Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo

Syracuse assistant Bernie Fine Molestation Investigation


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
201 replies to this topic

#51 Tyrone Biggums


  • nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion in colorado,


  • 3,557 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 12:39 PM

What a strange, strange recording. We learned that Bernie Fine is gay and that he and Laurie Fine had no physical relationship. We also learned that Laurie Fine slept with Davis. Basically, we learned that the Fine family was anything but fine and, in fact, quite strange.

The dates and ages are a bit unclear in this recording. But it certainly makes Laurie Fine a witness or perhaps even an accomplice.


The problem is, they have her on tape now warning the guy to stay away from him. Also she slept with the accuser as well, knowing all of this it leads me to two conclusions.

1) If this audio recording is admissible in court then Fine is going to do some serious time, it depends what state it was recorded in. I'm assuming it was New York, I'm not up to date on the laws about tape recordings taken in New York State.

2) Jim Boeheim will not make it through the season, hes done.

#52 bosockboy


  • SoSH Member


  • 7,010 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 12:44 PM

Deadspin says the recordings were legal.

#53 Tyrone Biggums


  • nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion in colorado,


  • 3,557 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 12:50 PM

Deadspin says the recordings were legal.


If that's the case then I'm sure they'll be working on a package for Boeheim soon for him to exit without dealing with the shit that happened at Happy Valley.

#54 mrcleanwell

  • 716 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 12:58 PM

On the call, Laurie Fine told Davis she'd already warned her husband that one day his alleged molestation of Davis might become public.

"I said to him, 'Bobby and I talked, and I know some things about you that if you keep pushing are going to be let out.' "

Davis continued: "He doesn't think he can be touched ... "

Laurie Fine: "No ... he thinks he's above the law."

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/7286347/otl-audio-tape-syracuse-orange-assistant-bernie-fine-wife-admits-worries-abuse

Wow. This situation just went from a seemingly baseless accusation to a near definite case of molestation.

#55 Dehere

  • 2,440 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 01:57 PM

2) Jim Boeheim will not make it through the season week, hes done.

Edited the quote above. I'd put the over/under on his termination (or resignation) as a week from today. It's over.



#56 bosox4283

  • 2,567 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 02:14 PM

Edited the quote above. I'd put the over/under on his termination (or resignation) as a week from today. It's over.


The problem, as pointed out by Yahoo! Sports, is that Boeheim publicly attacked the accusers. It seems like, for him to escape any sort of punishment, he will have to rescind his scathing comments and publicly distance himself from Fine.

#57 ivanvamp


  • one campus at a time..


  • 4,476 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 02:48 PM

The problem, as pointed out by Yahoo! Sports, is that Boeheim publicly attacked the accusers. It seems like, for him to escape any sort of punishment, he will have to rescind his scathing comments and publicly distance himself from Fine.


He's already kind of done that. This comment from (http://espn.go.com/m...ant-bernie-fine):

"We have to see what happens. I support Bernie, as I said," Boeheim said. "Known him for 50 years. If something else happens, surfaces -- some factual thing -- then we'll have to adjust to that."

In the video on that espn story, Boeheim said he knows of nothing that has happened. Obviously it could be a lie. But it might not be. There was a situation here in CT where two friends of decades were also business partners. It turned out that one of them was involved in an immoral sexual relationship with someone from work - and the other friend was completely blindsided by it - had NO idea it was going on. The other guy was able to hide it until it came out somehow (I don't know how it surfaced).

Boeheim is under no suspicion here. There was an investigation (several, actually), and nothing was found. Boeheim cooperated fully. If Fine is guilty, again, it's possible Boeheim is lying, but it's also possible that he really didn't know what was going on. Like the example I just gave, though it may seem hard to believe, it is possible for a guy to think he knows one of his best friends so well that there's nothing that can be kept secret...and yet it was (and can be).

There would need to be some reason to believe that Boeheim knew about it and did nothing about it. Unlike the Sandusky thing where it's clear that Paterno knew something was going on, in the Syracuse case, we have no evidence at all that Boeheim knew what was going on.

#58 Tyrone Biggums


  • nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion in colorado,


  • 3,557 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 04:34 PM

He's already kind of done that. This comment from (http://espn.go.com/m...ant-bernie-fine):

"We have to see what happens. I support Bernie, as I said," Boeheim said. "Known him for 50 years. If something else happens, surfaces -- some factual thing -- then we'll have to adjust to that."

In the video on that espn story, Boeheim said he knows of nothing that has happened. Obviously it could be a lie. But it might not be. There was a situation here in CT where two friends of decades were also business partners. It turned out that one of them was involved in an immoral sexual relationship with someone from work - and the other friend was completely blindsided by it - had NO idea it was going on. The other guy was able to hide it until it came out somehow (I don't know how it surfaced).

Boeheim is under no suspicion here. There was an investigation (several, actually), and nothing was found. Boeheim cooperated fully. If Fine is guilty, again, it's possible Boeheim is lying, but it's also possible that he really didn't know what was going on. Like the example I just gave, though it may seem hard to believe, it is possible for a guy to think he knows one of his best friends so well that there's nothing that can be kept secret...and yet it was (and can be).

