<p>OhioMom, I would think so.</p>
<p>[Pennsylvania</a> governor: Change law after Penn State scandal - CNN.com](<a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/13/justice/pennsylvania-coach-abuse/?hpt=hp_t1]Pennsylvania”>http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/13/justice/pennsylvania-coach-abuse/?hpt=hp_t1)</p>
<p>tom, Paterno himself said, “I should have done more.” If he knew nothing about it, his statement makes no sense. He knew.</p>
<p>^^ It makes common sense. Sad example of why these laws have to be SPELLED out. But, they really tried to get around it and almost did.</p>
<p>LasMa- it is quite common for people to say “I should have done more” after a situation if the end result is tragic even when most people think they did all they could. And no I am not saying Paterno did all he could. I am saying you have no idea what he did or what he was told.</p>
<p>tom, One thing I know for sure he didn’t do – he didn’t contact law enforcement. And he had at least 9 years to pick up the phone. That’s an awful lot of time for someone to mull over the ethical issues of the case, especially for someone who preached ethics as consistently as Joe did.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s not what Paterno said.</p>
<p>He said:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Big difference.</p>
<p>There’s a lot of speculating/misquoting/writing between lines insisting people said/did/knew/should have known/must have known/covered up… things. We simply don’t know and shouldn’t pretend we know more than we do. </p>
<p>In due course a full investigation will be made public and the facts, or the best representation that can be made of them, will come out. Until then, history hath shown that a rush to judgement to fulfill some desire for instant gratification is a dangerous course to follow.</p>
<p>Maybe he considers Schultz law enforcement. He knows he was contacted.</p>
<p>tom, Paterno testified, under oath, in the Grand Jury investigation that McQueary had seen Sandusky “in the Lasch Building showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy.” How can that not be enough for Paterno to do more than he did?</p>
<p>Don’t we have Paterno’s version of what McQueary told him from the grand jury report? Is there any reason not to believe Paterno knew at least as much as he told the grand jury that he knew? Paterno’s version of the state of his knowledge is enough for him, and others, to believe that he should have done more. It is not enough to conclude that he is an evil man. Additional facts may help or hurt his legacy.</p>
<p>
No, we don’t. We have a paraphrase of it.</p>
<p>Moving away from Penn State for a second, and into the broader issue, the truth is that campus security ought not to be treated as a police force by anyone. Students should be made aware of this before they go to school. If something happens of a criminal nature, call 911, not campus security.</p>
<p>That said, I think these campus investigations on all campuses are problematic, as are the disciplinary hearings held on campuses, in lieu of real police investigations. College campuses should be patrolled by local police. They should pay a proportion of property taxes and they should be patrolled by local squad cars and local police who do not ultimately answer to a head of department who answers to the president of the university.</p>
<p>If that were the case, so many of these ambiguities in so many of these types of investigations on so many campuses, because Penn State is hardly the only campus that has had a problem with full disclosure of criminal activity on campus, would evaporate. There would be some daylight and accountability brought into these proceedings, and universities would lose their ability to hide problems and to pick and choose what to investigate, who to investigate and how to investigate, as well.</p>
<p>Any time an institution is operating with a different legal system than the one that exists for the rest of us, you are eventually going to run into some sort of CYA problems. Not just at Penn state.</p>
<p>"…So for those in the University accused of knowing of the abuse and not reporting it, it all boils down to who is lying. The grad student or Curly/Schultz. What did the grad student tell Paterno? What did Paterno tell Curly? What did Curly/Schultz tell Spanier? The grand jury believes that Curly/Schultz were lying. The grand jury believes Paterno and Spanier were not implicated."</p>
<p>This was my post on page 1 of this thread hours after the story broke.</p>
<p>These continue to be the questions that need to be answered. If there is a trial we might get some answers, We will see.</p>
<p>To date, I have not heard any denial from Paterno and his supporters that the statement paraphrased from grand jury testimony is essentially accurate. However, my views of Paterno have assumed that the paraphrase is materially correct - and assumed that Paterno was not told in more direct terms than paraphrase suggests that he admitted to. While a lot has been said about McQueary’s credibility standing up to cross-examination, Paterno may have to pass that test someday too.</p>
