Penn State Child Molestation Scandal...continuing discussion - Page 11 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Put 'Em Under Pressure
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-11-2011, 02:42 PM   #201
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Where in the grand jury report does it say that?
The very top of page 8.
__________________

indra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 02:43 PM   #202
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
WildHoneyAlways's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: In a glass case of emotion
Posts: 8,158
Local Time: 06:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Where in the grand jury report does it say that?
The top of page 8.
__________________

WildHoneyAlways is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 02:47 PM   #203
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 12:28 AM
Eh? No, I mean McQueary explicitly stating that he'd described what he saw as anal sex when talking to to Paterno. The report does cite him as explicitly stating he told Curley and Schultz that, and thus concludes that they were guilty of materially false statements. It doesn't say that about Paterno.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 02:50 PM   #204
Ghost of Love
 
gvox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: In The Ballroom of The Crystal Lights
Posts: 19,901
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildHoneyAlways View Post
The top of page 8.
Exactly, and on page 7 it describes how not only did the graduate assistant report to Paterno "what he saw", Paterno also testified (under oath, I would think) that he reported to Curley that "the graduate assistant had seen Jerry Sandusky in the Lasch Building showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy."

In other words, he testified that when he informed Curley, he didn't say exactly what the grand jury found McQuery to be "extremely credible" about, he had downgraded it to fondling and later "inappropriate".

The whole thing is that as it went up the chain, it got watered down until they felt it wasn't such a big deal. Paterno is part of that process, and he either lied under oath or admitted under oath to changing the severity of the report.
gvox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 02:51 PM   #205
Ghost of Love
 
gvox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: In The Ballroom of The Crystal Lights
Posts: 19,901
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
It doesn't say that about Paterno.
It says he told Paterno what he saw. There's not much to interpret there.
gvox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 02:51 PM   #206
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 03:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Where in the grand jury report does it say that?

If you read page 7 and 8, I think Paterno is ok,
Curley and Schultz are at risk.

"Paterno said that he reported to Curley that "the graduate assistant had seen Jerry Sandusky in the Lasch Building showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy."

that is probably enough to save Paterno. he is reporting what he recalls from memory, from an upset person.

when the witness spoke to Curley, it was a first hand report, from an eye witness.
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 02:55 PM   #207
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gvox View Post
It says he told Paterno what he saw. There's not much to interpret there.
There's everything to interpret there, and is the whole reason why Paterno is not charged.
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 02:59 PM   #208
Ghost of Love
 
gvox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: In The Ballroom of The Crystal Lights
Posts: 19,901
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
There's everything to interpret there
I disagree. I think he's getting a free pass because he testified that he at the very least called it "fondling or doing something of a sexual nature" when he reported it and because the others actually outright lied about it being anything sexual in nature at all.

He was told the same thing by McQuery that McQuery also told the others. He started the dilution of the story.
gvox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 03:01 PM   #209
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 12:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gvox View Post
It says he told Paterno what he saw. There's not much to interpret there.
I understand your logic and agree the lack of specifity in the report on that point is strange, but, my own conclusion from the fact that the report quotes Paterno saying "fondling or doing something of a sexual nature," yet does not deem him guilty of materially false statements--whereas Schultz and Curley were directly charged with that, by virtue of the "extremely credible" McQueary having explicitly told the grand jury that he did cite anal sex when reporting to them (bottom of p. 7)--would be that McQueary himself indicated to the grand jury that Paterno's summary of what McQueary had told him was correct. Otherwise, you're left with the argument that the grand jury was simply too stupid to have it occur to them to explicitly ask McQueary whether he explicitly mentioned anal sex to Paterno.

ETA--There might also be something to deep's point, that because Curley and Schultz were the designated obligated reporters (to the police) under PA law, they might be in a different category in terms of responsibility to record and recall details of the eyewitness account precisely, hence the non-credibility of their supposed recollections compared to McQueary's testimony. I'm in no position to be sure on that though.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 03:07 PM   #210
Ghost of Love
 
gvox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: In The Ballroom of The Crystal Lights
Posts: 19,901
Local Time: 07:28 PM
I guess from a strictly legal standpoint you are right Yolland. He's still so wrong, what he did and/or didn't do. I tend to agree with deep's idea that when he was testifying, he was summarizing his memory of the events which I suppose keeps him from a direct charge of perjury, but would add to that there's no logical reason to believe, period, that a distraught McQuery would tell his immediate boss a lesser story so close to the event, and then later on tell a more severe version to Curley and Schultz. He told them all the same thing, and Paterno stood by as they all watered it down and finally swept it under the rug.

