As mentioned earlier, I agree that he should be allowed to coach this week's game (the last home game for the seniors), but then step down immediately afterwards. His team deserves to have their legendary coach with them for the last home game, but they also deserve his absence for the remainder of the season (all away games), if that makes any sense.

vball10set;965446 wrote:As mentioned earlier, I agree that he should be allowed to coach this week's game (the last home game for the seniors), but then step down immediately afterwards. His team deserves to have their legendary coach with them for the last home game, but they also deserve his absence for the remainder of the season (all away games), if that makes any sense.

I don't understand that take at all. He was either wrong and the whole situation serves as a terrible example of leadership, or he wasn't wrong and it should be business as usual. If it was wrong, it is terribly wrong. Why would his team deserve to be led by someone with such little moral fabric? And if it wasn't wrong, why should he be forced out at all? I just don't understand any kind of middle ground stance.

I'll chime in on this because I had an incident happen to me similar to this a few years ago. I run an after school latchkey program...

1. One of MY staff members comes to me and says "I saw older student A doing inappropriate things to younger student B" I respond, "What happened?"...details.... My last question was "Did you stop it?" Response- "Yes"

2. I get a hold of the principal "This happened..."

3. Principal comes in and takes a written statement from my staff. PRINCIPAL reports incident to CPS/ County.... PRINCIPAL follows up with the county and then fills me in on follow up.

This is how it happens in what you could call "World of Education" We get trained on Child Abuse issues; especially proper protocol.

In the PSU issue here is who is at fault

Grad Student- NOT stopping the act as he sees it and removing the child
AD- Not reporting it as he should and following up on it.

It's my understanding as to what I read that Joe Pa followed up with the AD and was told "It's being taken care of." I can tell you that I took for truth what the principal told me after I did what I needed to do. Why would Joe Pa think anything but the AD taking appropriate action?

As someone else said, these types of allegations are VERY VERY serious. You better be damn sure you've got all of your ducks in a row before you get the ball rolling. That's why there is a chain of command like this. So, when you go to the authorities, you don't have any loose ends.

I would consider myself Joe Pa in this situation. I did what the law says I need to do because I didn't witness the acts. When you're superior says that they've taken care of the situation

enigmaax;965462 wrote:I don't understand that take at all. He was either wrong and the whole situation serves as a terrible example of leadership, or he wasn't wrong and it should be business as usual. If it was wrong, it is terribly wrong. Why would his team deserve to be led by someone with such little moral fabric? And if it wasn't wrong, why should he be forced out at all? I just don't understand any kind of middle ground stance.

There are many factors to consider when discussing Paterno's fate. This team did nothing wrong, and all I'm saying is that this needs to be taken into consideration when Paterno's resignation is discussed.

vball10set;965503 wrote:There are many factors to consider when discussing Paterno's fate. This team did nothing wrong, and all I'm saying is that this needs to be taken into consideration when Paterno's resignation is discussed.

Okay, so then why make them play without him for the last two games and/or bowl game? Why let him coach one more game, then get rid of him? Don't they deserve to see how great their season can be with him?

Again, if you think he was wrong and needs to be removed over it, it doesn't make any sense to let him stay another minute. As far as his team, it would be more of a disservice to them to leave such a dreadful leader in place than to make sure the guy with the gameplan is in place. It is a much bigger issue than whether or not they win the next football game.

bigkahuna;965492 wrote:I'll chime in on this because I had an incident happen to me similar to this a few years ago. I run an after school latchkey program...

1. One of MY staff members comes to me and says "I saw older student A doing inappropriate things to younger student B" I respond, "What happened?"...details.... My last question was "Did you stop it?" Response- "Yes"

2. I get a hold of the principal "This happened..."

3. Principal comes in and takes a written statement from my staff. PRINCIPAL reports incident to CPS/ County.... PRINCIPAL follows up with the county and then fills me in on follow up.

This is how it happens in what you could call "World of Education" We get trained on Child Abuse issues; especially proper protocol.

In the PSU issue here is who is at fault

Grad Student- NOT stopping the act as he sees it and removing the child
AD- Not reporting it as he should and following up on it.

