Penn State Child Molestation Scandal

So you're saying individuals or in PaJoe's case his estate will not be at risk?

 

Almost certainly not since they were acting within the scope of their respective positions. Unless there's something going on that I don't know about, the insurance will extend to them. They have to have acted outside their employment for the insurance to deny responsibility.

 

Wow I just always remember sitting in court waiting for my hearing or whatever to start and hearing people suing everyone- the church, the pastor, the clerical staff, the maintenance man etc... You can replace school officials or day care providers with church employees depending on the case.

I'm not questioning you, I'm certain you know your business. Just a little surprised is all.

 

I'm assuming you mean me. If not, the following is irrelevant to the thread.

You can sue anyone for anything. The two questions for me are "is there any merit to the claim" and "is this a covered loss". The first question has a tragic answer. The second is more complicated. Assuming that the attorneys want to collect insurance money (which are deeper pockets) as opposed to endowment money (which cripples the institution, possibly permanently), they'll make their allegations in the civil suits in a such a way that the insurance companies are forced into the picture. They'll name all the conspirators personally in the suit, along with the institution, but that's irrelevant to the insurance coverage. Insurance contracts automatically extend coverage to any employee named in a suit provided that they were acting in the scope of their employment. That's the point of this kind of coverage - if your carpenter employee drops a hammer on someone else (who's not your employee), they need the insurance protection from you.

/possibly irrelevant comment.

 

Yes my question was meant for you. I just failed to hit "reply" when posting it.

I get it now, makes sense. I never paid that much attention to civil matters in court. I used to listen a little but after a while it all sounds like "blah, blah, blah." Some times divorce hearings would be funny. Ok, she gets the pool outright but he insists on getting the lights out of it first. She got the house. We're they going to move the pool to give it to him? And whats he going to do with used pool lights? Most of the time it's just boring. I remember getting a new cell phone once and it had some lame game where you tried to 'snake around the screen without ever running into yourself and the tail would get larger and larger. Stupid, stupid game but made no noise and helped me pass many hours sitting in courtrooms waiting for my cases.

 

That makes his death even more convenient for them. Regardless of what he did or didn't do (in other words, it's possible that the Freeh Report unfairly accuses JoePa), he's not available for rebuttal.

Or it's entirely possible that he should have been put out to dry a long, long time ago.

 

I know, Borla, I'm just pointing out that he's a convenient scapegoat under the circumstances.

That said, he was also the face of the institution for decades, so I doubt that he's being trashed because he's a convenient scapegoat. I have no reason to doubt anything in the Freeh Report.

 

Sad really sad.

Oh and I've been posting PaJoe when I guess it's JoePa... I told you I was dyslexic. My dab, sorry.

 

Deadspin has a handy page with all the stuff from the Freeh Report including some of their own take.

Everything You Need To Know About Louis Freeh's Damning Report On Penn State [Updating]

 

wait. are you saying that there are problems with big-time college sports?
like warped priorities? ethics challenges? insularity and excessive power? an ncaa that is a joke as a regulatory body? universities that are all too willing to look the other way because of the big big money these programs bring in, particularly when you consider every televised game a new branding opportunity?
and that this sort of institutional situation may be general conditions of possibility for the sort of behaviours we are finding out about in penn state's football program?

heavens to betsy!

and that nothing, at all, will change about those general conditions of possibility because now it's all about the particular individuals in this particular program...and you can almost hear the ncaa breathing a sigh of relief on release of the freeh report?

 

The NCAA is in a precarious position here. If there's a Federal investigation into the conspiracy, it basically gives them no choice but to give the program the Death Penalty.

 

right, but this would amount to the "bad apple" syndrome, the particularization of significant problems that are systemic on a specific program. the logic typically runs that once the bad apples are purged, the system is understood as corrected. that's self-evidently not the case here.

i should make it clear that i'd like to see the entire edifice of big-time collegiate sports brought down. not that i oppose the sports themselves. but this is obviously not about the sports themselves. it's about the institutional/corporate edifice that's grown up around them. this is a rare opportunity to smash the whole thing. i hope it happens. as obvious and deep-seated as were the particular problems at penn state in their football program, i still sense this whole thing moving from the general to the specific in a way that's not great. but, like i said, i think that education would benefit from the destruction of this sort of sports empire in general. your results may vary.