It struck me as funny that you asked for a link to the indictment, when it has been linked to several times in this thread, including 2 posts above the one in which you asked for a link. But, yes, I do think it’s kind of dim to keep arguing when you haven’t bothered to fully inform yourself, especially when people kept asking you, “Did you even read the indictment?”
Yep, just as I suspected, another child molestation enabler. Not someone with any legitimate confusion, just a garden-variety apologist for grown men doing nothing when presented with a report of child sexual abuse.
He reported it to his supervisor as required by law. I understand (from the information upthread) is that the purpose of the law IS to filter the information up the chain so that when the police are contacted, they only get one report instead of ten.
But, personally, why would you level such an accusation against me? We are posters on an internet board. We don’t know each other. Why would you believe that I would support child molestation? I have a daughter of my own and if something happened to her, I would hope that posters here would chip in to bail me out of jail when I responded.
What I don’t support, however, is a witch hunt based on unknown statements. Things that 30 years ago wouldn’t have batted an eye are now subject to police investigation. I would, like I believe Paterno did, be cautious before throwing an old friend under the bus over something ambiguous.
If this went down how you all think it did, why aren’t you screaming for McQueary’s head? He was the eyewitness and if he saw a boy being raped, he could have stopped it while it was happening. I guess a 28 year old athlete was scared of a fat 60 year old man?
My point is that we don’t know how any of us would react in Paterno’s situation. He was hearing one story, and he did his duty by reporting it to his supervisor. He is not the CLEO of Penn State. It is up to others to determine the route to take.
nm - thread has moved on.
One of the things I find particularly galling about the whole situation is that, according to the indictment, McQueary told Curley and Schultz that “he had witnessed what he believed to be Sandusky having anal sex with a boy in the Lasch Building showers” (p. 7). The PSU response was that “Sandusky’s keys to the locker room were taken away and that the incident had been reported to The Second Mile” (p. 7).
Seriously, that’s their response to the allegation? They obviously concluded that Sandusky had done something inappropriate, as they acted on the information. But to simply take away his keys to the locker room? And to inform the Second Mile and not the police? For Christ’s sake, this was an apparent 10-year old boy with Sandusky at 9:30 pm on a Friday night before Spring Break, when presumably the building was virtually deserted. So how innocent could the encounter have been, even giving Sandusky the greatest benefit of the doubt ever afforded to anyone ever?
It seems like a binary situation–either Sandusky did nothing wrong, in which case he shouldn’t have lost his keys or been reported to the Second Mile, or he did something horrible and should have been turned over to the police. I don’t see how there can be any middle ground. And, yes, I find it hard to believe that Paterno remained completely out of the loop after McQueary came to him with his report.
There are no “unknown statements.” Paterno reported that he had been told of “sexual contact or fondling.” This is a known statement. It is completely consistent with McQueary swearing that he saw “anal intercourse.” That is also a known statement.
A police investigation is not a witch hunt. Police investigations based on incorrect or fabricated reports happen every day. Usually, the system works pretty well.
Stop pretending, and enabling those who have some messed up agenda for pretending, that there is any meaningful ambiguity as to what McQueary saw and reported and what Paterno reported and what they both testified, and/or between various forms of physical, sexual contact with a minor – meaningful in a legal or moral sense.
I don’t know why I bother – I’m pretty much certain you have it in you at this point to dredge up “but we don’t really know what happened because Paterno just said it was horseplay” once again.
Because you believe in the board motto, and are under the mistaken impression that the people you are arguing with are arguing in good faith.
Put some people on ignore, and go have a beer.
Welcome to the SDMB, Cardinal Law!
Cognitive dissonance? A fervent hope that children aren’t really raped? I don’t know why people keep taking up this whole position of denial and blowing smoke. They’re like global warming deniers. They have no curiosity about the actual data available, just a passionate purpose of pretending that nothing is really known.
Here’s the deal, as I’ve already pointed out several times. Paterno must have known that what he was reporting up the line was an alleged crime. He must have known no report was filed with the police, because no police ever showed up to investigate or question any of his staff. Something that hasn’t gotten a lot of discussion here is that Paterno was also on the board of directors of the Second Mile charity that Sandusky had created and was still using to meet and groom young boys (he met every single one of his victims through that program).
And yet he did nothing further.
I agree with you that McCreary is more culpable than Paterno. He actually witnessed the rape, and he must have known that the report was buried, because no police ever followed up with him.