It's my understanding as to what I read that Joe Pa followed up with the AD and was told "It's being taken care of." I can tell you that I took for truth what the principal told me after I did what I needed to do. Why would Joe Pa think anything but the AD taking appropriate action?

As someone else said, these types of allegations are VERY VERY serious. You better be damn sure you've got all of your ducks in a row before you get the ball rolling. That's why there is a chain of command like this. So, when you go to the authorities, you don't have any loose ends.

I would consider myself Joe Pa in this situation. I did what the law says I need to do because I didn't witness the acts. When you're superior says that they've taken care of the situation

That's pretty much how I view Paterno in this whole situation. I'm curious now though, if you want to take the time to indulge me.

1) What would you have done if the staff member told you he hadn't stopped it?
2) Are you taught during child abuse training to directly intercede? I would think the first step (if witnessing something directly) would be to call the cops, as difficult as it might be to hold back. If you jump in and end up getting your ass kicked instead of stopping anything it seems like you could be putting the child's life in danger.
3) Would any part of how you handled it have changed if instead of "older student A" and younger student B it was "old man WTF" and younger student B?
4) What would you have done if the principal didn't follow up with you later on and/or you saw the older student hanging back around the program a few months later?

Sorry for piling on questions, but you piqued my interest.

2kool4skool;965361 wrote:Question for all those defending Paterno:

Paterno says McQueary came to him and told him Sandusky was molesting a child in the shower. Paterno reports incident to AD but in the coming years knows Sandusky not only isn't in prison, but continues to use psu facilities and hang around kids.

So in Paterno's mind, the logical conclusion is either the AD covered this up, or McQueary lied. If McQueary lied about something as serious as a coach raping a little boy, why did Paterno promote him over and over? If he knew nothing was done by the higher ups, why didn't Paterno do something?

Because Paterno thought the allegations were false since the higher ups didn't act on the situation. Wasn't that difficult to refute.

1) What would you have done if the staff member told you he hadn't stopped it?

I'd support and console McQueary, he was 28 and witnessed a legend buggering a boy....it would be like me catching my favorite uncle.

2) Are you taught during child abuse training to directly intercede? I would think the first step (if witnessing something directly) would be to call the cops, as difficult as it might be to hold back. If you jump in and end up getting your ass kicked instead of stopping anything it seems like you could be putting the child's life in danger.

My guess is when they saw McQueary they stopped having sex and Sandusky quickly took the kid home. Certainly McQueary could have done more to prevent Sandusky from leaving the facility (he had to put clothes on), but Paterno and Pedi-State are more culpable for not trying to identify the child.

3) Would any part of how you handled it have changed if instead of "older student A" and younger student B it was "old man WTF" and younger student B?

As long as "B" is a minor the duty is to identify and protect him, so no.

4) What would you have done if the principal didn't follow up with you later on and/or you saw the older student hanging back around the program a few months later?

I'd confront the student.

This is JoePa's biggest moral issue, he coached with Sandusky for years, why couldn't he have a conversation with him?

1) What would you have done if the staff member told you he hadn't stopped it?

I'd support and console McQueary, he was 28 and witnessed a legend buggering a boy....it would be like me catching my favorite uncle.

2) Are you taught during child abuse training to directly intercede? I would think the first step (if witnessing something directly) would be to call the cops, as difficult as it might be to hold back. If you jump in and end up getting your ass kicked instead of stopping anything it seems like you could be putting the child's life in danger.

My guess is when they saw McQueary they stopped having sex and Sandusky quickly took the kid home. Certainly McQueary could have done more to prevent Sandusky from leaving the facility (he had to put clothes on), but Paterno and Pedi-State are more culpable for not trying to identify the child.

3) Would any part of how you handled it have changed if instead of "older student A" and younger student B it was "old man WTF" and younger student B?

As long as "B" is a minor the duty is to identify and protect him, so no.

4) What would you have done if the principal didn't follow up with you later on and/or you saw the older student hanging back around the program a few months later?

I'd confront the student.

This is JoePa's biggest moral issue, he coached with Sandusky for years, why couldn't he have a conversation with him?

