Riots at penn state

[a completely inoffensive name]

According to the grand jury report, the 2002 McQueary incident is the only one of which Paterno was informed. The earlier incidents seemed to have gone through other channels - the State College (town) and university police. The other Penn State incident with the janitor was never reported reported to police - only his fellow janitors and supervisor. In a third case reported outside the university via the victim's mother, the university police appeared to be aware of the investigation and requested that the State College police drop, which, for whatever reason, they did. Of the eight victims, those three were the only ones in which the university had some level of involvement via a reported crime.

According known information from the grand jury report, Paterno was in the loop on one and he reported it. This is why many Penn State students, alumi and fans are still supporting him and are rather irrate over his firing. The national outrage over his (in)action is based on 1) assumption that he knew more, and 2) hindsight (Monday morning quarterbacking?) of the full and very graphic testimony of eight victims/incidents of the grand jury report. If further investigation reveals Paterno was involved, knew more and was involved in a cover up, then I will drop my support for him and toss his shattered image into the Funeral Pyre of Disillusionment and Innocence. Until then, he has my full support cultivated from a lifetime of outstanding contributions and service to Penn State and the betterment of its students.

Nope, sorry Gregoshi. Paterno doesn't get off the hook for doing his "job" and then leaving it well be. This isn't some allegation about stealing, this about child rape. Sanduski had been exposed for doing this kind of stuff since the late 90s, there is no way that Paterno, the head organizer, would not know all about this. Then for someone to come along and say that they caught Sandusky, mid rape, inside a 10 year old boy, and Paterno does what? He just tells his superior and goes back to his job? This was not some "isolated event" that Paterno could not have made a judgement call about. This was about Sandusky's perversion happening again, after it had already been long known, and long swept under the table by the university. If Paterno was a good man, he should have called the police. What was Paterno thinking when this event was swept under the rug, and Sandusky wasn't charged with anything? When Sandusky was still able to walk among the campus as if nothing had happened? Paterno was an enabler who didn't do the right thing, for whatever lame reason. He deserved to be fired, and to stick up for him because "of all the good he has done for Penn State" is ******* tribalism at its greatest, no better than the 2,000 students tipping over cars, rioting.

Grand jury report showed this pedophile committing heinous crimes since the late 90s, and all these Penn State apologists come out on every forum I frequent talking about Paterno as if he was some scapegoat who had nooooooo idea about what was going on in his own **** football program. It's disgusting.

[Ice]

Everything Gregoshi has said I agree with. As for the rioting... bunch of drunken idiots. It accomplishes nothing and makes Penn State look even worse. CNN did an alright interview with editor of Onward State:

http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#...e-psu-reax.cnn

As to the above poster, meh, you are entitled to your opinion. It's really not an uncommon one, but I can't say I agree much with. Joe did not witness the incident, and when brought to his attention he reported to his a) boss b) head of campus police. His resignation at the end of the season though was required as he will now be associated with this incident for the rest of his life.As for witness of the crime... he's got some explaining to do. He should have a) beat the living **** out of Sandusky and/or b) reported it immediately to the police.

[CrossLOPER]

His resignation at the end of the season though was required as he will now be associated with this incident for the rest of his life.

He would have been associated with it regardless. Except now, instead of being known as someone who outed a child rapist, he will be known as the man who just kinda accepted the fact that Jerry REALLY liked the kids and just sort of rolled with it.

When you receive information that there is kiddie fiddler in your midst, you do not have a casual chat about it with your boss and then go home about your normal routine. You go to the REAL POLICE and tell them that you have good reason to believe that A KID IS BEING RAPED.

[Gregoshi]

Paterno doesn't get off the hook for doing his "job" and then leaving it well be. This isn't some allegation about stealing, this about child rape.

But was that clearly communicated to Paterno? Paterno's testimony indicated that he could tell McQueary to greatly bothered by what he saw and what he got from McQueary was Sandusky was "fondling or doing something of a sexual nature" with a young boy. It sounds vague. If that is how McQueary presented it to Paterno, it seems McQueary wasn't sure what he saw from Paterno's perspective. And as for the other cases, how and why would Paterno know of them? Sandusky no longer worked for Penn State and Paterno was not part of the university police department, so why would Paterno be informed, especially since none of the cases ever got to a point where charges were filed?

The Paterno-the-enabler crowd are basing their postition on unsupported conjecture as to what Paterno knew. I'm sure the trials and additional investigations will shed more light on how informed Paterno was of this incident and any others. Until then, it is purely "guilty until proven innocent".

[a completely inoffensive name]

But was that clearly communicated to Paterno? Paterno's testimony indicated that he could tell McQueary to greatly bothered by what he saw and what he got from McQueary was Sandusky was "fondling or doing something of a sexual nature" with a young boy. It sounds vague. If that is how McQueary presented it to Paterno, it seems McQueary wasn't sure what he saw from Paterno's perspective. And as for the other cases, how and why would Paterno know of them? Sandusky no longer worked for Penn State and Paterno was not part of the university police department, so why would Paterno be informed, especially since none of the cases ever got to a point where charges were filed?

