Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NCAA imposes stiff penalties on Penn State
Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | July 23, 2012 | Jeremy Roebuck

Posted on 07/23/2012 8:24:17 AM PDT by Zakeet

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300301-314 next last
To: outpostinmass2

I agree with you...

CYA was the name of this Institution...
Nowhere in this decades long episode was there any follow up, ie concern, for the children, By the years in 2000 decade, Sexual child abuse was pretty well known and Paterno surely knew about what the Catholic church was going through...Most high up officials , even middle management DON’T WANT TO KNOW.

Molesting kids was just not a big deal to these guys..but the “image” of the university, the protection of the football team bringing in millions of donations...now THAT was important.


251 posted on 07/23/2012 3:34:37 PM PDT by Recovering Ex-hippie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 239 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

For the 1998 Curley’s email to Schultz and Spanier that he has “touched base with” Paterno. Also days later Curley email to Shultz: “Anything new in this department? Coach is anxious to know where it stands” Nothing in the report says what Paterno knew of the 1998 incident.

Plenty of evidence that Paterno was in the loop for the 2001 incident.


252 posted on 07/23/2012 3:37:52 PM PDT by outpostinmass2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

The board of trustees did not pony up their own money to pay for the report.

The report is also very harsh towards the board and the university as a whole including its counsel.

The conclusions of the report was that there was no over- sight at the school which allowed incidents to be swept under the rug. The board of directors never even discussed Sandusky until his indictment which was a whole year into the investigation.

“Standard personnel practices were ignored or undermined by the lack of centralized contrl over the human resources functions of various departments - most particularly, the Athletic Department”


253 posted on 07/23/2012 3:50:56 PM PDT by outpostinmass2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: outpostinmass2
For the 1998 Curley’s email to Schultz and Spanier that he has “touched base with” Paterno.

Where is that email in the Freeh report??? It doesn't name Paterno, does it???

Also days later Curley email to Shultz: “Anything new in this department? Coach is anxious to know where it stands”

"Coach" is Sandusky. When referring to Paterno he used the word "Joe". You can better believe that Coach Sandusky would be anxious to know where the prosecution stands.

Nothing in the report says what Paterno knew of the 1998 incident.

Exactly --

Plenty of evidence that Paterno was in the loop for the 2001 incident.

He notified his superior which was standard procedure. Sandusky no longer worked for Paterno or Penn State. It's not like he concealed the matter from those whose job it was to act on the information -- the higher ups.

It was up to Harmon, Schultz, Curley and Spanier to do something -- and the Board of the Second Mile. AND what did DA Ray Gricar know about it and do about it??? He was the real ennabler. Did Freeh discuss his failure to prosecute as part of the ennabling process.???

254 posted on 07/23/2012 4:04:35 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: outpostinmass2
“Standard personnel practices were ignored or undermined by the lack of centralized contrl over the human resources functions of various departments - most particularly, the Athletic Department”

And how would that have stopped Sandusky since he was no longer working for the University after his retirement in 2000. Most of his victims came while he was working for his charity The Second Mile.

255 posted on 07/23/2012 4:10:45 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
As I said before Paterno could have done a lot more and so could have the other people. One thing that the report showed over and over again that neither Paterno nor anyone else connected with the 2001 incident ever inquired into the well being of the child. Paterno took actions long after reporting the incident to his superiors as the emails and hand written notes show. Paterno even talked Spanier and Shultz out of reporting Sandusky to the authorities. In fact the Clery Act states what Paterno should have done. Paterno thought that Penn State had a better system and didn't need to adhere to the Clery Act system.

I want to find out about Gricar as well. Harmon, Schultz, Curley and Spanier will have their day in court too. It appears from the report that they reported more to Paterno or at least certainly had no control over him.

As for Paterno, the Freeh report spells out his lack of action. I guess you are right. Paterno didn't do anything.

256 posted on 07/23/2012 4:44:43 PM PDT by outpostinmass2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: outpostinmass2
Paterno even talked Spanier and Shultz out of reporting Sandusky to the authorities.

Where is the evidence for that?? Freeh never interviewed Spanier or Schultz, and he tortured one email to death to get it to change its meaning.

In fact the Clery Act states what Paterno should have done.

That chapter reads: The University's failure to implement the Clery Act -- not Paterno's failure. It wasn't his job to implement it.

As for Paterno, the Freeh report spells out his lack of action.

So which is it -- his action or lack of action. Was he busy running interference or was he not involved. Freeh needs to make up his mind.

As I scan through Freeh's timeline of significant events I see Curley, Spanier, Schultz, Harmon but little or no Paterno. Is he saying that Paterno was in the middle of this or should have insisted on being in the middle of this??? Freeh can't make up his mind. I think he's mad that he couldn't find more Paterno involvement than he did.

And since Spanier, Schultz, Harmon, and Curley knew of the 1998 incident and Paterno didn't, why would they even consult him about going to the authorities. It should have been a slam dunk for them -- unless there is something more going on here as with the DA in that county at the time.

Where in the report does he discuss Ray Gricar??? And if it is not in there don't you find that odd??? If Gricar had just indicted Sandusky back in 1998, he would have been outed and none of this happened. He would never have gotten to the second mile.

257 posted on 07/23/2012 5:31:06 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator; allmendream; All
What I find odd is the assumption that Paterno just threw the accusations into the wastebasket and disregarded them entirely. That assumption is unreasonable.

It's standard operating procedure in American management to bring up the accusations to the accused, even if obliquely, and give the accused the right of reply. (Part of it is to observe how the accused reacts to the accusations.) That's standard operating procedure period. A player is not an assistant coach, and an assistant coach is not a player. Sandusky was not Paterno's star player, he was Paterno's subordinate.

Therefore, it's reasonable to assume that Paterno brought the matter up to Sandusky. To assume the opposite is just too unreasonable given standard American bossing practice.

That leaves us one of two options:

1. Sandusky was a sociopath who showed the sociopath's notorious skill with conning people, including the boss. In this case, Paterno was one of his victims. It's even less reasonable to expect an athletic director to marshal the alertness and training required of police officers and jail guards, who are specifically trained to see through a sociopath's con maneuvers. If Sandusky's a sociopath, then an innocent man (Paterno) was hung.

2. Sandusky is not a sociopath, but yet another garden-variety (if particularly heinous) criminal. Non-sociopathic criminals exhibit "tells" that an ordinary person can pick up on. If Sandusky is not a sociopath, then Paterno should have spotted enough oddness to warrant a call for an outside investigator. Consequently: if Sandusly is not a sociopath, then Paterno deserved what he got.

Obviously, the sledgehammer of public opinion squares with #2.

258 posted on 07/23/2012 5:52:26 PM PDT by danielmryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
I didn't get around to answering your specific questions because we know how it all turned out. Speaking hypothetically, bosses sometimes keep employees that they consider valuable despite certain actions interpreted by the boss as disagreeable personality characteristics. "Just stay away from him and stick to what you're good at."

With regard to your last question, there are such things as jealous stage-moms.

Anyways, discussing it in the abstract is as far as I want to go. Regardless of whether or not Sandusky is a true sociopath, he's a real monster responsible for some horrifying crimes. As I said, we all know how it turned out.

259 posted on 07/23/2012 6:02:07 PM PDT by danielmryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper
but next time, who knows...it will be over-reacted to, just to avoid a similar fate.

Yep, that's the safe way to bet. Regardless of the facts of the matter, I can see athletic directors' executive assistants giving their bosses copies of Snakes In Suits - and saying, "You'd better start thinking like a warden."

260 posted on 07/23/2012 6:10:21 PM PDT by danielmryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Yeah, just like Curley decided on his own that he was ‘uncomfortable’ calling the police after talking to Joe.


261 posted on 07/23/2012 6:20:22 PM PDT by bjorn14 (Woe to those who call good evil and evil good. Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Oh yeah I’m sure Schultz forced Sandusky on Paterno for 10+ years after Paterno told him he was no longer the heir apparent after JoePa retired. If Joe wanted something done, it got done and if he didn’t it didn’t.


262 posted on 07/23/2012 6:27:13 PM PDT by bjorn14 (Woe to those who call good evil and evil good. Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: bjorn14
Yeah, just like Curley decided on his own that he was ‘uncomfortable’ calling the police after talking to Joe.

Curley certainly wasn't uncomfortable calling the police in 1998 when Sandusky's molestation went all the way to the District Attorney Ray Gricar who decided not to prosecute.

He never consulted Joe in 1998 and Sandusky was working for him then. Or if he did consult with him, Joe must have told him to call the police because that is what they eventually did.

