# It's time to officially Pit Joe Paterno and the Penn State football program. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 7, 2011, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167 "2011-11-07T14:23:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 310
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2012, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6183 "2012-12-27T23:39:34Z")
For what it’s worth, I concede that had a case for child molestation (or whatever similar charges might apply) been pursued against Sandusky in 1998, it might not have resulted in conviction, i.e. it is possible he could not be firmly _proven_ to be a child molester based on the evidence known at that time. Further, I draw the distinction between “pedophile” (someone whose sexual preferences include wanting to molest children) and “child molester” (someone who actually follows through). Further still, I can imagine that even had Sandusky been a Penn State janitor, the above might apply. That said, I’ll go back to analyzing the actions of McQueary, Paterno, Curley and Schultz post-2001. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6184 "2012-12-28T01:02:49Z")
> [@drewtwo99](#): > > My new year’s resolution is going to be not to open this thread again. I just heard on the radio [yeah, really reliable!] that only 8 % of people actually _keep_ their New Year’s resolutions. You’ll be back… ---
**Author:** ![Robb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a183cd/32.png) [@Robb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robb)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6185 "2012-12-28T04:59:26Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > IMHO, the evidence from the Sandusky trial tends to strengthen the case for McQueary having failed to communicate his point (even to the extent that he was trying to communicate what he now says he was, which is itself uncertain). That evidence being the testimony of Dranov, and the concession by McQueary that he spoke in euphemisms and circumlocutions. What evidence tends to strengthen the case that “McQueary … failed to communicate his point?” McQueary testified on the [second day](http://wearecentralpa.com/images/Multi_Media/wearecentralpa/nxd_media/dox/pdf/2012_09/JuryTrialDay2.pdf) of Sandusky’s trial and said things like: Q. [by Sandusky lawyer Rominger] And you remembered using very generic terms with Paterno. You never used profane or vulgar language. A. Yes. I definitely did not use profane words, swear words. Coach Paterno, according to his own testimony, definitely knew it was severely sexual. Day 2 transcript, p. 289, lines 12 - 18. So, McQueary said yes to one of two questions, then clarified that Paterno understood McQueary told him Sandusky was involved in a “severely sexual” situation with an obvious boy. At p. 205, McQueary testified that, “I made sure [Paterno] knew it was sexual and that it was wrong, and there was no doubt about that. I did not go into gross detail about the actual act.” He goes on to explain that although he thought he witnessed Sandusky performing anal sex, he did not use that term with either his father or Paterno, because he did not feel comfortable using the term. I’ll admit that I’ve only read McQueary’s testimony at the Sandusky trial once (and I don’t think I’ll read it again), but I didn’t see McQueary admitting “that he spoke in euphemisms and circumlocutions.” Could you show me the error of my ways? Dr. Dranov testified on the [seventh day](http://wearecentralpa.com/images/Multi_Media/wearecentralpa/nxd_media/dox/pdf/2012_09/JuryTrialDay7.pdf) of the trial. Q. [by Sandusky lawyer Rominger] Did [McQueary] describe seeing any particular sex act? A. No, he did not. He implied that it had gone on with what he talked about with sexual sounds. But did he give me any kind of graphic description? No. Day 7 transcript p. 13, lines 16-21. Q. [by Sandusky lawyer Rominger] But, doctor, you asked him three times if he saw a sexual act? … (omitted objections to this question) A. In the conversation, yes. I didn’t use the term did you see a sexual act. I kept saying what did you see and each time he would come back to the sounds. I kept saying but what did you see. And it just seemed to make him more upset. So I backed off that. Day 7 transcript page 15 line 24 to page 16 line 11. Now, I’ll agree that Dr. Dranov’s testimony doesn’t paint a clear picture of what Sandusky did, but it makes McQueary appear shell-shocked. Sandusky’s lawyers called Dr. Dranov as a witness. If you want some idea about how badly he hurt their defense, you should consider that in [closing arguments](http://wearecentralpa.com/images/Multi_Media/wearecentralpa/nxd_media/dox/pdf/2012_09/JuryTrialDay8.pdf), they only point they made from Dr. Dranov’s testimony was that he was a mandatory reporter. If you can show my how Dr. Dranov’s trial testimony casts doubt on McQueary’s ability to convey what he saw, I’d be happy to read it. But, I bet the best you can do is to show that McQueary was too distraught to provide detail. This certainly helped damn Sandusky and really doesn’t do much to exonerate Paterno. Until I read his testimony, I thought McQueary acted the way he did to save his own career, but his testimony makes him out to be much more sympathetic. He thought he’d go back to work on a Friday night and found Coach Sandusky in a shower having sex with a boy. McQueary fairy begged the judge to not answer questions about penises and genitals. His testimony and Dr. Dranov’s show that he didn’t know what to do. In retrospect - he didn’t do all that he could. He’ll have to live with that. Paterno didn’t do all that he could, but he doesn’t have to live with that decision any longer. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6186 "2012-12-28T15:10:46Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Okay, I recognize that the attempted hair-split that you think is so important exists - I just don’t give it any significance. No, I meant the word “think” applied to yourself. But I can see where that association might be difficult. > [@](#): > > Obviously, because the points you _are_ making have no real-world significance whatsoever. It’s like I’m rudely bringing up gravity to someone embroiled in an analysis of flying elephants. > > Hey, you’re groping for explanations of Paterno’s behaviour. Starving Artist maintained at length that anal rape under these circumstances was physically impossible (and thus if anyone was suggesting McQueary was lying, I submit it was him), with a follow-up that Paterno was blissfully unaware of the very _concept_ of man-on-boy anal rape. His arguments were of tenuous relevance, as are yours. You _presume_ Paterno thought an investigation had occurred? That’s very generous of you - how about bringing this into the realm of reality by giving us some supporting evidence? None of this changes the fact that you’re refuting something that is only your own suggestion and then preening as if you’ve done something. > [@](#): > > I’m only avoiding some household chores in taking these time-outs to clobber you. These repeated declarations of how resoundingly you’re winning have a familiar ring to them. Seems like I’ve seen that gambit before, somewhere. > [@](#): > > Well, that’s the risk of that particular form of sarcasm. You may think you’re being clever when you say things along the lines of “Oh, you’re clearly so brilliant that poor little me never stood a chance” but in the process you invite them to respond “Yes, that’s become clear at this stage.” That’s a lot of protesting over a 2 word throwaway comment. Sorry. > [@BigT](#): > > F-P, your point was demolished the second you refused to either take back or give examples of your statement that the actions of a child molester would appear to be the same as that of a mentor to an outside observer. When someone flat out asked you to give examples of actions by a groomer that would be perceived as mentoring, and you REFUSED to do so, you admitted you were not actually wanting to argue. Dial back the outrage, man. I gave some detail in post #6112. > [@Robb](#): > > McQueary testified on the [second day](http://wearecentralpa.com/images/Multi_Media/wearecentralpa/nxd_media/dox/pdf/2012_09/JuryTrialDay2.pdf) of Sandusky’s trial and said things like: > Q. [by Sandusky lawyer Rominger] And you remembered using very generic terms with Paterno. You never used profane or vulgar language. > A. Yes. I definitely did not use profane words, swear words. Coach Paterno, according to his own testimony, definitely knew it was severely sexual. > Day 2 transcript, p. 289, lines 12 - 18. > So, McQueary said yes to one of two questions, then clarified that Paterno understood McQueary told him Sandusky was involved in a “severely sexual” situation with an obvious boy. > > At p. 205, McQueary testified that, “I made sure [Paterno] knew it was sexual and that it was wrong, and there was no doubt about that. I did not go into gross detail about the actual act.” He goes on to explain that although he thought he witnessed Sandusky performing anal sex, he did not use that term with either his father or Paterno, because he did not feel comfortable using the term. > > I’ll admit that I’ve only read McQueary’s testimony at the Sandusky trial once (and I don’t think I’ll read it again), but I didn’t see McQueary admitting “that he spoke in euphemisms and circumlocutions.” Could you show me the error of my ways? No, I probably can’t. To me, “I did not go into gross detail about the actual act” means “that he spoke in euphemisms and circumlocutions”. He also repeats later “I didn’t explain those details or use those terms”. And “I made sure [Paterno] knew it was sexual and that it was wrong, and there was no doubt about that” is only his own understanding of what Paterno understood, about which, as noted, people are very frequently wrong. But since you quoted this language, you obviously don’t see it that way. > [@](#): > > Dr. Dranov testified on the [seventh day](http://wearecentralpa.com/images/Multi_Media/wearecentralpa/nxd_media/dox/pdf/2012_09/JuryTrialDay7.pdf) of the trial. > > Q. [by Sandusky lawyer Rominger] Did [McQueary] describe seeing any particular sex act? > A. No, he did not. He implied that it had gone on with what he talked about with sexual sounds. But did he give me any kind of graphic description? No. > Day 7 transcript p. 13, lines 16-21. > > Q. [by Sandusky lawyer Rominger] But, doctor, you asked him three times if he saw a sexual act? > … (omitted objections to this question) > A. In the conversation, yes. I didn’t use the term did you see a sexual act. I kept saying what did you see and each time he would come back to the sounds. I kept saying but what did you see. And it just seemed to make him more upset. So I backed off that. > Day 7 transcript page 15 line 24 to page 16 line 11. > > Now, I’ll agree that Dr. Dranov’s testimony doesn’t paint a clear picture of what Sandusky did, but it makes McQueary appear shell-shocked. Sandusky’s lawyers called Dr. Dranov as a witness. If you want some idea about how badly he hurt their defense, you should consider that in [closing