There would need to be some reason to believe that Boeheim knew about it and did nothing about it. Unlike the Sandusky thing where it's clear that Paterno knew something was going on, in the Syracuse case, we have no evidence at all that Boeheim knew what was going on.


And I believe that he probably didn't know what was going on, however, its guilt by association. Boeheim is finished, he's a great basketball coach and whether he knew about it or not the fact that it was going on for decades means hes through at Syracuse. I think he'll at least be able to have some control over his successor unlike Paterno.

#59 ivanvamp


  • one campus at a time..


  • 4,476 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 05:13 PM

And I believe that he probably didn't know what was going on, however, its guilt by association. Boeheim is finished, he's a great basketball coach and whether he knew about it or not the fact that it was going on for decades means hes through at Syracuse. I think he'll at least be able to have some control over his successor unlike Paterno.


I'm not at all convinced of this. Everyone thought Paterno swept this under the rug. I haven't heard anyone suggest that Boeheim has even come close to doing anything wrong.

Also, Mike Hopkins has already been named JB's successor, several years ago in fact.

#60 JBill

  • 1,944 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 07:00 PM

Transcript: http://www.syracuse....excerpts_f.html

Laurie: He’d always say, ‘Bobby and I are going in the Jacuzzi.’ And I’d go to the bathroom and I’d try to come in. The door’d be locked. I’d check: ‘What's going on?’ ‘Nothing.’ I said, ‘Unlock the door.’ ‘No, we’re in our underwear.’
Bobby: So, it’s not me, it’s him.
Laurie: I understand that. You don’t have to explain to me.
Bobby: I’m trying to convince myself.
Laurie: Convince yourself. You did nothing wrong. You did nothing wrong, and you were a child, and he took advantage of that. And with Bernie there’s a price tag on everything. If he does for you, it’s like he records it in a book and you better do it for him.


So Mrs. Fine knew, did nothing, and then went on to have an affair with the victim? What in the fuck?

If Boeheim had followed his university's lead and said nothing, or very little other than to wait for the investigation, I think he would be feeling less heat. But he publicly called the accusers money grubbing liars.

#61 Greg29fan


  • SoSH Member


  • 13,188 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 07:57 PM

Bernie Fine has been fired, effective immediately

http://espn.go.com/m...ion-allegations

#62 ivanvamp


  • one campus at a time..


  • 4,476 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 08:20 PM

Transcript: http://www.syracuse....excerpts_f.html



So Mrs. Fine knew, did nothing, and then went on to have an affair with the victim? What in the fuck?

If Boeheim had followed his university's lead and said nothing, or very little other than to wait for the investigation, I think he would be feeling less heat. But he publicly called the accusers money grubbing liars.


Two things: (1) I think he thought they *were* money-grubbing liars. Either he is lying through his teeth (which is possible) or he is as shocked as the rest of us about this (which is also possible, and would explain his defiance). And (2) honestly, I haven't really seen Boeheim take much heat at all. Have you?

#63 JBill

  • 1,944 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 08:32 PM

Two things: (1) I think he thought they *were* money-grubbing liars. Either he is lying through his teeth (which is possible) or he is as shocked as the rest of us about this (which is also possible, and would explain his defiance).


I don't think he knew about the abuse. And I understand that he was defending his friend, but he went about eight steps too far by attacking the accusers. That was everyone's reaction, that Boeheim better be right.

And (2) honestly, I haven't really seen Boeheim take much heat at all. Have you?

Just since the tape came out today. If I were a Syracuse alum, I'd be pleased the university has been reacting with lightening speed so far and is staying in front of the story as much as possible.

#64 ivanvamp


  • one campus at a time..


  • 4,476 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 08:38 PM

I don't think he knew about the abuse. And I understand that he was defending his friend, but he went about eight steps too far by attacking the accusers. That was everyone's reaction, that Boeheim better be right.


Just since the tape came out today. If I were a Syracuse alum, I'd be pleased the university has been reacting with lightening speed so far and is staying in front of the story as much as possible.


I am an SU alum (I have stated that already...it's not news) and I am happy with how they've handled it. Including firing Fine in light of this new information. I'm still not ready to implicate Boeheim yet until I learn more.

#65 bsj


  • Renegade Crazed Genius


  • 15,461 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 08:52 PM

I don't think he knew about the abuse. And I understand that he was defending his friend, but he went about eight steps too far by attacking the accusers. That was everyone's reaction, that Boeheim better be right.


Just since the tape came out today. If I were a Syracuse alum, I'd be pleased the university has been reacting with lightening speed so far and is staying in front of the story as much as possible.


As a Syracuse alum there is very little about this situation I am pleased about. This is completely devastating on a number of levels.

That said, I get your point...and I agree. To date, every time the evidence has even approached a threshold they have reacted properly.

I really hope that Boeheim manages his way through this, but right now I think it is 50/50. I think he needs to come out, disavow all knowledge of this, apologize profusely for allowing his emotions and the words of his longtime friend to cloud his judgement and lead him to say things like the "thousand lies" comment...to say that only the accuser and Bernie know the truth yada yada yada...

Really just awful.

