Thank you. That wasn't so hard, was it?

He went up the chain of command instead. People are reacting as though he tried to cover it up.

Again, I agree with much of what you are asserting, McLovin. It is indeed tragic. And it seems clear that some people dropped some balls.

And yet, I am growing confidence in my belief that you are rushing hastily to a judgment you have insufficient evidence to form. You want to BLAME and your favorite target seems to be Paterno. Either you adopted the sports-opinion-writer's conclusion hook line and sinker, or your and he have similar tendencies to blame blame blame and not worry about the facts. You don't know that Paterno didn't contact the prosecutor. You don't know that Paterno didn't pressure his athletic department to act more aggressively. It as the Athletic Director and the Prosecutor who shouldered the full weight of the responsibility to deal with this, and Paterno may have done all he could to urge them to action. You don't know that Paterno didn't ask for Sandusky's resignation in 1999 when he became aware of Sandusky's disgusting behavior. Everyone reports his resignation as odd. I personally, knowing Paterno's behavior pattern, strongly suspect Sandusky's resignation was Paterno's decision. You don't know that Paterno didn't go ballistic when he heard the Sandusky have even BEEN IN the locker room. You don't know that Paterno hadn't banned him from that facility. You don't know that the Athletic Director wasn't the one who continued to offer Sandusky access to the university's facilities.

And yet, you're making the conclusion that this is all Paterno's fault because he caused all this for the goal of making more money and attracting more talented recruits. I say you have ZERO evidence to back this last sentence up. So yeah, we don't understand each other. And it's not a matter of you having a higher moral code than I. You certainly have more righteous indignation, but I have come to distrust that tendency in people. What you really have is the tendency to blame. Irrespective of the facts. Plenty of that going on in PARF, in my opinion. Which is why I don't got there these days. Facts are important to me. Not to everyone, I see.

I have plenty of evidence to form my opinion. I've read the grand jury report. It's linked on ESPN. You will see from there, Paterno did not contact prosecutors or authorities. He did not put pressure on the athletic department to act. He did very little, the bare minimum to give himself some plausible deniability and what was probably the legal minimum (prob. on the advice of counsel) and keep it quiet. And it will work - it went uncovered for a decade (while this guy was out raping children, including by using the Penn State facilities as his own little trap for children) and he apparently will not be indicted like the Athletic Director and others. So, good for you, Joe, you escaped criminal prosecution and you had that extra decade to get to 409 wins. Hurray for Joe.

The editorial boards of every newspaper in Penn (where Paterno is a god) also agree with me. They are calling it what it is: A shameful mark on Paterno's otherwise good record. They are calling for this to be his last year because of it. Examples:

The front page of the Philadelphia Daily News is a photo of Paterno with a one-word headline: Shame.

The Star-Ledger of Newark, N.J., on its editorial page, wrote: "This would be a sad and ignominious ending to Joe Paterno's legacy, but it must be just that -- an ending." The editorial concluded with: "Given the disgusting nature of these widespread allegations, the insidious connections to Penn State football and Paterno's lack of judgment when told, it's time for him to take his 409 victories and Hall of Fame bust and leave. Quickly."

Law enforcement agrees with me. State police commissioner Frank Noonan said, as far as state police can tell, Paterno fulfilled his legal requirement to report. "But somebody has to question about what I would consider the moral requirements for a human being that knows of sexual things that are taking place with a child," Noonan said. "I think you have the moral responsibility, anyone. Not whether you're a football coach or a university president or the guy sweeping the building. I think you have a moral responsibility to call us."

The victims and their parents agree with me.

But you don't. And that's ok.

(BTW, of course I never said this was "all Paterno's fault." Your just making that up to try to make your argument. Of course it isn't all his fault. But as far as what goes on in the Penn State football locker room, IMO the buck stops at Paterno. And, even besides that, just as a human being, he had a responsibility to do more than he did.)