arguments](http://wearecentralpa.com/images/Multi_Media/wearecentralpa/nxd_media/dox/pdf/2012_09/JuryTrialDay8.pdf), they only point they made from Dr. Dranov’s testimony was that he was a mandatory reporter. > > If you can show my how Dr. Dranov’s trial testimony casts doubt on McQueary’s ability to convey what he saw, I’d be happy to read it. But, I bet the best you can do is to show that McQueary was too distraught to provide detail. This certainly helped damn Sandusky and really doesn’t do much to exonerate Paterno. See Dranov’s description of how McQueary described the incident to him, bottom of page 11 and top of page 12 of the transcript. (I’m not going to type it all up and it won’t copy, in my browser at least.) Do you think that Dranov’s understanding of what McQueary told him is consistent with how McQueary is currently describing what he saw? ---
**Author:** ![Robb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a183cd/32.png) [@Robb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robb)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6187 "2012-12-28T15:43:44Z")
**F-P** , you said that McQueary conceded that he spoke in euphemisms and circumlocutions, but it now appears you mean that you’ve interpreted his testimony to include those concessions? Do you think McQueary needed to use profanity to explain what he saw? (hint: McQueary was able to testify without profanity.) Did you see where McQueary testified about a statement that Paterno gave that showed Paterno understood what McQueary told him? I would say that if McQueary told Paterno about the event and if Paterno later recounted it to someone else, that McQueary adequately conveyed his information to Paterno. I think that Dr. Dranov understands and understood that McQueary witnessed Sandusky sexually abuse an obvious child. He testified about McQueary’s emotional state. Look at the testimony where Dranov kept asking McQueary what he saw, but McQueary just goes back to the sounds of what he heard. Consider that this was Sandusky’s lawyer eliciting these answers jurors tend to assume that the witnesses a side calls will support that side’s case. Here, Sandusky’s lawyer let Dranov paint McQueary as a victim trying to process his own trauma. So, I don’t know when Dranov learned that those sounds were from what McQueary perceived as Sandusky anally raping a boy, but I have no doubt found McQueary’s reaction consistent with what McQueary saw. Again, one of the ways you can tell that Dranov doesn’t help Sandusky (or Paterno) is that Sandusky’s lawyers hardly mentioned his testimony during their closing arguments. I hope Sandusky’s lawyers planned to obtain helpful testimony from Dranov, but it seems they failed. Instead, they called a doctor who knew McQueary for most of his life to paint a picture of McQueary as too distraught to act on his own. And those sounds. (Stephen King would emphasize those sounds if he wrote this story.) Do you think Dranov’s recollection of McQueary on the night of the event sheds light on the content of McQueary’s later conversation with Paterno? If so, how does it tells about the content? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6188 "2012-12-28T16:00:58Z")
> [@Robb](#): > > **F-P** , you said that McQueary conceded that he spoke in euphemisms and circumlocutions, but it now appears you mean that you’ve interpreted his testimony to include those concessions? Well yeah, I didn’t mean to say that McQueary used the actual words “euphemisms and circumlocutions” in describing what he told Paterno. Sorry if you had that impression. If you’d like, use substitute McQueary’s own words, that he “didn’t explain those details or use those terms” in my earlier wording. My point still stands. > [@](#): > > Do you think McQueary needed to use profanity to explain what he saw? (hint: McQueary was able to testify without profanity.) I’m not talking about “profanity”. But McQueary was definitely more graphic in court than he was to Dranov and Paterno. For example, he used the term “anal sex” in court, and he testified that he did not use that term with these men. > [@](#): > > Did you see where McQueary testified about a statement that Paterno gave that showed Paterno understood what McQueary told him? I would say that if McQueary told Paterno about the event and if Paterno later recounted it to someone else, that McQueary adequately conveyed his information to Paterno. I’m not sure what you’re referring to, but if it’s the language you already quoted about Paterno’s “testimony” then it’s an apparent reference to Paterno’s later testimony to the Grand Jury. In that testimony, Paterno indicated that he got the idea from McQueary that he was talking about something sexual, but not much more than that. > [@](#): > > I think that Dr. Dranov understands and understood that McQueary witnessed Sandusky sexually abuse an obvious child. He testified about McQueary’s emotional state. Look at the testimony where Dranov kept asking McQueary what he saw, but McQueary just goes back to the sounds of what he heard. Consider that this was Sandusky’s lawyer eliciting these answers jurors tend to assume that the witnesses a side calls will support that side’s case. Here, Sandusky’s lawyer let Dranov paint McQueary as a victim trying to process his own trauma. So, I don’t know when Dranov learned that those sounds were from what McQueary perceived as Sandusky anally raping a boy, but I have no doubt found McQueary’s reaction consistent with what McQueary saw. But the point is that Dranov’s understanding of what McQueary saw differed significantly from McQueary’s own description. So obviously McQueary was not communicating accurately at that stage. ---
