Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

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.

I don't recall seeing the police state this before. Was the law clearly defined this way, or is this how the State Police interpretted it?

[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. 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.

I understand what you're saying with regard to the law and procedure as a means to protect the income and livelihood of reporters. But, respectfully, I don't agree with the notion that an invocation of the law and procedure would be construed as a argument to protect Paterno's moral authority and PSU football's income, simply because I'm inferring a double standard based on economic class and social power, and isn't law supposed to level that field or, better, make it irrelevant?

Would you or I be able to use the law to "protect our moral authority" as well as our incomes? Theoretically, yes, we would--but because we make less money and are arguably less powerful, then that would make it OK? Or are we talking about two different things, and we'd still be guilty morally? I'm asking in conversation. I took care to separate my feelings w/re to the legal and the moral perspectives. I like to believe that I would say to hell with the law, I'll follow up and find out what's going on. if I were to contact my attorney, would he say, "Let me see your last several tax returns first"?

My comment about the law is based off of what I've been trained and the procedure I and others like me are supposed to follow. I'll admit that I don't understand the State Police's assertion that the reporting procedure according to the law should have been altered for Joe Paterno. Why? Because he's Joe Paterno? But it wouldn't be OK for you or me, even if morally we wanted to do what we thought was right?

I'll remind everyone that I also am on record as saying that I wish he had followed up and I remain disappointed in him that he didn't.

[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. 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.

I don't recall seeing the police state this before. Was the law clearly defined this way, or is this how the State Police interpretted it?

I recall a quote by a state cop who, when asked for an opinion, said something like, yeah, Paterno may have acted legally but he failed morally.

Truthfully, I'm not sure (if my recollection is correct) that that's a responsible comment for a state law enforcement official to make. But I'll stop there because I can't find the quote.

[columbia]

Paterno and other Penn State officials didn't do enough to try to stop the suspected abuse, State Police Commissioner Frank Noonan said Monday.

Paterno may have fulfilled his legal requirement to report suspected abuse, "but somebody has to question what I would consider the moral requirements for a human being that knows of sexual things that are taking place with a child," Noonan said. "I think you have the moral responsibility - anyone, not whether you're a football coach or a university president or the guy sweeping the building. I think you have a moral responsibility to call us."

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/08/ ... rylink=cpy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[DudeMan2766]

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;

That mother must have not waited to get the full story.

[Lt. Dish]

Paterno and other Penn State officials didn't do enough to try to stop the suspected abuse, State Police Commissioner Frank Noonan said Monday.

Paterno may have fulfilled his legal requirement to report suspected abuse, "but somebody has to question what I would consider the moral requirements for a human being that knows of sexual things that are taking place with a child," Noonan said. "I think you have the moral responsibility - anyone, not whether you're a football coach or a university president or the guy sweeping the building. I think you have a moral responsibility to call us."

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/08/ ... rylink=cpy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks, columbia. This is what I was referring to. And while I agree with the cop on moral grounds, the law states that Paterno or anyone shouldn't call the cops directly. If the cop were speaking as just himself, then that's one thing. But if he's speaking as a law enforcement official, then he's in essence saying not to obey the law--or that it would've been OK had Paterno not obeyed the law. I'm not afraid to risk derision by admitting I find it confusing.

I'm not invoking the law as a moral defense for Paterno's (in)actions. Personally, I think I'd take my chances and call the cops directly, but then again I'd be afraid an investigation wouldn't be launched if I didn't go through the proper channels.

[Lt. Dish]

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.

I think he's referring to university officials' and/or Corman's comments, but he's not clear. I know you only have 140 characters, but if you're a Tweeter with a platform, then you have the responsibility to make the most of them or use another mode where you can be more specific.

If he means "Penn State," as in millions of people related to or supporting Penn State being of one like mind, then we can add him to the mile-long list of people who aren't paying attention and are part of the problem.

[Lt. Dish]

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.

I'd like to remark on this important point, because it's a response to all who have claimed that Paterno would've acted differently had a grandson been involved. Perhaps it could've been.

