|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Nov 29, 2011 22:51:10 GMT -5
Your way to close to this situation given this is your favorite school.
I cant compare 99.999999 blood evidence with getting sexual molestation corroboration, they just are not the same, one is a cinch and one is super difficult to prove.
You would think after the PSU scandal just weeks earlier that Boeheim would have been super cautious in backing his friend, I mean there were people at PSU who knew Sandusky the same amount of time yet had no idea (supposedly) like Tom Bradley.
I am not saying anything should happen to Boeheim but he just did what many other people who are family of the victims do in these cases, maybe its just natural.
|
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Nov 29, 2011 22:54:45 GMT -5
Compare to Carmello Anthony's statment
"My heart goes out to the families and that's it. I have no comment on the Fine situation or the Boeheim situation. That's a sensitive situation, a sensitive topic that I don't even want to go near."
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Nov 29, 2011 23:45:19 GMT -5
I'm close to the situation, but it really has little bearing on my feelings as I've repeatedly stated that we still need to know what Boeheim knew and if he should be accountable...fire him.
I'm far closer to the Syracuse police than the school given I have family and friends that work for the SPD and grew up in a neighborhood that had numerous members of the SPD as my neighbors.
Carmelo's statement was well after Boeheim's statement. And Carmelo...I would imagine...would not have known about the *4* different investigations and didn't know Fine for 50 years.
Boeheim also originally stated that he said he had no reason not to believe Fine...unless information came along that showed elsewise. And then Boeheim said he wouldn't believe him.
I don't know how that gets lost in the situation. How many investigations had to be done that came away with nothing before one thinks your friend of 50 years didn't do it?
10? 20? 50?
3JACK
|
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Nov 30, 2011 0:40:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Nov 30, 2011 8:40:15 GMT -5
Chancellor Cantor said his job is not at risk.
I think that unless they find that he probably knew of something and did nothing or let's say there was something very inappropriate going on that he allowed to happen...I don't think he's going anywhere.
I think there's a difference between Boeheim and Paterno that ESPN is obviously missing.
Paterno was holding these pep rallies of sorts in front of the stadium before practice and leading 'we are Penn State' chants in front of his house. I think the Board of Trustees told him to stop doing that. Then he made an unauthorized statement and said that the Board doesn't need to contemplate his status any longer because he was going to coach out the rest of the season and retire. I think Paterno lost any of his supporters on the Board when he did that...and they quickly fired him after that statement.
Boeheim claimed the accusers were liars. He certainly had reason to....4 different entities each did their own investigation and came up with nothing. He had known Fine for 50 years on top of that. I could see the point being made if only 1 investigation was done...although if it were done by reputable source like the police, I still think Boeheim was morally in his right to dispute the allegations. And even still, he has apologized and been contrite afterwards. He hasn't thrown a gauntlet down and while ESPN is trying to make SU like Penn State..there have been no riots, rallies, etc. at SU. Another thing that ESPN conveniently forgets.
Even still, Boeheim stated early on that if he had evidence showing to not trust Fine, he wouldn't trust him. Again...ESPN has neglected that.
I am bafffled that the victim's groups have not gone after ESPN at all in this. They had a very pertinent piece of information that the police could have used and didn't give it to the police. Had they given it to the University, I think the University would have at least fired Fine back in 2005.
The truth is that ESPN does not give a shit about the alleged victims and Bobby Davis. What they did was just as despicable as what Paterno, Curley and Schultz did. And they have admitted as such.
I think ESPN will go after Boeheim because as Deadspin put it...they were beaten to the punch badly on the Penn State scandal. And I think now that they've overreacted and jumped the gun....and Fine has yet to be arrested...they'll try to find to make anybody they can look worse. Hell, Paterno did the same thing.
I've come to the point now where I pretty much believe Davis...although I still have some questions, like:
1. Did Fine molest Davis as an underage boy or make advances to him as a legal age male (17 years old in NY)?
2. Was Laurie Fine alluding to Bernie making advances at a legal age male? If so, did Davis know this when he taped the conversation?
3. Is Zach Tomaselli (3rd accuser) telling the truth?
4. If not, did Tomaselli contact Davis several times before going to the police (as Jason Whitlock reported in his column)?
