FatHobbit;1226405 wrote:I see where rec is coming from. I didn't want to believe it either. I thought Joe Pa was part of what was great about college football. It's still hard for me to believe. Paying players and extra benefits is a problem with college sports, and it doesn't really surprise me anymore when that comes out. Letting someone get away with molesting kids is on a whole different level of terrible.

I also can't understand how anyone else who had knowledge of this can sleep at night. They took it to their "superiors" and then let it go? They should have called the police when nothing happened.

I agree. While Joe Paterno certainly could have done a lot more, as he himself proclaimed just before he died, the brunt of the responsibility has to fall on Mike McQueary. According to McQueary's own testimony, he actually saw the rape happen. Oh. My. God. Why is he not being shoved the majority of the blame in this situation? Why the fuck did he go to Joe Paterno, who had seen nothing and had no ties to Jerry Sandusky by 2001? Sandusky was no longer an employee of Paterno's at that time.

Paterno made a fatal mistake, as we now know, by choosing to believe that everything was taken care of. But McQueary is the real coward in all of this and certainly more culpable than Paterno (that is if Paterno really did know less than what the Free Report's speculations lend readers to believe).

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/07/jerry_sandusky_case_three_men.html

Sources close to the Jerry Sandusky case say that three men have come forward and told police that they were abused in the 1970s or 1980s by the convicted pedophile.


They are the first men to allege abuse before the 1990s, and if found to be credible, would directly attack the 68-year-old's defense argument that a person doesn't become pedophile in his or her 50s.

Two sources with knowledge of the investigation say police are aware these men have come forward.


It is not known, however, if these men were contacted or interviewed by Louis Freeh's team, which was hired by Penn State to do an internal review of the scandal and the university's response.

reclegend22;1226503 wrote:I agree. While Joe Paterno certainly could have done a lot more, as he himself proclaimed just before he died, the brunt of the responsibility has to fall on Mike McQueary. According to McQueary's own testimony, he actually saw the rape happen. Oh. My. God. Why is he not being shoved the majority of the blame in this situation? Why the **** did he go to Joe Paterno, who had seen nothing and had no ties to Jerry Sandusky by 2001? Sandusky was no longer an employee of Paterno's at that time.

Paterno made a fatal mistake, as we now know, by choosing to believe that everything was taken care of. But McQueary is the real coward in all of this and certainly more culpable than Paterno (that is if Paterno really did know less than what the Free Report's speculations lend readers to believe).

I don't think anyone is giving McQueary a pass. I don't know how anyone could witness that and not beat the crap out of Sandusky right there and then.

Joe Pa did have ties to Sandusky in 2001. He gave him an office and let him visit the Penn State facilities. If you bring a guest to the work place, you are responsible for him or her. Why would Joe Pa give Sandusky so much access to PSU when he at least knew (and I am being generous here) that Sandusky had a very shady background. Would you invite someone to work place if there existed any suspicions at all that they had done things with children?

OneBuckeye;1226520 wrote:http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/07/jerry_sandusky_case_three_men.html

That's interesting because this morning I was telling my wife that there has to be more victims prior to this. Sandusky didn't wake up in the late 90's and say "I'm going to start abusing kids today". I wonder how many victims are really out there?

Al Bundy wrote:Joe Pa did have ties to Sandusky in 2001. He gave him an office and let him visit the Penn State facilities.

That's not true. Penn State's AD and board put together and approved the Sandusky retirement package. From what I understand and have read, Paterno didn't have anything to do with that process. While people may disagree with that assertion, where is the evidence that points to the contrary? As powerful as a man some think he was, I don't think Paterno had the authority to hand out emeritus status to former PSU employees. He was the coach of a game.

reclegend22;1226503 wrote:I agree. While Joe Paterno certainly could have done a lot more, as he himself proclaimed just before he died, the brunt of the responsibility has to fall on Mike McQueary. According to McQueary's own testimony, he actually saw the rape happen. Oh. My. God. Why is he not being shoved the majority of the blame in this situation? Why the **** did he go to Joe Paterno, who had seen nothing and had no ties to Jerry Sandusky by 2001? Sandusky was no longer an employee of Paterno's at that time.

Paterno made a fatal mistake, as we now know, by choosing to believe that everything was taken care of. But McQueary is the real coward in all of this and certainly more culpable than Paterno (that is if Paterno really did know less than what the Free Report's speculations lend readers to believe).

