OT: Paterno Fired

[Deadrody]

It's real easy to cast stones from the outside with the benefit of hindsight. It is also easy to take in the sloppy media coverage and riff on that.

Joe failed in his moral responsibility to follow up when it became clear after weeks and months went by without news of the proper authorities taking action in the case. For that, it was time for him to step down.

Prior to that, he did everything correctly. I've read the entire grand jury report. It is unclear exactly what Joe was told. It is clear that it needed to be report to the authorities. He did that. It is important to remember that there is a work place component to this matter. He reported it to his supervisor and the head of campus police. The university is its own legal principality. They are the legal police force. Unless find out Joe was actively covering this up, he for at least a reasonable period of time should have been able rely on the authorities doing their job. Only when it became clear that nothing was being done, did he fail in his moral obligation. This is why the DA made the statement she did.

With no other information, the board mistreated the man who was neither a witness nor in charge of the investigation. The BOT could have let him finish up, but they got squeamish and panicked. That is the same attitude that failed the victims in this case.

Firing Joe immediately does nothing for the victims. It only feeds the mob's need for more carnage. The president, the head of campus police, and the AD should be fired for their criminal negligence. The later two have been rightfully charged bases on the information available.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

This was exactly my original position. But I have since concluded that Paterno knew much more than he is letting on. That may not be fair, and you can admonish me for that, but beginning with that assumption, Penn State did exactly what it should have done, and probably should have done sooner, even, than they did.

 

[Deadrody]

1. Not sure why anybody would describe the grad student as a "kid." He was at least 22 years old at the time. How does he sleep at night after he walked in on a 10 year old being anally raped and he just walked out?

2. I'm really quite surprised how many people think that this chain of events is acceptable behavior - A) inferior tells you that your friend and former colleague was seen doing something inappropriate with a child in the shower. B) you tell your boss. C) you do nothing else.

I suppose we all have our own moral compass, and that they point in different directions.

I'm not going to "forgive" the grad assisstant (28 at the time), but having been in some situations where under duress you do not always act as you think you would, I can't entirely fault him for not physically attacking Sandusky and pulling him off the kid. That may not be in the mental makeup of the person. I think a sizable portion of the population would have trouble reacting that way. At least immediately. You might walk away and compose yourself before confronting him, but I DO have a hard time understanding how you walk away fro 24 hours. That's a bit much. At a minimum you call the cops directly and hope that is enough for your conscience will let you off the hook someday for not stopping the rape in progress.

 

[Deadrody]

This entire mess almost compels one to start by believing the absolute worst, and then allowing ones mind to toy with the notion that the absolute worst you can imagine is an order of magnitude shy of how bad it really is.

For example: This business about the DA who was investigating Sandusky back in 1998, and went missing in 2005....and is still missing, today.....It is like the plot of a cheap B-grade movie. Except for the fact that it is real.....

What kind of people have the power and ability to do stuff like this and then have it simply go away for a decade or so? And what motivates those kinds of people?

The rumor I have seen is that the prosecutor is not dead at all, and has actually been seen. He was just paid or otherwise influenced to go away.

 

[Deadrody]

I want everyone involved to be held accountable to doing the right thing and that includes the BOT and the media by being more precise with their actions. That's it, it's not even the fact they fired him. It's that they made their decision in a half-ass fashion. Just like everyone else involved.

Fair enough. I just don't think you know for sure that his immediate dismissal wasn't merited, or done properly. Its not like his immediate dismissal prevents them from adequately investigating this or prevent Paterno from cooperating. Paterno has his entire legacy on the line as incentive to cooperate entirely with this process. The bottom line is whatever process you think should have been followed, there is no way there is any process by which Paterno does not end up fired. So get it over with and fire him already. The BOT may be emotional and pissed, but I say they should be. If this is an organizational expression of outrage, frankly it is merited.

And absolute morons willing to riot over losing a coach under these circumstances are disturbing. I sure as hell wouldn't want my picture taken during THAT riot. Talk about a stigma - "So, you are in favor of sodomy of 10 year olds going unpunished?"

 

[Deadrody]

Now I don't know if the Board gave JoePa the option of resigning. I'm on the fence as to if they should have given him that option, based on all the good he's done for the university and community. Note that one does not nullify the other, meaning the failure to do what he should have in 2002, discounts all the good he has done, or all the good he has done should give him a pass on this failure. I do wonder if the board could have first announced putting him on administrative leave and then took steps to force him to resign or be fired in the coming days. That might have spared some of the riots last night...maybe not...but would have extended a little dignity to JoePa, something that many feel he does or doesn't deserve.

