Jerry Sandusky: Allegations and Obligations
[There will be liberal use of the word "allegedly" in this post. If it's not included in a particular sentence, pretend that it is. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty, and all information is taken directly from the Grand Jury Findings Of Fact.]
A working summary of the Jerry Sandusky scandal, as of 1:30 a.m. Sunday morning. Much has been debated as to what the administration at Penn State knew, and when they knew it. Not to mention, there has been considerable debate as to what the legal and moral obligations of the principals may have been, and what those individuals did to fulfill them.
First, the incidents themselves. Of the eight victims, four of them were allegedly assaulted while Sandusky was still on the Penn State coaching staff:
Victim #4: According to the Grand Jury Findings Of Fact, he was first singled out by Sandusky in 1996 or 1997. Alleged indecent contact occurred in East Halls showers near Holuba Hall, at Toftrees (where the team stays prior to home games), bowl games, and charity golf events. The Grand Jury alleges that Sandusky supplied the child with gifts including clothes, a snowboard, Nike shoes, golf clubs, hockey equipment, passes for sporting events, football jerseys, registration for soccer camp, cigarettes, money for marijuana and a promise that the child would be guaranteed a spot as a walk-on football player at Penn State.
After the football program moved into the new Lasch Building, the alleged non-hotel indecent contact mainly occurred in the sauna, in a more secluded area of the building.
Victim #5: Met Sandusky through The Second Mile in 1995 or 1996, when the boy was in second or third grade. He testified that he attended at least 15 Penn State football games with Sandusky, and was sexually assaulted in the Penn State locker room showers.
Victim #6: Also met Sandusky through The Second Mile in 1994 or 1995, when the boy was seven or eight years old. He testified that he was assaulted in the Holuba Hall showers in 1998. According to the Grand Jury Findings Of Fact, the victim's mother immediately reported the incident to University Police, who closed the case after a lengthy investigation (which involved another boy and similar circumstances, although he was not listed as a "victim" in the Grand Jury presentation).
The Grand Jury also noted that detectives from University Police and the State College Police Department eavesdropped on two conversations between Sandusky and Victim #6's mother, in which Sandusky admitted to showering with Victim #6 and other boys. When asked if he touched Victim #6's private parts, Sandusky allegedly said, "I don't know...maybe" and stated to Victim #6's mother, "I understand, I was wrong. I wish I could get forgiveness. I know I won't get it from you. I wish I were dead."
Despite these admissions detailed by the Grand Jury, Sandusky was not charged with any crime.
Victim #7: Also in the mid-to-late 1990's, the boy was allegedly given field passes to Penn State games and brought to the team's dining hall. He also testified that he stayed overnight at Sandusky's house prior to home games. The victim described more than one occasion in which Sandusky put his hands down the waistband of the victim's pants.
Despite not having contact with Sandusky for two years, the victim testified that he was contacted by Sandusky, Sandusky's wife, and another associate of Sandusky weeks before the victim's Grand Jury testimony.
Events Allegedly Occurring At Penn State, Post-Retirement
Victim #3: Testified that he met Sandusky through The Second Mile in 2000, when he was between seventh and eighth grade. He was allegedly given access to PSU football games and other PSU facilities. He tesified that he was touched inappropriately by Sandusky in PSU shower facilities and at Sandusky's home.
Victim #8: Allegedly found by a Penn State janitor in a sex act with Sandusky in the shower at Lasch, while the team was out of town for a road game. The janitor, who now suffers from dementia, told another janitor at the time of the incident and eventually reported it to his supervisor, Jim Witherite. Witherite described the janitor/witness as "very emotionally upset" and "very distraught". The victim's identity is unknown.
Victim #1: Testified that he met Sandusky when he was 11-12 years old, through a Second Mile camp held on the PSU campus. He testified that he met regularly with Sandusky, staying overnight at his house, attending PSU practices and going to Philadelphia Eagles games. According to the Grand Jury Findings of Fact, Sandusky was caught rolling around on the ground with Victim #1 by a high school wrestling coach. When the mother of Victim #1 notified the high school principal of the activities, Sandusky was barred from the high school, where he was a volunteer football coach.
Also according to he Grand Jury Findings of Fact 118 phone calls were placed from Sandusky's home and cell phones to the home of Victim #1 from January 2008 to July 2009.
Victim #2: Not to downplay the other alleged incidents, but this is the one prominently involving the Penn State administration and Joe Paterno. On March 1, 2002, Sandusky was alleged caught by a PSU football Graduate Assistant (identified by the Harrisburg Patriot-News as current PSU wide receivers coach Mike McQueary) with a 10-year old boy in the showers at Lasch. The next day, the Graduate Assistant called Joe Paterno and went to Paterno's home to describe what he saw at Lasch. On March 3, Paterno called Director of Athletics Tim Curley to his home and relayed what he had been told. According to the Grand Jury Findings of Fact, approximately one and one-half weeks later, the GA is summoned to a meeting with Curley and Gary Schultz, who assure the GA that they would investigate further. Joe Paterno was not at this meeting.
In April, Tim Curley allegedly tells the GA that Sandusky's keys to the locker room were taken away and the incident was reported to The Second Mile foundation. Curley never reports the incident to University Police, or any other police agency. The GA is never questioned by University police and no other entity investigated the matter until the GA testified before the Grand Jury in December 2010.
In front of the Grand Jury in December 2010, Curley testified that the GA notified him of "inappropriate conduct", and described the alleged conduct as "horsing around". When asked if the GA reported sex between Sandusky and the child in 2002, Curley testified "absolutely not." Curley also testified that he informed the executive director of The Second Mile and PSU President Graham Spanier of the incident.
Spanier testified that he approved of the remedial measures taken by Curley, presumably his informing Sandusky that he was no longer permitted to bring youths to Penn State's athletic facilities.
Spanier testified that Curley and Schultz reported the 2002 Victim #2 incident that made a member of Curley's staff "uncomfortable". Spanier described the incident as "Jerry Sandusky in the football building locker area in the shower with a younger child and they were horsing around." He also testified that as of January 2011, he did not know the identity of the GA who originally reported the incident.
Spanier denied that the incident reported to him was described as being of a sexual nature, and noted that Curley and Schultz did not indicate any plan to report the incident to law enforcement, the Commonwealth's Department of Public Welfare, or any county child protective services agency.
Gary Schultz testified that the allegations by the GA were "not that serious" and that he and Curley "had no indication that a crime had occurred." He also testified that he believed that he and Curley asked "the child protection agency" to look into the matter. Despite overseeing University Police as part of his job, Schultz did not seek or receive the lengthy police report of the similar 1998 incident, did not report the 2002 incident to University Police, and nobody at Penn State sought the identity of the child in the 2002 incident.
The GA and Curley both testified that Sandusky was not actually banned from any Penn State buildings, and Curley admitted the ban on bringing children to the campus was unenforceable.
So...yeah. Not good. No, but the proper course of action here would be one of reason and restrai...

Or we could roll like this.
First, let's start with Graham Spanier's statement:
The allegations about a former coach are troubling, and it is appropriate that they be investigated thoroughly. Protecting children requires the utmost vigilance.
With regard to the other presentments, I wish to say that Tim Curley and Gary Schultz have my unconditional support. I have known and worked daily with Tim and Gary for more than 16 years. I have complete confidence in how they have handled the allegations about a former University employee.
Tim Curley and Gary Schultz operate at the highest levels of honesty, integrity and compassion. I am confident the record will show that these charges are groundless and that they conducted themselves professionally and appropriately.
"Unconditional support"? "Complete confidence"? "Highest levels of honesty, integrity, and compassion?"
Seriously? It was appropriate that these things were investigate thoroughly a decade ago. Regardless, this is a completely abominable response to any crisis, most especially this one.
These are obviously vetted and carefully chosen words, which have the added effect of making Graham Spanier look like an idiot -- and that is casting Spanier in the most favorable light. I don't think he's an idiot, for the record, but the remaining alternatives are much more sinister.
Circling the wagons seems to be an odd strategy. We'll see if it's a temporary or long-term position. I wouldn't be surprised if this turns into four men trying to throw each other under a speeding bus.
"Legal Obligations" vs. "Moral Obligations". The Pennsylvania Child Protective Services Law has very clear language regarding the mandatory reporting of incidents like this:
(c) Staff members of institutions, etc.--Whenever a person is required to report under subsection (b) in the capacity as a member of the staff of a medical or other public or private institution, school, facility or agency, that person shall immediately notify the person in charge of the institution, school, facility or agency or the designated agent of the person in charge. Upon notification, the person in charge or the designated agent, if any, shall assume the responsibility and have the legal obligation to report or cause a report to be made in accordance with section 6313.
So, by notifying Tim Curley (as Director of Athletics) and Gary Schultz (as in charge of University Police), Joe Paterno fulfilled his legal obligation to pass Mike McQueary's discoveries onto the people in charge. Same goes for Mike McQueary, really -- the obligation is essentially to pass the information up the ladder to the person or people ultimately responsible for reporting the incident, pursuant to the reporting criteria found here.
The question remains, however: is that enough? The investigation obviously went nowhere. Curley and Schultz both admitted in their testimony that they didn't report the incident to the Department of Public Welfare or Centre County Children and Youth Services. There was no attempt to identify Victim #2.
At what point should Paterno have followed up with Curley and asked, "hey, remember that...thing I told you about? The one involving a little boy, my trusted defensive coordinator of 32 years, and our locker room? Anything happen with that? Should I make that phone call myself?" The Grand Jury Findings Of Fact state, "[T]he graduate assistant was never questioned by University Police and no other entity conducted an investigation until he testified in Grand Jury in December, 2010." Curley and Schultz admitted that they didn't act. Why didn't anyone else?
It's probably not a huge jump to conclude that if an incident about an alleged aggravated indecent assault in the Penn State locker room is reported to law enforcement, they're rather likely to open up a file on it. That didn't happen here. And please, for the love of God, stop saying that anyone other than Tim Curley or Gary Schultz was barred from reporting the incident. That is stupid and wrong:
§ 6312. Persons permitted to report suspected child abuse.
In addition to those persons and officials required to report suspected child abuse, any person may make such a report if that person has reasonable cause to suspect that a child is an abused child.
Stop it. If you're a Penn State fan that pontificates about moral character and Success With Honor, you need to start asking some very difficult questions.
Also, stop with the "if Joe Paterno or anyone else reported it, he could've been sued for defamation" wailing. No. No. Wrong. Stop.
I'm willing to cut McQueary slack on this, incidentally. He was a Graduate Assistant hoping to break into a coaching career and allegedly witnessed something unspeakably awful being done by a Penn State legend, then had the choice to (a) do nothing, (b) call the police immediately, or (c) call the King of Happy Valley, Joe Paterno. Not an enviable position, for sure. At least he didn't choose (a).
Finally, if someone can rationally explain to me why the hell Jerry Sandusky was permitted to have continued access to Penn State facilities and events (nevermind have permanent office space at Lasch after his "retirement"), I'd love to hear it.
This has been a dark few days for all of us. The program is going to be utterly ravaged for this, mostly for the obviously awful conduct alleged, but also because Penn State has spent millions of marking dollars telling the rest of collegiate athletics that Penn State Does Things The Right Way And You Don't. As I wrote Saturday morning, this is so much worse than the garden variety NCAA scandals that have dotted the media landscape for the past two seasons. If the allegations are true, we're in Baylor Basketball Scandal territory.
With all due respect to the Patriot-News, who dared to pursue this story when all others wouldn't, things are about to get very raw in Happy Valley now that the national media is primed to descend upon this story. Every college football writer was tweeting or writing about it on Saturday. ESPN had game breaks devoted solely to the charges against Sandusky, Curley, and Schultz. It was the lead story on the NBC Nightly News, for heaven's sake.
This is not going away, and I'll be shocked and infuriated if anyone survives this with their jobs -- very much including Joe Paterno.
It is awful in every conceivable way, and most certainly going to get worse. Buckle up, indeed.
847 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
With regard to subsection 6312
I think that you are incorrect in your application. The law is written that way to allow anyone to make a report, not just those named under the law as ‘mandated reporters.’ Coach Paterno and the GA were ‘mandated reporters:’ they are among those required to follow the correct procedures when they suspect child abuse in the institution.
I don’t think that anyone at this point, not knowing what we do not know, can say, “Paterno should have done more.” I think the lynch mob picture is excellent. And I don’t think Joe can survive it. I think I still believe he should, but I don’t think he can.
Thanks for your reporting.
Sickening, absolutely sickening.
This whole issue is awful almost beyond description. I can’t imagine Sandusky is innocent. Sorry….I can’t. Too many victims at too many different time periods for a conspiracy or anything similar that could even imply false charges.
And I also have a hard time believing this would surprise others involved with the program. There had to be at least “whispers” of what Sandusky was doing. Apparently a lot of people were afraid to either speak up or elevate things. I actually give McQueary kudos for taking it to the next level. He didn’t just close his eyes and ears and hope it goes away or magically stops as it appears others may have done.
The despicable Pgh media is having a field day with this. I understand it’s a huge story, but of course they can’t help use it as another reason to bash PSU as a whole. Honestly, it is bad…very bad, but I hate to say this but I think if it happened at just about any other school it probably would’ve been “handled” the same lousy way. But still….it didn’t happen anywhere else it happened at PSU and we like to say we’re “different”. So I guess the media is going to treat us “differently” on this. I guess they’re loving getting a chance to take their whacks at PSU and we have no ground to stand on to defend against it.
Only good things (and I don’t even know if that’s the right way to phrase it….I hate to even use the word “good” with relationship to this scandal) are that if it topples Joe…and I think it will…it’s not that big of a deal because Joe was gonna go this year or very soon anyway so PSU is prepared for this day, just not for the way it’s come about. AND…I seem to recall that when Sandusky “retired” their were whispers that he & Joe did not have a good relationship. In light of all this, I’m thinking that Joe did/does not like Sandusky because of his “problem”.
Front page of NY Times too
I disagree with the headline this rattled the football program — this rattled the whole university. Apparently, Tim Curley and Graham Spanier did not resign overnight. Jerry Sandusky has not killed himself yet either which is about the only good news this morning — he needs to stand trial and I would not be surprised if he takes the coward’s way out.
Joe Paterno was/is more powerful than Curley or Spanier, chain of command be damned. I reached the same conclusion yesterday afternoon Chris. He should resign immediately and say “I did not do enough.” He can still be an adult here this way. Curley and Spanier have clearly chosen a different path if they are not out by this time tomorrow.
Washingtonian and Penn Stater -- My blog features the triumph of hope over experience that is being a DC sports fan (especially the Nats) as well as the Nittany Lions, life in BeltwayLand and other things I find interesting. @doubleuefwhy
STOP
He should resign immediately and say "I did not do enough."
With what we know right now, this is 100% false. We do NOT know what Joe did or did not do after he reported it to his superiors. To suggest he didn’t do enough is based in fiction you are creating. There are facts, and that is not among them. To call for a resignation based on facts you are creating is just stupid so stop until we know what really happened.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 9:34 AM EST up reply actions 13 recs
I stand by my statement
Washingtonian and Penn Stater -- My blog features the triumph of hope over experience that is being a DC sports fan (especially the Nats) as well as the Nittany Lions, life in BeltwayLand and other things I find interesting. @doubleuefwhy
by WFY on Nov 6, 2011 5:06 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
And I stand by the fact that you're making shit up.
by misdreavus79 on Nov 6, 2011 10:08 PM EST up reply actions
And I stand by misdreavus' comment
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
by TJM5054 on Nov 6, 2011 10:18 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The sad thing to me (beyond the obvious of the abused children, which is heinous)
is that we’ve all seen instances like or similar to this play out too many times before. Everyone can argue what should have been done and who should have done what till we’re blue in the face. But, at the end, I can’t see any way Curley keeps his job, Schultz keeps his job, and quite possibly Spanier too. I really believe that in the end JoePa will be leaving at the end of this season with this being the impetus for his departure. It’s won’t be because anyone thinks he did anything wrong, but because the Board will want to clean house and distance the university as quickly as possible from it. For the Board, it’ll be all about revenue. If Alumni threaten withholding money, if major donors are unwilling to write checks, then they will see the need to scour the administration and athletic department clean.
"Illegitimus non Carborundum!" (Don't let the bastards wear you down)
Circling the Wagons
is what “fine organizations” always seem to do. Things have been swept under the rug for years; “they” see no resaon to change that. And the principals involved almost never admit that they have been wrong.
I sent the “President” an e-mail yesterday on behalf of myself and MK (the actual alum in this household). I told him that we will not be sending PSU any more money for now. THON is an exception-because unlike nearly everyone involved in this disgraceful situation we are “for the kids”. 1st such “letter” I have written in 32 years. The other one resulted in action by the recipient. I frankly do not expect the same response here.
For the Glory (and the kids-Pray for them.).
tO$U sucks-ALWAYS the right choice!
by nits4ever on Nov 6, 2011 7:33 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
They knew the GJ was investigating and this was their best response??
The school officals were not blind sided by this since the investigation took a long time and many employees were called to testify before the grand jury and the best Spanier can offer is unconditional support
How does Curley and Schultz’s inactions rise to Spanier’s quote that “Protecting children requires the utmost vigilance” ?
A simple 911 call would have made all of this much more simpler plus limited the number of victims.
"Raise the black flag and ride hard, boys! Our cause is just and our enemies many! "
by Corvus Baltimorius on Nov 6, 2011 7:37 AM EST reply actions
I'm a little bit oversaturated with this thing
I want to string up everyone involved, but on the other hand I want due process to take its course to make sure all the speculating we’re doing is what actually happened. I think we can safely say Sandusky has serious issues, though.
Buckle up, indeed. This is going to be ugly.
Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.
For everyone who wants everyone fired immediately
perhaps we should let due process take it’s course. No one has been found guilty.
If and when that happens, then you can release the pack of wild dogs on them. Go crazy at that point; I’ll be part of the unruly mob calling for scalps.
But you’re only hearing one side of the story so far, and even then very many details are left unwritten.
by Tailgate Shogun on Nov 6, 2011 8:03 AM EST reply actions 3 recs
This is always true. But the number of victims...and the number of people involved...
make it hard to say this is all a big misunderstanding that will show no wrongdoing on anyone’s part. Curley should at the very least be on some sort of leave until this wraps up.
And if we are holding Joe Pa to the “why didn’t he do more” standard (which I am personally not doing), what about this janitor who saw something? And his supervisor?
Dark Knight feeling, die and be a hero-or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.-Jay-Z
Hey, I didn't say it looked good for Sandusky!
This is more than a “he said/she said” sort of deal, like Austin Scott or Duke lacrosse had to suffer through.
by Tailgate Shogun on Nov 6, 2011 8:22 AM EST up reply actions
Due Process
is a criminal law term. The criminal justice system will run its course-probably over the course of years. In the meantime there is no reason any of those indicted and those conditionally supporting them should be employed at Penn State. If you live in the Commonwealth your tax dollars are supporting them. You really want your hard-earned money doing that?
Due process has nothing to do with whether someone has a job. People are fired all the time for less than this-or even no reason at all.
tO$U sucks-ALWAYS the right choice!
ultimately
your tax dollars are supporting a university network with the over-arching goal of educating and preparing 100k+ students for a future. is this a shame and a black eye on the university? yes. but there are many other people out there who need that university and everything else that continued to occur today when the sun rose again.
as that great fanpost said
“Jerry Sandusky, Tim Curley, Garry Schultz, and Graham Spanier did not write the Alma Mater. Believe it or not, neither did Joe Paterno.”
let's go state
by 424E. on Nov 7, 2011 11:53 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I would typically agree
But the preponderance of evidence against Curley and Schultz indicate, even if cleared of perjury, there was a failure to report. That alone violates the public trust and brings up serious questions about the worthiness for such positions of responsibility. If Spanier or the Board are unwilling to outright terminate them, then suspend them until it plays out (with pay if exonerated).
"Only hearing one side of the story"?..
You’ve got to be kidding. Yes, I’d love to hear Sandusky’s, Curley’s, Schultz’s and for tha matter Paterno’s side of the story.
Absolutely, there is a crying need for proper due process with these cases (Sandusky and Curley/Schultz) but the volume of testimony and detail of testimony is pretty damning.
"I'm not a psychopath, Anderson, I'm a high-functioning sociopath. Do your research." - Sherlock Holmes
The fact that everyone seems to agree on is a 58 year old man was taking a shower with a 10 year old boy after hours in the football building. That fact alone, without trying to parse what they were doing, required a much more serious response than occurred. They all should have been fired this weekend although given the make-up the board of trustees sadly I don’t think that will happen. We are talking about prompt action to salvage the University’s reputation.
Also:
for everyone promising to cut off their funding of the university, allow me to state this plainly: I THINK YOU ARE AN IDIOT.
Want to punish Curley & Joe? Fine. Do it. Don’t renew your football tickets. Hit them in the wallet there.
But to cut off ALL gifts to the university is a great way to punish students who have nothing to do with this scandal. I can’t fathom telling a student that they can’t afford to pay tuition this semester because I’m mad at what someone allegedly did 15 years ago.
by Tailgate Shogun on Nov 6, 2011 8:08 AM EST reply actions 7 recs
Sorry
Our PSU money is not going to the school-only to Thon. I want no chance any of my money goes to support and/or defend anyone involved in this disgrace.
tO$U sucks-ALWAYS the right choice!
Then donate to a specific program.
You’re only hurting current and future Penn Staters
by lion09 on Nov 6, 2011 12:56 PM EST up reply actions 7 recs
you are being short-sighted and ultimately negligent
the university is more than these few people who seem to have mishandled something very serious.
the kids there today who have nothing to do with this continue to require support – to punish them is misguided
let's go state
I completely disagree.
I refuse to show support (financially) for a university that is supporting this type of behavior. As long as Spanier and Curley have jobs, I consider that a black eye (and jesus, talk about an understatement there) for the school – which transitively makes me, an alumni, look bad. I don’t have a lot of avenues to show how angry I am by this situation. But the one thing I can do is pledge to never support them as long as the people responsible still have their jobs and “unconditional support.”
Plus, unless you specify a donation as being for a scholarship, the money people give to PSU generally does not help students directly. I guess you could make the argument that donations help cover things so that tuition doesn’t need to, and therefore it keeps tuition prices down. But if that’s the case, they aren’t going to be able to raise tuition mid year because of a lack of donations.
by ppfcpp on Nov 6, 2011 8:43 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I would love to know..
How many people here who are saying they will never give back to PSU again are also catholics who still give to the church. No one is arguing how terrible all of this is, but the wild overreactions calling for Joe Paterno’s head and for everyone to cease all funding to the school, 1 DAY, after this information was released, seriously need to stop.
This isnt going to just go away. So take a step back, go outside and enjoy your day, and let the facts lead the way.
Why do they need to stop?
why do they need to “seriously” stop? I’m a tourist here. But if child molestation accusations aren’t enough to get righteously indignant, what are? Sometimes a torch wielding mob is just what the situation calls for.
We take the principle in America that torch wielding mobs are never appropriate because we have a legal system that is supposed to keep things calm, orderly, and just. There are tradeoffs to our legal system as with all things related to human attempts towards justice, but I think the tradeoffs of “mobs” are always going to be worse in terms of innocence destroyed.
We are supposed to deal in facts, my friend.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 10:50 AM EST up reply actions 10 recs
I'm an American, and a lawyer.
I do not accept that torch wielding mobs are never appropriate, particularly where the mob is wielding checkbooks, not torches, and is merely withholding payment until the facts are in. In any case, as a general proposition, this country adores mobs, and vigilanty justice.
I do appreciate the need for order. Some kids were (probably) molested. Kids are less likely to get molested in places where mobs form, in my opinion.
I'm an American and a Pennsylvanian, and I have no ambition for being a lawyer.
The pursuit of justice requires a disciplined approach, and this idea that mobs will give us a better, more just outcome just because the crime is more heinous flies in the face of the evidence compiled from the many instances of what actually happens when mobs try to do what legal systems do.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 10:59 AM EST up reply actions
He's not being literal, Rambler.
He’s saying that collective behavior holding institutions accountable (“where the mob is wielding checkbooks”) tends to result in better institutions. Obviously he’s right.
And again, I don’t see any lynch mob here, at all. The worst that you can say is everyone is scratching his head and going, What the heck is Paterno doing in this flow-chart?
We play tackle football.
If you don't see a "lynch mob", then stop using that phrase.
I never used the phrase lynch mob to describe what I see because what I see can be explained adequately without such phrases.
I think Chris’s post was, for the most part, very commendable. But it is deeply flawed. What I see is someone making assumptions that are currently unreasonable and have no factual evidence behind them. This is indisputable. I see no possible way to read Chris’s remarks as something other than assuming that Joe Paterno deserves to lose his job. And he offers nothing to support this conclusion other than the assumption – made without anything in support – that Paterno didn’t press the investigation, ask “What’s going on?”, etc. Does this series of assumptions not strike you as possibly dangerous?
And I should add that even if Paterno did cease his involvement when he called Curley and Schultz’s attentions to the matter, that would certainly not have been illegal and it would only be very arguable at best as to whether or not that would be reason enough to terminate his career at Penn State (I honestly don’t know how I’d feel about that, if that’s where we end up).
But the main point remains the fact that it is wrong for us to assume Paterno should leave when we really don’t have the slightest clue what actually happened.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 11:17 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Just because a court hasn't ruled on an assumption
doesn’t make it unreasonable. You do not have a moral obligation to withhold judgment until the sacred Courthouse has so ruled; Judges are arbiters of law, not reason.
There is a lot of “factual evidence” that suggests something tragic happened. Most of the facts are currently uncontested, and until someone is willing to stand up an d say “no children were molested” I’d just as soon take everyone at their word.
I read Chris’s post and I’m not sure it’s fair to say that he demands Joe Paterno lose his job, tomorrow, without any additional fact-finding. Having said that, I think demanding your football coach’s job is a perfectly healthy, and morally responsible way to react to child molestation accusations which include his alleged inaction.
I certainly wouldn’t characterize anything Chris said as “dangerous,” possibly or otherwise, but do view with some suspicion any person more committed to combating unreasonable assumptions than child molestation. I apologize for the cheap shot, but I don’t think it’s unusual—or unreasonable, or immoral—that people are reacting viscerally to this tragedy. That’s how civilized people react to child molestation.