Mulva;965521 wrote:That's pretty much how I view Paterno in this whole situation. I'm curious now though, if you want to take the time to indulge me.

1) What would you have done if the staff member told you he hadn't stopped it?
2) Are you taught during child abuse training to directly intercede? I would think the first step (if witnessing something directly) would be to call the cops, as difficult as it might be to hold back. If you jump in and end up getting your ass kicked instead of stopping anything it seems like you could be putting the child's life in danger.
3) Would any part of how you handled it have changed if instead of "older student A" and younger student B it was "old man WTF" and younger student B?
4) What would you have done if the principal didn't follow up with you later on and/or you saw the older student hanging back around the program a few months later?

Sorry for piling on questions, but you piqued my interest.

No problem at all.

1. I would seriously question as to how serious the situation was if you didn't feel the need to intervene. I would then make sure that THAT part of the situation was well documented to show that the chance to intervene was there and wasn't acted on.

2. This honestly depends on the situation. I do know that in general it's taught to remove the child from harms way as quickly and safely as possible and then report. Me personally, I'd be willing to take the risk of getting my ass kicked to intervene right now. If it was the "wrestling around on the gym floor" like was reported, that's when you report, record.... because that's suspected. Seeing the actual act happen is cause to intervene.

3. See above. If you witness it actually happening, you have to intervene, or become an accomplice. If the staff member would have said, "There's some creeper guy [just talking] to the kids." They either A. Should be keeping every kid within 15 feet of them or B. Taking the kids to a secure location/ asking the creeper to leave. I would still do what I did in actual situation (reporting to principal and asking for advice). My supervisor actually told us in training to contact them before taking any type of action. I feel like I'm dodging this one, but I'm trying not to. I'm just asphyxiated on the fact that the person who actually sees it doesn't act right then and there. Coming to me and not doing anything puts doubt into my mind as to what you saw. The biggest thing is to remove the student and then follow reporting protocol.

4. I would wait a few days (2-3) before approaching the principal because it obviously takes some time to revue the case before acting on it. After that time, I would approach the principal and ask what was up. If I was told that it was taken care of/being investigated, I would 100% believe that until something made me not believe it. If the older student A shows up a few months later, I'm most certainly asking the principal.... "Hey, student A is around here, what happened?" If the principal tells me everything has been taken care of or something to that affect, I'm at the very least watching Older Student A like a hawk.

Like I said before, you trust your superior to have the same moral fiber to handle the situation appropriately. I'd take more security measures no doubt.

This is why I'm point the finger at the AD, Joe Pa didn't give Sandusky the keys to all of the athletic facilities; it had to be the AD. You really can't expect Joe Pa to have eyes and ears in every athletic facility at a university the size of PSU.

bigkahuna;965492 wrote:I'll chime in on this because I had an incident happen to me similar to this a few years ago. I run an after school latchkey program...

1. One of MY staff members comes to me and says "I saw older student A doing inappropriate things to younger student B" I respond, "What happened?"...details.... My last question was "Did you stop it?" Response- "Yes"

2. I get a hold of the principal "This happened..."

3. Principal comes in and takes a written statement from my staff. PRINCIPAL reports incident to CPS/ County.... PRINCIPAL follows up with the county and then fills me in on follow up.

This is how it happens in what you could call "World of Education" We get trained on Child Abuse issues; especially proper protocol.

In the PSU issue here is who is at fault

Grad Student- NOT stopping the act as he sees it and removing the child
AD- Not reporting it as he should and following up on it.

It's my understanding as to what I read that Joe Pa followed up with the AD and was told "It's being taken care of." I can tell you that I took for truth what the principal told me after I did what I needed to do. Why would Joe Pa think anything but the AD taking appropriate action?

As someone else said, these types of allegations are VERY VERY serious. You better be damn sure you've got all of your ducks in a row before you get the ball rolling. That's why there is a chain of command like this. So, when you go to the authorities, you don't have any loose ends.