Based on the news yesterday or the day before, Paterno had already jumped the gun and a press release issued saying he would retire at the end of the season. Frankly, to me that is Paterno trying to usurp the board's authority and he was rightly fired, effective immediately. Had he gone along with their plan and not tried to get out in front of the situation, maybe they would have allowed him to finish the season or go on administrative leave.

But once he made clear that to him the decision was HIS to make, he sealed his fate. Too bad he didn't take that kind of initiative in 2002.

 

[Prezidint]

That's it, it's not even the fact they fired him. It's that they made their decision in a half-ass fashion. Just like everyone else involved.

Here's the information that Joe Pa himself admitted -
1. Somebody came to me and told me Sandusky was directly seen doing inappropriate things in the shower with a 10 year old.
2. I passed that along to my superiors, but took no other action.

That alone, to me, is plenty for which to fire him. Just me and my personal value system. I would expect every person working for me to always be vigilant to protect those without defense - particularly children. By his own admission, he did nothing more than pass the information along.

 

[Prezidint]

Had he gone along with their plan and not tried to get out in front of the situation, maybe they would have allowed him to finish the season or go on administrative leave.

IMO - no way. It was his way of pleading - "please, let me stay until the end of the year, then I promise to go." They were going to fire him no matter what, but, IMO, he foolishly believed he might get them to consider letting him ride out the season.

 

[Walker11]

I'm not going to "forgive" the grad assisstant (28 at the time), but having been in some situations where under duress you do not always act as you think you would, I can't entirely fault him for not physically attacking Sandusky and pulling him off the kid. That may not be in the mental makeup of the person. I think a sizable portion of the population would have trouble reacting that way. At least immediately. You might walk away and compose yourself before confronting him, but I DO have a hard time understanding how you walk away fro 24 hours. That's a bit much. At a minimum you call the cops directly and hope that is enough for your conscience will let you off the hook someday for not stopping the rape in progress.

The assistant coach whistle blower in the Baylor murder cover-up has been blackballed from coaching and is working in a factory. The guy was acting selfishly with only his interests in mind but he probably had reason to believe that his career could be in jeopardy if he came forward. Still doesn't make his actions right but I don't think he bares close to as much fault as Paterno.

 

[Deadrody]

The assistant coach whistle blower in the Baylor murder cover-up has been blackballed from coaching and is working in a factory. The guy was acting selfishly with only his interests in mind but he probably had reason to believe that his career could be in jeopardy if he came forward. Still doesn't make his actions right but I don't think he bares close to as much fault as Paterno.

True. Probably not as explainable by innocence as I suggested. Especially after the heat of the moment had passed. At that point he was very much thinking of his own future and seeking additional input as to the right way to go.

 

[YeahShabazz]

if you look at Paterno's comments, he's unbelievably cavalier about what Sandusky has done...

"This is a tragedy... with the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more." It's like by saying that it's a tragedy he's done enough to acknowledge the horror of what has happened. This is more than a tragedy--it's also a gross indictment of everybody involved who brushed it off... "with the benefit of hindsight"??? he was told directly about probably the most disturbing incident that has been reported... I can't believe that he allowed Sandusky to keep working with Second Mile until a couple years ago

And then if you watch the youtube video of Penn State fans at Paterno's door, he refers to the incident as something along the lines of "that thing that happened"... and concludes with "Beat Nebraska." Maybe he's become delusional through old age but I think he's a despicable human being

 

[Prezidint]

Regarding the general lack of justice in this country:
If a guy gets pinched for theft or drug possession, a judge will ordinarily require a cash bond or a secured bond of some sort.
If a guy gets a 25k bail set, this means he ponies up 25 grand (returnable) or he pays 2.5 grand to a bailbondsman (money gone forever).

This scumbag is charged with raping multiple kids over many years and what does the judge do?

100,000 unsecured bond.
That means he didn't have to come up with any money. He simply promises to pay 100 grand IF he fails to show.

Nice legal system.

 

[John Fryer]

I'm not going to "forgive" the grad assisstant (28 at the time), but having been in some situations where under duress you do not always act as you think you would, I can't entirely fault him for not physically attacking Sandusky and pulling him off the kid. That may not be in the mental makeup of the person. I think a sizable portion of the population would have trouble reacting that way. At least immediately. You might walk away and compose yourself before confronting him, but I DO have a hard time understanding how you walk away fro 24 hours. That's a bit much. At a minimum you call the cops directly and hope that is enough for your conscience will let you off the hook someday for not stopping the rape in progress.

