Blue White Illustrated

As part of a lawsuit filed by Pennsylva- nia state Sen. Jake Corman and treasurer Rob McCord challenging the validity of the NCAA's consent decree, which Penn State signed in 2012, a flood of internal emails have become public, drawing na- tional attention to how the NCAA handled the aftermath of the Jerry Sandusky scandal. Nearly three years to the day after two uni- versity officials were indicted on perjury charges, controversial court documents were released as part of the discovery phase, and they initially painted a picture of collusion between the NCAA and former FBI director Louis Freeh, who conducted an internal investigation into the univer- sity's handling of the scandal, the results of which were used when the NCAA de- cided to hand down unprecedented sanctions against Penn State in July 2012. One internal NCAA email character- ized the potential imposition of major penalties as a "bluff." In an email, for- mer vice president for enforcement Julie Roe Lach expressed doubts that a nor- mal investigation process would result in penalties. In a prepared statement, university president Eric Barron and board of trustees chairman Keith Masser called the emails "deeply disturbing." Follow- ing a Nov. 14 meeting of the board of trustees, Barron approved a measure that will launch a review of the informa- tion that was used as the basis of the Freeh report. "If there are issues [with the report's comprehensiveness or credibility] that I felt the board needed to know about, I committed myself to come forward to them and report what it is that I found," Barron told PennLive.com. Barron, who officially succeeded Rod- ney Erickson as president in May, added that he is waiving the university's attor- ney/client privileges for the purposes of the review, so that Penn State lawyers who worked with the Freeh investigators have complete transparency, and the third-party staff assisting them will have unfettered access to all documents produced throughout the course of the Freeh investigation. Alumni-elected trustees Al Lord and Bob Jubelirer publicly called for Penn State to sue Freeh and demanded that the NCAA-imposed $60 million fine be returned to the university following the release of emails that suggested Freeh was in correspondence with the NCAA when determining sanctions for the football program. "The emails confirm what I have said all along. The NCAA lacked the legal au- thority to act and knew it," Anthony Lu- brano, another member of Penn State's board of trustees, told the (Allentown) Morning Call. "They bluffed Penn State into signing a consent decree as imposed by the NCAA. Now it's time for the NCAA to acknowledge its wrongdoing and tear up the consent decree." But as the university later responded, it has been public knowledge for almost three years that the NCAA and the Big Ten monitored the progress of Freeh's investigation. "While the NCAA may have made suggestions to the Freeh Group with re- spect to its investigation, the scope of the Freeh investigation was established by the Penn State Board of Trustees, as set forth in the Freeh engagement letter, not by the NCAA," university spokesperson Lisa Powers said in a pre- pared statement. On Nov. 14, the NCAA voluntarily re- leased a series of internal emails in hope of adding additional context to the pri- vate conversations that took place be- tween NCAA officials and Freeh. "When taken out of context, some of this material creates a misleading im- pression of the important issues related to the consent decree between the NCAA and Penn State," NCAA spokesman Erik Christianson said. "The NCAA believes the full story will emerge at the trial scheduled for January 2015." Other emails released as part of the Corman lawsuit revealed that Penn State narrowly avoided the death penalty when the NCAA was determining sanc- tions. In an email dated Sept. 7, 2012, NCAA chief legal officer Donald Remy told Penn State attorney Gene Marsh that a move to shut down the program was considered and favored in private discussions. "We did tell you after the Executive Committee call on July 17, 2012, that a majority of the Board members favored stronger penalties, and that same ma- jority favored the death penalty," Remy wrote. Remy further explained that the death penalty can be used for first-time of- fenders of NCAA regulations, and that the NCAA's infractions process "could likely result in the death penalty being imposed." The NCAA ultimately declined to im- pose the maximum penalty due to "Penn NEWS & NOTES F O O T B A L L NCAA emails shed light on sanction deliberations CORMAN

• Cover