Paterno and Spanier both fired!

[Icebear]

This piece by Joe Posansky says everything I have tried to say for the last few days and says it vastly better than I have or could. He speaks of all of the emotions, the rage, and the runaway train this has become. His observations are from ground zero in State College. As I have said repeatedly, be patient and let it play out. When all the facts are known there will be plenty of time to condemn the right people, if that includes Joe and McQueary fine but let the facts be gathered.

http://joeposnanski.si.com/2011/11/10/the-end-of-paterno/

 

[Icebear]

There remains one mystery to me. Paterno kept coaching to age 84. I am uncertain of interim coach Tom Bradley's age but I read that he has been at PSU as an assistant for 30+ years. Sandusky was retired at age 55.

Was his retirement completely voluntary? Was he pushed out the door? Given a nudge? Or was there some sort of a sub rosa agreement between him and the administration ("We are aware of what's been going on and want to keep the lid on it, so you retire and nobody says a word and the great image of PSU remains untarnished") that enabled Paterno's #2 guy and heir-apparent to leave at a relatively early age with a nice retirement package?

Maybe I am missing something but based on what I now know, something about Sandusky's age 55 retirement smells bad to me.

All great questions, Kib, and ones that must be answered. Let it all play out.

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

This piece by Joe Posansky says everything I have tried to say for the last few days and says it vastly better than I have or could. He speaks of all of the emotions, the rage, and the runaway train this has become. His observations are from ground zero in State College. As I have said repeatedly, be patient and let it play out. When all the facts are known there will be plenty of time to condemn the right people, if that includes Joe and McQueary fine but let the facts be gathered.

http://joeposnanski.si.com/2011/11/10/the-end-of-paterno/

I agree with that Ice. I am just overwhelmed by the perversion of Sandusky and the ensuing cover up thereof.

 

[Aluminny69]

NYTimes has an article about the 1998 investigationsYou may need a sign in)
Investigation of Sandusky in 1998 Raises Questions

A lengthy police report was generated, state prosecutors said. The boy was interviewed. A second potential victim was identified. Child welfare authorities were brought in. Sandusky confessed to showering with one or both of the children. The local district attorney was given material to consider prosecution.
In the end, no prosecution was undertaken. The child welfare agency did not take action. And, according to prosecutors, the commander of the university’s campus police force told his detective, Ronald Schreffler, to close the case.
“Sandusky admitted showering naked with Victim 6, admitted to hugging Victim 6 while in the shower and admitted that it was wrong,” said the report issued last weekend by the Pennsylvania attorney general. “Detective Schreffler advised Sandusky not to shower with any child again and Sandusky said that he would not.”

Lauro, the investigator for the state welfare department in 1998, said he was aware during the investigation that Sandusky was a prominent local figure, but that it did not affect his work.
“Was he a high-profile person?” Lauro asked. “I’d have to be stupid to tell you no. Everybody knew him.”
At the time of his investigation, Lauro said, all the child said was that Sandusky showered with him, and it made him uncomfortable. Lauro said he didn’t feel that was enough to substantiate a sexual-abuse complaint.
Lauro suggested that the child, now grown, had told the grand jury convened by the attorney general a much more explicit account.
Lauro said he has felt worse and worse as the scandal has unfolded, particularly when he read quotations in a newspaper from a victim’s mother blaming him and other officials for not doing more to stop Sandusky.
“I feel bad that there was not more information so I could have done something,” he said. “I feel bad that the mom thinks I should’ve done more. I just didn’t have all the information back then.”

 

[Aluminny69]

In the "You can't make this up" category, Sandusky's 2001 autobiography is entitled:
Touched: The Jerry Sandusky Story

I definitely agree with this comment: "I, for one, would like to see him spend the rest of his life locked up with the general prison population; then, perhaps he can write the sequel entitled "Touched II: Predator Becomes Prey".

 

[Icebear]

In the "You can't make this up" category, Sandusky's 2001 autobiography is entitled:
Touched: The Jerry Sandusky Story

I definitely agree with this comment: "I, for one, would like to see him spend the rest of his life locked up with the general prison population; then, perhaps he can write the sequel entitled "Touched II: Predator Becomes Prey".

I hope that no one orders Sandusky's book as it will only provide him income.

 

[Icebear]

Alum, for me that whole 1998 episode is when it all went wrong. What impact did the failure to prosecute and make public the behavior Sandusky was accused of have on cooling the whole situation and people's expectations. The DA and Children's Services were both aware. Who knew about the situation and could keep watch on Sandusky.

 

[Icebear]

I agree with that Ice. I am just overwhelmed by the perversion of Sandusky and the ensuing cover up thereof.

