Your Penn State thoughts for today go here. ALL of them.
Hockey pet peeve: "when a teammate tips a puck in on you, which is exactly how my first collegiate goal against happened. Thanks, Copper."
At some point, I am actually going to vomit.
That is atrocious. The Feds are going to come down hard on everyone who was involved at any level. The whole thing is sickening. One of the worst stories I've ever heard.
I think it's a safe bet that Sandusky takes his own life before he stands trial.
He should be in custody and on suicide watch.
Those victims NEED their justice. He should not be able to run away from his fate, especially since those he harmed couldn't run away from him.
If true, that's a ready-made racketeering case right there...
Matt Millen was right. The more we peel back the onion, the uglier its going to get. Millen was on the board for Second Mile. Now HE is somewhat involved/responsible for what happened with SM. Shit is getting worst by the second.
Oh, he's more correct than he even knows. Its just the beginning. The lawsuits that will be filed, for one, are going to last years. PSU as an institution is going to have to rebuild for years to get its reputation back. New applications are going to drop, annual giving is going to drop, etc., etc. All from numerous people's failures to take the extra step. Its mind-boggling. It really is.
LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA
LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA
LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA
LA LA LA LA LA LA LA LA
JoePa? is that you?
It's interesting that even though this occured in the off-season, I don't recall ever hearing about it.
...and didn't get much of a response beyond some shoulder-shrugging and a couple of unfunny jokes.
That's actually a pretty interesting read.
Yeah. Steve in PA looks like he was completely fooled by everyone in Happy Valley.
Never any stories about Sandusky being pursued for a high-profile job. Never any rumors about him coming out of retirement.
We already have articles that you can link to about VIRGINIA PURSUING SANDUSKY BEFORE HIRING GROH. They ended up backing down because of his involvement and commitment with the Second Mile. They felt that he was spending too much time with it to be a solid D1 coach. In fact, he had a huge staff assembled and ready to go, including Jim Caldwell and Al Golden. You can read the link here - http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=hQNWAAAAIBAJ&sjid=B0ENAAAAIBAJ&pg=6283,1195295&dq=joe+paterno+second+mile&hl=en
I hope the rumors aren't true, but the speculation like this HAS to stop. At this point, we can tell the story has completely derailed from the plight of the victims to pitchforking and burning men like Joe Paterno because well, we can. It's sick.
on what kind of man Joe Paterno is.
Then I'll hit you with two or three basic facts that refute anything you have.
It'll be fun.
They've interviewed him and they're so close to hiring him that the staff is already in place...and all of a sudden they back away because they've decided he isn't committed to coaching? If that's the reason for the decision why did they let things get that far? Wouldn't they have realized that during the interview or the ensuing debriefing? And if he's gone so far as to assemble a staff, doesn't that imply some commitment to returning to the job? Seems odd to me.
Or maybe they'd made up their minds but still needed to do their perfunctory due diligence, talked to folks in State College, got the official "he left the program so he could spend more time with Second Mile" and through some off-the-record backchannel contacts heard there were some skeletons in the closet that might make them want to rethink the hire.
What are they going to say, when they're asked about it? What's Sandusky going to say? They're going to say exactly what Penn St. said when he retired.
The total lack of involvement in college football after his "retirement" make it seem like the allegations back in the day were a poorly kept secret in the sport....
I really pray that rumor isn't true. This case is already horrible enough.
Blue, when you're done throwing up, if you don't mind handing me the same bucket....
I nearly shreaked reading that. Somehow that hits me a lot harder than the original allegations if true.
Kill PSU with fire.
One thing I wanted to comment on from one of the other threads is how the hell is McQueary getting a pass? He had arguably the biggest responsibility to report to the police as a person who actually witnessed the crime first hand. I don't understand why he wasn't the first person fired.
It isn't arguable. McQueary HAD the biggest responsibility here. Other than obviously Sandusky, McQueary was the only one who saw the acts. He needed to get that kid out of there and take him to the police or hospital. Truly sickening.
the best punishment for this coward. He will quit in weeks.
Unfathomable that McQueary is still on the staff. If anything, he should have gone before JoePa. If I ever see him in a game or on the street, he will be heckled. Just like OJ. If I ever saw that jerk, I'd say something.
The last thing the university needs is another person with a meritorious claim against them. McQueary could say that he told the right people, tried to blow the whistle and that he was retaliated against as a result of his grand jury testimony which contradicted that of Paterno, Curley and the guy whose last name begins with an "S" and currently escapes me.
What claim exactly? He is a school employee. Absent contracts otherwise, employers typically reserve the unrestricted right to fire their employees with or without cause, and they could still can his sorry, wormy ass, and pay him for a while to further ease any claim.
Yeah but if that immunity came from the people who took that whistleblower info and swept it under the rug, is it really valid? The whole thing is just crazy, I'm surprised they don't just clean house and start over.... hard to believe anyone that was involved is clean.
The immunity doesn't come from Penn State officials, the immunity comes from the relevant whistleblower statute.
Except that he wouldn't be fired for blowing the whistle, he'd be fired for NOT blowing the whistle - I believe that would be A-OK. Whistleblower laws only protect people who are retaliated against for reporting their employer, right?
Most whistleblower laws say that you can't retaliate against someone for reporting unlawful or other bad acts. But McQueary wouldn't be fired for reporting an unlawful act. He'd be fired for his 2002 actions (Morrisette-ironically, for NOT reporting an unlawful act).
But, according to the Grand Jury report, McQueary DID report the act in accordance with law. The failure was by Penn State executives who did not take it any further.
