# 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:** 55
**Author:** ![Ian\_D.Bergkamp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Ian\_D.Bergkamp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ian_D.Bergkamp)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1081 "2011-11-14T14:11:48Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > And this is what I’ve been getting at with Paterno. He has testified that he was told Sandusky was spotted engaging in fondling or some type of sexual behavior involving a young boy. Assuming this is correct, Paterno, knowing as I do that what may appear to be fondling to one person who gets only a brief snapshot of the activity and not understanding the dynamics between the adult and child involved, may very well have felt that what McQueary saw might indeed have been nothing more than horseplay of some sort. So, not knowing enough about what really happened but knowing things might not have been what they seemed but moved by McQueary’s passion, felt there was enough ground to report the matter to his superiors to get to the bottom of. Then, upon hearing nothing more of it, he simply decided that whatever behavior was going on could not have been determined to have been inappropriate amd thus no reason for furthet action. Except, as has ben noted previously, PSU determined that Sandusky _ **had** _ done something inappropriate, leading to his loss of locker room key privileges and a report to the Second Mile. Do you think it’s reasonable to assume Paterno didn’t know about those actions? Also–and I continually stress this because some people don’t seem to appreciate this fact–the incident McQueary saw took place at approximately 9:30 pm on a Friday night before Spring Break. What possible reason could Sandusky have for even being with a young boy in the showers at that time? Claiming that there could have been just some “innocent horseplay” going on simply strains credulity beyond the breaking point. Let’s assume for the sake of argument that Paterno knew about the 1998 incident. Does that change your reaction to the steps Paterno took in response to McQueary’s story? ---
**Author:** ![not\_what\_you\_d\_expect](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/not_what_you_d_expect/32/3246_2.png) [@not\_what\_you\_d\_expect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/not_what_you_d_expect)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1082 "2011-11-14T14:13:54Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Except for the fact, **Harborwolf** , that some apparent lighter forms of abuse can be innocent. Putting a hand on a child, for instance, might be of innocent or sexual intent. A little wrestling or tickling or teasing might just be innocent horseplay with a kid you like, or it may be sexual in nature and a prelude to more serious things later on. Until something obviously crosses the line so that sexual intent becomes clear it can be difficult to determine whether these lighter forms of play are inappropriate. Even some things that can be erroneously interpreted as fondling can be innocent in fact. I know all this not only from my own locker room experiences when I was in school but also in interactions with the playmates of my daughter and two neices when they were growing up. They climbef all over me and we wrestled and manhandled each other mercilously, and while hands landed on legs or butts from time to time during this horeseplay, not a glimmer of sexual interest ever occurred. But you weren’t naked in the shower when they were climbing all over you. Right? I saw this sort of playing around too. In my living room. Lots of people laughing at the antics. Everyone all fully clothed and stuff. ---
**Author:** ![MsRobyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@MsRobyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MsRobyn)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1083 "2011-11-14T14:20:03Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Can you cite another honest services theft case on similar facts? Obviously there won’t likely be another pedophile rapist coach case, but generally where a cause of action was sustained based on a fiduciary duty not to corrupt or sully a reputation for veracity and uprightness, where the underlying conduct has such a weak nexus to finance? Also, AIUI, theft of honest services is difficult to prove, plus PA tends to use it when there is some obvious malfeasance that isn’t covered under some other law. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1084 "2011-11-14T14:51:39Z")
> [@not\_what\_you\_d\_expect](#): > > But you weren’t naked in the shower when they were climbing all over you. Right? Joey, have you ever been in a… in a Turkish prison? ---