Technically his boss was the Athletic Director, Tim Curley. He told Curley and he told Gary Schultz, who was a PSU VP and head of the Campus Police. I suppose he could have stayed on the phone all night, calling the State College Police, the PA State Police, state Attorney General, the FBI, and then President Bush, who he was friendly with.

And now it appears Penn State agrees with me, as Paterno's press conference has just been canceled, and:

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. -- Penn State administrators on Tuesday canceled Joe Paterno's weekly news conference in which he was expected to field questions about a sex-abuse scandal involving former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky.

Soon after, The New York Times reported that Penn State's board of trustees has had discussions about how to manage the 84-year-old Paterno's departure. The newspaper, citing "two people briefed on conversations among the university's top officials," said that Paterno's exit could come within days or weeks.

Not exactly leaving on top...:(

Yep, technically that is true.

Yes, Paterno told those two. And then went on and pretended like nothing ever happened. No follow up. No investigation. Paterno saw that nothing was happening, that it was being swept under the rug. And did nothing. And got another 10 years before the scandal broke, and his precious 409 wins.

Meanwhile, innocent children were being raped during those years. Which could have been prevented had Paterno simply picked up the phone and called the police.

Again, some are ok with that. I'm not, as it turn out, most aren't.

But you are. I guess that's your right.

I don't know what he pretended and neither do you. Since we're only a few days into the legal process I'm not ready to lock anyone up and throw away the keys just yet.

But you go ahead.

Good grief.

We're not "a few days into the legal process." Where do you get that stuff?

There's already been a complete Grand Jury investigation, and a voluminous written Grand Jury indictment - with findings, etc. - handed down.

Do you know how long that legal process takes?

Plus Paterno has already made public statements and admissions. (Although apparently there will be no more).

This is disgusting. I'm done with you.

Sorry, I must have missed the convictions and sentencing.

This should all be over when? The end of the week?

Lemme get this straight. Paterno hears a complaint one evening at his house and the following day reports it to his Athletic Director. From there, the local Prosecutor becomes involved. Eventually a grand jury conducts an investigation. So.....we've got an Athletic Director, a Prosecutor and a Grand Jury pursuing this and, since Sandusky is not yet hanged, Joe Paterno is to blame?

How can Mike McQueary ever sleep at night? What a coward. Seeing a young boy getting raped and walking away.

They both need to retire. When it came time to step up to do the right thing, they both disappeared. I think 911 right when it happened. Case closed.

Sad, very sad.

I am a little surprised. It wasn't a complaint. McQueary saw a young boy being molested, raped.

In my company there is zero, zip, nada tolerance for for racial or sexual harassment, either direction.

To say that Paterno somehow gets a pass because he made other folks aware OF A RAPE OF A BOY is wrong. After I got through with the rapist I'd have called 911 and had the scumbag arrested.

But he didn't.

There is plenty of guilt to go around in this one. They are all looking for a scapegoat now. I don't see Paterno as" jail" guilty but he is guilty of gross disregard for another human being. And the worst part is this involved children.

Hell, Sandusky's name isn't being mentioned much except in the newspapers. It's all the other perverts that turned a blind eye just to keep this all under the table.

Pretty cut and dried in my mind. The real question is WTF isn't guilty of unethical behavior in this one???? And all done to keep winning football games and try and preserve reputation, well you can forget about that now.

No, you don't "have it straight."

You are either honestly mistaken about the facts (wouldn't be a first, see, e.g., the "corporations" thread from a few weeks ago), or you are being dishonest in your characterization.

You obviously haven't followed this very closely, or read the grand jury transcript.

But, here's a clue:

According to a grand jury report, Paterno back in 2002 was informed by a grad assistant that he had seen former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky naked and forcing a boy who appeared to be about 10-years-old to have anal sex in the showers of the school's sports complex. Paterno reportedly told his boss, Athletic Director Tim Curley, but it's unclear whether the coach did anything further to follow up on the shocking report.