#66 bsj


  • Renegade Crazed Genius


  • 15,461 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 08:56 PM

Boeheim, via a statement from the University...

“The allegations that have come forth today are disturbing and deeply troubling. I am personally very shocked because I have never witnessed any of the activities that have been alleged. I believe the university took the appropriate step tonight. What is most important is that this matter be fully investigated and that anyone with information be supported to come forward so that the truth can be found. I deeply regret any statements I made that might have inhibited that from occurring or been insensitive to victims of abuse.”



#67 JimD

  • 4,688 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 08:58 PM

I'm not at all convinced of this. Everyone thought Paterno swept this under the rug. I haven't heard anyone suggest that Boeheim has even come close to doing anything wrong.


I agree with this. Boeheim also reacted the way you'd expect someone to react if they thought the allegations were horseshit.

To date, the main difference also between the Fine case and the Sandusky case is that there is no evidence that the alleged behavior continued after the university became aware of the accusations and did their investigation. Obviously, if this changes, all bets are off.

FWIW, the third accuser is under sexual molestation charges of his own. I haven't read a lot about this yet, but there is certainly reason for suspicion about his sudden desire to come forward.

#68 JBill

  • 1,944 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 09:08 PM

Statement from the Chancellor:

Dear Students, Faculty, & Staff:

Tonight, in the wake of troubling new allegations that emerged in the media today, I am writing to let you know that Bernie Fine’s employment at the University has been terminated effective immediately.

Frankly, the events of the past week have shaken us all. The taped phone call that ESPN revealed today was not provided to the University by Mr. Davis during the 2005 investigation by our legal counsel. Like the media review of the case a few years earlier, no other witnesses came forward during the university investigation, and those who felt they knew Bernie best could not imagine what has unfolded.

Since I last wrote to you, we have been cooperating fully with the authorities. On Friday, November 18, as the District Attorney has noted, we turned over to his office the results of our 2005 months-long investigation. Also on November 18, our Board of Trustees retained an independent law firm, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, to review our procedures in responding to the initial allegations when they first came to the University’s attention. I fully supported that decision and it is vital that we examine our protocols and actions in dealing with such serious allegations. We need to learn all we can from this terrible lesson.

All of us have the responsibility, individually and collectively, to ensure that Syracuse University remains a safe place for every campus community member and everyone with whom we interact on a daily basis on campus or in the community as part of our learning, scholarship, or work. We do not tolerate abuse. If anything good comes out of this tragedy, it will be that this basic principle is reinforced.

Sincerely,

Nancy Cantor


http://syr.edu/news/...sage-11-27.html

#69 julesfan

  • 27 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 09:57 PM

I agree with this. Boeheim also reacted the way you'd expect someone to react if they thought the allegations were horseshit.

To date, the main difference also between the Fine case and the Sandusky case is that there is no evidence that the alleged behavior continued after the university became aware of the accusations and did their investigation. Obviously, if this changes, all bets are off.

FWIW, the third accuser is under sexual molestation charges of his own. I haven't read a lot about this yet, but there is certainly reason for suspicion about his sudden desire to come forward.


I get that the accusers seem somewhat shady, but the phone call between the wife and one of the accusers really leaves little doubt that Fine was a pedophile, does it? And didn't the University do their own investigation back in 2005 and declare there was nothing there? I mean, did they interview the wife I wonder? I don't know, this just all seems as sordid as Penn State, maybe just on a smaller scale.

#70 ivanvamp


  • one campus at a time..


  • 4,476 posts

Posted 27 November 2011 - 10:46 PM

I get that the accusers seem somewhat shady, but the phone call between the wife and one of the accusers really leaves little doubt that Fine was a pedophile, does it? And didn't the University do their own investigation back in 2005 and declare there was nothing there? I mean, did they interview the wife I wonder? I don't know, this just all seems as sordid as Penn State, maybe just on a smaller scale.


It's possible that they did ask her and she denied it. After all, she hasn't exactly been forthcoming about it presently....it's just that this private phone conversation, that was obviously recorded without her knowing, was made public.

Seems to be no doubt that Fine did some horrible things. But holy cow, what a seriously messed up situation. He molests this kid, who then has an affair with his wife, tells Fine about it, and.....he doesn't seem upset by it. Freaking bizarro world.

#71 bosox4283

  • 2,567 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 06:10 AM

It is an incredibly bizarre case. It is even strange that this was the first time the tape was revealed...nine years after it was recorded, after Davis went to the police, and after Syracuse conducted an investigation.

#72 ivanvamp


  • one campus at a time..


  • 4,476 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 06:13 AM

It is an incredibly bizarre case. It is even strange that this was the first time the tape was revealed...nine years after it was recorded, after Davis went to the police, and after Syracuse conducted an investigation.


And Davis had said the reason he made the recording was so that others would be sure to believe his charges. Very weird.

#73 Average Reds


  • SoSH Member


  • 10,529 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 06:16 AM

Just to remind everyone, here what Jim Boeheim said when this broke:

"The Penn State thing came out, and the kid behind this is trying to get money. He's tried before. And now he's trying again. If he gets this, he's going to sue the university and Bernie. What do you think is going to happen at Penn State? You know how much money is going to be involved in civil suits? I'd say about $50 million. That's what this is about. Money."