5. What is all of the information that ESPN and the Post-Standard know about the case?
3JACK
|
|
|
|
Post by cwdlaw223 on Nov 30, 2011 11:00:11 GMT -5
I've played golf with Boeheim and met him on more than one occassion. He always get a bad rap in the press because he looks like a sour puss. This seems like a made up scandal by ESPN and they know the story will only sell if they can bring Boeheim into the mess. Those guys who are making the allegations still look like they're on crack and it seems their stories weren't corroborated.
Go Cuse! Loved Gramaldis (sp?) and the 44 Club when I would visit!
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Nov 30, 2011 11:35:09 GMT -5
Unfortunately the old Grimaldi's is long gone.
I agree with you on Boeheim. I've met him and played golf with him on quite a few occasions. As Jay Bilas said about a week before the allegations broke...Boeheim takes his job seriously, but doesn't take himself seriously. That's really a perfect way to put it.
Obviously, Boeheim has been salty with the press before..although I think it's been warranted. There was the McNamara incident with the press where the school's own newspaper went out of its way to find Big East assistant coaches to say that McNamara was the most overrated player in the Big East, yet held these coaches anonymous. It's incredible that a school's newspaper would do that to fellow student who never did anything to warrant it. And Boeheim let the press know it was bullshit.
But, for every rant he's made, there are hundreds of times where he has a self depricating remark in press conferences.
He's not infallible by any means and neither is the program.
In fact, I've long admitted that as far as NCAA rules go...that program isn't clean. BUT, when it comes to breaking the law...the school doesn't put up with it anymore...no matter who you are. Look at the players who have gotten in trouble with the law recently and their outcomes. Hell, our best football player was recently suspended for the rest of the season. In fact, DA Fitzpatrick has gone on record *against* the *school* for how unfair they treat players who have allegedly broken the law.
Even with ALL of that being said...it does not really bother me if Boeheim had to be fired. I would be just as outraged if he was allowed to stay and pulled a Paterno. But at the same token...I should be outraged if he is fired for unjustly. And I think he was within his right of being outraged when this was brought up again after they found 0 against Fine after 4 different investigations.
My feeling with Davis is that as we've gone along...his story *appears* to be more and more true. I know Fine claimed that everything was patently false and even if he made advances when Davis was of legal age...everything was not patently false.
So when stuff like that happens...now I start to lean towards believing the accuser.
Still, if you read what the police described...they couldn't get the story corroborated or show any evidence. The statute had run out, but they still tried to get the story corroborated and get evidence and told Davis that if he had anything or wanted to pursue this further, he should meet them face-to-face. And given that he was in Utah, but still had friends and family in Syracuse...and never met up face-to-face, I could see the police thinking that there wasn't much they could do and that Davis may not be geniune.
And like I said, the entire thing changes if ESPN hands over that tape to the police.
So, that makes me wonder, why? It also makes me wonder why Davis didn't give them the tape.
Laurie Fine is accusing Davis of doctoring the tape (and she accused him of this back in 2005) and maybe he did that. It certainly seems like she is alluding to Bernie making advances of a legal age boy.
Also, Jason Whitlock reported that Tomaselli talked to Davis on several occasions before reporting it to the police. One cannot help but question if Tomaselli and Davis were trying to get their stories in line with each other.
I will say this about Tomaselli...he's from Rutland, NY when these allegations were made. I know that area pretty well as I used to date a girl who lived about 5 miles from that area. It's out in the middle of nowhere and it's a crappy drive in the winter time.
According to Google, it's 82 miles from Fine's house and equates to a 90 minute drive.
But, in the winter time, I can tell yout that drive can EASILY be a 3 hour drive.
My point is that I do believe that his father would know exactly what his son was doing in Syracuse because he would have to drive his son to the Carrier Dome because of the length of the drive and the often hazardous driving conditions.
Now, perhaps the father is a loon who hates his own son. But, I would tend to buy his credibility over his son...who recently was arrested for molesting a 14-year old boy himself. That provides his son with a motive to lie as well. And from the way the dad has talked, it seems like his son is a pathological liar.
So, if Davis and Tomaselli did talk to each other before Tomaselli went to the police...how did Tomaselli get in contact with Davis? What did they talk about?
And if Tomaselli is full of shit and Davis' step-brother is full of shit....where are the other victims?
All of these questions have to be answered.
3JACK
|
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Dec 1, 2011 14:25:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Dec 1, 2011 14:54:07 GMT -5
I completely agree with Cantor.
