Posted on 06/25/2012 9:14:26 PM PDT by FlJoePa
I don't think Joe was a required reporter at that point (as McQueary's father and Dranov ironically both were the night before). I also don't consider Schultz the "police".
Other than that, this guy says what many people PSU Alums think and what Phil Knight had the guts to state.
The botching of this happened above Joe Paterno.
“Most people are as unaware of the basic fact as they are that Sandusky was a FORMER Penn State assistant at the time McQueary came to him. In Paterno’s mind Sandusky was no longer his responsibility.”
Sorry, but wasn’t Sandusky still hanging around, with young boys, at the Penn State facilities after this incident? Paterno had no responsibility in that regard? Color me skeptical.
Sick.
I guess it wasn't “rape rape” when the kid was screaming so loud he thought for sure Sandusky’s wife would hear and come to his rescue.
While I agree with all the defenses here, there’s still more that folks don’t seem to get. No one in the media (including Fox) has made any connection at all to gay rights, gay education (even in elementary schools), or gay marriage. To cling to the hope (or blindness) that homosexuality is restricted to consenting adults is either ignorance or insanity. Whether the contact is loving or lustful or violent, the child is damaged.
I disagree with this assumption. Sandusky was forced against his will to retire in 1999. I believe the 1998 occurrence was the reason.
As far as the boy in the shower, I'm very aware that this boy was never found. My question is , didn't Paterno wonder why Sandusky was walking about free? Didn't he have any curiosity regarding the investigation? Or was reporting the incidence enough for him? I'm sure if he had any interest in this young boy's well being he could have asked the Penn campus police what was going on and they would have told the great Joe Parterno anything he wanted to know.
Either McQueary was a credible witness and both he and Paterno observed Sandusky parade boy after boy in front of their noses for the next dozen years, or McQueary was not a credible witness and he should have not been employed all those years by Paterno.
Well, I think the writer (a very good one, who I’ll now follow) is speaking from an administrative standpoint when he talks of js being an ex-assistant.
I think the important points are that up and until Joe’s testimony and eventual firing, all we had was victim #2 (McQueary/shower) and victim #4 (Central Mt. High School).
Assuming Joe didn’t know about 1998, which he testified he didn’t, how can he possibly be accused of being involved in a coverup?
js retired after Joe told him he’d never be the HC because he spent too much time with his charity. This was documented in numerous books. I think this was even confirmed by one of the victims in pre-trial testimony.
If you have proof that js was forced to retire to cover up a horrible sex scandal, you should come forward. Now!
If not, then maybe you shouldn’t believe everything you hear.
Paterno must have known that, and apparently didn't do anything to stop it. I don't know that I would call that a cover-up, but it certainly seems negligent to me.
I can think of something else "most people still don't 'get'," and that's this:
Is there any connection between Mr Sandusky's criminal activities and the April 2005 disappearance of Ray Gricar.
From the Wikipedia page for Mr. Gricar:
He continued, "You've got his car being found, locked with cellphones inside. The computers found and the hard drive is found there in the river. The body is never found. Looks to me like it was staged."After the revelations about the Penn State sex abuse scandal in which it was revealed that Gricar had declined to prosecute Jerry Sandusky, well-known forensic pathologist Cyril Wecht said that "I believe that his disappearance is almost certainly related to this Penn State debacle."
Or maybe Gricar did what his brother did before him, and committed suicide in the Susquehanna River.
From what I’ve read, Paterno had power and influence far above what you would expect from a typical football coach. Paterno must have known why Sandusky suddenly retired in 1999, and why he suspiciously wasn’t given another coaching job.
The main reason the victim was never identified in the shower incident witnessed by McQueary, is because everybody in Penn State kept this information in-house, all of them agreeing to a cover-up. (It’s silly to think that talking to the administrator technically in charge of the PD is the same as reporting a crime.)
McQueary telephoned his father, and they waited until the next day to meet with Paterno. Paterno waited another day before notifying the head of the athletic department. That guy waited even longer to notify his boss, and no police investigation was ever started. NONE of these people ever considered the 10-yr old victim, or took steps to identify him. It was the cover-up itself that made it possible for Sandusky’s shower victim to remain unidentified, and eliminated any chance for him to be examined by medical professionals, or interviewed by experts trained to deal with juvenile victims.
When told by McQueary about the shower incident, all Paterno had to do was tell McQueary to immediately accompany him to the police station, and instruct McQueary to tell the police what he had seen in the shower. That’s exactly what any competent administrator would have done. Paterno was as big a part of the cover-up as anybody else. Unfortunately, for the purposes of hiding the identity of the 10-yr old victim and making him unavailable to be examined and interviewed, the cover-up was a success.
From Paterno on up, I’m disgusted with these people and anybody who defends their actions.
Thanks for posting. Yesterday at my Grandson’s birthday party, his grandpa from the other side, knowing I’m a PSU alum, asked what I thought of the Sandusky verdict. I thought he was guilty as sin.
Then I added that I was dismayed that the media accounts kept stating that Paterno had not contacted police. I told him that he did contact the proper jurisdiction, the campus police. He exploded, yelling he disagreed and that I was just attempting to protect Joe. He left the room. To him I might as well have been saying Keystone Kops.
What would have happened if Joe had contacted the State College Police, Centre County Sheriff, the State Police, or the FBI?
To protect a revenue stream of ~$50MM/year? Absolutely.
Is his beard still claiming she didn't know?
being a pedophile is not the same as being homosexual ( no matter how convoluted your logic).
Maybe there is a connection, but one always has to be very skeptical about the stated beliefs of Cyril Wecht.
thank you well said
I wonder if someone had reported to you suspicions of child rape ( or child molestation of some type) if you would merely ‘report it to the next level’.
I am not a required reporter. I am merely a parent and if I had heard of any of the activity going on in the PSU locker room ( I mean really grown mean shower with prepubescent boys???) I would have been screaming my head off. What kind of community d you live in that thinks it is okay for some adult to shower with children?? I don;t get that at al
I am very much aware of that fact, and it is one of the most disturbing aspects of the case.
Couldn't the reason that there was no "known victim" in that incident be because that pussy McQueary witnessed the sexual assault and allowed Sandusky (who knew he'd been seen committing child rape) to leave with the boy?
And when McQueary told his father and Paterno about it, and Paterno told other Penn State officials, not one of them ever tried to locate that poor boy and see if he needed help or was even still alive.
The child rapist was caught red handed and left with his victim, whom nobody ever heard from again.
How the writer of this piece considers that dark fact somehow exculpatory is beyond me.
It's positively chilling.
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.