<p>Penn State is not going to allow Paterno to address this with the media as long as he’s in their employment. Speaking to the press against the Board’s direct instructions would be grounds for immediate termination for insubordination. It may be the best course of action for him to announce tomorrow that he’s stepping down immediately - not as a surrender or admission of wrongdoing, but in order to be able to defend his reputation by speaking out and because he’s not willing to violate the institutional leadership’s orders in order to do so. He’d get his chance to speak, he’d appear to be taking the high road, and the drama would end for PSU sooner rather than later. And besides, in the best case scenario, a month from now he’s not going to be the coach there anyway.</p>
<p>Most schools and gyms had open showers for males. Separate enclosed showers for females. It was common for males to shower in an open shower, Some even had a pedestal in the middle of the tile area with several shower heads at the top. Modesty was not an option.</p>
<p>This is not all that complicated. Read the 700 or so comments following the NYT article here:</p>
<p>[Penn</a> State Said to Be Planning Paterno Exit Amid Scandal - Readers’ Comments - NYTimes.com](<a href=“http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/sports/ncaafootball/penn-state-said-to-be-planning-paternos-exit.html]Penn”>http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/sports/ncaafootball/penn-state-said-to-be-planning-paternos-exit.html)</p>
<p>Coach Paterno - keeper of the sacred football flame at a major university and the university officials nominally (though not in reality) above him - chose to protect his program instead of acting on the specific and reliable report from his assistant that his former right-hand man raped a ten-year-old boy in a university shower. Nine years passed.</p>
<p>The multitude of other attacks, victims and reports provide context for the Grand Jury’s indictments. The fact that the predator used university sports facilities as recently as last week explains why the university needs to clean house immediately. This is child abuse and the enablers look likely to be guilty of a conspiracy to cover it all up. This is just beginning and the Board of the U would be well advised to march all of them off the property now, certainly including Paterno, perhaps even the President.</p>
<p>Why is the graduate assistant Mike McQueary getting a pass on this? If you saw a 50+ year old man raping a 10 year old boy, wouldn’t you do SOMETHING on the spot to STOP IT? </p>
<p>Yes he reported the incident to JoePa and then to Curley. But a decent human being would have followed up on the incident after seeing that no action was being taken against Sandusky. </p>
<p>What McQueary got out of all of this was a plum, asst coaching job at Penn State in exchange for silence.</p>
<p>JHS…Paterno testified of “disturbing” conduct by Sandusky in the shower…and that the grad assistant was “very upset” when he came over to tell him what he saw.</p>
<p>that is not enough for some?..</p>
<p>Paterno just addressed the crowd of students at his home</p>
<p>Paterno holding a press conference out his window in tears. “No matter what happens to some people Im proud of you”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am utterly astonished that you or anyone else could possibly say that. The grand jury report says (1) the graduate assistant testified that on Friday night, he saw Sandusky rape a 10-year old boy (see pp. 6-7); (2) the GA testified that on Saturday morning, he “reported what he had seen” to Paterno in Paterno’s home (see p. 7); (3) the grand jury found the GA’s testimony to be “extremely credible” (see p. 8). The report makes no finding or statement whatsoever on Paterno’s credibility, one way or the other. You have drawn a strained conclusion from those statements.</p>
<p>It was reported up thread that McQueary grew up in State College with the children of Sandusky and Paterno. If this is true, I can appreciate the hesitation of a young man who was still in a university environment and for him to talk to his father before alerting Paterno. In hindsight, was this the best course? Of course not!! Not making excuses just trying to understand. I’m sure his future also played a role.</p>
<p>Go to the post gazette.com deviate for the timeline ton the Sandusky situation. It’s pretty damning. All the punishment penn state did and patermo is Penn state and was hihs boss did, was take away shower room keys. They did nothing to stop further contact with young boys. They All knew and did the absolute minimum they could grt away with and sandusky continued to molest boys. Turning s blind eye and passing the buck is just so sad.</p>
<p>Fox sports has a timeline as well. </p>
<p>They all knew Sandusky had a serious peplums, yet when he showed upnwith young boys, they said and did nothing. There are multiple incidents in multiple locations, so sad it took this long for someone ton turn over the Penn state rock</p>