I understand, Oz, blessings on you and all of us who a disgusted by these events and most certainly the victims and their families.

 

[UConnCat]

USA Today has a front page story on Victim 1. Without his courage and that of his mother, Sandusky would likely still be committing crimes and the shroud of secrecy would still be in place. In a story utterly lacking in heroes, Victim 1 is surely the exception. BTW, note that Victim 1's mother was initially dissuaded from pursuing an investigation of the man with "a heart of gold."

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/coll...dusky-investigation-victim-1-cover/51160950/1

 

[Northeast86]

Let's play a game and switch the circumstances up a bit:

The Grad Asst. walks into the shower and sees Sandusky raping Paterno. Grad Asst goes to Beloved Asst Coach (BAC) BAC goes to AD and College Prez and does EXACTLY what Paterno did in the real situation. Question: Would everyone be supporting BAC like they are Paterno? Would people be asking for patience, although we know that Paterno knew what happened- Paterno acknowledges he should have done more- very little ambiguity as to what Paterno knew and what Grad Asst. saw.

People also need to understand lack of prosecution does not mean someone did not break a crime. One of my professors always talked about "prosecutorial discretion." Basically the DA/AG office could have seen the evidence and thought: "Is there enough to make a solid case against Paterno?" If yes: "Is this a case we can win?" It is quite possible that they simply thought trying the 84 year old Paterno would simply be an exercise in futility. Reading certain posters on this board and the disgusting support for him from Penn State students and PA residents makes me wonder if a conviction would even be possible (again this is IF he did break the law).

 

[Northeast86]

And as I read "Break a Crime" I realize that proofreading before you post instead of after is better. How about "Break law" or if you prefer "committed a cri

 

[Northeast86]

"Committed a crime" And not to try to make light of a serious topic- but I can not post today. Perhaps I will practice more this season by gushing over Stefanie Dolson's beautiful post moves.

 

[Moose]

I don't understand why PSU continued to cover up for Sandusky in 2002 after he'd already been disassociated from the university in 1998. Does that make sense?

 

[Aluminny69]

I don't understand why PSU continued to cover up for Sandusky in 2002 after he'd already been disassociated from the university in 1998. Does that make sense?

He was not "disassociated." He was allowed to resign, but given emeritus status, along with several perks, including access to all athletic facilities. Sandusky has been on campus as late as last Sunday.

ETA: Found this:

"Sandusky's ‘emeritus' position, alleged negotiated as part of his 1999 retirement, provided him with an office in the Lasch Football Building; unlimited access to all football facilities, including the locker room; access to all recreational facilities; a parking pass; a university Internet account; listing in the faculty directory and numerous other privileges – he had remained a regular presence on campus."

 

[Icebear]

Let's play a game and switch the circumstances up a bit:
The Grad Asst. walks into the shower and sees Sandusky raping Paterno. Grad Asst goes to Beloved Asst Coach (BAC) BAC goes to AD and College Prez and does EXACTLY what Paterno did in the real situation. Question: Would everyone be supporting BAC like they are Paterno? Would people be asking for patience, although we know that Paterno knew what happened- Paterno acknowledges he should have done more- very little ambiguity as to what Paterno knew and what Grad Asst. saw.

The reversal of the situation is inane. But yes, I would insist on letting the details play out for whoever was involved once the risk to future children or others was secured. And no we do not know what Paterno knew except in general terms, we do know in more detail what McQueary saw. Nor do we know if Joe inquired from Curley what had become of the situation and was told, "yes, it was followed up by the campus police." Paterno has acknowledged he wishes he had done more in hindsight. That hind sight includes everything we all know now.

 

[Aluminny69]

Some thoughts on McQueary:

McQueary was a 28 year old graduate asssitant at the time and I contend that nothing in his life prepared him for what he saw when he looked into the shower on that Friday night in 2002. If someone had told him what he was going to see before he looked into the shower that night then he could have prepared a response for that but he observed an act that very few of us have ever observed. ( I am reminded of a 25 year old Ron Goldman stumbling upon OJ brutally attacking his ex-wife.)

Two years earlier the janitors at PSU saw the same thing with Sandusky and a child at PSU and they didn't act to stop that. The first janitor that spotted Sandusky and the kid nearly had a breakdown. I think we have to understand that walking in on such an act is one of the most gutwrenching things in a person's life and many don't have the capability of reacting quick enough to stop the act.

As far as calling the police, McQueary, as a hired hand, did the correct thing by reporting it up the chain of command. After finding out that the chain of command did not report it to the police, I could understand his willingness not to report it. One thing he should have done differently is quit working at PSU and find a new place of employment.