When the smoke clears, Jim Boeheim is going to get exactly what he deserves.

#74 ivanvamp


  • one campus at a time..


  • 4,476 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 06:20 AM

Just to remind everyone, here what Jim Boeheim said when this broke:



When the smoke clears, Jim Boeheim is going to get exactly what he deserves.


If that's what he truly thought this was about, what, exactly, does he "deserve"? But the truth is, I hope he gets what he deserves. If he deserves to be fired in disgrace, that's what should happen. If he is just a guy blindsided by his best friend, then he doesn't deserve to be fired in disgrace, and if that's true, I hope he doesn't lose his job.

We'll find out. Meanwhile, interesting article here:

My link

One quote: "Again: We don't know what else will emerge. But Fine's accuser says Boeheim didn't know Fine was a pedophile." So this is still night and day from the Paterno situation, other than the fact that there was child sexual abuse (which is horrifying)....in other words, how SU has handled this is totally different than Penn State, and the Boeheim/Paterno situations are opposite as well. Paterno covered up what he knew. Boeheim, according to even Davis, had no idea this was going on. So his outrage and shock appear to be real.

But we'll see.

#75 bsj


  • Renegade Crazed Genius


  • 15,461 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 06:33 AM

Just to remind everyone, here what Jim Boeheim said when this broke:



When the smoke clears, Jim Boeheim is going to get exactly what he deserves.


Ordered by Cantor to make a sizeable donation to a victim's relief fund? Take some sensitivity training?

Paterno KNEW this was happening and let it continue. He got fired. Boeheim deserves the same as THAT?

Boeheim didn't know anything about it until after the fact. And then 9 years AFTER a police investigation AND University investigation cleared him, he made these comments in defense of a friend he felt like was being dragged through the mud again. They were stupid, premature, and emotion driven. But frankly, they were actually sort of understandable in light of the timing and previous events.

That said...he WILL get exactly what he deserves. I just think that is a lot less than you probably do. Is it possible he gets canned? Absolutely...then that would be a punishment well out of line with what he deserves.

Edited by bsj, 28 November 2011 - 06:33 AM.


#76 ivanvamp


  • one campus at a time..


  • 4,476 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 06:40 AM

Ordered by Cantor to make a sizeable donation to a victim's relief fund? Take some sensitivity training?

Paterno KNEW this was happening and let it continue. He got fired. Boeheim deserves the same as THAT?

Boeheim didn't know anything about it until after the fact. And then 9 years AFTER a police investigation AND University investigation cleared him, he made these comments in defense of a friend he felt like was being dragged through the mud again. They were stupid, premature, and emotion driven. But frankly, they were actually sort of understandable in light of the timing and previous events.

That said...he WILL get exactly what he deserves. I just think that is a lot less than you probably do. Is it possible he gets canned? Absolutely...then that would be a punishment well out of line with what he deserves.


I agree with the sentiment you express here, but I don't know about the bolded part. I think it's totally possible that he knew nothing about this, reacted emotionally like you described, in defense of a friend he felt like was being unfairly accused in light of the Penn State situation, and now has just realized that he's probably wrong and that his friend of 50 years is, in fact, a freaking pedophile...and in light of that, he (Boeheim) looks totally stupid and insensitive and it appears to some that he's been covering something up. And his most recent comments reflect a guy who has been taken totally by surprise by all of this and he's been blindsided as much as anybody.

And yet...I am more and more of the belief that he could be fired for this. Why? Because Cantor - who has done a really good job handling this so far, IMO - values her job more than his, and I could easily see her sacrificing him to take any heat (in the form of public pressure....I don't think for a moment that her job is at stake). Boeheim could end up being a very real casualty in all this as well.

#77 Tyrone Biggums


  • nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion in colorado,


  • 3,557 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 06:55 AM

I feel that Boeheim and the AD will be gone. The fact that there isn't proof that Boeheim knew about it will allow him to resign and not be fired. We might see a complete staff overhaul there as well, and its not because of any massive coverup but its because of public perception. If they keep anyone on that staff there, then people will never accept anything less than a complete house cleaning and cause a ruckus. Its not a matter of IF Boeheim is getting canned, but when. I still think the motives from Mr. Davis is less than genuine, but he was a victim so in my opinion he has a right to get whatever he wants. However, if he had this tape in 2002 and it was clearly audible why wait until AFTER the Penn State thing. If you really wanted justice, why not go to the authorities with the tape? He came to them with allegations with no proof in hand, when in reality he had a phone confession...not bright. Once these civil suits get settled, lots of former disgruntled employees are going to come out against their former coaches/employers, probably will be tough to tell whose lying and who was a victim.

#78 Average Reds


  • SoSH Member


  • 10,529 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 07:25 AM

And yet...I am more and more of the belief that he could be fired for this. Why? Because Cantor - who has done a really good job handling this so far, IMO - values her job more than his, and I could easily see her sacrificing him to take any heat (in the form of public pressure....I don't think for a moment that her job is at stake). Boeheim could end up being a very real casualty in all this as well.