What happened to Curley and the boyz between 1998 and 2001 -- did they lose the 911 number, their nerve, or their confidence in the DA???

263 posted on 07/23/2012 6:47:40 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

Thank you for posting those links. Mamy won’t bother to look at/read them but those who want the truth or some semblance of the truth will. Thanks again.


264 posted on 07/23/2012 9:03:06 PM PDT by Twink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: All
“For the next several years now, Penn State can focus on the work of rebuilding its athletic culture, not the next bowl game,” NCAA President Mark Emmert said.

Wow. Mark sounds like a very special guy.

The Big Ten will devote Penn State’s share of bowl proceeds over the next four years — estimated at $13 million — to endowments to address the issue in and around Big Ten schools.

What "issue" might that be? Have we just scratched the surface of the pedophilia issue in the Big Ten? One wonders where that $13 million, and indeed the $60 million, will ultimately come to rest.

265 posted on 07/23/2012 10:03:28 PM PDT by Amagi (Chief Justice John Roberts is a traitorous weasel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: Scoutmaster
Whining? Really? That's all you have? I wrote facts, sir, only facts. SC deserved sanctions. However, the punishment did not fit the crime. The penalties were worse than schools whose staff knowingly committed violations, including widespread cheating on tests across multiple sports, and other wrongdoings.

Fortunately the administration and coaching staff have handled the situation well and the Trojans are ready to kick ass again this season.

266 posted on 07/23/2012 11:31:24 PM PDT by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

“What happened to Curley and the boyz between 1998 and 2001”

They started losing football games, JoePa’s first back to back losing seasons where he had a 4 year stretch of 26-37. People were started websites like FireJoePa.com. If this had come out he surely would have been gone.


267 posted on 07/24/2012 4:43:00 AM PDT by bjorn14 (Woe to those who call good evil and evil good. Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

“What happened to Curley and the boyz between 1998 and 2001”

They started losing football games, JoePa’s first back to back losing seasons where he had a 4 year stretch of 26-37. People were started websites like FireJoePa.com. If this had come out he surely would have been gone.


268 posted on 07/24/2012 4:43:24 AM PDT by bjorn14 (Woe to those who call good evil and evil good. Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

“He did too report them and the DA Ray Gricar failed to prosecute and then disappeared in 2005:”

That was the 1998 case, not the later incident that was covered up by Paterno and his cronies.


269 posted on 07/24/2012 8:04:44 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
That was the 1998 case, not the later incident that was covered up by Paterno and his cronies.

You mean the later incident in 2001 that he passed upstairs to Curley, the same Curley who along with Spanier, Schultz, and Harmon had all been involved in the 1998 incident, the incident that the then District Attorney Ray Gricar refused to prosecute. What were all those people -- potted plants???

Are any of them still at the university??? Are they collecting their pensions??? If so, then just whose cronies were and are they???

270 posted on 07/24/2012 8:56:14 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies]

To: danielmryan

Some people can apparently justify anything to excuse a sick demented ignorant fanatic who thought football was more important that stopping child rape.

Disgusting.


271 posted on 07/24/2012 8:59:05 AM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

“You mean the later incident in 2001 that he passed upstairs to Curley...”

Yes, that’s the one. The one that he failed to report to the police even though he knew this was a pattern of behavior at that point. The incident where he advised his cronies to be humane to Sandusky but didn’t express one shred of humanity towards Sandusky’s victim. That’s the one.


272 posted on 07/24/2012 9:25:32 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
The incident where he advised his cronies to be humane to Sandusky but didn’t express one shred of humanity towards Sandusky’s victim.

Advising others to be humane is certainly not covering it up. The Colorado shooter is being treated humanely.

If he was not involved in the 1998 incident I can somewhat understand such a request, but it doesn't mean that the Athletic Director, the Finance Director, the President of the University, and Chief of the Penn State University Police, who were all involved in the 1998 incident, should accede to the request or give him any kind of pass. Paterno put the ball into their hands. What did they do with it???

273 posted on 07/24/2012 9:45:01 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 272 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

“Advising others to be humane is certainly not covering it up.”

It is when you use “humane” as a euphemism for not reporting them to the police.

“Paterno put the ball into their hands. What did they do with it???”

Nothing, they all decided to do nothing together.


274 posted on 07/24/2012 10:23:04 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
It is when you use “humane” as a euphemism for not reporting them to the police.

I have heard the word used all the time but never as that euphemism. Freeh will have to do better than that.

“Paterno put the ball into their hands. What did they do with it???”Nothing, they all decided to do nothing together.

By "all" you mean Curley, Spanier, and Schultz who he handed the ball off to, right??? And surely they atleast took it to the Chief of the Penn State University Police, right??? They did contact the Chief of the University Police as they did in 1998, didn't they??? Here's a refresher:

The victim's mother reported the 1998 incident to campus police. According to the Freeh report, then-Police Chief Thomas Harmon told University Vice President Gary Schultz: "We're going to hold off on making any crime log entry. At this point in time I can justify that decision because of the lack of clear evidence of a crime."

In 2001, graduate assistant Mike McQueary saw the sexual assault and told football coach Joe Paterno, who told Athletic Director Tim Curley, who subsequently consulted with Schultz and university President Graham Spanier. No one ever went to police.

"Paterno, Curley and McQueary were obligated to report the 2001 Sandusky incident to the University Police Department for inclusion in Clery Act statistics and for determining whether a timely warning should be issued to the University community. No record exists of such a report," the Freeh report said.

http://news.yahoo.com/penn-state-could-incur-steep-penalty-probe-unreported-223637830--nfl.html

The fact that no record of such a report exists doesn't mean that the report was never made to the Chief of the University Police. That's Freeh's euphemism for "they were made but we can't find them". See the darkened area above for proof.

Funny how reports are never be made in the first place and records just happen disappear, like those of the District Attorney in the 1998 investigation along with himself in 2005.

275 posted on 07/24/2012 11:58:12 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

“I have heard the word used all the time but never as that euphemism. Freeh will have to do better than that.”

It’s got nothing to do with Freeh. The emails, which were released before the Freeh report, and which contain no comment from Freeh, show that Paterno et al used that as their own euphemism.

“By “all” you mean Curley, Spanier, and Schultz who he handed the ball off to, right???”

No, I mean Paterno, Curley, Spanier, Schultz, etc. All of the people at Penn State who were involved in the decision to cover-up, Paterno INCLUDED.

“The fact that no record of such a report exists doesn’t mean that the report was never made to the Chief of the University Police. That’s Freeh’s euphemism for “they were made but we can’t find them”. See the darkened area above for proof.”

The “darkened area” contains no such proof, that I can see, unless you are conflating the 1998 and 2001 incidents. Why would people assume the report wasn’t made when there is no report to be found? Maybe it’s because we have their emails where they are engaged in a criminal conspiracy not to make that report? That might have something to do with it.


276 posted on 07/24/2012 12:18:06 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
The “darkened area” contains no such proof, that I can see, unless you are conflating the 1998 and 2001 incidents. Why would people assume the report wasn’t made when there is no report to be found?

Let me assist you:

"The victim's mother reported the 1998 incident to campus police. According to the Freeh report, then-Police Chief Thomas Harmon told University Vice President Gary Schultz: "We're going to hold off on making any crime log entry. At this point in time I can justify that decision because of the lack of clear evidence of a crime."

Did the mother contact the university police???

Yes.

Did Schultz meet with the Chief of the University Police??

Yes

Did the Chief of the University Police say that he was not going to make a record of the incident even after being notified by the mother and meeting with Schultz???

Yes

A report to and a meeting with the university police and still no record down on paper. Just because a record wasn't made BY the Chief of the University Police didn't mean that a report wan't made TO the Chief of the University Police, does it???

So what's to say the same thing didn't happen in 2001 ???

Freeh's words "No record exists" do not mean that "No report was made".

What evidence is there that the Chief of the University Police was not contacted in 2001??? Is the only evidence of "no contact" that "No record exists" or was the Chief contacted in 2001 as he was in 1998 and simply made no record of it in 2001 as he made no record of it in 1998 even after a report was made and a meeting was held???

277 posted on 07/24/2012 1:17:32 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

First, I don’t think you can extrapolate from one contact with the University police which did not result in a “log entry”, to think that they never made any reports from the 1998 incident, or that there wouldn’t be any reports made in 2001. It’s possible, but it’s a big stretch. After all, if no records were made at all, then how do we know about the decision not to make a log entry? Seems like they got that information from some written records about the 1998 incident and their decision-making process. Which would mean that there is written evidence of the 1998 report after all.

