<p>Cpt, I don’t understand that either. If Paterno called up the AD, and said, listen I really don’t need Sandusky anymore, figure out a way to get rid of him, the AD would meet with HR and Legal, if needed, and figure it out. Legally, Sandusky would be entitled to his pension, and if had emeritus status, it might have been difficult to take that away, but they could certainly take away access to the athletic buildings.</p>
<p>In JoePa’s mind, since he knew about the former Professor Emeritus’ activities for perhaps 15-20 years before 1998, and hadn’t blown the whistle, he felt complicit (note: he was complicit) in his closest associate’s extracurricular activities. (JoePa may also have committed multiple federal crimes if he helped facilitate his closest associate’s travels outside of Pennsylvania - though he may or may not have known it (that is, the criminal statute, not what the former Professor Emeritus was doing). Each one of those offenses could have resulted in a five-year federal prison sentence. We’ll never know unless the feds go after the former Professor Emeritus under the Mann Act - which I doubt.) And, in his mind, if he was complicit, then his program was complicit and Penn State was complicit. Can’t have that!</p>
<p>What might (this is all pure speculation) have started the chain is a threat from someone, after the Gricar investigation “fizzled” (I don’t believe that one for a second) to go to the DA or someone with evidence of the activities. The former Professor Emeritus turns around and says, “Not so fast. If you bring me down, I’ll bring you down with me.” And he wasn’t going to be simply sent off to pasture either. So a deal is struck. A very unusual deal. An unprecedented payoff of $168,000. A title (unprecedented for an assistant football coach). An office. Continued access to young boys and a nice shower. Keys to the city. A great pension. An agreement to promote Second Mile, and to funnel funds that way. Seats on the 50-yard line for him and his young charges. More “recruiting” trips, etc., etc. Paterno convinces everyone to say yes - after all, he is the surrogate President of the university. Whew! escaped a bullet!</p>
<p>But then 2001. And again, Whew! escaped a bullet! And now more is at stake, including large business dealings with Sandusky associates at Second Mile. </p>
<p>So that’s how I see it. I agree that much of it is speculative. But, for whatever reason, I have a very good track record thus far.</p>
<p>I still don’t see it. How far is anyone going to get in saying that someone knows he is child trafficking? Sanduskey isn’t even admitting that he did a single thing wrong. I doubt that Paterno ever was at a point where the evidence was staring him in the face as it happened to McQ. He probably just suspected the guy was a bit off, not out and out raping children on a systematic basis. And he could have just thrown him out on the grounds that he just didn’t have a place for him. The fact that he was “too close” with young boys would not have had to even come up. </p>
<p>I’m not saying that it is the right thing to do this. Paterno or anyone suspecting that someone is a problem with kids should report it to those trained to do so, but there is a huge gray area of what ones suspicons are. Just a feeling of discomfort about someone who tends to step over personal boundaries is not enough for most anyone to report someone to CPS. Around here, that is a devastating thing, to be so reported, And to report someone so high profile as Sandusky could be a real problem even if it is not true. You have to be pretty danged certain to do that. But if you are not comfortable with the way someone interacts, yet truly do not believe the person is raping kids, you do not want someone like that around, especially after you let that person know that certain actions, behaviours just leave the wrong impression and you want them to stop. That is a long way from believing the person is sexually abusing a kid. If the person is still hanging around singularly with children, taking them to his home (I don’t know why this was even permitted on a systematic basis), taking showers wit them, spending a lto of time with a single kid at a time, all behavior that points to issues, you cut him loose. Good by. Find a reason since the real reason is not reason enough. You cannot fire someone because you don’t like the way he touches other people in your sight, that it gives you the creeps and that simply is not enough for charges or reporting, but it is enough to get rid of him. Was Sandusky that lucrative to Paterno that he just couldn’t find any reason to let him go?</p>
<p>Well, one thing is not speculative. Paterno chose not to let the former Professor Emeritus go, and instead facilitated an unprecedented arrangement. I find your explanation for it far, far more farfetched and speculative than mine. The evidence thus far (from Freeh - and this guy was only the head of the FBI) points to Paterno knowing full well what was going on in 1998, and knowing full well in 2001. Your explanation simply doesn’t explain the evidence we already have, no less that which may yet be revealed (if someone chooses to investigate it).</p>
