Page 7 of 28 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 560
  1. #121
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by cspan37421 View Post

    edit: are we really up to "third hand" now? Pretty soon it'll be said that JoePa first heard about the allegations in the newspaper! I was not an English major, but it seems to me that if he was told of the shower rape incident by a person who saw it happening, he heard a FIRST-HAND account. JoePa telling that story to the AD makes JoePa's story a second-hand account. But the GA was the eyewitness, ergo, first-hand. I could be wrong, but if so, how? THanks.
    A small and obviously side point--but since you raise it I will give you an English major answer--you get a gold star. The GA's account was an eye witness and thus first-hand account of what he saw; what Paterno told the AD, and could have told the police, was a first-hand account of his own conversation with the GA, but a second-hand account of what the GA reported. Third-hand, in this case, might refer to what the AD might have reported to the university president if he spoke to him before interviewing the GA directly.

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Quote Originally Posted by peterjswift View Post
    When Joe Pa talks, people might listen, but they also think: "this guy is over 80 years old" and they don't take him seriously. Joe Pa is a figurehead at best.
    Then maybe we should add a university letting someone over 80 years old be the head coach of powerhouse 1-A college football program to the long list of failures involved here.

  3. #123
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    Then maybe we should add a university letting someone over 80 years old be the head coach of powerhouse 1-A college football program to the long list of failures involved here.
    That....might be a legitimate criticism.

  4. #124
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Quote Originally Posted by PADukeMom View Post
    One other question did Mike McClosky witness this or was it reported to him 2nd hand?
    It's my understanding that it has been reported that McClosky was the GA who witnessed it. I believe someone earlier in the thread mentioned it but didn't have a second source. Regardless, the GA is the first-hand source and the GA went to Paterno.

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Greensboro, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    Then maybe we should add a university letting someone over 80 years old be the head coach of powerhouse 1-A college football program to the long list of failures involved here.
    Seriously? Then why not just turn old people into Soylent Green and be done with it?
    Man, if your Mom made you wear that color when you were a baby, and you're still wearing it, it's time to grow up!

  6. #126
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Quote Originally Posted by Wander View Post
    Then maybe we should add a university letting someone over 80 years old be the head coach of powerhouse 1-A college football program to the long list of failures involved here.
    A Penn Stater would know better, but I have a vague recollection that there had been some trial balloons floated several years ago (maybe even a dozen) which appeared to be aimed at testing public opinion about asking JoePa to step aside. Very quickly it became evident that he didn't want to step down. At that point it was a judgment call as to which course of action would be best for PSU - pressure him to step down, and appear to be mistreating a living legend, arguably past his prime (but still pretty darn good), or letting him decide when he was ready to go, even if that meant PSU might never challenge for a title while he was still around (given his advanced age, what recruit could feel confident the coach would be around for four more years?). [Let alone any age-related lapses in judgment & oversight that could stain the program and university's name.]

  7. #127
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Quote Originally Posted by killerleft View Post
    Seriously? Then why not just turn old people into Soylent Green and be done with it?
    I may not be the best at brainstorming, but I'm pretty sure that's not the only other option.

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Lynchburg, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by cspan37421 View Post
    It's my understanding that it has been reported that McClosky was the GA who witnessed it. I believe someone earlier in the thread mentioned it but didn't have a second source. Regardless, the GA is the first-hand source and the GA went to Paterno.
    The person named is Mike McQueary, former PSU QB and the current WR coach and recruiting coordinator.

    I think it's reasonable to assume he's the GA. I caught parts of yesterday's press conference, and reporters referred to McQueary by name without correction from the AG. He's also been universally reported as the the GA, making it likely we would have heard a denial from McQueary if those reports were false.

  9. #129
    Quote Originally Posted by Dukeface88 View Post
    Just for general reference, the Pennsylvannia statue on reporting child abuse can be found here.
    There is no general duty to report child abuse. The statute referenced in the grand jury report is actually 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 6311, which contains almost identical language. I am having trouble linking it directly, but you can go here to search for it. It is very strange that the code would be organized that way. Reading both statutes, it does not appear clear to me that university administrators are among those persons required to report suspected child abuse. 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 6311(a) defines a required reporter generally as, “A person who, in the course of employment, occupation or practice of a profession, comes into contact with children,” and then goes on to list specific occupations such as doctor, social worker, law enforcement official and the like.

    Furthermore, Paterno would seem to be off the hook legally. 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 6311(c) indicates that persons working in an institution may satisfy the reporting requirement by reporting to the person in charge. Whether Paterno had a moral duty to go farther is another matter entirely. However, the Vice President involved oversaw the campus police.



    The apparent weakness of the legal case against Curley and Shultz seems to confirm my initial suspicion that prosecutors used the grand jury to run perjury traps on them. There is really no other explanation for a grand jury investigation in this situation. All the evidence against Sandusky himself in the grand jury report could have been developed through police investigation. A judge could have issued any subpoenas required to obtain documents from the university. I think it is fair to say that Curley and Shultz were targets of the investigation as much as Sandusky. Grand jury procedure 101 is that prosecutors never call the target of an investigation before the grand jury because the target can give exculpatory testimony. The only reason to call the target before the grand jury is to ask them questions about things the prosecutors already know about and then see if they testify differently.