“What evidence is there that the Chief of the University Police was not contacted in 2001???”

Well, I don’t know, how about the email chain where the conspirators are conspiring not to report it? I’d say that is some prime evidence right there.


278 posted on 07/24/2012 1:40:32 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

First, I don’t think you can extrapolate from one contact with the University police which did not result in a “log entry”, to think that they never made any reports from the 1998 incident, or that there wouldn’t be any reports made in 2001. It’s possible, but it’s a big stretch. After all, if no records were made at all, then how do we know about the decision not to make a log entry? Seems like they got that information from some written records about the 1998 incident and their decision-making process. Which would mean that there is written evidence of the 1998 report after all.

“What evidence is there that the Chief of the University Police was not contacted in 2001???”

Well, I don’t know, how about the email chain where the conspirators are conspiring not to report it? I’d say that is some prime evidence right there.


279 posted on 07/24/2012 1:41:02 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
First, I don’t think you can extrapolate from one contact with the University police which did not result in a “log entry”, to think that they never made any reports from the 1998 incident, or that there wouldn’t be any reports made in 2001.

The best indication of future behaviour is past behaviour.

After all, if no records were made at all, then how do we know about the decision not to make a log entry?

After enough reports and enough meetings with enough people, records of the 1998 incident were made, but clearly early on the Chief was trying to keep it off the record. That is what the record shows, isn't it???

If the Chief of the University Police in 1998 could justify making no "crime log entry" [a euphemism perhaps???] because of "lack of clear evidence of a crime", even though he had the mother and her son ready to testify, how much easier would it have been for the Chief to subsequently justify making no "crime log entry" in 2001 until he finds his "clear evidence".

Would the Chief consider McQuery's witnessing of the incident alone as "clear evidence of a crime", or would the Chief say that he has to also speak with the boy before having before him "clear evidence of a crime"???

280 posted on 07/24/2012 2:54:02 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: danielmryan

I imagine around 1998, Paterno learned about Sandusky, they made an agreement that Sandusky would “retire”, in exchange for PSU sweeping what happened under the carpet....they figured that from there the problem would just go away.

But Sandusky didn’t go away, he flaunted his leverage knowing that the Administration wouldn’t dare do anything to him, lest their image be blown to smithereens. That’s why he was still allowed to access the campus facilities. Call it a case of “Mutually Assured Destruction.” And the longer it went on, the worse it got, and the worse it would be once the news came up, as most cover-ups go, things just snowballed from there.


281 posted on 07/24/2012 3:03:06 PM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator; Boogieman; Liz

To: All

IT’S HIGH TIME L/E NAILS EX-PS PRES SPANIER FOR PROTECTING SANDUSKY’S WELL-KNOWN NEFARIOUS ACTIVITIES NBC news reported Emails uncovered by investigators suggest Spanier colluded with PS’s former Senior VP for Finance and Business, saying it would be “humane” to Sandusky to NOT alert authorities, NBC news reported.

COMMENTS Even left-leaning college administrators are starting to have second thoughts about the excesses of “gay-friendly” atmospheres on campus........these pedophile-havens have held numerous “homo-sensitivity training” sessions on campus......(read indoctrination).

Penn State prez Graham Spanier-—is a “human sexuality scholar.” How this guy got to be a college prez with that degree is amazing. SPANIER actually held what he called a “C***fest” on campus and installed a special tent just to indoctrinate WRT homo sex practices.

Spanier is out as PS prez-—but he and his wife are still on the PS payroll as tenured profs. Spanier also advocated wife-swapping——could be the reason why M/M Spanier are still getting paychecks-—they must have some hair-raising stories to tell WRT group sex play on the PS campus.

SPANIER CONTROLLED MILLIONS IN STATE AND FEDERAL EDUCATION GRANTS L/E needs to determine the extent of PS’s federal, state and local govt grants which emanate from an assortment of govt entities.....that might have covertly subsidized pedophile activities.

Besides the DOE, grants could have been issued by the EPA and DOJ for various campus projects——including monies private Foundations from a variety of private charitable organizations AND funding from more traditional sources, such as corporate and private foundations. Checkout PS donors available from the Capital Research Center, a non-profit which studies advocacy groups.