And incredibly no one, Paterno or his superiors, reported this alleged incident to the authorities. Those of us who have been on campus find it a joke that Coach Paterno would now say that he reported the incident to his bosses. What bosses? Everyone knows Paterno had as much or more power on that campus than anyone to make things happen, including the president.

See that bolded part?

That's what you left out of your "let me get this straight" recitation. See, the little bit about reporting it to authorities (or making sure that it was reported) is missing from your charactarization. It should go immediately after your sentence ending "Athletic Director." You imply that your recitation reads:

"Lemme get this straight. Paterno hears a complaint one evening at his house and the following day reports it to his Athletic Director. The AD and/or Paterno immediately reports it to the authorities. From there, the local Prosecutor becomes involved. Eventually a grand jury conducts an investigation."

But, because that reporting was not done, and the matter successfully covered up by Penn State (including by Paterno by his silence) for MANY YEARS, many, possibly dozens, of innocent children were subjected over the next few years to horrible sexual abuse. (Anal rape of 10 year olds. Good god).

Does that help put it a little straighter for you, why there is national, unanimous outrage about this?

I sure hope it does. Because their actions - including Paterno's - as human beings were inexusable.

If you were told by a co-worker that one of your employees was caught raping a 10 year old boy at work, would you just tell your boss? Chew on that one for a little while.....

If the previous thread you're referencing is the one I am thinking of, I cited court cases in which CEO's were prosecuted for failures in their duties of care and loyalty. I meant it when I said that corporations are legally required to have no more conscience than is necessary to maintain sufficient community goodwill in order to maximize profits. That is their sole agenda. Maximizing profits. While I notice that some people imagine corporations to have hearts and souls and the welfare of civic communities in mind, I also notice beliefs in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and unicorns. Similar.

That said, in this thread I am somewhat just playing Devil's Advocate (certainly an accurate term in this instance). I like to do that. I like to be the guy who says "Wait a minute.....is there only one way of looking at this and have all the facts been incorporated into the discussion." I don't disagree with you. Yes, a travesty and a tragedy seems to have occurred. And yes, it appears Paterno could have done more.

Crying out for his lynching, or even casting aspersions about my moral code, might be tempting and fun (particularly for people who just love to BLAME BLAME BLAME), but I continue to suspect it shortcuts the actual facts in this case. In other words, while I see everyone's condemnation of Paterno (which, again, may be substantially justified), I also see much, much greater failures by several others in this story. Perhaps the most glaring is McQueary's failure to march into that shower and stop a rape, then call police. At an absolute, bare frickin' minimum. Most of us would have had to tell the police that Sandusky was lying on the shower floor unconscious. That was the first of several failures, not counting Sandusky's horrific behavior.

McQueary walking through the shower area and sees Sandusky obviously raping Joe's wife. Not lovemaking, raping.

He waits and calls his Dad that night to see what he should do?

Tells Joe the next day. Joe thinks the best appropriate action is to tell the AD?

Duck, cover, monkey roll.

Well, I'd agree with that.

I don't know what kind of man could walk in and see a 60 year old anally raping a 10 year old, and turn and walk away and let it continue. Absolutely shocking (although that's too weak a word, I'm not sure a strong enough word exists).

Clearly, there were different levels of responsibility. Based on the facts as known (from admissions, statements, the grand jury, etc.), it is pretty obvious, though, that Paterno's actions/inactions were not those of a pillar of responsibility.

Did he do anything illegal? Well, he wasn't indicted, but IMO after reading the findings of the indictment, he was pretty close. Close enough that I think he is legally eligible to claim the 5th Amendment right to not say anything more (or be compelled to say anything), which is my guess he will do from hereon out.

In the end, some measure of justice will be done. He will be either fired immediately, or in any event be gone this year for sure. His legacy is forever tarnished. His 409 wins are tarnished. Hopefully he never has a good night sleep again.

I've always thought of Joe P as something like Mayor Daley: no matter how many scandals occurred under his watch, none of them seemed to reach him. How many of Joe P's athletes have had extra-legal incidents while at Penn State?

