Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials

[ulf]

Do people still believe that Paterno was the most powerful person at Penn State?

Umm yeah

[Bioshock]

Taking away the wins was a bizarre tactic, as it always is.

Having said that, there are way too many people who lead you believe that it (the restoration) is somehow an indicator that Penn State didn't fail in the matter.

Everyone who should have done enough didn't. That's the main takeaway.

But hey, we're just haters so you're wrong dude...

[Bioshock]

Colin Dunlap ‏@colin_dunlap
If you don't find it crazy Penn State has turned a man who admitted "I wish I had done more" into a sympathetic figure, then you are crazy.

[count2infinity]

I love how people forget to add "with the benefit of hindsight" to the beginning of that quote. But, carry on...

[slappybrown]

SDD, are you disappointed in what Paterno did or didn't do?

[Orlando Penguin]

Lt. Dish comes across as genuine and has the right priorities in line. And not one student blog was linked in her response.

That's the intent. Thank you for recognizing it.

Well done, Lt. (saluting). You get it. You've obviously followed this farce from the beginning and are asking the right questions and wanting to know the true answers. A large majority of the people out there are shallow and only interested in what's on the surface and what the media tells them. They're not interested in educating themselves by reading the hundreds of pages of the Freeh Report (joke) and the Clemente/Thornburgh Report (much more educating). I had a half-hour discussion yesterday with one of my editors at work about the situation and he, like the majority, had no idea that Erickson was the one who signed off on Sandusky's emeritus status, or that the stuff in 98 was referred to the DA but no charges were brought, or that the BOT hated Paterno and couldn't wait for the PR scales to tip in their favor to oust him. As I said in my previous post a few pages back, the Paterno lawsuit and the Curley et al trial needs to hit the court so all of the e-mails and all of the inside discussions are brought to light. I've said from the very beginning of all of this that I had a feeling the corruption would run all the way up to Corbett's office. I think there are a number of people who had/have something to hide in this situation (BOT, CYS, Corbett, etc) and it was too convenient to throw an old, feeble football coach under the bus to save themselves.

[columbia]

So Coach Joe's in the clear on this? Is that your contention?

[DudeMan2766]

So Coach Joe's in the clear on this? Is that your contention?

As soon as this all went down Joe went from the guy who essentially runs happy valley to a feeble old man who was an easy target because he was too weak to defend himself and too confused to understand what was going on around him. Completely ignoring that this all happened when Joe was much younger.

Admittedly tho that's just my uneducated opinion because I don't have time to read and compare the Freeh and Clemente reports. I just watch ESPN and read Pitt message boards all day.

[columbia]

I'm just trying to get a clarification on this:

and it was too convenient to throw an old, feeble football coach under the bus to save themselves.

[tifosi77]

Admittedly tho that's just my uneducated opinion...

That much has been clear for a while now.

[DudeMan2766]

Admittedly tho that's just my uneducated opinion...

That much has been clear for a while now.

You act as if I'm the only person on planet Earth that feels this way. Outside of Lt Dish, my stance has been met with nothing except "youre stupid" and "you must be a Pitt fan." Really compelling arguments. You're so damn smart you tell me, explain to me exactly what I'm missing. ...Let me guess, the WHOLE truth

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

SDD, are you disappointed in what Paterno did or didn't do?

It depends on what McQuery actually told him that day. We will never really know that, so I can't really make a judgment on whether he did the right thing at the time. I don't think it is really fair to make a decision on testimony given 10 years after the event and which may have been influenced based on what was told to him leading up to the Grand Jury trial by McQuery, the police, prosecutors, etc.

McQuery has said that Paterno followed up with him to make sure he felt comfortable with how things were handled, and he told Paterno that he was. McQuery was comfortable enough with Sandusky that he attended Second Mile Charity events after the 2001 incident.

Jay Paterno wrote in his book that his children and his brothers and sisters kids spent time at the Sandusky's home after 2001.

I think there is enough evidence to show that Paterno was most likely not told anything close to what was stated in the Grand Jury report, and possibly never told that anything sexual took place.

[shmenguin]

Ha, at that last paragraph.

[tifosi77]

Admittedly tho that's just my uneducated opinion...

That much has been clear for a while now.

You act as if I'm the only person on planet Earth that feels this way. Outside of Lt Dish, my stance has been met with nothing except "youre stupid" and "you must be a Pitt fan." Really compelling arguments. You're so damn smart you tell me, explain to me exactly what I'm missing. ...Let me guess, the WHOLE truth

You flat out state that you do not need all the information before forming an opinion and blasting off about it; how do you expect that to be met? Especially considering much of what people are basing their opinions on has proved to be inaccurate.