I would consider myself Joe Pa in this situation. I did what the law says I need to do because I didn't witness the acts. When you're superior says that they've taken care of the situation

3. Is were the the Paterno/Penn State/Sandusky molestations goes awry or is unexplainable. Did the AD call the police(obviously not). Did the AD follow up with the police(obviously not). Did the AD fill Paterno in on the follow up? If the AD did fill Paterno in and there was no conspiracy, then the follow up MUST have been something like, "WE investigated the reported molestation and we're "taking care of it". If after a reasonable period of time and we' re "taking care of it" means nothing has changed. Then I'm not buying that if I'm Paterno. Paterno was told the boy in the shower with Sandusky was being sodomized, and nothing changes for Sandusky??? Paterno did nothing. Didn't try to find out who the young boy was. Didn't investigate on his own to see who out side of the University was called, why Sandusky was still around the football facility with young boys. Nothing.... and you know damn well Paterno could go over ANYONE'S head on the campus if he really wanted to get to the bottom of what happened that night and what REALLY happened after that night.

In your case, what do you do if you believe what your staff told you was true and it becomes obvious the authorities weren't called and your Principal tells you nothing serious happened? I would certainly think you would do a little investigating of your own. Paterno did nothing.

sleeper;965558 wrote:Because Paterno thought the allegations were false since the higher ups didn't act on the situation. Wasn't that difficult to refute.

Why did he promote McQueary multiple times despite his belief he lied about something as serious as a fellow coach and friend raping a young boy?

bigkahuna;965570 wrote:No problem at all.

1. I would seriously question as to how serious the situation was if you didn't feel the need to intervene. I would then make sure that THAT part of the situation was well documented to show that the chance to intervene was there and wasn't acted on.

2. This honestly depends on the situation. I do know that in general it's taught to remove the child from harms way as quickly and safely as possible and then report. Me personally, I'd be willing to take the risk of getting my ass kicked to intervene right now. If it was the "wrestling around on the gym floor" like was reported, that's when you report, record.... because that's suspected. Seeing the actual act happen is cause to intervene.

3. See above. If you witness it actually happening, you have to intervene, or become an accomplice. If the staff member would have said, "There's some creeper guy [just talking] to the kids." They either A. Should be keeping every kid within 15 feet of them or B. Taking the kids to a secure location/ asking the creeper to leave. I would still do what I did in actual situation (reporting to principal and asking for advice). My supervisor actually told us in training to contact them before taking any type of action. I feel like I'm dodging this one, but I'm trying not to. I'm just asphyxiated on the fact that the person who actually sees it doesn't act right then and there. Coming to me and not doing anything puts doubt into my mind as to what you saw. The biggest thing is to remove the student and then follow reporting protocol.

4. I would wait a few days (3-4) before approaching the principal because it obviously takes some time to revue the case before acting on it. If the older student A shows up a few months later, I'm most certainly asking the principal.... "Hey, student A is around here, what happened?" If the principal tells me everything has been taken care of or something to that affect, I'm at the very least watching Older Student A like a hawk.

Like I said before, you trust your superior to have the same moral fiber to handle the situation appropriately. I'd take more security measures no doubt.

This is why I'm point the finger at the AD, Joe Pa didn't give Sandusky the keys to all of the athletic facilities; it had to be the AD. You really can't expect Joe Pa to have eyes and ears in every athletic facility at a university the size of PSU.

If you believe anyone is given keys to the PSU football facilities without Paterno approving it, you are naive. Remember: when the 2010 incident was reported by MM, he went to Paterno's house to tell him. Paterno didn't then go to the AD's house to inform his "boss" -- the AD was summoned to Paterno's house to find out the information. Paterno ran the program; not the AD.

Also, I get the feeling you haven't read the GJ report. If not, do so. It will clear up any misconceptions you may have that Paterno knew what was going on; starting with the fact that Paterno testified that MM told him Sandusky and the boy were involved in a sexual act. How do you not immediately call police when you hear this?

Finally, the very first report of misconduct by Sandusky was in 1998. Sandusky was forced to retire before the next football season. It's obvious, that happened because Paterno knew he was involved in misconduct with a child. That means when the 2010 incident happened, it was a repeat offense. How do you not call the police now, unless you fear the fallout from this?

Logic and reason point to a deliberate whitewashing of events and a coverup by Paterno and others. These are very intelligent people and gifted leaders. Intelligent people who are leaders don't react meekly or get "fooled" as Paterno now says happened.