Whether or not the extended Paterno family went around the Sanduskys is easily refuted or disproved information. Paterno didn't socialize with Sandusky, but does anyone think he'd let his family around him if he knew?

If we address the duplicity of child predators, then having Paterno grandkids around is a good cover. And I don't care how much you despise Paterno, you can't for a second think that he'd put his family at risk to protect a man he intensely disliked. It makes no sense.

I don't think he knew anything until the McQueary conversation. After that...

[Orlando Penguin]

Paterno and other Penn State officials didn't do enough to try to stop the suspected abuse, State Police Commissioner Frank Noonan said Monday.

Paterno may have fulfilled his legal requirement to report suspected abuse, "but somebody has to question what I would consider the moral requirements for a human being that knows of sexual things that are taking place with a child," Noonan said. "I think you have the moral responsibility - anyone, not whether you're a football coach or a university president or the guy sweeping the building. I think you have a moral responsibility to call us."

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/08/ ... rylink=cpy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yep, this is the same Frank Noonan, State Police Commissioner who is reported to have had several pornographic emails on his state account but 'supposedly' never opened or forwarded them. I don't exactly find much he says to mean much.

http://www.wgal.com/news/dep-secretary- ... l/28374394

[Orlando Penguin]

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.

Addressing all the points here (because I'm too technologically dumb to figure out multi-quote)...

1 -- I hope you didn't think I was singling you out or anything when it came to my remarks about those who only follow what the media report. If you inferred that, I apologize. Never meant for that to occur.

2 -- Is Joe clear? Legally, yes. Morally, no. Yes, he was following what the law told him he could and couldn't do. But with as much prestige and pull that he had in the State College community, if he had any grasp as to what McQueary told him, then he should have pursued it further. But then, we have no idea how McQueary conveyed what he saw to Paterno and then once reported to the superiors, how was Paterno to know it would get bumbled? That's something for the Curley/Spanier/Schultz trial will hopefully flush out. But no, I don't think he's totally in the clear.

3 -- As for my feeble old man comment -- at the time of the firing, Joe was a week away from the lung cancer diagnosis and 2 1/2 months from death. I think it can be agreed upon that despite the team's success on the field up to the firing, Joe was a figurehead. He was coaching games from the press box and his coordinators were running the bulk of the action. The BOT knew they had a very weakened Paterno and that he likely wouldn't fight too strenuously like he might have 5-7 years prior to that if in same situation.

[Lt. Dish]

Paterno and other Penn State officials didn't do enough to try to stop the suspected abuse, State Police Commissioner Frank Noonan said Monday.

Paterno may have fulfilled his legal requirement to report suspected abuse, "but somebody has to question what I would consider the moral requirements for a human being that knows of sexual things that are taking place with a child," Noonan said. "I think you have the moral responsibility - anyone, not whether you're a football coach or a university president or the guy sweeping the building. I think you have a moral responsibility to call us."

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/11/08/ ... rylink=cpy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yep, this is the same Frank Noonan, State Police Commissioner who is reported to have had several pornographic emails on his state account but 'supposedly' never opened or forwarded them. I don't exactly find much he says to mean much.

http://www.wgal.com/news/dep-secretary- ... l/28374394

Good Lord, I didn't know that.

[columbia]

Well, let's put the statue back in place.

[Lt. Dish]

Well, let's put the statue back in place.

No thanks.

columbia, why that response? I mean, how is that helpful?

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

Well, let's put the statue back in place.

[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.

Addressing all the points here (because I'm too technologically dumb to figure out multi-quote)...

1 -- I hope you didn't think I was singling you out or anything when it came to my remarks about those who only follow what the media report. If you inferred that, I apologize. Never meant for that to occur

I really wasn't at all. But thanks for trying to clarify. My remark about comparing the Freeh and Clemente reports wasn't directed at you personally either.

[shmenguin]

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.

I think he's referring to university officials' and/or Corman's comments, but he's not clear. I know you only have 140 characters, but if you're a Tweeter with a platform, then you have the responsibility to make the most of them or use another mode where you can be more specific.