Report your concerns here: FBI TIPS PAGE: https://tips.fbi.gov/


SOURCE: deadspin.COM

The majority of attention given to today’s Freeh Report has centered on figuring out Joe Paterno’s role in allowing Jerry Sandusky to go unstopped. But the most actively nefarious character—other than Sandusky himself—in the commission’s story is former university president Graham Spanier. Even before today’s news, experts had suggested that Spanier’s actions could be brought before a grand jury. Here are ten of the more reprehensible plot points from the Freeh Report, many of which support the notion that he could face criminal charges:

<><> Testifying to the 2001 grand jury he was unaware of the 1998 investigation against Sandusky, even though emails from 1998 show him discussing the investigation with athletic director Tim Curley and university vice president Gary Schultz.

<><> Repeating this claim to the Special Investigative Counsel, and stating he “never heard a report from anyone” that Sandusky was abusing children.

<><> Failing to notify the Board of Trustees that an investigation of a prominent assistant football coach was underway, withholding this information from them even while the board was considering (and approving) a favorable land deal between the university and Sandusky’s Second Mile charity.

<><>Approving and pushing for Sandusky’s emeritus rank—and the facility access privileges that came along with it— despite Sandusky not qualifying for it by the established academic rules.

<><>Declaring Curley’s plan to suggest Sandusky stop hanging around children, without actual sanctions, to be “a humane approach” rather than contacting outside authorities to investigate suspected abuse.

<><>Telling the Special Investigative Counsel his first knowledge of the 1998 incident came at the April 2011 grand jury appearance, when notes from his Attorney General interview a month prior reveal he was questioned about it then.

<><> Approving an unprecedented $168,000 lump-sum retirement payment to Sandusky in 1999.

<><> Showing no interest in identifying the child involved in the 2001 incident or ascertaining whether or not a crime had occurred.

<><> Opposing any and all independent investigations into Sandusky’s behavior.

<><> Modifying the November 2011 Board of Trustees statement without their knowledge or approval, asserting that Curley and Schultz requested administrative leave rather than that the board had actually decided to place them on leave.

10 posted on Fri Jul 20 2012 08:43:08 GMT-0600 (Central Standard Time) by Liz

I think that pretty well says it —


282 posted on 07/24/2012 4:07:18 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
Thank you for your informative response.

"IF you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,...
you'll be a Man, my son!

- Rudyard Kipling, "If."

283 posted on 07/24/2012 4:27:45 PM PDT by danielmryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

“The best indication of future behaviour is past behaviour.”

Yes, but one single incident is not necessarily representative of past behavior as a whole. That’s cherry-picking.

“After enough reports and enough meetings with enough people, records of the 1998 incident were made, but clearly early on the Chief was trying to keep it off the record. That is what the record shows, isn’t it???”

Ah, so there was a record, just not for that one meeting. So, clearly, one can’t extrapolate that any time these things were reported to the campus police, there would be no record.

Either way, all of that is pretty tangential, since this should have been reported to the real police. You can claim they were all just following the “chain of command”, but taken as a whole, it seems that everyone involved wanted to wash their hands of the affair rather than make sure that Sandusky couldn’t continue to molest children.


284 posted on 07/24/2012 5:16:43 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
it seems that everyone involved wanted to wash their hands of the affair rather than make sure that Sandusky couldn’t continue to molest children.

There is only one person who had direct access to the Board of Trustees, to whom the Football Coach, the Athletic Director, the Vice President were all answerable, who knew whether the police [campus or real] had been called and whether a report had been filed -- and that was "human sexuality" Graham Spanier, the President of the University.

And of all those that Freeh names in his report, "human sexuality" Graham Spanier was the one who could have cared least about whether or who Sandusky was molesting. And people want to point the finger at Paterno??? Laughable --

285 posted on 07/24/2012 4:45:55 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

“And people want to point the finger at Paterno???”

Of course they do. When you are part of a criminal conspiracy, it doesn’t matter whether you are the top or bottom of the totem pole, whether you are the mastermind or the muscle. You are all equally guilty of all the crimes committed. Every one of those guys knew that Sandusky was a child molester, and they all conspired to keep his crimes a secret. They all knew Sandusky was still walking the streeets, showing up at Penn State events, showing up at the football facilities, and still strutting around with young boys, and they all kept their mouths shut.


