Skip to comments.Penn State Said to Be Planning Paterno Exit Amid Scandal
Posted on 11/08/2011 11:40:43 AM PST by bjorn14
STATE COLLEGE, Pa. Joe Paternos tenure as coach of the Penn State football team will soon be over, perhaps within days or weeks, in the wake of a sex-abuse scandal that has implicated university officials, according to two people briefed on conversations among the universitys top officials.
The board of trustees has yet to determine the precise timing of Paternos exit, but it is clear that the man who has more victories than any other coach at college footballs top level and who made Penn State a prestigious national brand will not survive to coach another season. Discussions about how to manage his departure have begun, according to the two people.
Paterno was to have held a news conference Tuesday but the university canceled it less than an hour before it was scheduled to start.
At age 84 and with 46 seasons as the Penn State head coach behind him, Paternos extraordinary run of success one that produced tens of millions of dollars for the school and two national championships, and that established him as one of the nations most revered leaders, will end with a stunning and humiliating final chapter.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Re: “Paterno knew this vile scumbag was raping boys in the shower and did nothing.”
For Paterno to “know” this, under what the law defines as admissible evidence in court, he would have had to see it himself. If it happened, the only person who knew about it (as defined by law) and whose testimony to that effect would have been accepted by a court was McQueary. Paterno knew only that McQueary said it happened, i.e. hearsay evidence.
I once acted on a credible-sounding allegation from a very prominent pro-life Web site that an identifiable doctor and hospital left a baby (as defined by law, not the pro-life camp) to die. I sent a copy of the Web page to the state’s hospital regulatory agency, which investigated and found the accusation to be false. The pro-life site was lucky to not be sued for libel (along with the actual source of the allegation) by the doctor and hospital they named. The site also lost my trust because the owner never responded to my E-mail to the effect that the accusation was found to be false.
This is something one must consider before one goes beyond what one is supposed to do according to the law and/or organizational policy, which Paterno did. There is an ideal point between complicity through total silence, and engaging in what might turn out to be libel, slander, or the moral equivalent of a lynching—anybody remember the Durham Dirtbag and the Duke 88 who jumped on Mike Nifong’s bandwagon?
There will never be as good of a coaching rivalry again as there was between Woody and Bo.
Paterno knew only that McQueary said it happened, i.e. hearsay evidence.
Duh. Curley reports to him.
So, in other words, Curley just 'reported it to his superior' the way Joe Paterno did? Then why is everyone upset with Curley?
Obviously, I'm being sarcastic. Curley didn't call the police (wait - strike that, Joe Paterno, didn't, either).
I was being sarcastic about being sarcastic. Curley committed perjury. Although I am puzzled by the fact that he was charged with not reporting the abuse. Because he did report the abuse . . . to his supervisor, if Curley does report to Schultz.
But is anyone beginning to see why it's hard to give Joe Paterno a pass on this? Particularly when prosecutors are being so careful not to release anything regarding McQueary's statements about what he claimed to have told Joe Paterno. That one piece is missing from the GJ presentment and the GJ report. With respect to every other conversation, we know what a party claims to have said, and what the other party (or parties) claims to have been told. Paterno says he wasn't told the damning details . . . but we never hear what McQueary claims to have told Joe Paterno.
Yeah, I agree with you. Before I posted anything earlier today, I read as much as time allowed on both side of the issue at hand.
It seems to boil down to money and glory IMO. But that said I have no idea why they thought they could cover this up forever.
The president of the U. needs to resign now. Paterno needs to resign now. The entire coaching staff needs to resign now and seek life elsewhere. I feel sorry for the football players and the students, but it must be set right. If the NCAA has any stones they will deal with the football program as strongly as they are allowed to do. The board of regents or directors, whatever they call it there needs to man up and bring the hammer down and soon.
Additionally, I have to say that the silence speaks for itself. It’s a CF and it’s not going to get any better until someone steps up and takes action.