    Essentially, as I see it, prosecutors cannot successfully prosecute Curley and Schultz for failure to report so they used the grand jury to try to get them to say they did report when they did not and then prosecute them for perjury. The reason Curley and Schultz would be tempted to lie is obvious: they thought they were already in serious legal trouble and could be prosecuted if they said they did not report. The grand jury report characterizes their testimony as equivocal so they may have taken the bait.

    Do not get me wrong. I agree that they had a moral duty to get the police involved right away if there was reason to suspect Sandusky of child sexual abuse. If there was and they failed to do so, go ahead and put the boot into them for that. What I have a problem with is prosecutors manufacturing a crime where there is none in order to achieve an outcome that is not otherwise permitted by law. As distasteful as the allegations against Curley and Shultz are in this particular case, there are some obvious dangers in prosecutors using their power in this fashion.


    Quote Originally Posted by johnb View Post
    While we can--and have--complained about Brodhead's neutrality/lack of support with the lax case, Spanier's comments are precisely why Brodhead didn't provide unconditional support to the Duke students; an indictment generally means very bad news, so how could he know that Nifong would commit malpractice? If he'd given unconditional support" to rapists, he'd have been fired.
    Without getting into the merits, I just want to make sure the underlying issue is clear. Nobody asked Brodhead to declare the falsely accused players innocent. Brodhead was asked to condemn the systematic violation of their civil rights and demand due process of law. What Brodhead was being asked to do was made very clear to him. Nifong’s misconduct was beyond dispute and took place on national television. I hope I can say that much without getting the banhammer.

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Greensboro, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by cspan37421 View Post
    I may not be the best at brainstorming, but I'm pretty sure that's not the only other option.
    Well, he WOULD be good for something, at least
    Man, if your Mom made you wear that color when you were a baby, and you're still wearing it, it's time to grow up!

  11. #131
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of sports teams that disappoint in the playoffs
    Two things...

    1) To me a key question is what happened when Curley and Schultz confronted Sandusky to tell him he was banned from bringing kids into the Penn State locker rooms. Did Sandusky deny the allegations? Did he admit anything? More importantly, did they ask him the name of the kid he was with that day so someone could contact the child an investigate a little bit? Wouldn't most people's first reaction be to ask Sandusky for his side of the story -- I wonder what story he gave that they did not need to follow up at all and forward the info onto the police. Pathetic!

    2) JoePa's legacy - I think there is a lot to still be known about what JoePa did and (more importantly) did not do in this whole thing. I am not a fan of what I have heard so far. He may not have broken the law, but it sure feels like he did not rise to a moral standard we all think he should be held to. But, that is not what I want to talk about right now.

    JoePa has been a good man at Penn State. He has won a ridiculous number of games and been a mentor to an incredible number of kids. He has given back, to Penn State and other charities, in some remarkable ways. There is little question that up until this week everyone associated with the Penn State program had every right to be incredibly proud of his association with the school.

    And that is why this week has been so sad. Unless Sandusky is somehow completely exonerated (highly unlikely given the number of independent accusers), this scandal will forever taint the JoePa legacy. It comes at the very end of his career, so we will not have time to let it fade into history. It is such a disgusting scandal and involves folks so high up in the Penn St administration that it simply will not be forgotten. It is sorta sad that when JoePa's obituary is written, there will be paragraphs, probably highly placed ones, mentioning this story and the taint it put on the end of his career.

    --Jason "I feel sorry for the guy-- even though I think he probably should have done more in this case" Evans
    Don't ask me why, but my mother is making me Tweet. Says it will be good for my career. So, follow my ramblings, mostly on the film industry, @TVFilmTalk

  12. #132
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tennessee
    Quote Originally Posted by mph View Post
    The person named is Mike McQueary, former PSU QB and the current WR coach and recruiting coordinator.
    Thanks for clarifying - it didn't sound quite right, but I didn't check. I figured I knew what they meant ....

  13. #133

    Lets Suppose

    that Paterno did go to the police. What would the police have done? I would assume interview the GA first. I don't think that the police proceed on secondhand info when firsthand should be pretty easy to get.

    It just seems to me that the GA should have gone to the police and I would like to understand why he did not before judging Paterno.

    It also seems to me that by telling Sandusky not to bring kids on campus or whatever that the Penn State officials thought something was wrong and were trying more to protect the University than innocent children. Reprehensible.

    SoCal

  14. #134
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Mount Kisco, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    I wonder what story he gave that they did not need to follow up at all and forward the info onto the police. Pathetic!
    Agree. What's worse is that similar Sandusky crimes were reported 4 years earlier, in 1998 after the mother of a boy he molested called the police. The DA, the aforementioned Gricar, had police officers in the home of the accusing mother when Sandusky said to her, ""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", yet Gricar never pressed charges. No one will ever know why because Gricar is dead. The system broke down in so many places around Sandusky's crimes over such a long period of time that it is hard to believe.