**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:** [November 14, 2011, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1085 "2011-11-14T15:46:23Z")
Not much going by in this thread over the weekend - same old same old, for the most part. I do have a couple of additional observations, though. 1. At the risk of further inflaming the self-righteous pricks who infest this thread, it occurred to me that the evidence is not completely clear that there even was an actual rape in the 2002 incident, regardless of what McQueary may have told the others. Because if you look at the description of the 1998 incident in the indictment (Victim 6) it would appear that Sandusky had that kid in virtually the same position as the 2002 incident (Victim 2). In the shower, “holding the boy’s back against his chest”. And the investigation uncovered another kid (BK) who was subjected to nearly identical shower treatment, and the same was apparently also true of Victim 3 (& Victim 5). And yet, despite an investigation by the police - the real police, whose investigative skills are so highly esteemed by Paterno-bashers - and DA, the conclusion was that it was inappropriate behavior by Sandusky - “boundary issues” in the words of the police investigator - and there was no allegation of rape. So now the question is what happened in 2002? The entire allegation of rape rests solely on the observation of McQueary, who was probably at some distance, with the shower water running, and was apparently considerably agitated at the time. I would venture that he probably only got a short look at the scene, and that he did not stick around to pin down the details, based on his reaction. How likely is a person in that situation and frame of mind to be able to distinguish between a rape and the type of behavior that Sandusky apparently engaged in in 1998 & with the other victims? I am no anal sex expert, and I’m aware that some of our resident Moral Consciences have declared that there can be no mistaking anal sex, but given that many of these same people have made other declarations with equal conviction on matters about which they clearly know nothing, my inclination is not to put a whole lot of weight on that. [The only victim in the GJ report that Sandusky attempted to anally rape was Victim 4, and he had very limited success.] If the case against Sandusky goes to trial I would imagine that McQueary will be cross examined on these points, so this would become a bit more clear. OTOH, the actual victim has not come forward (at least at the time of the GJ report) and if in fact there was no rape, it lessens the likelihood that he will, since the guy might not recognize himself as the victim in that incident. [Note to nitwits: this is NOT to say that the alternative activities by Sandusky are acceptable etc. etc. etc., but it does have a bearing on what corrective measures might be required and whether the fact that he was not jailed was indication of a cover-up, as discussed previously.] 1. There is room for speculation about the mindsets of (some of) the Righteous Avengers in this thread and elsewhere. Truth is that I thought of this last week, but wasn’t going to comment on it, because it’s speculative and speculation about the motives of one’s opponents is frequently unproductive. Also, it’s undoubtedly only true of a minority of these people. However, I see that over the weekend Huerta and some of his esteemed colleagues have opened a discussion of the motivations and mindsets of their own opponents, and I figure in that case it might be a more complete picture if we noted that there’s also another side to the coin. It’s a fairly well known fact that many of the most violent homophobes tend to show sexual arousal when exposed to homoerotic imagery, and IIRC homophobia is actually correlated with a tendency to homosexual arousal. Not what you’d expect without thinking about it, but apparently for some people homophobia is a way of suppressing or otherwise distancing themselves from their own homosexual urges, which they despise in themselves. One would have to think that to the extent that this dynamic exists in (some) homosexuals, it would be even more so in the case of pedophiles, since societal opprobrium for pedophilia is far stronger than that which exists for homosexuality. So it would be logical to assume that the howling mob contains a higher percentage of repressed pedophiles than the general population, let alone those who are comfortable enough to take an unpopular position on these issues. As a possible case in point, I remember one incident from about 15 years ago. It was during one of these periodic pedophile controversies that come up every few years. In this case, a friend of mine told me that he had known the Alleged Perpetrator (AP) a few years back, during the time of a previous pedophile controversy. And at the time, the AP was one of the strongest string-him-up-first-ask-questions-later vigilantes out there. [OTOH, I should note that I myself was unsure whether the AP was in fact guilty in that incident. The allegations arose in the course of a very bitter divorce, and seemed to rest largely on some dubious - and possibly conflicting - doctors’ determinations. So it’s either an example of the above, or it’s just an ironic incident, one way or the other.] [Disclaimer for Dummies: as above, this would apply to a minority of these people. Another minority are thoughtful people who simply made a different judgment than me and those who agree with me. And the vast majority are simply a simpleminded mob of fellow travelers with inflamed imaginations.] ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1086 "2011-11-14T16:04:12Z")
The plot thickens. Just in: [**President of Charity Linked to Penn State Sex Abuse Scandal Resigns**](http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/11/14/president-charity-linked-to-penn-state-sex-abuse-scandal-resigns/) > [@](#): > > \*\*The president of a charity linked to the Penn State child sex-abuse scandal said he has resigned. > > The Board of Directors of The Second Mile said it accepted Dr. Jack Raykovitz’s resignation Sunday. > > Raykovitz’s resignation comes after the charity’s founder, Jerry Sandusky, was charged with sexually abusing eight boys over a 15-year period. Sandusky worked as a defensive coordinator for Penn State’s football team under legendary head coach Joe Paterno, who was ousted from his position last week. > > The organization said in a statement that Raykovitz had been CEO of the charity for 28 years…\*\* ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1087 "2011-11-14T16:22:32Z")