<p>The only plausible explanation is that Jerry had dirt on Joe that was not related to child abuse</p>
<p>For a nice change of subject:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m watching a game now…Team USA kicking it and taking names.</p>
<p>The neighbors knew somethng wasn’t right.<br>
[After</a> Sandusky verdict, neighbors release emotions - The Washington Post](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/after-sandusky-verdict-neighbors-release-emotions/2012/06/23/gJQAzESJyV_story.html]After”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/after-sandusky-verdict-neighbors-release-emotions/2012/06/23/gJQAzESJyV_story.html)</p>
<p>Geez - people are still thinking this is all false? Read those comments on the bottom and in the article. Do they need to see videotape to believe?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, more like the representative voice of the faculty. </p>
<p>Typically in any university, there’s no mechanism by which the faculty as a whole can speak. But at Penn State, as at many universities, faculty elect representatives (a Senate) to act on their behalf in a quasi-legislative capacity, but also as an advisory and consultative body to the administration. And the administration typically does talk to them, sometimes at least, using them as a sounding board to get the pulse of the faculty and so on. But I don’t think the Senate presumes to speak on behalf of the faculty, exactly. They speak for themselves as a representative body of the faculty, much as a state legislature speaks for itself as a representative body of the electorate.</p>
<p>Here’s how Penn State’s Faculty Senate describes itself:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Still, if you’re looking for a statement from the faculty, a statement from the Faculty Senate is likely as close as you’ll ever got.</p>
<p>Thanks for the explanation bc.</p>
<p>All these years I have read your name as bc blink.</p>
<p>^^ I’ve always read it as Bill Clinton Kay. With no idea why.
(I write that with a fond smile, since I really respect whatever you write, bclintonk.</p>
<p>Wait, bclintonk explained his screen name? Where?</p>
<p>“The only plausible explanation is that Jerry had dirt on Joe that was not related to child abuse.”</p>
<p>The dirt could be as simple as JoePa knew and hadn’t reported it, and actually facilitated it. And that’s what the facts we currently have seem to suggest.</p>
<p>Mini, it could also be that there were recruiting, academic etc violations that Jerry knew about.</p>
<p>Could be, but then the timing of the “sweetheart” package remains unexplained. (Of course, dirt can be additive.) I’m more likely to give JoePa the narcissist the benefit of the doubt on that one, but I could be convinced.</p>
<p>Of course, Penn State had the dirtiest recruiting in the history of college sports, with Jerry taking his charges across state lines to do it. But I imagine that JoePa compartmentalized, and didn’t see it.</p>
<p>Ericksen will be on Face the Nation this AM. In fact, it looks like they will do a huge analysis of the entire case.</p>
<p>I was very heartened to hear that his ‘first lesson learned’ was that we should be mindful of children and their engagement in activities. To me, he appeared very sincere.</p>
<p>woody, I hope he was sincere, but if there’s one thing we’ve learned about Penn State, it’s that appearances can deceive. Only time will tell if they’ve really learned anything about the relative importance of football.</p>
<p>“I was very heartened to hear that his ‘first lesson learned’ was that we should be mindful of children and their engagement in activities.”</p>
<p>Does he mean football players?</p>
<p>I remember seeing this on the news years ago, anyone in NY/NJ/PA should. this maybe the reason Sandusky got all the freedoms he had.He must have threatened to blow the lid off of the entire University/politicians/money raising. </p>
<p><a href=“Sports News - New York Daily News”>Sports News - New York Daily News;
<p>Bucceroni says Savitz lived in an apartment near Philly’s affluent Rittenhouse Square, and that the abuse took place there as well as well as at other locations. Bucceroni recalled horrific instances of abuse, where Savitz would engage in oral sex with Bucceroni and other victims. Savitz’s attorney, Barnaby Wittels, told the Daily News Savitz paid his victims in exchange for them performing deviant acts.</p>
<p>Sex abuse victim recalls horrid encounter with Edward Savitz, associate of ex-Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky
Greg Bucceroni says he remembers thinking Second Mile charity was going to save him from troubled times, but instead it led him down the road to being abused.</p>
<p>Bucceroni says he accompanied Edward Savitz, a well-known Philadelphia businessman, Democratic political booster and advocate for at-risk children, to a fund-raiser “somewhere past Harrisburg.”</p>
<p>The event was to raise money for the recently established Second Mile foundation, and Bucceroni says he remembers meeting the man everyone referred to as “The Coach,” Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky, who founded Second Mile in 1977. Bucceroni says Savitz and Sandusky knew each other through The Second Mile and political fund-raising events.</p>