It appears in this case, Joe P made the minimum effort, then moved on. His biggest concern was probably with keeping the scandal quiet...

+1

Well said...

This is exactly what I thought. You see a young boy being raped and you leave and go tell your boss? I would only have left to find a baseball bat to beat the rapist to death. I wouldn't shoot him only because I want his suffering to last a while.

Okay......Joe Paterno reported this to his Athletic Director. Do we know for a fact that he did nothing whatsoever other than that? Although, having asked that, I admit I am disturbed that it appears nobody called police.

Chris, I guess I am waiting for someone to illustrate this supposed pattern of Joe Paterno doing the bare minimum in enforcing codes of behavior within his program. As I have said, my understanding of his approach is 180 degrees off from that. I recall one instance in which a small group of PS football players got inebriated (these are college boys, after all) and created a disturbance that was reported to Paterno. Paterno considered this for a few days and ultimately chose his response. Apparently, a civic group had been cleaning the stadium after each game and donating the proceeds (the university pays to get the stadium cleaned up after games) to charity. Coach Paterno had his players, not just the ones who had created the disturbance but rather the entire team, clean the stadium in their place, and of course donate the proceeds to the same charity. This kind of response is more than routine for Joe. His intolerance of irresponsible behavior has come to be legendary.

No, I can't explain his lack of action in this Sandusky thing. And maybe Joe Paterno has, over the years, become transformed from a model of decency and propriety into a demon of deceit. I am unfamiliar with this last part. Very familiar with the first part. That's what I'm sayin'. For decades, a player's decision to become a Nittany Lion was a decision to follow a strict and narrow code of behavior.

One thing to consider regarding the history of JoePa would be the severity of past program issues. The example given by Supe above is a perfect starting point. A group of college football players getting drunk and causing trouble is nothing noteworthy, anything short of them seriously injuring or killing someone wouldn't even be worthy of national news. It's easy to write off such an incident as "boys being boys" and go on with life. But this issue is exponentially worse.

Even if JoePa had called the police immediately after hearing of the incident, his football program would have been tarnished for years to come. This wasn't someone on the periphery of Penn State football, this was his DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR raping young boys. It would have had a significant impact on his program recruiting, as well as reflected horribly on JoePa himself. As the saying goes, perception is reality.

So Joe was facing an issue that, if exposed to the public, would have had a very real impact on his football program and coaching career for years to come. Perhaps the risk of tarnishing his reputation was enough motivation to simply let the matter pass with a sigh of relief?

Yes, perhaps. A number of folks have posted their assumptions that Paterno was looking to avoid tarnishing the program and that he let the matter pass because of this motivation. Without a doubt, that is a leap of conclusion that is not backed up by fact. Nobody here has reported a knowledge of Mr. Paterno's motivations. Guesses, yes. Knowledge....impossible.

It looks like nobody reported this to police, and that is indeed disturbing. And frankly I will admit that, regardless of what Joe did or didn't do, he had the option of reporting this to police regardless of whether the Athletic Director did or did not report it. Failure to take decisive action was uncharacteristic for him, according to my observations. But again, if Paterno has changed his ethical code 180 degrees over the years and somebody can illustrate that for me, then great. I like to read.

BTW, his guy raping the young boy.....was NOT Paterno's defensive coordinator. Former, yes. Current, no. And I continue to wonder about what conversations might have taken place between Paterno and Sandusky immediately prior to Sandusky's resignation in 1999. Again, according to my understanding of Paterno's fairly consistent modus operandi, I would be not surprised at all to learn that Sandusky's choices were resignation or dismissal, and he chose resignation. The Joe Paterno I know would not have tolerated this sort of man within the program. And maybe he didn't. Still, I will once again admit, that it looks as though Paterno missed an important duty. Unusual.

