BeerHere

Is this your attempt to bring humor to this situation?

Is this true? Where are you getting this?

Things are getting weird in PA. My employer (apparently) is doing a large project for PSU (30 people) and has pulled everyone out of the campus due to the "social and political climate" at the university. Travel to this client is restricted for now.

There are two parts to this that infuriate me as a father and human being. What you mentioned above, and the brazen approach by Sandusky. It doesn't even look like he tried to hide it, almost like he thought it wasn't a bad thing. But then you read the grand jury report and he mentions that he "hates himself" for doing it and you think he knew it was wrong. Janitors were watching him stalk children in the parking lot after seeing him sexually abusing a kid in the locker room. Yet, neither they, the GA, Paterno, the AD nor the university president did anything. [expletive] sickening He probably just said he "hates himself" to make the one mom think he was remorseful and would actually not do that stuff anymore, hoping she'd accept that and not push the issue further. Which would imply that he knew it was wrong (which I think he did). If you can assume that was the case, how do you explain how brazen he was (took multiple kids to the showers, PSU games, coaches meetings) etc. Even after the coaching staff knew of the first abuse witnesses by the GA. If he knew he was wrong enough to make an attempt to make himself look pitiful to a parent, why was he so certain he wouldn't be caught by anyone else? I fear there is a LOT more to this. Just really a gut feeling, but there is more than a simple "good ole boy" being protected by the university and coaching staff. There must be.

Though I have to say, I think The Score had this guy on this morning and he is making a lot of allegations in his column, on twitter and now on the radio. If none of this ends up being true, this guy is opening himself to some liable suites. He better be going off more than just speculation. At this point, Sandusky is libel-proof because his reputation can't get lower (yes, that's a valid legal defense) and Penn State University is a government agency so they'd have to prove actual malice in a libel suit. ugh@the terrible typo on my part A lot of the allegations he is making are directed at Second Mile. As a charitable organization it would seem they would have firm ground to stand on if they chose to go after him. (disclaimer, I work in IT not law) I'm not at all saying that his allegations are false. I'm saying that the guy better get control of his emotions before going on the radio etc.

There are two parts to this that infuriate me as a father and human being. What you mentioned above, and the brazen approach by Sandusky. It doesn't even look like he tried to hide it, almost like he thought it wasn't a bad thing. But then you read the grand jury report and he mentions that he "hates himself" for doing it and you think he knew it was wrong. Janitors were watching him stalk children in the parking lot after seeing him sexually abusing a kid in the locker room. Yet, neither they, the GA, Paterno, the AD nor the university president did anything. [expletive] sickening

Though I have to say, I think The Score had this guy on this morning and he is making a lot of allegations in his column, on twitter and now on the radio. If none of this ends up being true, this guy is opening himself to some liable suites. He better be going off more than just speculation.

The grand jury report also stated that at the point that Sandusky was told that he wouldn't be the next coach at PSU, he told one of the boys he was abusing that was the reason he was upset that day and that he should keep it to himself. So a child being abused by Sandusky was told by Sandusky that the decision was the reason he was upset. So to put this into perspective.....the university had two eyewitness reports of Sandusky sexually abusing young boys in the football shower room and he was still under consideration to take over for Paterno after he retired. Makes you wonder if that was or was not the reason he was removed from consideration. If it was not the reason, why the [expletive] not? If it was the reason, why was it kept quiet?

I hate to defend these guys if it turns out they had any prior knowledge, but I think of a board of directors for a charity loaded with celebrities like that as pretty damn hands off. (pardon the phrase) I can't imagine Cal Ripken was doing much more than making an appearance or 2 per year and giving the occassional donation. I don't know why you'd think that given what we've found out in the past few days. Nothing would surprise me at this point. i'm going to go ahead and say it would surprise me if cal [expletive] ripken was involved in pimping out kids to rich donors. Do you have something against Cal Ripken? Is everyone aware of the alleged incident between Cal's wife and a certain actor from Field of Dreams?