This is precisely what I was getting at, although I disagree with the characterization that Boeheim would be a scarifice.

Based on what we know now, my perspective is that the scandal at Penn State is directly related to the University President believing that getting rid of Sandusky back in 1999 was the extent of his responsibilities. (Hence his phrase when the news broke about him supporting the actions of the AD in dealing with a matter of a "former university employee.") When the second incident came up in 2002, the institution put on blinders, and they are all paying the price now.

From what we know in the Syracuse case, there wasn't a very thorough investigation when this was first reported. And when the same allegations went public years later and more people supported the story of the accuser, Boeheim decided to attack the victim. And by doing that, he placed himself and the University at considerable risk if he turned out to be wrong.

My guess is that Cantor will do her job here. And given the rashness of his earlier statements, I don't see how Jim Boeheim comes out of this as the coach.

#79 ivanvamp


  • one campus at a time..


  • 4,476 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 07:58 AM

This is precisely what I was getting at, although I disagree with the characterization that Boeheim would be a scarifice.

Based on what we know now, my perspective is that the scandal at Penn State is directly related to the University President believing that getting rid of Sandusky back in 1999 was the extent of his responsibilities. (Hence his phrase when the news broke about him supporting the actions of the AD in dealing with a matter of a "former university employee.") When the second incident came up in 2002, the institution put on blinders, and they are all paying the price now.

From what we know in the Syracuse case, there wasn't a very thorough investigation when this was first reported. And when the same allegations went public years later and more people supported the story of the accuser, Boeheim decided to attack the victim. And by doing that, he placed himself and the University at considerable risk if he turned out to be wrong.

My guess is that Cantor will do her job here. And given the rashness of his earlier statements, I don't see how Jim Boeheim comes out of this as the coach.


You may very well turn out to be right. I guess I'm trying to think of what wrong Boeheim committed here. Obviously, there's the chance that he's lying through his teeth and his outrage is mock outrage. If that's the case, then he deserves hellfire and brimstone.

But let's say my scenario is right - that Boeheim honestly had no idea what was going on, that 3 investigations which have already taken place uncovered no wrongdoing on Fine's part (the phone recording, for example, was never released or known until now), and this is being rehashed in the wake of the PSU scandal. If that's true, then one can certainly understand Boeheim's outrage. I think even Davis could understand it, since he himself said that Boeheim did not know what Fine had done. And Boeheim the other day said that if new information came out that changed things, then he would have to adjust to that accordingly. And now, obviously, he's realizing that his good friend is a massive criminal. Talk about a blindside hit.

Now if that scenario is right, what, exactly, did Boeheim do wrong? Yes, he lashed out at Davis. Ok fine. But he did so because (1) he had no knowledge of anything, (2) three investigations years ago had already cleared Fine, and (3) the timing is, to say the least, a bit suspicious. He had every reason, *given those things*, to be angry and to defend his friend of 50 years to the hilt.

Now it is pretty apparent that Boeheim was wrong about these things. That's fine. And he's already apologizing. Is it a CYA moment, or is it a, holy crap, I cannot believe that my buddy really *IS* a friggin' pedophile!!, type moment? I think all the evidence points to the latter. He committed no crime, he did not hide anything, he did not get in the way of any investigation, he did not withhold any facts or knowledge, he did not fail to cooperate to the fullest extent possible. All he did was initially defend his friend in the strongest terms possible, which, given what he knew, was understandable (not wise, but understandable).

So again....what wrong, exactly, did Boeheim commit here, if my scenario is correct?

#80 notfar

  • 965 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 08:22 AM

I am completely shocked that people can have firsthand knowledge of someone molesting kids and then do absolutely nothing to stop it.

#81 Average Reds


  • SoSH Member


  • 10,529 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 08:36 AM

You may very well turn out to be right. I guess I'm trying to think of what wrong Boeheim committed here. Obviously, there's the chance that he's lying through his teeth and his outrage is mock outrage. If that's the case, then he deserves hellfire and brimstone.

But let's say my scenario is right - that Boeheim honestly had no idea what was going on, that 3 investigations which have already taken place uncovered no wrongdoing on Fine's part (the phone recording, for example, was never released or known until now), and this is being rehashed in the wake of the PSU scandal. If that's true, then one can certainly understand Boeheim's outrage. I think even Davis could understand it, since he himself said that Boeheim did not know what Fine had done. And Boeheim the other day said that if new information came out that changed things, then he would have to adjust to that accordingly. And now, obviously, he's realizing that his good friend is a massive criminal. Talk about a blindside hit.

Now if that scenario is right, what, exactly, did Boeheim do wrong? Yes, he lashed out at Davis. Ok fine. But he did so because (1) he had no knowledge of anything, (2) three investigations years ago had already cleared Fine, and (3) the timing is, to say the least, a bit suspicious. He had every reason, *given those things*, to be angry and to defend his friend of 50 years to the hilt.

