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

Skip to comments.

Things Most People Still Don't "Get" About the Jerry Sandusky Scandal
johnziegler.com ^ | 6-24-12 | John Ziegler

Posted on 06/25/2012 9:14:26 PM PDT by FlJoePa

Editorial by John Ziegler Things Most People Still Don't "Get" About the Jerry Sandusky Scandal

6/24/2012

One of the most interesting phenomenon about the biggest news stories of the modern age is that the larger a story is, the bigger the gap seems to be between what people think they know about what happened and what really occurred (this is how most Americans think Bill Clinton was impeached for having oral sex with an intern) .

Having communicated, from a contrarian point of view, with literally hundreds of people about the Jerry Sandusky case, I have been struck by how true this is regarding the horrific narrative which has captivated the sports world since last November. Because at one point I was preparing to produce a documentary on it for a major network (one that will be made, but without my participation) I have made it my business to know all of the facts about this case.

In my experience there are many important elements which, thanks in large part to poor media coverage, are not just lost on the general public, but which the average person simply refuses to accept as reality, even when they are directly told about them. Most incredibly, I have found that this is even true with a lot of Penn State supporters who, seemingly out of guilt and fear of being seen as not accepting reality, have bought into largely suspect narratives.

To be clear, I am totally convinced that Sandusky was guilty and that the verdicts were, for the most part, completely justified (though the process was clearly rushed). I just strongly believe that many people have come to unfair conclusions about the now deceased Joe Paterno because they simply don’t have a clear picture of all the facts.

Here are the most important things that, at least in my experience, most people just don’t "get" about the Jerry Sandusky scandal.

Without a doubt, the number one item on this list is that there is no known victim from the episode witnessed by Mike McQueary, which got so much of the media coverage and which ultimately resulted in Paterno’s firing. When I tell people this fact they think that I am either joking or that I simply mean that the victim just doesn’t want to be identified.

Neither is true. Despite worldwide media coverage and the likelihood of a huge civil case paycheck, no one has ever come forward in any way to say that they were raped or abused by Sandusky in the Penn State showers on the day McQueary says he saw something awful. This doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, but it should have at least raised important questions which were mostly never asked.

Not only is there no known victim from the McQueary episode, incredibly, the only known witness to the event got the date it happened wrong. McQueary didn’t just get the day of this seemingly momentous incident wrong. He also got the month wrong. And the even the year! The only thing more remarkable than this inexplicable lapse in memory (how do you forget the year in which something like that happened unless you only thought it was extremely significant years later?), was that the very same media which covered the initial McQueary allegation as if it was a presidential assassination, barely even mentioned this startling revelation which came to light just before the trial.

Two other facts about McQueary, which have been lost in the avalanche of information about the case, are that he told a doctor friend that he never saw any sex and that he went out of his way to participate in at least two events hosted by Sandusky after the scene in the shower. Both of these issues came up at trial (the jury even asked to have the doctor’s testimony read back during deliberations) and probably played a role in one of the verdicts.

Now that the verdicts are in, also making the list of things most people don’t realize about the Sandusky case is the significance of one of the three not guilty judgments. It turns out that, after all of the coverage of the McQueary allegation and the resulting ignominious ending of a 60 year era at Penn State football and the death of a legend, Sandusky was actually acquitted of the rape charge from that allegation.

This was hardly ever mentioned on any of the television coverage of the verdict and is more than just an interesting and ironic footnote to the trial. The reality is that this verdict proves that the grand jury report should never have described what McQueary witnessed as an “anal rape.” That one phrase dramatically altered the narrative of the entire saga. Without it, I honestly believe that media firestorm is greatly diminished (no one to my knowledge has ever pointed out that the first edition of Sports Illustrated after the grand jury report came out had exactly zero hard news stories on the scandal), Paterno and Penn State are not the only focus, and Paterno at least survives long enough to get the hearing he deserved.

Most people, even in the news media, are also unaware that there was only one other allegation of actual rape (interestingly the mother of that victim does not blame Penn State or Paterno at all) in the grand jury report, which is probably why the prosecutors stretched too far on the McQueary incident. All of the other most egregious allegations came about because new victims came forward after all of the initial publicity. All of the many accusers at trial created the misimpression that there was a mountain of evidence at the time of Paterno’s firing. This just wasn’t the case.