If he means "Penn State," as in millions of people related to or supporting Penn State being of one like mind, then we can add him to the mile-long list of people who aren't paying attention and are part of the problem.

Come on Dish, that's not part of "the" problem. It's just an annoyance. A bigger part of the problem is so many people desperately trying to absolve paterno of guilt.

[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.

I understand what you're saying with regard to the law and procedure as a means to protect the income and livelihood of reporters. But, respectfully, I don't agree with the notion that an invocation of the law and procedure would be construed as a argument to protect Paterno's moral authority and PSU football's income, simply because I'm inferring a double standard based on economic class and social power, and isn't law supposed to level that field or, better, make it irrelevant?

Would you or I be able to use the law to "protect our moral authority" as well as our incomes? Theoretically, yes, we would--but because we make less money and are arguably less powerful, then that would make it OK? Or are we talking about two different things, and we'd still be guilty morally? I'm asking in conversation. I took care to separate my feelings w/re to the legal and the moral perspectives. I like to believe that I would say to hell with the law, I'll follow up and find out what's going on. if I were to contact my attorney, would he say, "Let me see your last several tax returns first"?

My comment about the law is based off of what I've been trained and the procedure I and others like me are supposed to follow. I'll admit that I don't understand the State Police's assertion that the reporting procedure according to the law should have been altered for Joe Paterno. Why? Because he's Joe Paterno? But it wouldn't be OK for you or me, even if morally we wanted to do what we thought was right?

I'll remind everyone that I also am on record as saying that I wish he had followed up and I remain disappointed in him that he didn't.

I'm not inferring broadly that the law be applied any differently by any social or economic status or changed to fit the circumstances. Frank Noonan was the commissioner that said that he did was he was supposed to do but would expect that anyone in a position to do so should have reported child sexual abuse to the police, and many people believed that Joe was in that position because of his stature beyond the football program. By saying that, he wasn't suggesting that he should change the procedure but that it seems that the chain of command ended with little action, and no one following up is suspicious.

Wishing he had done more and being disappointed is how you feel about Joe. He was just a football coach... the problem is that people believed that Joe Paterno was more than that. When you replace him with any other coach, his actions make perfect sense; an employee following a documented protocol.

[DudeMan2766]

He was just a football coach..

No. He. Wasn't. I don't even have to leave this thread to prove that wrong.

Everything I ever heard about Penn State growing up was how right down to the uniform choices went thru Joe. PSU people almost wore it as a badge of honor, it was a bragging right how much control Joe Paterno had in Happy Valley. All of the sudden, he's just a simple small town football coach, who grew old and got confused, and targeted as an easy scape goat. Give me a break.

[columbia]

Yeah, that's a load of horse ****. Cow ****, if you frequent the creamery.

[shmenguin]

Just a coach...ha. I guess all the other stuff in this thread about what he did for the community is now bull s***. But I'm guessing it will be reinstated as fact when convenient.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

Paterno reported to Gary Schultz, who was responsible for overseeing the University Police force. He followed University policy, and the NCAA has made this policy their official way of how to handle things.

He couldn't do more after that according to the law and the University policy from what I've read. I'm not an expert in it so I'll defer to Lt. Dish as she seems to have more experience with it. And the law applies the same to everyone regardless of your stature or how much certain people put you on a pedestal.

PSU fans getting carried away about how much power Paterno had doesn't mean he actually had that power. And most of the stuff talked about like uniforms is usually under the football coach's control.

We can argue all we want about whether he did the right thing but without really knowing what McQuery told him, we are making an assumption on what level of action he should have taken.

[Lt. Dish]

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.

I think he's referring to university officials' and/or Corman's comments, but he's not clear. I know you only have 140 characters, but if you're a Tweeter with a platform, then you have the responsibility to make the most of them or use another mode where you can be more specific.

If he means "Penn State," as in millions of people related to or supporting Penn State being of one like mind, then we can add him to the mile-long list of people who aren't paying attention and are part of the problem.

Come on Dish, that's not part of "the" problem. It's just an annoyance. A bigger part of the problem is so many people desperately trying to absolve paterno of guilt.