Now it is pretty apparent that Boeheim was wrong about these things. That's fine. And he's already apologizing. Is it a CYA moment, or is it a, holy crap, I cannot believe that my buddy really *IS* a friggin' pedophile!!, type moment? I think all the evidence points to the latter. He committed no crime, he did not hide anything, he did not get in the way of any investigation, he did not withhold any facts or knowledge, he did not fail to cooperate to the fullest extent possible. All he did was initially defend his friend in the strongest terms possible, which, given what he knew, was understandable (not wise, but understandable).

So again....what wrong, exactly, did Boeheim commit here, if my scenario is correct?


Under any scenario, it was extremely unwise to lash out at the accusers unless he knew for a fact that the allegations were baseless.

If you take Boeheim at his word, not only did he not know this, but he knew damn close to nothing. And given how this has gone from "Bernie Fine was investigated and found to have done nothing wrong" to a case where Bernie is likely to be facing federal charges in about a week, it's fair to ask whether there was a real investigation at all of the charges back in 2005. It's also fair to wonder whether the initial refusal of the Syracuse PD to turn over their investigative files to the DA was an attempt to shield Boeheim and/or the program from embarrassment.

We will eventually know the facts, so I'll refrain from stating anything related to what Boeheim may or may not have done wrong. But to restate what I said at the outset, unless you know with certainty that the accusations are baseless, there are no circumstances where attacking the victims of sexual abuse is a good thing. And yes, in my book, this is more than enough to cost him his job.

Edited by Average Reds, 28 November 2011 - 08:37 AM.


#82 ivanvamp


  • one campus at a time..


  • 4,476 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 08:39 AM

Under any scenario, it was extremely unwise to lash out at the accusers unless he knew for a fact that the allegations were baseless.


I think he thought he *did* know for a fact that the allegations were baseless. But I have already agreed with you that his lashing out, while understandable, was definitely not wise.

If you take Boeheim at his word, not only did he not know this, but he knew damn close to nothing. And given how this has gone from "Bernie Fine was investigated and found to have done nothing wrong" to a case where Bernie is likely to be facing federal charges in about a week, it's fair to ask whether there was a real investigation at all of the charges back in 2005. It's also fair to wonder whether the initial refusal of the Syracuse PD to turn over their investigative files to the DA was an attempt to shield Boeheim and/or the program from embarrassment.


These are all excellent questions. Hopefully we'll know the full truth soon.

We will eventually know the facts, so I'll refrain from stating anything related to what Boeheim may or may not have done wrong. But to restate what I said at the outset, unless you know with certainty that the accusations are baseless, there are no circumstances where attacking the victims of sexual abuse is a good thing. And yes, in my book, this is more than enough to cost him his job.


You may well end up being right.

#83 Dehere

  • 2,440 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 08:45 AM

So again....what wrong, exactly, did Boeheim commit here, if my scenario is correct?

Legally, I don't see that Boeheim has done anything wrong. It seems clear to me that it's incorrect to equate Boeheim to Paterno.

His dismissal, and personally I do believe it's coming, turns on the question of his oversight of the program. What responsibility does a leader of any organization have when it comes out that a direct report was using his position to molest children who also had a relationship with the organization? The newest accusation indicates that Syracuse basketball resources were used to transport a minor across state lines, where he was then molested. At what point does some accountability have to fall to the leader of an organization that allows this to happen?

I think that because Boeheim hasn't broken any laws he will be allowed to resign. He doesn't deserve to be fired in disgrace the way Paterno was. But I don't think he deserves to run a program on a college campus or be responsible for minors anymore either.



#84 Bucknahs Bum Ankle


  • SoSH Member


  • 8,489 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 09:00 AM

Wow, I'm shocked. Like others, I suspect Boeheim honestly didn't know anything about what Fine (and his wife!?) was up to. But for this to happen under his watch is pretty inexcusable. You have ask how exactly it was that kids who were affiliated with and traveling with the team were molested and the guy in charge was completely unaware. Even if Bernie Fine is the most devious and deceptive pedophile on the planet, it's a failure on Boeheim's part not to have recognized it. I don't think he survives this.

#85 StuckOnYouk

  • 2,063 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 09:21 AM

One thing is for sure..you won't see Cuse fans like Bernie dumping on Calhoun for a long time.

#86 crystalline

  • 2,329 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 09:24 AM

Latest accuser's Dad claims his son never even talked to Bernie Fine.

http://mobile.boston...of_molestation/

Son claims abuse happened on Pitt road trip visit that parents helped set up. Dad claims son never attended any road trips. Seems like these are easily checkable facts, and we should know soon who is truthful.

Bizarre case. Wife admits to sleeping with kid who alleges abuse by husband? Tape comes out after first investigation is concluded? Best thing for justice for both accused and accuser would be to withhold judgement and media coverage for a few weeks to give time for an investigation.

#87 Bucknahs Bum Ankle


  • SoSH Member


  • 8,489 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 09:40 AM

Bizarre case. Wife admits to sleeping with kid who alleges abuse by husband? Tape comes out after first investigation is concluded? Best thing for justice for both accused and accuser would be to withhold judgement and media coverage for a few weeks to give time for an investigation.

