OT: UNC Academic Fraud Investigation

[HoopsFan21]

Yes it is incredible how the NCAA has backtracked on the Penn State issue. They really took the independent investigation results and came to quick judgment on it.

One thing on Paterno..... that i always have thought ..... Paterno was never one to alert authorities and call it a day when something affected his program. I know of a case in 2005 I believe, when he used his power to push the VP of Student Affairs (i think) out the door because she attempted to discipline players on the team, and he wanted to be solely responsible for matters connected to his team. I fault Paterno for blocking others from getting involved in matters like these over his tenure..... on everything else in the Sandusky affair, he got the short end of the stick

It's funny you mention that VP of Student Affairs. She was at UConn before Penn State while Emmert was Chancellor of UConn. She had a very rocky tenure at Penn State before being ousted even if you exclude what went on with the football program (from what I can tell with a little google research). And Freeh, the "independent investigator" that wrote the report that sunk Penn State had represented some of the board members in their corporate affairs, and was the man in charge of the FBI when they falsely accused Jewel of the Atlanta Olympic bombings. So I'm not sure I'd just go along with whatever that guy wrote in his report. I do agree it's probably a bad idea for coaches to be responsible for punishment of student-athletes because of the conflict of interest, but I guess Paterno being old school and what 70-80 years old wanted to do things his way as he had done them since the beginning of time. I will say this, at least he enforced academic standards and graduated his players, and that's something I can respect because not many other coaches and programs have had the on the field and in the classroom success he had. Here's a man that dedicated his entire life to one school, lived humbly, didn't demand $4 million/year contracts, donated millions to the school to build a new library and various other non-athletic buildings on campus, and at the end of all that his thanks is to be made out to be this sinister puppet master as he was quietly dieing of cancer? Something there doesn't add up for me, and I would hate for something like that to ever happen to one of our coaches.

 

[DobbsRover2]

So was PSU punished because something bad occurred on their campus or were they punished because something bad happened on their campus and they supposedly covered it up? If it's the latter, no such cover up has been proven. If it's the former, every college is screwed based on the amount of reprehensible things occurring every single day on campuses across America. The NCAA's enforcement should be limited to what is stated in the rules - no more and no less. If you don't do that where do you draw the line? How do you ensure rules are being applied fairly?

The NCAA did the wrong thing in this case. They should have never gotten involved in what was a purely criminal matter. I said it at the time without having even looked into the facts that this was a very dangerous precedent that the NCAA was setting. I assure you all other P5 schools were taking notes, and the NCAA's inconsistent application of rules and punishments is one more reason to jettison the NCAA as it presents a tremendous risk to the schools. Effectively the NCAA has declared that it can punish a member institution for any reason it finds immoral where there are no explicit rules violations. Imagine if the legal system worked that way? It would be absolute chaos. I really can't paint a better picture for you as to how this precedent could result in abuses of power by an organization that is known for its corruption and ineptitude.

Now the NCAA has repealed most of the sanctions and have called the whole thing "an experiment." Call me crazy, but I would never want to be part of some experimental new punishment, especially when after a couple of years of it the NCAA basically says, OK we were wrong, sorry and have a nice day. Oh yeah one more stupid thing about this is that the football team was hit because Paterno didn't do enough, which I guess equates to attempting to cover up what Sandusky did, but the NCAA's new guidelines for dealing with such crimes involving athletic department employees is exactly what Paterno did. To quote these new guidelines, staff are to "report the crime to the appropriate campus offices" and "do not manage, direct, control, or interfere in the investigation." I guess the old man did the right thing after all in the eyes of the NCAA's own newly published guidelines.