I vote that **Fotheringay-Phipps** should be Sandusky’s defense attorney. Clearly no one could possibly disagree with arguments such as “The witness was probably too far away and the light was bad and he had something in his eye and it was a weather balloon” or “He wasn’t holding the naked ten-year-old boy he was showering with alone in the exact right position to anally rape him” or “You’re all sheeple and probably pedophiles too”. Sandusky is sure to be exonerated. ---
**Author:** ![Carmady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f04885/32.png) [@Carmady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Carmady)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1088 "2011-11-14T16:24:24Z")
From what I can tell, the ones alleging an organized cover up are Paterno’s defenders. There would have had to have been a concerted effort to keep information away from Paterno for him not to have known about Sandusky. During the police investigation in 1998 Sandusky admitted to hugging a child in the shower and said “I understand. I was wrong. I wish I could get forgiveness. I know I won’t get it from you. I wish I were dead.” The police, the school, and the DA were all involved… was Paterno kept unaware? In 2002, Paterno was told at a minimum that Sandusky had fondled a naked child in the locker room shower at night (just playing!), and eventually Sandusky had his keys taken away and was reported to Second Mile. I don’t see how Paterno could have forgotten what he was told, but was he unaware of the actions against Sandusky? Even after the incident, Paterno continued to encourage his players to help attract children to the Second Mile program Sandusky was using to find his victims. Paterno continued to allow Sandusky to bring children to the Penn State campus. How can that be? Was Paterno somehow kept away from all knowledge that would indicate these (purely voluntary) actions on his part were a horrible idea? I don’t think so, but if so, it could only be the result of a conspiracy. And I’ll say again: Paterno’s actions were entirely voluntary. There was no legal obligation to continue helping to attract children to Sandusky’s program. None whatsoever. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1089 "2011-11-14T17:03:25Z")
I always wondered what Phipps fap fap fap would look like…now I know. ---
**Author:** ![crypto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b3f665/32.png) [@crypto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crypto)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1090 "2011-11-14T17:09:19Z")
**Big 10 is apparently** \*\* removing Joe Paterno’s name \*\ ***from their conference trophy**. read [**HERE**](http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7233492/big-ten-removes-joe-paterno-name-championship-trophy) ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1091 "2011-11-14T17:33:33Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > 1. There is room for speculation about the mindsets of (some of) the Righteous Avengers in this thread and elsewhere. Truth is that I thought of this last week, but wasn’t going to comment on it, because it’s speculative and speculation about the motives of one’s opponents is frequently unproductive. Also, it’s undoubtedly only true of a minority of these people. However, I see that over the weekend Huerta and some of his esteemed colleagues have opened a discussion of the motivations and mindsets of their own opponents, and I figure in that case it might be a more complete picture if we noted that there’s also another side to the coin. Ah yes, the old “I’m not projecting, you’re projecting.” Except it doesn’t work too well here. No one is obsessing over demonizing Sandusky or child sex abuse (we’ve in fact been criticized, wrongly I think, for “overlooking” that he’s the main culprit, when I think everyone (mostly) is just taking it for granted that the underlying conduct is pretty self-evidently indefensible). The real outrage here has been over inaction and possible coverup by the PSU authorities, which has nothing to do, per se, with sex. If in the course of it we scratched our head at the vehemence of those here who wanted to pretend that there was a legal or ethical distinction of meaningful dimension between various forms of illegall sexual contact with a juvenile, I think we can be forgiven, because there exists no sound logical basis for such illusory distinctions. On the honest services point, N.B. that I brought it up in the first instance as a very clear rationale for the appropriateness of denying these jackasses any pension payments. I wasn’t (at first) advocating that PSU would or should press such claims. But have a gander at, say, _United States of America v. Gray_ et al., 96 F.3d 769 (5th Cir. 1996) (involving basketball coaches convicted in part under an honest services theory for participating in a conspiracy to commit, and covering up, recruiting and related violations): > [@](#): > > In the instant case, the information withheld, i.e. the “coaches’ cheating scheme”, was material because Baylor did not get the quality student it expected. Further, appellants failure to disclose the scheme to Baylor was material as Baylor might have been able to recruit other qualified, eligible students to play basketball. Instead, once the scheme was suspected, Baylor was forced to institute a costly investigation and the players under suspicion were withheld from competition. It is quite reasonable to believe that Baylor would have changed its business conduct had it known of the “cheating scheme.” Accordingly, appellants challenge lacks merit. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1092 "2011-11-14T17:52:25Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > **Jimmy Chitwood** , it’s one thing to debate whether Paterno was correct in following the law and reporting the crime to the school’s administration or whether he should have called the minicipal police. Yes, it is one thing. It is the one thing that I’m doing right now. > [@](#): > > It’s another entirely to go batshit crazy and assume as fact that Paterno knew exactly what happened, didn’t care, engaged in or went along with a coverup, and is just as vile and guilty of child rape as Sandusky is, which is what tbe general tone of this thread has been. OK, cool. That isn’t what I did, and if I asked you for a quote of anyone saying those particular things you wouldn’t have one, which is why you said “general tone.” But I don’t actually care. I asked if you could please, since you’re in here to tell us all we’re rushing to judgment and Paterno deserves the benefit of the doubt, give me one example of a plausible narrative that explains what Paterno did, and why it was acceptable. It’s really simple. Knowing what we do know, is there a believable scenario in which Paterno acted responsibly? ---
**Author:** ![filmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@filmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filmore)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1093 "2011-11-14T17:55:50Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > And yet, despite an investigation by the police - the real police, whose investigative skills are so highly esteemed by Paterno-bashers - and DA, the conclusion was that it was inappropriate behavior by Sandusky - “boundary issues” in the words of the police investigator - and there was no allegation of rape. > > So now the question is what happened in 2002? The entire allegation of rape rests solely on the observation of McQueary, who was probably at some distance, with the shower water running, and was apparently considerably agitated at the time. I would venture that he probably only got a short look at the scene, and that he did not stick around to pin down the details, based on his reaction. How likely is a person in that situation and frame of mind to be able to distinguish between a rape and the type of behavior that Sandusky apparently engaged in in 1998 & with the other victims? Unless the kid is choking and Sandusky is administring the heimlich, there is no non-sexual reason for them to be in that position. Regardless of whether his penis was in the boy’s anus or not, he was engaged in sexual activity. He was using that situation for sexual gratification. And I wouldn’t hold the police in this case with such high regard. They likely had their own personal bias. The university is a huge part of the economy there. Probably they were fans of the team. I doubt there was a conspiracy to for them to dismiss the case, but likely they might want the situation to go away for their own reasons. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1094 "2011-11-14T18:02:41Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > give me one example of a plausible narrative that explains what Paterno did, and why it was acceptable. It’s really simple. Knowing what we do know, is there a believable scenario in which Paterno acted responsibly? Oh, I wish you hadn’t done that. I know why you did, but I wish you hadn’t. They’ll drag you back to the fever swamps of “horseplay” and completely not-in-the-record-or-remotely-supported-by-the-record (in fact, contrafactual) speculation about how it’s almost certain that Paterno “wasn’t sure” what McQueary had seen and reported. This despite his clear unqualified use of “fondling or sexual contact.” Which is criminal and reportable, full stop. Their logic [sic] seems to be that such doubt and unclarity (reflected nowhere in the sworn testimony or the indictment) **must have** existed in Paterno’s mind **solely based on the fact that he didn’t do more** – 'cause if he’d been clear, he’dve obviously done more! “But that’s question begging!!” you might ejaculate [heh]. Believe me, they don’t care. ---
**Author:** ![Hbns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hbns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hbns)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1095 "2011-11-14T18:07:50Z")
> [@Carmady](#): > > From what I can tell, the ones alleging an organized cover up are Paterno’s defenders. > > There would have had to have been a concerted effort to keep information away from Paterno for him not to have known about Sandusky. I don’t know. Knowing is one thing. Believing is a whole other thing. People don’t want to believe bad things about people they know and think are good people. I have no doubt that Paterno and many others knew that Sandusky had done some really creepy things. I just think they were in denial that he was a serial abuser and a monster. Does that absolve them? No. Just more evidence that mandatory reporting regulations should at least be instituted at an NCAA level if not at the state or federal level. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1096 "2011-11-14T18:10:14Z")