Disagree, McQueary (like the janitor) saw it and saw it end - these were low level employees that had everything to lose, whereas Paterno ran the place. Ask anyone that has every worked at a job at the bottom of the totem pole. JoePa is far worse than McQueary - at least McQueary told people about it and didn't perjure himself. I can't believe the hubris of JoePa apologists now. The guy was a failure as a leader.

Manhattan Buckeye;1226785 wrote:Disagree, McQueary (like the janitor) saw it and saw it end - these were low level employees that had everything to lose, whereas Paterno ran the place. Ask anyone that has every worked at a job at the bottom of the totem pole. JoePa is far worse than McQueary - at least McQueary told people about it and didn't perjure himself. I can't believe the hubris of JoePa apologists now. The guy was a failure as a leader.

When all this came out I was like joepa shouldve done more. I also thought I would hold more accountability to the higher ups cause they knew and didnt end it. Now that I know more I am just completely angry about joepa's involvement. How can you cover something like this up. It is sickening to me.

Manhattan Buckeye wrote:Disagree, McQueary (like the janitor) saw it and saw it end - these were low level employees that had everything to lose, whereas Paterno ran the place. Ask anyone that has every worked at a job at the bottom of the totem pole. JoePa is far worse than McQueary - at least McQueary told people about it and didn't perjure himself. I can't believe the hubris of JoePa apologists now. The guy was a failure as a leader.

Paterno did tell people. He told the president of the university. That was protocol at Penn State. To say that he told no one is just not true. Should Paterno have gone directly to the police after McQueary informed him of what the graduate assistant thought he saw? Paterno obviously wasn't comfortable making that type of decision on the spot, probably due to the fact that McQueary only told Paterno that he thought he saw something of a "sexual nature"; while completely inappropriate regardless of the circumstances, I am guessing that Paterno just wanted to make sure that McQueary wasn't somehow mistaken in the heat of the moment, so to speak, and that McQueary didn't just witness some sort of ill-advised horseplay that looked of a "sexual nature."

Calling 911 and claiming that your long-time friend and coworker was raping a kid in your shower is a big decision to make. You better make sure you have your facts in order. Paterno apparently felt that the PSU administration was better suited at handling that sort of serious matter, especially since Paterno didn't have any first-hand knowledge of the incident. Even if Paterno did know about the '98 investigation, which I think the vague nature of the Freeh Report leaves at least a window of doubt that he actually did, Sandusky had been cleared of claims regarding a similar shower incident by state authorities during that investigation. Perhaps Paterno believed that something inappropriate, yet not felonious, had happened yet another time and that Sandusky was just using bad judgement again by using the showers at the same time as a child.

As I've said repeatedly, I don't know where I stand. I am just trying to look at the whole situation from a different angle and not just viciously pile on top of Paterno based off of some speculation resulting from a few vague emails in a report that, mind you, is heavily filled with one man's conclusions and assumptions. Just because Freeh uses the phrase "reasonable conclusion," it doesn't make everything he says so.

Manhattan Buckeye wrote:The guy was a failure as a leader.

This I agree with in a certain respect. Paterno failed to properly lead the Penn State football program at the very moment that his advanced age, in my view, no longer allowed him to adequately stay on top of things and understand how to correctly deal with the management of important matters non-relating to football. I honestly think that it may have been that simple, that Paterno was just too old to handle the responsibility of the position outside of X's and O's. Call it senility or whatever you like. It does happen to people in as they move into the senior citizen stages of their lives. The fact is, Paterno should have retired much, much sooner than he was forced out.

I think another fatal character flaw aside from the unwillingness to step down from his post that Paterno was guilty of is extreme loyalty to a former long-time associate and the inability to either believe, or want to believe, that that person could have been doing such evil things. It is my opinion that Paterno didn't intentionally participate in aiding a child sex ring (that's ridiculous, from my perspective), but rather that he just pushed it aside in hopes that it wasn't really true. Either way, it's deeply tragic.

"Calling 911 and claiming that your long-time friend and coworker was raping a kid in your shower is a big decision to make. "

From what I read he couldn't even be bothered to contact his long-time friend and coworker. I'd like to think I (and everyone else posting here) would at least do that. They (not just JoePa but the rest of the administration) didn't just tolerate his actions, they enabled him by letting him to continue to have access to the facilities. This is what is really confusing and may open another Pandora's box. Did Sandusky have something on PSU to be treated so "humanely"? The Freeh report simply researched the sexual assaults, it was as perplexed as I am why a supposedly elite organization failed so miserably for so long.

reclegend22;1226871 wrote: Call it senility or whatever you like. It does happen to people in as they move into the senior citizen stages of their lives. The fact is, Paterno should have retired much, much sooner than he was forced out.

