So, from what I gather, a guy sexually molested some kids, and it got covered up. Now that he's getting the axe for it, the students are rioting and flipping news vans over because they all think this has something to do with football. Am I missing something here or are people that thick?
STATE COLLEGE, Pa – Late Wednesday night, at the Penn Stater Hotel and Conference Center, Penn State University’s Board of Trustees held a press conference. The situation deteriorated almost immediately.
After the Board announced that University President Graham Spanier and head coach Joe Paterno would be relieved of their respective duties, some students who had worked their way into the media assembly began shouting. They were not pleased.
“Do you realize that right now students are rioting because of your decision?” one screamed.
Board Vice Chairman John Surma thought about the question for a brief moment before responding: “Considering I’m here,” he said, “probably not.”
It was a smug answer, but even so it couldn’t have taken Surma long to regret the reply. Mere moments after the Board announced its decisions – both were unanimous, Surma said – thousands of students spilled into the center of campus. Some met up at Old Main, a Penn State administration building and university landmark, before migrating over to Beaver Avenue near Pugh Street.
When I arrived, the intersection was choked with people and it was hard to move. Sirens wailed. Beaver was blocked off by police cars, and on either side of the street you could see people hanging out of windows and perched on top of parking garages, all of them desperate to get a good view.
Most of the crowd seemed content to gawk and mill about and not get too involved beyond reflexive pushing and shoving over personal space invasion. There were chants, lots of them.
“We Love Joe” and “We Want Joe” and the ubiquitous “We are … Penn State.”
Now and then, when one student remembered why everyone was there in the first place, they would repeat far-less flattering things about Jerry Sandusky. Those chants were generally much shorter.
If all of this was set in motion by Sandusky’s alleged crimes – if students initially took to the streets and occupied Paterno’s lawn in a show of support for the football coach and a show of disgust for what the former defensive coordinator is accused of doing to at least eight small children over 15 unthinkable years – all of that seemed largely forgotten on Wednesday night. The riot – and it wasn’t much of one as those things go – felt more like a football rally or a frat party. The victims, if they were thought about at all, seemed to serve mainly as an excuse for many of the students to gather in one place and be college kids.
It was a sad and unfortunate thing to witness. What began as an investigation into heinous sex crimes had somehow been twisted and appropriated for the ignoble purposes of a low-rent flash mob.
Every so often someone would set off fireworks or climb a light pole and attempt to bring it down. I saw one crash onto Beaver Street and another almost plunge into a mass of people on College Avenue. Policemen in riot gear tried to disperse the crowd several times. It didn’t work.
Instead, the rally or the riot or the protest or whatever you might call it continued. More than a few drunks stumbled past me; one of them had a vuvuzela and blew into it almost nonstop. Even worse, and stranger, one student was carrying a giant circular cut out of Mel Gibson dressed as William Wallace from Braveheart. I asked a few people if they knew why. They didn’t, but they thought it was funny.
I overheard a girl standing next to me talking to a guy who appeared to be her boyfriend. She wanted him to overturn a car that was parked in the middle of the crowd. He declined. Later, over on College Avenue, the mob succeeded in flipping a TV truck. A great roar went up after that, and then students posed for pictures around and on top of the upended vehicle.
What little overt anger I encountered appeared reserved for the media. I watched a student in a knit cap, sweatshirt and mesh shorts follow a TV cameraman around and scream “f--- the media.” It didn’t take long for the crowd to pick up on it. The more the mob chanted, the more the kid in the cap fed off the energy. At one point, he pushed his face as close to the camera as possible and yelled “go home, no one wants you here.” It was the only time I thought someone was in real danger – aside from the frequent stampedes.
Because the crowd was packed together, you couldn’t see very far. At least four or five times, a giant knot of people suddenly untangled itself and sprinted in a random direction for no other reason than the man or woman next to them took off and looked panicked.