As to whether Paterno did anything illegal (not my call) or immoral (not my call) it isn’t the case that every legal obligation is a moral one, and it certainly isn’t the case that every moral obligation is a legal one.
Er...
As to whether Paterno did anything… immoral (not my call)
It is my call, because I’m a human being. It is not my call whether he loses his job, which is better left to y’all.
Maybe.
I’m not so sure you’re correct, but I understand your point. Too much due process can be a bad thing.
Spanier's actions are egregious to me as well.
That’s why I’m cutting the funds.
Penn State needs a great deal of change beyond just Curley and Schultz.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Spanier's actions
are insane. Someone who is a President of a University should know that the word “unconditional” REEKS of cronyism and protecting someone who may have done something terrible.
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 10:52 AM EST up reply actions
If Tim Curley is still AD at noon on Monday...
…I think I’m done. If Spanier is still university President on Thanksgiving, I think I’m done.
I’ve spent my whole life actually believing in this “Penn State” thing. From what I’ve read, which is pretty much everything, the best anyone has done here is what they were required to do by statute.
I thought we had to do more.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
by jesse. on Nov 6, 2011 8:09 AM EST reply actions 2 recs
"From what I’ve read, which is pretty much everything, the best anyone has done here is what they were required to do by statute. I thought we had to do more."
This is how I feel. I am disappointed in Joe Paterno. I am furious at Tim Curley and Graham Spanier and Schultz. As for Jerry Sandusky, I have no words other than he better not kill himself before he stands trial.
Washingtonian and Penn Stater -- My blog features the triumph of hope over experience that is being a DC sports fan (especially the Nats) as well as the Nittany Lions, life in BeltwayLand and other things I find interesting. @doubleuefwhy
by WFY on Nov 6, 2011 8:13 AM EST up reply actions
She agreed with that assessment
Washingtonian and Penn Stater -- My blog features the triumph of hope over experience that is being a DC sports fan (especially the Nats) as well as the Nittany Lions, life in BeltwayLand and other things I find interesting. @doubleuefwhy
by WFY on Nov 6, 2011 4:54 PM EST up reply actions
agreee completley
Ethics is more then a legal staute. it is more then a code. I believe the argument is more then and will be more then what was done by the letter of the law. I hate to make the analogy but please see the fugitve slave law. This was a law as well. Did this mean following this law made the persons actions right? There are times for moral courage. I have seen this instance happen in another instituion more so then others may have in this blog. I will defer from going into details but the damage perfomed by keep silent is not excusable and the direct result was more pain. Most insitituions have an outlet for reporting instances were proper action was not taken. I hope psu would have this mechanism and if they do then why was this not utilized.
There are times when a corps commander's life does not count.
by psu in the w-b on Nov 6, 2011 2:20 PM EST up reply actions
In all seriousness folks...
we need to load up a bus with strippers, guns, marijuana, and illegal fireworks and send them to Stanford.
I’ll drive. But I need an assistant to coordinate the daily activities for the strippers.
Dark Knight feeling, die and be a hero-or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.-Jay-Z
by OMEGAMAN on Nov 6, 2011 8:15 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
If he can plan out our rest stops, I shall consider him.
Dark Knight feeling, die and be a hero-or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.-Jay-Z
I would like to request
Scrabble. Or at least some Connect 4.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Well I quite literally am a guy that tells jokes at funerals
but, yeah.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
morbid sense of humor makes u hold onto sanity
There are times when a corps commander's life does not count.
by psu in the w-b on Nov 6, 2011 2:21 PM EST up reply actions
This whole situation is making me think horrible thoughts
There is a part of me that hopes Sandusky “opts out”, and that this never gets to CNN/FoxNews/TruTV trial of the century status, dragging on forever, which will just be disastrous for the University. So, some of me is rooting for a man to take his own life.
On the other hand, most of me wants Sandusky to stand trial, let his victims face him and get their “retribution”, although no punishment a 67 year old pedo could receive would be able to repair the victims’ lives.
And then, yet another smaller part of me hopes a truck-sized meteor crashes into South America, thus sweeping this news story under the rug.
I don’t think there is a word to describe this whole situation. Despicable, abominable, atrocious, etc just don’t cut it.
Definitely terrible in every single aspect.
It was foolish of me to think the QB controversy was going to tear the fan base apart. Something like this (in terms of what Joe Pa should do) certainly might.
Dark Knight feeling, die and be a hero-or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.-Jay-Z
I'm from the Caribbean
and a lot of my friends are from South America.
Can we choose another part of the world?
The media is on this like flies on roadkill
Just like the Nevin Shipiro thing at the “U”.
But if that scandal didn’t take down Dona Shalala, then who knows what will happen?
Jim Tressel didn’t survive “not reporting” something far less hideous.
People may lose their jobs, but jail time is a whole different ball game.
It is amazing how a single individual can wreak such havoc upon an entire institution and the lives of so many others. And child sexual abuse – can there be anything lower than that?
A question for the legal types.
Despite not having contact with Sandusky for two years, the victim testified that he was contacted by Sandusky, Sandusky’s wife, and another associate of Sandusky weeks before the victim’s Grand Jury testimony.
Could that be an obstruction of justice charge waiting to happen for those three mentioned? I have some tangential knowledge of the law, and I know of no situation where it is okay for the subject of a criminal investigation to contact a potential witness.
Absolutely
I am a civil trial lawyer-have never practiced criminal law. But depending on what was said it could be obstruction of justice.
tO$U sucks-ALWAYS the right choice!
without more info, you're making useless
conclusions. Best to put that one on the back burner for now.
by rodney20 on Nov 6, 2011 9:22 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
I don't think so.
It’s in the record that Sandusky, his wife, and an associate contacted one of the victims two weeks before grand jury testimony. That’s not a conclusion, it’s a fact. And it was phrased as a question in any case.
I’m surprised Spanier is getting such a relative pass here, not entirely in this space but certainly elsewhere. He’s ultimately responsible for the university, and by many accounts (as evidence by consideration for a variety of high profile positions) one of the most respected performers in the country. He’s also responsible for allowing Schultz to control the UP, which is ridiculous.
I’m firmly in the wait and see camp on Paterno. I’m a little amazed at how far the discourse has progressed here considering we have almost no insight into what the full picture looks like. Maybe he did lawyer up and ask for CYA instructions and no more, or maybe he called the SC Police and a friend at the FBI, only to be told the allegations where bogus or uninvestigatable by all parties. Sure some things seem more likely than others, but I’m not sure we’re doing anyone any favors by assuming things and then demanding action.
That being said, this thing is heinous. The only thing left is to try and do as much good during the cleanup. Appropriate heads must roll and the school better do whatever the hell they can to try and support the victims, which seems much more important to me than decided who and why particular administrators should be fired.
by Kevin Powers on Nov 6, 2011 8:35 AM EST reply actions 2 recs
Most people have just skimmed the GJ thing.
Nobody who read it thinks Spanier gets out of this alive. Like I said yesterday, the real reporters won’t be in State College until tomorrow morning.
The only think that has me holding any manner of hope in this is that I haven’t read anything yet that implicates Paterno beyond he heard something and he told his boss right away.
Clean up? This is going to cost the University 50 million dollars before it’s over. If they’re lucky.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
I said this in another post
Spanier testified that Curley and Schultz reported the 2002 Victim #2 incident that made a member of Curley’s staff “uncomfortable”. Spanier described the incident as “Jerry Sandusky in the football building locker area in the shower with a younger child and they were horsing around.” He also testified that as of January 2011, he did not know the identity of the GA who originally reported the incident.
How can Spanier honestly be told something like that and not inquire more about the situation. At the very least, Spanier acted incompetently by not investigating further. More likely, Spanier was well aware of what happened, participated in covering it up, and is letting Curley take the blame for it all. That would explain his unconditional support for Curley.
I’m not sure that any of these people realized they did anything wrong until it was way too late. When I originally saw “failure to report” as one of the charges, I was confused, I didn’t think Curley was a mandatory reporter. He is, but he’s a Division 1A Athletic Director, when would that come up? The law is designed to apply at High Schools.
My Wife read the GJ findings and she said, “it’s like they never even talked to a lawyer”. I’m not sure they did. They didn’t even bother to get their stories straight.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
Well, either Spanier or Curley would be the mandatory reporter
Curley, as AD could be considered a MR, but you could make the argument that Spanier as President fits that bill better. The problem is, if Spanier is the MR, then Curley has a legal obligation to inform Spanier. Based on the GJ report, it seems like the GJ believes that Curley was aware of the full extent of the allegations, but didn’t pass them on to law enforcement or to Spanier – making it failure to report no matter who the MR is.
Note that I don’t buy for a second that Spanier wasn’t aware, but that’s what they testified to.
Based on Paterno's statement this evening.
It sounds like the story got less interesting as it was passed up the food chain, like a reverse telephone game effect.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
Your wife is spot on.
I said the same thing to my buddy yesterday. What PSU attorney wouldn’t see potential liability out the wazoo, even if this was a single isolated incident? But now add the perspective of the 1998 investigation (done by UP police and reviewed by Gricar), and how could sirens not have been going off everywhere on campus?
If counsel wasn’t informed, Curley and Spanier were fools. If counsel was informed, PSU needs better lawyers.
by CvilleLion on Nov 6, 2011 9:06 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
What PSU attorney wouldn’t see potential liability out the wazoo
The one that was simultaneously General Counsel for both Penn State and the Second Mile. And that’s a fact.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
Wow.
Was that reported somewhere along the line in all the disclosures? That’s new — and important — news to me.
So to summarize . . .
We have university officials who failed to properly investigate a reported crime, and were being advised by legal counsel with a clear conflict of interest. Then they go perjure themselves to a grand jury.
Great. Awesome.
by CvilleLion on Nov 6, 2011 9:22 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Yes.
State College is a small town. And apparently, it’s a cesspool.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
Don’t forget the head of finance is in charge of exposing employees to the law and taking on the direct and indirect financial impact that goes with it.
by Kevin Powers on Nov 6, 2011 9:39 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Yes The Victims Must Be Helped
which means compensated-voluntarily. As for heads rolling that too must happen.
tO$U sucks-ALWAYS the right choice!
This victims compensation will be compelled.
Trust me. This will be one of the biggest civil suits in the history of the state. Maybe the biggest.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
Who knew what, when, who should report
If JD did this he can rot forever. But the reporting of incidents, obviously only a couple were possibly witnessed outside of the victoms. It is extremely difficult to report this to proper authorities. The GA needs to be commended and the fact he discussed it with his dad is proof how difficult this is. Did I really see that? Especially when it is an upstanding community member, especially if your accusation could sound spiteful due to coworker/mentor status.
In the middle to late 00’s an ex professor from Bucknell was prosecuted for this same thing. Retired from BU in the early 00’s. Started there in the early 70’s. WHo knew what when. I was 15, summer of 76. Rode my bike alot. Rt 192 to Half Way Dam, long ride (20 miles for me). No one lived along that road from Forest Hills to HWD. In June that year I was approached by a man in a maroon AMC Matador and solicited for sex. I laughed and kept going. Only person I told was a kid who lived in Forest Hills who then said, yeah there is some creep talking to boys from here to Lewisburg. In July I saw the guy again and this time he got out of his car and tried to approach. Scared the hell out of me and I never road to HWD alone again, even though I was a pretty good athlete and could handle myself, this was scarey. I never told my parents, I even remembered the license no of the car. Never told anyone else till I read about the arrest and then told my wife. The professor drove a maroon car back then. What would have happened if I had said something. I can’t remember the number of people who ended up reporting assaults against this man but I did nothing back then. Numerous of those reported as kids in the late 70’s early 80’s and they were scoffed at by people in charge. No way someone of this stature would do that. How wrong am I for not reporting that. THis prof’s story reads so much like JD. Kids said stuff but come on, this guy is a leader, active in the community. THe kids all were of questionable status. Who knew what when and how do you report it. Hide behind the black and white of the law but this crime transcends law. When you have witnessed victoms and seen the creeps personally it makes it hard to jump to conclusions. The worst thing I have seen is another youth coach accused by a disgrutled parent. The crime is horrid but it is also horrid because it is so difficult to accuse someone of it. That is why these creeps can do it for so long. People work side by side with these people and don’t know, would never know.
THis is just an extremely difficult situation. Those that want to blame, go ahead but chances are you working or associating with someone that does this and you don’t notice it and would have a tough time believing it if told. This GJ took a looooong time. The rest is going to take a long time too but the way things read it looks like PSU had one in their midsts, when do you accuse someone who is so beloved? When are you sure of what you saw? Its way tougher than most here realize.
My grammer skills need improved.
by BMAN13 on Nov 6, 2011 8:40 AM EST reply actions 3 recs
The GA was McQueary.
His Dad coached my brothers Little League team, and he was an excellent coach.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
I know what you're talking about exactly.
Having been a victim myself from the ages of 8 – 10, and having no one believe you because the people accused are older, active in the community, or whatever the reason, makes it even harder for somebody to come forward.
by misdreavus79 on Nov 7, 2011 10:13 AM EST up reply actions
THIS...is what I was trying to say yesterday, well written Chris
At what point should Paterno have followed up with Curley and asked, “hey, remember that…thing I told you about? The one involving a little boy, my trusted defensive coordinator of 32 years, and our locker room? Anything happen with that? Should I make that phone call myself?” The Grand Jury Findings Of Fact state, “[T]he graduate assistant was never questioned by University Police and no other entity conducted an investigation until he testified in Grand Jury in December, 2010.” Curley and Schultz admitted that they didn’t act. Why didn’t anyone else?
It’s probably not a huge jump to conclude that if an incident about an alleged aggravated indecent assault in the Penn State locker room is reported to law enforcement, they’re rather likely to open up a file on it.
I blame HITS
Who's to say he didn't follow up?
I’m not trying to defend anything anybody has done or didn’t do, but we do not know enough to make judgements one way or another. Maybe Joe did follow up and Curley said they looked into it. Maybe he said he was working on finding out what happened. We don’t know. Joe might have just sat on his hands, that’s possible too.
"I don’t know what he’s done differently, whether he’s eating differently or Sue is making him happier, but he’s definitely a different coach out there" Devon Still
You keep making this jump to a story line that hasn't been reported yet.
Joe may not have made the call, but he could have been repeatedly told that there was an investigation into it, this grand jury investigation took what, 3 years? They can last for a very long time, if he was being lied to about what was going on after the report he would have no reason to push for an investigation, as far as he knew, there already was one. It may or may not be true and we need to stop treating it like fact.
So far there is absolutely no objective, based on fact, reason to have a negative opinion of Joe based on what we’ve learned so far. We just don’t know what he did, to state we do, without being an inside guy like Derrry, is just speaking directly from the ass.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 9:15 AM EST up reply actions 4 recs
According to the GJ transcripts
The 1998 incident was investigated by SCPD, and Sandusky admitted having inappropriate sexual contact with the boy, but essentially promised to “knock it off”, and nothing more came of it. Shortly thereafter, Joe Paterno informed Sandusky that he was never going to be head coach at Penn State.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
I don't recall it being the reason why from the reading
The timing works out, but, still, its a jump to conclusions if it doesn’t state why in the reports. There are plenty of reasons Joe could have told him why he wasn’t going to be HC.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
The reasons are probably the same...
…that they have been the last 10 years. To Joe, retirement is the final step before the death bed.
According to the Centre Daily Times
The circa 1998 incidents’ investigations were terminated with no prosecution by the local DA.
The local District Attorney, the lunatic Ray Gricar, was the person who called them off.
This tells me that PSU reported to police in 1998, told Sandusky that he was through, and, since the DA did not prosecute, gave the old coach room and phone and shower privileges for the next few years.
Elizabeth, with Vin Scully, only folks working longer than JoePA at same place!
by joefromboalsburg on Nov 6, 2011 6:08 PM EST up reply actions
Gricar was a lunatic?
Everything I’ve read about him points to the contrary. If he didn’t pursue this there was good reason not to.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
addendum
I mean “good reason not to” in the sense that he seemed like the type of DA that would definitely prosecute if he had the evidence for it.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
Seriously
Gricar brought charges against a football player for taking a bike out of a dumpster.
You think he wouldn’t call in the National Guard on this one?
by Tailgate Shogun on Nov 6, 2011 8:38 PM EST up reply actions
If you read the full GJ presentment
it appears as though it was called off because there wasn’t enough evidence to have a good chance at conviction. When the police hid in the Mom’s house while she confronted Sandusky, she was able to get him to admit he showered with the boy, but that’s as far as it went. He equivocated on the question of whether or not his genitals touched the boy. Beyond that, it’s just he said/she said with a (at the time) very well respected community leader. This was the first time anything like this had ever come to light with Sandusky. Honestly, what were the chances of conviction?
I’m not a lawyer, but as far as I know, it’s not a crime for a 50-something year old to shower with a child if no sexual activity occurs. It’s freaking weird and suspicious as hell, but I don’t believe it’s illegal.
For all I know...
Paterno may have been giving Sandusky the cold shoulder since the first allegations surfaced in about ’96 – it sure sounds like things took a southward turn in their relationship about that time.
The fact is that none of us can honestly say what we would or wouldn’t have done in the situation where we find that someone we’ve know our whole adult life is a monster, until it actually happens. Trying to imagine what a Reasonable Man would do is futile, since reason pretty much goes out the window in these situations. Just try to fathom for one second what situation could even arise that would potentially force you to simultaneously throw a substantial portion of your associates under the bus. None of us knows what has been going through Paterno’s head every time he looked at Curley for the past nine years – but obviously their relationship hasn’t been the best. I’m not even going to try to speculate on what could have blown up if Paterno had tried to raise holy hell after the 2002 incident – even if his particular version of holy hell was to punch Sandusky squarely in the face the first time he saw him (a course of action which, incidentally, would be near the top of my personal list of ways to handle this).
The only involvement that we know for sure that Paterno had in this situation at this point is what is stated in the Grand Jury summary. The fact that they included a statement praising his level of involvement is enough for Paterno to get my full support (and not Spanier’s brand of unconditional support either). My opinion will change if it surfaces that Paterno was still chummy with Sandusky after the 2002 incident, but until that happens, I have no reason to think that Joe Paterno is not the person I’ve always thought he was.
…and Curley, Schulz, and Spanier had better not come through this without seeing the inside of at least the unemployment office, or possibly a prison cell.
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 9:06 AM EST reply actions 6 recs
I can tell you that.....
there was no “chumminess” between Joe and the Creep from the get go and Joe still is the person we think/know he is, and I heartily agree with the statement that these enablers/collaborators should see the insides of a prison wall….statements were made by these guys that an ongoing investigation was in hand and Joe took that as gospel. AND the beat goes on…..
"The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God." The Government is like the Mob, you can check out, but never leave.
by DerryPharmer on Nov 6, 2011 9:12 AM EST up reply actions 7 recs
Thanks
This is what I would have expected. I think we’ve known Joe long enough to know he would act in a certain way with this thing. I mean, this is the man who doesn’t want to pick a QB because he doesn’t want to hurt the other’s feelings. If he was being lied to about what was going on, he had no chance to help and through no fault of his own beyond trusting Curley’s word. I don’t know enough about that relationship to know if the trust was unfounded or not.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
good to hve somene to fill in the holes right now thanks derry hope y r feeling well
There are times when a corps commander's life does not count.
by psu in the w-b on Nov 6, 2011 2:33 PM EST up reply actions
When I made some reference about a year ago....
that “something” was going to break concerning a former coach and some horrible acts involving the athletic/FB department, I was criticized for rumor mongering…..my “sig” is my motto and I get no satisfaction in finally having the news break…..lives have been ruined(the kids), cover-ups made and now the finger pointing has begun as to whom should die, kill themselves, resign, or should have done more about this case….it will not go away soon and this incident, which was allowed to fester for some 15(?) years will tear apart the good that PSU football has fostered for 125 years…..the FB program will survive, I’m just not sure that the individuals involved will and that’s the shame of it all for those who did their due dilligence…..the obvious collaborators should get the death penalty and in the very least for some serve some hard time. I, on the other hand, have never written anything that may be considered libelous nor the start of a rumor(see: this case and the OSU tragedy)….it will be a long, long time for the stench of this horrible crime to blow away and it’s going to be a really tough time for all of us who live the PSU experience, but justice will pevail in the end and as many of you have stated before, “buckle up, it’s gonna be a long and bumpy ride.” God bless us all.
"The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God." The Government is like the Mob, you can check out, but never leave.
by DerryPharmer on Nov 6, 2011 9:06 AM EST reply actions 5 recs
SO from your sources, Joe was told there is an active investigation ongoing?
If that is the case, he is probably furious with Spanier/Curley/etc…
I blame HITS
You really need to cut that last part about Paterno out.
We CANNOT make a judgement on Joe’s moral standing in the issue with the information we currently have. It’s impossible. No where does it state what Joe did after he reported it. He may very well have followed up repeatedly, all Curley had to do was lie and say “There’s an ongoing investigation” or he may not have, but to state he didn’t is absolute fiction as we stand now.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 9:09 AM EST reply actions 13 recs
My feeling is that if Joe would have followed up on it repeatedly
That info may have been released as well, to build a stronger case against Curley for not reporting it. We don’t know if there is more info out there, but considering there was such substantial specific detail in the report, my stance is that if Joe would have been pressing the issue, it may have been in the report as well.
by mundyscorner99 on Nov 6, 2011 9:17 AM EST up reply actions
I think that is what we all expect of Joe
And because it hasn’t been reported, people are jumping all over this as “Joe didn’t care to follow up” which is based in fiction, there is no report either way. As of yet, there is no reason to be disappointed in what Joe did in regards to this, as outsiders we do not know what Joe did or what he was told.
We will though, Paterno’s testimony in the case will probably be very illuminating. But the jumping to conclusions about Joe’s actions and judging him on these conclusions needs to stop.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 9:29 AM EST up reply actions 8 recs
Nobody knows what Paterno did or didn't do, knew or didn't know.
I will say, however, that it is extremely odd that Sandusky departed as he did, that he was banned from PSU facilities, and that he was never hired elsewhere. But I haven’t followed the career of Mr. Sandusky, so perhaps all of that is incorrect or a string of coincidences.
We play tackle football.
I don't think we'll truly know
Until Joe’s testimony in the trials. Almost certainly “Joe, why did you tell Sandusky he would not be head coach and why did he retire?” will be a question. We won’t know the real answer until then.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
The actual fact is more chilling.
He retired to spend more time working with children. [shudder]
Works on contingency? No, money down!
If it's a fact that he was banned from PSU facilities
there are going to be some really uncomfortable depositions.
We play tackle football.
I think there are going to be really uncomfortable depositions regardless. But to your point, I think if he was banned from facilities then it’s going to paint the school in an even darker light.
Ed Snider is a crotchety old fuck.
That is all.
Everybody admits that he was banned from PSU facilities.
In law, admissions = facts. In fact they are better than facts, because you don’t have to prove them.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
I guess he was banned
for things that never happened. That would seem to be the administrators’ explanation.
We play tackle football.
No.
According to Curley, he heard that Sandusky was “inappropriatly horsing around” with a minor and as result he was forbidden from bringing children on campus with him.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
Absolutely. I am not disputing any of that. I am simply saying that the fact that he was banned from the facilities speaks to how serious people thought these allegations were. And yet things still weren’t followed up properly. You don’t ban someone like Sandusky from the facilities without good cause.
Ed Snider is a crotchety old fuck.
That is all.
He wasn't banned from the facilities...
…he was banned from bringing underage children into the facilities.
Unless I missed a paragraph in the report (please post if I did), I saw no where in there where he was banned from the facilities.
According to the Testimony
Curley told the GA that he had been banned from the facilities but that in actuality no ban had ever been placed on JD.
Where does it state that?
From the report (page 8), “Curley testified that he met again with the graduate assistant and advised him that Sandusky had been directed not to use Penn State’s athletic facilities with young people…”
Page 9, “Schultz testified that he and Curley agreed that Sandusky was to be told not to bring any Second Mile children into the football building…”
Page 11, “Both the graduate assistant and Curley testified that Sandusky himself was not banned from any Penn State buildings and Curley admitted that the ban on bringing children to the campus was unenforceable.”
Once again, reference the page number where it states that he himself was banned from the facilities.
I didn't say he was banned
I said that Curley told the GA he had been banned, however I wasn’t quite accurate. From the bottom of page 7,
The GA heard back from Curley a couple of weeks later. He was told that Sandusky’s keys to the locker room were taken away and that the incident had been reported to the second mile
So to summarize, he was never banned, but the GA was told that he had lost his keys (aka had his access restricted) to the locker room.
the woute about being a great pretender in a book actually gave me the chills
There are times when a corps commander's life does not count.
by psu in the w-b on Nov 6, 2011 2:35 PM EST up reply actions
Late 2000
Sandusky was in the running to replace George Welsh at Virginia. I imagine there was a phone conversation between Welsh and Paterno at some point.
FTR-Al Groh (a UVa player in the 1960’s) decided after one season as HC of the NYJ he wanted to coach in college so he was hired at his alma mater. Brought in some guy named Golden as his DC.
tO$U sucks-ALWAYS the right choice!
My take
I’m sure I’m not saying something that hasn’t already been said, but first, I feel so badly for the victims. I hope there aren’t any others, because when news like this comes out, it is possible for others to now have the courage to speak. There is so much blame to go around. Sandusky’s actions are despicable. It appears that Curley and Schultz did not take the allegeations seriously and as a result these terrible actions continued to occur. I also feel that Joe could have gone to the police and/or looked into the matter more after relaying the info to Curley and Schultz. To me this is similar to a rape, something that should be reported immediately to the police, and I don’t feel that just “following protocol” is good enough to be in the clear in something like this. And although it may have been a tough situation, I also feel the GA should have gone to the police immediately as well, considering he was an eyewitness. I don’t see how anyone survives this.
The crimes are those of a compulsive sociopath.
I think we will learn that 8 is on the low side.
We play tackle football.
this I agree with. And people don't want to confront these sociopaths with only minimal allegations.
They usually hold power and have many unknowing protectors
My grammer skills need improved.
I'm a divorce lawyer.
One thing I know about child sexual abuse is that you don’t just decide that 10 year old boys turn you on. You either molest kids, or you don’t. The Second mile was founded in the late 70’s, as a foster home for troubled kids. This guy might be like Mr. Burns evil.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
Smithers once said...
you are moving from villainy to cartooninsh super villainy. Sandusky is more toward the latter.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
It may be inappropriate for this website
But I am interested in the pathology here. What makes a person behave this way? Are there common characteristics?