Could he, the grad student, have been more concerned about his personal security/scholarship?

Peace,

John Fryer

 

[John Fryer]

IMO - no way. It was his way of pleading - "please, let me stay until the end of the year, then I promise to go." They were going to fire him no matter what, but, IMO, he foolishly believed he might get them to consider letting him ride out the season.

I will defer to the lawyers on the point that I am about to make.

But, isn't there a thing called "Condonation?"

For example, if a wife charges her husband with domestic violence and subsequently sleeps with him. She has no case.

By sleeping with him, after pressing charges, she condones his previous behavior.

In a similar way, but vastly different. Once the BT was made aware of what had happened and of coach Paterno's failure to inform (police) about a possible crime it had to take some kind of action. Had the BT allowed coach Paterno to complete the football season, then it (the BT) would have condoned all that had transpired.

These are, of course, just my opinions.

Peace,

John Fryer

 

[bobbygt]

I will defer to the lawyers on the point that I am about to make.

But, isn't there a thing called "Condonation?"

For example, if a wife charges her husband with domestic violence and subsequently sleeps with him. She has no case.

By sleeping with him, after pressing charges, she condones his previous behavior.

In a similar way, but vastly different. Once the BT was made aware of what had happened and of coach Paterno's failure to inform (police) about a possible crime it had to take some kind of action. Had the BT allowed coach Paterno to complete the football season, then it (the BT) would have condoned all that had transpired.

These are, of course, just my opinions.

Peace,

John Fryer

I'll refer you to my previous post. As bad as it might get, it's important to make judgements based on the facts, not assumptions and inaccuracies.

It is not accurate to say that Paterno didn't tell anyone, even teh police, since he informed the man who oversaw the university police.

Here are the facts as we know them:

"Schultz testified that he was called to a meeting with Joe Paterno and Tim Curley, in which Paterno reported "disturbing" and "inappropriate" conduct in the shower by Sandusky upon a young boy, as reported to him by a student or graduate student"

http://www.attorneygeneral.gov...Presentment.pdf (Page 8 last paragraph)

"But despite his job overseeing campus police, [Schultz] he never reported the 2002 allegations to any authorities, "never sought or received a police report on the 1998 incident and never attempted to learn the identity of the child in the shower in 2002," the jurors wrote. "No one from the university did so."
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/ncaa/11/07/penn.state.schultz.step.down.ap/index.html

So, Paterno had a meeting with the AD (who is Joe Paterno's boss) and Shultz, who oversaw the university police.

 

[Prezidint]

I'll refer you to my previous post. As bad as it might get, it's important to make judgements based on the facts, not assumptions and inaccuracies.
It is not accurate to say that Paterno didn't tell anyone, even teh police, since he informed the man who oversaw the university police.

Not sure what you're trying to say here.
It's 100% accurate, by Paterno's own words, to say these things:
Paterno did not tell the police.
Paterno only told his superiors.

You seem to be relying on the word "oversee" to impute something that just isn't so.
He was not the head of the department.
He was not a law enforcement officer.
He had no authority to investigate or make arrests.

If you were a defense lawyer, I'd congratulate you on a clever defense and then counsel you to prepare your client for the guilty verdict as the proposed defense does not hold water.

 

[prankster]

I'll refer you to my previous post. As bad as it might get, it's important to make judgements based on the facts, not assumptions and inaccuracies.

It is not accurate to say that Paterno didn't tell anyone, even teh police, since he informed the man who oversaw the university police.

Here are the facts as we know them:

"Schultz testified that he was called to a meeting with Joe Paterno and Tim Curley, in which Paterno reported "disturbing" and "inappropriate" conduct in the shower by Sandusky upon a young boy, as reported to him by a student or graduate student"

http://www.attorneygeneral.gov...Presentment.pdf (Page 8 last paragraph)

"But despite his job overseeing campus police, [Schultz] he never reported the 2002 allegations to any authorities, "never sought or received a police report on the 1998 incident and never attempted to learn the identity of the child in the shower in 2002," the jurors wrote. "No one from the university did so."
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/ncaa/11/07/penn.state.schultz.step.down.ap/index.html

So, Paterno had a meeting with the AD (who is Joe Paterno's boss) and Shultz, who oversaw the university police.

Shultz "oversaw" the campus police, in much the same fashion that the mayor of your town "oversees" the police department.

Reporting a rape to the mayor is not nearly the same thing as reporting a rape to a cop.....any cop.....