I mean, we’re not going to get into a worse swamp than what actually happened. I’m asking specifically because they’re keeping up this nonsense about “lack of clarity.” McQueary is visibly upset and says he has to tell Paterno about something. We know what he actually wanted to tell Paterno about. We know what he told the other people he talked to about it. I would like to hear a specific account of what McQueary could have said and what Paterno could have done that would explain no further action for 9 years, including, by definition, never even asking about it again. ---
**Author:** ![Huerta88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/82dd89/32.png) [@Huerta88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Huerta88)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1097 "2011-11-14T18:21:33Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > I would like to hear a specific account of what McQueary could have said and what Paterno could have done All right man, not my place to tell you what to do. But that’s a clear invitation to them to invent facts out of thin air, when **even if** such fictitious hypothetical facts (and they’re more than happy to provide any number of 100% made up factors such as it was dark, McQ. was unclear exactly where Sandusky’s penis was, etc.) can **never** counteract the fact that “sexual contact with a minor” was known by Paterno to have taken place, hence triggering (irrevocably – additional facts can’t unring the bell) his legal and ethical duties. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1098 "2011-11-14T18:29:28Z")
Well, that’s the other thing about this not being a courtroom. It’s not like I win because they don’t have a case, so I’m stuck with trying to point out to them where they don’t have a case. I’m sure that **Starving Artist** will be back in just a moment and he’ll consider what I’ve asked him and in trying to formulate a response he’ll realize that it doesn’t actually matter how McQueary told him, only that he did, and then he’ll say that he agrees with us now about Paterno’s moral responsibility. I’ve really got a good feeling about this one. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1099 "2011-11-14T18:33:06Z")
> [@Naxos](#): > > Do you mean you may have done the same thing as McQueary did and called your father or your lawyer to advise you as to what to do in order to protect your PSU paycheck? I’d like to think I would do more, as my moral compass tells me that reporting to the police, intervening, etc. is the right thing to do, but I have no idea I I would respond in reality. It’s not a lack of resolve that gives me pause, but rather the astounding number of otherwise moral people who fail to act in those situations. For anyone to say with certainty how they would respond is to not appreciate what the data tells us. > [@Naxos](#): > > There’s a reason this kind of child abuse keeps on happening. Too many adults are willing to tolerate it for their personal gain and benefit. There is zero evidence that anyone in this case tolerated sexual abuse for personal gain or benefit. There is also no evidence that such motives are common for those who find themselves in similar positions. > [@Naxos](#): > > And it will keep on happening. > > That’s sad. It is sad. It’s tragic. But if you really want to prevent it from happening, the focus should be on why PEOPLE fail in these instances, not why Joe Paterno did. I get that the two are not mutually exclusive, but with finite resources and time, we should really try to focus our energy towards more utile solutions. > [@DragonAsh](#): > > Starving Artist and brickbacon are rotting, stinking, shit-eating wastes of space. I’m surprised they are able to use a keyboard, because it’s pretty clear that the best part of them dribbled down their momma’s leg after the goat was finished. > > That is all. Once again, stay classy DrangonAsh. LOL, and you’re the “good guy”, right? > [@Zakalwe](#): > > Hmmm…not sure I can agree with this part of what you said. The problem with SA’s “JoePa didn’t know it was ‘anal rape’” defense is that it de facto establishes grades or categories of abuse - something we should not allow. There are “grades” of abuse. The law recognizes it as do most objective people. Should the lowest standard of abuse be sufficient to involve the police? More than likely, but to act as though recognizing different “grades” is problematic is pretty naive. > [@Carmady](#): > > From what I can tell, the ones alleging an organized cover up are Paterno’s defenders. Really? > [@not\_what\_you\_d\_expect](#): > > I agree. And I think we need to remember that the case in 1998 _was_ reported to the police, if I’m remembering correctly. From the little we know, even _they_ swept this under the rug. > > So, the cover-up goes much deeper than just Penn State. > [@Huerta88](#): > > The real outrage here has been over inaction and possible coverup by the PSU authorities, which has nothing to do, per se, with sex. That’s just on this page. Feel free to comb through the other 20 or so to find the others. > [@Huerta88](#): > > On the honest services point, N.B. that I brought it up in the first instance as a very clear