B*V
发帖数: 3365 | 1 PSU现在挣得另一个别名为Pedophile State University
http://l.yimg.com/dh/ap/default/120712/freeh_report_final_07121
Penn State could pay $100 million in civil damages to Sandusky's victims and
lose public funding
23 hours ago
Penn State supporters likely felt the university hit rock bottom Thursday
with the release of the Freeh Report, with its damning litany of evidence
that school leaders ignored and concealed horrific crimes against children.
But the cost to Penn State could be more severe than anyone imagined. The
university could eventually fork out more than $100 million to victims of
Jerry Sandusky's child molestation, experts say.
Although the Freeh Report is not a legal document, its findings following
the conviction of Sandusky, a former Nittany Lions defensive coordinator, on
45 counts of child molestation would make any civil trial difficult for the
school to win. Penn State already has encouraged victims to come forward
and settle, but now the victims will be encouraged (and many will say
justified) to come forward asking for millions of dollars.
"Penn State could get clobbered," said Norm Pattis, a leading trial lawyer
based in Connecticut who specializes in civil suits. "The plaintiff's theory
is not just that people were injured but that lives were ruined. It's not
uncommon to see behavioral problems. I think the damage claims could be very
significant."Graham Spanier's decisions might cost Penn State millions. (AP)
How significant?
"Five million apiece is a conservative estimate," Pattis said. "If I had one
of these plaintiffs, I'd hold out for a $10 million settlement and it would
take a lot of work to get me to do less."
Some experts feel that number is excessive, that six-figure settlements are
more likely. "Somebody said $10 million per victim," said legal expert
Michael McCann, director of the Sports Law Institute and professor of law at
Vermont Law School and a contributor for Sports Illustrated. "No, I don't
see where that number is from. When somebody dies, it's not that high."
But McCann acknowledges the real possibility that new victims could come
forward, emboldened by the courage shown by the victims who testified
against Sandusky. Fewer than a dozen took the stand, but one study found
that men who molest boys average 150 victims. "Let's face it," McCann said.
"There must be other victims. That's why Penn State should get closure."
Chicago-based attorney Andrew Stoltmann believes the cost to Penn State
could soar past $100 million in settlements – a number Pattis agrees with.
And that's the preferred path for the university because a trial not only
likely would lead to more ugly evidence against Joe Paterno and the school,
but could outrage a jury enough to award a victim tens of millions of
dollars in damages (though a legal procedure called remittitur allows a
judge to reduce a jury award deemed excessive).
University insurance could cover a large award, but the school's inaction
over the course of the past 14 years in stopping Sandusky's behavior may
threaten the coverage. "If you found high-level officials knew what was
going on," Drexel law professor Richard Frankel said, "it could give rise to
punitive damages. Then the university is on the hook for itself."
Asked by Yahoo! Sports columnist Dan Wetzel on Thursday if civil claims
could run into the hundreds of millions, Victim 1’s attorney, Michael Boni,
said, "I don't think that's out of the question."
Nor is further investigation out of the question. In fact, experts say, it's
likely. The Freeh Report showed evidence of a clear violation of the Clery
Act, which mandates a school report crimes on campus to the federal
government. That could cost Penn State tens of thousands of dollars in fines
. And then there's the possibility of NCAA violations, specifically articles
2.4 and 10.1 of the NCAA constitution, which insist on proper ethical
behavior on the part of coaches and school officials: "These values should
be manifest not only in athletics participation, but also in the broad
spectrum of activities affecting the athletics program."
The NCAA sent a letter to Penn State asking for answers to four key
questions related to the Sandusky scandal, and sports law expert Alan
Milstein thinks it's a foregone conclusion the NCAA will get involved. "If
Penn State is smart," he said, "they're going to self-punish and eliminate
the program for one year to avoid the death penalty."
Others believe that because this is a criminal issue and not a sports
concern, the NCAA will avoid interfering. Milstein vehemently disagrees. "
This is all about sports," he said. "All about protecting your sports empire
."
He predicts Penn State will "shut down" its football program temporarily and
allow athletes to transfer without penalty. If that happens, the school
obviously would suffer a serious financial hit.
Would all this irreparably damage the university? Probably not, as Penn
State's endowment is $1.8 billion. But unfortunately for the school, there's
another frightening scenario to think about, and it involves Title IX.
Most of us think of Title IX as federal legislation that ensures gender
equality, and that's true. But in a well-argued article for Justia.com last
year, Hofstra professor Joanna Grossman and Pittsburgh professor Deborah
Brake pointed out "Title IX's ban on sex discrimination clearly encompasses
sexual harassment, whether it is opposite-sex or same-sex, and sexual
assault and rape each constitute a severe form of sexual harassment, as well
as being criminal acts."
The authors cited a 1992 Supreme Court case, Franklin v. Gwinnett County
Public Schools, which allows a sexual harassment victim to sue for damages
based on Title IX. (It's difficult to argue the Sandusky victims were not
harassed.)
Grossman and Brake then tackled the issue of whether Sandusky victims can
sue under Title IX since they are not affiliated with the university. But
they noted the use of the word "person" in Title IX language: "No person in
the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be … subjected to
discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal
financial assistance …"
Since some of Sandusky's crimes occurred on university property, and were
enabled by his affiliation with the school – bowl trips for Second Mile
children – Grossman and Brake argued that "Title IX covers all programs of
a school, even when such programs take place away from school facilities,
including on a bus, field trip, or at another location."
In an interview with Yahoo! Sports, Grossman said, "There is going to be
some pressure on the Office of Civil Rights to investigate [a possible Title
IX investigation]. The Freeh report really calls upon them to look into it
because of what it says about the institutional culture." Joe Paterno, right
, and other Penn State officials were part of the problem. (AP)
Grossman and Brake concluded that Penn State is liable, citing Gebser v.
Lago Vista Independent School District, another Supreme Court case in which
it was ruled "a school is only liable for damages for harassment (or assault
) by a teacher if an official with authority to address the harassment has
actual notice of the harassment and responded with deliberate indifference."
The Freeh Report went a long way to establish "deliberate indifference" by
several Penn State officials with the authority to address the harassment.
Paterno, then-athletic director Tim Curley, then-university president Graham
Spanier and then-vice president Gary Schultz were found to have "repeatedly
concealed critical facts relating to Sandusky's child abuse."
Title IX has not been applied to a situation quite like this because there
hasn't been a situation quite like this. But now there is, and the U.S.
Department of Education already is investigating. Penn State, as with all
public universities, relies on government money. And a violation of Title IX
could have implications beyond civil suit payouts.
"They could lose federal funding," said one attorney in the counsel's office
of a major university, who requested anonymity. "It will bury the
institution. There will be no university without financial aid."
Is Penn State in jeopardy of surviving as an institution? Most experts say
no. But there is a price to pay for a total failure of leadership at one of
the nation's top universities. And that price will be enormous. |
|