Paterno knew that this had to be reported to the proper authorities. Paterno knew it had not been reported. McQueary knew it had not been reported. They knowingly looked the other way while PSU officials broke PA law. OTOH, McQueary got his coaching job and Joe went on the set the record for most NCAA football victories so all was good in Happy Valley.
Because as an officer of the school he was required by law to report it withing a certain time frame. As an officer he can't get off the hook by passing it up the chain.
In most cases involving molestation of a child, you're required to report it when you have a credible claim. Hearsay doesn't matter.
Also, Pennsylvania State law requires that if you don't report it yourself (in a school setting), that you inform your supervisor and that the President or head of the school or institution report (I can give you the site to the specific statute; it's in the GJ presentment). So Pennsylvania state law doesn't just permit hearsay disclosures of child molestation, it requires them in school settings.
Finally, if Joe couldn't report it, how could his supervisor? It would be hearsay for his supervisor. If his supervisor heard it from Joe, it would be double hearsay.
And if you're concerned about "credible-sounding' allegations, (a) err on the side of reporting, in the case of child sexual abuse, and (b) Paterno already knew that Sandusky had been showering with little boys and had been investigated back in 1998 for multiple incidents. Seems as if this claim would have been . . . credible.
A great man knows when an idol is no longer worthy. I want to commend you for your comments and logic based discourse on the situation. I know this is a mournful time for you in seeing the debasement of a man whom you believed was great. My compliments again, and well written.
Convenient how this all hit the fan AFTER the record was broken. Who held up the story?
I am sure that they have it in testimony but Joe is not part of the indictment and what McQueary told Joe is irrlevant to this case prosecution of Sandusky, Curley and Schultz.
The story has been out for months. The question is who held up the indictments which made it news.
23 Pa. Con. Stat. Section 6311(c), regarding staff members of institutions:
Whenever a person is required to report under subsection (b) in the capacity as a member of the staff of a medical or other public or private institution, school, facility or agency, that person shall immediately notify the person in charge of the institution, school, facility or agency or the designated agent of the person in charge. Upon notification, the person in charge or the designated agent, if any, shall assume the responsibility and have the legal obligation to report or cause a report to be made in accordance with section 6313. This chapter does not require more than one report from any such institution, school, facility or agency.
Nope. Don't see anything saying that officers of a school are required to report it. "Person in charge" or "designated agent". If there's a case that makes the term "person in charge" applicable to all officers of a school, then please let me know. The Grand Jury Presentment says that the president or head of a school has the duty to report.
What McQueary told his father is also irrelevant to the prosecution of Sandusky, Curley and Schultz, yet we are told that specifically.
As I said, we are told about every conversation from every point of view, except what McQueary said that he told Paterno. It's not necessary to prosecute Sandusky, Curley and Schultz. It is necessary if you want to protect Paterno's image. And it's the one thing that's missing. I read a document twice. Once for what's in it, and once for what it's missing. Of the entire chain of links of all conversations, just that one link is missing.
And we're told plenty that isn't necessary for the prosecution. Sometimes what you're not told is . . . telling.
I told you what it told me. Now please tell us what it is telling you.
Where do yousee that. I only see that McQueary told his father what he had seen, his father told him to tell Joe what he had seen and that McQueary told Joe what he had seen.
I hate to accept compliments in this situation, and I'm afraid that my replies have gotten snippy. I don't understand how people can read this and not understand JoePa's role.
In my profession, I have to read documents like this twice. Once, for what's in them. Once, for what is missing from them.
It's like putting together a large jigsaw puzzle. In the beginning, you look at pieces and match them based on what you see. Later, you look at the puzzle and see the missing spots and find pieces to fit those missing spots.
I was bothered when I read the presentment and, later, the report. I was sickened when I re-read them for what was missing.
That's when I realized that every conversation from the moment McQueary called his dad through McQueary's multiple meetings with Curley and Schultz were documented. With respect to one meeting, the report states what McQueary says he said, and what Curley says he was told, and what Shultz says he was told. It report all three viewpoints of the conversation.