Similarly, people I speak to have a very difficult time separating what we now know about what a monster Sandusky is and what information Paterno apparently had at the time when he decided all that he had to do was notify his superiors. Based on the current evidence, all Paterno knew was that a graduate assistant had sort of witnessed Sandusky engaging in highly inappropriate contact of a sexual nature in a Penn State shower. There is no existing proof that Paterno knew of any other allegations and certainly didn’t have the full context of Sandusky’s actions we all unfortunately have now.

This leads to the next misunderstanding surrounding how easy it would have been for Paterno or anyone else to pin a child molester label on Sandsky. Not only were there no other concurrent allegations (as far as we currently know, Penn State football was unaware of the 1998 investigation into an incident which prosecutors deemed unchargeable), but Sandusky was a local hero and ran a huge charity on which thousands of people relied. A false charge of child molester would have been devastating to many people and irreversible. It has been presumed that Paterno and others at Penn State looked the other way on Sandusky out of fear of damaging their precious program, but there are other rational interpretations of their hesitancy to go public.

It is also important to point out that, while he didn’t go public with McQueary’s story, contrary to widespread perception, Paterno did indeed go to the police (the head of the campus police) and his superior, just as the law required him to do so. 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.

Most people I speak to about this presume that Paterno took part in a cover up and placed the reputation of his football team over the well being of defenseless children. But just to be clear, as of today, there is zero evidence to back up this allegation. While numerous email are being made public which indicate other Penn State officials may have participated in a cover up, there is not even one relevant mention of Joe Paterno.

If people still want to think that the crimes of Jerry Sandusky were really the fault of Joe Paterno or someone else, that is fine with me. People are entitled to their own opinions. They just should have all the facts before they come to their conclusions. Unfortunately, in this case, very few people, even in the news media, are aware of all of them.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Sports
KEYWORDS: coverup; gaypride; homosexualagenda; joepa; johnziegler; lavendermafia; manboylove; mcqueary; paterno; pedostate; pennstate; psu; sandusky
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last
As an alum, I agree with this article up and until he says ..."Paterno did indeed go to the police (the head of the campus police) and his superior,".

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.

1 posted on 06/25/2012 9:14:34 PM PDT by FlJoePa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa

“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.


2 posted on 06/25/2012 9:31:41 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa
And amazingly - people from the Penn State Athletic Department testified that there was nothing unusual about a grown man showering with young boys at Penn State.

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.

3 posted on 06/25/2012 9:34:24 PM 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 1 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa

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.


4 posted on 06/25/2012 9:35:26 PM PDT by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa
as far as we currently know, Penn State football was unaware of the 1998 investigation into an incident which prosecutors deemed unchargeable

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.

5 posted on 06/25/2012 9:36:07 PM PDT by CaptainK (...please make it stop. Shake a can of pennies at it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
No kidding.

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.

6 posted on 06/25/2012 9:37:27 PM 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 2 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

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?


7 posted on 06/25/2012 9:49:46 PM PDT by FlJoePa ("Success without honor is an unseasoned dish; it will satisfy your hunger, but it won't taste good")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CaptainK

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.


8 posted on 06/25/2012 10:04:51 PM PDT by FlJoePa ("Success without honor is an unseasoned dish; it will satisfy your hunger, but it won't taste good")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa
I don't think the anger over Paterno is about him being involved in a "cover-up", so much as his negligence. Paterno got a report of Sandusky "horsing around" with a young boy in the shower, as he put it. Whether the school thought this was something that needed to be report to the real police or not, they thought it was serious enough to tell Sandusky not to use those facilities or bring young boys to them anymore. Yet, we have witnesses saying that Sandusky was still allowed to do just that, even after this decision was handed down.

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.

9 posted on 06/25/2012 10:24:14 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa
Things Most People Still Don't "Get" About the Jerry Sandusky Scandal

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:

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."

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."