The tape of Mrs. Fine pretty much confirms that Bernie was molesting underage kids (and that she was aware of it, did nothing to stop it, and then slept with at least one of the victims herself). Unless it's something like the wife and Davis were conspiring to set Bernie up, but that seems too far fetched. I guess I shouldn't assume anything is too bizarre at this point though. In any event, I think we can be pretty certain Bernie is guilty, whether or not the third accuser is credible.

#88 Average Reds


  • SoSH Member


  • 10,529 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 09:43 AM

I think he thought he *did* know for a fact that the allegations were baseless. But I have already agreed with you that his lashing out, while understandable, was definitely not wise.


I'm going to let this go after this comment, but I have to correct this one thing. The bolded part is false as a matter of fact. The best case scenario for Boeheim at this point is that he did not know for a fact that the allegations were baseless - he assumed that they were, and he decided to attack the victims of a sexual predator on his staff on the basis of that assumption.

This is not understandable. It's inexcusable.

The other thing that continues to annoy me in this thread is the constant refrain of "He's not as bad as Paterno" which is not a statement that can be supported by evidence at this point.

  • Jerry Sandusky was investigated in 1998 and cleared. Penn State decided after this to cut ties with him
  • Bernie Fine was investigated in 2005 and cleared. He stayed on staff.
  • Additional accusations came up against Sandusky in 2002. Paterno reported them up the line and the school covered them up. All individuals involved are paying a dear price for this cover up, as they should.
  • In the wake of the Penn State fiasco, old accusations against Fine were revisited. Boeheim's response was to point out that Bernie was cleared and he then lashed out at individuals who we now know were the victims of sexual abuse.
This is not to say that there aren't clear differences in the two cases. For one, it looks like the woman heading up Syracuse University understands her responsibilities to the University and the community at large. But until we know all the facts related to the abortive investigation of Bernie Fine in 2005, I'm not going to characterize Jim Boeheim's actions as being better or worse than Joe Paterno's.

I'll make one last point - the recordings of the phone call with Bernie Fine's wife were turned over to a Syracuse newspaper in 2002 shortly after the recording was made. In 2003, Fine's wife confirmed to the newspaper that the conversation took place, although she disputed the accuracy of the recording at the time. Does anyone really believe that the newspaper would have withheld this from investigators in 2005 or that Boeheim would not have known about it?

I guess we'll know soon enough, but given how things have played out, I wouldn't be comfortable saying anything in support of Jim Boeheim.

Edited by Average Reds, 28 November 2011 - 09:45 AM.


#89 Plantiers Wart

  • 2,677 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 09:50 AM

I have an honest question - Is Boeheim as big a deal in the local community at 'Cuse as Paterno was at PSU? The arguments about paterno knowing always say that he ran everything, that he was sure to know all the details of any police investigations. Does Boeheim get the same courtesies? Because if the police investigation against Fine was a sham, or if it uncovered some questionable, although not criminal, activities, then I can see Boeheim getting booted as coach.

#90 ivanvamp


  • one campus at a time..


  • 4,476 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 10:26 AM

I'm going to let this go after this comment, but I have to correct this one thing. The bolded part is false as a matter of fact. The best case scenario for Boeheim at this point is that he did not know for a fact that the allegations were baseless - he assumed that they were, and he decided to attack the victims of a sexual predator on his staff on the basis of that assumption.

This is not understandable. It's inexcusable.

The other thing that continues to annoy me in this thread is the constant refrain of "He's not as bad as Paterno" which is not a statement that can be supported by evidence at this point.

  • Jerry Sandusky was investigated in 1998 and cleared. Penn State decided after this to cut ties with him
  • Bernie Fine was investigated in 2005 and cleared. He stayed on staff.
  • Additional accusations came up against Sandusky in 2002. Paterno reported them up the line and the school covered them up. All individuals involved are paying a dear price for this cover up, as they should.
  • In the wake of the Penn State fiasco, old accusations against Fine were revisited. Boeheim's response was to point out that Bernie was cleared and he then lashed out at individuals who we now know were the victims of sexual abuse.
This is not to say that there aren't clear differences in the two cases. For one, it looks like the woman heading up Syracuse University understands her responsibilities to the University and the community at large. But until we know all the facts related to the abortive investigation of Bernie Fine in 2005, I'm not going to characterize Jim Boeheim's actions as being better or worse than Joe Paterno's.

I'll make one last point - the recordings of the phone call with Bernie Fine's wife were turned over to a Syracuse newspaper in 2002 shortly after the recording was made. In 2003, Fine's wife confirmed to the newspaper that the conversation took place, although she disputed the accuracy of the recording at the time. Does anyone really believe that the newspaper would have withheld this from investigators in 2005 or that Boeheim would not have known about it?

I guess we'll know soon enough, but given how things have played out, I wouldn't be comfortable saying anything in support of Jim Boeheim.


I think that's a very reasonable post, and a good piece of advice at the end (which I will heed) in light of the rest of it.

#91 bsj


  • Renegade Crazed Genius


  • 15,461 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 10:36 AM

I am completely shocked that people can have firsthand knowledge of someone molesting kids and then do absolutely nothing to stop it.


I think you meant to post this in the PSU thread.

Unless you are talking about ESPN or Fine's wife...