Why isn't it? The problem is akin to that which plagues our political discourse. No one talks to each other, and worse yet, no one listens. It's all about tossing salvos without discernment and making pithy or snarky judgments. It's all about stamping labels on others. You're with us or against us. You're crazy or you're spot on. It's my biggest objection to Twitter.

So we've got a spectrum, from people desperately trying to absolve Paterno <-----> people desperately trying to damn him. As for the relativity, I don't care who is making a "larger annoyance" of themselves.

[Lt. Dish]

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.

I understand what you're saying with regard to the law and procedure as a means to protect the income and livelihood of reporters. But, respectfully, I don't agree with the notion that an invocation of the law and procedure would be construed as a argument to protect Paterno's moral authority and PSU football's income, simply because I'm inferring a double standard based on economic class and social power, and isn't law supposed to level that field or, better, make it irrelevant?

Would you or I be able to use the law to "protect our moral authority" as well as our incomes? Theoretically, yes, we would--but because we make less money and are arguably less powerful, then that would make it OK? Or are we talking about two different things, and we'd still be guilty morally? I'm asking in conversation. I took care to separate my feelings w/re to the legal and the moral perspectives. I like to believe that I would say to hell with the law, I'll follow up and find out what's going on. if I were to contact my attorney, would he say, "Let me see your last several tax returns first"?

My comment about the law is based off of what I've been trained and the procedure I and others like me are supposed to follow. I'll admit that I don't understand the State Police's assertion that the reporting procedure according to the law should have been altered for Joe Paterno. Why? Because he's Joe Paterno? But it wouldn't be OK for you or me, even if morally we wanted to do what we thought was right?

I'll remind everyone that I also am on record as saying that I wish he had followed up and I remain disappointed in him that he didn't.

I'm not inferring broadly that the law be applied any differently by any social or economic status or changed to fit the circumstances. Frank Noonan was the commissioner that said that he did was he was supposed to do but would expect that anyone in a position to do so should have reported child sexual abuse to the police, and many people believed that Joe was in that position because of his stature beyond the football program. By saying that, he wasn't suggesting that he should change the procedure but that it seems that the chain of command ended with little action, and no one following up is suspicious.

Wishing he had done more and being disappointed is how you feel about Joe. He was just a football coach... the problem is that people believed that Joe Paterno was more than that. When you replace him with any other coach, his actions make perfect sense; an employee following a documented protocol.

Thank you for taking the time to reiterate, Pitt87.

And yes, based on what I know and understand now, I'm disappointed. I'm not projecting on you, but I realize that doesn't seem to express sufficient outrage for many people. Knowing me personally would allow the profundity and lack of lenience to be self-evident. Different people feel things differently.

I've been turned off by what I've seen as an out-outrage competition from the beginning. I think it's absurd and nonsensical. Besides, I can't think when I'm outraged.

I save my ire for Sandusky and my incredulity (as in bafflement) for Curley/Schultz/Spanier.

[Lt. Dish]

Paterno reported to Gary Schultz, who was responsible for overseeing the University Police force. He followed University policy, and the NCAA has made this policy their official way of how to handle things.

He couldn't do more after that according to the law and the University policy from what I've read. I'm not an expert in it so I'll defer to Lt. Dish as she seems to have more experience with it. And the law applies the same to everyone regardless of your stature or how much certain people put you on a pedestal.

PSU fans getting carried away about how much power Paterno had doesn't mean he actually had that power. And most of the stuff talked about like uniforms is usually under the football coach's control.

We can argue all we want about whether he did the right thing but without really knowing what McQuery told him, we are making an assumption on what level of action he should have taken.

To be clear, I'm not an expert in the law, and I apologize if I've misrepresented myself.

I know it as far as I'm trained to follow it w/re to reporting.

[count2infinity]

Here at PSU that's how we are trained and required to report it as well. Everyone I work with (coworkers, my boss, my bosses boss) have all gone through the training, and it all boils down to one simple rule: if you see something, report it to your superior. There are footnotes on certain things, such as if you actually witness someone sexually abusing a child, you call the police immediately. But for the most part, it's report it to your superior and they take it up the chain.