And, not to put too fine a point on it, but where, precisely, was the outrage? That entire football complex was Paterno's Garden of Eden. Everything that happened inside its gates did so with his approval....

Someone brought a 10 year old kid into the Penn State locker room.... and was raping him in the showers. By all accounts, Paterno was OK with it, and planned on remaining OK with it....unless and until Shultz said something to the cops, and even then only after the cops might have said something to Sandusky.

Sorry for my pre-disposition to this end point, but where the (k was the outrage?

Where the (k was Paterno button holing Sandusky and telling him to stay the hell out of his sports complex....and while he is at it, why doesn't he stay the hell off the Penn State Campus....and on his way out the door, maybe he should save everyone some trouble, by stopping by the police station and turning himself in. That very day.

See....None of that happened.... Not one bit of it.....Sandusky was still boning these kids, in Paterno's sports complex, even after McQueary told Paterno what he saw.....

 

[SkyWalker2011]

Am I the only one here who feels bad for Paterno? The guy is the victim of a media witch hunt. He did everything a person in his position I would expect to do.

He heard a statement (without apparent evidence) that a friend of his was molesting kids. So he goes and tells what he heard to his superior and the head of campus police so they can further investigate it. There is nothing wrong with that chain of events. It wasn't, and isn't, Paterno's responsibility to play detective in this case, so he reported what he heard to the right people.

Some people are saying it's Paterno's "moral responsibility as a human" to call the police directly. Sorry, but that's bullshit. If I came to you and told you that your long-time friend and co-worker raped somebody in the bathroom, what would be your first reaction? Would you investigate it and inform your superiors that there might be a problem or call the police based on a statement from a guy you barely know? Paterno did what any level headed person would have done: he informed people more qualified than himself to investigate the matter.

Firing Paterno doesn't help those kids who were raped, all it does is satisfy the thirst for blood of the public.

 

[bobbygt]

Not sure what you're trying to say here.
It's 100% accurate, by Paterno's own words, to say these things:
Paterno did not tell the police.
Paterno only told his superiors.

You seem to be relying on the word "oversee" to impute something that just isn't so.
He was not the head of the department.
He was not a law enforcement officer.
He had no authority to investigate or make arrests.

If you were a defense lawyer, I'd congratulate you on a clever defense and then counsel you to prepare your client for the guilty verdict as the proposed defense does not hold water.

I think we're just disagreeing on this.

It is my understanding that Shultz ran the University Police. The university police have the legal authority and the expertise to investigate.

Curley is Joepa's boss.

I understand that Joepa should've done more, but he informed men who were in a much better position than himself to follow up on this crime.

Schultz and Durley have been charged here, NOT Paterno.

 

[Prezidint]

He heard a statement (without apparent evidence) that a friend of his was molesting kids. So he goes and tells what he heard to his superior and the head of campus police so they can further investigate it. There is nothing wrong with that chain of events. It wasn't, and isn't, Paterno's responsibility to play detective in this case, so he reported what he heard to the right people.

This thread, as another poster feared, is starting to send chills up my spine. So, I'm out of here after this post, as I'm full up on sad today.

1. The guy was not "head" of campus police. He had no police authority whatsoever. Like a previous poster said, it was like a mayor-police force relationship, if anything.

2. The statement he heard was an eyewitness viewing of a rape. The only evidence better than that is DNA or video.

3. Do you have children? What would say to this fact pattern: you child's teacher is told by a student teacher that he saw the gym teacher sodomizing a young boy. Your teacher reports the matter to the principal of the school, who oversees the police officers permanently stationed at the school. Nothing is said directly to the police officers and no action is taken. A year later your 10 year old son is anally raped in the locker room by that guy.

You would really believe that your son's teacher "fulfilled his responsibility?"

We have very, very difference moral standards.

 

[Prezidint]

It is my understanding that Shultz ran the University Police.

It's always about words, isn't it.
Look. If the guy "ran" the police, then you have a point that JoePa's lack of action is less severe.
But I don't think "run" is going to be the verb that fits.
In any event, it's just a question of degree to me.
If he had gone straight to the top cop in PA and reported it and then nothing happened, he's still guilty, morally, in my book, of failing to protect children, so it's immaterial to me.

 

[prankster]

Am I the only one here who feels bad for Paterno? The guy is the victim of a media witch hunt. He did everything a person in his position I would expect to do.