True, but then again this first happened in 1998. 14 yrs ago?

Manhattan Buckeye wrote:From what I read he couldn't even be bothered to contact his long-time friend and coworker.

Do we know this for sure? (Serious question, I don't know either.) If Paterno did contact Sandusky, however, to inquire further about the alleged incident, how exactly do you think that conversation would have gone?

"Hey, Jerry."
"Yeah, Joe?"
"What were you doing in the shower with that boy the other afternoon?"
"Raping him."
"Oh."

I know and you know that that's not what would have been said.

jordo212000 wrote:True, but then again this first happened in 1998. 14 yrs ago?

And that would have made Joe, what, 134? I'm not condoning Paterno's lack of a proper response to the situation, but he would been about 71 years old in 1998. You are a fan of college football. You've followed Penn State and seen how Paterno was post-2000. While certainly still a great football mind, he often times appeared rambling and spaced out. I really don't think he was "all there," at least not enough to basically act as CEO of an organization (PSU football) worth in the range of hundreds of millions of dollars in business terms. Do you think he still would have been CEO of Nintendo or Sony at that stage of his life, handling big-time matters? I highly doubt it.

"Take the statue down or we will"

^^Banner flying from the back of a plane over Beaver Stadium today.

SportsAndLady;1227347 wrote:"Take the statue down or we will"

^^Banner flying from the back of a plane over Beaver Stadium today.

just saw that...

vball10set;1227350 wrote:just saw that...

That's probably Bobby Bowden piloting the airplane.

vball10set;1227350 wrote:just saw that...

Airplane is licensed to a company in Genoa, OH. It's the same plane/company that flew the banner over the US Open(or whatever) in 2010 taunting Tiger Woods after his scandal.

Whenever something big in sports happens, the airport in Genoa gets some use lol.

reclegend22;1226598 wrote:That's not true. Penn State's AD and board put together and approved the Sandusky retirement package. From what I understand and have read, Paterno didn't have anything to do with that process. While people may disagree with that assertion, where is the evidence that points to the contrary? As powerful as a man some think he was, I don't think Paterno had the authority to hand out emeritus status to former PSU employees. He was the coach of a game.

Paterno wouldn't think it just a little odd that his D co-ordinator would retire at THE pinnacle of his career, at the age of 54, right after the 1998 incident and he wouldn't be involved in the floating of the golden parachute? Paterno, the head coach, THE man in Happy Valley just said good by and good luck????

Big Gain;1227608 wrote:Paterno wouldn't think it just a little odd that his D co-ordinator would retire at THE pinnacle of his career, at the age of 54, right after the 1998 incident and he wouldn't be involved in the floating of the golden parachute? Paterno, the head coach, THE man in Happy Valley just said good by and good luck????

Sandusky's 1998 retirement had NOTHING to do with the investigation. It had to do with Paterno informing Sandusky that, because of Sandusky's inability to properly balance his time and efforts between PSU football and the Second Mile, and Paterno deciding to stay at the helm for several more years than expected, Sandusky was no longer in the running to become the next PSU head coach. If you'll look at the Freeh Report closer, you'll realize that Louis Freeh himself even affirms this fact. This is why Sandusky decided to opt out and take the retirement package that the state of Pennsylvania was offering at the time.

It's right there in the report. The media, however, has conveniently ignored this fact in its attempt to make Paterno appear as suspicious as possible.

I dont know who you are reclegend22 but you and I are in agreement with many of your posts on this thread. I really have a hard time with anything the media tells me is "fact", reading for yourself is the best bet to understanding the depth of this entire ordeal. if one wanted to take this a little further into the rhelm of "possible"? The retirement of Sandusky could have just given him more time to really focus on what it looks like his number one priority was? I would just add one thing to this thread as a man.... I don't question McQueary as a coach or low level employee, BUT I do question his MANHOOD!!! I don't care, I don't know any one man I call a friend that would or could walk by what he claims to have walked by and not made an effort to see what was happening and then if what he "thought" was happening was "actually" happening not act! It amazes me on a daily basis how men of action or a dying breed! Right is right, I understand that McQueary is not at all to blame for what has happened at Penn State but in my book of "men" he aint in it!!!