Like I've stated, I've never thought of Syracuse basketball, from a NCAA rules standpoint...to be a 'clean' program. But since 1995 or so, the school just doesn't put up with student-athletes that break the law. So much so that DA Fitzpatrick has gone on the radio and railed *against* Syracuse for their *unfair* treatment of those student-athletes who either break the law or have questions with the law.
The Billy Edelin case in 2001 was a perfect example. He was accused of sexual assault. But, he was never arrested. Why? Because as DA Fitzpatrick said...it was NOT a case of 'he said, she said'...it was a case of the accuser making the accusation and then telling the details to the DA and the DA saying 'that's not against the law.'
Essentially what happened (a friend of mine got involved when the accuser was at his frat house and first made this accusation to him and a couple of friends)...is that the accuser liked another player named Craig Forth who didn't want anything to do with her. She then thought if she banged Edelin, it would make Forth jealous. Which it didn't. Edelin then stopped returning her calls and in her words that constituted rape.
That's why DA Fitzpatrick didn't even arrest Edelin.
But...back to the point...Edelin still had to go in front of a judiciary review from the University...consisting of 3 SU Law students to decide his fate (and all 3 were female). And Edelin still got suspended from school. Furthermore, he wasn't allowed to have an attorney to defend him in the judiciary review.
The point being...when it comes to the law the University has been more overzealous to punish student-athletes. In fact, DA Fitzpatrick vowed to not allow that to happen again and now arrests those student-athletes just because if they are arrested, they are allowed to have an attorney to defend them in the judiciary review.
It's utterly ridiculous. But, the media wants you to believe that SU just let's anything slide for their basketball program which is hardly the case.
I just wonder where the outrage is against ESPN and the P-S from victims advocacy groups. Why there is nobody calling for the jobs of people at ESPN and P-S. Why there is no media camping out in front of their houses and their headquarters.
The P-S stated themselves that they ADVISED Davis to make the tape of him talking with Laurie Fine...but didn't feel it was necessary to advise him to turn the tape into the police or the University. Or to just hand in the tape themselves.
Outside of radio host Dino Costa and select sports fans...I haven't seen the outrage by anybody else towards ESPN and the P-S.
Personally...I think we need to call a spade a spade here. I think the P-S simply didn't believe Davis back in 2002. Neither did ESPN. And the taped phone conversation is ambiguous with regards to Bernie Fine molesting an under-age boy and Laurie Fine having seen it.
I think it's obvious that when the Sandusky scandal hit, ESPN saw the opportunity to get the scoop on this before everybody else and the P-S just didn't think they had enough evidence to go forward with this. ESPN didn't care. And I think ESPN saved this tape even after they initially broke this story because they knew it was ambiguous.
But, people started to really question Davis' story and in order to pump some credibility into it...they suddenly released the tape. All the meanwhile, the P-S just piggybacked on ESPN's report and went along with the bashing.
I actually believe Davis for the most part, although we really need to know if he molested him as an underage boy or made advances as a legal age adult. I think that starts with investigating Lang and Tomaselli's accusations.
It's funny because the NY Daily News found a big crack in Tomaselli's accusation, claiming that he took a bus with the team to Pittsburgh when the records show that the team flew to Pittsburgh after a road game at Tennessee. Yet, ESPN nor P-S will report that.
In the end, I think ESPN and the P-S have done more harm to Davis' case than they've done good. And I think they have never really given a shit about what has allegedly happened to him.
I personally feel bad for him, even if it was a legal age thing because the Fines took him in and forced themselves upon him and they had that position of authority and became somebody that Davis needed in their life. To me, that's reprehensible by itself.
And there is still a reasonable possibility that it can be *proven* that Bernie Fine never even made sexual advances and that Laurie Fine's interpretation was wrong and proven that Laurie Fine never indeed saw Bernie touch Davis...and that Lang and Tomaselli could be prove liars.
I'm not apt to believe it, but it could still reasonably turn out that way.
Like I stated when the Penn State scandal broke...once we forget that you're innocent until proven guilty, that's when things like the Duke Lacrosse scandal happen and innocent people get their lives terrorized. I wish people would not forget that.
3JACK
|
|
|
|
Post by gmbtempe on Dec 1, 2011 15:08:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Dec 1, 2011 16:34:29 GMT -5
I think that entire column speaks for itself. It's spin control for Schwarz.