 

[Northeast86]

It is called a hypothetical situation. The point is for people to stop and see if their feelings are more out of support for Paterno, or the process.

[politics deleted. JS]

Sorry that you think the exercise is inane. I am betting a lot of people would not like what they would discover about themselves if they truly examined what they would be calling for if that situation occurred.

 

[Icebear]

Alum, add to that the fact that the McQueary family and Sandusky family and the kids reportedly grew up together playing grade school sports, etc. and you have a family dynamic that may approach turning in a favorite uncle. It is hardly a surprise the first person he called was his father. The psychological components here are powerful.

 

[JS]

This piece by Joe Posansky says everything I have tried to say for the last few days . . . He speaks of all of the emotions, the rage, and the runaway train this has become. . . . When all the facts are known there will be plenty of time to condemn the right people . . . http://joeposnanski.si.com/2011/11/10/the-end-of-paterno/

Posansky himself reaches the following conclusions about Paterno:

So, two points to get out of the way:
1. I think Joe Paterno had the responsibility as a leader and a man to stop the horrific rapes allegedly committed by Jerry Sandusky, and I believe he will have regrets about this for the rest of his life.
2. Because of this, Joe Paterno could no longer coach at Penn State University.

He reaches these conclusions without waiting until that magic moment when "all the facts are known" and there is "plenty of time to condemn the right people."

JoePa is one of the right people, and Posansky says so just as a "point to get out of the way." He also gets out of the way how much he feels for the victims and their families ("All that matters are the victims") before amply demonstrating that that's not all that matters.

In fact the main point of his blog, his reason for writing this piece, is obviously that he's at least as upset, and apparently more so, about the horrible things being said by somebody or another about Paterno:

there has been a desperate race among commentators and others to prove that they are MORE against child molesting than anyone else. That makes me sick.

Screw you JoeP II, resident biographer of JoeP I. You paint a picture of people dancing on JoePa's grave, calling him an inhuman monster, failing to stand up for him when they should, etc. etc. So attack the attackers, decimate the straw men, stand up for your "client"/book subject. Scream and howl at the carrion crows you see dropping bird doo on the statue you're building.

But to borrow a phrase, there will be plenty of time for you to condemn them when all of the facts are known and they're proven wrong. You reached the two important conclusions for now, insofar as the story concerns the subject of your pending book (and it concerns a lot more) as quoted earlier, and you reached them without the further and lengthy factual development to come.

1. Joe Pa had the responsibility and ability to stop a series of horrific rapes and he didn't do so.

2. Because of that he had to go.

No one here is saying more than that. No one here is calling Joe Pa a monster.

And no one here has to wait before forming some conclusions, just as you've formed some. They're always tentative conclusions anyway, pending further investigation, but form them we may.

You say Joe Pa isn't charged with a crime. One of my tentative conclusions is that he's escaping indictment only by grace of an overly narrow Pennsylvania reporting statute that covers administrators (such as those PSU administrators targeted by the grand jury in this case) and teachers, but not coaches (who ought a fortiori to be covered for good reasons, including the existence of locker rooms and showers). I feel certain the Pennsylvania legislature will amend this statute to broaden and strengthen it -- as a direct result of this case. And that's all to the good.

 

[Icebear]

It is called a hypothetical situation. The point is for people to stop and see if their feelings are more out of support for Paterno, or the process.

And frankly it is not a bad exercise to engage in.

Sorry that you think the exercise is inane. I am betting a lot of people would not like what they would discover about themselves if they truly examined what they would be calling for if that situation occurred.

If one changes their expectations for justice to change like that then one is not guided by core values and principles. If one is driven solely by feelings one is already lost.

 

[Northeast86]

I was simply pointing out the similarities between the two situations. People had their heroes publicly tarnished and their dreams of them shattered. It is hard for anyone. My point is that I doubt a lot of the Paterno supporters would be supporting another person in the same situation. We try to rationalize what happened or minimize our own hurt. Sorry if that is offensive to some people, but I bet we can all think of a time that has happened. For some it is happening right now.

_____________

Not a matter of it offending some people. We have a rule here against discussing politics. Doesn't matter which political figure you pick as an example to make your point. Others will want to take an example from the other side, and there we go.

Your current statement of your point is fine. You could illustrate it, if you want to, by examples from fields other than politics.

JS

 

[Icebear]

Posansky himself reaches the following conclusions about Paterno:

So, two points to get out of the way:
1. I think Joe Paterno had the responsibility as a leader and a man to stop the horrific rapes allegedly committed by Jerry Sandusky, and I believe he will have regrets about this for the rest of his life.
2. Because of this, Joe Paterno could no longer coach at Penn State University.

