Greg Schiano and Tom Bradley knew about Sandusky - unsealed Mike McQueary deposition
https://twitter.com/PancakeCatapult/status/752851543007735808
Apparently Schiano and Bradley mentioned seeing Sandusky commit atrocities. Sickening. Not much more for me to add but Schiano had a quote before saying something along the lines of it being a terrible situation and fewer words would be better (perhaps b/c he knew it could be used against him at some point).
I find your take the extreme end of naive. Especially with the velocity with which you place your position. Any human in the 70's knew that having intercourse with little boys who could not protect themselves was wrong. Anyone who knew it was going on either agreed with it or made a concious decision to place something more important to them ahead of the well being of these boys. That is a layer of cowardice. Maybe you can agree that Paterno was an extreme coward for allowing innocent boys from being violated.
Paterno is and was a total piece of shit for covering up what happened under his watch. He absolutely knew it was deplorable, and that it could come back to haunt him (I'm sure). That doesn't change the fact that at the time it began, these things were not talked about as they are today. That's just the way it was, and to deny that is just not realistic.
All of them should burn, every last one, but that doesn't really have anything to do with how society treated these things in that era.
Something we can agree on, they all can burn.
I just don't openly accept it as a cultural thing to turn your eye to this. The country was in the midst of awareness and activity to protect children from abuse in the late 60's into early 70's. The energy resulted in The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1974. States adopted policy and laws to educate and support childen of abuse throughout the 70's. I don't know Pennsylvania state law but I trust they were progressive enough to get on board early in the process. Paterno was in it for himself. Or, as others have alluded, he was a weidro pervert as well. Either way, Hell has a place for him.
It's the eye-turning of earlier generations that were the cause of those laws. We don't have laws defining certain individuals as "mandated reporters" for other crimes, murder for example, because we don't have a history of people ignoring or even simply failing to recognize those crimes.
That many of those laws passed in the mid to late 70s will help you locate the generational shift--that's when there was finally majority support.
Oh yea. I agree with the causal relationship. I am stating that the social awareness was perculating at that time. Paterno may have had his head down and was "unaware" of the social shift. I am just not willing to release him from being a sick and twisted enabler that knowingly allowed boys to be raped. Call it blind eye, if you like. I call it active acceptance. He knew it was wrong and took steps to keep it secret. Worse, he allowed the perp to be around boys in the future.
All I'm trying to say is that the behavior's entirely believable to me without need for any further motivation. There's no reason to suspect blackmail, for example. I think ijohnb's suggestion elsewhere on the thread is right on point.
It was a bit ironic to have been accused of defending the man. I've never particularly liked him, and I think it was precisely because he always struck me as the kind of stubborn cuss that would dig in his heels even when deep down he knew he was wrong. It's not a trait I respect.
But I never imagined it would come to this. Not that I think it's out of character.
among men of that generation that certain guys have their wierd predelictions--whether for women, men, boys, regular violent drunken behavior--that you just didn't talk about. They were your friends and the idea that lesser mortals were being victimized or having their lives ruined by your friends' activities wasn't even part of your mindset. A certain degree of enabling and denial goes on with many of us around friends or family, and the more that there is to lose. . . That's not to say that these people aren't complete bums, deserving of all the law has to give them, but these things often have a certain dynamic; this didn't happen in a complete vacuum.
It's also not hard to see how the time may have come when everyone in Happy Valley realized that a ferocious shitstorm was going to be the consequence if the beans were spilled.
but in 1976, when Paterno had been there 8 years and didnt have much of a legacy to protect,and he coul've axed Sandusky without anyone paying much attention to it at all, why keep him around? Something stinks. Its not as if Sandusky were some defensive savant who ran schemes that no one else could have dreamed of. DC's are fairly replaceable. Why keep this guy on at the risk of your own career? The more that comes out about the longer Paterno knew the more I think theres some kind of skeletoon in Paternos closet that maybe Sandusky knew about, so they traded silence for silence
There's nothing there that requires that there be something worth protecting. You didn't talk about this stuff, in that generation, simply because you didn't.