The Paterno-the-enabler crowd are basing their postition on unsupported conjecture as to what Paterno knew. I'm sure the trials and additional investigations will shed more light on how informed Paterno was of this incident and any others. Until then, it is purely "guilty until proven innocent".

Sandusky was still present at the school. If Sandusky was able to hang out in the showers, how did this man escape Paterno's eye and review? Why did Paterno not get suspicious at a man who was retired, still hanging around the showers and the area?

Paterno worked at Penn State for 60 years. Sandusky worked there for 30 and left around 1999 when the first allegations and victims came about. How did Paterno have his head so far up his ***, that he knew absolutely nothing about one of his own coaches being a pedophile?

Now you want to tell me that "fondling or something of a sexual nature" is too vague to act on? Are you telling me, that if someone gave you the notion that there might be a child getting sexually abused, that you would do the bare minimum in following up on that? This a report from a 28 year old graduate assistant. This was not somebody young with no life experience, this not one of the players whose motivations or interpretation skills could be questioned. A full fledged adult claimed to have seen a child being sexually handled, and Paterno passed the buck and did nothing to follow up on what is one of the most serious crimes we could talk about.

For such a role model, Paterno seems to either be a willful participant or the biggest, most ignorant, oblivious man ever to run a football program.

By the way, I would like your thoughts on what Paterno knew, considering this is from the bottom of page 8 on the Grand Jury report:

Schults testified that he was called to a meeting with Joe Paterno and Tim Curley, in which Paterno reported "disturbing" and "inappropriate" conduct in the shower by Sandusky upon a young boy, as reported
by a student or graduate student.

"Disturbing" and "inappropriate" towards a 10 year old boy. Oh well, might be nothing.

[Gregoshi]

To acin:
And Paterno, who was not a witness to the act, reported it to the head of the university police and the atheletic director. Was Paterno supposed to start his own investigation to insure that the head of the university police did his job?

As for how could Paterno not know one of his coaches was a pedophile, the two times Sandusky was caught in the act it was after hours when Sandusky thought no one was around. How come none of his players or the other coaches knew? Paterno was a great football coach, but far from All-Knowing and All-Seeing.

You have already convicted him on charges not made against him, so there is nothing else I can say to change that. I'll wait for the facts before passing judgement.

To Sasaki:
If McQueary told Paterno he saw anal sex, I think there would be little doubt as to what he saw. If all he could manage to tell Paterno was "fondling or something of a sexual nature", that sure sounds to me like McQueary wasn't sure exactly what he saw. Unfortunately, the grand jury report does not delve into what McQueary said he told Paterno, but the grand jury did find McQueary's testimony very credible, but not Curley's or Shultz's, hence the perjury charges against them. The conclusion based upon this is that Paterno's testimony must have had an air of credibility to the grand jury.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

And Paterno, who was not a witness to the act, reported it to the head of the university police and the atheletic director. Was Paterno supposed to start his own investigation to insure that the head of the university police did his job?

You would really have done the same thing, huh.

[a completely inoffensive name]

And Paterno, who was not a witness to the act, reported it to the head of the university police and the atheletic director. Was Paterno supposed to start his own investigation to insure that the head of the university police did his job?

As for how could Paterno not know one of his coaches was a pedophile, the two times Sandusky was caught in the act it was after hours when Sandusky thought no one was around. How come none of his players or the other coaches knew? Paterno was a great football coach, but far from All-Knowing and All-Seeing.

You have already convicted him on charges not made against him, so there is nothing else I can say to change that. I'll wait for the facts before passing judgement.

When nothing had been done regarding Sandusky, Paterno had the moral obligation to contact the police. Yes, he should have started his own investigation by contacting people who don't have the incentive to cover the situation up.

By the end of the "internal investigation" Paterno must have known about the decision to take away Sandusky's key. Why would they do this, if it was a baseless accusation? There is so much doubt in that situation, that any reasonable person would have said, hold on, I see some red flags here, I don't think something is right here. Sandusky is punished but isn't accused or tried? Why? The graduate student to Paterno was very concerned and yet it turned out to be nothing?

You are waiting for the facts, because the facts that have already come out are not in your favor. As far as I am concerned you waiting to pass judgement until a jury's decision is like asking for everyone to reserve judgement on O.J. Simpson until the trial is over.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I'm baffled at the argument you guys are making. As you say, even accepting his version of the story, he was told that sandusky was "fondling or doing something of a sexual nature" with a young boy by someone who was greatly bothered by what he saw. Why do you dismiss that as "it sounds vague"? Jesus.