I found myself wondering this myself last night
I think that’s probably a discussion that might be too in depth for a medium like this.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Yeah you might want to take a psyche class or something...
from what I’ve observed, abuse (all kinds) is often passed down through generations. its a difficult cycle to break.
Not that any of that excuses the accused here.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:06 AM EST up reply actions
What I think many are forgetting....
……is that most organizations, including Penn State, require training for the sort of procedure in cases such as this. I would be surprised if nobody within the organization (or The Second Mile for that matter) were not at least familiar with the law and procedure.
These are the kinds of training many people in corporate organizations lambast and consider a waste of time. This is why they are very wrong.
As a Scouting volunteer, we are required to take this training annually. We are told the law as it pertains in our locality and also the policy of the organization, which in Scouting’s case is much stricter.
Scouting has a No Tolerance policy toward single adult to single youth contact behind closed doors. Volunteers are required to report any matter to Professional Scouters and then are required to not speak of the matter again once the initial report is made. The adult in question is then banned from Scouting – no questions asked, no appeal. Professional Scouters are not to investigate the matter but are required to formalize the report and bring in the appropriate authority. Regardless of intent of the contact (with some exceptions for extreme medical cases) the adult may not return to Scouting in any capacity.
Matters such as these are delicate. Hearsay, conjecture and whisper-down-the-lane are all hindrances to investigation and the truth. This is the primary reason why administration are the ones who bear the responsibility of following through on reporting to civil authorities. Part of that paycheck is taking on the responsibility of being the only person who must go through this process. In this instance, the Athletic Director is incompetent – regardless of the outcome of the case.
The travesty is two administrators at the University made a decision that is not their right to make: That is in taking the law into their own hands by not reporting the matter to investigative authorities. Furthermore, they took upon themselves the decision of rendering both a guilty/not guilty verdict and punishment for a crime.
Ok I'm going to be *that* guy
From a legal PoV a lot still has to play out.
As far as we know the whole case against Sandusky will be circumstantial. There will be no physical evidence presented in court against him. The jury will have to decide who they believe – the accusers or Sandusky.
The only two first-hand witnesses for the prosecution will be Big Red and the Janitor. The defence will only have to discredit them or push either of their testimony to the ‘questionable’ pile and Sandusky may well be found not guilty.
As far as I’m aware Sandusky has a wife and several of these alleged incidents happened under the marital roof. From all we know the wife will not take the stand for the prosecution and will be a key defence witness. If she takes the stand and says she knows nothing, she saw nothing, heard nothing and is perceived as a credible witness she is a very key witness in this case.
Also the charges stem back what 17 years, it will only need the defence to discredit two or three of the accusers – heck even one – and the jury will suddenly shift to being far more concerned. The fact that no-one filed police charges until 2009 will also concern the jury. If it comes out under oath that the accusers told their parents and the parents did nothing then a jury will struggle with this as why should they believe testimony when their parents didn’t even believe it when it first came up.
I don’t like being that guy but I was the foreman of a jury in a very similar case and we found the defendant not guilty on all charges (it was a step-dad charged with abusing his step-children) and as a jury we could not get over the fact the mother didn’t believe her own child and only reported the case weeks later after she confided in other parents what her daughter had said.
I have no idea if Sandusky is guilty or not. I’m just saying the legal process has to play out and all the defence has to do is discredit one or two people to the point where a jury doesn’t believe their testimony and they’ll find him not guilty.
As for JoePa. Reading the national writers today they all think he should go. They though like you or I don’t know what Paterno did or didn’t do beyond the fact that legally he did everything right. Did he follow up with Curley/Schultz? We don’t know but until I see a reason to blame JoePa on any moral ground then I’ll fully back him.
Innocent until proven guilty is a very important motto – and legally that word proven is vital and something I think most people overlook unless they are actually sitting as a juror. Thinking he’s guilty after the evidence isn’t enough. They have to believe it.
by Blokee on Nov 6, 2011 9:29 AM EST reply actions 9 recs
As far as we know the whole case against Sandusky will be circumstantial.
An eye witness’s testimony, which Red’s will offer is considered Direct Evidence and not circumstantial at all.
Ed Snider is a crotchety old fuck.
That is all.
by EREX21 on Nov 6, 2011 9:34 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
but what he witnessed was not sex, it was two people in the shower.
not that I would want that to be my kid but he did not witness a sex act.
My grammer skills need improved.
Maybe you should re-read the GJ stuff.
by Chris Grovich on Nov 6, 2011 10:02 AM EST up reply actions
I would recommend not doing so.
and just take our word that he saw/heard more than two people taking a shower
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:03 AM EST up reply actions
maybe I am wrong, but I thought the janitor story involved sex but the GA did not.
My grammer skills need improved.
I think its the other way around..
or at the least, the janitor heard things that implied it.
I’d go back to the report but I can’t bring myself to read that again.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:07 AM EST up reply actions
The janitor saw it.
The other janitors were worried he would have a heart attack, that is how upset he was. He stated that it was the worst thing he had ever saw, and he was an veteran (I don’t exactly remember where and what war(s)) and saw unspeakable things.
He was a Korean War vet.
"Want a donut go to dunkin donuts, want a linebacker go to Penn State."
- Cris Carter, NFL Draft, 4/25/09
twitter: @princessblueezy
According to the GJ report
Both witnessed sex acts, and the GA testified that he made this clear to Paterno, Curley and Schultz. This is where the perjury charges are stemming from.
There is no doubt in my mind that Sandusky will be found guilty on many of these charges.
Too many victims over too many years with too many witnesses to report at minimum inappropriate behavior, the vastness of the case will do the rest of the talking.
Curley and Schultz, it’s hard to say about them, it’ll turn into a he said this he said that and it’ll come down to credibility.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Nohing, nothing, nothing, nothing,
Nothing I’ve read or seen makes me think Joe did anything wrong. I think some people are being overzealous. A lot of people are offering a “I would have done this” kind of reasoning and that’s unfair.
by rodney20 on Nov 6, 2011 9:41 AM EST via mobile reply actions 9 recs
Joe
I don’t see or read anything wrong either. He and McQueary each reported to superiors. And the results of the 1998 case was that no criminal charges were being filed, disgusting as that is. But what more can someone do or say if no criminal charges are filed. Sandusky retired after that. As for 2002, he reported it. Most importantly, Joe wasn’t charged with anything. After this years-long investigation, if there was anything to charge Joe with, they would have done it.
Also good to point out
That the prosecution has come out and stated that Joe did everything that he should have and praised him in the report.
by AriesGD on Nov 6, 2011 12:06 PM EST up reply actions 6 recs
One thing that I don't understand
Iowa had to deal with rape allegations a few years ago, as well as the fallout from an inappropriate internal “investigation”. In cases like these, I do not understand why the first call isn’t to the police. A university is not equipped to handle such an investigation and, given a sizable conflict of interest, would never be completely trusted with the results of such an investigation. Why not hand the thing over to the proper authorities immediately? Universities really have no business investigating felony allegations and it seems to only lead to problems when they try.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Yeah
If I see someone getting raped in a grocery store, I don’t just tell the manager and then go on my way. It is just a weird system they have constructed.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
I believe it's grown out of sexual harassment law,
in which the accuser if presumed innocent but there is no criminal offense (typically), and the institution wants to keep a lid on the accusations and attempt to manage them down. (Corporations do the same thing.) And senior managers have a tendency to go into full-on stonewalling suppression mode in regard to anything that can damage their careers. So now we have people calling fondling or rape in a shower with a 60 year-old and a 10 year-old boy “horsing around.”
Anyway, that’s obviously a lie, on some level, if he was banned.
We play tackle football.
I understand
I just think that the presumed acceptable conduct in these cases should be re-examined.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
What would the headline....
“Joe Paterno reports Ex-Assistance Coach to Police for Sex Crime,” do to the ability of the necessary authorities to investigate. That thing would drop an even bigger bombshell than this – and one thing that hasn’t been mentioned yet is just how well the Grand Jury procedure has been conducted because the High School followed the proper procedure.
The thing with your supermarket example is that the organization in question simply is not “large” enough to necessitate special process for investigation. The potential interference simply does not exist because a relatively small amount of people have an invested interest in that organization.
by stonewall435 on Nov 6, 2011 10:15 AM EST up reply actions
The problem
That thing would drop an even bigger bombshell than this
This should not be a consideration.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Then how about replace 'bombshell' with 'legal clusterfuck'?
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 10:32 AM EST up reply actions
Exactly.
Unfortunately, once a crime is witnessed, it has already been committed. Once the crime is committed, the process must be to take the criminal out of society and mitigate the harms done to the victim.
by stonewall435 on Nov 6, 2011 10:35 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
This was pretty much what I meant above:
I’m not even going to try to speculate on what could have blown up if Paterno had tried to raise holy hell after the 2002 incident…
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 10:42 AM EST up reply actions
Maybe it would have stoppd a guy from molesting children
I understand the benefits that the university (and the perpetrator) gets by keeping an investigation in-house. I haven’t seen anyone here talk about how such an investigation benefits the victims.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Give me an example
of a situation in which a trusted employee tells an administrator that he has witnessed a violent crime committed upon a child and it would not be appropriate to tell the police.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
I think the military deals with this all the time.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Who do you think is the administrator in this instance?
Joe Paterno is not. Tim Curley is.
by stonewall435 on Nov 6, 2011 11:24 AM EST up reply actions
I did not say it was Joepa
You guys are so sensitive about JoePa you can’t even admit that this system is flawed.
My point is this: with a crime of this severity, why take evidence to an administrator when his role should really be nothing more than a middle man on the way to the proper authorities. I can’t imagine that there is any consideration that would keep someone from reporting such a thing to the police. It would be best for the institution and possible victims. The way this system works now, it only benefits the perpetrators.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
by Lycurgus on Nov 6, 2011 11:36 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Like I just told my wife:
According to the Penn State org chart, Schulz was the police. According to Derry, when Paterno followed up with Curley, he was assured that the ‘proper authorities’ were handling the situation.
I challenge any lawyer on this board to tell me that they wouldn’t advise Paterno to just let the matter play out in the legal system if they had been representing him through all this.
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 11:25 AM EST up reply actions
Rape in large institutions is the same as rape in the 7-11.
Large institutions do not get to shield rape because they require a “special process for investigation.” Rape is rape.
It’s alarming to me how many people seem to have internalized that large bureaucracies have rights and obligations that individuals and small organizations do not.
We play tackle football.
That's not the point at all...
…the point is from the moment of initial report to the point of a trial a large institution is much more prone to interference with the investigation. This is why Grand Juries exist in cases of this scale in the first place. That is why there is a critical mass and why this sort of thing only falls under certain job categories.
The Athletic Director failed in his job in this case and he was notified in a timely manner. Had he not done so – the only issue would really be with Jerry Sandusky.
by stonewall435 on Nov 6, 2011 10:20 AM EST up reply actions
It's more of an employment law issue.
Penn State is the party that has the obligation to report. Not Red, nor Paterno, or even Curley. The question is was Penn State aware, they were, and did they report it, they did not. Curley (and eventually Spanier) are being held responsible because they were people at Penn State that had the final obligation to report it on behalf of Penn State.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
by jesse. on Nov 6, 2011 10:23 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Oh, please.
If I see a crime on campus, I’m calling the cops. Everything else is equivocation and institutional self-interest.
No dispute on the Curley et al liability for crimes of ommission and commission.
But PSU (or SUI) doesn’t get to manage criminal investigations or somehow influence them.
We play tackle football.
Going off half-cocked...
…in cases like this (that’s why it’s called SPECIAL VICTIMS UNIT, they are not the same things) does not work.
The victim, many times, is not going to rat out the offender. So it now becomes the word of the witness vs. the word of both participants. The case and investigation disappears just as quickly as it was brought up.
Look, statistically, a portion of the people that have responded on this thread today have been the victim of some form of similar assault. Those people need to really look within themselves and remember how they felt. I can tell you that it is not nearly as cut and dry as you are making it out to be.
by stonewall435 on Nov 6, 2011 10:31 AM EST up reply actions
Sorry, if I witness a violent crime I'm reporting it, among other things.
And you are completely failing to reflect on the fact that your point was that large institutions are allowed to manage criminal behavior differently than every other person or entity.
We play tackle football.
And the "half-cocked" straw man is just cheap.
You either witness violence or you don’t, and the justice system sorts it out just fine without the ministrations of university vice presidents.
We play tackle football.
See above...
…once the crime is witnessed, it is already committed. The process is then to remove the criminal from society and mitigate the damage to the victim.
I haven’t failed to reflect on the the large institution point. When many more people are responsible and can potentially interfere with an investigation, having a sole pointman is critical to the process. When you see a crime at a 7-11… how many other people are going to potentially throw their .02 into the fray? How many could do so at Penn State if they operated under similar circumstances?
The thing you’re overlooking is that only the GA witnessed the crime. Paterno did not. Or did I miss that distinction?
I would be willing to say that the GA was acting on the guidelines set out in the legal training provided by the University. I know that once I make a report as a Scouting Volunteer, I am required to not speak of the matter ever again. Period.
by stonewall435 on Nov 6, 2011 10:40 AM EST up reply actions
The other thing you're not acknowleding is...
…there is a large division of responsibility in a chain of command. Multiple people are responsible for what goes on in University facilities with large amounts of overlap. If Paterno or the GA do not make the other people responsible aware of the situation first and those people with the job to report do not report fully and openly, it becomes infinitely more difficult to solve the issue.
So the crime gets reported… then what? That HAS to be the level headed question.
by stonewall435 on Nov 6, 2011 10:46 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
This is blather.
Crimes are the same, inside and outside of the country club.
While this reasoning may make no sense to you, I guarantee you it makes sense to the boys who were raped after this guy was witnessed committing a crime on university property — and raped because of crap like “a large division of responsiblity in a chain of command.” Because the ‘chain of command’ or whatever you want to call a bunch of people protecting their nests, more boys were raped.
We play tackle football.
....
…you may not want to make guarantees like that… speaking from the perspective of the victim without actually being the victim is a bit too far, IMO
To your point though:
The Chain of Command did not fail. People within the Chain of Command failed. The chain of command exists here to provide the necessary people with the best opportunity to gather information and prosecute the criminals. At best, your desired course of action would leave us exactly where we are today, IMO.
I believe your response is rooted in emotion that will do little to actually solve the problem.
You’re assuming the people involved (on every level) were capable of both enforcing and disseminating rule and information to the necessary authorities at the times given, in capacities well outside their realm. One person is trusted with the responsibility of reporting any incidents. That person failed.
I feel like you either wanted or expected Joe Paterno or the GA to say a word, and then have the issue magically solved. Unfortunately, that is not in the cards for anyone.
Reporting the crime would make you feel better about yourself, but still places the responsibility on others to make it right.
by stonewall435 on Nov 6, 2011 11:01 AM EST up reply actions
The Chain of Command did not fail. People within the Chain of Command failed.
Of course the chain of command failed. It did not fulfill its responsibilities to the victims of crime. That system is designed to protect an institution, not victims.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Listen, I respect your point,
but if you intend to drive this into the ground, do it over on BHGP. You’re getting old in your short time here.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
I see no reason for this post.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 11:26 AM EST up reply actions
Oh, the chain of command succeeded?
Brilliant! Nothing to see here! Chain of command succeeds, except where human links fail!
Fortunately no individual had the temerity to report independently some violent crimes. That would have embarrassed the chain of command!
We play tackle football.
I feel very strongly about this topic
…for very personal reasons that you are in danger of severely insulting. I will no longer respond to your increasingly sarcastic and emotionally driven posts as you do not seem willing to understand the true difficulty of these situations.
by stonewall435 on Nov 6, 2011 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
Which is why I see reason for my posts.
Lycurgus, my reply was directed at Bellanca, not you. However, I did not differentiate between authors in this thread, but only messages. I do apologize for replying to your message when I intended to reply to Bellanca’s.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
in danger of?
He crossed that line several comments ago
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
Perhaps that's because your opinion is morally and intellectually bankrupt.
There is no superseding chain of command (a chain of command that is above and outside statutory authority) in a corporation. It doesn’t exist. The argument that you are making may be exactly translated: a violent crime occurs in a Citibank shower. Before law enforcement is engaged, the chain of command of Citibank should be provided nine (9) years to figure out how to handle it. Whether your mistaken point of view is based on serving in the armed services (i.e., under the irrelevant UCMJ) or in the Boy Scouts, where pederasty is managed by trained professionals, or something, Penn State has no exemption from criminal law. These opinions you describe created a decade long, enabling environment for a sociopath. This is neither a sarcastic nor emotional response to someone justifying an institution creating an environment for a sociopath to rape boys.
We play tackle football.
by Bellanca on Nov 6, 2011 4:04 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Tim Curley did not fulfill his responsibilities as Athletic Director. Once Curley knows about the incident, the chain of command no longer applies, but the responsibility of the man in that position does apply.
Clearly, the system does not protect the institution but everyone involved with the incident, including law enforcement. One must remember that the minute an investigation starts with law enforcement, they must follow specific rules that if broken will get a criminal freed (see: OJ, Casey Anthony, etc. etc.).
An institution that is acting reasonably and within a set guidelines is MUCH more able to assist in law enforcement than a series of individuals acting of their own accord.
by stonewall435 on Nov 6, 2011 11:28 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
You asked for an explanation.
I gave it to you. I’m sorry you didn’t like it.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
Don't know what happened here:
I believe it’s grown out of how institutions defend themselves from sexual harassment cases, where shakedowns are common and a publicized allegation, alone, often leads to a financial settlement. I’m not saying that criminal behavior of the sort alleged and supposedly observed here should be treated like a sexual harassment allegation, just that the same people are involved in both and appear to respond first by attempting to bury and hide the allegation in order to minimize civil liability.
We play tackle football.
The univ vice president is in charge of the Penn State Police Force, which is recognized as a legit force in Pa.
My grammer skills need improved.
The univ vice president is in charge of the Penn State Police Force
I am not convinced. There are still serious conflict of interest issues. At Iowa, the widening tide of problems with the internal investigation lapped at the toes of the university president. These things should be handled by outside authorities.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Agreed, I think Mason should have been canned, no question.
She abandoned the student to her HR/Student Services machine.
We play tackle football.
What about that high school?
Never mind what I think about Curley, Schultz, Spanier, the University Police, DA Gricar, Department of Health and Public Welfare, the janitor and his staff, Sandusky’s family, and, mostly, that scum monster Sandusky, why weren’t people at this high school implicated in this? I read the report this morning, and these people thought something seemed odd. Hello!!! What he did at that high school was more than odd. They have guilt in this as well. I’m beyond repulsed and disgusted. I have no words beyond outrage that I am having trouble putting into words.
This came to light because of the high school.
The parents complained, Sandusky was immediately banned from the school and police were notified. They did exactly what they were supposed to do. Exactly.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
by jesse. on Nov 6, 2011 10:05 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
well why didn't they call the police?
I think what’s frustrating is that there were multiple opportunities for somebody to call the police and it didn’t seem to happen or go anywhere.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:06 AM EST up reply actions
The High School totally did.
Sandusky was caught because the a High School in Clinton county followed a law that Penn State administrators, at best, didn’t understand.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
by jesse. on Nov 6, 2011 10:08 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Clarification
I know they called the police and banned him, etc. Thank God. What i meant was what I ready in the GJ report. Sandusky repeatedly called kids out of classes and was allowed to meet with them alone. Read the thing where the wrestling coach caught him alone with the one boy. The coach admits that he thought the behavior was odd. I meant that, if people are going to say those at PSU should have seen the signs, etc., and they are all guilty for not doing something sooner, then the high school is just as guilty. They allowed Sandusky lots of access and didn’t do anything until it was reported to them. As I said, this doesn’t make up for Curley and Schultz not reporting it and Spanier not pursuing it further. I’m disgusted by their inaction. I’m just saying the school is just as guilty on some level.
Chris
You are a jackass. Stop assuming things about Joe until the trial.
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 10:10 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Probably not the way you want to conduct yourself..
but I see your point….its a lot of speculation on our part until the trial begins and we know everything
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:11 AM EST up reply actions
Or what, the BSD gestapo is going to come out and "silence" the critics?
You know, I don’t recall Mike ever shoving his opinion down our throat as much as Grovich does. This site has gone down the tank since August. The only reason I show up is to read the stat breakdowns for the upcoming games and recap of former foes.
Then, of course, this train wreck has captured my interest. It’s amazing how fast a lynch mob formed.
by cjapsu on Nov 6, 2011 10:22 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Hey I've got no personal favorites between BSDMike and Chris..
so you can calm the fuck down. I’m just saying that we should reduce this to calling each-other jackasses.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:23 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
From the looks of it, I'm way more calm than the vast majority of y'all
I never even noticed the subtle differences between the moderation of the board until after the Indiana game where it was painfully obvious the mood shifted from one of guarded optimism to downright pessimism.
Good..
sorry for getting snippy, but I think we can all express our opinons without the name-calling.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:26 AM EST up reply actions
I apologize
I was out of line. I just think it’s insane to blame this on Joe… right now. Wait until the trial and see what comes out. If he was negligent, he should be fired immediately.
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 10:28 AM EST up reply actions
FYI...
I side with you in not wanting to start a Paterno Lynch Mob
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:25 AM EST up reply actions
The worst I have seen in respect of Paterno,
are a few people saying, “This doesn’t sound like Paterno at al, how is this possible?” Not much of a lynch mob.
The answer, if we understand Paterno, is that there is some really dark stuff — if that is even possible, that things could be worse — that is not in the GJ report.
We play tackle football.
Really?
This is not going away, and I’ll be shocked and infuriated if anyone survives this with their jobs — very much including Joe Paterno.
This is what is bothering me. This assumption that Paterno did something wrong which then leads to the above statement that it would be an injustice for Paterno to survive with his job.
I simply don’t understand this reasoning. There is no currently no factual basis for making statements such as the one above.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 10:33 AM EST up reply actions 4 recs
Exactly
It’s killing me that people keep overlooking that. We simply don’t know enough, and probably won’t until the testimony.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 10:37 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
It's not possible to have a rational discussion here about Paterno.
But the statement you quote? That’s neither a lynch mob forming nor even a very odd statement to make. Scandals of this scale generally wash away people and careers indiscriminately. And Paterno is going to get asked a whole lot of questions about what he knew and when he knew it. The prosecutors are satisfied with how he’s answered them, so fine. But that doesn’t mean PSU isn’t staring at major changes.
We play tackle football.
" But that doesn’t mean PSU isn’t staring at major changes"
We’ve been at this point for the last 4 years or so regardless of this report.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:39 AM EST up reply actions
Agreed.
But the “infuriated” part applying to Paterno doesn’t make sense yet.. Being outraged if Spanier/Curley/Schultz based off of the information right now? You betcha..
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 10:40 AM EST up reply actions
How is it not an odd statement to make?
Bellanca, you didn’t address my point, which is this: Currently, Chris is stating that he would be “infuriated” by the continued employment of the Penn State officials involved “very much including” Joe Paterno because Paterno may not have done enough. So he is assuming that Paterno did something wrong and assuming that what he did was wrong enough to justify removing him.
And you don’t think it’s perhaps dangerous, perhaps a bit out-of-line to make assumptions and statements like those when there are no facts to support them and the absolute most damning thing we can say is, “Paterno may not have done more”?
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 10:44 AM EST up reply actions 4 recs
That's his feelings
Your feelings differ, that’s all.
Yes, they do differ.
A good portion of us aren’t ready to break out the torches and pitchforks based solely on stories that we’ve concocted in our own heads.
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 10:46 AM EST up reply actions
And?
My feelings are that we should not make any assumptions about Joe Paterno when we have no reason or factual basis to do so.
I fail to see how this is a very radical proposition. I think it is the absolute right thing to do.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 10:46 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I didn't say your opinion was radical
Nor did I say Chris’ position was right. People are going to react differently to a horrible stories and jump to differing conclusions.
This is true:
People are going to react differently to a horrible stories and jump to differing conclusions.
And my point is that it is quite dangerous in situations such as this to react rather than respond.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 10:48 AM EST up reply actions
Exactly
The counter to this is “we should make assumptions about Joe Paterno when we have no reason or factual basis to do so”… and that just sounds ridiculous.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I think Joe
has done enough for the university and State College to get the benefit of the doubt.. for now.
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 10:48 AM EST up reply actions
This is not just because he's Joe Paterno.
I don’t say there’s no reason to assume blah blah yadda yadda because he’s Joe Paterno, I say it’s because he’s a citizen of the United States and citizens of the United States are entitled to not have assumptions made about their character and actions when we have next to nothing on which to base our assumptions.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 10:53 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Well, RR, you'll have to ask him. I didn't write his post.
I haven’t made any assumptions about Paterno. What is delivered in the GJ doc is his involvement. He’s in the middle of this. It’s a very strange place to find him.
We play tackle football.
Bellanca, I was addressing what *you* said.
You said you didn’t see anything odd about what Chris said, I do.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 10:49 AM EST up reply actions
I think it's very well-written.
And Paterno will be asked, under oath, and I’m sure not for the first time, why he didn’t do more. Evidently the prosecutors are happy with his answers. We don’t know what they were.
The same thing happened with Ferentz and the sexual assault a few years ago. It turns out Ferentz followed his institutional rules, handed the case off to the student services neckties, and waited for the machinery to grind. He did throw the two men off the team asap. In the meantime the girl was vilified and humiliated for a year. The president ignored the girl’s mother. You’ll recall that I didn’t consider the HR manual a valid excuse for either Ferentz’ or Mason’s behavior.
We play tackle football.
I still think you're missing the point.
When “the same thing happened with Ferentz”, did you all make assumptions against him with no facts, evidence, or reason to do so – before the case had even really started?
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
Sure.
I asked why Ferentz didn’t protect the girl, the way I would expect my own daughter protected, because I could care less about HR manuals in respect of moments of moral failure. Because I knew that he knew, and I knew that he backed off — per university “procedure”. He was fully exonerated by university procedure. I didn’t care, and still don’t.
We play tackle football.
I think you answered my question:
Because I knew that he knew, and I knew that he backed off — per university "procedure"
We don’t know that Paterno “backed off.” Hence my annoyance with this whole matter of assuming that he did.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 11:19 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
We don't know enough to even say that is the question to be asked though.
The first question almost certainly has to be “WHAT did you do?”