Big Gain;965571 wrote:3. Is were the the Paterno/Penn State/Sandusky molestations goes awry or is unexplainable. Did the AD call the police(obviously not). Did the AD follow up with the police(obviously not). Did the AD fill Paterno in on the follow up? If the AD did fill Paterno in and there was no conspiracy, then the follow up MUST have been something like, "WE investigated the reported molestation and we found nothing improper happened in the shower." I'm not buying that if I'm Paterno. Paterno was told the boy in the shower with Sandusky was being sodomized. Paterno did nothing. Didn't try to find out who the young boy was. Didn't investigate on his own to see who out side of the University was called. Nothing.... and you know damn well Paterno could go over ANYONE'S head on the campus if he really wanted to get to the bottom of what happened that night.

In your case what do you do if you believe what your staff told you was true and it becomes obvious the authorities weren't called and your Principal tells you nothing serious happened, what do you do? I would certainly think you would do a little investigating of your own. Paterno did nothing.

I'll be honest, this is a tough question. Some things cannot be divulged to you, so investigating yourself leads to brick walls. I would get what information I could, but there's so much red tape with this crap. At the very least, I'd make a phone call "Did my supervisor contact you on this?" But, it boils down to how well/what the AD actually did.

bigkahuna;965570 wrote:
3. See above. If you witness it actually happening, you have to intervene, or become an accomplice. If the staff member would have said, "There's some creeper guy [just talking] to the kids." They either A. Should be keeping every kid within 15 feet of them or B. Taking the kids to a secure location/ asking the creeper to leave. I would still do what I did in actual situation (reporting to principal and asking for advice). My supervisor actually told us in training to contact them before taking any type of action. I feel like I'm dodging this one, but I'm trying not to. I'm just asphyxiated on the fact that the person who actually sees it doesn't act right then and there. Coming to me and not doing anything puts doubt into my mind as to what you saw. The biggest thing is to remove the student and then follow reporting protocol.

After listening today to a Doctor from Kansas State University whose specialization is in child molesting, according to him it isn't that surprising that McQueary didn't stop the molestation. He said the number one factor in being a child molester is that the individual is a person in a position of power who wields his power in a overwhelming manner. In this case McQueary had played football for Penn State and saw how Sandusky "coached" since he was 18. He had been a subordinate to Sandusky as a GA for several years. Thus had been around Sandusky every day of his life for the better part of a decade and was undoubted scared of him yet highly respected him. He felt the same about Sandusky as the victim. He couldn't stop him. Obviously I'm not saying McQuery was right, trying to understand why.

Big Gain;965645 wrote:After listening today to a Doctor from Kansas State University whose specialization is in child molesting, according to him it isn't that surprising that McQueary didn't stop the molestation. He said the number one factor in being a child molester is that the individual is a person in a position of power who wields his power in a overwhelming manner. In this case McQueary had played football for Penn State and saw how Sandusky "coached" since he was 18. He had been a subordinate to Sandusky as a GA for several years. Thus had been around Sandusky every day of his life for the better part of a decade and was undoubted scared of him yet highly respected him. He felt the same about Sandusky as the victim. He couldn't stop him. Obviously I'm not saying McQuery was right, trying to understand why.

However, he didn't feel the need to call the police after he saw it.

Joe Pa fired, will never coach again

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2011/11/9/2550972/joe-paterno-fired-penn-state-tom-bradley

2kool4skool;965582 wrote:Why did he promote McQueary multiple times despite his belief he lied about something as serious as a fellow coach and friend raping a young boy?

I don't know, I'm not Joe Pa. McQueary might just be a great coach.

Writerbuckeye;965595 wrote:If you believe anyone is given keys to the PSU football facilities without Paterno approving it, you are naive. Remember: when the 2010 incident was reported by MM, he went to Paterno's house to tell him. Paterno didn't then go to the AD's house to inform his "boss" -- the AD was summoned to Paterno's house to find out the information. Paterno ran the program; not the AD.

