<p>Also, as many of you are, I am troubled about the missing DA and wonder if that investigation can be re-opened?</p>
<p>Arguing over the fate of the statue, even the football program, seem like a quasi-diversion if the highest power-brokers in PA are unaccountable for their ethical misconduct in this case.</p>
<p>As paterno knew Sandusky was a child sexual predator at the very minimum, why would he, as boss of football and defacto head of penn state, why did he let Sandusky run rampant? And he did. His motivations? He was omnipotent and he was in deep. </p>
<p>And he didn’t cRe a out anything but football and is legacy.</p>
<p>We don’t need to read minds to see the results. And the results and actions of the Penn state cabal had one mission…protect football and protect themselves</p>
<p>Whatever reason they did what they didnfor Sandusky is not as important as they dis it.</p>
<p>Why does some rob a bank? Was does a man rape an old women? Why do dictators imprison those who speak out? Why do cops cover for each other? Why did that principal cover up for her molesting teacher? Why do people stand by their crime boss? Why do bishops shuffle rapist priests around? Why does the military blame the rape victims and call them liars? </p>
<p>Does it matter the why? The motives of the Penn state leadership vried year to year, conversation to conversation, and once it had been going on and pnce they enabled Sandusky and once they didn’t report, they protected themselves and their wallets.</p>
<p>As for paterno, there were problems, but he covered them up and demanded it be handled internally. He could get people fired at will. He had more power then the president of psu. He was god on earth. And he was not a good person,</p>
<p>I think it is fairly obvious that much of the growth of Penn State was tied to the growth of the football program. And the football program was tied to Paterno and the squeaky clean “no NCAA infractions”, win with honor, etc. </p>
<p>It brought a lot of pride/publicity/notice to Penn State. And a LOT of money. So those men did all they could to protect it all. Everything from special consequences to football players who broke the rules to giving a child abuser keys to the locker room. There were other choices available. But those choices could have led to dirt on the school–possible NCAA infractions, potential loss of revenue, etc so they went with a cover up. </p>
<p>It is both easy to understand, and completely incomprehensible. Because it is evil. And most of us are not evil.</p>
I think it was powerful men attempting to maintain the perfect-school image they created (PSU as the model for successfully blending academics and collegiate sports). Remember, until the grand jury report became public PSU sat above the other top athletic programs – they won games and maintained control of their athletes/program/school. While other schools published their crime stats and publicly identified NCAA violations – PSU claimed they had no such problems. When SMU received the death penalty Paterno was one of SMU’s harshest critics – saying such violations would never happen w/ his program. Spanier as a member of the NCAA governing board was known to look down on any and all NCAA rules violators. The over whelming characteristic these men possess is the need to maintain the illusion of perfection no matter what the cost.</p>
<p>"One of two things seems to be true, as there is no third option. Either A) you were an incompetent attorney general, which virtually no one believes, or B) the investigation was deliberately understaffed and drawn out because you did not wish to be the gubernatorial candidate who took down fabled Penn State - with its massive and intensely loyal alumni network - and the beloved Joe Paterno. "</p>
<p>There IS a third possibility - and it has to do with money. Paterno was a major backer of the Pennsylvania Republican Party, which provided substantial money for Corbett’s campaign for Attorney General. The same was true of Gricar, some 10 years earlier.</p>
<p>No one that plans a cover up expects to be caught. Nixon, the Catholic church and JoePa. Even though Penn State is #15 now in 2013, it is early in the process. Expect PSU to have another downward slide as competing coaches poach the remaining prized recruits after sanctions are imposed. Prized recruits want to be on big time tv. Even if the death penalty isn’t imposed there will be at a minimum a tv. Conference and bowl ban.</p>
<p>are you serious? nothing is going to be fixed until they shut down the program and face the facts about what happened and what the priority of the school are.</p>
<p>It’s more than a coverup. And I think (speculate) that we are only at the tip of the iceberg.</p>
<p>If Paterno or any of the others knew that Professor Emeritus Sandusky was a pedophile and, through them, or on their recommendation, or through their signature, Penn State paid for the Professor Emeritus’ hotel or his travel expenses with a young boy across state lines, they could be guilty of child sex trafficking.</p>
<p>“Whoever knowingly transports any individual in interstate or
foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United
States, with intent that such individual engage in prostitution,
or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged
with a criminal offense, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”</p>
<p>It also specifically covers procuring of tickets or transportation. Alternatively, if not guilty of child sex trafficking, they could be charged with criminal conspiracy for same.</p>
<p>Right now the 2013 recruits are only “verbal” recruits and aren’t official until they sign the letter of intent. Last year after the Sandusky news broke, five highly prized verbal recruits changed their minds and signed with other colleges. Current players that are signed can’t play for other schools unless Penn State releases them, which they may do (IMHO) if Heavy sanctions are implemented.</p>
<p>Ohio, actually, my question was broader. If any sanctions (or self-imposed equivalent) are imposed, will even current players be allowed to transfer without sitting out a season? Even if PSU still has a team, but can not have TVor bowl games?</p>
<p>ETA – OK see you answered that, that if heavy penalties, they may be released.</p>
<p>Kayf – no they can’t. And that’s what opposing coaches will use on any penn state recruits that they covet. Exposure is what attracts the 4 and 5 star recruits. They aren’t going to get that at Penn State for the next couple of years.</p>
<p>The courts have typically looked at letters of intent as contracts and there are numerous court cases that have been determined regarding what each side in the contact can and can’t do. In my opinion, it would be in the interests of Penn State to do what they can if they decide to change the program in some way to avoid law suits. Some kids have release clauses that trigger based on certain things,like a coach leaving etc., others sign a more standard contract that may or may not have been reviewed by the family attorney. So out of the 100 or so players there may be different variations of the letter of intent. The team has been on campus and practicing for awhile already.</p>
<p>Few years ago Penn State had a QB who probably would never see any game time, based on the QB that had the role, he transferred. Wound up taking his team, a lower D1 (I believe) to championships. He was signed to the NFL, the other star at Penn, is playing in Canada. </p>
<p>Sometimes being the big fish in the smaller pond works out better.</p>
<p>Perhaps you haven’t seen the emails. On February 26, 2001, Schultz emailed Curley about reporting Sandusky to Second Mile and the Department of Public Welfare. The next evening, Curley emailed Spanier, copying Schultz. The email states: “After giving it more thought and talking to Joe yesterday, I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps.”</p>
<p>I don’t see how this can be interpreted in any other way but that Paterno vetoed the plan to report Sandusky, thus leaving his sacrosanct football program and his own spotless reputation untouched. And, of course, leaving a predator free to roam the campus for another decade.</p>
<p>But you apparently have a more benign interpretation, and I’d be interested to know what it is.</p>
<p>^^Hopefully that e-mail is part of a chain. If not a good lawyer would rip it to shreds. They could have been talking about investing in new turf for the football field. I’m not a joe lover, just observing the backs and forths of what is being released to the public and playing devil’s advocate. It will all get court tested no doubt.</p>
<p>momofthreeboys, yes, there is a series of emails, and it’s crystal clear. They were going to turn Sandusky in, until Mr. Clean intervened. </p>
<p>BTW, in the emails, Spanier agreed with not reporting him, calling the new plan “humane.” The emails do not discuss the “humane” aspects of giving Sandusky free rein for another 10 years. In fact, the victims are never discussed at all. Strange, wouldn’t you say?</p>