286 posted on 07/24/2012 5:25:52 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Sandusky and Paterno worked closely for 30 years. The other administrators came later, so it stands to reason that of all of them, Joe was closest to Sandusky.


287 posted on 07/24/2012 5:30:17 PM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 286 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
When you are part of a criminal conspiracy, it doesn’t matter whether you are the top or bottom of the totem pole, whether you are the mastermind or the muscle.

We know from the Freeh report that Spanier was the mastermind of the cover-up. What are the authorities and the university doing about that???

You are all equally guilty of all the crimes committed.

If that is so then why are Spanier and Curley and Schultz still walking around free???

Every one of those guys knew that Sandusky was a child molester

and the one in the most advantageous position to do something about it was Graham Spanier but that would mean exposing his human sexuality cult at the university to investigation.

They all knew Sandusky was still walking the streeets, showing up at Penn State events, showing up at the football facilities, and still strutting around with young boys, and they all kept their mouths shut.

They all know Spanier, the master ennabler himself, is still walking the streeets, showing up at Penn State events, showing up at the football facilities, and still strutting around with university students, and the authorities have still not arrested him.

Wow -- it must be the Football Coach's fault, right???

288 posted on 07/24/2012 6:45:50 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 286 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
Sandusky and Paterno worked closely for 30 years. The other administrators came later, so it stands to reason that of all of them, Joe was closest to Sandusky.

And yet he still picked up the phone and called the Athletic Director in 2001 to report his longtime friend after the McQuery incident.

289 posted on 07/24/2012 6:54:33 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
Sandusky and Paterno worked closely for 30 years. The other administrators came later, so it stands to reason that of all of them, Joe was closest to Sandusky.
And yet he still picked up the phone and called the Athletic Director in 2001 to report his longtime friend after the McQuery incident.


Big deal. It was two day's after he was told. Paterno never even tried to find the child or to ensure the child's well being. Paterno called the athletic director to alert him that Sandusky was at it again and there was a witness this time. The emails and notes show that what took place next was a cover-up. Sandusky still had access to the showers after 2001 and was still bringing children to football practices and games. Sandusky raped a child before the Alamo bowl using tickets given to him by Paterno.

I'm not buying that Paterno didn't know what was going on. Several janitors said that they knew what Sandusky was doing in the football team's showers but were afraid of Paterno.

I own apartment buildings. I have rented to people who turned out later to be criminals. I evicted them. If I saw them hanging around the buildings today I would call the police.

Paterno let Sandusky bring children to football practice and games for years after 2001. Sandusky was also convicted of raping boys at Penn. State in 2002 and 2003. There wasn't a third party to witness those attacks so Joe Paterno didn't need to call the A.D. in 2002 and 2003 to try to sweep it under the rug.

I think there are other coaches and players who know what Sandusky was doing as well. I think there are people at the Second Mile who knew as well. Those people are still sticking their heads in the sand.

290 posted on 07/25/2012 9:41:33 AM PDT by outpostinmass2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | View Replies]

To: outpostinmass2
Paterno never even tried to find the child or to ensure the child's well being.

That's the most bothersome part of it all and that he has never been located.

I think there are other coaches and players who know what Sandusky was doing as well.

It wasn't much of a cover-up, was it??? A lot of people at Happy Valley accepted it, joked about it, made ice cream cones about it,....

I think there are people at the Second Mile who knew as well. Those people are still sticking their heads in the sand.

Supposedly they were notified in 2001 -- and most of the molestations occurred after that and were of Second Mile children.

291 posted on 07/25/2012 10:29:31 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies]

To: outpostinmass2
Paterno let Sandusky bring children to football practice and games for years after 2001. Sandusky was also convicted of raping boys at Penn. State in 2002 and 2003. There wasn't a third party to witness those attacks so Joe Paterno didn't need to call the A.D. in 2002 and 2003 to try to sweep it under the rug.

The longer Penn State and Paterno swept it under the rug, the more leverage Sandusky gained, if they took him down, he knew he could take everyone else with him.

292 posted on 07/25/2012 10:31:24 AM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies]

To: outpostinmass2
I think there are other coaches and players who know what Sandusky was doing as well.

I would dare say it was known all through the college coaching community.....the lack of offers for Sandusky from other universities suggest that throughout the entire coaching fraternity there was knowledge that Sandusky was toxic, although they may not have known the exact reason.