There's a common assumption--and now that I think about it, this applies at Baylor too, at least to the administration's part of it--that the primary impetus of the coverup was to save the football program. No doubt there was a point where people realized there'd be hell to pay if it ever got out, but I don't think that's how it started.
there is reason now to wonder if Paterno was also hiding something, and it warrants investigation. To continue to say "ehh thats how it was back then" is the same mistake over again. All I said was "maybe". Whats wrong with taking a look?
The same thing that's usually wrong with investigations of "crimes" involving not a single shred of evidence of any kind.
And is probably what explains JoPa's lack of reaction to the whole situation.
The part I don't understand is the assistants. If I saw a co-worker or boss raping someone in a shower (child or not), my first action would be to stop that person and then call the police.
How anyone can witness the rape of a child and then just sneak out of the room and report it to their boss is beyond me.
I have a feeling that A LOT of people involved in CFB knew Sandusky was a sick fuck. He was an excellent DC that retired young and never got another job offer. I wonder why that is?
My assumption is that his being a pederast was an open secret amongst the AD's and coaches of most schools.
at all.
that is true, it would seem to almost lessen the culpability of Paterno and raise the culpability of everybody involved with the sport. If coaches and ADs knew then beat writers and broadcasters knew. If that is true than the entire sport is complicit and it would in fact seem to lessen Paterno's culpability because at least he had the balls to fire Sandusky. Paterno is relegated in this narrative to little more than a "fall guy."
The assistants followed JoePa's lead. He wasn't going to punish Sandusky. To come forward with evidence would risk angering the most powerful man in State College (if not Pennsylvania).
I think it's interesting that many in this thread seem a bit uncomfortable assigning guilt to Paterno. I wonder if we've just been conditioned from the years of watching him look like a crazy old uncle on the sidelines into not thinking too badly of him - "He's just an old man, he's harmless!"
Paterno was the man who should have taken action. It should not have had to come down to a whistleblower.
Trying to figure out his initial motivation, and assigning it to his old-boy mentality, is only that. It doesn't justify or exonerate him in any way.
I'll admit that I was uncomfortable when somebody suggested, without evidence, that he personally was also a child molester. But I don't think that's what you mean.
People are rallying to the most charitable explanation possible to explain his actions. When an alternate explanation was raised, the poster was told to "GTFO" and others agreed with that hostile response.
I mean, I understand this - people more or less instinctively want to assume the best of someone - but at this point, I don't care to give him the benefit of the doubt anymore. I don't care to blame his entire generation for his failure to do the right thing. (And he had chance after chance after chance to do the right thing, it seems.)
People don't want to admit that this was once not so uncommon, that their own parents or grandparents or great-grandparents might have part of a generation that was often willing to turn a blind eye, so they have to find Paterno a different motivation.
believe it to be the simplest explanation. Paterno learned that something was up, but either did not want to believe it or was actually talked out of believing it. He did not report it. That became "the coverup." As the years went on the questionable conduct continued, he came to believe that it was happenning but by that time had already "covered it up" and began to understand the gravity of not reporting it to begin with. It snowballed. Every time an accusation was made or he learned of problematic behavior, to report it would be to necessarily report both the conduct and the "coverup," revealing his complicity and opening himself up to big problems including criminal prosecution. I believe Paterno was acting strictly out of personal self-interest, not even in the interest of the football program. I actually think that is why Paterno stayed there as long as he did. I think he believed, correctly, that once he left Penn State the house of cards would fall and all hell would break loose. I am not at all sympathizing with him or excusing him, but I think he was living a very, very tortured existence by the end of his days.
no talking out of school mindset, the records and documents are starting to show that Paterno's denial of prior incidents and the university's documented history of paying settlements to victims reporting abuse or allegations that were never followed up by the school itself or outside authorities, confirms without any doutbt that Sandusky's behavior was known and then condoned and not only tolerated over time, but allowed to become more provocative with no real attempt to check it at any level.