<p>And second mile, therogram started by sadunsky, says they were never informed of the incident. So seems they lied about that.</p>
<p>If whether the Penn men heard of anal rape or fondling, their actions after were sorely lacking to ton say the least.</p>
<p>[The</a> Penn State Scandal Raises Far Bigger Transparency Issues - Forbes](<a href=“http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/2011/11/08/the-penn-state-scandal-raises-far-bigger-transparency-issues/]The”>The Penn State Scandal Raises Far Bigger Transparency Issues)</p>
<p>"…If, however, the allegations are true, it is tragic for those victims and embarrassing for the university. But the big-picture implications are far greater. It should force us to think about the vulnerability of 440,000 student athletes when under the tutelage and quasi-custodial care of coaches.</p>
<p>One issue that comes to mind is this: Shouldn’t the teenagers recruited and wooed by the school, and the teenagers’ parents be able to receive a report from the school confirming the physical and mental health of the coaches before they decide whether to commit the four most important years of the teenager’s life to the school? And shouldn’t the teenagers and parents receive an assurance that the university has a system of monitoring the coaches that they employ and send as agents on their behalf? I think so.</p>
<p>Maybe such a report would not have prevented the first despicable act, if it happened. But if there was an institutional monitoring plan as serious as those the school uses to monitor tuition payments, there would not seven more alleged acts to investigate…"</p>
<p>Excuse me, Donna, but the grand jury indicted Curley and Schultz for perjury for denying that McQueary told them about the anal sex, and Paterno also denied knowing about the anal sex, and the report makes it clear that Paterno did not tell Curley that he had received a report of anal sex. The failure to indict Paterno can only mean that he was credible on not knowing about anal sex, and that McQueary, at the very least, did not credibly insist he had told Paterno about it. </p>
<p>Does that sound weird? Of course it does. But, really, none of these people behaved like they had heard Sandusky was raping a boy in the shower. There are two general possibilities, besides the middle ground taken by the grand jury: (1) They are all three bigger dirtbags than anyone ever dreamed. (2) They all three really didn’t hear that Sandusky was raping a boy in the shower.</p>
<p>“I don’t know – it’s absolutely clear that Paterno was NOT told Sandusky was having anal sex with a boy on the shower.”</p>
<p>JHS…where are you getting this from?</p>
<p>OhioMom, The scary thing is that it would not only be college coaches and programs that could have problems.By the time kids get to the level to be recruited by a college, most of them have had contact with coaches, traveling teams,etc. for years. The whole thing is very disturbing.</p>
<p>"and Paterno also denied knowing about the anal sex, and the report makes it clear that Paterno did not tell Curley that he had received a report of anal sex. "</p>
<p>100% wrong…I suggest you re-read</p>
<p>@JHS, do you honestly believe that the graduate asst couched his description in euphemisms, so it was not explicitly clear to Paternao, Curley & Schultz what he observed?</p>
<p>"…none of these people behaved like they had heard Sandusky was raping a boy in the shower." </p>
<p>JHS, there is a lot of disbelief regarding these incidents and the possibility of wrongdoing from you, Spanier, etc. And that is part of the problem and part of the reason nothing was done to prevent these incidents from occurring.</p>
<p>JHS, the grand jury’s failure to make any finding at all on Paterno’s credibility – and the statement that it found McQueary “extremely credible,” without excepting any aspect of his testimony – speaks volumes to me. You ask why they didn’t indict Paterno? Is it really, truly, so difficult for you to think of a reason for that other than the grand jury finding him credible? Which they “clearly” didn’t? </p>
<p>Don’t forget, I’m a lawyer too. And I really do think that your statement that it’s “clear” what Paterno was told is a serious misreading of the grand jury report.</p>
<p>And I also think you seem somewhat naive about what goes on the world sometimes. I agree with OhioMom3000.</p>
<p>Just re-read page 7 ,where this issue is addressed…Paterno ,in my opinion, is embarrassed discussing this sex act with the admisntrator and AD, so he says fondled or some type of sex act to them…I believe he was told by the GA,but being old school couldn’t bring it upon homself to say the words</p>
<p>@qdogpa, the GA had a mtg with Curley & Schulz, so whatever JoePa said to C&S had enough weight to merit a followup mtg with the GA</p>