<p>I agree that now Curley and Schultz can claim Paterno wasn’t clear and we’ll never know. </p>
<p>All of them including Paterno had the opportunity to ask questions. But thus far Curley and Schultz claim they didn’t know the behavior was of a sexual nature and that’s why they didn’t report it. So they either didn’t ask and/or McQueary wasn’t clear. However if McQueary offered vague information due to the embarassment of saying anal rape, then they needed to ask.</p>
<p>I personally don’t think McQueary was that vague. I think a reasonable person hearing what McQueary claimed would “get it”. They chose not to get it.</p>
<p>what you haven’t addressed is how you can make sense of Paterno going without McQueary to report what McQueary witnessed? I do HR investigations and would never speak for someone else, furthermore, documentation of a report of violence, (sexual assault of a child) is required and OSHA reportable.</p>
<p>Also, you seem to think it’s acceptable that they waited 10 days to interview McQueary, while I think that was criminal. Too much time for distortion, and worse, too much time to be unable to locate and help that child.</p>
<p>If it was up to many of the people posting here we wouldn’t need to hear what the accused have to say. We should just convict them of wrongdoing based on the grand jury report that was written specifically to convince a judge that it should go to trial.</p>
<p>For all we know Paterno believed it was investigated by Curly, Schultz and whoever they got involved and that nothing solid came out of the investigation again. Who knows?</p>
<p>We just can’t make stuff up about how we believe things were.</p>
<p>What in the world makes you think I believe it was acceptable/unacceptable to meet 10 days later? How do I know?</p>
<p>Paterno didnt speak for McQueary. He had McQueary talk directly to Curly, Schultz.</p>
<p>This needs to go to court. People need to have a chance to defend themselves. Then, hey, if they were all a bunch of scumbags they need to be punished. But for petes sake. Lets let it play out.</p>
<p>He was fired only after he was given multiple chances to retire over the years. Penn St. wanted him to retire years ago. They finally had to fire him because noise of the molestations hit the fan and Paterno still wouldn’t leave on his own. Everyone knows Paterno answered to no one.</p>
<p>hops, yes he was fired – after the grand jury report became public. But several years prior, Spanier went to JoePa’s house to fire him, and was summarily dismissed by the great man. Until this all came out, JoePa was the most powerful person at PSU. It was only after his shabby role in this whole sordid mess was known that he became vulnerable.</p>
<p>McQ has stated he told Paterno it was sexual and it was wrong. That is enough in itself to raise suspicion of abuse and to require proper investigation.</p>
<p>Sax–when you write that Paterno did what he needed to do by reporting to C and S and then add that they met with McQueary 10 days later it appears you are saying that too was reasonable. I guess I get that impression because you haven’t criticized any of the actions PSU took.</p>
<p>“Paterno didnt speak for McQueary. He had McQueary talk directly to Curly, Schultz.”</p>
<p>but he did initially pave the way for the actual interview of McQueary and I don’t understand why. Why wasn’t McQueary there to begin with? Why did they need privacy?</p>
<p>Sax–confused bc you edited your post to now say, “what makes you think I said it was acceptable or unacceptable, how would I know.”</p>
<p>but previously you posted, what makes you think I think it was acceptable. implying you found it unacceptable. sorry I can’t keep up with your point of view? I found it highly unusual and inappropriate to wait 10 days.</p>
<p>you also told us before the Sandusky trial to wait before coming to our own opinion or expressing our views. I am not influencing a case by expressing my views here, and I will continue to do so. I think PSU clearly did not handle this properly and enabled this for years. and I think actions like waiting 10 days, and then claiming to not know it was sexual are evidence of that poor judgment and enabling.</p>
<p>I am very interested in the timeline of knowledge. I think this makes a huge difference in how things are viewed and what people did.</p>
<p>It is very,very difficult to separate out the horror of that grand jury report. Our whole perception of this case is seen through this horror. </p>
<p>What did Paterno, Shultz, Curly, McQueary know about Sanduskys behavior at his time? One admits to knowing about the previous investigation that resulted in no charges. Did the other guys know. I believe they said they did not.</p>
<p>SO their perception is based only on what McQueary told them at the time.</p>
<p>Sorry about the editing. I reread my post and realized I have not said exactly what I am trying to get across.</p>
<p>and just for the record I don’t even like Joe Paterno. I thought he was a gruff, grumpy old guy that stopped caring about what any body else thought about him and conducted himself that way. But I do not believe he was an evil man.</p>
<p>Went to a meeting this morning about an upcoming trip I’m going on. Several of the women there voiced their feeling SO sorry for Sandusky. I said I felt sorry for his victims & they said they had a LOT of doubts about the testimony & why they were so late coming forward. I was stunned! I guess Sandusky has his supporters, even after all the voluminous testimony. Sure glad these women weren’t on the jury!</p>
<p>I guess it makes all kinds to create a world. I was really floored, as these are folks who went to HS with my H. Of course, don’t know them well, but was really a surprise to me that there are still supporters of Sandusky, when even his attorney was publicly making some damning statements (weird lawyer anyway).</p>
<p>There are plenty of people who just don’t want to believe that these things happen. I don’t want to either, but I believe the kids I’ve worked with who have gone through this.</p>
<p>I guess I just could NEVER believe all these men would fake the horrible agony and testify about it to the world except to protect others who have suffered similar fates and make them know that it’s OK to face their tormenter and put an end to it. I don’t WANT to believe there are people capable of doing the things that Sandusky was found guilty of but unfortunately, I do believe these things and worse DO happen. My thoughts and prayers are all for the victims. The defendant has caused a horrific amount of harm to so many very vulnerable young boys and men and their loved ones.</p>
<p>I can feel a degree of human sympathy for most people who commit crimes and get sentenced to long prison terms. Most were guilty of momentary lapses, or were consumed by temporary passion, or were the products of rough upbringings, or simply made some bad judgments. (I admit to being a bleeding heart liberal, and proudly.) But not this guy. He had it all, and he used his position and power to prey on vulnerable children. </p>
<p>And not the system that enabled and protected him, all for the sake of the brand. </p>
<p>I’ll repeat what I said 4,500 posts back: they should shut the place down and fumigate it. Starting with removing every reference to Chief Enabler Paterno.</p>
<p>Himom, you’re traveling with some darn fools. I’d rethink that trip. :)</p>
<p>I can understand the loyalty of the Penn State family. After reading so much about it over the past months, it must be a wonderful community to be a part of and to be proud of. Had my son chosen to go there, and he became part of that, I’d be sick over all this. I’d be angry at all the unwarranted hate towards PSU and its football program.</p>
<p>But the reality is I’m not part of that family, like so many, many others. I have no vested interest in PSU, so I see things differently. If the football program ended tomorrow, I would see it as a positive for Penn State.</p>
<p>So just like those women HImom spoke of, people will see things differently based on their life experiences. That won’t change.</p>
<p>I was trying hard to stay away from the thread. The night Sandusky’s verdict was delivered, at our local station, the news was followed by the catholic priest guilty verdict. Back to back child abuse case was a bit much for me and had to turn it off.</p>
<p>For those dying to bring down PSU and its football program because of Sandusky and the local culture that is perceived/claimed to have made him possible, shall we also close down catholic chuches? Catholic culture is no less responsible for allowing sexual abuse continue as PSU football program for Sandusky.</p>