Of course, this was allowed to grow and worsen as the Penn State football program won and rose in national stature. If you want to put a timeline on the abuse reports as they relate to Penn State's football record over that same time, I think you will see a direct correlation.
As for those assistants not coming forward, they knew that such a disclosure would essentially end their careers in the college game. Given the attitude in Happy Valley today towards Paterno and the genuine belief by many that the coach was railroaded and not guilty failing to investigate his colleague, it's hardly surprising why all incriminating information that might have become public sooner, simply hasn't. People at Penn State still don't want to believe this stuff.
Through all of this smoldering and non-stop court activity, not one single peice of evidence or statement has made any mention of Paterno himself doing anything to any boys. He was a monster for enabling, but I'm not ready to believe he was actively involved.
If Meyer has any conscience, he'll make Schiano come clean about everything he knows under threat of firing him. Maybe Schiano wouldn't say a thing, and might be pressed to file an unlawful termination suit. But that is one OSU would win.
Sadly, I don't see Meyer doing anything about it...
That was practically the first thing Schiano told Rashan Gary's mom.
assistants took any action other than possibly telling Paterno about it was they were following his lead of ignoring it and hoping it would all go away. When your leader sets the morality bar low, it becomes easier to just let things slide. I'm not in any way condoning that mentality, just trying to understand how such heinous crimes were swept under the rug for so long.
It would have been extremely hard. It's not like today where you yell "child molester!" and everyone comes running to stop it.
You would have been totally alone. Nobody would have believed you. You would have been told to shut up under threat of firing and a lawsuit. You would have been publically and savagely shamed as a disgruntled employee trying to tarnish a cherished icon for your own petty gains, via sick filthy rumors.
Worst of all, you would not have been able to prove anything. The technology was not like it is today. There would be no absolute independent proof. it would have been just your word against an icon's. Who do you think people would believe?
Paterno owned that place and the idea that he would be involved in something like this would have been unthinkable. Anybody trying to accuse him of something must be out for their own cynical gains and must be crushed.
That's pretty much what it would have been like.
He was coaching for a guy that wasn't an icon, at a school that didn't really care that much about the program and in a community where half the people were probably Texas or A&M fans anyway, and there was proof that what he was saying was true...and he still got blackballed for life.
College athletics is exceptionally harsh on whistleblowers.
This is really amazing.
It seems as if there are several child molestation news stories virtually every week and I wonder how anyone could hurt a chilld......and these were children when he perpetrated those hideous acts.
Schiano and Bradley.......what a couple of pussies to see and not report this shit.
and these fuckers still want the paterno statue back. You gotta be fucking kidding me, these fucktards haven't learned anything.
Chop Schiano.
Start with his dick.
And somehow they both still have jobs working with kids and working camps? These enablers should not be able to be around kids at all, it is responsible adults first job to protect kids, and they don't do it. This makes me sick.
really need shutdown talk of ressurecting Jopa's statue.
They need to plow over that entire site and plant grass or make it a parking lot.
Make it clear, that statue is not coming back.
Cleanse the area with fire and brimstone, then sow it with salt so nothing grows.
That's the Bible method of dealing with an evil site.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
actually could be the first news of significance in some time concerning possible additional action by the BIG or the NCAA. Bradley took over the team after Paterno was fired for a couple of games.
was a bit of a meathead... now I think he's just a huge dickhead.
OK, good for you that you at least told somebody... but if you don't blow the whistle until something changes just to save your career, you're an asshole.
No disagreement from me there. To further expand my point, turning a blind eye to that situation, is just not acceptable under any circumstance.
I understand what you're saying, but if he really witnessed child molestation with his own eyes, there's no excuse for not taking that to the authorities until someone addresses it. This isn't the more mundane kind of whistleblowing for theft or something. It's child rape. I assume there are legal obligations for reporting that kind of thing, and there damn well are moral obligations.
McQuery went through all of that crap for the wrong reason. He should have been raked through the coals for not stopping the rape and beating the living shit out of Sandusky. Its a sad statement that he went unscathed (relatively) for doing nothing to stop it, but was vilified for reporting the incident...