**Author:** ![Robb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a183cd/32.png) [@Robb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robb)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6189 "2012-12-28T16:31:50Z")
**F-P** , could you provide a link to Paterno’s grand jury testimony? McQueary testified under oath that he explained to Paterno that Sandusky was doing something sexual with a child and that Paterno understood and later repeated what McQueary told him. You seem to hand wave that away by saying that people don’t often convey what they mean to convey. I’ve seen summaries of the grand jury testimony, I think it would help to read the transcript. Dranov’s testimony shows he knew McQueary witnessed something sexual and that the experience left him distraught. How do you know that McQueary was unable to collect his wits well enough to convey to Paterno that he witnessed Sandusky engaging in a sex act with a child? What are you using to bridge this gap? (Again, McQueary was prepared to swear that Paterno later repeated what he learned from McQueary in a way that satisfied McQueary that the message was conveyed.) You make these assertions with the kind of confidence that tells me the source materials support you. Could you point me to these source materials? ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6190 "2012-12-28T16:48:01Z")
> [@Robb](#): > > **F-P** , could you provide a link to Paterno’s grand jury testimony? McQueary testified under oath that he explained to Paterno that Sandusky was doing something sexual with a child and that Paterno understood and later repeated what McQueary told him. You seem to hand wave that away by saying that people don’t often convey what they mean to convey. I’ve seen summaries of the grand jury testimony, I think it would help to read the transcript. Here’s [one link](http://network.yardbarker.com/college_football/article_external/transcript_joe_paterno_grand_jury_testimony/8911426). And the relevant testimony: > [@](#): > > Well, I don’t know what you would call it. Obviously, he was doing something with the youngster. > > It was a sexual nature. I’m not sure exactly what it was. > > I didn’t push Mike to describe exactly what it was because he was very upset. Obviously, I was in a little bit of a dilemma since Mr. Sandusky was not working for me anymore. > > So I told — I didn’t go any further than that except I knew Mike was upset and I knew some kind of inappropriate action was being taken by Jerry Sandusky with a youngster. > [@](#): > > Dranov’s testimony shows he knew McQueary witnessed something sexual and that the experience left him distraught. How do you know that McQueary was unable to collect his wits well enough to convey to Paterno that he witnessed Sandusky engaging in a sex act with a child? What are you using to bridge this gap? As previous, if a guy is describing a situation in which he saw a man holding a kid up against a wall, and the guy he’s speaking to walks away with the understanding that he saw the kid poke his head from around the shower stall and only saw the man when he later emerged, then I would say this guy is failing to communicate accurately. Which lends support - not proof, but support - to the notion that he might have similarly failed to communicate accurately with other people to whom he described that same incident, and with regards to whom he had the same communication issues. We seem to be going round and round on this. I don’t anticipate doing this forever - if you disagree that’s fine. ---
**Author:** ![Robb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a183cd/32.png) [@Robb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robb)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6191 "2012-12-28T17:36:22Z")
I think we’re looking at the same evidence. I see that Paterno understood that McQueary witnessed Sandusky doing something sexual and inappropriate with a young boy. I see that that is what McQueary thought he conveyed to Paterno. I see that Paterno didn’t get the play-by-play description that McQueary provided at trial. I think you are interpreting things backward - McQueary composed himself well enough to convey his message to Paterno, even though he lacked the composure to adequately convey it to Dranov. I get the impression that you see things in McQueary’s and Dranov’s testimony that help Paterno, but I don’t know what you think that is. You’ve helped me understand your position, and I thank you for that. Now that we’ve read the same material, I can see that your conclusions aren’t supported by the evidence. I doubt you will change your conclusions, so it’s probably time to stop the merry-go-round. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6192 "2012-12-28T18:38:17Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > No, I meant the word “think” applied to yourself. But I can see where that association might be difficult. Oh, I know what you were _trying_ to say, but I took the liberty of getting to the heart of the matter in the interests of expediency. Basically, you can’t score points by trying to condescend to me, and the more you try to explain that you were trying to condescend to me, the more amusing your futility gets. Many people clue into this much sooner than you have. > [@](#): > > None of this changes the fact that you’re refuting something that is only your own suggestion and then preening as if you’ve done something. I got you labouring on an obvious misinterpretation, for what that’s worth. > [@](#): > > These repeated declarations of how resoundingly you’re winning have a familiar ring to them. Seems like I’ve seen that gambit before, somewhere. Well, at least I shan’t be quoting fast-food jingles. In any case, if McQueary found himself unable to bring himself to clearly describe what he saw (and what he saw was obviously deeply disturbing to him), the reasonable thing to do would be to tell him to talk to the police, who have experienced officers who can deal with and draw out reluctant witnesses. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6193 "2012-12-28T18:44:44Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Basically, you can’t score points by trying to condescend to me Still at it … ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6194 "2012-12-28T18:49:53Z")