In fact, following four men - McQueary, Paterno, Curley, and Schultz (and later, the Penn State president), the presentment and report detail each link in the chain of conversations from both sides.
Except one time.
The presentment and report are carefully written so that the topic of what McQueary told the investigators that he told Paterno is missing. It's the hole in the completed jigsaw puzzle. We know what Paterno says he was told (none of the details). If McQueary said that he told Paterno details, it would be even more devastating that what we know. And both documents carefully come to that hole and walk around it.
It tells me that McQueary said that he told Paterno that Sandusky was raping the kid. That McQueary said more he told Paterno more than he saw 'fondling' and maybe something inappropriate of a sexual nature.
And that Paterno had creditable reason to know something worse happened than 'fondling.' And still, he just reported it to Curley. And when nothing happened to Sandusky and Sandusky was still around with little boys, Paterno did nothing.
That's that it tells me.
If it doesn't tell you that, then I'm glad you still have more respect for Joe Paterno than I do. You're somewhere closer to where I was on Sunday, when JoePa was the only coach I respected in NCAA football.
Thanks. I'm signing off. I feel as if I found out yesterday that there is no Santa Claus. No. That's light-hearted. I feel much worse than that. I feel betrayed by what I thought was the one decent thing, the one decent man, in college football. When I lived in Seattle in the 1970s, I had white football helmet for backyard football. I used black electrical tape to put a stripe on it so it would look like Penn State. In Seattle. My parents never went to college and I had no ties to Pennsylvania.
I don't understand that part of your post at all since I have posted many times here (and also to you, I think) that Joe knew everything and was getting a pass from the DA at this time because he had agreed to testify against Curley and Schultz. The only way his testimony is any good is if he was a party to conversations in which either he told them or heard McQueary tell them the actual details.
I think the problem here is that you think Paterno actually has divine powers. If Paterno demanded of Curley and Spainer that Sandusky be banned after he got his retirement package, they would have put their arms around his shoulders and explained why they couldn’t do that.”
Sure they would have. And the minute anyone found out about it, and someone would have, what would they have done then? I think you are the one who thinks Joe is divine and above the standards that are to be used in dealing with the rest of us mere mortals.
I was accusing Joe of COVERING IT UP. Not of actually committing the act. Get real yourself. I actually used to respect Joe Paterno. No more.
Coming from a Pedo State lackey, Buckeyes will take your derision with less than the grain of salt that it deserves.
It seems this gets deeper and worse. I take it you think he was taken out.
It seems this gets deeper and worse. I take it you think he was taken out.
McQueary was the one who should have called the cops since he was the one who saw it. With Paterno, it became whisper down the lane and he reported it to the people to whom he was supposed to, and I imagine who thought would do the right thing.
BTW, if you look at the Grand Jury Report you'll notice that another incident of child sex abuse by Sandusky was observed by a janitor, who couldn't bring himself to make a report. Maybe if we try real hard we'll find a way to blame Paterno for that.
You make a lot of assumptions. While Sandusky may have brought kids into the facilities as part of Second Mile -- i.e. when there were a lot of people around -- the kids were brought to the showers when Sandusky thought there was nobody around.
It's in the Grand Jury report.
I would expect that over the course of decades that Joe had direct knowledge of Sandusky bringing kids into the locker room.
the kids were brought to the showers when Sandusky thought there was nobody around.
the problem with your analogy is that you can’t compare your “website” to Paterno’s source.
McQueary is an ex-psu quarterback. He was the GA at the time.
If JoePa thought him to be a questionable source, I’m not sure why he would still be on the sidelines today.
that part of the presentment describes Sandusky driving by the building slowly until 3:00 am.
Why were they so afraid of him?
Why was McQueary so afraid? the janitors?
I’m wondering - how did anyone come to know about this night the janitors describe if they didn’t report it?
Which came first, being gay, or being a pedophile.
Most people think these are two different things, but they are now more different than an hetero prefering young women.
How does that expression go again?