We don’t know the answer to that one. So the question “Why didn’t you do more?” is based on the answer to a question that hasn’t yet been asked.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
And that's all we know.
Just because we know he reported it to his boss, doesn’t exclude the possibility that he did more that wasn’t mentioned in the GJ document. The next question has to be “What did you do after you reported it?” because we don’t know the answer to that one, the answer to that will be telling of whether he did or did not do “enough”.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Obviously, that's what is in his sealed testimony.
I was just remarking that he’s been asked what, and he’ll be asked why not more? if he has not been asked yet.
Look, Paterno is involved and he is going to spend the rest of his life giving depositions and testifying in the civil suits about violent pederasty. You want bleak? That’s bleak.
Again, I don’t think it’s possible to discuss him rationally here. There’s too much love. I’m discussing his practical dilemmas, which are now legion.
We play tackle football.
We can though.
Because rationally all we know is that Joe reported it. We do not know if he did more, we do not know he did nothing after. Objectively there is 0 cause for us to be asking the question “why didn’t you do more?” He may never be asked that question depending on the answer to “Including after you reported it to Curley, what did you do?”
The answer could be “I followed up with him for months and was continually told that there was an ongoing investigation into it, that’s what I believed to be true, I had no reason not to.” Is there a need for “why didn’t you do more?” then? The answer is clear and he did no legal or moral wrong. He was lied to.
We can rationally discuss him here as long as we deal in facts. There are a large number of people discussing based on assumptions of answers to questions that haven’t yet been asked and answered publicly, or the accusations of Joe at the end of Chris’s article. They are irrational.
Rationally there is only one thing to say about all this, wait for the testimony. People aren’t doing that though and creating their own conclusions.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 11:27 AM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Actually, I think there is good reason to speculate, provided one does not accuse.
And that is this: we, each of us, need to ask us what we would have done in Joe Paterno’s circumstances (or the GA’s, or the neckties who got indicted).
I think anyone who has been around the block has been forced to deal with criminal or unethical behavior by an associate or friend. There are different ways of dealing with it. Some are better than others. Each person must decide, if he chooses to believe in abstractions like right and wrong, and then be willing to pay the price if he makes an inconvenient choice.
We play tackle football.
“Why didn’t you do more?” IS an accusation.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 11:36 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
And I also wholeheartedly disagree with your contention that is not possible to rationally discuss Paterno here. We have done it. I have seen it happen. Perhaps you may not want to simply take my word for it, but, with God as my witness, it’s true.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 10:45 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Well when you say it's impossible to have a rational discussion
you don’t give it a lot of hope
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
Right.
Like I’m a fool for suggesting that a military chain of command and separate code of justice concept, as applied to the PSU management bureaucracy, is an absurdity. Dream on.
Whatever Paterno did satisfied the prosecutors, so that is good enough for me. But that poor man is going to be in deposition until he’s 100 years old.
We play tackle football.
There's not much he can do about that
and that’s Sandusky’s fault, not Paterno’s.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
Life sucks.
Possibly through no fault of his own, Joe Paterno is associated with a monster and a bunch of cowards and morons. It will damage if not ruin his legacy, and it may cause his resignation, even if he fulfilled his legal obligations. Some things in life are out of your control. This is why life sucks.
by Illegal Formation on Nov 6, 2011 10:42 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Reasonable and true.
This does not justify our assuming that Paterno is guilty of some unknown moral crime.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 10:47 AM EST up reply actions
Sure.
We don’t have enough facts. I think most would agree with that.
But this is all really troubling stuff and people are going to react to it differently. When, on one day you are prouder of Penn State than any other institution with which you are affiliated, but, on the next day you wish you had never gone there (which is how I’m feeling), it’s emotionally difficult. If people think Joe has to go because of this, even without the facts and even without evidence of wrongdoing, I cannot begrudge them that feeling.
by Illegal Formation on Nov 6, 2011 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
No.
If people think Joe has to go because of this, even without the facts and even without evidence of wrongdoing, I cannot begrudge them that feeling.
It is morally unacceptable and simply dangerous to state that someone should be punished when we don’t even have the slightest idea what he did and/or when the prosecutors say he’s done nothing wrong.
It’s true that we have no legal obligation requiring us to not react viscerally and angrily. But that doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do. It’s one thing to react viscerally and angrily against Sandusky (Since none of us are under a legal obligation to assume he’s innocent), it’s quite another to paint with a broad brush just about everyone who ever had anything to do with this case.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 11:05 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Disagree.
A lot of people are going to be hurt by this scandal, regardless of the outcome of the allegations. (I agree that it’s a dangerous element of American life, but it’s a fact.) It is pretty clear that certain people could have mitigated some of the damage by handling the situation better – by being more transparent and acting more quickly. If you think Joe is one of those people, and you want him gone, you have the right to that opinion.
No one reasonable thinks he should be thrown in jail or tarred and feathered. People think his tenure as the coach of a game should end. It’s not really that big of a deal in the grand scheme of life – which is really what this whole scandal illustrates.
by Illegal Formation on Nov 6, 2011 11:12 AM EST up reply actions
We have the right to all opinions.
That doesn’t make those opinions right.
No one reasonable thinks he should be thrown in jail or tarred and feathered. People think his tenure as the coach of a game should end. It’s not really that big of a deal in the grand scheme of life – which is really what this whole scandal illustrates.
I think you’re missing the implications of being fired in this situation. If we fired Paterno right now, we would be saying, “You knew something was wrong, you did nothing about it, and you deserve to be punished. The law cannot punish you, so we are going to give you the greatest punishment we can give you. We are going to publicly humiliate you and make it obvious to the whole world that you enabled a serial pervert to commit crimes here at Penn State.” Ruined reputation is, in fact, a rather big deal – even if it doesn’t compare to what Sandusky allegedly did.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 11:22 AM EST up reply actions 5 recs
In short:
Firing Paterno after these revelations would be the modern equivalent of tarring and feathering him.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 11:23 AM EST up reply actions
Relax, he's not going to get canned. He'll be retired to an admin job.
Among other things, they’ll want to pay his lawyer in order to better manage the civil litigation. He won’t have time to coach football once discovery starts.
We play tackle football.
Fine, I'll modify:
Being “retired to an admin job” is also roughly the modern equivalent of being tarred and feathered.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 11:25 AM EST up reply actions
Of course, he wasn't forced to retire
not the same situation at all really
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Again, life sucks.
I drew a distinction in another comment that I think is worth repeating. Whether or not Joe or Curley or whoever enabled molestation is largely a legal question that we don’t have the information to answer. Whether or not they enabled the collateral damage the university will feel is far more subjective; and those responsible for that damage need to be held accountable. It’s not a legal accountability, it’s a public accountability that results from being a public figure.
by Illegal Formation on Nov 6, 2011 11:31 AM EST up reply actions
I think you're still missing the point.
Whether or not they enabled the collateral damage the university will feel is far more subjective; and those responsible for that damage need to be held accountable.
Of course, it’s more subjective. But what is not subjective is the fact that we don’t know what Paterno did. What is objective is the fact that we are rushing to judgement on his role.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 11:32 AM EST up reply actions
I don't really disagree with anything you're saying.
But I don’t think people are necessarily rushing to judge his role. I think some people think he should be gone regardless of his role, just by way of his tangential affiliation with the whole thing. His job isn’t that important. His reputation is important, but not so important. Justice is important, and there’s a lot of justice that needs to be doled out.
by Illegal Formation on Nov 6, 2011 11:36 AM EST up reply actions
Right...
but the Attorney General doesn’t work for PSU so I don’t see why he/she would need to paint Paterno’s role in this in a lighter shade.
What we do know is that he complied with the GJ and is prepared to testify against JS.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:34 AM EST up reply actions
What I meant was...
if the GJ investigation revealed that Paterno had a larger role in a cover up or something else, we’d have read about it in the report.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:36 AM EST up reply actions
Not the case
The presentment is exactly and only what the Attorney General wants you to read. She reveals only what she wants/believes she needs to reveal to obtain the desired result.
*
I think that goes to his point
If Paternos involvement were in question in any way, why make the statement commending him for his actions?
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Who knows. The political-jerk side of me would say
becasue she has aspirations for higher office and knows she stands nothing to gain from frying Joe and could use his support down the line.
*
That is true
I would hope her actions at this point would be focused soley on convicting the guilty parties and bringing them to justice, not advancing herself. Besides, bringing down Joe Paterno would probably gain you favor with about half the state.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
She's an elected politician
And one part of me will not give her the benefit of the doubt on removing her personal aspirations from the equation. I would hope as well, but I’ve known far too many to be that wishful. And I’m not so sure bringing down Joe — in this manner — would have your stated result.
*
that was more of a jest
and I’m sure she has aspirations and motivation to manipulate things if she desired. I just hope thats not the case.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
There is a huge potential civil suit for the victims against PSU here...
If they knew Paterno had a larger role, why wouldn’t they go for the jugular?
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:41 AM EST up reply actions
This, straight up,
makes me ashamed to be at PSU at the moment. It’s terrible.
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 10:42 AM EST up reply actions
The Attorney General
All but exonerated Paterno and announced that he would be prosecution witness.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
by jesse. on Nov 6, 2011 11:24 AM EST up reply actions 5 recs
Oh no, mean Mr. Grovich wants to ask questions rather than just assume Saint Joseph Vincent did nothing wrong! What a horrible person! How dare he ask questions of such a noble man!
The problem is, is that Grovich is assuming Joe did something wrong!
Morally, not legally that is.
So yeah, that’s a really big problem for some of us.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 2:02 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
No
Here’s what Chris wrote:
If you’re a Penn State fan that pontificates about moral character and Success With Honor, you need to start asking some very difficult questions.
He asked that we all start asking questions. Which is fine with me. I’m a second-generation graduate of this university, I’ve admired Joe my whole darn life, but you know what, it’s okay to to fucking ask questions once and a while. Nothing wrong with that.
Here’s a quote for you: “Blind faith and blind abuse are closer to each other than rational questioning is to either.” It is perfectly fine to question Joe, or McQueary, or anyone. Period. If you can’t handle that, too bad.
Nothing wrong with asking questions. Something happened in 2002, and there was precedent in 1998. The pederast never got nailed after either incident. This demands questions, not apologetics.
by OmarLittle on Nov 6, 2011 2:17 PM EST up reply actions 6 recs
This is not a question, it's a conclusion based on unfounded assumptions
This is not going away, and I’ll be shocked and infuriated if anyone survives this with their jobs — very much including Joe Paterno.
There is no evidence that Joe did anything wrong. To suggest he should lose his job before ANY facts come out that lead us to believe he did anything wrong is something I have a big problem with.
by ppfcpp on Nov 6, 2011 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Do you honestly think Joe coaches next year? I don’t. The quote you posted is probably very accurate. Saying that many people will lose there jobs, and that that may include an 85-year old coach who very well may have been on the way out anyway regardless of the actions of a pederast former coach, is not “suggesting he should lose his job.” Chris suggested he may very well be done, but hey, that was gonna happen sooner rather than later anyway.
Again, this isn’t fun for me or any Penn State grad/fan. But it is what it is, and a cleaned house is, quite frankly, what is going to have to happen. If you can’t handle a cleaned house, that’s not Chris’ problem, or mine.
Whether or not Paterno was going to retire anyway is irrelevent
What part of “I’ll be infuriated if Joe Paterno keeps his job” is not suggesting that he should be fired. The way that is written, it has nothing to do with Joe retiring under his own will and everything to do with him being fired/resigning due to an involvement in this mess.
Furthermore, the questions being asked are under the assumption that there was wrongdoing on Joe’s part. A fair question to ask would be “What did Joe do to follow up after reporting to Curley?”
Asking instead, “Why didn’t Joe follow up” is assuming things that no one here has any knowledge of.
If it does turn out that Joe did something wrong, then I’m fine with him being gone. But suggesting that he should be fired without any facts to support that argument is unfair and it borders on flat out irresponsible.
by ppfcpp on Nov 6, 2011 2:40 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Well, it would look bad for the university if Spanier, Curley, and Paterno are all here for much longer. Heads will roll, and it WILL be infuriating if they don’t roll, as far as I’m concerned.
That Joe is less guilty than others, or not guilty is irrelevant. The mere appearance of covering asses and preserving the status quo would be infuriating as far as this alum is concerned. If that offends you, well, too bad.
by OmarLittle on Nov 6, 2011 2:54 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
I don't even know how to respond to you
The idea that innocent people’s heads should roll is batshit insane.
I’m all for removing anyone with any wrongdoing in this situation, but to suggest people who are not guilty deserve to be caught in the crossfire is absurd.
by ppfcpp on Nov 6, 2011 3:03 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
1. We don’t know how innocent/guilty everyone is yet. But heads should roll, and they will, regardless of what you want.
2. We know Joe did right to report, according to what he told the Grand Jury. But we don’t know how he, or the witness (McQueary) slept at night for nine years while a pederast remained free.
3. Like I said, the mere appearance of preserving the status quo would be wrong. In the best interests of the university, there needs to be a cleansing. Let’s hope the Board of Trustees does that.
by OmarLittle on Nov 6, 2011 3:14 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 2 recs
In hindsight I agree with 2
But all of these testimonies were not known to everyone before yesterday
keep winning ugly
You didn't read all of it:
At what point should Paterno have followed up with Curley and asked, “hey, remember that…thing I told you about? The one involving a little boy, my trusted defensive coordinator of 32 years, and our locker room? Anything happen with that? Should I make that phone call myself?” The Grand Jury Findings Of Fact state, “[T]he graduate assistant was never questioned by University Police and no other entity conducted an investigation until he testified in Grand Jury in December, 2010.” Curley and Schultz admitted that they didn’t act. Why didn’t anyone else?
Specifically :
Why didn’t anyone else?
This is an accusation by the author that Paterno didn’t do anything else and is unfounded.
A lot of people are saying that Joe did nothing. But show the fact that backs that up. I don’t see it anywhere, likely, because it’s made up.
Questions are OK, but the ONLY question that is relevant right now is “What did you do after you reported it to Curley Mr. Paterno?”
Until we have the answer to that question, “Why didn’t you do more?” is VERY premature.
The author DOES assume.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 3:06 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
You’re right, let’s ask not ask any questions. Nine years without a police report regarding the abuse of a child by a person who was previously implicated in a similar abuse (an act that seemed to coincide with his retirement) warrants no questions at all. In fact, how about a midnight vigil outside the stadium where we light a wreath outside the statue on the east side of the stadium!
Or we can ask perfectly valid questions about a child sex abuse and wonder if the same guy who kicked Spanier, Curley, Garban and Schreyer out of his house in 2004 after they politely suggested he should step down could’ve, maybe, I don’t know, maybe exerted more pressure to do something. Which maybe he did, or he didn’t. Maybe. Just a question I’m more than entitled to ask while my alma mater is publically disgraced by heinous crimes.
by OmarLittle on Nov 6, 2011 3:59 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 2 recs
If we don't know if he did or didn't
They why are so many people questioning why he didn’t?
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 4:03 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
The word 'Why'
Implies some piece of knowledge that you admit we don’t have yet. No one except those involved do it. The only question we are currently entitled to ask is “What did you do after you reported it to Curley and Schultz?”
Everything else is based off an assumption to the answer to that question, and it hasn’t been asked.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 4:07 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Because asking questions is right and proper. Blind faith is not. I didn’t sleep well last night. I suspect I won’t sleep well tonight either. I didn’t witness a child get abused by a monster, or have a trustworthy former player and grad assistant affirm to me that that sort of thing took place.
Which is to say, bureaucratic compliance is fine and dandy, but its fair to say that there was a lack of ruckus about this. Asking why there was less ruckus then there should’ve been is fair, as far as I’m concerned. If asking questions makes me a bad person who “jumps to conclusions” then fine, whatever. But I’ll keep asking questions, and keep defending others who ask questions.
by OmarLittle on Nov 6, 2011 4:14 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 2 recs
By asking "Why didn't Joe do more?"
You’re accusing him of something without any sort of factual backing.
If you’re of the moral character to accuse and slander someone with the accusation of ignoring child abuse without any factual basis, enjoy being a conspiracy theorist.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 4:19 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Yeah, asking questions=slander. Totally.
Not once have I proposed a conspiracy theory. You’re emotional. I pray you deal with it.
by OmarLittle on Nov 6, 2011 4:31 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
"Why didn't you do more?"
Is a conspiracy, it’s on the assumption he did nothing, what is the factual basis of it?
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
It's akin to
When did you stop beating your wife?
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
by Paige2PSU on Nov 6, 2011 4:37 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Or "Why did Craig James kill 5 hookers at SMU?"
You know, allegedly.
by ppfcpp on Nov 6, 2011 4:38 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Do you seriously not see the difference between the two?
1. “What did Joe do after he talked with Curley?”
2. “Why didn’t Joe do more?”
One of those questions is perfectly reasonable, and is in everyones minds. The other is a biased question based on an assumption to the answer of the first question – an assumption completely unfounded based on the facts at hand.
If you can’t understand what the difference is there, that’s on you.
by ppfcpp on Nov 6, 2011 4:37 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs
you seem pretty emotional yourself
frankly, we all probably are. So how about we all try and cool down a bit and not tear each other to shreds.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Agreed
Its an emotional issue. Hope it didn’t appear that I was villifying anyone on this sie, or Joe, or Red.
by OmarLittle on Nov 6, 2011 5:01 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I dont think anyone is relying on blind faith here
most people are taking a wait and see before we condemn everyone to hell and back attitude, which I dont see what the problem with is, considering that is how our justice system works. Most peoples issues with what Chris wrote is that he was condemning Paterno before all the relevant information was revealed.
You can ask all the questions you like, but you arent going to get any answers probably until Joe is up on the stand and the question is asked. People are just asking for temperance instead of the suspected animosity he will probably receive.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Asking these particular questions serves no ultimate purpose other than to cast Joe in a negative light
And without any sort of factual cause to do so.
That’s my main reason with it. The rest of the article was perfectly fair, the accusations are not with what we know.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I agree
It seemed to me like there was a disconnect with what was being argued. I see no problem with asking the question “Did Paterno do more?”, but not “Why didn’t Paterno do more?” That’s the line between just asking questions and condemning him prematurely.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
by skarocksoi on Nov 6, 2011 4:31 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Well, I have no animosity towards Joe. And in case it wasn’t clear, I don’t think Joe was apart of a cover-up or anything. I’ve already been accused by one hotheaded fool for being a conspiracy theorist.
I want justice fir the eight kids, and I do believe Joe will be apart of the justice in 2011. That the justice didn’t arrive in 2002 or 1998 is going to engender reasonable questions from people here and else where, like it or not. Its not slander.
by OmarLittle on Nov 6, 2011 4:38 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Slander: Make false and damaging statements about (someone).
To suggest that someone didn’t do everything in their power to stop child abuse, without knowing what they actually did, is just that, slander. It’s false and damaging if enough weak minded people buy into it.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Actually, it would be libel here.
/smartassed
/trying to inject some humor
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
I giggled.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
There are so many libelous statements
being thrown around in this debate, it’s actually frightening.
if its a question, that means I’m looking for an answer, not that I’m implying he didn’t do enough.
For what its worth, I’m hoping the answer is “Joe did absolutely everything in his power.” Hopefully we get that answer. Maybe we never do.
My intent is not to imply Joe did anything wrong. I hope for his sake he is found innocent in the court of public opinion.
Last thing: the questions I have and others have are the same journalists will ask, as will any concerned citizens. I don’t think honest journalists or well-minded citizens are intending to slander anyone. Nor am I.
by OmarLittle on Nov 6, 2011 5:12 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Journalists will have the sense to not ask him
“Why didn’t you do more?” At least, not before they ask “What did you do?” A journalist who skips ahead will not be treated well by Joe.
To ask ‘why’ and ‘more’ without asking first ‘what’ and ‘do’ is making an implication, the implication is that the ‘what’ was ‘less’.
Your question is only fair after it’s been established what he did. A question isn’t fair when it requires an assumption.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
It isn't blind faith - there's no evidence to overlook
Very, very little about what Joe did is known at this point. Stop filling in the holes with your imagination and wait until the facts get released to make a judgment.
Well they came there to discuss his future after his fourth losing season in five years, and they left with him still running the show. “Kicking them out of the house” may be a strong way of putting it, but the episode illustrates the type of power Joe has.
Like anyone I don’t really know what happened here in this Sandusky fiasco and any comment on the power play there would be pure speculation, but its worthwhile to inquire as to what went wrong, not just with Curley and Schultz, but everyone else.
by OmarLittle on Nov 6, 2011 4:25 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Take your shit elsewhere.
I’m tired of you.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
by MainLion on Nov 6, 2011 8:50 PM EST up reply actions 8 recs
FYI
They could have gotten rid of Joe if they really want to. But they didn’t have the balls to deal with the media backlash of replacing a legend.
A lot of Joe’s power comes from his public perception and how he is perceived.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 4:26 PM EST up reply actions
Another take on the situation with Joe.
If one of Joe’s grandchildren was being allegedly abused by JS in the shower and it was reported to him by the GA
Would he just kick it up the chain? Or would be follow up like a pit bull and call the Police?
Ask yourself that question.
I blame HITS
by SweepTheLeg on Nov 6, 2011 3:09 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Hell, if we're going to be ridiculous
Maybe it was just Joe in a Sandusky mask in the showers.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
It's not a fair question
The only reason to ask it is to cast the man in a negative light, neither answer is a good answer in terms of his character. For what reason would anyone want to do that? I can’t understand why so many people are so quick to assume things of Joe that are unfounded.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 3:17 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs
Rouge - we will never agree on this topic
I just can’t accept Joe not calling the police immediately…I will never get over it.
One thing is for certain, you will NEVER get in trouble for going the extra mile to protect a kid from potential abuse.
And its not like this guy wasn’t on the police radar at this point.
I blame HITS
by SweepTheLeg on Nov 6, 2011 3:31 PM EST up reply actions 4 recs
My position is that the GA dropped the ball
HE immediately should have called the police with what he saw as the eyewitness. He failed to do that and then waited a day to actually do something about it.
But if we’re going to make assumptions:
By knowing he had been witnessed in the act Sandusky would probably lay low and away from little boys for the time being, he wouldn’t disappear either, he wouldn’t want to appear guilty by not picking up phone calls from say, his former HC Joe Paterno, so assuming that the threat to children had already passed due to said GA dropping the ball and there was no risk of Sandusky fleeing, Joe decided to go directly over the heads of the police to their overseer, someone he felt had more power to get something done, Schultz. That ultimately could have been a more powerful move than calling the police with the GA immediately. Maybe what he actually did was go the extra mile but we don’t know the facts to know otherwise.
We need to reserve all judgement on Joe until after his official testimony. Because what we do know, isn’t conclusive enough to pass judgement.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
You know, it wouldn't surprise me,
if Joe and McQueary’s father advised him on what he should or shouldn’t have done. He was a young man in a terrible situation and asked for guidance. I’m not putting any blame on him.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
by Paige2PSU on Nov 6, 2011 4:03 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I can certainly understand why he may not have done it.
But that doesn’t make it the right decision. Down to legality/morality, I feel legally he fulfilled his obligation, but morally there was a lot more he could have done at the time.
Which is how he differs from Joe, we know more of the circumstances around what the GA did, we don’t know them around what Joe did and a lot of people are pretending they do.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I thought he was younger,
but you may be right. He graduated in 1997 or 1998, right?
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
But even at that age,
I probably would have gone to someone for advice. Hell, I still do that. We don’t know exactly what was said in any of the conversations discussed in the document or later.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Paige - Just my limited knowledge of you from BSD
Pretty sure you would have enough sense to call 911 first…at least I hope so
May no act.................
I would hope so, too.
I know I once caught a guy videotaping a girl’s underwear on the escalator at the mall (she was wearing a skirt, he had a camera in a bag that he sort of held under her) and I immediately got security.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
He got away, though,
because the girl wasn’t sure she wanted to do anything about it. And there weren’t any police there.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Honestly I'm 27
and while I’d love to say I’d run in and rescue the kid, I dont know if that would be the case as I’ve never been in a situation even remotely close to that. But if I walked in on a person I respected, revered, and who was a highly regarded man in the community and my profession doing unspeakable acts to a child, I cant say I wouldnt be too shocked to do anything different. That being collect myself, call up my father for advice, and then talk to my superior based off that advice. Sorry if everyone cant rush in and save the day, but we’re dealing with a lot more than just logic when it comes to a situation like this.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
by skarocksoi on Nov 6, 2011 4:27 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
You're right.
And the important thing to realize — something like this is going to happen to you someday, and you will need to make a decision. And it may be a more trying situation than even this one was for McQ.
We play tackle football.
I hope to god something like this doesnt happen to me or anyone else
I cant argue that he probably should have gone to the police, but its easy for everyone here to say “why didnt he do this or this” looking in hindsight after reading a black and white report on it. In that moment I’m sure it was much more difficult.
I mean, if we were going to throw blame at everyone, why didnt the GA’s dad tell him to call 911? He’s another adult in this whole situation, and someone the GA put his trust in.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
I really dont think everyone walks in on an adult sexually abusing a minor
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
You completely miss the point.
Get back to me after you lose a job because you report your boss for stealing intellectual property, while you have a 1 year-old daughter and a non-working wife.
We play tackle football.
Everyone is tested.
It’s actually a blessing to be tested. It’s not always a movie-of-the-week sort of nightmare test. But we don’t need to get theological today. I envy your next posting to the arctic, which I miss.
All I know is that when we are tested, it’s unlikely that an assistant deputy secretary for unpleasant situations is going to do the right thing for all concerned.
We play tackle football.
I agree what you say about being tested
just hopefully, many won’t have to face that kind of punishment for doing the right thing (I guess that is really the definition of moral courage though isn’t it).
I lived in Fairbanks, AK for two years before coming down to Lubbock. I desperately want to get to a place with some culture and some tundra (not an easy combination). Still going through the application, but I have my fingers crossed.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Bellanca’s point is right on the mark, whether you like it or not. My wife got fired for reporting her CEO to higher ups for using hospital employee’s to do renovations at his house. He found out, fired her ass, no one lifted a finger. This, of course, has nothing to do with the main story here, but you, sir, are the one deflecting about what is right or wrong.
That scenario is in the Ethics book
That I used for my Health Care Ethics class. We always told the students that they still had a duty to report it.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
It's not the points he's making
it’s the way he’s making them
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
And I'm not deflecting
The questions were not posed to me.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
+1 Bellanca
At one or multiple times in your life, you have the opportunity to help a defenseless person.