The PSU faithful will vigorously defend the actions of the admin in the Sandusky case as being totally in the bounds of legal obligations and that nothing against the Curley-Schultz-Spanier group has ever been proven, knowing that the trial could get pushed years down the road and that ironically the actions of the PSU counsel could allow the defendants the chance to walk away without having to address the troubling issues raised in their indictment. It is also true that even outside of the NCAA sanctions, PSU has borne the penalties of the huge costs in settlements to Sandusky's victims. And yes Paterno may have possibly even followed the correct legal line of reporting the incident and then turning his back on further knowledge of it. And we can accept the PSU faithful's assertion with a straight face that JoePa's heir apparent and defensive genius coach stepped aside from his duties as the charges were first being made because made in 1999 due to maybe some need for family time without any involvement from Paterno in this decision.

The problem of waiting sometimes years for legal decisions to be played out and then how to mete out the punishment in the case of a conviction on a changing institution like a university is indeed a tough one. Should the future students of a UNC or a PSU or an FSU suffer for the actions of past administrations? Not really fair. Should publicity conscious admins be allowed to stifle investigations into the many recent abuse cases knowing that no one around them wants a scandal to sully a school's image? The victims feel otherwise.

These are knotty problems that challenge our concepts of justice and morality, but to skirt the huge ethical issues that bedeviled PSU and say that "no child rapes" were ever proven to have happened there or that the school's admins did not seek counsel about how to "handle" them, well, that's being way too close-eyed for those of us who have read the documents about the case.

 

[Bayareahusky]

HoopsFan21.... yes, your words are good ones..... and I am certainly a JoePa fan...... having no dog in this fight ...... Joe is in history and was in living history beyond reproach.... and yes, he did things the right way..... my only issue with him is his insistence on being judge and jury for all things related to anything that happened in his program connected with discipline......

It is a shame that the NCAA was quick to action..... as they quite clearly have in so many words said since "We are sorry we penalized you so severely..... we probably made a mistake in doing so....."..... but they haven't come full circle and made corrections like giving Joe back his victories..... It is a shame in our country of checks and balances, the NCAA has nobody checking THEM.....

 

[SWHuskyFan]

HoopsFan21.... yes, your words are good ones..... and I am certainly a JoePa fan. having no dog in this fight . Joe is in history and was in living history beyond reproach.... and yes, he did things the right way..... my only issue with him is his insistence on being judge and jury for all things related to anything that happened in his program connected with discipline.

It is a shame that the NCAA was quick to action..... as they quite clearly have in so many words said since "We are sorry we penalized you so severely..... we probably made a mistake in doing so....."..... but they haven't come full circle and made corrections like giving Joe back his victories..... It is a shame in our country of checks and balances, the NCAA has nobody checking THEM.....

I don't read the NCAA's removal of sanctions that way at all. I read it as them stopping punishing people who are now completely removed from the crime and the coverup of the crime. Joepa got some of what he deserved but not nearly enough. Time does not make his actions or lack of action look any better to me.

 

[Icebear]

Dobbs the damage was done by ESPN's horrible coverage which drove shoddy information. There was only one event on campus. It was reported by McQueery to Paterno and by Paterno exactly according to the law and the NCAA now requires exactly that same process.

Sandusky was terminated in 1999 because he was forced to make a decision between PSU and the time being required at the Second Mile Foundation. It had nothing to do with his family or time with them. Given what we know now that Second Mile was his primary hunting ground the choice for him was obvious. That is prior to anyone at PSU knowing anything about Sandusky's activities which were previously investigated only by State Authorities.

The Freeh Report was so badly done that it has regularly been criticized by those studying it. Speculation is that the NCAA has backed off on much of it penalties in an effort to cut off many of the suits. The greatest flaws of the Freeh report is it made huge overreaches and assumptions not based on facts in evidence.