He heard a statement (without apparent evidence) that a friend of his was molesting kids. So he goes and tells what he heard to his superior and the head of campus police so they can further investigate it. There is nothing wrong with that chain of events. It wasn't, and isn't, Paterno's responsibility to play detective in this case, so he reported what he heard to the right people.

Some people are saying it's Paterno's "moral responsibility as a human" to call the police directly. Sorry, but that's bullshit. If I came to you and told you that your long-time friend and co-worker raped somebody in the bathroom, what would be your first reaction? Would you investigate it and inform your superiors that there might be a problem or call the police based on a statement from a guy you barely know? Paterno did what any level headed person would have done: he informed people more qualified than himself to investigate the matter.

Firing Paterno doesn't help those kids who were raped, all it does is satisfy the thirst for blood of the public.

This is where you and I define ourselves differently....

I would have the guy making the report to me (a person who apparently trusts me to do the correct thing with the information), take a seat in my office....Then I would call the police and request that they come to my office and take the man's statement....

Why?

If the statement is completely unfounded (as I might devoutly wish were true), then I am there, ensuring that the police make a written record of the slanderous statement that is being made against my friend. This can then become foundation for termination of the slandering individual....as well as foundation for the ensuing civil lawsuit....should my friend choose to pursue that option.

If, on the other hand, the statement were true....then this would be the fastest pathway to resolution of this situation, ensuring the public's well being, and ensuring that the institution's best interests are protected....

That whole "....people more qualified than himself to investigate the matter" thing kind of resolves itself when you call the police in cases where criminal assult is being alleged.......

But...then....that is just me...

 

[SkyWalker2011]

This thread, as another poster feared, is starting to send chills up my spine. So, I'm out of here after this post, as I'm full up on sad today.

1. The guy was not "head" of campus police. He had no police authority whatsoever. Like a previous poster said, it was like a mayor-police force relationship, if anything.

2. The statement he heard was an eyewitness viewing of a rape. The only evidence better than that is DNA or video.

3. Do you have children? What would say to this fact pattern: you child's teacher is told by a student teacher that he saw the gym teacher sodomizing a young boy. Your teacher reports the matter to the principal of the school, who oversees the police officers permanently stationed at the school. Nothing is said directly to the police officers and no action is taken. A year later your 10 year old son is anally raped in the locker room by that guy.

You would really believe that your son's teacher "fulfilled his responsibility?"

We have very, very difference moral standards.

Yeah actually, I wouldn't hold the teacher accountable. I would be much more upset with the student teacher who didn't directly contact the police, or the principal that failed to use their resources to investigate the initial claim.

 

[SubbaBub]

Here's the information that Joe Pa himself admitted -
1. Somebody came to me and told me Sandusky was directly seen doing inappropriate things in the shower with a 10 year old.
2. I passed that along to my superiors, but took no other action.

That alone, to me, is plenty for which to fire him. Just me and my personal value system. I would expect every person working for me to always be vigilant to protect those without defense - particularly children. By his own admission, he did nothing more than pass the information along.

This is my last post on the subject as it no longer serves any purpose other than me railing against the illogical need for immediate resolution by the masses.

When Joe is referring to his superiors, included in that meeting was the man in charge of the police force, who is now under indictment for perjury and will likely also be indicted for failing to act.

Joe's problem comes much later when nothing happens to Sandusky. Absent other facts, IMO it was unfair to treat the man in the manner they did, because he his the face of the university.

I'm ready for some football.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

 

[SkyWalker2011]

This is where you and I define ourselves differently....

I would have the guy making the report to me (a person who apparently trusts me to do the correct thing with the information), take a seat in my office....Then I would call the police and request that they come to my office and take the man's statement....

Why?

If the statement is completely unfounded (as I might devoutly wish were true), then I am there, ensuring that the police make a written record of the slanderous statement that is being made against my friend. This can then become foundation for termination of the slandering individual....as well as foundation for the ensuing civil lawsuit....should my friend choose to pursue that option.

If, on the other hand, the statement were true....then this would be the fastest pathway to resolution of this situation, ensuring the public's well being, and ensuring that the institution's best interests are protected....

That whole "....people more qualified than himself to investigate the matter" thing kind of resolves itself when you call the police in cases where criminal assult is being alleged.......

But...then....that is just me...

Fair enough. I just feel Paterno did do something (if not by many people's opinions the best thing) to resolve the issue, and therefore shouldn't be thrown on the cross. It's just my opinion that he's getting more blame for not calling the police when the direct witness of the incident could have done it himself the whole time.

 

[superjohn]

SkyWalker2011, it scares me that you and many others think that way, absolutely frightening.