It could be an abused child, kid walking in traffic, old person lost, etc…you can either act or walk away…can’t do both.
Doing the right thing is never easy.
Favorite saying “good enough, rarely is”
May no act.................
drove past
a man beating his lady in the parking lot of a shopping center…
turned around… got him off her… called the police….
she said he wasnt doing anything… and that her bloody nose came from trying to pull me off of him…
I was arrested… released.. and lectured that the only response is to report it….
All of our comments are irrelevant - LetsGoPSU
Domestics never go good.
surprised you were not attacked by the women….happens all the time.
Next time, call the Po Po and start honking horn like crazy and scream/yell to startle the perp.
Still think you did nothing wrong though…would have never locked you up. Would have shook you hand and sent on way.
May no act.................
yeah but you report it to the police, not your coach.
by gshiler2 on Nov 7, 2011 9:36 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Which, ultimately still
Doesn’t make it the right decision.
I feel like this may be the exact scenario that played out, but I still feel he should have immediately while the child was still in danger. I find what happened after to be perfectly acceptable on the parts of the GA and Joe but only because the GA failed to act immediately. After that, the correct path was taken.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I can't really fault McQueary here either
He likely reacted in the way Penn State had instructed him to. If he goes to the police and the kid says nothing happened then its McQueary’s word vs. Sandusky’s and he’s going to lose that battle. So then he possibly gets fired when all he was trying to do is the right thing. There’s just no good move in this situation and it’s unfair that McQueary even had to deal with it.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
The same police department that ignored the situation in 1998?
Every insult does not require a response.
by Esteban d' Amur on Nov 6, 2011 8:08 PM EST up reply actions
Sounds like it was a different department
State College police in 1998 and it would have been UP Police in 2002.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
still...
Every insult does not require a response.
by Esteban d' Amur on Nov 6, 2011 9:08 PM EST up reply actions
Furthermore
It’s isn’t a fair question because we STILL DON’T KNOW WHAT JOE DID! He may not have called the police directly, getting Schultz involved was supposed to do that, he may very well have been in Curley and Schultz’s offices every damn day like a pitbull trying to get updates and was fed lies. The same as he would do for his grandchildren. We don’t know. Because of that it’s a damned unfair question to ask of him.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 3:22 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
There is nothing whatsoever ridiculous about his comment. These are the decisions we make in life.
We play tackle football.
Sure, but to actually ask it serves no purpose but to slander.
By the answers, Joe either doesn’t care about his family enough or he is motivated purely by revenge and hate. That’s why it’s an unfair question. It’s up there with, you can only save one of your two children, which one? Questions you just don’t ask.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 3:42 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Not an attempt to slander at all.
My point is, the right thing to do regardless of family/non family is call the police immediately, same goes for the GA..
I understand he was young and trying to break into coaching…he should know that was a crime and call 911.
I blame HITS
by SweepTheLeg on Nov 6, 2011 3:49 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
See my above situation about how not calling the police and going to Schultz
May have been the stronger move using his unique position of power in the university.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
While I'm not a fan of Chris's take on this, it is not completely unreasonable to ask these questions.
And it certainly doesn’t make him a jackass.
"This is being a Penn State fan. We’ll prove it, or we won’t. It’s not about proving it to them, it’s about proving to ourselves."
Not unreasonable to ask
But Chris seemed to be making some moral judgments towards the end of the article based on answers to these questions that don’t yet exist. Which to me, was very wrong to do.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 10:13 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
This sucks
But when the AG says he did the right thing and handled himself correctly, what else can anyone want? The AG has more knowledge of the case than Chris. Look, I don’t want to call him out, but I just don’t think it’s fair to say he deserves to lose his job over this.
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 10:14 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Everyone has different standards of "doing the right thing".
Was the AG referring to legal or moral?
I blame HITS
by SweepTheLeg on Nov 6, 2011 3:10 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The assumption that Joe didn't follow up with Curley
There’s no reports at all about what conversations ma have occurred between Joe and Curley after the initial report. Let’s wait until the details come out before damning Joe for not following up – because at this point we have no idea whether he did or not.
by ppfcpp on Nov 6, 2011 10:18 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Where did he blame Paterno for not "following up"?
I think your man Chris wrote a very fair summary of this situation.
We play tackle football.
by Bellanca on Nov 6, 2011 10:19 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, okay, but I think that's drafting.
He concludes with an “anyone” more than “this is Paterno’s failure.” I have the same question about Paterno, especially given how Sandusky was banned from the campus, but I also think we are going to encounter a whole lot more about institutional maneuvering here that makes Paterno’s action or inaction incidental. I guess the thing I can’t figure out is how any administrator could say anything to Paterno to cause him not to go ballistic on this set of events.
We play tackle football.
That's the confusing part
He would have had to, or he is not the man everyone thinks he is.
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 10:26 AM EST up reply actions
I'm confused with how Sandsuky being banned from campus raises issues about Paterno?
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Chris is doing the best he can right now.
In my opinion, for what it’s worth, he’s doing well.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
by jesse. on Nov 6, 2011 10:19 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
This
and something tells me we won’t find out for a while because I doubt Joe will be allowed to speak on these matters until the trial.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:19 AM EST up reply actions
I concur.
The rush to judgement on the issue of Paterno’s involvement needs to stop until we have actual facts to base our opinions on (And this goes for me too – I think I got a little too riled up last night).
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 10:21 AM EST up reply actions
especially since he is a witness for the prosecution against all three that were charged.
My grammer skills need improved.
Joe's press statement in full
“If true, the nature and amount of charges made are very shocking to me and all Penn Staters. While I did what I was supposed to with the one charge brought to my attention, like anyone else involved I can’t help but be deeply saddened these matters are alleged to have occurred.
“Sue and I have devoted our lives to helping young people reach their potential. The fact that someone we thought we knew might have harmed young people to this extent is deeply troubling. If this is true we were all fooled, along with scores of professionals trained in such things, and we grieve for the victims and their families. They are in our prayers.
“As my grand jury testimony stated, I was informed in 2002 by an assistant coach that he had witnessed an incident in the shower of our locker room facility. It was obvious that the witness was distraught over what he saw, but he at no time related to me the very specific actions contained in the Grand Jury report. Regardless, it was clear that the witness saw something inappropriate involving Mr. Sandusky. As Coach Sandusky was retired from our coaching staff at that time, I referred the matter to university administrators.
“I understand that people are upset and angry, but let’s be fair and let the legal process unfold. In the meantime I would ask all Penn Staters to continue to trust in what that name represents, continue to pursue their lives every day with high ideals and not let these events shake their beliefs nor who they are.”
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
by Paige2PSU on Nov 6, 2011 5:33 PM EST up reply actions 8 recs
Thanks Paige
Hadn’t seen that elsewhere and you deserve a million recs for posting this!!
You're welcome.
It came up on twitter about the same time that I posted it.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Joe is going to be a prosecution witness
even though he’s going to go out and state what Curley and Schultz are, that the charge wasn’t specific from the graduate assistant?
That doesn’t add up to me.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
perhaps that he set up the meeting between the GA and Curley/Schultz?
Show that they were informed something happened.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
If I remember from the GJ
McQueary ended up meeting directly with Curley and Schultz.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
So Joe told Curley and Schultz
what the GA told him, which was not specifics since GA did not tell specifics to Joe. I could see why Joe would not be going all crazy over the issue if he did not know the actual specifics of the situation (though we do not know if he continued to make a fuss to Curley Schultz). McQueary ended up meeting with C/S one and a half weeks later. Joe did the right thing.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Also to add
in the GJ, it says Joe reported to Curley and Schultz that it involved a sexual nature. Not specifics. Curley and Schultz decided to make this as “horsing around.”
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Which still begs me to ask
Why is he a prosecution witness if he’s going to say the same thing as the defense?
I’m thoroughly confused.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
He won't be if what TJ says it accurate.
Curley and Schultz made a determination that this was just “horsing around” and passed it up the chain. Joe reported it as a sexual allegation. Fundamentally different.
You without me is like Harold Melvin without the Blue Notes . . . you'll never go platinum.
#OccupyESPN
by Adam Collyer on Nov 6, 2011 6:54 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Joe's statement tells me that he didn't think the allegation was as strong
As the GA claimed it was in his GJ testimony. Schultz and Curley are almost certainly saying the same thing, that the GA led them to believe it wasn’t as serious. I guess it’s a matter of to what degree things were said, but at the moment Joe’s story from this press release, to me any way, lines up far better with Curley and Schultz than the GA’s and prosecutions.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I was thinking that too
And since MM and Joe aren’t charged, they must have both been truthful. So did Curley and Schultz call it horsing around even though they were told it was sexual in nature? Did MM give them details he didn’t give Joe? i’ve read how Schultz’s lawyer is going to try to get the charges dropped against Schultz. Curley’s lawyer will probably do the same. Joe must be as sick about all of this as we are.
All you guys need to do is read the GJ
and Joe’s statement makes sense.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
I read it this morning
And I agree. Just trying to figure it out in my mind and wonder if it helps Curley and Schultz in any way. For the record, I’m not calling for Joe’s job here. Joe did the right thing in my opinion. As an alum, I’m still disgusted and saddened by the whole thing.
Wont make a difference to GJ
in a small way, but Joe said in his statement nothing more, nothing less than what is said in the GJ.
Fact is, Joe reported it, even if it wasnt specific (as he did not receive the specifics), and C/S reported it to The Second Mile, none of them reported directly to the police, most importantly C/S as I am sure Joe was told they will take care of it and it will be investigated.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Yep
I think they told Joe they would handle it from there, take care of it, etc. I’m still baffled as to how the Second Mile didn’t do anything. They disgust me more. And I still think the high school should not have been allowing Sandusky to pull kids out of class and be alone with them on so many occasions. They testified his behavior was odd but still allowed him to do all of these odd things. They didn’t report it till someone complained.
I think this will be the defense of Curley & Schulz
as Sandusky wasn’t a University employee, and the victim was not connected to the University, it didn’t fall under their jurisdiction—they reported it to the Second Mile, who in their opinion had the responsibility to report it to the police.
Obviously, this seems very insufficient to most of us. But it may be plausible enough to get them off and have charges dismissed.
Fire Dan Snyder
If that is their defense
they should be fired regardless.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Re: Joe must be as sick about all of this as we are
Try to imagine you’re in his position – twilight of the greatest coaching career in D1A history, and you’re possibly going to have to step down to devote 100% of your time to being a witness in a criminal matter where the objective is to incarcerate a man who you once called your friend.
None of us has the slightest hint of a clue how sick Joe must be about all of this.
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 7:50 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs
maybe he’ll have time to feel sick for any of the kids that got abused after he made the decision to go to a school administrator instead of the police.
by gshiler2 on Nov 7, 2011 9:40 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Ok heres how it breaks down on the GJ
-GA sees Sandusky in shower doing something bad (specifics noted in document) with a 10 year old boy.
-GA next morning tells Joe what he saw (GJ does not mention any specifics of this report of GA to Paterno, hence Paternos’ statemet)
-The very next day, Sunday, Joe reports that his GA saw Sandusky “fondling or doing something of a sexual nature” to Curley/Schultz
-1 and a half weeks later, Curley/Schultz call in GA to meet with them (without Paterno). GA tells C/S the SPECIFICS (noted in the report). C/S ensure GA that something will be done.
-Couple weeks later GA is notified that Sandusky had his keys taken away and that the incident has been reported to The Second Mile.
-Curley testifies that GA told him that the GA reported “inappropriate conduct” that made said GA “uncomfortable.”
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Thanks for clarifying
I didn’t want to read that whole thing again. It kind of ruined my day.
read below
GA DID NOT tell Joe the specifics. GA DID tell C/S the specifics (noted in the report).
Court is claiming that GA DID actually in fact tell C/S the specifics, and that C/S failed to report it and perjured.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
No, I get all of that
There just seems to be a disconnect between what Joe said today and what he said to the GJ. Maybe it’s just how he phrases it.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
No idea of how this whole procedure works
according to the GJ, Joe told Curley/Schultz that GA saw “disturbing and innapropriate” of a “sexual nature.” Even if Joe did not know the specifics, that is enough for Curley/Schultz to have to report it. Joe will prob. tell them what he told the GJ, and that is enough to warrant the need for C/S to report it.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Interesting
I was informed in 2002 by an assistant coach that he had witnessed an incident in the shower
Not graduate assistant, but assistant coach. Little bit of a slip, and further confirms Big Red.
Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.
I still don't know why everybody else has been named publicly
And he wasn’t.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
At what point should Paterno have followed up with Curley and asked, “hey, remember that…thing I told you about? The one involving a little boy, my trusted defensive coordinator of 32 years, and our locker room? Anything happen with that? Should I make that phone call myself?” The Grand Jury Findings Of Fact state, “[T]he graduate assistant was never questioned by University Police and no other entity conducted an investigation until he testified in Grand Jury in December, 2010.” Curley and Schultz admitted that they didn’t act. Why didn’t anyone else?
An assumption at the end that Joe didn’t do anything after reporting to Curley and Schultz. Which we don’t know about. It’s an assumption. Joe may very well have been told there was an investigation. Investigations can last a very long time. Chris made a big assumption in this article that isn’t based on fact. There are plenty of reasonable, in character, reasons why nothing more came of this in 2002.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I just don't think it's fair
to assume that Joe didn’t do everything in his power for this to come to light, or didn’t follow up with Curley.
I respect Chris’s work for the site, because BSD is the best place for PSU news.
Having said that, it’s literally sheer insanity to think that a man with kids, grandkids, and a major supporter of THON wouldn’t want this to come out.
All the details will come out during the trial, and you can make a judgment on whether he deserves a job or not then.
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 10:19 AM EST up reply actions
Holy shit guys..
I can’t believe how much this sucks.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 10:11 AM EST reply actions 6 recs
yeah
I had planned on doing a lot of stuff today. Now I just want to crawl in bed and hide under the covers.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Continuing thoughts at the moment
1) For those reading the grand jury presentment — keep in mind it is a “novel”, written by the Attorney General in a manner guaranteed to create an emotional response that justifies criminal charges. If you are disgusted, in shock, ready for “bear”, then the Attorney General has achieved her goal. She is a statewide elected official with an agenda – to get convictions. And be clear, if Jerry committed crimes, he must pay. But at this point the only public information you have is highly inflammatory content from one side. Reading it as “fact” could be highly mis-leading.
2) I appreciate the sentiment some have expressed about withholding funding. I personally give to many subsections of Penn State for a whole variety of reasons. My gifts will continue for all those reasons. But for those who have mentioned giving only to THON, please know that the University is a $3.5 billion dollar corporation and very little, including THON, is clear of questionable practices. This from first-hand knowledge. (And I give to THON as well)
3) Graham’s statement is, to my mind, about as clear and forthright a statement as he could make. He knows Tim and Gary very well and if he says that the charges are groundless, it’s not because he “thinks” they are groundless, he “knows” they will be found to be groundless. It is likely not coincidental the University last year hired its first VP & in-house general counsel, who just happened to be an ex-PA Supreme Court justice. Who knows a thing or two about state law.
*
by Smee on Nov 6, 2011 10:23 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Great
so now were at the point that we are even saying THON is a scam. Strong accusations to make.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Ok so you are questioning
THONs practices. So your claiming that the money being donated is not going towards The Four Diamonds Fund and are being funneling elsewhere?
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
It appears he is just saying its easy to question everything EVEN Thon.
no biggie
keep winning ugly
by tlrpsu on Nov 6, 2011 5:48 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
BTN just read a statement from Curley's attorney..
typical lawyer-speak, she believes he will be exonerated, etc etc.
I swear lawyers have a form
I believe that < insert client name > will be found innocent of < insert charges >, they are completely < insert synonym for false >.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
It's more of a Word document with macros.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
by MainLion on Nov 6, 2011 10:58 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Very nice post Chris
Don’t bash his content, even if you don’t agree with everything. This shit is hard, and not black and white. This was clearly well thought out and had to be incredibly hard to write.
by STU Boy on Nov 6, 2011 10:42 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
I'll bash the content he's making up.
I’ve respected him during his time here, but the assumptions he’s making against Paterno are, as we stand, completely unfounded and should not be presented as fact.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 10:46 AM EST up reply actions 8 recs
I believe in nothing...
anymore.
Every insult does not require a response.
by Esteban d' Amur on Nov 6, 2011 10:53 AM EST reply actions
I Believe In America

Seriously, I’m just looking for something, anything, to lighten this all-consuming gloom.
Run.
The Reaction
Here, at least, seems to have some root in attempting to be openly critical of the University in order to show that we are not fanatical, nor blind to any failings of the organization.
There is nothing wrong with that. It is good to question, but the intent of the question has to be to find answers – not to protect one’s self.
If you're wondering, just reading some reaction from other places
It really seems like the public perception isn’t slanted as bad towards PSU as the Shapiro/Tat-5 were. It’s everywhere, it’s on every front page, but our reputation is keeping us alive.
The negativity is directed at the individuals in this incident and not the program/department. Just to try to give an overview.
Needs moar Dukes
Sean Lee is the only tolerable thing about the Cowboys
by ICEICETHATGUY13 on Nov 6, 2011 10:56 AM EST reply actions
Irrelevant to me..
This is bad. Bad to the point when I look at my resume and see “Penn State” on it, its going to be hard to separate the incidents.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 11:02 AM EST up reply actions
I agree
And what Graham Spanier said was absolutely unthinkable. All it did was acknowledge his pals in the athletic department who “had his unconditional support” and it fails to recognize how terrible this looks for the university, and by proxy, how terrible the perception is on people associated with it.
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 11:16 AM EST up reply actions
Had an email convo with a few PSU alums from DC last night
The most common view was best expressed by one alum whose comment I paste with a minor edit for family-friendliness:
“Nobody really gives a sh-t guys”
*
by Smee on Nov 6, 2011 12:13 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I honestly feel for you, man
Don’t let the actions of a few individuals taint your perception of your alma mater. Until the day when I discover that the university is ran by Communist-Nazis subliminally implanting messages to kill the prime minister of Malaysia and steal from the poor, I’ll forever stand up for my university as a whole.
by cjapsu on Nov 6, 2011 11:18 AM EST up reply actions 5 recs
Just like in anything. Groups Teams everything.
you rise and fall as a team. you don’t give up on it because of a few people within it.
keep winning ugly
Don't blame the victim, BUT,
in the words of Momma MainLion, didn’t any of these children’s parents, grandparents, guardians, etc. teach them to tell someone else when something like this happens?
Perhaps the final victim told someone, which opened the investigation. But everyone else—how can so many not tell someone, or if they did tell their parents/guardians, why did those parents/guardians not do anything until very recently?
As a member of the Catholic Church, I recognize that victims exist. But I have a large issue with victims who tell their stories decades later. Accuracy fails, the chance for embellishment (especially when a civil suit looms) increases, etc.
I know we’ll never read the whole truth. But I hope what we do read has enough of it.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
I've thought this as well..
but the nature of the allegations is extremely embarrassing for the victims. I’m willing to be that not all the parents/guardians knew at the time of the incidents.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 11:01 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I understand this
But there are some other factors, namely as Artie states, it is embarassing. These kids weren’t very old at the time and it would tough for them in school if their classmates knew what had happened. Also, they were being bribed the entire time, Alamo bowl trips, PSU games, Eagles games, getting to meet players, laptops, autographs. The kids were young enough that these things might sway them, especially since they were from the Second Mile, they were already troubled or from broken homes.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 11:05 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Which is understandable, but logically I cannot apply that umbrella to all accusations.
Perhaps the one exception is the last victim and family. Who knows.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Well...
…didn’t any of these children’s parents, grandparents, guardians, etc. teach them to tell someone else when something like this happens?
Isn’t the lack of active parents, grandparents, guardians, etc. the reason they were in Second Mile to begin with?
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 11:19 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
At some point there is an individual other than Jerry responsible for these children's day-to-day
well being. To thin that Jerry was the only authority figure in their lives is asinine.
“The Second Mile plans, organizes, and offers activities and programs for children – and adults who work with them – to promote self-confidence as well as physical, academic, and personal success.”
There always is “someone else”, and many times, many other “someones”. Teachers, school counselors, support staff, etc.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
I didn't say there were no adults in the kids' lives...
only active adults. …who do things like teach them to go the police when something like this happens.
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
This...
…is MUCH easier said than done.
Part of being a victim is feeling like you deserved it in the first place in a lot of cases like this. Only after years of reflection and guidance in society does the true nature of the crime ever come to pass.
by stonewall435 on Nov 6, 2011 11:32 AM EST up reply actions
Exactly.
Kids who do have active and caring parents (or proxies for parents) often let abuse go unreported.
Sandusky targeted these kids because the odds were even more skewed toward them never reporting it.
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 11:34 AM EST up reply actions
And perhaps that explains it all.
We come at this from relatively stable families, or so it seems. So we were raised differently.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Not only that...
…but a child’s sense of morally right and wrong is very fragile at this age. It is VERY possible to twist such actions into an act of love or even caring. After all, sex is an act of love, right?
It takes years to be able to develop the context to determine when an act that can both be a crime and an act of love is right or wrong.
by stonewall435 on Nov 6, 2011 11:40 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think what this analysis begs
is the question whether individuals within the Second Mile had knowledge of these accusations and did nothing with them, also.
I get the feeling many entities failed these children, not just the University.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
How much structure did Second Mile even have?
I mean if they were using the University’s attorney as their counsel, I’d bet that they didn’t have much of a staff outside what Sandusky could get from his standing as retired faculty.
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 11:43 AM EST up reply actions
Can't speak for 2002 as the public records are not available online
But in 2007 they had $1.5 million in income and at least 5 employees making over $50,000 a year. Plus at least three lawyers and a judge on their Board of Directors.
*
Five employees?
That’s about what I would have figured.
I am kind of puzzled by the fact that they had three lawyers and a judge, and yet couldn’t seem to find their own independent legal counsel – they certainly had connections in the legal community.
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 11:55 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
It's easier to pay friends than strangers.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Yeah, but isn't it slightly more legal to pay strangers?
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 12:18 PM EST up reply actions
It's sure as hell more proper.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
by MainLion on Nov 6, 2011 12:28 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
And that friends, is a question that really needs an answer
“…individuals within the Second Mile had knowledge of these accusations and did nothing…”
*
I think one should go slow on this one
and examine the chain of command in place at Second Mile. These situations are complex.
We play tackle football.
Just said the same thing
If they really learned of the 2002 incident, even if that was the first time they knew anything (and I think they had to know about the 1998 report), they still allowed him access to the kids.
Well, it was his charity
Hard to fire the “boss”.
But they could have reported it
Maybe they couldn’t have fired him. But if we’re going to say why didn’t Curley, Schultz, Joe, or MM report it to the police, well why didn’t the guy from Second Mile report it? The organization continually allowed JS access to young boys after knowing of the 2002 incident. And if we’re going to say how did PSU not know what JS was doing? Well how did the Second Mile organization not know? I guess that’s my point. A lot of people missed this scary and sad as that is.
Yes.
And why they were available victims. It’s quite insidious actually.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
Predators like this pick their targets very specifically
for these reasons.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
I cannot even begin to describe the uncomfortability in this theory.
Not because it’s off base, but because if true, I’m not sure when I’d stop puking.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Rarely, if ever, is it appropriate to put this on the victims.
Most people do know to tell when something like this happens. But knowing that, and being a young child dealing with the fear, shame, and emotional scars that come with abuse are different things. How many victims of abuse do you think are on this Board who have never said anything? How many, both male and female?
It’s like those people that say, “Man, if someone had a gun in my face I’d do this, and this, and this…” Well you didn’t have one in your face, contemplating the end of your life. You can’t look at a standard protocol and hold everyone to it.
We’ll find out how much the families knew in the future.
Dark Knight feeling, die and be a hero-or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.-Jay-Z
by OMEGAMAN on Nov 6, 2011 11:29 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
This is about the most disgusting piece of filth I have read in a while
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
What I have come to learn in briefs
is that the unintelligent rely on emotion, whereas the intelligent rely on reason.
Glad you could contribute your emotion.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
LAWYER BURN!
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 11:36 AM EST up reply actions
Lawyers are the last people that should make arguments about reason.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
You don't know me
Questioning the motives of a ten year old who may have been raped is pretty low.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
I think it's highly relevant to ask why a victim waited to tell his or her story.
In many cases, the answer is simple, whether it is embarrassment, previous discouragement, fear of retribution, and so on. And that is wholly understandable.
In other cases, the answer is more complex. At first glance, query whether an event occurred. Then, query whether the event is as stated by the victim or different. Then, related to the previous, query why it might be different.
From an emotional level, I believe each of these victims deserve justice to the extent permitted by the Pa. Criminal Code. But logically, I am not going to railroad my conclusions to conviction and sentencing. I want to know the facts and decisions involved in each step of the process.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
As you said, there are lots of reasons why a victim, especially a child, would not come forward. I certainly don’t see any need to place a greater onus of reporting on a ten year old victim than I would on an adult witness to the crime.
The guy seems to have been bribing and manipulating many of these kids into keeping quiet. Unless you are suggesting eight or more victims are colluding to misrepresent facts in this case, then I think there is decent evidence that something inappropriate was occurring.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Without a doubt something appropriate happened. Perhaps I should have worked my first post more simply, such as did these children’s caregivers know, and if so, why did they not speak up; did these children ever tell anyone, and if not, why not (although this question answers itself, really). As to my comment on the RCC, I am cynical, not towards these children, but towards all claims.
And my apologies for the cheap shot.
I’m taking this entire situation much harder than others I think. From an alumnus level, it’s embarrassing as hell to see the University, and specifically Spanier, respond as has been done. Coming from a Penn State family, it’s horrifying to realize that a man I watched on television as a child, cheered for as a youth, and respected in retirement as an adult is a piece of shit. As a human being, I cannot even begin to accept the contents of the grand jury report because they tell the story of a serial child molester, and one who is as intelligent a criminal as he is a football strategist. And as a lawyer, I am frustrated with the tendency to jump to an end result—something I have restrained myself from doing, albeit not easily—without seeing a court record that is 25,000 pages deep.
Perhaps my best course of action is to incorporate the D.E.N.N.I.S. systrem and Separate Entirely.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Yeah
I understand that. As I said before, Iowa fans had something similar, though not to this horrific scale, happen a few years ago. I don’t know enough about this situation to make definitive judgements about specific persons. However, having seen something like this play out with Iowa, I do think that there is something wrong with the way universities prefer to handle these situations. The earlier the police are involved in a possible rape case, I believe the better. Let an unbiased investigation go forward and rather than have these kind of things just crush you years later.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Also
If people here can use statements by the DA to defend Paterno, then I think the same should be true of the victims. If a person thinks the DA’s endorsement is important and the DA seems to think the victims stories are credible, then it would follow that the same benefit should be afforded the victims as is afforded Paterno.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
by Lycurgus on Nov 6, 2011 12:37 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
It's funny you mention this.
As I drifted to sleep last night, I tried to determine what purpose that endorsement truly serves. I still don’t have any answer with which I feel comfortable.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Perhaps
because the DA recognizes that as loved as Paterno is, it would be best to publicly distance him (justifiably) from the case as early as possible. It is already a crap-storm, if JoePa was involved as a possible target of prosecution it would be the mother of all crap-storms.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Eh, I think it's much simpler than that
Paterno is acting as a witness for the prosecution. If this comes down to he said – she said between Curley/Schultz and Paterno/GA, it’s in the DAs best interest to make GA/Paterno look as credible as possible.
Going to issue of not feeling comfortable with an answer,
I considered this, but then I questioned whether there is any agreement between him and the AG as to his service. In other words, his service as a witness is in exchange for something else from the AG.
And now you know why I am not comfortable.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
If the DA could take down..
Paterno she would. I’m not sure how I feel about Paterno morally, but I don’t think he did anything criminal. The talk about how he headed some grand cover up is laughable.
Every insult does not require a response.
by Esteban d' Amur on Nov 6, 2011 12:59 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I would not want to be known as the AG
who tried to bury one of PA’s, and really, sports’, most beloved figures.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
That's not to say I would in some way obstruct the judicial process,
but I merely am recognizing it as a consideration.
Of course, this is ALL speculation because, like a broken record, we have no information at this point. I hate to see how this develops, but I really, really want to see, to the extent we can, the documents, witness statements, deps, etc. The uneasiness of so many unsettling thoughts is annoying, especially for something none of us have a direct, immediate stake in.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Well.
if he’s testifying to avoid prosecution, then he isn’t a very credible witness.
Every insult does not require a response.
by Esteban d' Amur on Nov 6, 2011 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
This thought had popped into my head when I first heard the story
Until I have reason to doubt it, I’m taking everything at face value (i.e Joe did everything he was supposed to do). But you’re right, it is a little uncomfortable.
what a horrible comment
I was abused by a methodist minister as a boy in my early teens (yes every church has these predators). I was so traumatized by it I couldn’t even sleep for weeks. I was so ashamed I couldn’t tell my parents until I was 22 and out of the Navy. I couldn’t bring it to the church until the Catholic church scandals came to light in my early thirties. I remember the day I heard the story about the priests, I was driving in my car and nearly wrecked because of the immediate shame and flood of emotions. It’s very difficult to talk about now, and was impossible to emotionally digest and talk about as a boy. To blame these kids is repugnant, you should be ashamed.
In a similar vein to this story, the minister that abused me (and unbeknownst to me until much later several of the boys in my church) the Church had inklings (reports about the guy) and they also hushed it up, moving him out of his post in children’s ministries to a small church in Columbus with a very elderly congregation to get him away from children. Unfortunately Columbia Heights United Methodist church was my church. Penn State told Sandusky to keep his kids off school property and never really investigated. It’s horrifying how organizations like colleges and churches that we entrust to the education of our children can do this.
You're a brave man, gshiler2.
There is a particularly craven personality that inhabits bureaucratic hierarchies that considers the lifelong loss of your innocence less important than the ability of certain executives to pay mortgages on second homes and drive expensive cars. Some of those people are in evidence here, loudly asserting that, even when discovered, it’s not in the best interests of a raped child for the raping to cease. And yet there is no rejection by either the publisher of this site or its readers.
What more fortunate people do not understand is the permanence of child abuse, and the irrelevance of material things (“the chain of command”, as though that even exists in a civil, democratic society), and the corruption that those would create by making one’s humanity secondary to whichever organization is threatened by perversion.
We play tackle football.
The stonewall solution.
“Thank you…
…it is clear to me on this thread those who have worked in these situations before and know just how sensitive they are and those that just don’t have that experience.
Regardless of what we want to happen, what HAS to happen is that level headed people make rational decisions.
In many cases stopping the act and pushing the matter further is even more traumatizing to the child."
We play tackle football.
thank you for your comment. I wish there had been an adult that witnessed the attack on me as a child that could have went to the police, I wish JoePa or the GA had gone to the police. I don’t know how someone can know about an attack on a child and think that reporting it to their boss is their sole responsibility. Yes JoePa should have reported it to “superiors”, but he should have done it from his cell phone as he was driving the GA to the police station to make a full report.
Penn State is a great school, and while I have always been a rival, I have always been an admirer. I sincerely hope Penn State can do what my university couldn’t and admit the failings of it’s employees, including JoePa. While he may have technically did what was required, to say that is enough is disingenuous. I hope JoePa can do what my coach couldn’t and admit his failure. I’d hate to see a Tressel equivocation from a man of such long demonstrated integrity.
"I once had a rose named after me and was very flattered until I read the catalogue description which said ' not very good in a bed, but great up against the wall'."- Eleanor Roosevelt
by gshiler2 on Nov 7, 2011 10:47 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
One of the crappier parts
is that when something like this happens, it affects 10000 other things that have nothing at all to do with the incident. For example, more than likely, this will very negatively affect giving to THON, and that is not right at all.
Good point.
Did Curley and others enable child molestation? Maybe – that’s largely a legal question.
Did they enable much of the collateral damage that the university community will experience? Absolutely, and you don’t need all the facts to see that. That’s why I, and I would guess others, am so pissed.
by Illegal Formation on Nov 6, 2011 11:06 AM EST up reply actions
I am too
I also feel very bad for this team. This is something that happened many years ago while they were in middle school and they will likely bear some of the brunt of it. How in the world will the game go Saturday? Will people even show up? What about Joe? I can’t even imagine the presser on Tuesday..
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 11:12 AM EST up reply actions
I'll be there.
And many others will, too.
In the words of a well-reasoned FanPost, don’t punish the kids.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
by MainLion on Nov 6, 2011 11:13 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah.
I wrote something along those lines yesterday. Just awful. They’re trying to win a Big Ten title, and then this shit hits the fan, and they’re caught in the shit crossfire. What terrible circumstances for guys like Moye and Lynn and Astorino – my God, Drew Astorino, what a player – in their final home game.
by Illegal Formation on Nov 6, 2011 11:15 AM EST up reply actions
I will be there to support the team
They are hard working kids and deserve our support…
by archerbullseye on Nov 6, 2011 3:03 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I have to bring this up
And I hate to turn this into some stupid CSI plot, but when exactly did Ray Gricar mysteriously disappear, and was he investigating this case? Wouldn’t he be responsible, ultimately, for bringing criminal charges against Sandusky? I feel like if there were foul play involved with Gricar’s disappearance, certainly the alleged villainy of Sandsuky must be at least considered.
I debated for 10 minutes whether or not to post this… I just can’t get over that a former DA is still missing with absolutely no real answers as to where/how/why.
Anyway, the flashlights eat our human power grids, our souls if you will. So i destroyed them, and if a few precious panties were burnt or soiled in the reckoning then so be it
by millzners on Nov 6, 2011 11:08 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
I thought the exact same thing yesterday,
as soon as I saw his name in the AG report.
Maybe I’m crazy too.
"That Craig James gets such prominent assignments remains a mystery on the D.B. Cooper scale."
Richard Deitsch on Craig James, who allegedly killed 5 hookers while at SMU.
by Pete the Streak on Nov 6, 2011 11:12 AM EST up reply actions
I'll put it this way
When the heavy hitters of journalism arrive in town and start looking around, they are going to have a lot of dots they could connect. But maybe I’m crazy.
Anyway, the flashlights eat our human power grids, our souls if you will. So i destroyed them, and if a few precious panties were burnt or soiled in the reckoning then so be it
Imagine being a reporter
“So the DA had all these allegations and decided not to prosecute? I’d like to speak with him, where can he be found?”
“Oh Ray Gricar? Yeah, he went missing around 6 years ago. He’s presumed dead.”
Makes you really wonder what was on that laptop.
Anyway, the flashlights eat our human power grids, our souls if you will. So i destroyed them, and if a few precious panties were burnt or soiled in the reckoning then so be it
Wait...
6 years ago the DA disappeared? Just “puff” gone?
Every insult does not require a response.
by Esteban d' Amur on Nov 6, 2011 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
Yeah, one of the stranger missing persons cases in recent history.
"This is being a Penn State fan. We’ll prove it, or we won’t. It’s not about proving it to them, it’s about proving to ourselves."
Iirc, his car Crashed
And then they couldn’t recover the body? Not even a serious crash (Like car flips over, explosions etc, crash) but he was gone. That’s what I remember from that.
Needs moar Dukes
Sean Lee is the only tolerable thing about the Cowboys
by ICEICETHATGUY13 on Nov 6, 2011 11:31 AM EST up reply actions
I remember reading in the paper
they found a computer in a pond/lake/puddle that was destroyed, what millzners referred to. Whole situation had Lifetime movie written all over it.
Dark Knight feeling, die and be a hero-or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.-Jay-Z
Yeah.
They found his car near the river in Lewisburg, his laptop was in the river, the hard drive was found months later on the banks somewhere. His internet search history revealed he had googled on how to destroy a hard drive before he disappeared.
Side note… anyone else thing it’s odd that my google chrome browser wants to auto-correct the words google and googled?
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Didnt know about the google hard drive tidbit
thats crazy
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
I think he made himself dissappear
Found a new identity. I’m incredibly interested in the reason why though.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Has a DA ever gone into Witness protection?
"This is being a Penn State fan. We’ll prove it, or we won’t. It’s not about proving it to them, it’s about proving to ourselves."
I'd imagine it's happened before.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I imagine it happened with many 5-borough assistant D.A.'s.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Didn't want to be in the eye of the worst shitstorm to hit Centre County ever, perhaps?
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 11:45 AM EST up reply actions
referring to this?
I’d be curious as to why he chose 2005 to leave. 3 years after the 2002 event and 3 years before the 2008 one that kicked off this investigation. I’d imagine it was something else.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I'm not really into conspiracy theories, but what the hell...
I could see it taking three years in the court system before he realized there was no way this was going to end without blowing up and taking a good chunk of the University with it.
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 11:51 AM EST up reply actions
Or hell, two years and then another year to plan how he was going to disappear himself.
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 11:52 AM EST up reply actions
According to the story Ben just linked on twitter
he doesn’t sound like the kind of guy that would run away from that
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Let me clarify my above statement -
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 11:56 AM EST up reply actions
I really hate conspiracy theories, and usually theorists as well.
I do like to play Devil’s Advocate, though.
Sometimes it gets me in an odd situation…
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
by leeharvey418 on Nov 6, 2011 11:57 AM EST up reply actions
Oh I hear you
If this were some movie, this would be the perfect twist in the story. And chances are DiCaprio would be in it too. God I wish this was just a movie.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
at that point he could have probably prevented it
had he known of it, that is
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
The mountains of Central Pennsylvania have their stories to tell.
This is a tradition which dates back to the kidnapping of Mary Jemison and the murder of Jack Armstrong by some pissed off Delaware at Jack’s Narrows.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 11:30 AM EST up reply actions
This made me think too....
Needs moar Dukes
Sean Lee is the only tolerable thing about the Cowboys
by ICEICETHATGUY13 on Nov 6, 2011 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
Maybe, but there is another possibility
I hate to bring this up because I’m not exactly proud of how I conducted myself while at PSU, hence my lack of a degree. In my time there I had some substance abuse issues. There were a lot of rumblings around the time of his disappearance about him trying to prosecute one of the local kingpins and this leading to him vanishing. Take this for what it’s worth though, it’s not like most of the people I heard this from or myself were exactly of outstanding moral character at the time. Though I will say I heard it from enough different people that it’s hard dismiss as a possibility.
(Also before anybody starts judging me too badly, I’ve been clean for a little over 6 years now. Sorry, I just feel there’s already been enough judgment in this thread already.)
"Put it to the floor, hold on, and watch the mud fly!"
by biscoiv on Nov 6, 2011 6:25 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Thanks
No problem with keeping it up, too much to lose now(wife and son).
"Put it to the floor, hold on, and watch the mud fly!"
by biscoiv on Nov 6, 2011 7:39 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Congratulations on getting and staying clean.
Thank you for sharing; no judgment here.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
I don't understand...
the motivation of Curely and Schultz in this. Why not simply report this to the police? Any resulting scandal would be minimal. Yeah, there probably would be a civil case and some sort of large settlement, but large organizations deal with that stuff all the time.
Every insult does not require a response.
by Esteban d' Amur on Nov 6, 2011 11:08 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
I also don't understand,
how two guys could become so successful despite being so mind-numbingly stupid. But you just know that when I get out of grad school I’m going to be unemployed for months.
by Illegal Formation on Nov 6, 2011 11:19 AM EST up reply actions
My email to president@psu.edu
I know many of you have sent something similar to Mr. Spanier but I want to share what I wrote. I encourage anyone who hasn’t written our esteemed President yet to do so. I am hoping I receive a response.
Mr. Spanier,
I spent some of the best years of my life as a State College resident and a student at The Pennsylvania State University from 2004-2008.Unfortunately, today is the first time I am embarrassed and ashamed to be a Penn Stater. Hearing the news of an alleged predator living in our community and the fact that administrators and football coaches knew of accusations for years and appear to have blown them off hurts. The most baffling accusations are that Mr. Sandusky was allowed full access to the University even after these accusations were known. The stories that have been alleged by the District Attorney and the Police Department and the amount of information that was known by people in authority at Penn State is sickening and makes me doubt everything I know about the leadership at the University. Being a former student I know how involved you are and how responsive you can be to a problem. But this is much worse than “State Patty’s Day,” tailgating after kickoff or any other cause that I know you have led to keep students under control. As the leader of this University I feel you owe the entire Penn State community an explanation for your lack of action to these much more serious problems.
It appears to me that Tim Curley and Gary Schultz displayed an extreme lack of judgment, abused their positions and let down many people in our community. I would like you to explain how you are offering Mr. Curley and Mr. Schultz your “unconditional support.” I believe the only people who deserve support in this case are the alleged victims of Mr. Sandusky’s disgusting acts.
I love to tell people that my degree only means something because of Joe Paterno and what he has done during his fifty plus years at Penn State. While I am the biggest supporter of Coach Paterno and I understand he did what was required of him legally, I can’t help but feeling more could have been done and if the people in leadership positions at Penn State had in fact done more maybe we would have less in victims today.
I graduated in May of 2008 and since my graduation I have made contributions to Penn State within my means every year. I have done this because I believe in the leadership of Penn State, most notably Graham Spanier and Joe Paterno. It appears my beliefs were misguided and I will now find more noble places to make contributions.
Mr. Spanier, I look forward to hearing how you will restore my faith in Penn State.
We Are,
“My Name”
The Pennsylvania State University
Smeal College of Business of Adminstration
Class of 2008
by tc2621psu on Nov 6, 2011 11:14 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
Here was my letter.
Subject: please resign
Dear Mr. Spanier,
As a graduate student in the Department of Meteorology at Penn State, and a tremendous fan of Penn State, I have to ask that you please resign from your post as president of Penn State for your handling of the Sandusky case. From the information released by the grand jury, I am incredulous how you could throw your “unconditional support” behind Mr. Curley and Mr. Schultz, and say that you believe they will be “completely exonerated.” To me that implies that you do not trust the eyewitness GA or Coach Paterno’s testimony, in opposition to the judgment of the grand jury. Furthermore, and more egregiously, it appears that you were aware of the 2002 incident and yet did not notify the police to launch an investigation. For these two reasons, I believe you are no longer fit to lead our great university, and that the longer you remain in leadership of the university, the more the reputation of PSU will continue to be tarnished. Right now I am embarrassed to be a student of Penn State, and to be currently overseas representing Penn State while conducting field research. Your resignation would be the first step toward rehabilitating the reputation of The Pennsylvania State University. “May no act of ours bring shame.”
Jared A. Lee
M.S., Meteorology, 2007
[add’l contact info]
Let's Go State!
by Gopher Broke on Nov 6, 2011 11:38 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The indictment of JoePa at the end of this article is way off base
What do we know so far?
1. The Grand Jury’s Report: McQueary went to Joe with his story; Joe went to Curley with the story, and made sure Curley heard McQueary’s account first hand. It is worth noting that the credibility of Joe’s testimony on this matter is directly responsible for the charges against Curley and Schultz. These are the only facts in the Grand Jury’s report because they’re the only facts that have any legal relevant.
2. DerryPharmer’s report: Derry’s word is gospel around here, and for good reason. We want to know that JoePa went beyond his legal obligation and did the morally right thing here. According to Derry’s post above, Joe relied on Curley’s statements that an investigation was ongoing. What more do you want from him? Do you want him to assume that Curley is lying to him, not doing his job, and breaking the law, and to take matters into his own hands based on those assumptions?
3. Joe’s continued cooperation with the prosecution: Right now, we’re speculating on a lot. But at some point in the next year or two, Joe is going to take the witness stand and answer direct questions about all of this. He has already provided sworn testimony, corroborated by McQueary, that led to the indictments of Curley and Schultz. I don’t expect to see him hold anything back in court.
I appreciate your coverage of a difficult matter, Chris, but you’re dead wrong to be calling for Paterno’s head. We don’t know nearly enough about his role in all this to make a definitive judgment, and what little we do know suggests that he’s the one prominent figure in this mess that’s doing the right thing. I hope you’ll reconsider your position.
ACCEPTS THE PAYPAL
Hello, everybody, coach get old, the new coach approaching, click in.
Welcome to http://www.pennlive.com
by newenglandnittanylion on Nov 6, 2011 11:16 AM EST reply actions 13 recs
At times like this I miss Mike's level-headedness.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
by MainLion on Nov 6, 2011 11:18 AM EST up reply actions 11 recs
To be fair to Chris
This is a delicate issue that involves a lot of emotion; anger, sadness, frustration, etc. It’s impossible at this point to keep those out of any discussion at this point in time, but unfortunately Chris, and the other writers here, arent afforded the luxury of sitting back and trying to digest everything as it is slowly revealed. They either have to address it now or just completely ignore it, which is impossible at this point. Those emotions are going to boil through into their writing occasionally, as with us all, so while we may disagree with what he might have said, we should probably cut them a little slack
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
I think Chris is doing good.
I’d like to read what Mike thinks as well. But my guess is he is beyond outraged.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
I wouldn't go too far with that.
From what I’ve read of him recently, I wouldn’t be shocked if Mike is calling for Paterno’s head. I’m not saying he is, but I wouldn’t rule it out as a possibility.
Tom Bradley for offensive coordinator.
by ReadingRambler on Nov 6, 2011 11:28 AM EST up reply actions
I cannot possibly say another time, as I did yesterday,
that a GJ charging simply states enough facts to move the indictment forward.
To make conclusions based on it wholly irresponsible.
The Pa. A.G. is not writing it for defense. She is writing it for the Commonwealth, whose strongest interest is obtaining a conviction on some or all of the charges. She is not making her case and then defending against it.
The simple conclusion, then, is that the indictment presents what we know, or at the least, what the Commonwealth intends to show at trial. You can sure as hell assume that the defense will show much more.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
You are correct.
But you can derive much from the admissions contained therein.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
I didn't read it as calling for Paterno's head
For right or wrong, the court of public opinion will judge Paterno first. For right or wrong, he may not survive it. That’s the reality of the situation.
Only PSU fans and those who know Joe best will give him the benefit of the doubt. Outsiders will question him to no end. The same questions some of us have for him but with a greater degree of scrutiny.
Again, I’m not saying it’s right, but Paterno is lumped in with this scandal.
by Mr. Rosewater on Nov 6, 2011 3:11 PM EST up reply actions
AP is reporting that Sandusky has been barred from campus.
File that one under, Decisions that should have been made 15 years ago.
by Illegal Formation on Nov 6, 2011 11:21 AM EST reply actions
Um, yeah
I’m pretty sure Sandusky won’t be showing his face anywhere in the Western Hemisphere for the rest of his life. But as far ask token gestures go, this is a pretty necessary one.
ACCEPTS THE PAYPAL
Hello, everybody, coach get old, the new coach approaching, click in.
Welcome to http://www.pennlive.com
by newenglandnittanylion on Nov 6, 2011 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
One Reason for the Ban
It would be VERY embarassing if Sandusky were seen at Saturday’s game.
tO$U sucks-ALWAYS the right choice!
I think the fans would remove him.
Something very organic.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Re: Tim Curley and coverups
No shock here in regards to poor investigation and covering up details by the administration. Same thing happened with Women’s Basketball and Rene Portland, and Dawna Prevette (who is still coaching at PSU as Dawna Denny now) and the Women’s Tennis team. Not quite sure what it is about PSU hiring mental or sexual abusers as coaches but it NEEDS TO STOP, and allegations need to be taken seriously instead of being swept under the rug. If heads needs to roll metaphorically for a cleanup to begin than so be it, but from what I can tell from the information presented it’s not Joe Pa’s fault.
by PSUTennisBoyfriend on Nov 6, 2011 12:28 PM EST reply actions
In case anyone hasn't decided to cut off financial support to Pen State...
From ESPN:
University spokeswoman Lisa Powers says the allegations against Curley and Schultz concern how they fulfilled their responsibilities as employees, so Penn State is paying for their counsel.
Looks like Spanier really is giving his unconditional support.
Well, the University should.
These actions occurred within the course and scope of each’s employment with the University. And, Penn State has a vested interest in their defense—the interests of Penn State (as an institution) are intimately tied to Curley’s and Schultz’s interests.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
by MainLion on Nov 6, 2011 12:36 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
And doesn't that put McQueary in a difficult position?
This seems to be boiling down to what Mike says he told Curley and Schultz vs. what those two say Mike told them. Penn State would benefit from Curley and Schultz prevailing in the finger pointing contest.
Oh, without a doubt, there are HUGE conflicts of interest now.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Well, the report says the GJ found Mike to be a very credible witness.
As long as he’s telling the truth I hope he stick to his guns. The only thing worse than what Penn State administrators are accused of doing would be if they really did do all those things and somehow get away with it.
The Attorney General wants to win her primary case against Sandusky
Pitting Penn State people against one another is a possible tactic to help achieve that end.
*
Same goes for Joe, who will be testifying for the prosecution
ACCEPTS THE PAYPAL
Hello, everybody, coach get old, the new coach approaching, click in.
Welcome to http://www.pennlive.com
by newenglandnittanylion on Nov 6, 2011 2:14 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, for the prosecution and against Curley and Schultz
#Awkwardmomentatthewatercooler.
by Mr. Rosewater on Nov 6, 2011 2:56 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, for goodness sakes.
Why would McQ. lie to the very people he wanted to employ him, unless he had no choice morally?
We play tackle football.
Jeeze, where did I say McQ lied???
McQueary’s testimony with the grand jury contradicted Curley’s and Schultz’s. It was primary in the perjury charges being brought against them. All I said was that puts Mike in a difficult position heading into the trial. I don’t see how anyone can possibly think that’s not an uncomfortable position for him to be in.
You said it was a matter of 'he said, they said".
Well, the first thing the judge and jury do is try to figure out which person is lying. That’s reality. Don’t even go there. The young guy without power will get burned.
We play tackle football.
You're either trolling or have a reading comprehension problem.
I’m probably twice your age and don’t need your wisdom on power brokering in a court room.
From a legal point of view, I understand why they are doing this
But that doesn’t make me any less irate that money from alumni contributions, tuition etc will ultimately go towards defending their actions.
by ppfcpp on Nov 6, 2011 12:43 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Yes PSU Sounds
more and more like the Catholic Church. Whatever happened to truth?
tO$U sucks-ALWAYS the right choice!
It has been lost in "misunderstandings," "misstatements," and "misinterpretations."
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
MK and I Had Already Decided
to cut off all support except for THON. I am glad I don’t live in PA-I wouldn’t want a cent of my taxes going towards this.
tO$U sucks-ALWAYS the right choice!
It will be interesting to see if/how Curley & Schultz's counsel conducts cross-exams
of Paterno and McQueary (if he testifies).
ACCEPTS THE PAYPAL
Hello, everybody, coach get old, the new coach approaching, click in.
Welcome to http://www.pennlive.com
by newenglandnittanylion on Nov 6, 2011 2:21 PM EST up reply actions
Second Mile
Another thought about all of this. If Curley and Schultz reported the 2002 incident to Second Mile, why in God’s name did that organization allow Sandusky 8 more years of access to those kids. WTH.
by psueagle on Nov 6, 2011 12:44 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I'm wearing my bright white Penn State sweatshirt today out in Hoboken in broad daylight.
This is an incredibly embarrassing incident for all of us. Multiple members of the administration appear to have really screwed up.
That said, Penn State is more than football, more than Joe Paterno, more than Jerry Sandusky, Tim Curley, Gary Schultz and Graham Spanier. I refuse to let the actions of some of those men shame me into ignoring or hiding a significant part of who I am.
Forget the rest of them. WE are…
You without me is like Harold Melvin without the Blue Notes . . . you'll never go platinum.
#OccupyESPN
by Adam Collyer on Nov 6, 2011 1:31 PM EST reply actions 7 recs
Well, you seem to be in much better spirits today than last night. Keep it up!
I used to be indecisive. Now I'm not sure.
I do hate admitting that you were right......
You without me is like Harold Melvin without the Blue Notes . . . you'll never go platinum.
#OccupyESPN
Thank you
This whole thing sucks, but I haven’t gotten to the point where it’s changed my perception towards Penn State as a whole.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
YAY!
A couple of bigwigs f*** up. Maybe we’ll find that they were not as compliant as we think today. Maybe they were doing “the right thing”. Maybe they did things that are far worse. This thing stinks to high heaven but we only have allegations from the Prosecution’s side so far.
However, separately, there are (what?) 100,000 students, millions of alumi, thousands of faculty an administrators (less two or three), 100 football players, 100 members of the blue band, 15 gorgous volleyball players, etc. that had nothing to do with this. They need our support and need us to stay positive.
We are embarrassed. However, across the country, most people “don’t give a rat’s ass”. They see the headline, they say “Wow, that sucks”, but they lump it with all the other bad shit that’s out there and they move on. We, as alumni and other “friends of the University” are taking this much harder and that’s to be expected. We’re going to have to deal with this for maybe a few years! It’s embarrassing, disgusting, depressing, etc. But nobody that loves Penn State need to feel individually responsible or sorry for this. It is extremely clear that every one of the posters on BSD feel these very serious allegations and should be punished severly if/when proven accurate.
I used to be indecisive. Now I'm not sure.
by PaJoe on Nov 6, 2011 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Wish I felt the same way.
For a tattoo scandal, I could maintain that attitude. For this, I’m embarrassed and ashamed.
by Illegal Formation on Nov 6, 2011 1:54 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I hope
nothing ridiculous happens, like the team getting booed when they come out Saturday or something to that effect.
I hope nothing happens at Columbus and Madison
by Mr. Rosewater on Nov 6, 2011 2:54 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed
This is so sucky for this team. I love the way they win and how hard they’ve worked, and it doesn’t seem fair that a bunch of cowardly adults (who should be their role models) are ruining this all for them. Legally, Joe probably can’t say much of anything at his press conference on Tuesday, but I hope he explains himself some if he is able.
A bunch of non-answers and “let’s talk football” probably isn’t going to work here.. and might inflame things for the worse.
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 2:57 PM EST up reply actions
Well that is stupid for people to get upset if that is all he says, because as you pointed out he will probably have a gag order since he will be a witness for the prosecution.
You're giving people too much credit.
You’re assuming people understand things like state law, civics, court cases, etc..
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 3:02 PM EST up reply actions
Just wait for the signs at OSU
You know they will be there. ESPN is gonna have a hard time censoring those.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Perhaps Big Red should have told Curley & Schultz that in addition to the rape he saw Sandusky binge drinking
That certainly would have convinced Spanier to contact law enforcement.
I suck 'em down like Coca-Cola.
by ATLion on Nov 6, 2011 2:37 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
The problem I'm having with everything
is that so many people have known about this for so long, and not just administrative people. I worked on campus and when news broke a guy I was working with said, “Yeah, I’ve known that for years.”
What?!?!
This is sheer insanity.
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 3:09 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
NLC early donation incentive
The deadline was right before the GJ report. Coincidence? I thought it was weird that they were doing it. Figured donations were down due to STEP. But it wouldn’t surprise me if this had something to do with it. Since we are talking about conspiracies…
by speedotito on Nov 6, 2011 3:28 PM EST via mobile reply actions
The program I love has been dragged through the mud over the years
for several hugely embarrassing off-field incidents (self-styled crime rings, rape cover-up, recreational drug use, etc.) and I am here to say only this;
I’m sorry for you guys. Genuinely. This is the worst kind of thing to happen to something like football, which is a game that we all love and that should be rooted in joy and the spirit of competition. It’s an escape from these kind of horrible realities that occur in the rest of the world. When something this heinous encroaches upon that outlet, well it’s just sad.
As the father of three small children, the incidents in question (and regardless of what shakes out from all of this, there was certainly some kind of incident) are nothing short of sickening and infuriating to me. But I also understand that the actions of few are not the actions of all. Penn State is still a grand tradition on the field and, more importantly as shown by sites like this, a community off the field. Whatever comes from all of this I hope patience and support for those who deserve it is shown.
Thinking of you guys and hoping you all come through it together; the next few weeks/months/years are almost certain to be exhausting, embarrassing and sad. Be good to one another and direct your anger where it deserves to be directed, not at each other. I’m out, good luck.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Nov 6, 2011 3:28 PM EST reply actions 4 recs
Thanks Kyle. We appreciate all the Hawkeye sympathy over the past day.
You without me is like Harold Melvin without the Blue Notes . . . you'll never go platinum.
#OccupyESPN
Thank you Kyle.
Most sincerely, thank you.
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
Y'all aren't going to like this,
but I’m going to play the Devil’s Advocate here. I think that Spanier must have some kind of documentation or evidence to show what happened in 2002 and how the university responded to it. These are the types of things where you should write a memo and file it away, just for CYA purposes, if nothing else. I think that Spanier must have something that he believes will exonerate Curley and Schultz. He’s a smart man and he’s always been very media savvy.
I don’t know what to think about the allegations. I’ve read the entire indictment and it sickens me. But I also realize that it is only one side of the story crafted by the prosecution with the goal being to lead to charges and a conviction. I am trying to withhold judgment until all the facts are in.
As to Jerry Sandusky having access to the campus, here is the explanation. He was made a Professor Emeritus upon retirement. The way this works at my university is that you have to be nominated by your faculty peers and it has to go through a lengthy approval process, including being voted on by the Board of Trustees. Once a professor is granted Emeritus status, he has access to virtually everything on campus that he did before. Office, phone, email, keys, etc. ANY Professor Emeritus at Penn State has these perks as well. It was not a matter of special treatment. We have an 80 year old Professor Emeritus who has been retired for at least 15 years who still comes into the office almost every day of the week.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
by Paige2PSU on Nov 6, 2011 3:59 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
I'm sorry, Paige2PSU...
…but I can’t see what Spanier could possible have in his possession that exonerates him or the university. It’s very confusing because the man is so media-saavy, but this behavior back then and the content of his statement yesterday are anything but.
He may not,
I’m probably just being an apologist, but this seems so atypical of Spanier.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
He could have a tape of the meeting he had with everyone
And in the tape the GA says “Horsing around” and never actually mentions supposed sexual acts. Unlikely, but possible.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
This guy was Professor Emeritus? PSU makes involuntarily retired assistant football coaches "Professor Emeritus"? Really?
You realize that a jury will consider that a “go away” bribe.
Just curious, where and when did he publish?
This whole thing is turning into a David Lynch movie.
We play tackle football.
by Bellanca on Nov 6, 2011 4:19 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Oh, and great news! Sandusky's appointment as Professor Emeritus was endorsed by the Board of Trustees? Is this really happening?
We play tackle football.
I'm not sure he was officially given Emeritus status...
but being given an office and access is similar to that situation.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 4:21 PM EST up reply actions
I read that he is an Emeritus.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
It specifically mentions in the report that he held Emeritus Status
I believe it said he was granted it in 2000, but I could be wrong.
How do you know he involuntarily retired?
Sure the timing works out, but once again, operating with facts I’m not aware have been presented yet.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I think a lot of the football coaches
are tenured professors, including Joe. It’s part of the teaching role. And you don’t have to conduct research to get tenure or promotion. Usually you have to demonstrate some level of accomplishment in two areas out of teaching, research and service.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
There are a lot of places where you don’t even have to be particularly good at any of these
teaching, research and service
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
True.
I don’t work there, though!
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
No, not West Texas.
Although if I don’t get tenure next year, maybe I should apply there!
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Low standards make things less fun.
I’m trying to drag out a postdoc period as long as possible so I don’t have to worry so much about tenure. Hoping Northern Norway is the next job.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Good luck!
What’s in northern Norway?
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
bears
snow, ice, blondes.
Oh, and arctic plant evolutionary genetics.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
I figured there had to be something
other than the blondes.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
It hardly seems more important though
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Of course not.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
The Scandinavians do really good work with arctic plant biology and phylogeography. Thought I would learn something, plus I hate the climate and culture of West Texas and am looking to get as far away as possible.
Good luck with tenure. Stress, stress, stress…even when you have it in the bag.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Thanks!
I’m working on a mid-career fellowship application right now (due Wednesday). If I get that, it’s in the bag.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Good Luck
Not sure what funding agency, but it is like a slaughterhouse out there for money. Many NSF rates are in the single digits.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
They’re expecting 50-60 applications for six positions.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
10%, well good luck
I don’t envy you medical types, there are never poisonous snakes or bears trying to impede your research. We botanists are the rogue, danger-junkies of the academic world.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
And you love it, right?
Good luck to you, too.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
This whole thing sickens me,
The allegations against Sandusky sicken me. The actions of Curley and Schultz and Spanier anger me. The role of Gricar intrigues me. And the reaction by large swaths of the fan base disappoint me.
IF Joe’s involvement ceased at informing Curley, I will be gravely disappointed, and if that’s that case, I’ll call for his head too. BUT WE STILL DON’T KNOW WHAT JOE DID. Should he have called police himself? Probably. But he’s not the one who witnessed it. Calling for Joe’s head while at the same time, giving the GA a pass is irresponsible. In my mind, the GA is just as responsible as Paterno for reporting it to authorities and then following up.
Beyond Curley and Schultz, it’s premature to be calling for heads to roll.
I love Penn State, and I’m angry that an alleged act by one of our own has brought shame upon us all. And even if Sandusky is acquitted, there’s no amount of makeup that can cover the resulting black eye.
by joe_knows on Nov 6, 2011 4:02 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
pretty much this...
but I might add Spanier to the list of those who should be canned. Can’t accept is allegiance to those two this early in the process.
by Artiefufkin10 on Nov 6, 2011 4:06 PM EST up reply actions
I imagine
this story is going to be a 30 for 30 someday.
by AlmostAYardShy on Nov 6, 2011 4:13 PM EST up reply actions
I have had the chance to digest this
and am now completely and utterly disgusted with the Attorney General. The reason is I believe she is dragging Penn State through the mud for one reason and one reason only – to get a conviction she doesn’t think she has the evidence to support. And for that several hundred thousand tried and true Penn State alums must suffer as their alma mater is tarred and feathered.
Sandusky retired in 1999. How and why is for the gossip column. The fact is PSU disassociated itself from him eons ago and here is one thing I know as fact — PSU has LONG had a zero-tolerance policy for anything funky sexually. In fact, they will gladly err on the side of getting rid of someone. And I could name names of people no longer employed who took them to arbitration and won but still remain unemployed. Which is really the ironic thing in this — the U is getting dragged through the mud for actions by someone who was not employed by them for an issue they have a less-than-zero-tolerance policy on.
As I’ve posted multiple times the grand jury presentment is (as it’s supposed to be) a very one-sided version and sufficient for an old-fashioned frontier hanging. However the Attorney General’s continued efforts to drag Penn State into this and fuel the media fire has pushed me past the acceptance of her action as a function of her job. I’m Penn State proud and I’m pissed.
The crap McQ saw was while Jerry was working for the Second Mile. It went up the line from McQ to Joe to Curley to Graham to Jack Raykovitz at the Second Mile (the employer). And this is where it must end up – the Second Mile. And that is all CLEARLY outlined in the presentment. Why is no one from Second Mile questioned anywhere in this thing? Jerry had access to the kids through the Second Mile. Jerry met, worked with and handled the kids all under the auspices of the Second Mile. In fact Jerry had access to kids through the Second Mile all the way until 2008 or later. WHY NO FREAKIN’ MENTION OF THE CULPABILITY OF THE SECOND MILE ANYWHERE IN THIS PRESENTMENT?!? Why is “Penn State” the focus of anything here?
Bottom line, whether people acted morally right is up for debate. Everything I see in this presentment says all the Penn State employees involved acted legally and properly, I support them 100% and I look forward to the day the Attorney General suffers the consequences for this egregious miscarriage of media justice.
*
And as we wait for the results of the Board of Trustees meeting this evening
I reread this in a less PO’d mode and want to point out that by “suffers the consequences” I mean: gets impeached, charged with false accusal, not re-elected or any combination thereof.
*
because the President of Second Mile didn’t perjure himself?
Get a grip and stop viewing the world through the eyes of PSUPSUPSUPSUPSUPSUPSU… crimes have been committed. Get over it. It doesn’t change who PSU is or what it stands for, but it should make you very, very angry with certain employees of the university.
by Brodie on Nov 6, 2011 7:07 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
PSU has deep pockets
and when you arrest their employees it makes the front page of every paper in America (I’m guessing).
Politicians looove publicity.
by Tailgate Shogun on Nov 6, 2011 8:47 PM EST up reply actions
Not sure if troll
One paragraph of accusations of ulterior motives based on nothing.
One paragraph of unrelated ranting.
One paragraph of related ranting.
Two paragraphs discussing the culpability of Second Mile, as if their culpability is exclusive with Curley and Schultz’s culpability.
Nothing of actual relevance.
Thanks for all of the comments (positive and negative) and for keeping this mostly civil.
My position on this whole thing essentially boils down to the following: if anybody associated with Penn State found out about these allegations and did not do everything in their power to make sure the allegations were thoroughly investigated, they have failed the victims before and after, as well as the University, the community, and all of us.
If such information was passed onto Tim Curley and Gary Schultz, and then ignored, anyone with knowledge of the situation in the locker room had a duty to contact the State Police, Children and Youth Services, or another comparable entity. I’m not talking about a legal duty. I’m talking about a duty to report one of the most horrible crimes in human nature, and making a full effort to give law enforcement the best possible chance to stop the perpetrator, find justice (and sorely needed counseling) for the victims, and prevent other children from becoming future victims.
I don’t care if it’s Joe Paterno or a part-time janitor. If anybody knew that abuse was highly likely to have taken place and failed to do the absolute most to ensure that these incidents were thoroughly investigated needs to resign or be fired, promptly.
After hearing countless hours of testimony, the Grand Jury concluded that the allegations regarding Victim #2 weren’t investigated in a serious manner by anyone outside of University Police FOR EIGHT YEARS. Those who knew of the 2002 incident and did little or nothing about it have failed miserably. If they knew then, they need to go. Now.
by Chris Grovich on Nov 6, 2011 6:51 PM EST reply actions 3 recs
The univ. police are the only ones that can investigate crimes on campus unless THEY call in help
There is nothing else someone can do if the jurisdiction does not pursue a charge properly. It appears the campus police knew about the 02 charge. The 98 charge was town police because of where it occurred when charged, at Sandusky’s home. I agree there are investigative problems but the univ police are basically a Pa locality force, same as any town or borough in the commonwealth.
My grammer skills need improved.
if called in.
The local PSP was chastised and troopers punished for not informing local police when breaking down the door of a suspected DUI person that dissed an off duty trooper at a local grocery. Point being, the PSP are supposed to get local approval when investigating an incident the is being investigated locally, or be called in by higher authority, Pa AG.
My grammer skills need improved.
Can't imagine any LE agency jamming up their people for investigating abuse on a minor
May no act.................
you need to learn the PSP rules of investigation.
they must be called in or sent in by higher authority.
My grammer skills need improved.
That is why there are separate jurisdictions in the state.
Locally, the PSP can legally monitor the state highways that run through the borough, but there an agreement in place so that they can monitor non state roads without calling in the report before proceding. might be dumb but it keeps agencies from tripping over each other.
My grammer skills need improved.
also, the PSP could not even investigate the Gricar disappearance until called in by local authorities
one of the sticking points in the disappearance is how the state police were not allowed to investigate till long after. They cannot just take over investigation of a local nature without due cause.
My grammer skills need improved.
I get you point.
In my agency we could make an arrest any where in the US regardless of jurisdiction, once complete just turn over to the locals if needed…they didn’t want us flying back for court
May no act.................
A question:
if University Police investigated it, shouldn’t there be a file stating the outcome of their investigation? Wouldn’t this save everyone some time & energy now?
by Tailgate Shogun on Nov 6, 2011 9:07 PM EST up reply actions
The UP Police didnt themselves investigate it, per se
but the director (Schultz) was who Paterno and MM told what they knew too, prob. expecting the director of the UP police to actually investigate it.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Got it.
confused 2002 with 1998, which did get investigated and was deemed “unfounded”:
Doesn’t mean it didn’t happen; maybe just lack of evidence to take to trial.
by Tailgate Shogun on Nov 6, 2011 9:18 PM EST up reply actions
Joe's statement
If I’m reading it correctly, Joe is saying MM didn’t tell him all the specifics in 2002. Joe says he didn’t know all of what was in the GJ report. So does that mean Curley and Schultz didn’t have specifics either? Or perhaps when they interviewed MM, they got specifics Joe was never told? Joe and MM were not charged so the GJ must have thought they were truthful and credible. God this whole thing just makes me ill.
Something isn't adding up with Joe's statement
He is saying that he didn’t have specifics. What does he think McQueary was talking about? That’s a bunch of BS, and a preview of his defense in the matter.
by mundyscorner99 on Nov 6, 2011 7:03 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I can't believe a man as smart and educated as Joe Pa didn't ask TONS of follow up
questions to MM during their chat about the incident…don’t buy it…this is the program HE BUILT
This is a very serious event, JVP didn’t just accept horsing around and not ask for additional details. If he did then I seriously question everything I “thought” to know about PSU/JVP.
May no act.................
Also - I don't really buy any written press statement from ANYONE.
I mean…how many drafts do you think they went through?
May no act.................
From above and the report
On March 1, 2002, Sandusky was alleged caught by a PSU football Graduate Assistant (identified by the Harrisburg Patriot-News as current PSU wide receivers coach Mike McQueary) with a 10-year old boy in the showers at Lasch. The next day, the Graduate Assistant called Joe Paterno and went to Paterno’s home to describe what he saw at Lasch.
That is what I’m having trouble reconciling in my mind. If the report says McQueary described what he saw, how can Joe say he didn’t know specifics? And even if he didn’t go into every specific detail, I can’t imagine how Joe wouldn’t have done everything in his power (as noted in Chris’s post above) after hearing that.
by mundyscorner99 on Nov 6, 2011 7:21 PM EST up reply actions
^everything in his power to ensure they were thoroughly investigated.
by mundyscorner99 on Nov 6, 2011 7:22 PM EST up reply actions
You're quoting Chris's summary,
which is in turn a summary of the grand jury indictment summarizing years of testimony. None of us knows what was said word for word by any of the parties.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
by Paige2PSU on Nov 6, 2011 7:36 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I don't see your point
Obviously the allegations that McQueary reported were serious and it is stated in the report that he was believed to be highly credible. The report stated that McQueary went to see JoePa the next day to describe what he saw. Joe is saying that he didn’t receive specific information. Either JoePa is not correct in his statement or the report isn’t.
by mundyscorner99 on Nov 6, 2011 7:52 PM EST up reply actions
That's my point, the report is a summary.
It may not be correct, it may be. It certainly isn’t precise. I don’t know how the AG crafted the testimony and GJ findings into the report.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
And your point does not make sense
The GJ mentions no specifics of what was said between MM and JVP. Joe reported non-specifics to Curley/Schultz. And reading Joes statement, he said he received no specifics. Joes Statement makes perfect sense.
The little clip that is copied above is a summary.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
I said that the quote was from above - thanks for pointing that out for some reason
If you don’t think Joe heard enough in terms of specifics, then you must think that McQueary is at fault and didn’t tell him enough. Because I can’t imagine MM telling any part of that story and that not being “specific” enough. Once you hear words like young boy and shower, I think that is specific enough for most reasonable people.
It’s clear that you are defending JoePa at all cost, but people are entitled to their opinion. You are no more knowledgable about it than anyone else here.
by mundyscorner99 on Nov 6, 2011 8:05 PM EST up reply actions
Exactly.
Young boy. Old man. Together in a shower. Who cares the details. How can Paterno say 9 years later that he feels “fooled”. He had the evidence 9 darn years ago.
by froggiebaby on Nov 6, 2011 8:07 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
This discussion isnt about that
issue of being fooled. Its on JoePas statement about what he was told and was not told – specifics (what MM told Curley/Schultz) vs non-specifcs (what MM told Joe).
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Well I actually read the GJ
and comprehended it unlike some people it seems.
How does this fall on MM? He reported specifics to Curley/Schultz. Joe reported what MM told him. What more is there? I am not defending Joe, Joe is doing that himself with what he told the GJ and his statement. His statement makes complete sense with the information we know right now from the GJ.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Maybe McQueary didn't actually tell Joe he saw Sandusky raping the boy.
Maybe he didn’t know what he saw, maybe he was being somewhat vague. He knew it was inappropriate and sexual, so maybe that’s what he told Joe and that’s what Joe told Curley in turn.
People never tell the same story in the exact same way. These events happened 9 years ago. I have no idea what Mike told Joe and what Mike told Curley and Schultz, but it wouldn’t surprise me at all for the story to be more or less graphic depending on who he was speaking to or what he remembered after taking a week to reflect on it.
You without me is like Harold Melvin without the Blue Notes . . . you'll never go platinum.
#OccupyESPN
I think it's important to note that McQueary's meeting with Joe happend the next day
while his meeting with Curley and Schultz happened a week and a half later. Given the emotional state McQueary was in the day after he witnessed the incident, coupled with the fact that he was talking to Joe Paterno, I can’t imagine he was even capable of articulating the details of what he saw. A week and a half later, in an official meeting with the officials responsible for deciding how the matter would be handled, he probably could have.
I posted this in another thread, but I’m reposting it here to save people the trouble of opening that awful PDF again:
The portion of the report that is apparently from McQueary’s testimony simply says that he "telephoned Paterno and went to Paterno’s home, where he reported what he had seen." Then, from Paterno’s testimony:
"Joseph V. Paterno testified to receiving the graduate assistant’s report at his home on a Saturday morning. Paterno testified that the graduate assistant was very upset. Paterno called Tim Curley ("Curley"), Penn State Athletic Director and Paterno’s immediate superior, to his home the very next day, a Sunday, and reported to him that the graduate assistant had seen Jerry Sandusky in the Lasch Building showers f—dling or doing something of a s—ual nature to a young boy."
It’s apparently not until McQueary’s account of his meeting with Curley and Schultz a week and a half later that the term "a—- s—" comes up.
ACCEPTS THE PAYPAL
Hello, everybody, coach get old, the new coach approaching, click in.
Welcome to http://www.pennlive.com
by newenglandnittanylion on Nov 6, 2011 8:27 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
What I've been trying to say
and have said many times in this thread. People are looking for every way to place more blame on Paterno.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
See the GJ and you will see
that the meeting between JP and MM had no specifics, hence Joe told C/S what he knew, which was “fondling or doing something of a sexual nature.” No where does it say Joe was told anymore by MM than what Joe reported to C/S.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
How do we know he didn't do everything in his power?
Sounds to me like getting Schultz, you know, the overseer of police, involved was an excellent way of using his power in the school, MM probably couldn’t get that audience himself.
Maybe Joe didn’t need the specifics, the unspecific report may have been all he needed to know that what happened was wrong and needed to be taken care of, hence the meeting with Schultz.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Yeah.
I read it and felt better for about 10 seconds. It hit the right emotional notes, just, I don’t buy it. How many questions have you personally asked about this today? I’ve spent nearly three hours looking into this over the weekend. He didn’t ask five questions to figure out exactly what MM saw?
Works on contingency? No, money down!
Maybe...
McQ said it was sexual in nature and disgusting. Maybe he said, “Coach, you don’t want to know the details” and Joe guessed at what those could be. I don’t know. Maybe McQ didn’t give him all the details but gave him enough for Joe to report it to Curley and Schultz and make sure McQ had a separate meeting with them. I don’t think Joe is lying.
I've been reading since 12:00pm
yesterday. Stopping only to sleep. 100% serious. Not getting too far, but just looking at every angle.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Or he didn't need to and what MM said was enough for him to know action was needed
And decided to go up the entire chain of police to the top, Schultz.
Maybe you don’t need to rethink anything about PSU/JVP besides the method you use to jump to conclusions about them.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 7:47 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Guys
just read the damn GJ. Joes statements make complete sense if you just actually read the document.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
by TJM5054 on Nov 6, 2011 7:32 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Just looked at it again
I see what you’re saying. It does pretty much say that McQ told Joe one thing but reported more info to Curley and Schultz. Damn.
It makes perfect sense...
If you suspend disbelief long enough to think that you would report somebody for child sexual abuse on the word of somebody else with getting that other persons full account of the story.
Works on contingency? No, money down!
by jesse. on Nov 6, 2011 7:41 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I dont know Joe but
I am sure hearing MM say something like “sexual nature,” and “disturbing,” is enough. I dont think Joe needed specifics from MM to be pissed enough about those words above. Fact is, Joe reported what MM told him, and MM met directly with C/S and reported the actual specifics to them. They reported it to Second Mile and thats about it.
If someone told me the above and was uncomfortable talking about it, I am sure those words enough would’ve been enoiugh for me. I wouldnt of been egging him on “come on man, what were they doing, &&&* *, **, etc..?” Disturbing sexual nature is enough for me to understand.
Second Mile failed just as much as the previous line.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Add onto the fact
that Joe most likely knew that whoever he told would be talking to MM directly anyways. Joe prob. heard enough, even if it wasnt specific, for him to understand.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Do you honestly believe that Joe didn't ask MM a million questions about what *exactly* he saw?
I find that to be absolutely beyond the realm of possibility.
Think this through for a minute. What would you do in that situation? At what point do you say that you’ve heard enough details?
by Chris Grovich on Nov 6, 2011 7:55 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think at "shower," "Sandusky," and "10 year old."
You without me is like Harold Melvin without the Blue Notes . . . you'll never go platinum.
#OccupyESPN
Too add on
“sexual nature” would be enough. If MM was extremely uncomfortable, which JVP and the GJ notes, I would not be egging him on for ever detail, instead I would assume the worse.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
I worked directly with children and had it drilled into my head that if I myself saw something inappropriate or someone else had mentioned it to me, I had to report it directly to my superiors. You are asked not to ask any questions further if you are not in the power to investigate as that can taint the investigation. So it’s not that far fetched that once Joe heard something inappropriate of a sexual nature, he immediately turned it over to the authorities who are then able to take those details from the reporting person.
I know we all revere JoePa as above everything, but demanding that he should have somehow gone above what he was allowed to do at the time is a stretch.
This is a disgusting situation, but we are viewing it from the first time with all the graphic, horrid details all at once. I’m sure it was viewed much differently as a separate occurence Joe assumed was being taken care of.
by mleepsu08 on Nov 6, 2011 8:13 PM EST up reply actions 8 recs
Thank you...
…it is clear to me on this thread those who have worked in these situations before and know just how sensitive they are and those that just don’t have that experience.
Regardless of what we want to happen, what HAS to happen is that level headed people make rational decisions.
In many cases stopping the act and pushing the matter further is even more traumatizing to the child.
Wow.
A child is being raped. The right thing to do is not prevent it happening again.
Please relate this to your prior discussions as to the primacy of a “chain of command” in a civilian society.
I suppose the most remarkable thing about saying that “stopping the act” is harmful to the child being raped, is the total absence of comment by anyone with a PSU persuasion.