You are certainly not the only person on planet earth who thinks the way you think. You are, however, the only one I'm conversing with on the subject at the moment.

This story is not the same as it was in 2012, and yet you and other detractors come to places like this thread spouting opinions on 'facts' that are two years out of date and then get snarked off when challenged.

I think there is enough evidence to show that Paterno was most likely not told anything close to what was stated in the Grand Jury report, and possibly never told that anything sexual took place.

This is really the heart of it. Some are willing to believe that the GJ presentment represents findings of fact (it doesn't, that's not what a grand jury does), despite much of what was in that report vis-à-vis Paterno having since been changed substantially - if not contradicted - by trial testimony and subsequent public commentary by those involved.

[count2infinity]

I think that a lot of people don't understand the mindset of a pedophile as well (and for good reason... I don't want to either). I was horrified to find that an average pedophile that have been caught (which is a small percentage) have violated hundreds of kids to that point in time. Most are crafty sociopaths that masquerade as normal people and are typically quite good at it.

[columbia]

Most are crafty sociopaths that masquerade as normal people and are typically quite good at it.

Until they're not:

1998: Sandusky asks a boy identified as Victim 6, now 24, to shower with him when he is 11, and Sandusky lathers soap on his back and bear-hugs him, according to the grand jury report. The boy tells his mother, who reports it to the university.

Note the 2nd sentence.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012 ... y-sandusky" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[DudeMan2766]

Admittedly tho that's just my uneducated opinion...

That much has been clear for a while now.

You act as if I'm the only person on planet Earth that feels this way. Outside of Lt Dish, my stance has been met with nothing except "youre stupid" and "you must be a Pitt fan." Really compelling arguments. You're so damn smart you tell me, explain to me exactly what I'm missing. ...Let me guess, the WHOLE truth

You flat out state that you do not need all the information before forming an opinion and blasting off about it; how do you expect that to be met? Especially considering much of what people are basing their opinions on has proved to be inaccurate.

You are certainly not the only person on planet earth who thinks the way you think. You are, however, the only one I'm conversing with on the subject at the moment.

This story is not the same as it was in 2012, and yet you and other detractors come to places like this thread spouting opinions on 'facts' that are two years out of date and then get snarked off when challenged.

I think there is enough evidence to show that Paterno was most likely not told anything close to what was stated in the Grand Jury report, and possibly never told that anything sexual took place.

This is really the heart of it. Some are willing to believe that the GJ presentment represents findings of fact (it doesn't, that's not what a grand jury does), despite much of what was in that report vis-à-vis Paterno having since been changed substantially - if not contradicted - by trial testimony and subsequent public commentary by those involved.

I said there's plenty of truth that's already been presented to logically conclude that high ranking officials at the university knew something was going down under their watch and at best half assed any attempt to put a stop to it. How am I, as someone with zero ties to the university supposed to take the information that's already been presented and have any sympathy towards the school for any punishments that come their way? I don't subscribe to the Jay Paterno mantra of WE NEED MORE TRUTH. And I'm certainly not loony enough to believe that all the information we've been given so for (except of course the good stuff) has all been a lie.

I understand not EVERYTHING reported has been 100% factual and stories change over the years but at the heart of the matter we know for a fact what happened, there was some knowledge of it, and the response by the university was next to nothing. I'm not sure what parts of this "whole truth" are going to change that.

The only ones left putting up a fight are PSU who expect us to believe that everything everything we've heard up to this point except that Sandusky is guilty are complete lies. That's not going to ever happen. I'm supposed to believe that every statement, every court document, every testimony we've heard and read up to this point is false??

[Lt. Dish]

Taking away the wins was a bizarre tactic, as it always is.

Having said that, there are way too many people who lead you believe that it (the restoration) is somehow an indicator that Penn State didn't fail in the matter.

If that's the case, then I think they're also incorrect and are part of the problem. They're not separating the issues and addressing them appropriately, either.

The criminal cases are about the sexual abuse and the (in)actions of officials on campus. If we're using the word "fail," then school officials are alleged (I say this because the court cases are pending) to have failed.

The sanctions and wins are about what the NCAA was authorized to do to the football program about the above. Here, we could say that the NCAA allegedly (or admittedly) failed in adhering to their charter and overstepped their jurisdiction.