Something I don't understand is why they just separated him from activities with children. Why not just completely separate from him? There were multiple reports and multiple investigations. Wouldn't the sane thing be to tell him that until it is involved we should disassociate with you? Even if he doesn't go to events where there are children, the fact that he's associated with an organization that helps children gives him cache with parents and at risk kids who may be unaware of the allegations. It was his Amex Black Card. Agreed. As an organization that relies on charitable donations to survive it is extremely important.

Agreed, those adopted kids/people need to be protected immediately.

Statment from Second Mile http://www.thesecondmile.org/welcome.php

Arnold Palmer Dick Vermeil Andy Reid Mark Wahlberg Franco Harris Jack Ham Lou Holtz These guys have to be sick right now.

didn't he decide not to prosecute sandusky in 1998? and he disappeared in 2005. I believe there were allegations in 2004 as well. And....after two eyewitness accounts of graphic abuse of multiple children, how do you not prosecute? i just find it very hard to believe penn state arranged for the murder of a DA in order to protect a retired coach/molester. i think it's much more likely that it's a coincidence. unless the 2nd mile pimp story is true, in which a bunch of rich donors would be in need of protection. That is my point as well. There is certainly going to be a lot of speculation and investigations forthcoming. However, from my earlier post, there seem to be a lot of "loose ends" that don't align with typical human behavior even for those not alleged to have been involved with the molestation. See my earlier post but I can't get past the GA continuing to see him on campus and not doing anything, the wife not thinking something was up, the Second Mile people brushing it away. If you were the GA, how would you react every time you saw him afterward? How would you react if you saw with another boy -- a distinct possibility since the GA worked there and Sandusky continued to bring the boys to campus. The grand jury report also said that he was bringing boys to games and into PSU coaches meetings as recently as 2007. The GA had to have seen him. If you were Sandusky, how would you react every time you saw the GA? Would you not think to yourself that he needed to be taken care of to keep his mouth shut? Again, all of this is pure speculation on my part but if you honestly think about all of the individuals involved and how many people knew or must have known or reacted, there is too much that doesn't align for it to be limited to a single coach and a university sweeping it under the rug. *edited to make a further point

I agree, but somehow that doesn't seem to be enough. I don't think he can be brought up on charges but they need to investigate this guy at a minimum to make sure that his bank account didn't receive a single big deposit around the time this all occurred.

didn't he decide not to prosecute sandusky in 1998? and he disappeared in 2005. I believe there were allegations in 2004 as well. And....after two eyewitness accounts of graphic abuse of multiple children, how do you not prosecute?

Sandusky still worked there after the GA witnessed the abuse. I would imagine that they still saw each other. Something doesn't sit right here: 1) How could the GA continue to see him around the office/halls etc and not say something to him? According to the grand jury report he continued to bring boys to the campus and many people saw them -- including a janitor that witnesses more abuse of an even younger boy (8-9). The janitor reported it as well. Nothing happened. At a minimum the GA should have been sick to his stomach and if he saw Sandusky with more boys, how could be let that continue after seeing no action from the university? O hope he wasn't paid off or something to keep it quiet. 2) Second Mile didn't take any action and allowed him to still spend time with boys even after being told my the PSU president that he was caught raping a boy. I feel like there is something very wrong with this organization. It was supposedly setup to protect young children and there they are after one of their leaders is accused of raping a boy....taking no action. I hope this organization isn't a front for something else more sinister. 3) Sandusky's wife.....after the investigation in 1998 and continuing to see her husband bring young boys home, she didn't suspect anything? The guy was spending the night in her basement with the boys....something is very awry there. She had to know something....had to. 4) The university had reports from two different people, the GA and the janitor. Two people that didn't know each other with eye-witness accounts of graphic abuse. Where the [expletive] was the university police here? Why weren't the local police notified? 5) The Assistant District Attorney that is finally investigating the allegations and eyewitness accounts suddenly disappears? They find his laptop minus the HD in a river/lake. His disappearance can't be a coincidence. Was he paid off to disappear? Was he killed? What was on the HD? I fear this is going to get much much worse before it gets better. I have a suspicion that they are about to uncover something huge that goes well beyond PSU and Paterno.