After the TV truck was overturned, a stampede started down College Avenue before emptying out onto a side street. As the runaway faction of the crowd slowed to a jog, I heard one guy turn to his buddy and say “why are we running?” His friend just shrugged.
If he had asked why they were there at all, I suspect the answer would have been the same.
You're right. I guess it's more about rioting than it is about rioting for a purpose. From what I'm reading they only used 7 cans of teargas. Only 7. Against a mob like that I'd be using a lot more.
Necroshea wrote:So, from what I gather, a guy sexually molested some kids, and it got covered up. Now that he's getting the axe for it, the students are rioting and flipping news vans over because they all think this has something to do with football. Am I missing something here or are people that thick?
STATE COLLEGE, Pa – Late Wednesday night, at the Penn Stater Hotel and Conference Center, Penn State University’s Board of Trustees held a press conference. The situation deteriorated almost immediately.
After the Board announced that University President Graham Spanier and head coach Joe Paterno would be relieved of their respective duties, some students who had worked their way into the media assembly began shouting. They were not pleased.
“Do you realize that right now students are rioting because of your decision?” one screamed.
Board Vice Chairman John Surma thought about the question for a brief moment before responding: “Considering I’m here,” he said, “probably not.”
It was a smug answer, but even so it couldn’t have taken Surma long to regret the reply. Mere moments after the Board announced its decisions – both were unanimous, Surma said – thousands of students spilled into the center of campus. Some met up at Old Main, a Penn State administration building and university landmark, before migrating over to Beaver Avenue near Pugh Street.
When I arrived, the intersection was choked with people and it was hard to move. Sirens wailed. Beaver was blocked off by police cars, and on either side of the street you could see people hanging out of windows and perched on top of parking garages, all of them desperate to get a good view.
Most of the crowd seemed content to gawk and mill about and not get too involved beyond reflexive pushing and shoving over personal space invasion. There were chants, lots of them.
“We Love Joe” and “We Want Joe” and the ubiquitous “We are … Penn State.”
Now and then, when one student remembered why everyone was there in the first place, they would repeat far-less flattering things about Jerry Sandusky. Those chants were generally much shorter.
If all of this was set in motion by Sandusky’s alleged crimes – if students initially took to the streets and occupied Paterno’s lawn in a show of support for the football coach and a show of disgust for what the former defensive coordinator is accused of doing to at least eight small children over 15 unthinkable years – all of that seemed largely forgotten on Wednesday night. The riot – and it wasn’t much of one as those things go – felt more like a football rally or a frat party. The victims, if they were thought about at all, seemed to serve mainly as an excuse for many of the students to gather in one place and be college kids.
It was a sad and unfortunate thing to witness. What began as an investigation into heinous sex crimes had somehow been twisted and appropriated for the ignoble purposes of a low-rent flash mob.
Every so often someone would set off fireworks or climb a light pole and attempt to bring it down. I saw one crash onto Beaver Street and another almost plunge into a mass of people on College Avenue. Policemen in riot gear tried to disperse the crowd several times. It didn’t work.
Instead, the rally or the riot or the protest or whatever you might call it continued. More than a few drunks stumbled past me; one of them had a vuvuzela and blew into it almost nonstop. Even worse, and stranger, one student was carrying a giant circular cut out of Mel Gibson dressed as William Wallace from Braveheart. I asked a few people if they knew why. They didn’t, but they thought it was funny.
I overheard a girl standing next to me talking to a guy who appeared to be her boyfriend. She wanted him to overturn a car that was parked in the middle of the crowd. He declined. Later, over on College Avenue, the mob succeeded in flipping a TV truck. A great roar went up after that, and then students posed for pictures around and on top of the upended vehicle.
What little overt anger I encountered appeared reserved for the media. I watched a student in a knit cap, sweatshirt and mesh shorts follow a TV cameraman around and scream “f--- the media.” It didn’t take long for the crowd to pick up on it. The more the mob chanted, the more the kid in the cap fed off the energy. At one point, he pushed his face as close to the camera as possible and yelled “go home, no one wants you here.” It was the only time I thought someone was in real danger – aside from the frequent stampedes.