#92 Bucknahs Bum Ankle


  • SoSH Member


  • 8,489 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 11:02 AM

I have an honest question - Is Boeheim as big a deal in the local community at 'Cuse as Paterno was at PSU? The arguments about paterno knowing always say that he ran everything, that he was sure to know all the details of any police investigations. Does Boeheim get the same courtesies? Because if the police investigation against Fine was a sham, or if it uncovered some questionable, although not criminal, activities, then I can see Boeheim getting booted as coach.

Not as big, but probably as close as you're going to find in any other coach/community comparison. But I don't think Boeheim would be considered above the law locally as some might have concluded about Paterno. I think we can assume that Boeheim was aware of the 2002 Syracuse police investigation against Fine, but thought he was in the clear when nothing further came of it and again when the SU internal investigation found no wrongdoing by Fine in 2005. In the Penn State situation, it appears there was enough to the first accusations that Sandusky was made to retire even though he wasn't charged. The biggest difference is we don't have a first hand witness subsequently coming to Boeheim and that account basically getting systemically ignored. While it doesn't appear to be as egregious on the part of the Boeheim and the University, I'm still of the position that they bear some responsibility simply because there weren't enough safeguards in place to keep this from happening under their program.

#93 pedros hairstylist


  • Allison?


  • PipPipPip
  • 5,577 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 11:32 AM

Jerry Sandusky was investigated in 1998 and cleared.


Sorry, but no. This is inaccurate and has been repeated in this thread several times now. Sandusky wasn't "cleared" by the DA, he was simply not charged with anything. Those are two very different things.

#94 Clears Cleaver


  • SoSH Member


  • 8,395 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 11:36 AM

This is only going to get weirder. A guy I work with was a player on Cuse and he claims it was pretty well known that Mrs Fine used to sleep with the players. He does not think that Boeheim had any idea about Mrs Fine or Bernie, for that matter.

I don't think this will end up being a Paterno situation

#95 ivanvamp


  • one campus at a time..


  • 4,476 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 11:36 AM

Sorry, but no. This is inaccurate and has been repeated in this thread several times now. Sandusky wasn't "cleared" by the DA, he was simply not charged with anything. Those are two very different things.


I'm not a lawyer. What's the difference. If the DA thought there was enough evidence to suggest that Sandusky did something illegal (especially a crime of this nature), why wouldn't he file criminal charges? Or, conversely, if he didn't file charges, doesn't that mean he didn't think there was enough evidence of criminal wrongdoing?

And if that latter statement is true, how is that different than Sandusky being "cleared"?

(of course, there's always the possibility that he knew Sandusky was guilty but was part of the coverup)

#96 Rudy Pemberton


  • Just a string of characters


  • 28,373 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 11:48 AM

Anyone else baffled by the taped phone call? It's a very casual conversation given the subject matter and seems to be lacking in actual details. Something (well, everything) seems odd here.

#97 Average Reds


  • SoSH Member


  • 10,529 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 11:48 AM

Sorry, but no. This is inaccurate and has been repeated in this thread several times now. Sandusky wasn't "cleared" by the DA, he was simply not charged with anything. Those are two very different things.


You are correct in stating that a more precise way of describing the conclusion of the 1998 investigation is to say that the DA decided that there was not enough evidence to charge Sandusky.

#98 Nuf Ced


  • stupidity monitor


  • 9,310 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 12:36 PM

A Syracuse TV station, WSYR, is reporting that law enforcement authorities have obtained and are executing a search warrant at SU's Manley Field House.

Update: WSYR is now back tracking on this report.

Law enforcement sources disagree on whether or when a search warrant will be executed at Manley Field House.

NewsChannel 9 has word from a source in a position to know who says search warrants will be executed.

Another source in a position to know says that warrants will not be executed.


http://www.9wsyr.com...u0RcEGSufQ.cspx

In the rush to be first, accuracy goes out the window....

Edited by Nuf Ced, 28 November 2011 - 12:40 PM.


#99 Warning Track Speed

  • 488 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 12:37 PM

Anyone else baffled by the taped phone call? It's a very casual conversation given the subject matter and seems to be lacking in actual details. Something (well, everything) seems odd here.


I thought the same thing. Lots of innuendo and 'we both know what happened' type stuff, but.... it just seems odd.

#100 pedros hairstylist


  • Allison?


  • PipPipPip
  • 5,577 posts

Posted 28 November 2011 - 12:39 PM

I'm not a lawyer. What's the difference. If the DA thought there was enough evidence to suggest that Sandusky did something illegal (especially a crime of this nature), why wouldn't he file criminal charges? Or, conversely, if he didn't file charges, doesn't that mean he didn't think there was enough evidence of criminal wrongdoing?

And if that latter statement is true, how is that different than Sandusky being "cleared"?

(of course, there's always the possibility that he knew Sandusky was guilty but was part of the coverup)


Not at all. It could easily mean -- and this has been mentioned in many stories I've read about why that 1998 police investigation got filed away with no charges against anyone -- that the DA looked at the evidence he had in hand, at the potential witnesses he had and more, importantly, the ones he didn't have and decided it wasn't enough to overcome the local jury pool's probable predisposition to see Sandusky as a hero and thus, incapable of such a heinous crime.