We play tackle football.
by Bellanca on Nov 7, 2011 10:02 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
+1 Chris.
I just don’t buy JVP accepted “horsing around” when it involves a man and minor boy in shower.
That could not have been a 15 min convo.
May no act.................
lol
obviously you did not read the GJ and people are messing up where “horsing around” was mentioned to and when.
Your way off base.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Yeah I confused that point...my bad
I still don’t buy Joe didn’t ask / demand details
May no act.................
Your free to do that
but right now the only facts per the GJ is that he prob. heard enough in his description to C/S that MM told him he saw Sandusky “fondling or doing something of a sexual nature” to Curley/Schultz"
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
I work for the government
If I report an impropriety to my boss he is not supposed to ask for any more than what he deems necessary to move such incident up the chain, whether report up the chain or call the depot police force. If he tries to pursue farther than necessary there are legal lines that he could cross. If I witness sexual harassment, he has specific thing he is to do and it does not involve asking questions about what happened. It has to do with reporting it to the proper authorities.
My grammer skills need improved.
And hell
if an employee came to me and said he saw a guy I worked next to for over 3 decades doing something of a sexual nature with a child in the office, I doubt my reaction would be “specifically describe everything.” It would be “wow…uh…holy shit…we need to run this up the flagpole.” I’d be stunned, and twisted up emotionally.
Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.
by 06Lion on Nov 6, 2011 8:29 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I'd run it up the flag pole right after I called 911
Then it would be “hey boss…just called the Police, we have an issue”…
May no act.................
by SweepTheLeg on Nov 6, 2011 8:32 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Really though?
Would your first reaction be to the call the police on a guy you’ve trusted for almost half your life? If it was a stranger, yeah, but somebody close to me…I probably wouldn’t be able to think clearly for at least a day.
Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.
In most cases, you would be wrong. However, it severe cases, and I would agree rape would be one, I would probably call 911 first. We would probably get fired, but it would be the right thing to do.
I used to be indecisive. Now I'm not sure.
If you get fired for putting the safety of a child before your employer’s comfort then maybe it isn’t an institution for which it is worth working.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
by Lycurgus on Nov 6, 2011 8:41 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Please remember, that Schultz was in charge of Campus Police.
That’s who’s jurisdiction this fell under. Paterno, did effectively, call the police on it. That jackass never opened a file or investigated it.
"This is being a Penn State fan. We’ll prove it, or we won’t. It’s not about proving it to them, it’s about proving to ourselves."
by mvrck on Nov 6, 2011 8:38 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Misuse of 911
I’ve seen too many people say this to keep ignoring it. You would not (at least, should not) call 911. The crime has concluded, it is not an emergency. You should contact the police using the normal non-emergency number.
by bubba0077 on Nov 6, 2011 9:35 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I hear ya bro...my head is just spinning
and I feel a deep sense of hurt personally and more importantly for the victims.
I can’t describe how sick I feel
May no act.................
Most businesses handle it the same way, BMAN
You are responsible to get the person to the authority that is responsible for taking care of it. It’s not your job nor the job of the employee who observed the activity to “take action”. If you do follow up a week or so later, about all the Human Resources can tell you is “it’s being taken care of”. Rights of “all” people to privacy.
I used to be indecisive. Now I'm not sure.
by PaJoe on Nov 6, 2011 8:33 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Exactly what I tried to articulate in my post. I had the unfortunate experience of reporting what I thought was abuse (physical not sexual) and my manager cut me off mid-sentence and made an appointment with her director to take my statement to hand over to Child Protective Services. Once I met with her director, my manager had no jurisdiction over what did or did not happen with the alleged abuser.
He didn't need to, "Sandusky" "Little boy" and "shower naked"
Those are the only details he needed, anything else might just make him puke.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I would be kind of shocked if he did.
So, Mike McQueary is sitting in Joe’s living room, distraught and possibly still in shock. Do you really think Joe is going to start pressing him to describe the graphic details of the horror he’d just witnessed? He heard enough from McQueary to know that the acts were of a “sexual nature,” and that’s exactly what he reported to Curley the next day.
ACCEPTS THE PAYPAL
Hello, everybody, coach get old, the new coach approaching, click in.
Welcome to http://www.pennlive.com
by newenglandnittanylion on Nov 6, 2011 8:39 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs
I posted this at the top but it needs posted here
-GA sees Sandusky in shower doing something bad (specifics noted in document) with a 10 year old boy.
-GA next morning tells Joe what he saw (GJ does not mention any specifics of this report of GA to Paterno, hence Paternos’ statemet)
-The very next day, Sunday, Joe reports that his GA saw Sandusky "fondling or doing something of a sexual nature" to Curley/Schultz
-1 and a half weeks later, Curley/Schultz call in GA to meet with them (without Paterno). GA tells C/S the SPECIFICS (noted in the report). C/S ensure GA that something will be done.
-Couple weeks later GA is notified that Sandusky had his keys taken away and that the incident has been reported to The Second Mile.
-Curley testifies that GA told him that the GA reported "inappropriate conduct" that made said GA "uncomfortable."
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
Paterno's Comments
“If this is true we were all fooled, along with scores of professionals trained in such things, and we grieve for the victims and their families,” Paterno said in the statement issued by his son, Scott. "They are in our prayers.
What a bunch of BS. How can you say you were fooled? Ginger brought you the evidence. I don’t care if ginger didn’t go into detail when they had the meeting at Joe’s house years ago. Ginger saw something creepy. A grown man with a little kid in a shower together is disgusting. How and the hell can you say you were FOOLED, Joe? You are fooling yourself.
by froggiebaby on Nov 6, 2011 8:05 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Joe and Sandusky had a relationship before 2002, they'd known each other since like what, the 70s?
So no BS, he was fooled by Sandusky for a very, very long time.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
by Rogue Nine on Nov 6, 2011 8:32 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
this
exactly this. Joe did not say he was fooled in this instance. He said he was fooled—along with “professionals trained in such things”—which to me might indicate the 1998 investigation. Meaning, those who look for this type of thing were fooled by Sandusky.
Perverts can lie, and lie convincingly, for years and years. This happens all the time, with many people never knowing the true nature of those around them, even those they may care for.
Fire Dan Snyder
by Cari Greene on Nov 6, 2011 8:45 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Yeah, the "professionals trained in such things" is pretty cryptic
My first thought was the ‘98 investigation as well, but he could be referring to details we don’t know, and may never know.
ACCEPTS THE PAYPAL
Hello, everybody, coach get old, the new coach approaching, click in.
Welcome to http://www.pennlive.com
by newenglandnittanylion on Nov 6, 2011 8:52 PM EST up reply actions
Are there psychologists
or social workers that work for the Second Mile? That’s what I assumed he was talking about.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Just posted a similar response
So the educators and psychologists missed it too. Lots of people did.
yes and I bet an organization like that has extreme vetting procedures because of the vulnerability of the youth involved
My grammer skills need improved.
I didn't even think about '98 when I read that
But that makes sense. I wondered about psychologists or something like that who missed it. Maybe the people at the high school or Second Mile.
I'm sure there were probably psychological evaluations of the coaches at various points
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Random thought
Has Sandusky’s PSU office computer been confiscated, or his Second Mile or home computer(s)? Wonder if anything has/will be found on those.
Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.
StateCollege.com reporting that trustees, admins, board members were observed arriving for meeting around 7 p.m.
Well...2 nights on national news will get the attention of everyone
Expect some major changes ASAP
May no act.................
I'm sure they were
all just getting into town to pre-game for the Nebraska tailgate.
Or something like that.
by Tailgate Shogun on Nov 6, 2011 8:51 PM EST up reply actions
Good. Put Curley and Schultz on leave, tell Spanier to keep his mouth shut if he's going to say stupid things.
You without me is like Harold Melvin without the Blue Notes . . . you'll never go platinum.
#OccupyESPN
I'm glad...
so many people have the supposed moral clarity to march straight to police headquarters at the first sight of wrong doing!
Every insult does not require a response.
by Esteban d' Amur on Nov 6, 2011 8:35 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
For those of you that read my original comment in the other thread,
you know I am not trolling. You also know that I am actually quite sympathetic towards you guys at this time. One thing I am struggling to understand, though, is how some of your arguments in defense of Penn State are eerily similar to those many of my kind used to defend Ohio State. You shot down all of our defenses and labeled them blind homerism. Because of that, I am NOT shooting down your defenses. I just hope perhaps you guys can understand us (Ohio State) a little better after this. Have a good evening and I am looking forward to November 12th.
This here is a God-Damned - media conspirasah!
Do you want sympathy?
Or just attention?
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
thats a little harsh
I’ve actually reconsidered some of my thoughts on how we reacted to the OSU issues. I’m not sure either party is really justified in their defenses, but I can understand some of the feelings and thought processes they’ve had to deal with. Of course, the main difference will be how we handle ourselves once the truth is fully revealed.
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Neither.
Just opening up some discussion. I would love to hear some legitimate responses that don’t turn into stupid arguments. I could have a field day with this as many Penn State fans did over the course of all of Ohio State’s bullshit, but that’s not the right thing to do.
This here is a God-Damned - media conspirasah!
Again, do you want sympathy or attention?
“I am not trolling . . . .”
“I could have a field day . . . .”
Get the god damned crown of thorns off your head.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
by MainLion on Nov 6, 2011 9:15 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I understand why you don't welcome me here,
especially at this time. So I won’t bother you any longer.
This here is a God-Damned - media conspirasah!
I don't welcome you here because I remember your words about Paterno when you first arrived.
And since then, your veiled trolling.
And now, you show up, once again veiling trolling in statements of concern.
Your shit is old, and your shit is transparent.
I haven’t welcomed you here from your first post. At this time is no different.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
by MainLion on Nov 6, 2011 9:21 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Could you remind me what my words were about Paterno when I first arrived?
I truly do not remember.
This here is a God-Damned - media conspirasah!
Think harder.
There’s a reason you and Az were treated as you were.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Well, I still can't think of anything specific, but
I can tell you my current opinion on Joe Pa:
I think first and foremost he is an amazing dude and THE staple of Big Ten Football. On the flip side, I think his activity in major coaching duties have long been subtracted and that his career has dragged on since your last Rose Bowl appearance. I don’t think that is an incredibly unfair statement.
This here is a God-Damned - media conspirasah!
When your as old as Joe Pa is,
I do believe 3 seasons is a very long time. He also has struggled with injuries. But let’s not get into a debate about this now, I was just trying to help myself understand where MainLion is coming from.
This here is a God-Damned - media conspirasah!
when you're as old as JoePa is
three years is a blink of an eye.
but you are right, we should not debate this. perhaps you should not have brought it up.
Fire Dan Snyder
I did not bring it up, friend,
MainLion asked me to remember what I said about JoePa. Read the comments above to see how this topic was brought up.
This here is a God-Damned - media conspirasah!
you brought up his career dragging on
ML just brought up your “former comments” on Joe—he didn’t elaborate past that. You then decided to add your current opinion, which is what I was referring to as what you brought up.
Fire Dan Snyder
Let's stop this now.
You without me is like Harold Melvin without the Blue Notes . . . you'll never go platinum.
#OccupyESPN
He told me to "think harder"
so I did.
Now this has just become silly.
This here is a God-Damned - media conspirasah!
Not sure how many
PSU fans from here were over on your board “rubbing it in.” But I dont suppose many, if any. Yes we had our laughs here on our own boards.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
The answer is few to none
because ATO deleted and banned almost everyone not a blind Buckeye fan during that time.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
As far as I’ve seen, nobody is really defending Curley, Schultz, or Spanier. Quite the opposite, actually. The only person getting defended is Paterno, and quite honestly, his situation isn’t anywhere near what Tressel’s was. So I’m not sure what you’re getting at?
Luring recruits with my new "Posting HD" scheme since '08.
He may be referring to me.
I’m not defending them per se, as much as trying to find a logical reason for their actions at the time and not in hindsight and trying to withhold judgment.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
I would not consider your comments a defense of their actions.
Parsimony methods are the easiest ones to explain - Felsenstein
OK, thanks for that.
I’m really struggling with how to handle this in a rational way (not saying that others aren’t being rational, I’m just really bending over backwards to force some “devil’s advocacy” into my thinking).
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
I applaud the idea of this
though it can be difficult with the emotion surrounding this. It can be difficult to do AND to hear.
Fire Dan Snyder
I believe it is a bit messier of a situation for Paterno.
But at the same time I don’t think he is in trouble. I just think its disgusting that he had a defensive coordinator like that for so long. And that’s not me judging Joe Pa or saying Joe Pa made a mistake, I’m sure he would say the same thing.
This here is a God-Damned - media conspirasah!
lol yeah
and Joe knew the dark side of Sandusky like that. Please. Joe knew as much about this darkside of Sandusky as least as everyone else.
http://twitter.com/tmaluchnik
You must have either not read my entire comment or completely misunderstood it, man.
You must have either not read my entire comment or completely misunderstood it, man.
This here is a God-Damned - media conspirasah!
The difference between Paterno and Tressel
Tressel, when faced with a relatively minor issue, lied about it.
Paterno, when faced with a major issue, did the maximum he could by law.
Tressel is more akin to Curley/Schultz here than Paterno.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
by Kyle_Martin on Nov 6, 2011 9:55 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Kyle,
To be certain, the law created a duty to report, and Joe reported. The maximum he could do by law is really limitless; he could have told others, or he could have relied on his duty alone.
I’m not nitpicking, but it’s a point many are glossing over.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
by MainLion on Nov 6, 2011 9:58 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Alright fair enough
My understanding from the fanpost Dr. Screenpass posted was that Joe did all he was allowed to do in this situation.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
Its probably the procedure laid out by the university for reporting things of this nature
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
Yeah, Dr. S misinterpreted the statute.
It created a duty by “shall.” Dr. S. interpreted it to be “shall only” or “only shall”. But in reality, all the statute says is that Joe MUST do something. Legally, he is permitted to do anything, so long as it consists of that something, or something else that includes that something, too.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Gotcha
Then I’ll retract that part of my statement.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
But as other people have pointed out,
often times company/organization policies are to report the matter to a supervisor and let the proper authorities handle it (with the expectation that the correct steps will be followed).
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Very true, too.
We need just the facts, ma’am.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Well those aren't coming out
until the trial, if there’s a trial.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
I don't see any defenses of actions here.
I see people being charged with crimes, and us wanting them to be punished for it—many of us are calling for the firing of our AD and President, unlike most of the Buckeye fans after your scandal.
When it comes to our coach, these are different issues as well. In your case, it was proven Tressel did something wrong. Therefore, he should be punished accordingly. Paterno by all accounts has not been proved to do anything wrong, so he shouldn’t be punished. If and when it is found he has done something wrong, than this should be revisited.
Let me say this, though: I would take your scandal over ours in a split second.
Fire Dan Snyder
They're just so different that any comparison is futile.
We’re talking about NCAA violations and ethics in intercollegiate athletics versus a scandal with a tangential relationship to sports that could take down power players at the university
Apples and oranges.
You without me is like Harold Melvin without the Blue Notes . . . you'll never go platinum.
#OccupyESPN
by Adam Collyer on Nov 6, 2011 9:20 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
NO ONE
will be having rallies in support of Sandusky the way there were rallies in support of the OSU admin.
No dice.
by Tailgate Shogun on Nov 6, 2011 9:24 PM EST up reply actions
What?
We don’t have a Sandusky float prepared?
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
if they did
it is now a giant sandusky piniata
I'm on the Internet cause I'm an Internet thug.
Follow @134Lounge
What about using him as a pinata?
You without me is like Harold Melvin without the Blue Notes . . . you'll never go platinum.
#OccupyESPN
even better
am I alone in partially hoping he either a) pleads guilty or b) is for whatever reason no longer of this earth before the trial comes about? The victims should not have to go through the pain of a trial. Having to relive all of that, and possibly in such a public way? My heart goes out to them.
Fire Dan Snyder
Nor Curley, nor Schultz, nor Spanier...
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
The major difference here is...
…the actions of Ohio State compromised the integrity of the level playing field expected in College Football.
…the actions of certain people at Penn State have delayed due process on a crime unrelated to College Football or the scope of the Football program at Penn State.
The defense of Joe Paterno is because he is being villified for something that was ultimately not his role, nor within his scope of influence.
The defense of Ohio State attempted to redirect or gloss over the fact that continuing to play by the rules IS their job.
Cool.
The actions of “certain people at Penn State have delayed due process” for, oh, 15 years? while children were being raped, and this means that anyone who knew about children being raped in college facilities could do nothing because it was “ultimately not his role, nor within his scope of influence.”
These are monstrous, inhuman, amoral, and areligious conclusions. And the PSU community is silent.
We play tackle football.
by Bellanca on Nov 7, 2011 10:07 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
You are so enlightening.
But, with all due respect, take your pontification back to BHGP. Or choke on it. Either works for me.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Scott Paterno gives quotes to the NYT
Paterno’s son Scott said in an interview Sunday that Paterno never spoke to Sandusky about the allegation, and that he never seriously pursued the question of whether any action had been taken by the university or any other authorities against Sandusky.
"From my imperfect recollection, once he referred it off, I do not believe he had a second conversation about it," Scott Paterno said of his father and how he handled any follow-up on the allegation. He added: "The appropriate people were contacted by Joe. That was the chain of command. It was a retired employee and it falls under the university’s auspices, not the football auspices."
why the hell is Scott talking about this?
he has NO horse in this race, so to speak.
Fire Dan Snyder
I believe he issued the initial statement
on Joe’s behalf.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
I was pleased that it came from Scott.
…and that the statement didn’t come “from the University”. Even though the statement was probably seen by PSU prior to its release, I think it’s better that it came from someone more associated with Joe personally—rather than associated with the bureaucracy of the university. Better for Joe to be seen as his own man, rather than a layer in an organization that clearly has supervisory problems…though I don’t know that the average citizen will focus in on the minutia such as this.
He also said that Joe did not know (in the family's opinion) about the 1998 incident
Thats something I’ve been struggling with. How could Joe have not heard of or been aware of the 1998 incident? It can’t be that easy to keep information like that quiet.
An army is a team. It lives, sleeps, eats, and fights as a team. This individual heroic stuff is pure horses**t. --Patton
Unless Joe kept it from his family, I cannot, under any circumstances,
see Sue allowing him to sit on this if he knew.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
I can't believe him wanting to sit on it
if he knew. That’s just preposterous to me.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Me too
An army is a team. It lives, sleeps, eats, and fights as a team. This individual heroic stuff is pure horses**t. --Patton
Awesome:
According to prosecutors, a decision not to prosecute Sandusky was made by the county district attorney, who has since died.
Would it not have the same impact if they mentioned that he actually went missing and has since been declared dead?
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
I think that might have just encouraged
conspiracy theories. I find it hard to believe his disappearance in 2005 was related to this.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
I think it would have made us look too country.
"I don’t know who to believe – A used car salesman or the OSU Chief of Compliance."
-rahpsu92
Its hard to respond to all of you.
I hope this all turns out okay for you guys. I don’t want trouble for the Penn State football program. I get no joy out of that. I’m sorry if some of you think I’m just being an insincere jackass about things. I’m not trying to be, so I’ll just say I hope you all have a great night and a great monday. MainLion: cheers buddy even if you don’t like me. I’ll see ya on the 12th. As long as I’m not banned I’ll try and stop by for some real football talk before then.
This here is a God-Damned - media conspirasah!
Per the collegian:
Board of trustees are leaving an emergency meeting just now, said that Spanier has an important announcement tomorrow.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I really have to get some work done tomorrow.
Why couldn’t this have been made tonight! LOL!
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Geez wonder what that means
Wonder if some people will be on leave or something like that.
Spanier to announce washboard tour; donate proceeds to childrens' charities.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Hopefully he'll be giving his own resignation after announcing Curley and Schultz being put on leave.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Well
if he’s making the statement he’s probably not stepping down right now.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
I'm really not sure that I agree with this.
I know I’m still in the minority here, but I believe that Spanier has been a good President. And I believe that when he made his statement, even if it was idiotic, he was acting in good faith with the information that he possessed at the time.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
by Paige2PSU on Nov 6, 2011 10:13 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Also my feelings
If he has done something wrong/participated in the cover up, he should be fired/be charged. But outside of proof that he was involved, I suppose whether you think he should be fired or not hinges on whether or not you think he should have known about this.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
It's not about what he knew.
It’s about what he said yesterday.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
The more I read it
The more I think there’s little else he could’ve said. Curley/Schultz haven’t been convicted yet. They’re Penn State employees. It would look really bad if Penn State didn’t support their employees. I wish he wouldn’t have said “unconditional support” but I also don’t think that’s a fireable offense.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
That's the point I was trying to make.
I’m still hoping the university has some sort of documentation of the entire episode.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Or, at the very least,
they have an army of first-year associates right now “finding” that documentation.
/stupidlawjoke
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Well, I'm sure they have some ways
to make memos look like they were printed in 2002.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
That's why IT kept those DOT Matrix printers.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
He doesn't have to fire them
He probably can’t right now.
But he knows exactly what everyone read yesterday, the only reason that Curley and Schultz didn’t look like bigger scumbags was because they were dwarfed by the scumbagginess of Sandusky, everyone is disgusted with it and them. And then he came out offered his unconditional support and assured they would be found innocent. They don’t have to be found guilty to still be terrible people for not reporting it, if they get away because of the statue of limitations or some other loophole my opinion of them does not change, they need to go.
He didn’t have to issue support, he didn’t have to fire them or admonish them. He could have said “We take these charges very seriously as a university, we will launch our own internal investigation of their actions ans well as put our faith in the American justice system to sort this out.”
That’s what he could of said, instead he threw his and as top dog at PSU, OUR, hats in line with tweedle dee and tweedle dum.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
And like other's have stated
Spanier is a pretty intelligent and savvy guy. I don’t think he’d say that if he didn’t have reasoning for it.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
He may have reasoning for it
That doesn’t mean it was remotely the right thing to say while everyone was feeling utterly disgusted with what they were finding out. It’s not like he was unaware of the mood of Penn Stater’s across the world. We were all calling for their heads and he was offering strong support. There might be a time and place for that, but it certainly wasn’t yesterday.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
I largely agree that he has been a good president...
Up until yesterday when he offered “unconditional support” for Curley/Schultz. That was the end of any respect I had for him.
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
Spanier's announcement brought to you by:
PNC Bank. The Lion’s Den. Centre Daily Times. Hershey Medical Center. University Book Store. BiLo. MBNA.
Oh boy, even levity fails me right now…
by Mr. Rosewater on Nov 6, 2011 10:22 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
If we print out the PDF statement, can we take it to a Centre County McD's for a discount Big Mac?
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
On a light note.. every time i try to open this thread my computer locks up for a few seconds...
by archerbullseye on Nov 6, 2011 10:35 PM EST up reply actions
my computer can't believe this is happening either
by Mr. Rosewater on Nov 6, 2011 10:37 PM EST up reply actions
Your right..
maybe my Blue/White computer is dieing inside a little bit every time i open it..
by archerbullseye on Nov 6, 2011 10:44 PM EST up reply actions
We probably should have moved everyone
to a new thread awhile ago. I’m just never leaving this page until there’s a new thread.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Find a news article that has some good pros and cons about it and fan post it so that we can move there.
by archerbullseye on Nov 6, 2011 10:41 PM EST up reply actions
There was a column that I almost lput in a fanshot.
But nobody reads the fanshots.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
True
I figure 802 is the most comments for a BSD post ever?
by archerbullseye on Nov 6, 2011 10:47 PM EST up reply actions
But a drop in the bucket.
B. Ware’s nudes thread had over 1,000.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
I must have missed that, too.
And I don’t miss much on here!
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
NO!
It was a joke. Because he’s large.
Please, BW, don’t sue me for libel!
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
I figured it was a collection of nudes
that he posted on twitter or something.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Nah.
I pictured him laying spread eagle next to a lamp with a piece of KFC Extra Crispy stuck in the shade.
Then I tried to burn that image from my mind.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
It was actually
in the base of the lamp, I thought.
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
You and your details.
Now stop picturing him nude. I know you are.
"Is that a shot at me? 'cause that makes me want to read it all the less."
Comeon girls..
Don’t make this post even more disturbing then it already is! ;-)
by archerbullseye on Nov 6, 2011 11:35 PM EST up reply actions
I may sue you
for inappropriate mental images.
Formerly known as kmart93
@kmart93
Black Shoe Diaries
Try this.
Redirect here.
http://www.blackshoediaries.com/2011/11/6/2543514/david-jones-column-seriously-read-it-its-not-what-i-expected#comments
"It's never a bad thing thing to vote for the suckiness of tOSU." -RWReese
Follow @Paige2PSU
Curley and Schultz stepping down during the lead-up to prosecution:
http://live.psu.edu/story/56238
"We are not normal, We are Legends. People will tell their kids about us." - Deon Butler before Ohio State Game 2008.
listen
to everyone saying this makes all alumni look bad need to check themselves. Do alumni from ohio state look bad because Jeffrey Dahmer went there? no. Do alumni from virginia tech look bad for what the gunman did a few years ago? no. Do alumni from uva look bad because of a psychotic lacrosse player? no. This incident has no reflection of its hundreds of thousands alumni.
you may think it shouldn't be a reflection, but unfortunately to many it is
I was called a child molester by a former friend on twitter when it broke, simply because I am a Penn State and I still support the university as a member of the Alumni Association. Not kidding. Yeah, he was massively trolling. Doesn’t excuse it. He’s gone to me now, pretty needless to say.
Fire Dan Snyder
After having read everything
And knowing how everybody thinks things should have gone down, all I can say is that I wished I had somebody go to their superior when this was happening to me as a child.
These kids are at least getting some justice. As fucked up as it sounds, this is reality, and at least we can take solace in knowing that their predator is going to get prosecuted.
I didn’t have that opportunity, but I did have the chance to recover from the trauma it causes and how having your childhood taken away from you affects you for the rest of your life.
I implore people to focus on how these kids can get help recovering and let the system take care of the perp.
And please, for the love of all things cute, let’s stop focusing on what could have been. We can’t change that. Let’s focus on what is.
Thanks, Misdreavus, for sharing some of your story
I can’t imagine how hard it must be, but those of you who have I truly applaud.
And of your statement, I fully endorse this:
let’s stop focusing on what could have been. We can’t change that. Let’s focus on what is.
Fire Dan Snyder

by 


























