Penn State scandal (merged)

#76
#76
Ohio Vol said:
The entire report basically reads like a repeat of what Theo Fleury and Sheldon Kennedy both reported about their old junior hockey coach (Graham James), which was plenty nauseating as well.

Paterno spoke earlier and said that the GA didn't offer specific information when he was informed of the matter. Unfortunately, of the three people who he seems to have spoken to about the matter (the GA, Schultz, and Curley), two of them are being indicted for perjury related to the matter. So, since it's not like they have much in the way of credibility anyway, it's entirely possible that they told Paterno at some later point that it had been investigated and that there was nothing to the matter. It's possible that they threatened to force him out if he asked questions. We don't know; it's not in the records, and I highly doubt that Paterno wants to go into any detail in the middle of a season.

Here's the timeline as I see it from the report.
1) GA sees a crime being committed
2) GA tells Paterno the next day
3) Paterno calls Curley to his house the next day and reports the matter
4) Roughly 10 days later, the GA meets with Curley and Schultz; they assure him that they'll follow up
5) A couple weeks later, Curley calls the GA and says that it's been reported and otherwise taken care of

There are a lot of gaps in there that can't be reconciled. But frankly, I think it's fair to say that Paterno has built up 60 years of credibility with pretty much a spotless record. I'm a lot more inclined to believe him and give him the benefit of the doubt than I am to believe two guys who are being charged with perjury.
Click to expand...

I want to give Paterno the benefit of the doubt as much as anybody that isn't actually affiliated with Penn State. But I don't see any way to swallow his statement today that all he ever heard from the GA was that something "inappropriate" had happened and that he was "shocked" by the details. He doesn't dispute that the GA saw something, came to him, and that he passed it on to the AD. He's just claiming that the GA never told him any specifics. He's clinging to the word "inappropriate" like it's a life raft.

So the GA testified that he saw a former coach sodomizing a kid in the shower, testified that he told Paterno that that's what he saw....and we're supposed to believe that what actually happened is that the GA just said he saw something "inappropriate," JoePa didn't pursue it, and now he's "shocked" by the details that have come out?

It's just not believable on its face. Paterno did the same thing that the Catholic Church has been rightly vilified for -- he stuck his head in the ground about it and pretended it didn't happen and hoped that it would go away.
 
#78
#78
Ohio Vol said:
Paterno's grand jury testimony says that he told Curley that the GA had reported seeing Sandusky "fondling or doing something of a sexual nature". His earlier statement was that "(the GA) 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"

Yes, those two statements can be reconciled.
Click to expand...

Okay, so while I find it literally incredible that the GA would A) testify that he saw Sandusky sodomizing a kid in the shower, but B) that he that he got all shy and would only tell Coach Paterno that he saw Sandusky "fondling or doing something of a sexual nature" to the kid, let's just assume for the moment that it's true. You still have a situation where Paterno basically ignored it. He passed the buck to his AD and forgot about it. He kept Sandusky around his program.

Why is this okay if he heard a report of a former coach "fondling or doing something of a sexual nature" to a child in his own team's locker room, but not okay if he actually heard that his former coach was sodomizing the kid? Why would the specificity of the accusation matter?

I can't see how anybody can defend Paterno here. See no evil, hear no evil. Even when one of my longterm lieutenants is raping kids in my locker room.
 
#80
#80
This is some crazy stuff. Can't believe JoePa swept it under the rug
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#82
#82
what year did Patreno testify to the Grand Jury...
I'd like to see a timeline, I still can't belive that it couls be covered up for 9 years
 
#83
#83
Paterno should be fired by lunchtime; his entire career is now ruined in my eyes. I don't care how old he is and how senile he acts, at the least he should be crucified in the media over this.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#88
#88
I'm not sold Jo Pa is at fault on any level. Sounds like he followed procedures.

The guy wasn't on staff.

Maybe I missed something in the timeline.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#89
#89
TXVOL07 said:
I'm not sold Jo Pa is at fault on any level. Sounds like he followed procedures.

The guy wasn't on staff.

Maybe I missed something in the timeline.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

The guy was on the staff, and he continued to be on the staff for 7 years. JoePa never followed up, never asked any questions to the AD about why this guy was not in jail yet, and swept it under the rug. And because the whole deal was swept under the rug, the Pedophile was able to continue hosting youth football camps, and committing God knows how many more sexual assault crimes against young boys.
 
#90
#90
SamRebel35 said:
The guy was on the staff, and he continued to be on the staff for 7 years. JoePa never followed up, never asked any questions to the AD about why this guy was not in jail yet, and swept it under the rug. And because the whole deal was swept under the rug, the Pedophile was able to continue hosting youth football camps, and committing God knows how many more sexual assault crimes against young boys.
Click to expand...

This guy and all pedophiles should be subject to 15 minutes in a locked room with the parents of the victims....no questions asked.:bash:
 
#91
#91
I wonder if civil suits will be raised by the victims. I imagine PSU may be paying for this for a long time.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#92
#92
Last edited:
#93
#93
But from what I read, it appears Joe reported it once he was made aware of it. Is it his position to terminate the creep based on speculation/sexual misconduct with out due process?
 
#95
#95
TXVOL07 said:
But from what I read, it appears Joe reported it once he was made aware of it. Is it his position to terminate the creep based on speculation/sexual misconduct with out due process?
Click to expand...

He wasn't on staff anymore, but someone should've reported it to the cops. PSU clearly tried to sweep it under the rug
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#96
#96
TXVOL07 said:
But from what I read, it appears Joe reported it once he was made aware of it. Is it his position to terminate the creep based on speculation/sexual misconduct with out due process?
Click to expand...

Come on man.

If someone told you they saw a coworker ****ing a prepubescent in the office bathroom, would you just tell your boss and forget about it?


I'd make sure as hell the authorities knew. Period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#97
#97
and by "PSU" am I to understand you all mean Joe Pa specifically? Thats what I am having trouble with.
 
#98
#98
I think that after the AD was informed, then he had a duty as the schools authority to report it. JoePa not completely at fault
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#99
#99
TXVOL07 said:
But from what I read, it appears Joe reported it once he was made aware of it. Is it his position to terminate the creep based on speculation/sexual misconduct with out due process?
Click to expand...

He has a moral and legal obligation to report it to the cops.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#100
#100
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," Paterno said in the statement. "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."
Read more: Joe Paterno: Shocked, saddened by charges brought against Jeff Sandusky - NCAA Football - SI.com

Which again, leads me to believe Joe followed the chain of command and appropriate action. Its not his position to chase down every former employee and prosecute their transgressions.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top