<p>Hunt~ If I saw a coach bringing young boys to stay at hotels with him, with no other adult overseeing, yes I would certainly find it very strange. </p>
<p>my youngest had a female kindergarten teacher whose 60 yr old boyfriend (a retired principal from another school) joined her in the classroom almost daily, interacting with the children. When I attended a class party I learned how often he was there and I found it odd, why would he want to be in a kindergarten class every day? I reported my concern to my child’s elementary school principal, who thought I was odd for being suspicious. I kept my eyes and ears open all year.</p>
What I find interesting is that anybody who asks for actual facts is characterized as believing Paterno “above all else.” It’s really unfair.
You consider it suspicious that a retired school principal might like to interact with kids? Do you find all Boy Scout and Girl Scout leaders, volunteer youth sports coaches, etc., to be inherently suspicious?</p>
<p>Sandusky ran a charity designed to help troubled youth. I don’t consider it inherently suspicious for him to bring kids from there over to Penn State. I do consider much of what he did to be highly suspicious, but not bringing poor kids to football games.</p>
<p>My point–which careful reading would reveal–is that “bringing boys around” is not, in itself, inherently a suspicious behavior. It could be part of a pattern of suspicious behavior, and how suspicious any observer would be might depend on what, exactly, they saw.</p>
<p>“What I find interesting is that anybody who asks for actual facts is characterized as believing Paterno “above all else.” It’s really unfair.”</p>
<p>Let’s just agree that we all have our biases. It would be unfair if those are just asking about facts, but in most cases, they (you excluded) proceeded to concoct different scenarios and ways to justify the motives for the actions those people took. Many times those justifications in themselves are unsupported by any facts and many times are contrary to already known facts, granted that it is also true from the other side also. I think just let’s just agree to disagree and argue based on the merit of the points based on facts.</p>
<p>I love kids myself and of course would not be suspicious of every boy scout leader etc. I do however consider it suspicious when a grown man chooses to be in a kindergarten classroom with his new girlfriend every day. If he attended occasional events sure, but daily, something was off. Frankly it was inappropriate for him to be there. The teacher may have an aide or parent to help but her own boyfriend? Yes that is imho the type of situation where a potential predator becomes a trusted adult to children. </p>
<p>Hunt, you left out that for Sandusky the bringing boys around that he described in the NYT interview included sharing hotel rooms with them after and before games. Do you think that’s normal/appropriate? That’s what I referenced.</p>
<p>Myturn,
I’m a teacher and I agree with you about the retired principal. My first thought wouldn’t be that he was a predator but I would think it very unprofessional on the part of the teacher and administration to allow the teacher’s boyfriend in the classroom every day. Regardless of what his career had been.</p>
<p>As far as Sandusky bringing boys to games and hotels. It absolutely is suspicious if a man routinely brings young boys to hotels and has them stay in his room without another adult present. This would make me extremely uncomfortable and I would be suspicious, regardless of the person’s reputation.</p>
If there was no other adult present in the hotel room with them, I agree that it’s inappropriate. This is something that a Boy Scout leader wouldn’t do (at least, if he’s following the rules.) I just bridle at the idea that it’s suspicious for an adult to want to be around kids. I suppose you have to be there, but I don’t really get why the retired principal volunteering in a kindergarten class is suspicious. I also suspect that nobody would be suspicious if the retired volunteer was a woman, and I don’t think that’s fair, either.</p>
<p>Never said that it’s suspicious for an adult to be around kids. It’s normal for adults to like being around kids and to offer to be volunteers etc. I said it was suspicious and unusual for a new boyfriend of a teacher to want to be in a classroom with little kids every day, (remember kindergartners have a rest room in the classroom and still need some help with self care)</p>
<p>Hunt, Myturnnow thought it was suspicious. I thought it was unprofessional. In what profession does someone bring their significant other with them to work? Even if it is to help out? No, not cool.</p>
<p>As far as the inequity in the amount of scrutiny that male volunteers, teachers, etc experience as compared to female…well, pedophiles are predominantly male.</p>
<p>But this guy was a retired school principal. It doesn’t seem weird to me at all (at least, no weirder than anybody wanting to work with kids). Why isn’t it odd and suspicious that the kindergarten teacher herself is there every day? Would a male kindergarten teacher be suspicious?</p>
<p>Tom, Paterno did nothing wrong. He always have done everything by the book and oversaw his program with a strict and the highest of standard. And because of that, he could not have ignored any of these things if he really knew. He was lied to about the investigation after he properly reported what he was told. He tried to inquire but was rebuffed and told that the matter was taken cared of by the police. In fact, he was not told about anything of significant, all he knew was some a little out of ordinary in the shower with kids. He did not even know about the 1998 event and has denied several times about knowing anything about any of Sandusky behavior in the past. Paterno is just a simple lowly coach that has no standing in the power structure at PSU, the power actually lies with the administration that presides over him. For that, he would never ever be able to force anyone to get fired and interfere with police matter or judicial proceeding against anyone in the school. Anyone that disputes those facts should be ashamed and are just haters, conspiring to defame PSU.</p>
<p>No. A male kindergarten teacher would be paid to be there thus would have incentive to show up along with his love for children. Someone who shows up on a daily basis without pay may, indeed, be there out of the goodness of his heart but it is possible that there is another reason. In this case, I think he wanted to be with his girlfriend and that is unprofessional. It would not be tolerated in my school regardless of what his former career was. </p>
<p>"I also suspect that nobody would be suspicious if the retired volunteer was a woman, and I don’t think that’s fair, either. "</p>
<p>It is not about being fair to the adult who want to hang around children, it is about doing whatever it takes to protect the children. Life isn’t fair - we all get that.</p>
<p>I think tom’s point is that too many people are asserting that certain things are “known facts” when they really aren’t. That’s also been my concern. People are awfully certain, for example, about what Paterno “had to have known” at certain times.</p>
I believe in protecting children. I get a little nervous when I see phrases like “whatever it takes,” though, because I also think civil liberties are really, really important.</p>
<p>I don’t think any of us are certain about anything. I know that I’m not. But I do think that it is okay to draw conclusions and form opinions based on the information that we already have heard and suspect to be true. I’m willing to wait until the end of the story to come to a firm conclusion. But I will say that it’s not looking good for any of them.</p>