rationale for the appropriateness of denying these jackasses any pension payments. I wasn’t (at first) advocating that PSU would or should press such claims. But have a gander at, say, _United States of America v. Gray_ et al., 96 F.3d 769 (5th Cir. 1996) (involving basketball coaches convicted in part under an honest services theory for participating in a conspiracy to commit, and covering up, recruiting and related violations): The problem with your cite is that the crime committed was sufficiently related to the job they were tasked to do. As a basketball coach, they were tasked with recruiting, and expected to go about those duties with honesty. The actions taken by nearly all of the people in involved in this matter have nothing to do with the job they were tasked to do, and thus, theft of services would likely not apply. > [@](#): > > Analogizing to the public official context, the 2nd, 5th and 6th Circuits have held that the defendant must have owed a fiduciary duty or similar duty of loyalty to the victim for the conduct to fall within the statute’s reach.21 **Such a duty is frequently found in the context of the employer-employee relationship**. > > The federal courts also have held that the concept of fraud imposes other limitations on the reach of Section 1346 to eliminate the risk that immaterial ethical lapses (including the extreme example of the afternoon at the ballgame) might be prosecuted. **A number of courts have explained that a private employee’s breach of loyalty, by itself, is insufficient to constitute honest-services fraud as the breach of loyalty must have actually mattered and conflicted with the purpose of the parties’ relationship**.23 Could they bring those charges? Maybe, some courts have ruled the other way, but it seems extremely unlikely to me. Either way, I would never get behind such a measure as a matter or practice because it will likely lead to abuses (as it seems to have in the past). Furthermore, such broad application of the law has been struck down pretty recently. > [@](#): > > In December 2009, the Associated Press reported that the Justices of the Court “seemed to be in broad agreement that the law is vague and has been used to make a crime out of mistakes, minor transgressions and mere ethical violations.”[40] Both liberal and conservative justices have criticized the law.[40] Richard Thornburgh, a former United States Attorney General, has remarked that he expects the court to issue “something fairly sweeping…without doing violence to proper law enforcement.”[23] > > On June 24, 2010, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in the cases of Black and Skilling that the law against “honest services” fraud is too vague to constitute a crime unless a bribe or kickback was involved.[41] Feel free to chime in as to WHY you think it will apply. Also, let me know if you want to take my bet. ---
**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:** [November 14, 2011, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167/1100 "2011-11-14T18:36:00Z")
> [@Huerta88](#): > > Ah yes, the old “I’m not projecting, you’re projecting.” Except it doesn’t work too well here. Your post misses the point. The issue is not “projecting”. Rather it’s an internal tension and self-loathing. The mind compensates by overreacting in the opposite direction in an attempt to deny to itself that the underlying feelings are there. As previous, I am not accusing any particular individual, and it’s probably not the case for most. I will note though, that one result of this overreaction would be an inability to see any “legal or ethical distinction of meaningful dimension between various forms of illegal sexual contact with a juvenile”. Although FWIW, I don’t believe that even you guys take this seriously. While no one would be happy to find that their kid was fondled sexually by some pervert, to put it mildly, I think even you would much prefer that over finding that your kid had been anally raped. So I think there are differences between various degrees of “bad”. > [@filmore](#): > > Unless the kid is choking and Sandusky is administring the heimlich, there is no non-sexual reason for them to be in that position. Regardless of whether his penis was in the boy’s anus or not, he was engaged in sexual activity. He was using that situation for sexual gratification. Of course. No one is disputing this. > [@](#): > > And I wouldn’t hold the police in this case with such high regard. They likely had their own personal bias. The university is a huge part of the economy there. Probably they were fans of the team. I doubt there was a conspiracy to for them to dismiss the case, but likely they might want the situation to go away for their own reasons. Very possible. I don’t hold the police in such high regard in general, and it’s possible that they got it wrong. (Although FWIW, DA Gricar was said to be a guy who was not subject to the influence of PSU - or anyone else.) I did note though that the whole brouhaha here is that the police were not called, so turning around and saying that the police also covered up seems a bit inconsistent. Maybe the mandatory reporting rules should require all cases to be reported to the SDMB. Apparently that’s where the real experts are. Incorruptible, too. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167.md?page=54) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-time-to-officially-pit-joe-paterno-and-the-penn-state-football-program/602167.md?page=56)