There are people at both extremes who aren't taking the time to separate things.

In the past week, I've been focusing on the jurisdictional issue and wondering whether or not the NCAA would've acted had the scandal occurred around (God forbid), say, the PSU men's and women's volleyball programs, the Arizona baseball/softball programs, the Minnesota men's/women's hockey programs, the UVA lacrosse program. While those programs aren't huge moneymakers on the scale of a D-I football program like PSU, they're still prestigious, championship programs in their own rights and arguably have some influence on the culture of the school (yes, volleyball is huge at PSU). I'm not trying to make a point in defense of PSU, I'm just wondering if the NCAA would argue that it would be within their charter to act there, as well. Let's hope we never have to find out.

And here I said I was tapped out. Sigh.

[Lt. Dish]

I think that a lot of people don't understand the mindset of a pedophile as well (and for good reason... I don't want to either). I was horrified to find that an average pedophile that have been caught (which is a small percentage) have violated hundreds of kids to that point in time. Most are crafty sociopaths that masquerade as normal people and are typically quite good at it.

I'm a mandatory reporter who must attend training every year, and it frightens me to no end: What if I miss something and a child is harmed? What if I make an anonymous report and I'm wrong, and it starts the ball rolling to ruining someone's life and reputation?

[Lt. Dish]

SDD, are you disappointed in what Paterno did or didn't do?

As a human being, as me, yes. I am. I wish he had "done more."

But as someone who knows the PA law, I also recognize that he followed the PA law. The reasoning is that any influence by him in the course of "doing more" could've mucked up the investigations. I, too, am trained to report to your supervisor and get out of the way. And you're not supposed to ask for a status. That's also, in part, to protect your identity and spare you from repercussions in the event that you're wrong.

Do I understand it all? Intellectually, yes. Emotionally, no, I find it extremely difficult. Legal =/= moral.

[Lt. Dish]

Do people still believe that Paterno was the most powerful person at Penn State?

Umm yeah

I don't believe he was, and everything I've heard from people who would know say that in the last years he intentionally retreated from a power POV. His telling the BoT that he wasn't retiring was his blaze of glory. And after that, he told them he was going to be "just the football coach," and apparently made good on it as the relationship between him and the BoT deteriorated.

But if he were the most powerful person on campus: Then, if we look at the PA state law, that actually could be a problem, especially because it was common knowledge that he disliked Sandusky. Students knew it, everyone did. I'm not saying that he would've pressed for Sandusky to be arrested out of a personal vendetta, but the last thing you'd want is Sandusky continuing to walk free because his attorneys asserted Paterno had it out for him and was influencing the investigation in course.

Unfortunately, it didn't matter, and the monster walked free anyway.

I'm not offering that argument as my own, but I think it's something to consider.

[ulf]

I mean, if he intentionally gave up power, saying he'd be "just" the coach.. That's kind of inferring he had a ton of power no? And when he had this power, that's when this scandal was happening right?

[columbia]

Yes and yes.

[Pitt87]

SDD, are you disappointed in what Paterno did or didn't do?

As a human being, as me, yes. I am. I wish he had "done more."

But as someone who knows the PA law, I also recognize that he followed the PA law. The reasoning is that any influence by him in the course of "doing more" could've mucked up the investigations. I, too, am trained to report to your supervisor and get out of the way. And you're not supposed to ask for a status. That's also, in part, to protect your identity and spare you from repercussions in the event that you're wrong.

Do I understand it all? Intellectually, yes. Emotionally, no, I find it extremely difficult. What's legal isn't necessarily moral, and vice versa.

The law your referring to is designed for teachers and administrators to protect their livelihoods, not to protect Joe Paterno's moral authority and PSU's football income. The State Police actually disputed this aspect of the law saying that Joe, as the head of the football program at Penn State, was in a position to follow up and ensure that it was being properly handled since Sandusky continued to access University buildings and engage in youth football activities as a former Penn State coach.

[Lt. Dish]

Admittedly tho that's just my uneducated opinion...

That much has been clear for a while now.

You act as if I'm the only person on planet Earth that feels this way. Outside of Lt Dish, my stance has been met with nothing except "youre stupid" and "you must be a Pitt fan." Really compelling arguments. You're so damn smart you tell me, explain to me exactly what I'm missing. ...Let me guess, the WHOLE truth

This entire situation is emotional and inflammatory enough. I'm not going to attack anyone for disagreeing, as we gain more from talking and learning from each other. None of us have all the answers. I know I certainly don't.