Paterno did notify Schultz, who was not only a VP of the University at the time but in charge of the campus police. I don't know the hierarchy of first responders regarding campus incidents but I would assume it to be the campus police. Penn State, University Park, is a large facility. I don't believe the campus police are a joke.

For me this issue goes far beyond the guilt or failings of Joe Paterno. its about the poisonous corrupt atmosphere that can come to exist in organizations that supposedly function for the enrichment and well being of the individuals within that organization. But come to the point where the enrichment and well being of the org. trumps that of the individuals. To the extent that this kind of scandal is handled to minimize the impact on the org. at the likely expense of the very people the org. is supposed to be serving and nurturing.

Knowingly moving or covering up for Perps that prey on young, weak, defenseless kids.
Allowing known predators the chance to continue their devastating crimes on other victims
for years to come. And the school did that by giving the Perp access to the facilities for use with the youth programs there on campus. Its beyond belief.

There is another, world wide organization (unnamed, don't want to sent this to PARF) that is trying to dig its self out from under the consequences of century's of this kind of policy. Seeing the scaring impact of such behavior on the victims and their families has not apparently been enough to bring about the changes needed to stop this sort of attitudes.
Scary

Richard

Every single person involved, either as an eye witness or 3rd party to this are guilty for not calling the police.

The guy has been on campus for a decade after the known incidents.

Anyone who knew about the allegations and did not enquire further as to why that POS was not rotting in jail is culpable.

Escalating up and not following up is not an excuse.

Hope they have good lawyers cause I smell a well deserved civil suit coming.

I agree. It appears that multiple balls were dropped resulting in ongoing tragedy. Why this man was allowed to use university facilities (assuming that people knew of his disgusting and criminal predatory behavior) is impossible to explain away.

Assuming?

That's one of the basic facts here.

FYI, here's just part of the timeline:

1998: The investigation into retired Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky begins in 1998 with the first child sex allegations reported to law enforcement. Campus police and the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare investigate an incident in which the mother of an 11-year-old boy reports that Sandusky has showered with her son. In an interview with authorities in June 1998, Sandusky admits showering naked with the boy. He admits that it was wrong and promises not to do it again, according to the grand jury report. No charges will be filed and the university police chief instructs that the case be closed.

1999: Sandusky retires after coaching at Penn State for 32 years. He remains on campus as a volunteer and has full access to football facilities.

2000: A janitor at the football building on campus tells his supervisor and another janitor that he saw Sandusky performing a sex act on a young boy, according to the grand jury report. Another janitor reports that he saw Sandusky and a boy leave a shower room and walk out of the building hand in hand. No one reports the incidents to authorities.

All of this was successfully kept quiet until around 2005, when someone came forward and busted them on this current shower rape, which happened in 2002.

If he (Sandusky) is found guilty he needs to have someone twice his size shove something you know where. No KY jelly either. Make sure he enjoys it.

And he was part of a program for "at risk" kids until they removed him from the organization in 2008 (though they first heard allegations in 1998). This is an f'ed up story...

That part is really not surprising. Pedophiles routinely seek out jobs or activities where they have access to children and are in positions of trust.

Sick bastards.

I'm also reminded of some past PPOT threads where an adult woman in a position of authority has sex with a minor boy and people here think it is "awesome". I wonder why they haven't piped up with the "maybe the kids wanted to have sex" argument.

This is a bad thing. A man in that position of trust pulling something like this off. This has devastated the good people up here in PA. I believe enough people are up in arms that this won't slip by this time.

Really?

You think a 16 year old boy having sex with a 30 year old (usually young looking and hot or semi hot) woman is at all like a 60 year old man anally raping a 10 year old boy?

No distinction there for ya?

Lets hope that you are right, Larry.
I'm pretty sure that his victims over the last 10 - 12 years
wish that this had been dealt with way back when it first came to light.

I think they are both wrong.

How about a 35 year old woman molesting a 13 year old boy vs. a 13 year old boy having sex with a 35 year old (kinda hot) man?

Shirley, you don't think they are equally wrong?