Re: your last sentence...well, didn't they? It seems almost unthinkable that they didn't!


eta...I just remembered something..somewhere along the way one or more media outlets reported that Paterno testified that McQuery never told him that it was anal sex. It's not directly mentioned in the findings of fact though. I guess there is more to the record than what's listed in that document, right? Isn't that just a summary of what facts they feel are relevant?
gvox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 03:13 PM   #211
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 03:28 PM
But I think Paterno knew the guy would be going to the 'higher ups' for a more thorough handing of the situation.

If I report an incident, identify the parties, and turn it over to 'investigators' I would assume they be responsible for the proper follow through.
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 03:16 PM   #212
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 64,498
Local Time: 04:28 PM
The question that sticks in my mind is: then what do you do when time goes by and clearly nothing has been done?

If you reported some minor incident up the ladder per the proper procedure and nothing is done, maybe you'd be okay with "well, I did my part, it's not my problem now."

But how do you do that when this person was either molesting or raping a child, depending on which varying report you heard?
corianderstem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 03:17 PM   #213
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
WildHoneyAlways's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: In a glass case of emotion
Posts: 8,158
Local Time: 06:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
But I think Paterno knew the guy would be going to the 'higher ups' for a more thorough handing of the situation.

If I report an incident, identify the parties, and turn it over to 'investigators' I would assume they be responsible for the proper follow through.
I am a high school teacher. I would never assume this. Also, the AD is not an "investigator." Reporting abuse to an administrator is not part of mandated reporting in my state. I would need to call the authorities and report it myself. I understand that not all states are the same however.
WildHoneyAlways is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 03:18 PM   #214
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Danny Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Harvard Supermodel Activist of the Decade Runner-Up
Posts: 9,562
Local Time: 03:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corianderstem View Post
The question that sticks in my mind is: what do you do when time goes by and clearly nothing has been done?
You get promoted.
Danny Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 03:18 PM   #215
Ghost of Love
 
gvox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: In The Ballroom of The Crystal Lights
Posts: 19,901
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corianderstem View Post
The question that sticks in my mind is: what do you do when time goes by and clearly nothing has been done?

It seems so patently obvious, yet time and time again and in many different types of organizations, this piece of common sense seldom seems to kick in.
gvox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 03:20 PM   #216
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 03:28 PM
I participate in different organizations, where there is a chain of command.

when that happens, you either stay with the program or you leave.

Also, this isn't the type of thing where you would necessarily know.

Do you go up and ask him, Are you in court ordered therapy? etc.?
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 03:22 PM   #217
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corianderstem View Post
The question that sticks in my mind is: then what do you do when time goes by and clearly nothing has been done?

If you reported some minor incident up the ladder per the proper procedure and nothing is done, maybe you'd be okay with "well, I did my part, it's not my problem now."

But how do you do that when this person was either molesting or raping a child, depending on which varying report you heard?
This is why I blame Paterno more than McQueary: Paterno had nothing to lose. There's no way he's losing his job over trying to do the right thing and make a big deal about child molestation. People talk of the hypothetical: what if McQueary wasn't right and you're accusing a man of something he didn't do? Horseshit. Paterno had nothing to lose, even if things were tense between him and Sandusky (they may have coached together, but they were never exactly good friends) and it could have been perceived as him trying to stir shit up.

Whereas with McQueary, you could see why he might have some fears that making too big a deal of it could lose him a lot of things. Obviously he should have done more, but you can at least understand that. With Paterno, there's nothing bad that could have come out of making a bigger fuss about it.
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 03:23 PM   #218
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 64,498
Local Time: 04:28 PM
That's been my impression as well. (As a total outsider to both college football and Penn State; just my impressions based on what I've read.)
corianderstem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 03:23 PM   #219
Ghost of Love
 
gvox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: In The Ballroom of The Crystal Lights
Posts: 19,901
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
Also, this isn't the type of thing where you would necessarily know.
Of course you would in this type of situation: you'd be part of the child protective services / police investigation. If you are Paterno and it is reported properly, you are getting questioned by some legal authority. So then you'd know.
gvox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 03:24 PM   #220
Ghost of Love
 
gvox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: In The Ballroom of The Crystal Lights
Posts: 19,901
Local Time: 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
This is why I blame Paterno more than McQueary: Paterno had nothing to lose. There's no way he's losing his job over trying to do the right thing and make a big deal about child molestation. People talk of the hypothetical: what if McQueary wasn't right and you're accusing a man of something he didn't do? Horseshit. Paterno had nothing to lose, even if things were tense between him and Sandusky (they may have coached together, but they were never exactly good friends) and it could have been perceived as him trying to stir shit up.

Whereas with McQueary, you could see why he might have some fears that making too big a deal of it could lose him a lot of things. Obviously he should have done more, but you can at least understand that. With Paterno, there's nothing bad that could have come out of making a bigger fuss about it.
Bang on. He's the big fish, not the other way around. They're not going to touch him for going all the way with it, and that is why his inaction is all the more reprehensible imo.
__________________

gvox is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×