10 posted on 06/25/2012 10:31:26 PM PDT by Steely Tom (If the Constitution can be a living document, I guess a corporation can be a person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
You think maybe Joe and the Athletic Department had Gricar "rubbed out" to protect the PSU Brand?

Or maybe Gricar did what his brother did before him, and committed suicide in the Susquehanna River.

11 posted on 06/25/2012 10:38:15 PM PDT by FlJoePa ("Success without honor is an unseasoned dish; it will satisfy your hunger, but it won't taste good")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa

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.


12 posted on 06/25/2012 10:38:23 PM PDT by 04-Bravo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa

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?


13 posted on 06/25/2012 10:39:57 PM PDT by ntnychik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa
You think maybe Joe and the Athletic Department had Gricar "rubbed out" to protect the PSU Brand?

To protect a revenue stream of ~$50MM/year? Absolutely.

14 posted on 06/25/2012 10:44:57 PM PDT by Steely Tom (If the Constitution can be a living document, I guess a corporation can be a person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
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.

Is his beard still claiming she didn't know?

15 posted on 06/25/2012 10:56:24 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (The media ignored the 40th anniversary of Bill Ayers' Pentagon bombing but not Watergate. Ask Why.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mach9

being a pedophile is not the same as being homosexual ( no matter how convoluted your logic).


16 posted on 06/25/2012 10:57:32 PM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom
well-known forensic pathologist Cyril Wecht said that "I believe that his disappearance is almost certainly related to this Penn State debacle."

Maybe there is a connection, but one always has to be very skeptical about the stated beliefs of Cyril Wecht.

17 posted on 06/25/2012 10:59:53 PM PDT by wideminded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 04-Bravo

thank you well said


18 posted on 06/25/2012 10:59:53 PM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ntnychik

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


19 posted on 06/25/2012 11:04:08 PM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa
Without a doubt, the number one item on this list is that there is no known victim from the episode witnessed by Mike McQueary, which got so much of the media coverage and which ultimately resulted in Paterno’s firing.

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.

20 posted on 06/25/2012 11:04:32 PM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nifster
"being a pedophile is not the same as being homosexual ( no matter how convoluted your logic)."

It just so happens that most pedophiles, nay pederasts, are gay. At least those who make the news.

I think we can agree that when an old man rapes young boys he would be considered gay.

Shall we discuss the media's aversion to associating pedophiles with homosexuals?

What is this humanity when there is an apologist for a homosexual child rapist?

I understand the author is trying to protect his institution, but this is over the top.

We know that all of the Lions are not homo-child-rapists, the institution is fine but we've got some rotten people who need to be held accountable.

Pardon me while I vomit...

21 posted on 06/25/2012 11:34:44 PM PDT by KitJ (Shall not be infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa

I believe the writer is biased.

” I have made it my business to know all of the facts about this case.”
__________
Ransomnote Says:
He doesn’t limit his article to the ‘facts’, he tells us his interpretation of them.
__________

“In my experience there are many important elements which, thanks in large part to poor media coverage, are not just lost on the general public, but which the average person simply refuses to accept as reality, even when they are directly told about them. Most incredibly, I have found that this is even true with a lot of Penn State supporters who, seemingly out of guilt and fear of being seen as not accepting reality, have bought into largely suspect narratives.”
__________________

Ransomnote Says:
I think this is biased framing of those, even former supporters, who disagree with his interpretation of the ‘facts’.
________________

“Here are the most important things that, at least in my experience, most people just don’t “get” about the Jerry Sandusky scandal.”

_________________

Ransomnote Says:
Again - I think he departs from his fake focus on ‘facts’ here and is really playing interpreter -showing how the facts should be interpreted.

________________

“Without a doubt, the number one item on this list is that there is no known victim from the episode witnessed by Mike McQueary, which got so much of the media coverage and which ultimately resulted in Paterno’s firing. When I tell people this fact they think that I am either joking or that I simply mean that the victim just doesn’t want to be identified.”
_______________

Ransomnote Says:
I forget the name of the hearing that is held to determine whether to file charges, is it a grand jury that is empaneled? Whatever the name of that first legal hurdle was, the ‘panel’ found McQuery believable.
Sandusky was found guilty of other rape charges but the ‘problem’ with the shower incident the writer focuses on is the identity of the 10 year old rape victim.