Again, Paterno's exact actions have now been justified by the NCAAs own actions and policy. 'Nuff said. To date absolutely no public evidence has arisen indicating in anyway that Joe knew anything about any of Sandusky's actions in one of the most researched events of this nature.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Ice, as always you can take the view that JoePa somehow knew nothing. I have talked with former professors of PSU at the time who like me having grown up as extreme PSU fans took jobs at the school as dream jobs only to be totally disillusioned by the ethical culture of the admins, and the Renee Portland situation was just one of many situations they were shocked about. And they state that it was a fact that Joe knew minutiae-detail everything about PSU and certainly anything concerning his football program. You can naturally believe that Joe was totally in the dark about all the incidents involving Sandusky in the 1990s and that he took at face value that his heir apparent suddenly decided he needed to devote more time to the boys at Second Mile than continue with the Lions, and I'll continue believing in tooth fairies.

Sure the Freeh report was messy, and this is not a black-and-white world. We all want justice to be fast and clean, but these situations rarely work out that way, and institutions have many means to stall proceedings, muddy the waters of evidence, and screw up legal proceedings by semi-inadvertent blunders. I fully understand the anguish of innocents who are penalized by the misdeeds of the admins, but to have the PSU faithful asserting that no Sandusky crimes have been proven to have happened there that the admins knew anything about and that all the sanctions taken against the school are unfair -- that's just unseemly. I fully realize that after the school and its counsel messed up its procedures that Curley, Schultz and Spanier case may never go to trial, but the stench rising from their actions as described in the so-far released documentation will linger for decades. Hopefully, admins at all universities are now on the alert there may be grave penalties for turning their backs on the victims while seeking legal advice on "just what they need to do" to avoid incriminating actions. Probably too much to hope for though.

 

[SWHuskyFan]

Dobbs the damage was done by ESPN's horrible coverage which drove shoddy information. There was only one event on campus. It was reported by McQueery to Paterno and by Paterno exactly according to the law and the NCAA now requires exactly that same process.

Sandusky was terminated in 1999 because he was forced to make a decision between PSU and the time being required at the Second Mile Foundation. It had nothing to do with his family or time with them. Given what we know now that Second Mile was his primary hunting ground the choice for him was obvious. That is prior to anyone at PSU knowing anything about Sandusky's activities which were previously investigated only by State Authorities.

The Freeh Report was so badly done that it has regularly been criticized by those studying it. Speculation is that the NCAA has backed off on much of it penalties in an effort to cut off many of the suits. The greatest flaws of the Freeh report is it made huge overreaches and assumptions not based on facts in evidence.

Again, Paterno's exact actions have now been justified by the NCAAs own actions and policy. 'Nuff said. To date absolutely no public evidence has arisen indicating in anyway that Joe knew anything about any of Sandusky's actions in one of the most researched events of this nature.

Paterno's actions have certainly not been justified. Even if he reported upward in his chain, he knew nothing happened. He had a responsibility as a human being to report that monster to the police. Why people feel so necessary to protect their sports hero over the kids that were traumatized here bothers me to no end.

The likelihood that he didn't know about this is infinitesimally low. He knew about everything else that went on and everyone above and below him knew about it. I don't get the need to protect this guys legacy.

 

[Beemer]

Paterno's actions have certainly not been justified. Even if he reported upward in his chain, he knew nothing happened. He had a responsibility as a human being to report that monster to the police. Why people feel so necessary to protect their sports hero over the kids that were traumatized here bothers me to no end.

The likelihood that he didn't know about this is infinitesimally low. He knew about everything else that went on and everyone above and below him knew about it. I don't get the need to protect this guys legacy.

I have never understood this either.

As you say Paterno had a moral obligation to turn Sandusky in to the police. That he didn't do so speaks volumes as to the kind of man he really was-he was more concerned about his program's public image than the actual harm Sandusky inflicted on those boys. Shameful doesn't even begin to describe it. And yes I know Paterno & Sandusky had known each other for decades and that it wouldn't have been an easy thing for Paterno to turn his friend & colleague in to the police. But damn it all there were children being abused and that is something no one should ignore. Yet Paterno did nothing other than the very minimum required of him. Yet there are still many people who consider him a great man & defend him to this day.

 

[HoopsFan21]

I have never understood this either.