I think McQueary probably has a very heavy heart over what's happened, but I don't think legally that he did anything in 2002 other than exactly what he should have done.
So did JoePa, the question isn't of legal responsiblity but moral, and McQueary seems to have failed in that every bit as much as Paterno.
Perhaps because the firings weren't so much for the initial failure to report as for the ensuing cover up? (And in the case of Spanier his ham-handed public statements when the story broke.)
Perhaps because there's more to this story than what we know, and unlike the others McQueary isn't part of that more?
Perhaps McQueary's fully cooperating with the current investigation and the others have not?
All just speculation, but I'm not going to assume the Trustees are idiots until we know more.
I agree we don't know the whole story, but to me seeing what happened and knowing Sandusky wasn't in jail is tantamount to a cover-up. He might be cooperating, but not until a case was opened by someone else's actions.
was discussing the possiblility that McCreary DID report this to the police and had been feeding them information.
This would explain why he gets to keep his job.....FOR LIFE.
How is McQueary getting a pass? What does that mean?
He didn't call the police, that is true, but I'm sure he assumed the higher ups would do so.
Hindsight is 20/20 but I'm sure at the time he was more than happy to let those above him handle what happened. Those same higher ups informed him that things were happening.
No, he didn't do his upmost, but he didn't break any laws. If the only thing he did to be condemed about was not calling the police, I don't think he should be condemn. Hell, maybe he did call the police, we might not know the whole story. It's sad that he didn't follow up and hindsight is a beotch, but in terms of McQueary I don't think it would be right to punish him.
because he is a coach at a major college football program who saw that almost nothing was done after he reported a child rape and decided that it would be better to leave it at that...while Sandusky was bringing young boys to practices he was coaching at.
would be done about it.. Now if he knew anything else and was looking the other way, I'd agree with you, he was culpable and should be punished by law. If he blindly -and with poor judgement- assumed that things were going to happen or were already happening, I don't think you punish a man for that. If he didn't break any laws, and only exercised poor judgement in trusting in 'the system', I wouldn't punish him.
I'll be honest, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt with the few facts about him that I know, but this is a messed up situation for sure...
I'm sorry, but it's not like he saw something minor, and just assumed that after he ran it up the chain of command it was taken care of. He saw a kid get raped by a man that continued to show up to the football facility with other kids, for years..... I think you deserve to lose your job for not doing anything about that.
Break away from the rigidity of the chain of command for a minute and think:
He saw a child being raped.
He saw Sandusky walking around practices he coached at with other children.
Given that child rape is always an offense that should send someone to prison, clearly not enough had been done.
He was there FIRST HAND.
He, more than anyone, has no excuse not to follow up.
Stop trying to rationalize this.
He has no business being out on that sideline, it's the least PSU can do.
As I read the Grand Jury report, it is obvious that Curley and Schultz are trying to make McQueary the fall guy by claiming he did not tell them anything specific.
The Grand Jury concluded McQueary was telling the truth and the others are lying (see page 12 of the report) and that is why they are charged with perjury.
If McQueary tells the Grand Jury that he only may have seen some fondling and this is what he told his superiors, all this never gets exposed. Sandusky gets arrested but PSU gets away with the cover up.
Because McQueary tells the truth, the cover up is exposed. BTW, McQueary has no reason to think that Curley and others will lie to the Grand Jury.
Curley is more than happy to throw McQueary under the bus to save himself.
Why didn't McQueary stop the abuse when he saw it happening? Why didn't he yell out "what are you doing?" or "stop that!"
I cannot imagine witnessing something like this and NOT stopping it. The alleged victim was 10 years old. How can someone not intervene? I just don't get it.
I suspect he freaked out when he saw that it was Sandusky, who he had presumably admired and respected for a long time. That doesn't excuse his actions, but I think a lot of people would react differently to seeing a trusted friend and authority figure committing a violent crime than to seeing a stranger commit the same crime.
The prosecution needs McQueary and so Penn State is playing nice. Without McQueary, you don't have the sodomy testimony (2002) and you have the testimony of seven shattered kids and a high school coach who saw a Sandusky laying on his side with another kid. He is the star witness, and is being treated with kid gloves. Now does it make sense?
Many have probably seen this, but check out the 1000+ comments in this thread on the Black Shoe Diaries website. Some of them absolutely blow my mind, the lack of perspective displayed:
It's insane what's being thrown around on that board. There's support, There's mind bogglingly blind support, and then there's the support JoePa is getting from these people. To say that this is being done without any facts is ridiculous. There was a 23 page Grand Jury report compiled over a significant amount of time. Pat Forde also made a great comment stating that you can't be all up in arms that JoePa was fired with all the respect and class of someone in middle management while on the other hand saying his only responsibility was to escalate the matter up the chain of command.
I just hope this board / community / alumni base would have handled this with more of an eye on what's really important and who the victims in the case are.
The whole Pat Forde coverage of this situation has been mind-boggling in general. He's generally shown himself to be a total asshat, but his writing on this story has actually been quite good, dare I say insightful.
When McQueary saw Sandusky abusing a child, he had a split second to make a decision. This was his boss and he was a graduate assistant. He obviously made the wrong decision but it was a split second decision.
Within hours he realized his mistake and went to JoPa. Then, JoPa and others made a calculated, conscious decision over days of deliberations to cover it all up -- knowing full well about Sandusky's previous incidents.
McQueary made a split second decision that was wrong and tried to correct it.
JoPa and others made a calculated decision that was also horribly wrong and then continued to make many othere decisions that were horribly wrong over years and years.
McQueary was a young adult in his 20's conflicted by what his boss had done.
JoPa and the others were mature adults in their 50's - 70's.