We know that Sandusky was found guilty of raping children, we don’t know the name of of this victim. We know that some victims of horrible trauma like childhood sex abuse never make it to adulthood because they become suicidal or become drug addicts etc. So there is an unidentified victim said to be in a shower with Sandusky who is known to have raped other children fitting that description. What to do? Look at McQueary’s testimony. The jury believed his testimony in Sandusky’s trial.

Quoting an online analysis of the trial outcomes “The jury’s conclusion that McQueary observed indecent assault and unlawful contact with a minor demonstrated that the jury believed McQueary saw something improper and illegal, but not necessarily actual sex, as he admitted.”
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/23/12370562-analysis-number-of-victims-persuaded-sandusky-jurors-in-he-said-he-said-case?lite

So in the case of things like child rape or child pornography, sometimes a young child is not identified by name and at that point they look at who reported what and the credibility of those people. A custodian also reported having seen this kind of sexual activity with Sandusky and a boy in the shower and it put him in a state of shock. The write doesn’t mention that. I believe the writer implies that people don’t realize that the shower victim was never identified and therefore Paterno was innocent and acted properly. But Paterno believed McQeary enough to a) report him to a campus police person and b) treat McQeary like he was honest and trustworthy for years following the report.
___________________________
“Neither is true. Despite worldwide media coverage and the likelihood of a huge civil case paycheck, no one has ever come forward in any way to say that they were raped or abused by Sandusky in the Penn State showers on the day McQueary says he saw something awful.”

___________________________
Ransomnote Says:
The writer says “Despite worldwide media coverage, no one has come forward...” He really should have said “Perhaps because of worldwide media coverage, no adult male having been repeatedly raped by the football ‘hero’ throughout their childhood was emotionally able (or alive) to brave the media storm and the hatred of Paterno’s rabid fans to speak of the worst, most destructive trauma they received at the tender age of 10 (or whatever age).” I mean, it is touch for children who were raped to face it let alone brave the insane media storm and rabid fans. That’s why the jury turned to McQueary re the show rape. And note the writer qualifies that no one says they were raped ON THAT EXACT DAY. I really doubt children would remember the date they were raped but that’s just me.
__________________________

“Not only is there no known victim from the McQueary episode, incredibly, the only known witness to the event got the date it happened wrong. McQueary didn’t just get the day of this seemingly momentous incident wrong. He also got the month wrong. And the even the year! The only thing more remarkable than this inexplicable lapse in memory (how do you forget the year in which something like that happened unless you only thought it was extremely significant years later?), was that the very same media which covered the initial McQueary allegation as if it was a presidential assassination, barely even mentioned this startling revelation which came to light just before the trial.”
_______________________
Ransomnote Says:
How do we know McQueary got it wrong? How do we know that no victim came forward to report that occurred on that date? Because the date was recorded by the campus police. Paterno believed there was something to report, he believed McQueary was trustworthy enough to report it. Making a big deal about McQueary totally lousing up the correct date isn’t much of an issue if there is record with the campus police of a report.
______________________

“Two other facts about McQueary, which have been lost in the avalanche of information about the case, are that he told a doctor friend that he never saw any sex and that he went out of his way to participate in at least two events hosted by Sandusky after the scene in the shower. Both of these issues came up at trial (the jury even asked to have the doctor’s testimony read back during deliberations) and probably played a role in one of the verdicts.”

___________________________

Ransomnote Says:
The reason Sandusky was not given a ‘guilty’ verdict on the case reported by McQueary is because McQueary always admitted he didn’t see, specifically ‘sex’ as in ‘anal rape’ but was reporting sexual activity. McQueary said this to Paterno, the initial panel (grand jury?) and at the trial, so why wouldn’t he say it to a doctor?