Zambrano would be a big draw in Miami and his friendship with Guillen could pull him in that direction. I honestly think Hoyer should give them a call assuming that Z performs well in Venezuela. Z and $8-9M for Morrison

except their stories weren't straight. paterno says he knew that mcqueary had witnessed something of a sexual nature. mcqueary claims to have told curley and schultz that a former coach appeared to be having anal sex with a young boy. what i don't understand is why you're so hung up on paterno possibly watering down mcqueary's account from "anal sex with a boy" to "fondling or doing something of a sexual nature" when the grad assistant directly told curley and schultz that he thought he'd seen sandusky having anal sex with a boy. they were told twice that a likely crime had occurred and did nothing except push the guy off campus. Personally, I'm not drawing a distinction between Paterno, the AD or the university president. Regardless of the perjury charges, those three men, as well as the GA and the GA's dad failed to report a known pedophile to the police. For that alone, they are despicable human beings.

Agreed and you would have to think that if it was uncomfortable enough for him to have to water it down the for the coach that he would have to have been absolutely certain in what he saw in the first place.

Assume for a second that all this is true, and that the GA did restate it for Paterno to save a conservative old man from the dirty details. Everyone involved, including Paterno still has a concrete moral responsibility to go straight to the police with what they knew. The GA, his dad, Paterno, the AD, the university president, all of them through their lack of action showed their loyalties toward the accused and the reputation of the university over law and the safety of a child from a known pedophile. Despicable human beings.

Thanks goony...that song is stuck in my head now.

no, that's wrong. the grad assistant was interviewed by the AD and some other administrator. what appears to have happened, and what nobody is alleging didn't happen, is that the grad assistant told the coach (who again, is a conservative old man and coaching icon) that there was inappropriate sexual conduct between a former coach and a young boy. the coach relayed this information to the AD, who then interviewed the grad assistant about what he witnessed. the AD and other administrator are being prosecuted because they repeatedly claimed that they did not know the seriousness of what had occurred, which the grand jury did not find credible given the testimony of the grad assistant and what he claimed he told them during his interview with them. there is plenty to criticize about joe paterno's actions without making things up or assuming things that are unlikely to be true. Why is it important to point out that he's a coaching icon? That is the second time in this thread that you've made that statement. I do understand your point about him being a conservative old man but being an icon isn't at all pertinent when it comes to moral responsibility. This is the reason that I asked about your affiliation with PSU. I feel like others in this thread know you're a booster or something that I'm not aware of.

Agreed but I would be shocked if the NCAA did anything to the football program specifically. It seems like a stretch to me but I could be wrong.

(a) he didn't report it to the AD and the president. he reported it verbally to the AD, who along with another administrator interviewed the grad assistant (mcqueary). they subsequently spoke to the president. (b) paterno has said that he didn't know the exact nature of the sexual abuse, which seems logical to me - when you're talking to a conservative old man/coaching icon, do you tell him that you saw inappropriate sexual contact between sandusky and a minor, or do you tell him that you saw sandusky anally penetrating a young boy? i suspect it is the former, which is what paterno testified to in front of the grand jury. neither mcqueary nor curley has claimed that paterno knew more than what he let on. what kyle said above (about downgrading the seriousness of the allegations) is just making [expletive] up that is based on nothing whatsoever. You didn't answer my question about your affiliation (or lack thereof) with PSU. Regarding point a -- no one in the university thought to involve the police at any point. That includes Paterno. The people that have been charged to date are alleged to have perjured themselves. That alone implies a level of deceit. b -- is pure speculation on your part.