Penn State Sandusky scandal

Bogney · November 13, 2011, 12:53pm

LasMa:

Didn’t McQueary report it to Joe Paterno the next day, not nine years later? He also appears to have met with the higher ups at Penn St. fairly short time later. Unless McQueary knew or suspected that it would not go further than Paterno, that is reporting the crime. Again, with 20/20 hindsight, he should have gone to the police, but could he have foreseen that Penn St. as an institution would fail so miserably at the time that he reported to Paterno, and again later to his superiors?

parent56 · November 13, 2011, 1:00pm

thank you for the timelines…i was utterly confused

LasMa · November 13, 2011, 1:06pm

Again, I’m not talking about the day that the crime happened. No one disputes that McQueary did the legal minimum by reporting to Joe.

Here’s the problem that so many of us have: After doing the minimum, he saw the predator walking around a free man for another 9 years. He knew the man was a felon, and he knew the felon wasn’t in jail.

Why didn’t HE, at some point in the ensuing nine years, pick up the phone HIMSELF and call the cops? Yes, it would have required courage – he might very well have lost his job. He certainly would have been responsible for besmirching the Penn State brand. But he would have saved God knows how many little boys who became victims between 2002 and today.

Every day for 9 years, he had to choose between little boys and Penn State Football. And every day for 9 years, when he failed to act aggressively, he made his choice. Like I said, moral bankruptcy.

zapfino · November 13, 2011, 1:06pm

Surely, one of the longest threads ever, so maybe someone already said this…

It’s really time for the universities to take back control of their athletic programs—no more fiefdoms where the real power in the university lies with the football coach, no more ADs and coaches who earn more than the university president, no more university presidents running scared of the football coach, etc.

(As a Big 10 fan, the Penn State fiasco would be the perfect excuse to kick PSU out of the Big 10. They’re really an Eastern team—never had any business being in the Big 10 anyway.)

jym626 · November 13, 2011, 1:08pm

Whoa. Now I am confused. Poster parent56 vs poster parent57. :eek:

LasMa, I think bogney has done an excellent job of addressing this. McQueary didn’t stay silent. He spoke to Paterno. He spoke to Curley/Schultz. I would bet if he had asked for an update/status he was told it was “being investigated by the university police” since that seems to be wath Second Mile was told. Short of demanding that he speak to the police directly (when he had already spoke to the person that oversaw the campus police) was he supposed to keep demanding to do so. Perhaps. By then woudl they have been able to track down the victim? Who knows. Its all a travesty.

woody · November 13, 2011, 1:09pm

There finally was an ‘official investigation’ of Sandusky in 2008 (Victim 1 at the HS).
It still took them 3 years after THAT, to arrest this guy? Sheesh!

jym626 · November 13, 2011, 1:10pm

Exactly, woody!!

LasMa · November 13, 2011, 1:12pm

jym, there was nothing tho prevent McQuery from contacting the authorities himself, from the day it happened right up until last Saturday.

jym626 · November 13, 2011, 1:15pm

Again, no one said there was anything preventing him from doing so. We are merely suggesting that it may be understandible that he thought he HAD reported it and that it was being handled by the correct authorities.

Bogney · November 13, 2011, 1:17pm

Lasma:

I do understand your point about how McQueary could not have questioned why Sandusky was not behind bars after witnessing the sex act with a minor in the showers. I find that troublesome as well. However, words are slippery and who knows what he was told by the higher ups about the status of the investigation, whether it had been “resolved” or some “deal” had been made. There are a lot of questions yet to be answered. Certainly, McQueary had loyalty to the institution and may have opted to become a “good German” in going along to get along after he passed the information up the chain, and that would be despicable. Too much is still speculation for me to jump on that bandwagon as to McQueary, and I give him some points for the initial reports, and for honesty in front of the grand jury about what he saw and what he did (assuming that he was honest, of course).

gettingridofson · November 13, 2011, 1:21pm

He saw a little boy being raped and he went home and went to bed! What else is there to say.

Bogney · November 13, 2011, 1:25pm

Apparently 1812 posts and counting are left to say, and that is only on this thread.

ttparent · November 13, 2011, 1:31pm

The key here is what being discussed and said during those meetings. It does not excuse anybody from guilt or bad behavior but what were discussed and relayed back and forth is very important and might explain the behavior of everyone involved. Why is McQ not dismissed and on paid leave? Aside from what is there in the grandjury report, what is the BOT privy to after talking to all the individuals involved?

parent56 · November 13, 2011, 1:52pm

lol jym… i’m the one that had to bear a tulane defeat over uab (hate that football was our common denominator while posting on this thread)

LasMa · November 13, 2011, 2:00pm

Yes, I give him points for that as well, especially since his superiors lied to the grand jury.

Your parenthetical point troubles me… are you saying that you’re not sure that this thing happened at all?

TutuTaxi · November 13, 2011, 2:01pm

Bogney post # 1794 well said.

rocketman08 · November 13, 2011, 2:15pm

I’ll admit I haven’t read all 120+ pages of posts, but from I’ve seen here and elsewhere a few things are clear:

<ul>
<li>It’s clear a lot of bad things happened at Penn State. Sandusky’s alleged actions speak for themselves and far too many people who had the opportunity to speak up chose, for whatever reason, not to. </li>
</ul>

In time with a through investigation–which a leaked grand jury presentment is not–we will hopefully uncover exactly what happened, or didn’t happen, and those responsible should be held accountable.

<ul>
<li>However, it’s also clear from watching TV reports and reading posts on this forum that as a society our own ability to handle the responsibility of properly investigating allegations is also sorely broken. With our instant gratification mentality and our legal degree from CSI and Law & Order we demand justice be handed down within a few news cycles. We can not accept the responsibility of placing investigation and fact finding before judgement. </li>
</ul>

We need someone to blame and we need it now. Anyone that dares to suggest we remain patient and reserve judgement until all the facts are known and a full investigation is completed is labeled as being complicit with the alleged crimes and steamrolled by a blood thirsty mob.

With Saturday’s game over, the satellite trucks will roll out of town, this thread will eventually fall off the first page and not just a football team but a whole university and town will be left in tatters trying to pick up the pieces and figure out what actually happened. And of course there are the victims in all this who were largely pushed aside in the hunt for blood.

Yes, maybe Joe Paterno really is some Soprano’s style kingpin sitting in the basement of his tiny modest ranch home smoking Cubans while he orchestrates a mass conspiracy that extends all the way to the Govenor’s office. Or maybe this whole thing is a bit more complicated and requires more than the 140 characters of a Twitter post to uncover.

Maybe McQuery didn’t tell Paterno all the graphic details. Maybe Paterno knew about the 1998 incident but when he followed up was told:

“Hey Joe, yeah the police, CPS and DA looked into it and this all appears to have been a misunderstanding. They see no reason to pursue this any further so I wouldn’t worry about it. Jerry’s a high profile figure that works with kids and sometimes people in such positions are subject to spurious complaints.”

And then maybe in 2002 Joe was told “Hey Joe thanks for passing on the message from McQuery. We’re going to have some people look into this, but I suspect it will be like 1998 and will be a misunderstanding. We’ll let you know if the authorities find anything of concern.”

Then again, maybe Paterno was making calls from his basement directing his mob to remain silent. But we simply don’t know and we shouldn’t pretend like we do.

I agree that from the limited amount we know today, it strongly appears there was a coverup in 1998 and 2002–and the later was likely fueled most by McQuery decision, forced or voluntary, to remain silent.

However, beyond that we don’t know much.

Paterno was clearly the scapegoat in all this. As the most public of the figures involved I suppose that is to be expected. However, in most places people’s vitriol for Paterno is based on what he “must have known.”

If a full investigation uncovers that Paterno, or anyone else, knew exactly what was happening and did nothing then I’ll be the first in line to condemn him and write that asterisk next to his name in the history books.

However at the moment there are far more questions than answers.

Until them I’m respectfully reserving judgement until we know more and I would ask everyone else take a step back, a deep breath, and do the same.

The way we as a society respond to such a complex incident is as much a lesson to our children as is the events that allegedly took place to begin with. Lest we forget that.

GTalum · November 13, 2011, 2:17pm

I understand why McQ did what he did. He probably was shocked and concerned with his future career and thought that he could report the incident to Paterno who had nothing to lose (which is why his cover-up is more reprehensible). But, I see someone mention he did the “legal minimum” by reporting this to Joe Paterno. He did not do the legal minimum. The legal minimum would have been reporting the incident to the police.

TomSrOfBoston · November 13, 2011, 2:20pm

Not in Pennsylvania.

Bogney · November 13, 2011, 2:25pm

ttparent:

I agree, but at some point the problem becomes what was the intent of the investigation. If the responsible parties allowed words to massage over what they clearly should have known was a heinous criminal act, and what McQueary knew was a heinous criminal act, then the whole investigation process at Penn St. was corrupt and incompetent. There is only so much leeway for “that was someone else’s job,” or “I didn’t know what had happened,” or “I thought it was being handled.” When ignorance, euphemism, and procedure become the instruments for sweeping criminal conduct under the rug, then evil can flourish. I expect the situation to look much dirtier when all is said and done, but exactly who did what to whom, and who knew what and when, is not yet clear.

What is clear is that there were no heroes. No one acted with courage under fire. Pedophile predations are not uncommon. We have seen the Catholic Church fail to handle its pedophile priest problem with any semblance of decency. That was a stunning failure of morality. With the fall of tiger and the innumerable college sports sex, money, and drug scandals, we don’t necessarily see sports figures as role models anymore - except for Penn St. where they allegedly did things the right way. To see the behavior of role model coaches of role model athletes range from small, to weak, to dishonest, to criminal, all the way to grossly immoral, with not a single admirable act among them, is to see how warped values can become when institutions are more important than individuals. The Nebraska football coach is one figure who seems to have a reasonable response to the crisis, though perhaps he should have followed his words with actions and had his players sit out the game.

To me, the lesson here is that people need to be trained not to value institutions over individuals, an inversion of priorities that happens all of the time. When weighing the risk of embarrassment to an institution, or the particular office holders, against physical harm to innocent individuals, the balance should resemble that of a feather vs. an anvil. The same principle should apply when weighing monetary costs to an institution vs. physical harm to an individual or group of people, yet we look the other way at corporate abuses of workers and the environment too by valuing profits more than safety.

People in power rarely acknowledge fault or consider the point of view of little people. It is all about them and the interests they represent. This is not a political forum, so I’ll just say generally that disdain for little people whose victimization might threaten the status quo happens in politics all of the time, and on both ends of the political spectrum. Lewinski was becoming the victim of a smear campaign until the dress appeared. Cain appears to be successfully downplaying his misconduct.

Penn State Sandusky scandal

CONNECT WITH US