________________________________

” It turns out that, after all of the coverage of the McQueary allegation and the resulting ignominious ending of a 60 year era at Penn State football and the death of a legend, Sandusky was actually acquitted of the rape charge from that allegation.”
_____________________________
Ransomnote Says:
I don’t think the writer ‘gets’ that the Jury believed McQueary and the other rape victims, but carefully reviewed testimony on this case and didn’t find evidence (Mcqueary said he didn’t see actual anal rape) to convict on that charge but convicted Sandusky on two other charges for that specific shower event. Paterno wasn’t sent to an ignomius end by the lack of evidence of anal rape.
Again, repeated an excerpt from the analysis I linke, “the jury believed McQueary saw something improper and illegal, but not necessarily actual sex, as he admitted.” Paterno lost his career for failing to report (to the police, not campus police) and address ‘improper and illegal’ activity involving the abuse of a child which was reported to him.

_________________________

“The reality is that this verdict proves that the grand jury report should never have described what McQueary witnessed as an “anal rape.” That one phrase dramatically altered the narrative of the entire saga. Without it, I honestly believe that media firestorm is greatly diminished “
__________________________________

Ransomnote Says:
Again, the reporter implies that McQueary had to actual witness instance anal rape and not just that specific instance of illegal and improper behavior (Sandusky and a boy in the shower) in order for Paterno to be responsible for reporting sexual abuse of a child to the ‘real’ police and to see to it that Sandusky was barred from further access to the showers at the school in which Paterno was coach. Paterno had influence and he chose to deploy it in the protection of his schools reputation in stead of acting to protect children being abused by Sandusky. It was his choice.
__________________________

“Most people, even in the news media, are also unaware that there was only one other allegation of actual rape (interestingly the mother of that victim does not blame Penn State or Paterno at all) in the grand jury report, which is probably why the prosecutors stretched too far on the McQueary incident. All of the other most egregious allegations came about because new victims came forward after all of the initial publicity. All of the many accusers at trial created the misimpression that there was a mountain of evidence at the time of Paterno’s firing. This just wasn’t the case.”
___________________________
Ransomnote Says:
So it would have been ok if Paterno betrayed one sexually abused child? He should have kept his career then? It only matters if the public thinks Paterno ignored a MOUNTAIN of evidence instead of the innocence of a boy. Paterno knew Sandusky ran a charity for children. Sandusky’s proclivities were known. All Paterno did was distance himself (Really do you think Sanduksy was so committed to his charity that he’d just not pull away to spend time with coaching? That was Paterno’s cover for why he dumped Sandusky.)

______________________
“Similarly, people I speak to have a very difficult time separating what we now know about what a monster Sandusky is and what information Paterno apparently had at the time when he decided all that he had to do was notify his superiors. Based on the current evidence, all Paterno knew was that a graduate assistant had sort of witnessed Sandusky engaging in highly inappropriate contact of a sexual nature in a Penn State shower.”
_____________________
Ransomnote Says:
Is anyone as repulsed as I am reading that? One sexually abused child or eight of them - you go to the police because a child deserves a protection and help and a hope for some kind of future.
______________________

“This leads to the next misunderstanding surrounding how easy it would have been for Paterno or anyone else to pin a child molester label on Sandsky. “
______________________
Ransomnote Says:
No one said that Paterno had to pin a child molester label on Sandusky. Plenty of us believe he had to report the information he received regarding the sexual activity taking place between a man and a child in the showers as reported to him.
_____________________________

“Sandusky was a local hero and ran a huge charity on which thousands of people relied. A false charge of child molester would have been devastating to many people and irreversible.”
____________________________
Ransomnote Says:
And Paterno was the ‘winningest coach ever!’. Paterno would not charge Sandusky with molestation - he would report it to the proper authorities and they would investigate. Sandusky would have to accept the fact that activity reported to Paterno had to be relayed to the proper authorities by Paterno (if he had done his job) regardless of their friendship or Paterno’s own opinion.
____________________________________________________
“ 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.”
____________________________
Ransomnote Says:
Again, this is repulsive. Sandusky was no longer Paterno’s responsibility - but the child being molested in campus football team showers on Paterno’s watch WAS. Do we really only report molesters if they are currently employed with us?
___________________________

“While numerous email are being made public which indicate other Penn State officials may have participated in a cover up, there is not even one relevant mention of Joe Paterno.”
__________________________

Ransomnote Says:
Pathetic...do I need to explain why?
__________________________

“If people still want to think that the crimes of Jerry Sandusky were really the fault of Joe Paterno or someone else, that is fine with me.”
_________________________
Ransomnote Says:
I’ve only heard people say Paterno failed in his responsibility to act, not that he was responsible for the crimes of Jerry Sandusky. But, this is just another biased attempt by the writer to shape the facts for us.

