Penn State scorn versus Michigan State scorn

This is still the best post in this entire thread.

I've wanted to respond to this post, but have been attempting to find the best way to do so. I appreciate the attempt to help me get it, but I don't. In the first place, there's something wrong with people -- and yes, that includes the athletes, too -- and, even worse, their parents, essentially abdicating their control over their own lives and/or that of their children. This is exactly where the problem begins.

The minute I go to a doctor about my pulled hamstring or fractured ankle, and he starts doing an exam of my private parts, somebody's going to hear about it. The minute I (or the parents) decide to get a second opinion based on that BS pelvic exam and the still-untreated hamstring/ankle injury, to boot, and I come back with that doctor's recommendation/treatment and it is not accepted by Nassar or Geddert, well, somebody -- somebody above Nassar/Geddert -- is going to hear about it. Especially if it happens multiple times, with multiple athletes.

How does that not happen?

Not even considering any sexual-assault aspects of this case, that second point with regard to the athletes' actual, untreated injuries points to the kind of gross negligence of patient care, and even actual intent to harm in a way that reeks of coercion, and would seem to have been enough to cost Nassar his medical license, irrespective of any involvement in Olympic sports, by either him, or the athletes. Did no one think to go above Nassar/Geddert , or even completely outside of USA Gymnastics, to get this ball rolling?

I can't see any normal medical, legal or judicial representatives tolerating this, or allowing Olympics-related repercussions to come down on the athletes for speaking out.

I hope he does.

The more I read this story, the more disbelieving I get. At least some of the parents knew about this. It's incredible that they could have so relinquished their rights and responsibilities as parents -- particularly when they clearly could have found strength in numbers -- as their daughters have over the past couple of weeks -- a long time ago, and something could have and probably would have been done about it before now.

Those Olympic medals surely must seem tainted and devalued at this point. I'd have to wonder if it was all really worth it now.

 

It's bad enough the pressure gymnasts, young girls are put through - moving away, just hoping to stay and get a shot at the Olympics. I can't imagine a more manipulative situation for a child predator, let alone someone put in a position of trust like a doctor. It disgusts me, and the adults in charge more worried about causing a fuss, losing sponsors and donors cover it up.
Nasser can go away forever. Despicable.

That said - I do kind of get tired of judges showing how tough they are in their courtroom by taunting a convicted felon in front of TV cameras and protected by an armed bailiff. I have no sympathy for the convicted, but I think it is a bad look for the judiciary. Like a lecture is going to have any more impact than the 40 years to life? O.K. Your honor. NOW I get it. I'm sorry. Thanks for pointing out the error of my ways.Hell, most of these convicts probably enjoy getting a rise out of the judge.

 

I'm reminded of the mid-80s when San Francisco suspended its men's basketball program for a few seasons. But what would be the equivalent here?

 

AD, assistant ADs, coaches, anyone who received a complaint and didn't follow up.

 

Just so we're clear, now you are saying that any parents finding out that their daughters are being molested should take action immediately, doing everything possible to make sure it stops and to keep the perpetrator from ever doing it again. Right?

I'd be surprised as well if there were no parents who knew. The entire thing is just ugly as hell. Just had to clarify that one point with you.

 

Reports to MSU went back to 1998. She's been president since 2004.

Dr Larry Nassar timeline (LSJ)

She might have brazened some of that out, but what likely cooked her these last few weeks was this:

https://www.freep.com/story/news/2018/01/18/msu-simon-nassar-sentencing/1041942001/

 

What I did not know until this very morning is that the Michigan St. board of trustees is an elective office. If they're on the ballot in 2018, good luck.

 

Judges make harsh statements at sentencing every day in many more than one courtroom in this country. It's a common practice.

 

From the story:
The university hired a former federal prosecutor to conduct an internal investigation to discover who knew about Nassar's sexual assault allegations, and when they knew it. But Simon declined to make the findings of that investigation public.

The attorney the university hired wrote: "We believe the evidence will show no MSU official believed that Nassar committed sexual abuse prior to newspaper reports in late summer 2016."

And they took a page from the Baylor playbook:
A detailed summary of the findings, MSU told the state attorney general's office, were never put in writing. Therefore, there were no findings to divulge.

Good god, what a lack of leadership. What a lack of transparency. What a lack of decency. And these are our best and brightest. These are our leaders. They get paid the big bucks. And they are some of our worst humans.

 

I know, I guess I wish such pronouncements were a little less "personal sounding" and seemed more authoritarian, less passionate. The judge deserves all the credit for letting all the witness who wanted to speak, not just for justice, but to help them with their emotional healing - but really - there wasn't anything she was going to say that would have had any more impact than those statements.

As to the broader topic - in a lot of cases - the worst actually, a lot of the sentencing is taken out of the judges hands entirely and there is a matrix which proscribes the range the judge is too impose. The parole board decides if it's the short end or the long end. But judges do get the last word, and they do speak for the people, and I imagine most feel it is their obligation to summarize the public's view to the convict. And it won't hurt during elections or seeking a seat on a higher court.