Also, I get the feeling you haven't read the GJ report. If not, do so. It will clear up any misconceptions you may have that Paterno knew what was going on; starting with the fact that Paterno testified that MM told him Sandusky and the boy were involved in a sexual act. How do you not immediately call police when you hear this?

Finally, the very first report of misconduct by Sandusky was in 1998. Sandusky was forced to retire before the next football season. It's obvious, that happened because Paterno knew he was involved in misconduct with a child. That means when the 2010 incident happened, it was a repeat offense. How do you not call the police now, unless you fear the fallout from this?

Logic and reason point to a deliberate whitewashing of events and a coverup by Paterno and others. These are very intelligent people and gifted leaders. Intelligent people who are leaders don't react meekly or get "fooled" as Paterno now says happened.

Sorry, I had to go re-read the GJ report because you had a lot of incorrect statements in your response.

1. In 1999, when Sandusky retired, he was given access to all of the facilities as part of his retirement package. If you think Joe Pa can come in over top the B.O.T and say "He's not getting keys to the football complex," then you sir are naive. He might be bigger than the program, but he's not bigger than the entire University.

2. Yes, Paterno called the AD to come to his house to discuss something. He wasn't telling him/making him. With something this severe, you obviously want to discuss the matter in person.

3. How do you not immediately call the police when you SEE THAT!?! Like I said, there is protocol that you have to follow with things like this, especially if you don't see it happen with your own eyes. By reporting this to a superior like Joe Pa did, he followed what the law said he is to do.

4. A week later, the AD and VP contacted the GA about the incident to get a report from him. According to law, this needed to be done and reported to the police within 48hrs. That is on the AD/VP.

5. The AD/VP downplayed the severity of the incident and decided not to inform law enforcement as the law states.

SportsAndLady;965677 wrote:Joe Pa fired, will never coach again

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2011/11/9/2550972/joe-paterno-fired-penn-state-tom-bradley

B.O.T member is doing a great job at dodging these questions. Someone asked him if he was concerned about backlash from students who were already protesting. He said "They'll act appropriately." He's in for a rude awakening.

Paterno and the president get axed.

It is about time! Congrats to the trustees for finally doing something with the situation. Now, how long will it take Penn State to recover from this stuff -- I hope it takes a loooooooong time.

Uh, okay we gotta go.........lol

sleeper;965701 wrote:I don't know, I'm not Joe Pa. McQueary might just be a great coach.

And that outweighed the fact that he believed McQueary had lied about a fellow coach raping a child? Sounds like a morally sound man...

bigkahuna;965725 wrote:Sorry, I had to go re-read the GJ report because you had a lot of incorrect statements in your response.

1. In 1999, when Sandusky retired, he was given access to all of the facilities as part of his retirement package. If you think Joe Pa can come in over top the B.O.T and say "He's not getting keys to the football complex," then you sir are naive. He might be bigger than the program, but he's not bigger than the entire University.

2. Yes, Paterno called the AD to come to his house to discuss something. He wasn't telling him/making him. With something this severe, you obviously want to discuss the matter in person.

3. How do you not immediately call the police when you SEE THAT!?! Like I said, there is protocol that you have to follow with things like this, especially if you don't see it happen with your own eyes. By reporting this to a superior like Joe Pa did, he followed what the law said he is to do.

4. A week later, the AD and VP contacted the GA about the incident to get a report from him. According to law, this needed to be done and reported to the police within 48hrs. That is on the AD/VP.

5. The AD/VP downplayed the severity of the incident and decided not to inform law enforcement as the law states.

Did you read the GJ testimony where an investigator and 2 Police detectives interviewed Sandusky in 1998 and he admitted to being naked in the shower with a 10 yr old and probaly touched his genitals? or the part about the 2 Janitors, 1 who witnessed Sandusky giving oral to a 12 yr old boy and said it was more disturbing to him than being in Korea and seeing guts blown up around him, yet NEITHER of them reported the incident to the Police or anyone at PSU?

Am I the only one that thinks Penn State's football program is the LAST thing they should be focusing on right now? That seemed like a total disaster of a press conference.

I don't think the BOT is focusing on football but I'm not exactly sure if they're focusing on the situation at hand. I don't even know what to say...the lack of credible PR being done at this university is mind-boggling.