________________________

“People are entitled to their own opinions. They just should have all the facts before they come to their conclusions.”

_______________________
Ransomnote Says:
The jury knew the facts and found McQueary believable, as did Paterno. There is evidence that Paterno reported to the campus police only and then distanced himself. THose are the facts.


22 posted on 06/26/2012 12:14:09 AM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nifster
being a pedophile is not the same as being homosexual (no matter how convoluted your logic).

Strike two!

Larry Brinkin, S.F. Gay Rights Icon, Arrested on Child Porn Charges

"Police say they arrested 66-year-old Larry Brinkin, the high-profile gay activist, on possession of child pornography on Friday night....Brinkin, a community icon who led the fight for the city to recognize same-sex partnerships, was arrested and booked into San Francisco County Jail, police said."

http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2012/06/larry_brinkin_chil_porn.php

23 posted on 06/26/2012 1:09:16 AM PDT by zipper (espions sur les occupants)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: zipper

“being a pedophile is not the same as being homosexual (no matter how convoluted your logic).”

Strike two!

Larry Brinkin, S.F. Gay Rights Icon, Arrested on Child Porn Charges

Police say they arrested 66-year-old Larry Brinkin, the high-profile gay activist, on possession of child pornography on Friday night....Brinkin, a community icon who led the fight for the city to recognize same-sex partnerships, was arrested and booked into San Francisco County Jail, police said.

~ ~ ~

Gays (sodomites) have many perversions. God is right, it’s
an abomination. Our messed up country, both candidates
for President support the homosexual agenda.

Sister Lucia’s calls it...”diabolical disorientation.”


24 posted on 06/26/2012 2:24:10 AM PDT by stpio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Do football coaches have control over who maintains their tenured faculty status at your school?


25 posted on 06/26/2012 3:24:39 AM PDT by rwilson99 (Please tell me how the words "shall not perish and have everlasting life" would NOT apply to Mary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa

“all Paterno knew was that a graduate assistant had sort of witnessed Sandusky engaging in highly inappropriate contact of a sexual nature in a Penn State shower.”

Highly inappropriate is a professor with a college student in the shower.

A middle aged man having sex with a young boy in the showers is freakin rape. Forget the “required reporter” cop out, anyone who knew this was happening had a duty to report it and make sure it was handled. That includes the cops who apparently ignored these crimes.

Apparently folks are willing for fatherless boys to be raped in order to protect their sports business.


26 posted on 06/26/2012 3:43:11 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

So if you they are saying that if you don’t have direct supervision responsibilities over a man raping little boys you should do nothing?


27 posted on 06/26/2012 3:45:59 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 04-Bravo

It’s what any normal person would do. Would all these people have acted the same way if it had been little girls instead?


28 posted on 06/26/2012 3:53:05 AM PDT by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 04-Bravo

It’s what any normal person would do. Would all these people have acted the same way if it had been little girls instead?


29 posted on 06/26/2012 3:53:05 AM PDT by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

Seems like people are still making excuses that this series of events isn’t as bad as some people may think.

How many children were raped and were never reported or identified? Sandusky had access to many many children over a very long period of time.

They are still trying to cover it up.


30 posted on 06/26/2012 3:56:32 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

negligence does not have the same moral stink as does a cover=up.

I don’t know all the facts of the case, and so have refrained from any judgment on JP, who is no longer here to defend himself.

He is in God’s hands now, and justice will be done. Count on it.


31 posted on 06/26/2012 4:48:09 AM PDT by chesley (God's chosen instrument - the trumpet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa

I didn’t say I heard it. I said I assumed it.
And the reason being he spend too much time on his charity?
LOL he certainly did.


