brendag Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Here is the link on cnn: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/11/penn-state-trustees-consider-panel-to-investigate-sex-abuse-allegations/ Definitely a good thing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdalley Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Good call. I think the only reason he hasn't been fired is because he's the state's best witness against Sandusky. Heard an interesting rumor that this man actually stopped a knife fight between two football players when he was in college. Stepped right in between them. Why could he do that and not help that little boy? Questions... so many questions... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingersmom Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 :hurray::hurray: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinkInTheBlue Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 :thumbup: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linguistmama Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Good! I've wondered what the reasoning is behind not firing him too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aggieamy Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Finally! I'm glad to hear it though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xuzi Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Good call. I think the only reason he hasn't been fired is because he's the state's best witness against Sandusky. Heard an interesting rumor that this man actually stopped a knife fight between two football players when he was in college. Stepped right in between them. Why could he do that and not help that little boy? Questions... so many questions... Okay, I'm going to show my ignorance a bit here, but, what does his still having a job at PSU have to do with his being a witness? How would him being fired affect the case? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantlion Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Good. :glare: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdalley Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Okay, I'm going to show my ignorance a bit here, but, what does his still having a job at PSU have to do with his being a witness? How would him being fired affect the case? I think he's being handled with kid gloves so he will testify. He could fall under 'whistleblower' protection laws. I don't know the PA laws covering that. I think he should have been fired first myself but I do think he's probably the best shot the prosecution has got to counteract the defense attorneys. They are going to probably claim the victims testimony is not reliable based on their backgrounds. (I don't agree with that but I think that's why Sandusky chose them to victimize.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirch Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 Well, that was a no-brainer. I can't believe they were ever even floating the idea of having him coach tomorrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starr Posted November 11, 2011 Share Posted November 11, 2011 i read something about government employees and whistleblower protection laws. He's at a State University so they have to figure it all out. It's in the lawyers hands now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 i read something about government employees and whistleblower protection laws. He's at a State University so they have to figure it all out. It's in the lawyers hands now. I don't get how he's a whistleblower--unless it was simply that his testimony was deemed truthful by the grand jury (fact) and the testimony from the two over Paterno was not deemed truthful. (fact). I guess that could be a form of whistleblowing because he could have gone along with the rough-housing story. He didn't need to say he saw the full extent of what he did see, thus incriminating himself. They don't even know who the kid was yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starr Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Whatever is going on I'm sure it's now the Board doing what the lawyers tell them to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alte Veste Academy Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I don't get how he's a whistleblower :iagree: Isn't the biggest problem with him the fact that he was NOT a whistleblower? :mad: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nono Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 i read something about government employees and whistleblower protection laws. He's at a State University Actually, not exactly. PSU fall under the state-related university. Like Lincoln U., Temple U., and U of Pittsburgh. From wikipedia...but I do remember some of this from back in the day: Previously, the Pennsylvania State University (Penn State) was repeatedly defined as a "state-owned university" in numerous official acts and Pennsylvania Attorney General opinions from its resurrection as a "land grant" institution, the Pennsylvania State College in 1855, as applicable to having its road system and buildings on state campuses constructed using state funding, paying its employees through state-issued checks and having them eligible to collect state employee retirement system benefits. In 1989, Penn State asserted a public status in court for the purpose of not having a private bank branch's operations on its University Park campus subject to local county taxes, while simultaneously asserting private status for the purpose of not having to reveal the salaries of its top administrative employees.[2] With the enabling legislation changing the failing Williamsport (PA) Area Community College to the affiliated "Pennsylvania College of Technology" in 1989, Penn State was again designated as a "state-related" institution. Nothing about the law on the East Coast is ever straightforward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retired Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Glad is gone ! Seriously a grad student at the time that was thinking of himself. He walked in and saw someone raping a 10 yo boy and turned around and left. :cursing: I am 5 3 and weight a 125 pounds but I would of been beating the sh*t out of the guy with whatever I could of found or something to get that boy away from that sick-o I then would of called 911, instead of what that self serving moron did sorry I wouldn't of been thinking call my dad, call the coach, yeah isn't a grad student in their early 20's and should be a adult, just don't understand his crap except as my original conclusion he is a self serving moron. he will be the states star witness and seriously doubt he will get any type of punishment except now the whole world knows what a self serving :cursing: well you know how I feel I just caught up on the whole thing and read the grand jury script. It just make me want to cry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdalley Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 :iagree: Isn't the biggest problem with him the fact that he was NOT a whistleblower? :mad: He did report the incident and he did testify and not perjure himself before the grand jury which the other two (Not Joe Pa the other two admins that have been charged with perjury) did. Not sure if that qualifies or not. He lived next to the Sanduskys while growing up as I understand it. I get the icky feeling there might be more to the reason he froze like a deer in the headlights but that is complete speculation on my part and me trying to understand how you could witness such horror and not physically intervene. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsmama Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 About d*&n time. (Sorry, my own background makes me very angry at a person who witnessed such a horror but did not intervene or immediately report to police.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 and me trying to understand how you could witness such horror and not physically intervene. I know it's hard for people to believe, but *many* people freeze in such situations. People on the boards are confidently asserting, "I would do this and I would do that," and a good percentage of them are simply wrong: they too would freeze, despite what they *think* they would do. The janitor who witnessed another incident did the same thing--he walked away but told other janitorial staff. He was so upset the others were afraid he was going to have a heart attack--he was shaking like a leaf and continued. Yet he never reported it. Clearly he, as well as McQueary, were very affected by what they saw, but they didn't act. They initially went into something like shock, like people can do who are in or who witness an awful accident . I don't condemn them for freezing in the moment. It's the failure to report it in the time period that followed, when they had begun to process what they saw that is morally unacceptable imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joker Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 He did report the incident and he did testify and not perjure himself before the grand jury which the other two (Not Joe Pa the other two admins that have been charged with perjury) did. Not sure if that qualifies or not. He lived next to the Sanduskys while growing up as I understand it. I get the icky feeling there might be more to the reason he froze like a deer in the headlights but that is complete speculation on my part and me trying to understand how you could witness such horror and not physically intervene. This is the first time I've heard this. That's a bit disturbing and weird. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhonda in TX Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Good! I've wondered what the reasoning is behind not firing him too. I heard on the news that he can't be fired for reporting an incident (which he did, even though it wasn't to the police). While he wouldn't be fired for that reason, it's possible that it could be construed that way by somebody looking to sue the school. I'd like to see him fired, but I'll settle for leave. Is he still being paid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alte Veste Academy Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 (edited) He did report the incident and he did testify and not perjure himself before the grand jury which the other two (Not Joe Pa the other two admins that have been charged with perjury) did. Not sure if that qualifies or not. He lived next to the Sanduskys while growing up as I understand it. I get the icky feeling there might be more to the reason he froze like a deer in the headlights but that is complete speculation on my part and me trying to understand how you could witness such horror and not physically intervene. ETA: Oh, oh! I just processed your second paragraph. That would explain a lot. If... Who knows. More depravity and sadness to consider. I think of a whistleblower as someone who brings attention to a situation and exposes wrongdoing. He did report it but then knew that his report did not bring the evil he witnessed to light. If your whistling falls on deaf ears, you don't stop whistling. Fine, maybe he is technically a whistleblower, just the crappiest possible example of one. I am sure he has his reasons for not acting immediately to protect that boy. His decision will rightly haunt him for the remainder of his days. Edited November 12, 2011 by Alte Veste Academy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdalley Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I know it's hard for people to believe, but *many* people freeze in such situations. People on the boards are confidently asserting, "I would do this and I would do that," and a good percentage of them are simply wrong: they too would freeze, despite what they *think* they would do. The janitor who witnessed another incident did the same thing--he walked away but told other janitorial staff. He was so upset the others were afraid he was going to have a heart attack--he was shaking like a leaf and continued. Yet he never reported it. Clearly he, as well as McQueary, were very affected by what they saw, but they didn't act. They initially went into something like shock, like people can do who are in or who witness an awful accident . I don't condemn them for freezing in the moment. It's the failure to report it in the time period that followed, when they had begun to process what they saw that is morally unacceptable imo. I was trained to respond so I think that's why I have trouble wrapping my mind around not stopping someone from hurting a child - especially in that manner. Also being a Mom has made that instinct even stronger for me. I think you're right that the failure to act once it's been processed is the thing I'm most upset about. I hadn't realized it until you explained it that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deacongirl Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 He did report the incident and he did testify and not perjure himself before the grand jury which the other two (Not Joe Pa the other two admins that have been charged with perjury) did. Not sure if that qualifies or not. He lived next to the Sanduskys while growing up as I understand it. I get the icky feeling there might be more to the reason he froze like a deer in the headlights but that is complete speculation on my part and me trying to understand how you could witness such horror and not physically intervene. This would help explain his inaction. I can't even imagine how many children Sandusky victimized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linguistmama Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 I think you're right that the failure to act once it's been processed is the thing I'm most upset about. :iagree: Yeah, I can understand being so shocked by seeing that that a person would freeze. It's the never reacting properly that gets me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrappyhappymama Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 Finally. :glare: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margo out of lurking Posted November 12, 2011 Share Posted November 12, 2011 When I heard this on the news yesterday, part of the report said it was due to death threats against him. I'm not saying that's an accurate report, but that's what is being put out there. Oh, wouldn't that just be another layer of ugliness and sadness at the possibility he grew up next to Sandusky . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.