  15. #135
    Quote Originally Posted by mph View Post
    The person named is Mike McQueary, former PSU QB and the current WR coach and recruiting coordinator.

    I think it's reasonable to assume he's the GA. I caught parts of yesterday's press conference, and reporters referred to McQueary by name without correction from the AG. He's also been universally reported as the the GA, making it likely we would have heard a denial from McQueary if those reports were false.
    I know it is McQueary, red headed guy who was a so-so QB. Call it a Tuesday morning, caffine deprived 50 something brain. Why did Mike McQueary not go directly to the police himself????? I honestly believe if Paterno witnessed this happening personally Sandusky would have already been tried & convicted. Did McQeary witness this in 1999 or 2009? I live right smack dab in the middle of Penn State country so the new overload is overwhelming & conflicting.

  16. #136
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Mount Kisco, NY
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    It just seems to me that the GA should have gone to the police and I would like to understand why he did not before judging Paterno.
    SoCal
    How about the fact that this GA is now a full fledged assistant and has been looking at Sandusky in and around the football facility for the past 9 years since seeing him do what he did with his own eyes, knowing that the guy is still around kids all the time! I guess the human mind is really capable of remarkable compartmentalization.

  17. #137
    Jason,b eing the mother of sons who were involved in sports and as a parent who was involved in the various organizations if someone where to come to me with any allegations of any sort of abuse of a child my response would be to contact the police immediately. I would not talk to the coach first nor the organization. The child has got to come first.
    The more I hear of this the more digusting this is. This is a huge mess.

  18. #138
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    ... It just seems to me that the GA should have gone to the police ....
    Or, called 911 then and there. The institution-must-report-laws seem to fit when folks learn something after the fact (like Paterno and the AD and the administrator). If you stumble on an active crime scene, call 911.

  19. #139
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    that Paterno did go to the police. What would the police have done? I would assume interview the GA first. I don't think that the police proceed on secondhand info when firsthand should be pretty easy to get.

    It just seems to me that the GA should have gone to the police and I would like to understand why he did not before judging Paterno.
    Why can't we judge the actions of the two independently - whatever McQueary's reasons for choosing not to go to the police, it appears that Paterno had enough information to do a lot more than he chose to do.

    Here's what I don't get. Penn State has to have known about the likelihood of an indictment for the better part of a year - the story broke in March! How can they not have been better prepared for this?

  20. #140
    Quote Originally Posted by Billy Dat View Post
    The system broke down in so many places around Sandusky's crimes over such a long period of time that it is hard to believe.
    This is what's been so saddening to me this week. I understand where JE's coming from, but I'm really not sad about the tarnishing of Joe Paterno's legend and reputation. He's a football coach. Everyone will always know he was a really good football coach and did some good things and helped a lot of young men become upstanding and productive adults, and was not himself molesting and raping children. So if his reputation takes a hit because at the end of all of this the consensus becomes that he didn't do enough or allowed himself to remain willfully ignorant, I'm not going to be upset by that. It will be well-deserved.

    What's sad is that a 10-year-old boy is alleged to have been raped in a shower in the Penn State football locker room, and it appears that no actions were ever taken to even find out the identity of the child. Somewhere out there, if the claims are correct, there's an 18-year-old kid who's been living with this, anonymously and with no help, for almost half his life, undoubtedly forming the conviction that grownups will not protect him. Which conviction has surely not been challenged over the last week. I'm trying very hard to reserve judgment on all of this until we know all the facts, and account for human fallibility in the individual decisions. But it appears to be undisputed that McQuery says he saw Sandusky in the act, and within a few days three separate, very powerful adults had heard his story, and no one ever figured out who the kid was. If that all turns out to be true, then it's inexcusable for each of them, including Paterno, under any set of circumstances I can imagine. I won't care if Paterno can plausibly make the case that his superiors had told him the matter was being taken care of and he had no reason to not believe them. Even if his initial reaction was one of shock and disbelief that his longtime assistant could possibly be capable of something like what he was hearing. If he didn't at some point ask "Have you found the kid?" he will have failed miserably in the morality department. If these were individuals who didn't know Sandusky personally and did not continue to interact with him for years afterwards, or who had no power within the system, it might be different. It might also be different if these were not individuals who were (or are) employed by the State of Pennsylvania for the express purpose of educating and caring for the wellbeing of young people. That it appears none of them did anything to ensure that a young person was being attended to, is the sad thing here. I'm having a difficult time figuring out the hypothetical scenario where the facts that may materialize over the next several months change this.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-17-2011, 02:29 AM
  2. Scandal at USD
    By SoCalDukeFan in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-12-2011, 09:25 PM
  3. UNC Scandal latest
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 152
    Last Post: 12-05-2010, 11:15 PM
  4. Post Article - NCAA Attacks Academic Abuse
    By gw67 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-02-2007, 11:06 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •