<p>Shocking new rumors. </p>
<p>[Penn</a> State Scandal: Jerry Sandusky Rumored To Have ‘Pimped’ Boys To Donors: REPORT](<a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>Penn State Scandal: Jerry Sandusky Rumored To Have 'Pimped' Boys To Donors: REPORT | HuffPost Sports)</p>
<p>From what I heard, joe was barely even coaching anymore, handing off the bulk of his duties, and yet he kept that salary </p>
<p>He was a figure head with a lot of influence however</p>
<p>Bill walsh said that one shouldnt stay more then ten years at any organization as then you become beholden and too entrenched. Smart advice</p>
<p>ttparent, I read it, but I don’t think it answered the questions I posed about Paterno’s role in the affair.</p>
<p>It does matter about 2002. He was aware of the 1998 incident and the hasty unexplained “retirement” of his DC the next year. Yet he allowed him to remain part of the PSU family and use their facilities. That smells to high heaven as indulging a known pedophile.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>four hundred nine wins</p>
<p>
I agree, barrons. Also, Sandusky had kids/victims with him as invited guests to team functions. No one suspected in light of the 1998 incident?</p>
<p>For me, it is as clear as it can be that he knew enough to make sure or at least to follow up to make sure that Sandusky could not continue to hurt anyone anymore. Passing the buck does not cut it for me. And that goes for everyone involved, not just Paterno.</p>
<p>How great JP would have been remembered for his moral compass and football records if he would have demanded this monster to be put in jail as soon as he knew what, we all know, he knew. He had the power to sweep this under the rug or to threaten to step down and expose it all. He felt football was more important than the lives of young boys. How very sad.</p>
<p>Barrons, how do you know that Paterno was aware of the 1998 investigation. Are you inferring it or is that a fact.</p>
<p>Look, it is basically a cover-up getting uncovered. It is way more than a mistake of judgment or lack of information about the laws (except possibly for the grad student observer.)</p>
<p>As to the multiple criminal incidents, not only is the illegality and criminality clear, but so is the basic morality, i.e. even if there were no law against it.</p>
<p>It is also human to try to hide wrong-doings. And that is especially tempting if we have power and influence, and if we have a franchise to protect.
And minors are considered to need protection in our system.
Thus the laws also require the reporting of such crimes.</p>
<p>You know, it was the standard gamble that they would just not get caught. </p>
<p>The furor after a revelation of the sexual abuse(s) would have been huge at the time (s), but as in any uncovered cover-up, the furor is even greater.
And here the cover-up itself was explicitly illegal.</p>
<p>parent57, he’s questioning the timing of Sandusky’s retirement soon after the 1998 incident. Paterno likely knew.</p>
<p>It seems to me that the Board could have suspended everybody as opposed to firing them.</p>
<p>UCB, you may be right, but I would still like to hear from Paterno about exactly what he knew before I make a judgement.</p>
<p>@parent57 - From Paterno yesterday,</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>From CNN today quoting a PSU student;</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sandusky adopted his children and had many foster children over the years.</p>
<p>What more do you need to hear when the graduate asst. reports that he saw a child and a grown man in the shower? Major bells should go off.
I just don’t understand how the graduate asst. walked in on this and turned away. Would you walk away from a child being abused?</p>
<p>I commend the board of trustees, they took the important step that other institutions, have failed to do, they set a level of accountability for what happened and that is critical, especially going forward, and this case kind of shows why. The guy who discovered Sandusky sodomizing the 10 year old by his own account was worried about what to do, as a graduate assistant he was afraid to report it to the police, afraid that if he did so the university would find an excuse to fire him, and that tells a key piece of the culture of Penn State at the time, that there was very real fear of not ‘toeing’ the line. I have heard some people on talk radio defending Paterno, claiming that he (Paterno) could have been afraid of being fired, but that is obviously ridiculous, Paterno had the kind of power where if the school tried to fire him for doing the right thing, they would have been in deep trouble. It may seem harsh, but by firing both Paterno and the head of the school, they are sending the message that culturally and otherwise these kinds of breaches will be dealt with. And the firing of Paterno was much more huge then the president of the school, it sets the precedent that no one is above the rules. </p>
<p>I also think it might have been a kindness to Paterno that they forced him out, if he tried to coach given the firestorm around this issue, it would have been a total mess IMO, you would have seen protests at the game, violence, and Joe would have been subjected to a lot worse. </p>
<p>As far as whether Joe Paterno is legally culpable or not depends on the interpretation of the law as it was at the time; however, I suspect even if you could argue he had a duty to report it to the police, I don’t think they will prosecute him, and if he testified in front of the grand jury what McQreedy told him, he was not guilty of perjury (though I wonder did McQready not tell him the full story, or did he decide to tailor his testimony in front of the grand jury to fit Joe’s version, to protect him? We probably will never know, though given the culture of the place, not exactly unlikely), plus frankly they will probably assume that at his age getting fired was punishment enough…</p>
<p>For the person who asked why the victims themselves didn’t come forward, that they are now in their 20’s, you need to read up about child abuse and what it does to the victims. First of all, in part because of anything to do with sexuality, there is an incredible amount of guilt involved here; adults who have been raped or sexually abused have a hard time coming to grips with it, someone abused as a child has an even harder time.Yeah, I have heard the thick as a brick type, you ‘move on’, ‘get a grip’, ‘pull yourself up by your bootstraps’, but that is as ignorant as the moron in a blog post who said Sandusky wasn’t guilty of rape, since sex with a child can be consensual… the reality is it causes tremendous damage and even with therapy it leaves all kinds of scars, plus would you want everyone to know that you had been raped as a child? I would hope the rape shield laws would protect the victims, but that kind of stuff still often gets out thanks to the Rupert Murdochs of the world and their ilk, and would you want to face that? There is a reason why the sexual assault of children is made such a big deal of, it is because children bare burden many times worse then an adult when this happens.</p>
<p>I suspect there is also a lot more to this, everything I am reading indicates that Paterno and others may have known earlier about Sandusky, that in the 1998 incident that the campus police investigated, Paterno may have received a 30 page memo detailing what the investigation found (in that incident, Sandusky was caught showering with a 10 year old boy, and he basically got off the hook by saying “yeah, I can see where that would be considered innapropriate, I won’t do it again”). </p>
<p>Where Paterno failed was a moral issue more then a legal one, he simply didn’t seem to think that allegations of some sort of sexual conduct warranted his attention, so he passed the buck. Put it this way, according to the grand jury testimony McQreedy was really shook up when he told Paterno what happened, and even if he said he thought it might involve inappropriate touching only, it is still a major matter, and that is where he fouled up, he acted as if this was a minor matter, and that betrays a lot I think. I have heard the excuses, that he was a ‘busy man’, but that quite frankly is pathetic, I don’t care if Joe Paterno was the president of the US, or the football coach as PSU, that is a pretty lame excuse.Is planning the defense against the next opponent life threatening? Is looking at the next recruiting class life threatening? What is it that was more important then something like this? And put it this way, many people are asking what I did, if I had an allegation of abuse and passed it on, I would want to know what happened, especially considering the fact that Paterno likely saw Sandusky on campus (he was last seen on PSU turf a wekk ago…)… </p>
<p>It is a sad way to end a storied career, maybe in one sense Joe forgot his own beliefs and structure, for someone who preached integrity and the importance of family and school over football, he seemed ot have forgotten it. There is a big irony here, Joe apparently is a classicist, who loved Ancient Greece and Rome and their culture, and his story is literally a Greek tragedy, the accomplished, powerful man brought down by a character flaw.</p>
<p>It was more than a character flaw, it was an institutional mindset that protected a football program above all else.</p>
<p>Ziggi’s post upthread is correct. Paterno should not be on the sidelines this weekend and he would have been if the BOT had not taken action. And I’m sure they know much more than we do at this point.</p>
<p>I am trying to understand why anyone that knew or could have known are still collecting a paycheck. Why is Mike McQueary still allowed to be on the coaching team? This makes me really sick. He saw the crime and did nothing. I have been volunteering in schools for a long time. Even before 2002 you had to sign papers that you would report any crimes against the kids. He should have called the police and the boy should have had a rape kit down right then. Wrong is wrong and he should be gone. Mike McQueary was 28 at the time and should have had a better moral compass. I really hope he gets what coming to him too.</p>