<p>Actually, born2dance, the scariest thing of all is that when he was confronted by the mother, Sandusky refused to promise never to do it again, and said he wanted “forgiveness” and wished he was dead. The Police listened in from the other room.</p>
<p>Well, Tom, the thing I have a problem with is that you are saying that your records are protected from the police AND your boss would want you to report an on site rape to him/her and not the police. You see how this can begin to look like a cover up? You see how it already is a cover up.</p>
<p>Institutions should not be having all these internal investigations about criminal behavior. Let’s bring in some outside investigators. This would protect people like Paterno as well as the victim.</p>
<p>Do you think the fact that nobody attemtped to find the victim of this rape is okay? I have a huge problem with that.</p>
<p>So the GA goes to JoePa and begins mumbling something about “Sandusky” and “inappropriate behavior.” What REASONABLE things might JoePa say to the GA.</p>
<p>“Son, you’re mumbling. Slow down and tell me exactly what you saw.”</p>
<p>“Son, you were there … I wasn’t. I’m going to call the University Police. They’ll take your statement and advise you about what you should do.”</p>
<p>“Son, I can see you’re upset. But you gotta stop lying about friends of mine.” (jk!)</p>
<p>So the GA goes to JoePa and begins mumbling something about “Sandusky” and “inappropriate behavior.” What REASONABLE things might JoePa say to the GA."</p>
<p>“If someone was raped on a job site I would expect the witness to go to the police directly.”</p>
<p>And if the victim was helpless? Either physically or emotionally incapacitated? What then? “Well, I guess they’ll go to the police once they get better.”</p>
<p>@poetgrl @Snowdog Sorry, my bad. But the point I was trying to make to @tom1944 is that administrators DID know, and therefore DID have “cause for removal,” both of which @tom1944 contests.</p>
<p>poet- a crime not involving our work product would and should be reported to the police that have jurisdiction. Ultimately that was done here not by the witness and not by Paterno but by Curley who set up the meeting with Schultz. I think we all acknowledge they had a responsibility to go further.
My only question is what was Paterno told once the situation was reported. As I said earlier I would not be shocked if Paterno was in the wrong here. My point is if Paterno is not at fault we are destroying a man who may have led a exemplary life and I do not see how destroying his reputation does anything for the victims especially if if we end up finding out he is not this evil person who orchestrated a cover up.
Hey while I enjoy the back and forth I have three dogs to walk so you may not hear from me for a while.</p>
<p>cartera- if that was directed at me it was a cheap shot. I have been polite to everyone and just because I have a different opinion does not mean you should disparage me. I have acknowledged those with a different opinion may be right, Now what if the facts prove you all wrong when they all come out?</p>
<p>“Hey Coach, whatever happened to that kid Sandusky was caught raping in the shower?”</p>
<p>“Geez, don’t bring that up. You got no idea how many favors I used up burying that incident.”</p>
<p>I mean, as long as we’re MAKING UP what MIGHT have occurred. (Not helpful, is it?) What’s known for sure is that the kid didn’t get much in the way of justice, did he?</p>
<p>Well, Tom, I certainly respect your right to have a different opinion, even if I can’t imagine any scenario under which Paterno was not informed of ‘why’ Sandusky “retired” from coaching at the height of his career in 1998.</p>
<p>Also, I think his lack of complete and utter shock and outrage at what McQueary told him that day in 02 is rather telling in and of itself. But, hey, that’s just me.</p>
<p>I think we will simply have to agree to disagree.</p>
<p>“My point is if Paterno is not at fault we are destroying a man who may have led a exemplary life…”</p>
<p>At this point, that’s an unproven assertion. He may have. He may have been on the take. Or he may have been on the other side of the ledger. </p>
<p>“It is a shame that the kids who were legitimately served by Second Mile will be impacted.”</p>
<p>I don’t agree with that either. What if we find out that 100 kids (out of, say, 2,000) were abused. Is that a fair price to pay? How about 50? 20? 10? Quanto? Il prezzo? What if we find out (as Madden reported), that some of the kids were being “pimped out”? I think it is WONDERFUL that they will be gone, and I hope (and fully expect) that something better will take its place.</p>
<p>What if we find out that, while he was told of the incident in 2002 (that’s not an assertion), JoePa continued to serve as an Honorary Director for nine years (that’s not an assertion), of an organization where kids were pimped out? (that’s still an assertion, but I’m sure there will be more to follow.)</p>
<p>Most of what’s been stated on these 2100+ posts have been unproven assertions. Thank you, tom1944 for attempting to promote the concept that a person is innocent until proven guilty. I am referring to the character assassination of Joe Paterno.</p>