#1 Did you see this Friday column from the former sports editor in State College? Ron Bracken: Climate of secrecy led to crumbling of Camelot
What did Ron Bracken conclude as to how long JoePa knew?
"He may not have known what happened prior to 1998 when the first incident involving Sandusky and a child are reported to have occurred but from that moment on he should have been on high alert to the possibility of it happening again."
#2 Barry Switzer said this week that the coaching community is a tight-knit group and that "they ALL" knew. This is actually exemplified by the reality that here, Jerry Sandusky, was THE top defensive coach in the nation...and applied at the University of Maryland and a few other schools after leaving Penn State...yet NONE would take him...tho he was only 55 when he "retired" [more likely "coerced" into retirement]
...2002, at which point he knew that his graduate assistant had seen something. Paterno has said repeatedly that what was told to him was not explicit or detailed, which explains why he would still not be certain what Sandusky was doing.
ALL: Do you think flintsilver can get any more vague than that?
(a) "something of a sexual nature to a young boy" (Joe's testimony before a grand jury) gets "edited" to just "something..."
(b) "fondling" -- a very specific word -- gets spun into "not explicit or detailed"
ALL: Just skip Flintsilver's consistent Grand Jury "edits" and read it yourself...p. 7.
Oh, and btw, Flintsilver:
* When did "fondling" of 10 yo boys become less than a "felony" in your eyes? [Something not worth following up and thru over the months and years?]
* When did "fondling" of 10 yo boys become something that didn't need attention by responsible adults who might protect them?
Even if we grant the "delegation" of Joe lateraling this report to his superiors in 2002. What? This boy (or boys) didn't need protection in '03? In '04?
Are you telling us, Flintsilver, that if McQueary had seen Sandusky BEATING up a 10 yo boy...and came and told Paterno that he saw Sandusky "doing something of a VIOLENT nature" to a 10 yo boy, that this was "something" that wasn't "explicit" or "detailed" enough for Joe to have followed up over the long run?
What? Joe NEVER had ANY opportunity to even follow up that convo with McQueary? What, was McQueary too busy recruiting or workin' with the wide receivers for Joe to get a clarification on ANYTHING over a 6-year period or so?
Why do you and other Paterno supporters keep telescoping an entire relationship into a single weekend?
And, as both McQueary and Paterno realized that the admins were perhaps "stonewalling" any investigation, are you saying that perhaps the most powerful man in Pennsylvania had NO moral influence or could not give directives to an underling to go spend an hour or two or three talking to authorities by 2003, 2004 or so?
Really?
Your arguments are so pathetic that you insult the intelligence of so many others!
Just a strong case of denial by those who believe in the cult of PSU.
You’re living in a world of blind ignorance and blind hate. I do not know if Paterno knew anything in 1998. The grand jury report never mentioned anything about Paterno knowing and in fact the general consensus I got from reading that report was that it was in fact buried from quite a few people, Paterno included. Is it possible that Paterno knew? He may have known the outcome of the investigation (no criminal charges) and what it was about, and that would explain why Sandusky’s tenure was cut short. We know now that that investigation was bungled and handled poorly. There is no reason to believe that details of an investigation are shared with a football coach because that’s simply not how the law works.
Barry Switzer is one of two people Paterno has ever said anything that can be construed as negative about. Barry Switzer knows nothing about Penn State and has long had an ax to grind. Barry Switzer, like you and others here, keep saying that people “KNEW” (I love how the caps lock key is broken on this point) when there is no evidence that people knew. Sandusky may not have been able to hide the fact that he was investigated for being a homosexual predator in 1998. However, HE WAS NOT CHARGED. Even if we assume that EVERYBODY KNEW the details of that, they CANNOT act as though he was charged with a crime, tried, and convicted. In fact the actions of everybody involved are consistent with those of somebody who suspects something and does not want the potential disaster involved with employing Sandusky. There is a HUGE difference between suspecting something is definitely wrong with somebody and having absolute ironclad proof (as did McQueary) that knowing that personal is a child rapist.
Do not parse words. You should know what I’m saying when I say something. I know what McQueary says he saw and I know what Paterno and others say they were told. I am not changing or spinning anything. The point is I wasn’t there and neither were you so all we can do is take the testimony of those involved and make an assumption. I was not quoting when I said “something” - I was pointing out that Paterno repeatedly denied being told it was forcible sodomy.
I have repeatedly stated that the witness to the felony had the responsibility to follow up. Check my post history if you’re capable of figuring out how. I have never said that it didn’t warrant follow-up. It does NOT warrant follow-up by somebody who didn’t witness the attack and already reported it to the proper authorities. After Paterno put McQueary in touch with Schultz, he can’t “follow up” because he was not a witness. I don’t know why I need to keep saying this. People should be (and hopefully will be) going to jail for failing to identify the victim and failing to press charges given eyewitness evidence. This does NOT include Paterno.
I refuse to give any weight to the argument that Paterno should have used his perceived power to force an investigation. Police don’t start investigations on hearsay just because they come from a famous figure. The law works the same way for Paterno as it does for anybody else. He’s a football coach with no more or less expertise on legal and moral matters than anybody else.
It may be found that Paterno did in fact know. I will not assume that this is the case when following a three year grand jury investigation no fault was found in Paterno. I do not, as does nearly every asshole with a keyboard from sports writers to message board posters, believe that Paterno should’ve been held to some ridiculously all-powerful standard when he wasn’t a witness to a crime. Many of the same people like Mark Madden and Ron Bracken have long been claiming that Paterno is a doddering old fool who doesn’t belong on the football field. That is, when it suits their agenda. Now, when it suits their agenda, he’s an evil genius mastermind that not only knows everything that goes on in State College - he controls it as well.
I admit that it is quite difficult to take you seriously because you clearly have no idea what the hell you’re talking about when it comes to the actual location. You’ve called it “College Station” and you’ve claimed that Paterno lives on campus. I lived there and thanks to the incompetence of dozens of people I will forever be tarnished by this. I am fortunate enough to be soon finishing my Ph.D. from another institution so maybe I can use a smaller font when I list Penn State. This makes me sick. My argument is that those who were responsible should pay, but the evidence doesn’t point to Paterno at all. It might in the future, but we live in a society governed by the rule of law and I’m not to convict a man without evidence.