<p>Yea, D learned to her regret that she should NOT have relied on campus security to assist her after one of their employees hit her on her bike and made NO report and did NOTHING to help her and ensure that she got home safely late at night after she had been knocked to the ground and was bleeding. She had up to that time respected them. She & her friends learned NOT to trust them from that moment on. </p>
<p>S had never trusted them but D & I had–until then. Sadder but wiser. Wish campus security WOULD be a place that could be trusted to do the right thing for injured people. :(</p>
<p>Not sure if this subject has been mentioned yet (long thread!), but last night I listened to an interview with Tom Looney of Fox Sports, himself a Penn State grad. He pointed out that it was very odd that Sandusky, with his years of experience and coaching reputation (having been considered Paternos’ heir apparent for so long), did not take any other college coaching job for all those years after he retired at a relatively young age (55) for a coach–Looney believes his “problematic” status must have been known throughout college football. The rot may go very deep and very wide. Looney also thinks the timing of the indictment was delayed to allow Paterno to get the title of “winningest” coach in Div. 1. Lastly, he thinks the entire football staff will have to go to properly cleanse the program. I would personally extend that to the entire sports staff–I think it’s the only was to rid the school of this blight.</p>
<p>Of course, the source of the conclusions above was Looney. :)</p>
<p>poetgrl,
You are bringing up a bigger, more abstract and very important version of what a number of us have already said here.</p>
<p>It goes to the questions of law and order being able to be enforced on university sited transgressions.</p>
<p>One poster said that Campus Police are more about protecting the reputation of the school than adding security (which obviously can protect reputation indirectly) and paving the way to the legal system and due process (which can damage the reputation of the school).</p>
<p>I would be very interested to see what the job description and rules are for Campus Police.</p>
<p>I really am seeing a tension being expressed over and over again about that the circle of proprietary/independent powers and jurisdiction of a university or college are in relation to:
under-age drinking
drugs (use, sales, overdoses)
date rape
burglaries and theft
gender harassment
inappropriate relations bet faculty and students
and now, child abuse</p>
<p>Should colleges and universities take the law into their own hands? Are they being permitted to do this?</p>
<p>The DOE is now getting involved with PSU, and also with Yale. But they do not supervise the Campus Police, as far as I know. They do control Federal Funding, esp to the publics.</p>
<p>Last, does anyone know if whistleblower laws apply to / are enforceable in university cases??</p>
<p>And is a sports program legally contained within the university or is it a separate entity? Are the finances and for-profit status of sports programs melded into the university or are they stand-alone???</p>
<p>cartera- I think you are correct if all Paterno did was go to Curley I think he should have done more. If that is essentially all he did I will join in the criticism of him. My point which I have made over and over again is that we do not know if that is all he did. We have no idea what if any thing he did as follow up with Curley, Schultz or Spanier. We have no idea if he called the DA. We have no idea if he did anything but what is in the GJ report and is the reason he was not charged.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I looked into this and the NYT had an article about this too. </p>
<p>The Penn State police force are a real police force. If you call 911, that’s who responds. </p>
<p>Penn State also has the equivalent of “campus security” that makes sure buildings are locked and such, but that’s not who was involved in 1998. </p>
<p>I do agree though that the line of reporting into university administrators does make for a potential conflict of interests… but then again the police everywhere report into some administrative body be that a mayor or town supervisors so fundamentally it’s not that different. </p>
<p>If that oversight body is the subject of an issue that’s a natural conflict of interests. In the Penn State case the testimony states that external observers were brought onboard in 1998 in the form of the town police and the local DA (neither of which report into the university). </p>
<p>So on the surface they did the right thing there. Why nothing ultimately happened though still remains an open question.</p>
<p>performersmom- the web site says the campus police are responsible to investigate all matters that happen on the campus or up to 500 yards off campus plus any college owned property.</p>