32 posted on 06/26/2012 4:54:28 AM PDT by CaptainK (...please make it stop. Shake a can of pennies at it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ntnychik

“What would have happened if Joe had contacted the State College Police, Centre County Sheriff, the State Police, or the FBI”?

Joepa would of been known for doing the right thing. That being said he didnt contact the police, FBI etc and forever he will be stained with being part of the coverup. Rightfully so! PSU made the right move in removing him


33 posted on 06/26/2012 5:05:58 AM PDT by italianquaker ( Mr Obama inherited an AAA rating and made it AA, thnx Resident Zero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ntnychik

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...

...it so happens that I don’t think Paterno should’ve been terminated over this situation, although I can understand why others do...if he’d had the moral fiber he was supposed to possess he would’ve retired ten years ago, and not have deprived some deserving younger coach the opportunity at a blue chip job...but he did in fact report what he’d been told, albeit to a nominal superior (nobody, but nobody was actually superior to Paterno at PSU)and fulfilled his moral obligation, again albeit in true minimalist fashion...he was terminated as a result of his high handed treatment of administrators who wished to (rightfully) exercise his retirement years prior, and they, sensing a rare opportunity, struck him down, payback for his prior dissing of them...Paterno’s hubris was so exaggerated that he thought he could still control a situation that had bombshelled the campus; he publicly stated that he, not they, would determine his fate, saying he would retire at year’s end...but, in the end, he was fired for petty administrative reasons, opportunely, but not directly, tied to the scandal...

...by the way, if anyone believes that the football program in 1998, when Jerry was still the celebrated DC, was not aware that he was under suspicion of lewd behavior with a child in a shower, a situation conveniently swept under the carpet, I certainly don’t know what to say, except that sometimes suspension of belief just beggars the imagination...


34 posted on 06/26/2012 5:07:01 AM PDT by IrishBrigade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa
We get it just fine. A PC liberal institution not only protected, they encouraged a gay pedophile child rapist in his activities for decades. Then they covered it up and denied it for years even to the faces of the very victims themselves, completely confident that not only was it the right thing to do, but that this was how things were supposed to be and that this was just another lifestyle.

Yes, we understand clearly.

35 posted on 06/26/2012 5:09:10 AM PDT by Caipirabob (I say we take off and Newt the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dead

I’ve posted the same here since the story broke. They may not have found shower boy because he may have been killed for all we know - and for all Joe Pa and McQueery knew. That they did so little is horrible.


36 posted on 06/26/2012 5:11:06 AM PDT by Treeless Branch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa
The nicest thing that anyone can say about the involvement of Paterno is that no one really knows what happened.

The kindest conclusion you can come to about Paterno's involvement is that he was very busy and was simply negligent while a pedophile he wasn't entirely aware of was ruining his legacy and reputation. I find that at best, very sad and very disturbing.

The worst that you can surmise was that Paterno knew the whole story, and was involved with the cover up with other people at Penn State in order to save the legend and football machine he had created there.

The truth is likely somewhere in between, but we will probably never know what actually happened. All we know is that a lot of young boys were irreparably scarred for life and shattered while a record was being made for a legend that is now entirely tarnished, even if you come to the kindest of conclusions.

37 posted on 06/26/2012 5:52:08 AM PDT by Lakeshark (I don't care for Mitt, the alternative is unthinkable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwilson99

How is Sandusky’s tenure status relevant to Paterno’s failure to enforce the ban on him bringing little boys to the facilities under Paterno’s direct supervision?


38 posted on 06/26/2012 6:14:56 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

No, I’m saying pretty much exactly the opposite.


39 posted on 06/26/2012 6:16:04 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: chesley

“negligence does not have the same moral stink as does a cover=up.”

Maybe not, but when the negligence in question allows children to continue to be raped and molested, then that negligence is a very serious issue in and of itself.


40 posted on 06/26/2012 6:22:43 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Sorry I wasn’t clear. I guess we agree.

I don’t understand how anyone could make excuses for not protecting the child. Using “it’s not my job” to explain why he didn’t report a rape is indefensible.