He reaches these conclusions without waiting until that magic moment when "all the facts are known" and there is "plenty of time to condemn the right people."

JoePa is one of the right people, and Posansky says so just as a "point to get out of the way." He also gets out of the way how much he feels for the victims and their families ("All that matters are the victims") before amply demonstrating that that's not all that matters.

In fact the main point of his blog, his reason for writing this piece, is obviously that he's at least as upset, and apparently more so, about the horrible things being said by somebody or another about Paterno:

there has been a desperate race among commentators and others to prove that they are MORE against child molesting than anyone else. That makes me sick.

Screw you JoeP II, resident biographer of JoeP I. You paint a picture of people dancing on JoePa's grave, calling him an inhuman monster, failing to stand up for him when they should, etc. etc. So attack the attackers, decimate the straw men, stand up for your "client"/book subject. Scream and howl at the carrion crows that you feel are dropping bird doo on the statue you're building.

But to borrow a phrase, there will be plenty of time for you to condemn them when all of the facts are known and they're proven wrong. You reached the two important conclusions for now, insofar as the story concerns the subject of your pending book (and it concerns a lot more) as quoted earlier, and you reached them without the further and lengthy factual development to come.

1. Joe Pa had the responsibility and ability to stop a series of horrific rapes and he didn't do so.

2. Because of that he had to go.

No one here is saying more than that. No one here is calling Joe Pa a monster.

And no one here has to wait before forming some conclusions, just as you've formed some. They're always tentative conclusions anyway, pending further investigation, but form them we may.

You say Joe Pa isn't charged with a crime. One of my tentative conclusions is that he's escaping indictment only by grace of an overly narrow Pennsylvania reporting statute that covers administrators (such as those PSU administrators targeted by the grand jury in this case) and teachers, but not coaches (who ought a fortiori to be covered for good reasons, including the existence of locker rooms and showers).

JS, a wonderful example of how two people read things completely differently. I see none of your assertions in his writing except as Posansky readily acknowledges. Nor was he addressing the situation here. There have been those in PA who have wanted Joe gone for years because he was too old and the game had passed him by. A number of those are connected to the sports department of the Harrisburg Patriot are among these. With three years of research in Posansky knows this well. It is, also, to me the attitude of a number in the media. There is indeed much dancing on his grave just as there was when Rene P. left. To me neither was a reason for rejoicing.

 

[Northeast86]

Renee Portland harassed, berated and finally kicked players off of her team for being lesbians or her believing they were lesbians. Her leaving was a reason to celebrate if only to introduce a new era of women's basketball at PSU where players would only be criticized for their play and not for their personal life.

 

[Icebear]

Renee Portland harassed, berated and finally kicked players off of her team for being lesbians or her believing they were lesbians. Her leaving was a reason to celebrate if only to introduce a new era of women's basketball at PSU where players would only be criticized for their play and not for their personal life.

Since I know personally a number of those who suffered under Rene I know well the emotions I would say it was more relief than joy. Too many people suffered and still do.

 

[JS]

Nor was he addressing the situation here.

You have been.

 

[Icebear]

You have been.

Then I apologize for losing track of your prepositions.

I have not seen anyone here whom I would term dancing on Joe's grave.

 

[pap49cba]

Ice,

With all due respect I find it a bit odd you keep insisting we “let it all play out” and at the same time seem compelled to respond to nearly every post in this and the original thread.

 

[Northeast86]

Since I know personally a number of those who suffered under Rene I know well the emotions I would say it was more relief than joy. Too many people suffered and still do.

Is it possible and I mean slightly possible- that people outside of who you talked to might have felt joy at her leaving? From other message boards it seemed that people were quite jubilant (if I may be so bold) about the PSU athletics department finally ousting her. But frankly we are getting off the main point.

 

[JS]

Then I apologize for losing track of your prepositions.

I have not seen anyone here whom I would term dancing on Joe's grave.

Don't know about my prepositions, and my propositions may be even more suspect, but you've been counseling all along "Patience . . . don't form conclusions until all the facts are in . . . there's too much rushing to judgment . . . too much emotion."

Much of that has explicitly been directed at the board. And I'm saying, patience before forming what conclusions? The ones Joe P II formed? I don't think you originally wanted us to go there either. And I'm saying we all form tentative conclusions, subject to revision, and saying "patience" can just be a damper on expression of those one doesn't like.

 

[Aluminny69]

Ice,

With all due respect I find it a bit odd you keep insisting we “let it all play out” and at the same time seem compelled to respond to nearly every post in this and the original thread.

I am not exactly sure what IceBear's relationship with PSU is, but suffice to say he is very "affected" by the situation. I completely understand his desire to respond when appropriate.