
Everything today is damage control and image. These are actually billion dollar industries----image and damage control. They (the NCAA) think they have shown the public how tough they are, how moral they are, how ethical they are. Hell, all they have shown is how they too, given a perceived need to do so, can victimize innocent people.