41 posted on 06/26/2012 6:31:14 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa

Yes it is good to sort out the facts when the dust settles. There was more people than just Jerry to blame. I see in the future that Penn State will be paying a whole lot of money when the lawyers are finished. What we need to remember is the victims.


42 posted on 06/26/2012 6:32:43 AM PDT by bmwcyle (Romney - not Obama - not a Conservative - not a real Christian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
And amazingly - people from the Penn State Athletic Department testified that there was nothing unusual about a grown man showering with young boys at Penn State.

In my own upbringing, throughout grade school and high school we routinely showered after gym classes and extra-curricular sporting activities. If on any occasion one of our gym teachers or coaches would have had the temerity to join us in the shower room (such a thing NEVER happened), it would have caused a scandal that would likely end with the teacher being fired or worse.

In fact, if I recall correctly the athletic staff had their own showers in their offices. It would be very interesting to know if this was the situation in the Penn State athletic staff offices, and if so, why some claim it was "normal" for the staff to shower with their charges.

43 posted on 06/26/2012 6:35:36 AM PDT by tjd1454
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: KitJ
Well you can't base your opinion on reality on what you see on the news.

The majority of child sexual assault victims are girls.

The vast majority of sexual assault perpetrators are male.

While there may be (and there is) and argument made about disproportionality - the numbers simply don't add up to the majority of pedophiles/pederasts being gay.

44 posted on 06/26/2012 7:08:56 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 21 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa

The homo/pedophile community and their sympathizers demonizes anyone who stands up to them without a conviction. The name the victims and witnesses liars. It takes a lot of courage to stand up because you will be named wierd - even a homophobe - for standing up to an unconvicted homo wierdo.

Pedophiles thrive in secrecy and keeping everyone in fear of them. Joe could have messed all that up by being open with everybody in football, in administration, and within the charity, that Sandusky was suspect in his eyes and he could have asked for all eyes to watch him based on him taking boys into the shower with him and acting inappropriately.

Heck, in his position, he could have brought in experts to speak to the whole football program about why boys don’t tell, how they get entrapped by sexual predators, how sexual predators operate, what is appropriate and inappropriate contact between men and boys and what to look for and what to do if you see signs of abuse.


45 posted on 06/26/2012 7:13:47 AM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Maybe, but it’s in God’s hands, now.


46 posted on 06/26/2012 7:50:08 AM PDT by chesley (God's chosen instrument - the trumpet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Nifster

They are not the same.

However, they DO walk hand in hand.


47 posted on 06/26/2012 7:56:59 AM PDT by RoadGumby (This is not where I belong, Take this world and give me Jesus.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
The simple majority of sexual assault perpetrators are male.

The vast majority of sexual assault convictions are male.

Thus you get wildly different graphs if you chart your information strictly from court records or a head count of convicted prisoners in the justice system than what you see from counseling and therapy researchers. Female predators may approach thirty percent. As with male predators, they go after both sexes in their victim selection.

48 posted on 06/26/2012 9:00:31 AM PDT by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

“Female (sexual) predators may approach thirty percent”

Source?

Everything I have seen says around 10%. Around 5% of abused girls are victimized by women and 20% of boys.


49 posted on 06/26/2012 9:24:34 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 48 | View Replies]

To: FlJoePa
The author is mischaracterizing the evidence when he says McQueary told "the doctor friend he never saw any sex."

McQueary never told the doctor that. What the doctor friend, Jonathan Dranov, M.D., said was that whenever he pushed McQueary on that point, McQueary would break down. To quote from Dranov's testimony:

“He couldn’t go on. He just seemed to get more upset."

Dranov asked him three times and all three times McQueary broke down when asked whether he saw sex. Dranov also testified on cross that he knew McQeary and had never seen him break down like that over anything.

The fact is: McQueary NEVER told Dr. Dranov he didn't see sex. McQueary couldn't answer the question the three times he was asked it by Dranov.

50 posted on 06/26/2012 9:38:07 AM PDT by Scoutmaster (You knew the job was dangerous when you took it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 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