Well, I said I’d obey the will of almighty Robb, and since he’s given up on you, I may as well, too. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2012, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6195 "2012-12-28T18:52:22Z")
OK, this time I see that I might have been a bit too cryptic. I didn’t mean that I was still at it. I meant that you were still posturing. ---
**Author:** ![HighSky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c2a13f/32.png) [@HighSky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HighSky)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2013, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6196 "2013-01-02T02:31:56Z")
[And the shit just keeps hitting the fan.](http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8800479/pennsylvania-gov-tom-corbett-sue-ncaa-penn-state-sanctions) Honestly, i’m little torn on this because i can see the state’s potential argument, but on the other hand, why the fuck did you wait 7 months to start fighting this… ---
**Author:** ![Morgyn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/morgyn/32/3041_2.png) [@Morgyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgyn)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2013, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6197 "2013-01-02T02:41:09Z")
> [@HighSky](#): > > [And the shit just keeps hitting the fan.](http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8800479/pennsylvania-gov-tom-corbett-sue-ncaa-penn-state-sanctions) > > Honestly, i’m little torn on this because i can see the state’s potential argument, but on the other hand, why the fuck did you wait 7 months to start fighting this… Too busy election-rigging and gerrymandering, probably. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2013, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6198 "2013-01-02T03:47:19Z")
> [@HighSky](#): > > [And the shit just keeps hitting the fan.](http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8800479/pennsylvania-gov-tom-corbett-sue-ncaa-penn-state-sanctions) Sandusky Claus has a big sack of goodies this season… I wonder if he brought **SA** a new paper towel tube? ---
**Author:** ![MsRobyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@MsRobyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsRobyn)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2013, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6199 "2013-01-02T23:55:18Z")
I heard about this gem on this morning’s news. Simply put, Corbett is deathly afraid. The new AG, who is a Democrat, has promised to investigate Corbett’s actions during his own investigation of Sandusky; this was, in fact, one of the things she ran on and probably one of the reasons she won. Some people (translation: me and some of my friends, but these friends are in a position to know something) think that Corbett may try to use pending litigation to keep AG Kane off his back for as long as he can. So the suit isn’t about righting a wrong or anything even remotely noble like that, but about protecting Corbett and his political career. The guy is a scumbag, pure and simple. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2013, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6200 "2013-01-03T00:30:51Z")
> [@HighSky](#): > > Honestly, i’m little torn on this because i can see the state’s potential argument, but on the other hand, why the fuck did you wait 7 months to start fighting this… More than that, he actually spoke in favor of just accepting the sanctions at the time. My guess is that at the height of the storm people just wanted to put it behind them. Now that it’s died down a bit, and the sanctions are actually hitting, he’s reassessing. I think there’s also an issue of the penalty money going out of state, which has irked some PA people. ---
**Author:** ![NoLittlePlans](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/8797f3/32.png) [@NoLittlePlans](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NoLittlePlans)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2013, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6201 "2013-01-05T21:56:18Z")
You heard it here first: - Dr. Rodney Erickson abt to be prematurely relieved of his duties at Penn State. - Dr. Dave Joyner also to be prematurely relieved of his duties at Penn State as well. - Lawsuit No. 3 about to be filed against the NCAA. - Paterno family putting finishing touches in discrediting leaps of logic used in Freeh report’s conclusions. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 6, 2013, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/6202 "2013-01-06T00:39:22Z")
Only in your perv dreams, **Starvy**. And those of your silly little sock there. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167.md?page=309) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167.md?page=311)