sanitizer;1227796 wrote:I dont know who you are reclegend22 but you and I are in agreement with many of your posts on this thread. I really have a hard time with anything the media tells me is "fact", reading for yourself is the best bet to understanding the depth of this entire ordeal. if one wanted to take this a little further into the rhelm of "possible"? The retirement of Sandusky could have just given him more time to really focus on what it looks like his number one priority was? I would just add one thing to this thread as a man.... I don't question McQueary as a coach or low level employee, BUT I do question his MANHOOD!!! I don't care, I don't know any one man I call a friend that would or could walk by what he claims to have walked by and not made an effort to see what was happening and then if what he "thought" was happening was "actually" happening not act! It amazes me on a daily basis how men of action or a dying breed! Right is right, I understand that McQueary is not at all to blame for what has happened at Penn State but in my book of "men" he aint in it!!!

Agreed. Good post. The only argument I have is that I definitely think Mike McQueary is a big person to blame in all of this. He said he saw a rape. He should have called 9-1-1. End of story. He didn't, though, and now we have this mess.

I do find it odd, however, that the boy McQueary said he saw getting raped in the shower has never come forward. Interesting, especially considering dozens of others have.

reclegend22;1227873 wrote:I do find it odd, however, that the boy McQueary said he saw getting raped in the shower has never come forward. Interesting, especially considering dozens of others have.

I don't. Who would want to be that guy or admit they were raped?

FatHobbit;1227881 wrote:I don't. Who would want to be that guy or admit they were raped?

I totally get that, and have used that very point to support my argument of why I don't think it is unreasonable to conclude that these victims wouldn't want to be "viewed" as one of the reasons that Penn State lost its football team. They are obviously not the reason, but, nevertheless, I don't think that's what the victims would want to happen. They just want justice in the form of criminal prosecution of the people most responsible.

I just find it interesting that the lynchpin of the case, so to speak, the victim from the PSU locker room, is not one of the dozens that we heard from in the courtroom. But I understand why he wouldn't have wanted to come forward.

I'd also add that I want to hear from that kid in the PSU showers, to see if he remembers anything from that day in 2001 (i.e. seeing McQueary enter the room and look on at Sandusky and the boy from the mirror). This might help determine what it is exactly that Mike saw.

I very much doubt this is the case, but what if the victim came forward and said that it was just inappropriate playing and not actual sex that happened on that day? This would still make it disgusting, but might make the hestitancy of Curley and Shultz to alert child welfare seem at least somewhat fathomable if not reasonable (based on my belief that what Paterno, Schultz, Curley and Spanier were all guilty of is negligence on the basis of choosing to believe that it was all a misunderstanding and not actual sexually criminal activity).

While McQueary seems certain 10 years later that what he saw was rape, that's not what he told Joe Paterno. He left some doubt, claiming only that he believed he saw something of a "sexual nature," and Paterno and the rest chose to perceive that doubt as a small mix-up, that something so henious couldn't be true. For Paterno, who I believe did not know about the prior investigation, I can see why he, while deeply unfortunate in hindsight, might have taken that course of thought. Put yourself and a friend, someone you trust, in that situation. It's understandable. Paterno did the right thing, though, by taking that information to the university president and campus police.

I do find it odd, however, that the boy McQueary said he saw getting raped in the shower has never come forward. Interesting, especially considering dozens of others have.

I agree, and can see why he would and would not come forward. There seems to ALWAYS be questions that just go unanswered in molestation cases. Lots of how and why left for guys like us to discuss on boards like this one. I am a big Occam's Razor fan....... They are or were hanging a lot of this story on what McQueary said he saw or heard or whatever he is saying now. I just can't for the life of me see any scenario where I could hear or see ANYTHING like that and not feel compelled to act!!!! I have learned a few lessons on life and one of them is that bad people are everywhere, Schools, churches, neighborhoods and yes Penn State! Just so very sad!!!!

bigkahuna;1227556 wrote:Airplane is licensed to a company in Genoa, OH. It's the same plane/company that flew the banner over the US Open(or whatever) in 2010 taunting Tiger Woods after his scandal.

Whenever something big in sports happens, the airport in Genoa gets some use lol.

to your point...

http://www.toledoblade.com/frontpage/2012/07/18/Genoa-ad-firm-flies-controversial-banner.html