Penn State's Joe Paterno has been *fired*

[snickelfritz]

I just read that there are rumors and tweets from columnists about possible allegations involving p!mp!ng out kids to rich donors????

 

Possible additional charges by Saturday?

 

Anyone else seen this?

 

ETA. Here's a link.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/10/penn-state-scandal-rumors-sandusky-pimping_n_1086099.html

[Joanne]

Are you saying that victims should be charged as accessories if they come forward because they did not report it before now? :confused:

 

No, I am saying that those who under responded to the first allegations/event they witnessed should be in some way held responsible for the victims that came after that event; victims that would not have been raped had McQueary and Joe done the right thing.

[Laurie4b]

Oh, I'm sure that's what it was. And if it turns out that he was procuring for other big donors (perhaps donors to the school as well as to his charity), then this is just the beginning....

 

I'm wondering what on earth happened to the prosecutor to cause dismissal of the '98 case. I just don't see how it could have suddenly been marked as "unfounded" when a police officer easedropped with permission as the mother of the boy spoke with Sandusky and heard Sandusky admit his inappropriate behavior with him.... What I'm reading about that prosecutor doesn't indicate that he would have dropped such a case.... Perhaps his disappearance some years later is totally unrelated, but it does make one wonder....

 

I read the prosecutor did drop the case before he disappeared. The friend I saw quoted said that it was because he didn't think there was enough evidence to win the case.

[Halcyon]

December 20, 1999 Sports Illustrated article, featuring a picture of Sandusky with "victim 4":

 

"Still, Paterno is the boss—Sandusky doesn't expect Paterno to solicit his opinion about who should follow him as coordinator—and no doubt part of Sandusky's reason for retiring is that he's tired of being second banana. He's not even coy about his desire still to run a program, any program, perhaps a Division III team or, don't laugh, a midget league basketball team. Sandusky's parents, Art and Evie, ran a recreation center in Washington, Pa., and at heart, E.J. says, Sandusky is "a frustrated playground director." E.J. remembers the kickball games his father organized in the backyard. "Dad would get every single kid involved," says E.J. "We had the largest kickball games in the United States, kickball games with 40 kids.""

[Laurie4b]

Well yes but my response was in response to a previous post implying that the police were ok with letting this go as well. I haven't heard anything to support police involvement in the cover up. In fact any lack of prosecution (and yes you would expect prosecution if Sandusky confesses on a wire - unless the wire was illegal) would fall at the feet of the DA's office, not the police. They don't have the authority to actually press charges or get the warrants for arrests (hence the TV show Law and Order- not just Law LOL).

 

Believe me, I think these people who knew and did nothing are vile, sick people. And the idea that McQ actually saw an attack and didn't attack back to stop the assault is just reprehensible to me. But I didn't agree with the poster who implied that the police are just as culpable as these cowards who knew and actively continued to support Sandusky and cover up his acts - enabling him to continue raping.

 

Heather

 

I am thinking that what I read was that he admitted to showering with the boy and to touching him in the shower, but that doesn't mean that he admitted to touching him in private parts. Without the private part touching, depending on how the PA state laws are written, there may have been no crime, or at most, simple assault. While it seems outrageously apparent to us that adult men don't shower with boys.... in fact they do. They shower together at the YMCA when they get out of the pool, they pee next to one another in full view of the other, etc. That's where that case apparently got tricky if I am recalling what I read correctly (putting it together with another case I know about where there was inappropriate but not overtly sexual touching.) When you try to go from there to a crime, there can be a lot of gray for the defense attorney to make use of.

[Halcyon]

Let's leave Joe alone.

 

 

No.

Edited November 11, 2011 by Halcyon

[ThatCyndiGirl]

I'm with Halcyon here.

 

"Success With Honour" my foot. When you know about abuse of a child and do not do everything in your power to stop it, you are as bad as the abuser. You are a coward. :glare: EVERYTHING IN YOUR POWER, not 'whatever the handbook says you have to do'. EVERYTHING IN YOUR POWER. Not the bare minimum.

[GWOB]

I'm with Halcyon here.

 

"Success With Honour" my foot. When you know about abuse of a child and do not do everything in your power to stop it, you are as bad as the abuser. You are a coward. :glare: EVERYTHING IN YOUR POWER, not 'whatever the handbook says you have to do'. EVERYTHING IN YOUR POWER. Not the bare minimum.

 

 

:iagree:

[GailV]

. She specifically says she does not blame Joe-- so why do you?

 

!. This is ONE family member of ONE victim. For all we know, her brother feels differently. For all we know, every other victim and all other family members of those victims feel differently. Are you wanting us to go by majority vote?

 

2. This was her reaction at ONE particular point in time, during an emotionally charged few days. Once the crowds of students showing support for Joe dissipate, will she still feel the same? How will she feel 6 weeks from now? Six months? Six years? Are you asking us to reframe our assessment accordingly?

 

3. Frankly, people make some truly bizarre choices when it comes to assigning or not assigning blame. Actual victims of all sorts -- from minor traffic accidents to major abuse -- will point to the actual perpetrator and say, "Oh, it wasn't really his/her fault." Are you giving that much power to someone who may be too overwhelmed to think through what she's saying?

 

I do not SOLELY blame Joe. I think he's done many other things that are great. But I do blame him for this, for reasons that others have more eloquently stated. Whether this woman blames him or not doesn't really sway my decision.

[5kidsforME]

He did better than that. He also reported it to the head of campus police, whose job it was to follow through with the off-campus police and upper admin, and who, unlike JoePa, knew about the earlier investigation. Sandusky, who was retired, did not work for Joe ny longer.

 

There is no indication that Joe got the detailed report we sickeningly read in the GJ report, nor is he trained to extract such from a distraught witness. He took the (possibly, we don't know yet) vague report from another person and directed it to the people who have that training.

 

The Vice-Chair of the board stated that they had no specific reason to fire him, they just wanted to be seen as taking "some" action (say what?). The board also admitted it operated without any facts.

 

You end the career of a distinguished educator and mentor, who has (possibly; some of us await actual facts before convicting people) only hindsight to guide him in wishing he had done more (who doesn't? This situation is incomprehensible in its horror) without facts, and for what you admit is no reason, and think this action will improve the situation?

 

I do not approve of violence or mob behavior, but am hardly surprised in an environment in which so many emotions run so high, and then the board of trustees bows to the media and exercises such poor judgement.

 

This is not about football. This is not about the house that JoePa built. It is about not compounding horror and unfathomable choices with further errors.

 

Try reading the article on PennLive about the sister of one of the victims, currently a Penn State student. She is where we should be focusing and supporting the efforts of the board. She specifically says she does not blame Joe-- so why do you? Because the media told you to, despite a lack of evidence or logical reason to do so. Because Joe, not victims, grab headlines. Shame on the board for not seeing this and remaining focused on those who are important in this situation!

 

For those who forgot the victims altogether in the joy of a good feeding frenzy and started making suggestions about shutting down the university or the football program, shame on you, too.

 

Penn State is an amazing university which runs a spectacular cooperative extension, supporting farmers and 4-H groups throughout the state. It provides a world-class education, including a top medical school, and is affiliated with a children's cancer center without which thousands of children would be dead. It's scholars program lures top students away from full scholarships at ivy-league schools (I should know-- I married one of them). Its faculty is top-flight. And let's discuss the football program, which has one of the top graduation records of any division I school, in real majors. Football players from PSU are now doctors, lawyers, soldiers, scientists, and more. Joe has benched players merely for skipping a single class-- first string marquee players scheduled to play. Oh, and don't forget the over $4 million he and SuePa donated to the library system alone.

 

Do not confuse my points!

 

None of the above make Joe innocent or untouchable! Those points show how silly it is to deride a world-class university, or its football program over the actions of Jerry Sandusky, a long-retired assistant coach. His actions are heinous. An investigation needs to be made about how this happened. I just fail to see how crucifying JoePa absent any facts, just because it makes great headlines, is the answer.

 

Many of you tsk tsk the students for thoughtlessly jumping on a bandwagon, writing them off as just kids, or not understanding because they aren't parents. Well, I'm no kid, and my sons are 8 and 10. I'm horrified at the bandwagon jumping here, that so many would celebrate the senseless ending of a career without facts or logic, and completely overlooking the fact that the media invented the entire furor over Joe because they didn't have any new stories about the victims for a bit!

 

Let's leave Joe alone-- the press has done enough damage-- and focus our energies on what the victims and their families must be going through now that they must relive all of this. I cannot imagine the horror. My heart breaks when I retread that PennLive interview with the sister.

 

Wow, where are they selling that kool aid you're drinking?

[Trish]

I just read that there are rumors and tweets from columnists about possible allegations involving p!mp!ng out kids to rich donors????

 

Possible additional charges by Saturday?

 

Anyone else seen this?

 

ETA. Here's a link.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/10/penn-state-scandal-rumors-sandusky-pimping_n_1086099.html

 

Yes, I heard about this earlier, it seems the story may get quite a bit bigger. Has some shades of the Franklin Coverup to it. (google it if you hadn't heard about that one from the late 80s/early 90s)

 

Did anyone mention Sandusky's autobiography is called, "Touched?"

[elegantlion]

I'm with Halcyon here.

 

"Success With Honour" my foot. When you know about abuse of a child and do not do everything in your power to stop it, you are as bad as the abuser. You are a coward. :glare: EVERYTHING IN YOUR POWER, not 'whatever the handbook says you have to do'. EVERYTHING IN YOUR POWER. Not the bare minimum.

 

:iagree: If Joe is all powerful, it's HIS reputation on the line. You'd think to CYA, he'd go above and beyond to make sure it was dealt with properly, even if he wasn't appalled by the actions of those under his authority. Even heroes aren't above the law.

[Trish]

The D.A. who never charged Sandusky disappeared (along with his laptop) in 2005. He was declared legally dead this year.

 

There might be a LOT more to this story than appears on the surface.

 

DA 'Disappeared' in 2005

 

:confused:

[Lady Florida.]

The D.A. who never charged Sandusky disappeared (along with his laptop) in 2005. He was declared legally dead this year.

 

There might be a LOT more to this story than appears on the surface.

 

DA 'Disappeared' in 2005

 

:confused:

 

I read that earlier today. That is VERY strange. Very possibly a coincidence, but very strange nonetheless.

[ZooRho]

I'm guessing you are responding to me.

 

I didn't read all the stuff, as some one else said about it, I have no desire to have to bleach and comet scrub my head. The issue with my friend's husband and the minute knowledge I have about it is, more than enough for me.

 

Yes some things may seem weird. but so much can be hindsight, as it is with my friend, even by one comment I know that she made, I told the one telling me that, hmm that is a red flag, neither of those ladies had any idea about that, totally clueless that would be a red flag. One it was never in their wildest imagination of a possiblity.

 

Was his wife a heavy sleeper? Did she go to bed early? ETC, ETC. Even in my own family, I probably go to bed an hour or 2 later than dh. He is early to bed, and I'm a night owl.

 

They had lots of foster kids,-sort of sick now, did they also use those rooms? On the surface they were obviously an open to others being in thier home.

 

And my dh takes care of all the bills, yeah he knows I can look, and I have double checked at times, But by in large he takes care of all of that and no I don't always know how much it is or how many calls he makes,= he uses his phone for work so, he makes a lot. I can't remember the last time I looked at dh's phone.

 

I can also see how she wouldn't neccessarily question things he would do after games, maybe she felt the boys were taken hm, etc.

 

NOW some where in there I do think she did know something. When exactly I have no idea.

 

 

 

I'm sorry, but I read the indictment this morning. He had a bedroom specially built for these boys in his basement. He went down there at bedtime and initiated them into some weird touching rituals to try to habituate them to his touch. He went down in the middle of the night and did things. His wife had to have had some clue that he was spending too much time in the basement bedroom with those boys and at inappropriate times.

 

Also, he traveled to various sporting events with various boys on a regular basis and spent the night in hotel rooms with them. Alone. Just he and the boy. There have been rules in place for years and YEARS regarding no time spent alone in a room with a minor. He was the head of a charity organization. Such groups have to adhere to such rules just as teachers, ministers, scouting leaders, YMCA leaders, or any other sorts of adults who deal with children. His wife MUST have known something unless she WANTED to be deaf and blind....

 

He called some of these kids literallly hundreds of times when they tried to start avoiding him. Did she never see his cell phone bill or happen to look at his phone and wonder why he would be doing such things?

 

He stayed out way, waaaaaaay too late after sporting events with those boys (utilizing empty locker rooms, etc.) She never questioned such extremely late night goings on with very young boys (always in the 10-12 age range, apparently).... Why would they be in an empty locker room with him at midnight or later? The night the janitor caught him, he stated that he continued to drive back and forth through the parking lot for some reason until about 3 a.m. She never wondered where he was or what he was doing out so late with little boys? Come on....

 

If he was just viewing things on his computer, not engaging in regular activities at his own home (with his wife present) as well as elsewhere, if no other charges had ever been filed that should have alerted her, if, if, if, then maybe she could be said to be clueless. This lady was not clueless, in my opinion....

[Liz CA]

This is so true and heartbreaking. I hope that Penn State will have to pay mega bucks to all those boys - now young men who suffered through this abomination. At least then they could get the kind of high caliber counseling you are mentioning so they can have a shot at a normal life.

[MariannNOVA]

I just read that there are rumors and tweets from columnists about possible allegations involving p!mp!ng out kids to rich donors????

 

Possible additional charges by Saturday?

 

Anyone else seen this?

 

ETA. Here's a link.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/10/penn-state-scandal-rumors-sandusky-pimping_n_1086099.html

 

I saw that earlier today. And early this morning, it was being discussed on ESPN radio. No words.

[Laurie4b]

 

Too much has come out for me to believe Joe did not know enough that he should have personally gone to the Police - the real police - not the campus police.

 

.

 

Perhaps it's different in PA, but here, campus police *are* real police. They have jurisdiction over crimes that occur on campus; city police do not. They can work collaboratively.

 

This is the first time I've read that Paterno did report it to campus police.

[Laurie4b]

No, I am saying that those who under responded to the first allegations/event they witnessed should be in some way held responsible for the victims that came after that event; victims that would not have been raped had McQueary and Joe done the right thing.

 

I am sure they will be held liable in civil suits. Lots of deep pockets going to be empty.

[LittleIzumi]

Perhaps it's different in PA, but here, campus police *are* real police. They have jurisdiction over crimes that occur on campus; city police do not. They can work collaboratively.

 

This is the first time I've read that Paterno did report it to campus police.

 

The "financial director" was also the head of campus police, if I remember correctly.

[pdalley]

Perhaps it's different in PA, but here, campus police *are* real police. They have jurisdiction over crimes that occur on campus; city police do not. They can work collaboratively.

 

This is the first time I've read that Paterno did report it to campus police.

 

 

It's like asking foxes to guard the hen house apparently. According to the grand jury report they felt it should have been reported to the state police and child welfare. I maintain that once Joe saw that the Campus police weren't doing anything - after the 1998 incident which I don't see how Joe could not have known about and then the second incident witnessed by the Grad assistant - that he could not have gone higher. He knew everybody. They listened to him. The Gov - something. A ten year old boy. One time maybe it was a mistake but looking at the timeline a clear pattern with Sandusky emerges. He retires the year after the 1998 incident but with all these privileges? The next incident is reported and he still has access to campus? Really?

 

Just read that San Antonio is looking at Grand Jury indictment based on this indictment and from there probably the FBI will get involved.

[elegantlion]

It appears McQueary will not be at the game Saturday due to multiple threats to his safety. Really? Is that a surprise to the athletic department?

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/10/justice/pennsylvania-coach-abuse/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

[MariannNOVA]

It appears McQueary will not be at the game Saturday due to multiple threats to his safety. Really? Is that a surprise to the athletic department?

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/10/justice/pennsylvania-coach-abuse/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

 

Not a surprise to me, but at this point, there is not much that their athletic department could do that would surprise me -- I hope.

[happypamama]

This is a slight aside, but I really want to know what was going on. This article is scary, because of what the school allowed: http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/45254478/ns/sports-college_football/

 

HOW did Sandusky leave the school with the child, taking him out of classes, without the mother's knowledge and permission?? The school district apparently banned Sandusky, but did they also report to proper authorities? I sure would love to hear the school's explanation for why it was okay for an unrelated man to take children out of classes and off campus -- wouldn't some legal guardian of the child have to sign for that??

 

Those poor kids. So many opportunities to protect them that didn't happen. Such a tragedy.

[ZooRho]

This is a slight aside, but I really want to know what was going on. This article is scary, because of what the school allowed: http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/45254478/ns/sports-college_football/

 

HOW did Sandusky leave the school with the child, taking him out of classes, without the mother's knowledge and permission?? The school district apparently banned Sandusky, but did they also report to proper authorities? I sure would love to hear the school's explanation for why it was okay for an unrelated man to take children out of classes and off campus -- wouldn't some legal guardian of the child have to sign for that??

 

Those poor kids. So many opportunities to protect them that didn't happen. Such a tragedy.

I know that is what too me becomes more shocking in this whole deal, IT wasn't jsut Penn state but many more knew or had suspicions

 

sick

[ravinlunachick]

I just had a sickening realization. These men turned their heads and were willing to look the other way because *boys* were being raped. So it was "gay" in their minds, and icky, but not rage-inducing. At least that's what I"m guessing. I can't imagine so many of these men would have done nothing if they'd walked in on a man @nally raping a little 10 year old girl.

 

Those poor little boys. :(

[happypamama]

I know that is what too me becomes more shocking in this whole deal, IT wasn't jsut Penn state but many more knew or had suspicions

 

sick

 

It also drives home how slick Sandusky was -- fooling everyone, not being "off" enough to raise huger red flags. Even that poor mom in the article -- she could tell something was up but didn't know how bad it was. That's the take-home message to me -- don't be fooled, and keep digging with your kids, even if their answers seem okay.

[ravinlunachick]

As a man, I can say that rape of little boys is just as rage-inducing. I almost wrote "more", but of course both are just as terrible. Honestly, I'd be happy if all pedophiles were put to death... and I'd volunteer to throw the switch on them, after a trial of course.

 

 

 

I agree with you, on all counts. Obviously, though, the men in question weren't operating with the same ethics as the rest of us.

[Laurie4b]

It's like asking foxes to guard the hen house apparently. According to the grand jury report they felt it should have been reported to the state police and child welfare. I maintain that once Joe saw that the Campus police weren't doing anything - after the 1998 incident which I don't see how Joe could not have known about and then the second incident witnessed by the Grad assistant - that he could not have gone higher. He knew everybody. They listened to him. The Gov - something. A ten year old boy. One time maybe it was a mistake but looking at the timeline a clear pattern with Sandusky emerges. He retires the year after the 1998 incident but with all these privileges? The next incident is reported and he still has access to campus? Really?

 

Just read that San Antonio is looking at Grand Jury indictment based on this indictment and from there probably the FBI will get involved.

 

I can't find any corroboration in any articles online or in the grand jury indictment that Joe Paterno reported it to the campus police. They are police and would have had to investigate or if they felt they had conflict of interest, to ask other LE to do so. The financial director was also "over" the campus police, but not the head of them, kind of like a mayor might be "over" the city police, but telling the mayor something isn't the same as making a police report. At this point, I'm inclined to believe that PP got mixed up and thought he reported it to campus police because he told his supervisor who was over campus police.