He even says that they found Davis' story very credible back in 2003. Schwarz never answers why he didn't ask Fine before they reported the story.
It's not ESPN and Schwarz's duty to determine what is 'good evidence' and what is 'bad evidence.'
What's horribly ironic is that OTL and ESPN has done stories on the 'stop snitching' attitude that permeates the inner city, yet when they have very important evidence in their hands...they don't believe they need to hand it over to the authorities.
What if they were given plans of terrorist attacks on the US from an anonymous source? Would that not feel obligated to hand those to the authorities? Would they just say 'not my job"?
Something tells me that if the situation was on the other foot and it was Schwarz's kid that was molested and somebody had evidence and used the 'it's not my job to turn it into police' defense..I don't think he would like that too much.
They are just as bad as Joe Paterno, whether they want to admit it or whether they can grasp their hypocrisy. They just don't carry a clipboard and a whistle.
3JACK
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Dec 2, 2011 15:32:50 GMT -5
An article by ESPN. espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/7303172/vera-house-survivors-speak-syracuse-college-basketballI think the issue I have here is that O'Neil, who is employed by ESPN, didn't ask 3 very simple questions: 1. What should Boeheim have said in light of the accusation already having been investigate by the Post-Standard, ESPN, the Syracuse Police and SU and none of them came up with any hard proof and the people Davis told them would corroborate the story, didn't? What should Boeheim said differently, in light of that, which would have been better for everybody involved? 2. How should future accusations, particularly ones that are quite possibly false, should be handled? 3. What are their opinions on the Post-Standard and ESPN having the taped conversation and not handing it into the police and saying 'it's not our job to do so?' I agree, Jim Boeheim needs to be educated. Hell, I need to be educated and so do most people who have never been a victim of child molestation. But, by the same token people have lied about molestation accusations...be it for money, notoriety, mental illness, being deceived by psychologists, etc. We can't just go to one extreme and say that people cannot defend their friends who have been accused (and not even arrested at the moment). But, we need to understand a way to best handle these situation so people have the right to defend their friends that they believe in, but not scare away other victims in case these allegations are true. 3JACK |
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Dec 7, 2011 14:08:31 GMT -5
Just an update. The DA, William Fitzpatrick, had a press conference today on Bernie Fine.
- Said that he found both Davis and his step-brother's stories credible, but could not prosecute (presumably because statute of limitations).
- Condemned the Post-Standard for not handing the tape over, but never mentioned ESPN (don't know why).
- Said that even if he had the tape, they probably could not prosecute. I do get the point for wanting it, police could have used that tape to possibly get Fine to confess if he did any wrongdoing.
- Could not comment on Tomaselli accusation (3rd accuser) too much because it was out of his jurisdiction. Did mention that his accusation did *not* add up.
- Said that they had Tomaselli's school records that made the accusations *not* add up. Sounds like Tomaselli was at school the day after the Pittsburgh road trip when he would still be on the road traveling back home. Tomaselli's high school is very small, typical graduation class is about 20-30 people, so they would know if he was not in school or not.
- Said that Tomaselli did get nervous when they told him that they were going to be investigating the school records. If true, then it points to Tomaselli realizing that they had proof that he was lying.
- Said the 4th accuser's story doesn't have crediblity and he's been a lifelong criminal.
Now I think we come down to whether or not Fine molested Davis and Lang as children or made sexual advances towards them when they were legal.
I think the state law sorta contradicts itself. IIRC, NY State laws says that a person who is 21 years old cannot have sex with a person under the age of 17. I remember this because there was a case about this with a female teacher and a male student in regards to this matter. I also remember Sergei Federov being warned about this with Anna Kournikova years ago at the tennis US Open in NY.
But, I believe as far as 'molestation' goes, the law is up to 18 years of age.
So, it sounds like Bernie Fine could have made sexual advances at Davis at the age of 18...but, that would be considered 'molestation.' Whereas Laurie Fine could have had intercourse with Davis at 18 years old, and that would be perfectly legal.
Presuming that DA's statement about Tomaselli and the 4th potential accuser are true, the questions I would have:
A. Why did Davis never turn this tape into the police or the University?
B. Why did Lang never corroborate his own step-brother's story back from 2002 to 2005 when asked about it?
C. Why haven't any other accusers come forward? (I would think that an alleged child molestor with the access to children that Fine had would have tons of accusers, like Jerry Sandusky still has coming out now).
3JACK
|
|
