I had been a Paterno defender before but depending on how this actually shakes out, he may be guilty. I really have no idea at this point. It does bother me that he isn’t around to give his side of the story, but that’s life.
It is interesting that even in court McQueary’s testimony was uncertain and they could never decide who he told and what he told them. That was the extent of Paterno’s involvement (or at least we thought it was). Now, these e-mails don’t really give us much information. There is a lot of speculation as to who the word “we” refers to, what Paterno said, and what all the people knew about 1998. We don’t know. We could ask Curley, but as far as Paterno’s legacy that doesn’t matter. He’s dead and his legacy is of no legal consequence.
It would be really nice to have the whole story.
The discrepancies regarding what McQueary said to which party have been overstated.
For example, you'll read that when Jonathan Dranov, M.D. testified for the defense, he testified that Mike McQueary told him that he didn't see any sexual act that night. That's not true.
Dranov said that each of the three times he asked McQueary if he actually saw sex, McQueary broke down and couldn't talk. McQueary was so upset, he couldn't get past the point where he described hearing the rhythmic slapping sound before he would break down and couldn't talk. Dranov, a long-time family friend, said he'd never seen McQueary break down before.
That testimony was far from "McQueary told Dranov he didn't see any sex act,' as presented by some.
"No idea" huh. Really?
Paterno himself says he knew that his wingman was screwing little boys. These emails are documentary evidence of more of the same. Yet you have "no idea." What do you need to get an idea, a video tape of Sandusky in the act with Paterno watching?
I'm not dogging on you man, I'm really not, but this is one of the major problems with America today. People have vast amount of evidence right before their eyes of the devolution, debauchery and complete desolation of what's good, yet either shut it out somehow or for whatever can't makee a logical determination that it's wrong.
At least you're not like some of the insufferable sports-moron personality-cultists who actually have the nerve to defend this miserable, pathetic(thankfully DEAD) douchebag in public.
But if these email exchanges are true, it could prove that Paterno’s testimony to the grand jury was false, a complete lie and that he was indeed involved in a cover up after the fact, after his initial report.
While Patnerno is dead and can’t be prosecuted for it, if true, it could have serious legal consequences for Curley and Spanier. If they admitted in their email exchanges that they knew that a crime was committed and they had initially admitted they had an obligation to report it to the proper authorities, and then changed their minds based on a conversation with Paterno, that convinced them to treat Sandusky “humanely” and that it should not be reported for whatever reason, and that they furthermore discussed the potential legal fallout of not reporting it should it ever become public, it would seem they weighed that bad outcome against the bad outcome of the bad publicity and deemed it was the lesser of those risk of not reporting it and keeping it “quiet”.
It would be really nice to have the whole story.
Yes it would. And I think when the whole story comes out, Sandusy is not the only one to face criminal charges.