Grass on the infield, play ball!
Sorry to be so crass, but what irks me is the idea of outrage toward this man Sandusky. This is normative behavior, after all, being gay. That he’s attracted to ten year olds, well that’s a matter for his therapist, but the gay part is A-OK in everybody’s book in the new millenium.
That a 10 year old was in proximity to a shower on campus is a matter for parents I would guess.
To quote Woody Allen, “The heart wants what it does.”
Don’t know what Paterno was thinking. I don’t think we know everything at this point.
Hard to say. On the one hand his bro killed himself. On the other the DA was considered strange. But after the 2002 incident was there something around 2005 that came to light?
Sorry: I read your post again and now understand what you were trying to say.
You can now return to the mob and burn Joe at the stake before hearing what he has to say.
PS: Tressel (sp?)is still a good man, a great coach and he deserved better.
Of course not, practically everyone knows he runs the show, however, as I said he covered his butt legally, by reporting it to his technical supervisor, but didn’t follow up and did not call the cops. He covered himself legally, but didn’t do remotely the right thing.
I suspect we are going to find out that this coaches “retirement” in 1999 was because it was common knowledge this guy was doing this, and rather than reporting it pushed him out... Also, I fear that the local police up in happy valley probably were complicite in the cover up as well. That’s speculation at this point, but I’d say its better than even odds.
Exactly, did Joe report it to the police, knowing they wouldn’t do anything about it, but legally keeping Joe clean?
It’s really starting to smell, like PSU under Paterno was run like a mafia family....and that Sandusky was just one of many things not kosher with the program. It’s inconceivable (yes, I’m using that word), that somebody who witnesses something so horrid, wouldn’t do everything in their power to make it stop.
I guessing that this came to light when police started questioning staff about other cases.
I think what we are seeing is a decline in character in this country.
The locker room custodial staff all knew about it but were afraid to say anything about it for fear of losing their jobs. Why?
Third hand? Sorry, but he got a first hand report from a witness to the event. He did the minimal to cover his ass and walked away.
You have someone come to you and tell you he saw someone having sex with a child, what are you going to do? Just tell your boss and walk away? or are you going to call the cops, or at the very least advise the witness to call the cops?
Joe Pa is no dummy, he knew exactly what he was doing.. he was protecting a friend, pure and simple, and that friend went on molesting for another 9 years.
There is no moral defense for Joe or his actions, and you can claim its a press lynching all you want, but its not. You do the right thing, this is a guy who claims his program is all about integrity, but he clearly showed none in his handling of this.
Penn State is done if Joe Pa isn’t gone and gone quickly.. No alumni or endowment is going to send money that way as long as he is still there.
I suspect highly that Penn State knew long before 2002, and Sandusky’s retirement in 1999 was a direct result of folks knowing and covering it up then. Now, THAT IS admittedly conjecture, but given how much of an “open secret” this guys behavior has turned out to be since this broke, I have a hard time believing 2002 was when it first started to come to light.
I really hope I am wrong about this....but I believe when all is said and done, we are going to find out that JoePa wasn’t the man, everybody thought he was.
It has been reported they were threatened with job loss if they squealed.
Joe Pa is trying to defend himself with I did the legal thing, which it appears he did.. but he didn’t do the right thing, and that’s why he’s done.
Sadly I suspect the more digging that goes on, we are going to find out he knew about Sandusky long before 02.. and that him “retiring” in 1999 from the program was likely a result of the fact folks knew what he was doing.
Conjecture at this point, but sadly I suspect that will likely come out.
The university police investigated the report in 1998. University attorneys reviewed the report against Sandusky in 1998.
The board of directors is canning their current president.
Tom Ridge is being considered to be the new head of the board.
I have to wonder. Was there a ‘special’ relationship between Sandusky and Spanier?
You're thinking that JoePa hires the janitorial staff?
Give it a rest. PSU was a corrupt institution. They are now cleaning house and everyone from Paterno up to the President are on their way out. More and more will come out.