293 posted on 07/25/2012 10:34:43 AM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

When is Second Mile going to be investigated? I suspect that’s where the real ugliness will be found.


294 posted on 07/25/2012 10:35:54 AM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

It folded rather quickly. But it did have a longtime president and CEO who should be investigated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Second_Mile


295 posted on 07/25/2012 12:09:11 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies]

To: outpostinmass2

<>I’m not buying that Paterno didn’t know what was going on.<>

The Grand Jury did. It came down to Paterno and McQueary versus Schultz and Curley. The Grand Jury returned indictments against Schultz and Curley for perjury and failing to report the abuse of a child. To the very end these two were insisting that it was reported to them to be only “horseplay”.

And then human sexuality promoter President of PSU Graham Spanier, who had earlier ordered Paterno not to speak to the press, showed what side he had been on from the beginning. “After the charges came to light, former President Graham Spanier issued a statement in which he said Curley and Schultz had his unconditional support, and saying they “operate at the highest levels of honesty.”

What!!! No “unconditional support” for McQueary and Paterno, just the two cronies charged with perjury and failure to report child abuse???

<>Sandusky raped a child before the Alamo bowl using tickets given to him by Paterno.<>

That was 1999. Paterno told the Grand Jury that he had no knowledge of the 1998 incident, which incidentally was reported to law enforcement and fully investigated. If the Grand Jury believed him to be lying, why didn’t they charge him with perjury???

Freeh’s evidence indicting Paterno is an email from the none other than an indicted perjurer who has now lawyered up.Is that the best evidence that Freeh can find???

Finally there is this little tidbit. McQueary said that he reported the 2001 incident to the police. What??? What police??? Gary Schultz was THE POLICE. As Vice President of PSU, he was head of and had oversight over the PSU Police Department.

He had a meeting with Schultz and Curley after reporting it to Paterno. Why would anyone think that once the head of the PSU Police Department knew about the incident that it would get swept under the rug??? Why would anyone think that the head of the PSU Police Department would fail to investigate it from there???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn_State_sex_abuse_scandal


296 posted on 07/26/2012 7:17:47 AM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip
Gary Schultz was not the police. His office had over-sight of the police in budgetary terms much the same way a city mayor does.

Freeh’s report didn't let anyone off the hook and in his public comments Freeh indicts all of Penn States heirachy and doesn't blame Paterno anymore than the board of directors.

The two things Freeh pins on Paterno is one that he didn't inquire into the well being of the victim and two that Paterno refused to adhere to the Clery Act.

I am not on a grand jury and this isn't a court of law. The burden of evidence in court is a lot greater than it is in my court. O.J. Simpson did not kill his ex-wife so said the court of law. I have stated before that Paterno reported the incident to his superior which was the minimal thing he had to do. Freeh’s report states this but he is also of the opinion that Paterno as a man of his statue and influence could have done a lot more for that child.

I believe that Paterno who coached with Sandusky for thirty years knew a little more about him than he has led us to believe. I also believe McQuery was given a full-time job at Penn State for keeping the shower incident “in house”. It appears that Penn State had a culture of fear as reported by the janitors employed there, created by Paterno.

This isn't over for Penn State or Spanier, Curley or Shultz. They will get their day in court. Paterno is dead and his lack of action is something he took to the grave. Paterno did not go to the police and there was no police report. Paterno went to people he could count on to keep things quiet.

297 posted on 07/26/2012 10:52:42 AM PDT by outpostinmass2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies]

To: outpostinmass2

The longer Paterno and Penn State covered up for Sandusky, the more leverage Sandusky had over them, since if they were going to turn him in, he would take them all down with him.

Few people have touched on the fact that this only broke, right after JoePa got win 409 to surpass Eddie Robinson, how long did they sit on this story? Was there some kind of agreement to only break the story once JoePa had the record?


298 posted on 07/26/2012 10:55:42 AM PDT by dfwgator (FUJR (not you, Jim))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

David Newhouse broke the story in March of 2011. The national media ignored the story until a couple of weeks before the indictment was handed down.


299 posted on 07/26/2012 11:07:30 AM PDT by outpostinmass2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

David Newhouse broke the story in March of 2011. The national media ignored the story until a couple of weeks before the indictment was handed down.


300 posted on 07/26/2012 11:07:48 AM PDT by outpostinmass2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300301-314 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson