<p>I think the sense in many posts here is that people have a general duty to do what is necessary to protect children from sexual abuse.</p>
<p>JHS~ don’t you think Paterno had the responsibility to ascertain exactly what McQueary did observe? if McQueary was unclear, because he was likely somewhat traumatized by the sight of the abuse/assault, then it was Paterno’s place to ask those awful questions. what did you see, what did you hear, did Sandusky see you, etc!</p>
<p>imho we humans have the duty to report crimes when we see them</p>
<p>How cold he NOT know about the 1998 incident…as others have noted HE is Penn State, and to think he wouldn’t at least be informed of it is wishful thinking</p>
<p>With all the craziness surrounding PSU, as a gambling kind of person, i take Nebraska</p>
<p>Great Op-Ed piece on NBC10 in Philly by Vai Sikahema…He is very involved with those type of children allegedly molested by Sandusky…He is of opinion Joe doesn’t last long, and likley PSU President is goen also, very swiftly</p>
<p>myturnnow: No, I actually don’t think it was Paterno’s job to ascertain exactly what McQueary saw. It’s only his job if, like everyone in State College, you consider him God. As football coach and de facto university president, he was probably entitled to ask someone else to figure out what McQueary was saying and what to do about it. Remember, Paterno had already fired Sandusky, years before. It really wasn’t his job to deal with Sandusky. It was his job to make certain someone was dealing with it, and he seems to have done that.</p>
<p>I like to base my opinions on facts.</p>
<p>The grand jury states Schultz knew about the earlier investigation. Did they ask anyone else this question? Did Schultz just volunteer it?</p>
<p>JHS- the 1998 event wasn’t just hair washing for goodness sake. An old man showers naked with a young boy, touches him in ANY WAY— this is wrong, wrong, wrong—AND criminal. To say the mother got her hackles up is insulting and demeaning. She was brave and confronted this man. </p>
<p>I don’t really care what Paterno may have legally been responsible for-- he was morally responsible to act and he decided not to follow through. Every single person involved needs to be fired without golden parachutes.</p>
<p>Sandusky wasn’t fired, he was resigned,lol</p>
<p>^ it is his job to protect innocent children…don’t know how he can sleep at night. So paterno going to the AD was good enough for you JHS?</p>
<p>I</p>
<p>I think everyone should read the report before posting their opinions here…</p>
<p>What I have read is that Sanduskt retired in 1999 to spend more time on his boys program. Sadly.</p>
<p>JHS~ You state Paterno had a responsibility to make certain someone was dealing with it. And you believe he did. But you think it’s okay he didn’t clarify what it was he was even reporting.</p>
<p>it seems to me that Paterno had a responsibility to understand what McQueary observed, otherwise how would he be capable of reporting accurately. It seems like this is a key issue, what did he know.</p>
<p>Paterno is convicted by his own words. He said the witness who came to him was “distraught”. What could make a 28 year old man distraught over what he saw in the school showers late at night that wouldn’t provoke some follow up? It appears that Paterno did the legal minimum. I’m sure there is a reason.</p>
<p>“The failure to report “crime” – today, a class 3 misdemeanor, back then a summary offense, i.e., a traffic ticket – applies only to people who regularly care for children who observe or otherwise receive evidence of abuse to children in their care. The kid in this case – the only kid Messrs. Curley, Schultz, or McQuearey knew anything about – was not a kid in their care (as, for example, a 17-year-old Penn State football player might have been); he was a guest of a retired coach.” - JHS</p>
<p>Spoken like a true lawyer. So, you’re saying they were not legally required to report the abuse of the 10 year old boy because he was not in their care, but if he had been a 17 year old student, they would have been legally required to do so.</p>
<p>I try to follow college sports a little bit but don’t claim to be an expert.
We’re far away out here in California, so I am not an expert on Penn State! and while driving today on the freeeway I heard the Penn State topic – scandal? - discussed on our prominent sports radio station KNBR AM 680 (San Francisco) and - if I am correct, did I understood this man Sandusky was still able to get into athletic offices/areas this past weekend?! That surprised me, since he had previously been banned from that school district where it was recognized he had caused some issue with a young boy (when was all that?) – sometime ago. Maybe with child attack/abuse allegations, there needs to be better communication across institutions or the abuser can just move from place to place?!
There was some argument from the sports broadcasters as to how high repercussions/ accountability of all this should all go - however it did seem the horror of the alleged acts WAS fully recognized, well ahead of the need to protect the Penn State athletic image, which I gather is very important to some.</p>
<p>JHS makes a lot of good points–these cases are often a lot murkier than they appear at first. As more facts come out, it may get worse for some of the players, and better for others.
One point, though, JHS–about the perjury. I’m not sure the perjury would be irrelevant if the purpose of questioning Curley and Schultz was to gather evidence against Sandusky. The DA probably wants to use McQueary as a witness to the sex act with Victim 2, and a contemporaneous report to Curley and Schultz would be some corroboration that he’s telling the truth about it.</p>
<p>The GA came to Paterno the day after he witnessed something. Paterno only had second hand information on what actually happened. Sandusky had not worked at PSU for 10 years. Paterno told the Athletic Director the next day (Monday, I believe) something was wrong, something happened that the GA thought was sexually inappropriate and asked him to investigate it. He then continued his job as football coach. </p>
<p>Only Paterno, the GA and his father were present that Sunday in Paternos house. Who knows what was really said and what was really heard?</p>
<p>What we do know now is that the GA believes he witnessed the child being raped and he left the building and went home.</p>
<p>Actually in 2002, Sandusky was only 3 years removed from being a PSU coach,not 10 years, AND he had an offfice in the Penn State football facility, so JoePa saw him likley everyday</p>