As you say Paterno had a moral obligation to turn Sandusky in to the police. That he didn't do so speaks volumes as to the kind of man he really was-he was more concerned about his program's public image than the actual harm Sandusky inflicted on those boys. Shameful doesn't even begin to describe it. And yes I know Paterno & Sandusky had known each other for decades and that it wouldn't have been an easy thing for Paterno to turn his friend & colleague in to the police. But damn it all there were children being abused and that is something no one should ignore. Yet Paterno did nothing other than the very minimum required of him. Yet there are still many people who consider him a great man & defend him to this day.

I likely would have done the same thing he did if someone tells me what McQueary told him. I probably would have just brushed it off as a mistake or misinterpretation especially if it was someone I had known for a long time. My guess is nothing happened that night in the shower. Why? First he told his doctor friend after it happened, then was buddy buddy with the supposed child moldster for years afterwards (consulting him on recruits, playing golf with him, etc.), the school administrators accused of the cover up all seem pretty consistent in describing a much more watered down version (horse play)of what McQueary now claims he told everyone, McQueary's testimony has changed while everyone else's is more or less the same, there is no complainant, Paterno supposedly asked McQueary a few weeks later if he was satisfied with the resolution to which McQueary said he was, and finally just simple human nature: if you're a 30 year old grown man and you witness something horrific as he claimed, do you just grab something from your locker and run out, or do you call the police instinctually like any of us would have? Too many holes in that one incident, and that one incident is why everyone wanted to nuke Penn State.

 

[SWHuskyFan]

There are no holes in the incident. He reported what he saw to the person most in control of the situation. That person was a party to the cover up of the story. As for the people involved and their story, who really believes them? They covered it up, they conspired to squash the story, of course their story is consistent. They planned out the story together, that's the conspiracy part. McQueary clearly should have done more, but he was young and likely scared for his livelihood. I can understand what he did, don't like it , but understand it. Also, no one is making a crusade to clear McQueary's name, only to make him the fall guy. The only person that anyone seems to care about clearing is JoePa. I haven't heard anyone defend the rest of them, only JoePa was innocent somehow.

 

[CL82]

Now the NCAA has repealed most of the sanctions and have called the whole thing "an experiment." Call me crazy, but I would never want to be part of some experimental new punishment, especially when after a couple of years of it the NCAA basically says, OK we were wrong, sorry and have a nice day.

Well UConn MBB certainly seen it's share of NCAA "experiments."

Texting is bad and you've done it too much but after your punishment we'll just drop the rule. Students who transfer out of your university are a bad thing, especially if they are struggling acamdemically. If it happens we'll dock you a scholarship, maybe two if we're really pissed. Wait did you just win a National Championship down two scholarships? Well we're making up a new rule prohibiting post season play for that. Oh by the way, we're applying it retroactively, using the same scores that we've already punished you for. What that means it is impossible for you to be in compliance? Don't care. What? You have up to date scores and if we use them you will be in compliance. We won't use them.

Don't get me started....

 

[Icebear]

Paterno's actions have certainly not been justified. Even if he reported upward in his chain, he knew nothing happened. He had a responsibility as a human being to report that monster to the police. Why people feel so necessary to protect their sports hero over the kids that were traumatized here bothers me to no end.

The likelihood that he didn't know about this is infinitesimally low. He knew about everything else that went on and everyone above and below him knew about it. I don't get the need to protect this guys legacy.

If he had done what you suggest he would have been breaking the law. As a trained and mandated reporter in PA I am well aware of what we are expected to do and what we are to not do. Every PA school teacher is trained it that same manner. Paterno had no proof of what was done, he was not a eye witness. He had no way of knowing that Sandusky was the monster you suggest. You and I know it is true because of the charges that were eventually brought and the benefit of hindsight.

McQueary's comments about the incident have been inconsistent. Paterno did make further inquiry and was told the investigation was proceeding. He repeated such to McQueary. It is Curley and Schultz who remain at the heart of the situation and President Spanier to a lesser extent.

Unless you know the structure and nature of the relationship between Joe and the others involved you have no means to assess the situation and to make any comment about what Joe knew or didn't know. Many of the assumptions that have been speculated on in the media do not reflect the reality.

 

[Icebear]

There are no holes in the incident. He reported what he saw to the person most in control of the situation. That person was a party to the cover up of the story. As for the people involved and their story, who really believes them? They covered it up, they conspired to squash the story, of course their story is consistent. They planned out the story together, that's the conspiracy part. McQueary clearly should have done more, but he was young and likely scared for his livelihood. I can understand what he did, don't like it , but understand it. Also, no one is making a crusade to clear McQueary's name, only to make him the fall guy. The only person that anyone seems to care about clearing is JoePa. I haven't heard anyone defend the rest of them, only JoePa was innocent somehow.

Not near to the truth or accurate in any way.

 

[SWHuskyFan]

No use talking to someone who is blinded by homerism. I do think JoePa is criminally liable in this situation. They lacked the proof to go forward with charges, but that hardly makes him innocent.

 

[Icebear]

No use talking to someone who is blinded by homerism. I do think JoePa is criminally liable in this situation. They lacked the proof to go forward with charges, but that hardly makes him innocent.

Seeing I live within 45 minutes of campus and know many, many people who work at PSU and some who played for Joe I can honestly say your perception does not jive with the facts at all. I am far from a homer and had no problem finding Rene Portland accountable for everything she did.

Read Joe Posnanski book on Paterno which is the fairest and most honest portrayal of JoePA in print.

 

[SubbaBub]

No use talking to someone who is blinded by homerism. I do think JoePa is criminally liable in this situation. They lacked the proof to go forward with charges, but that hardly makes him innocent.

I'll make one attempt to educate you. Take it or not. Any accusation of this nature is highly sensitive for obvious reasons. If a witness, third hand or otherwise, makes the accused aware of the investigation or otherwise makes this information public, then the ability of law enforcement to convict the accused is highly compromised. The accused might get wind of the investigation and start to destroy evidence or run for it.

According to PA state law, Joe reported the incident to a duly designated law enforcement official. His part, whatever you wanted it to be aside, was over.

This is the law, and as Icebear points out now the official policy of the NCAA. Focus whatever interests you about this topic toward learning the facts, because most of what was reported was deeply flawed if not outright false.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

Those who can do, those who can't teach, those who can't teach become guidance counselors! Remember that one? Well, there is a lot of truth to that ( and it does a terrible injustice to committed, talented teachers I know). Well, it has one step missing. Those who can't fake guidance counseling become administrators. All along that chain the instinct for self preservation goes up. The self preservation instincts at Penn State were highly developed and only partly exposed in the multiple investigations. Then, of course, we can go on to the NCAA, which is essentially a bunch of administrators who could not survived in the most protected sinecure of American employment - the sports side of a college/university (I do not include coaching in that statement - ref. administration ).

 

[pap49cba]

Hatchell speaks... Says she was unaware... LINK

 

[j66kicker]

Hatchell speaks... Says she was unaware... LINK

Either covering up or clueless - neither looks too good.

 

[cockhrnleghrn]

Either covering up or clueless - neither looks too good.

I've always thought Sylvia seemed rather clueless. It will be interesting to see where everything ends up with this situation at UNC.

 

[CL82]

I'll make one attempt to educate you. Take it or not. Any accusation of this nature is highly sensitive for obvious reasons. If a witness, third hand or otherwise, makes the accused aware of the investigation or otherwise makes this information public, then the ability of law enforcement to convict the accused is highly compromised. The accused might get wind of the investigation and start to destroy evidence or run for it.

According to PA state law, Joe reported the incident to a duly designated law enforcement official. His part, whatever you wanted it to be aside, was over.

This is the law, and as Icebear points out now the official policy of the NCAA. Focus whatever interests you about this topic toward learning the facts, because most of what was reported was deeply flawed if not outright false.

So you are saying he had not further legal duty. Okay, I'll accept that, at least for the purpose of this discussion. But JoePa held enormous influence on campus and certainly over football facilities. He was aware of Sandusky's access to and position of influence over vulnerable children through Second Mile Foundation. Would you say that he moral duty under those circumstances to make sure those kids weren't at risk?

 

[HoopsFan21]

So you are saying he had not further legal duty. Okay, I'll accept that, at least for the purpose of this discussion. But JoePa held enormous influence on campus and certainly over football facilities. He was aware of Sandusky's access to and position of influence over vulnerable children through Second Mile Foundation. Would you say that he moral duty under those circumstances to make sure those kids weren't at risk?

I don't think Paterno had as much power as everyone seems to think. For example, when Sandusky retired, he did not want Sandusky to bring Second Mile kids into the gym, but was overruled. Paterno did not want the new baseball stadium built near the football stadium, and was overruled. Paterno did not want anything to do with the Big Ten Network, and was overruled. There are apparently countless decisions big and small made by the school that Paterno objected to, and for someone that supposedly wielded tremendous power as we were told by the media, he seemed rather powerless over things involving his own program and facilities. Regarding the moral obligation, as Ice explained above, there is a protocol that needs to be followed to protect the victim, accused, and the investigation. I assume this is why Paterno's first move was to check the University's policies. The laws seem counter-intuitive to us laypeople that aren't mandatory reporters, but most states seem to have something similar on the books when it comes to reporting child abuse. If people are upset by this, they should write their congressman, not blame a football coach. Also, for those that keep saying Paterno escaped criminal charges because he died, even the lead prosecutor in the case said they found no evidence that Paterno had attempted to cover anything up. I believe I saw it in an interview on 60 Minutes earlier this year.

 

[CL82]

. Regarding the moral obligation, as Ice explained above, there is a protocol that needs to be followed to protect the victim, accused, and the investigation.

Ice was talking about the legal duty if you are aware of possible abuse. That is a different standard. Sometimes doing the legal minimum is enough. Sometimes it isn't. I submit that when an accused child rapist has access to particularly vulnerable children might well be one of the times when the absolute minimum to avoid individual prosecution isn't enough.

 

[HoopsFan21]

Ice was talking about the legal duty if you are aware of possible abuse. That is a different standard. Sometimes doing the legal minimum is enough. Sometimes it isn't. I submit that when an accused child rapist has access to particularly vulnerable children might well be one of the times when the absolute minimum to avoid individual prosecution isn't enough.

So what exactly did you want him to do? He put McQueary in touch with who he was supposed to. He checked with McQueary later about it to make sure he was OK with how it was dealt with. If I'm Paterno at that point, having not witnessed anything first hand, I'm of the mind that it was handled or is being handled appropriately by those charged with dealing with such situations. Furthermore, given McQueary's friendliness towards Sandusky after supposedly witnessing him rape a child in the shower tells me he probably never actually saw such a thing and just misinterpreted what was ultimately horse play which also explains why the school administrators all say that is what McQueary described to them.

 

[Icebear]

Ice was talking about the legal duty if you are aware of possible abuse. That is a different standard. Sometimes doing the legal minimum is enough. Sometimes it isn't. I submit that when an accused child rapist has access to particularly vulnerable children might well be one of the times when the absolute minimum to avoid individual prosecution isn't enough.

Your assumption is he didn't follow up which is wrong. He followed up with the authorities to whom he reported it and was told the investigation was proceeding. Sandusky was not convicted of anything, had never been charged with anything. Joe did his job others not so much.

 

[CL82]

Your assumption is he didn't follow up which is wrong. He followed up with the authorities to whom he reported it and was told the investigation was proceeding. Sandusky was not convicted of anything, had never been charged with anything. Joe did his job others not so much.

Joe did his job, met the legal minimum to avoid prosecution. I think that sums up how people feel about the Icebear. People expected more of Paterno both because he was a larger than life figure and because they hope they'd have found the courage to do more.

 

[CL82]

So what exactly did you want him to do? He put McQueary in touch with who he was supposed to. He checked with McQueary later about it to make sure he was OK with how it was dealt with. If I'm Paterno at that point, having not witnessed anything first hand, I'm of the mind that it was handled or is being handled appropriately by those charged with dealing with such situations. Furthermore, given McQueary's friendliness towards Sandusky after supposedly witnessing him rape a child in the shower tells me he probably never actually saw such a thing and just misinterpreted what was ultimately horse play which also explains why the school administrators all say that is what McQueary described to them.

So you are saying that McQueary lied to Paterno and that no rape took place. Does Sandusky's eventual convict make you least bit uncomfortable with that assumption?

 

[HoopsFan21]

So you are saying that McQueary lied to Paterno and that no rape took place. Does Sandusky's eventual convict make you least bit uncomfortable with that assumption?

Sandusky was acquitted of the rape charge in that incident, so obviously the jury felt he didn't see a rape either. McQueary said he never told Paterno it was a rape out of respect for the coach, and instead described it as something sexual. Yeah, he was still convicted of other charges in that incident because Sandusky was showering with a child, but the way it was made out at the time was that Paterno witnessed a kid being raped and made sure it was covered up. Very few people know this, but the weekend after the grand jury presentment was leaked, Paterno was actually praised for doing the right thing. Look it up. Journalists that slammed him days later, wrote articles in a much different tone when the story first broke on that Friday afternoon. It wasn't until after that weekend's CFB games that ESPN made it their #1 story and really whipped everyone up into a frenzy. Probably made for good ratings during an otherwise quiet time. By the way, it is a crime to leak a grand jury presentment, and you can easily see why. Do you honestly believe Sandusky got a fair trial with jurors that were not tainted by a raging public opinion that had months to stew over that grand jury presentment and all of its gory details (grand juries convened to decide on indictments are one-sided by nature as there is no cross examination)? Sandusky was also represented by the equivalent of the public defender from My Cousin Vinny, and any delays the defense asked for were denied. Amazing that a guy with nearly 50 counts could be tried and convicted so quickly, and in many of the charges there was not even a complainant! How long was that trial to decide if Roger Clemens lied about using steroids again?

I'm not picking on you here, but I want you, or anyone else for that matter, to describe exactly what you would have done if faced with the same situation and information that Paterno had at the time. Remember, you don't know Sandusky is a pedophile, and you're getting a second hand report that's pretty outrageous and is about someone with whom you're not best friends with but you've known for decades. I'm being honest with saying that I probably wouldn't have done any more than Paterno did. A lot of people cast stones but can't seem to bring themselves to admit that they also wouldn't have done more than just report it up the chain and let those trained to handle such situations handle it.

 

[Icebear]

Joe did his job, met the legal minimum to avoid prosecution. I think that sums up how people feel about the Icebear. People expected more of Paterno both because he was a larger than life figure and because they hope they'd have found the courage to do more.

You realize if he did more he could have been prosecuted for obstruction of justice. That is the exact point made to mandated reporters in our training. How was he to know the situation wasn't resolved without any charges because the report was discovered to be without basis. If he took personal action without basis he would be open to litigation for defamation. It wasn't about a lack of courage for Joe but rather there are realities within which we function. Without having been an eye witness how was he to discern for himself the validity or emptiness of McQueary's fuzzy report. Joe put it in the hands of the professionals. Be angry at them but as to Joe your assumptions are just that assumptions and no basis for any expectations that Joe should have done more. As to others' thoughts about me what does that have to do with the price of tea in China.

 

[Icebear]

So you are saying that McQueary lied to Paterno and that no rape took place. Does Sandusky's eventual convict make you least bit uncomfortable with that assumption?

He never said to Paterno that a rape was taking place. To suggest that is to participate in myth making.