And in subsequent years he and Paterno repeatedly saw Sandusky on campus accompanied by little boys.
And yet he did nothing further either.
Paterno had to go. He had already announced is retirement at the end of the reason, claiming that in part it was because he didn’t want the board to spend eny more time deciding about his future. Even he knew he had to go. He possibly didn’t understand how big this story would get – after all, it apparently wasn’t that big a deal to him at the time – but if he was being honest about wanting Penn State to resolve this as quickly as possible, he couldn’t really raise any legitimate objection to leaving immediately.
You know, I get that Joe Paterno is a legend, and has worked very hard for a very long time to cultivate a particular public reputation. In addition, he worked very hard to create a strong football program that also involved him actually making his players get the education they’re ostensibly in college to get.
And I understand that people might simply be fighting hard to not believe that a person (in most cases that they’ve never met) who they admire greatly would be capable of being such a moral coward. It’s got to be difficult to realize that good people (or supposedly good people) can do really really bad things.
So, I get that people are going to fight against that realization for a while.
But to minimize and deny Paterno’s own statements in order to weasel around and excuse his nine-year period of inaction on the 2002 incident alone, much less Paterno’s knowledge that Sandusky had an admitted history of this behavior and he (Paterno) still didn’t ensure something other than “we took away his keys”, is just a step too far.
I think it’s the result of an…
“who the #@ gives a @# about an at-risk-kid… there’s college football to be enjoyed and you’re killing our sports buzz with this crap”
… type of attitude.
Have you read the thread at all? Have you read all of the many posts by people who are disgusted and flabbergasted that McQueary did so little, both in those moments and in the nine years after? It’s not like we have to pick one person and one person only to be disgusted with here. We have many to choose, unfortunately.
Well, I really want to give at least SOME people SOME credit, and hope that there’s a somewhat reasonable explanation for the “Joe didn’t know!” phenomenon other than blind allegiance to sports.
Paterno: I know I have to do something — let’s see what is the minimum I have to do to cover my !@#
McQueary: I know I don’t have to do more — let’s just do the minimum required of me and hope I keep the PSU job. My dad also agrees with me.
But the police wasn’t contacted. That’s the whole fucking POINT. Minimize the number of phone calls - have the senior staff make the call - fine, that’s reasonable policy. But no one made the call and no one bothered to wonder why the fuck not. For nine goddamned years. THAT’S basically the source of the outrage - people knew, and people did nothing, and they are contemptible for it.
Per the testimony of Paterno and McQueary, it is NOT ambiguous that Sandusky did something of a sexual nature with a child of approximately 10 years of age. Even if Paterno only heard “fondling a 10 year old” - which is the mildest possible term that he himself has used - it STILL requires a police report and a real investigation. Even the most trivial of investigations would have revealed prior complaints regarding Sandusky’s behaviour, and would have been a basis to investigate more as now there’d be reason to believe that there were several more victims of inappropriate sexual behaviour by Sandusky.
Many people in this thread have expressed disgust at McQueary - no one is supporting him on this.
Personally, I might be able to understand him walking out of that locker room out of the sheer WTFedness of what he’d just seen (in his mind, Sandusky was a powerful man - I can kind of understand how, in that situation, that mental idea of this person he’s trusted might lead to a reaction other than trying to physically overpower him), but he failed at every step along the way after that - say, starting about 1 minute after leaving the locker room. He should have gone back in and helped the child. He should have called the police, not daddy. He should have talked to the police, not Paterno. He should have followed up with the police. So many opportunities to do the right thing, and he failed at each of them.
Why do you you want to give any people any credit?
We do know that Paterno knew of the activities of his assistant coach. It would be also reasonable to assume that that’s why he cut him off from getting his job after Paterno’s retirement, and that’s why Sandusky stopped purshing any other big-ten coaching jobs, when he already knew he would be a favorite for many of them.
There’s too much need for ego-gratification in this situation… at the expense of the welfare of young kids.
That’s so sad. — that’s not about you, by the way.
This borders on RO, but whatever – here’s my contribution to making your blood boil tonight.
Or how about this? The judge who let Sandusky walk on an unsecured bail of $100,000 is a Second Mile volunteer.
Oh, I meant the people on this website and in this thread. I would like to think that once the Paterno defenders read the indictment and see the facts, that they’ll realize how ridiculous they sound.
I give NO ONE involved in this crap at Penn State any credit. At all.