Because the crowd was packed together, you couldn’t see very far. At least four or five times, a giant knot of people suddenly untangled itself and sprinted in a random direction for no other reason than the man or woman next to them took off and looked panicked.
After the TV truck was overturned, a stampede started down College Avenue before emptying out onto a side street. As the runaway faction of the crowd slowed to a jog, I heard one guy turn to his buddy and say “why are we running?” His friend just shrugged.
If he had asked why they were there at all, I suspect the answer would have been the same.
Nuke the site from orbit. Its the only way to be sure.
Wow! Good article but damn, college kids down south got they heads in the wrong places man. Why does it seem like no one cares about the real issues anymore. The government has brainwashed us all into thinking that celebrities and sports are more important than family values, life/death, and current political events. Some people/ all people are F***ing dumb!
The government has brainwashed us all into thinking that celebrities and sports are more important than family values, life/death, and current political events. Some people/ all people are F***ing dumb!
quite a few kids needs to get belted as they grow up just to get into the right frame of mind
Some guy that worked for Joe Paterno molested some kids. The coach may have known about it (although IIRC he's the one who reported him). The school fired him.
Joe Paterno is the greatest college football coach in the history of college football, and for him to be thrown out on his behind and remembered solely for this scandal is outrageous.
I'm not a fan of Penn State, but he deserved far more than what he got from the Board.
biccat wrote:Some guy that worked for Joe Paterno molested some kids. The coach may have known about it (although IIRC he's the one who reported him). The school fired him.
They didn't just fire him they also fired several other people, including the President. There was no question of whether they knew or not...they did know. A student saw the assistant coach sexually assault a student in the showers. That student told the coach, who told his boss, and then nothing ever happened with it. It was just forgotten. None of them reported it to the authorities and the guy went on to do it a few more times to other students. All-in-all I think they got him for 8 different victims. The way people are acting you would think he was being charged with a crime. He failed to live up to his position and role of leader when he ignored a sexual predator in their midst to focus on a sports game. It doesn't matter how long he or the others were there, as this is a huge mistake. It isn't that they didn't report someone skinning their knee near the swimming pool, they didn't report a rapist who went on to do it again.
And it wasn't just 'some guy', he was his assistant and being groomed to take over the franchise. This wasn't some random janitor.
biccat wrote:Some guy that worked for Joe Paterno molested some kids. The coach may have known about it (although IIRC he's the one who reported him). The school fired him.
Joe Paterno is the greatest college football coach in the history of college football, and for him to be thrown out on his behind and remembered solely for this scandal is outrageous.
I'm not a fan of Penn State, but he deserved far more than what he got from the Board.
No, he totally deserved to be fired. He never checked up on whether it was reported to the police or not, even though the guy continued to work there. IMHO, they should have sacked a lot more people than paterno and the president. And I don't care if you're the greatest coach to ever grace to earth, to let the rape of a 10 year old slide is ridiculous...I hope it's all he's ever remembered for
Ahtman wrote:He failed to live up to his position and role of leader when he ignored a sexual predator in their midst to focus on a sports game.
The problem is that he didn't fail to live up to his position. He reported the guy to his superior (athletic director), which is what he was supposed to do. Coach Paterno had no obligation (either ethically or legally) to report the guy to the police.
If there was some evidence that Coach Paterno knew the Athletic Director was covering for this guy, maybe you could make the case that he had an ethical obligation to report to the authorities. But I haven't seen anything that supports that.
Jonesyboy12 wrote:Wow! Good article but damn, college kids down south got they heads in the wrong places man. Why does it seem like no one cares about the real issues anymore. The government has brainwashed us all into thinking that celebrities and sports are more important than family values, life/death, and current political events. Some people/ all people are F***ing dumb!
Ahtman wrote:He failed to live up to his position and role of leader when he ignored a sexual predator in their midst to focus on a sports game.
The problem is that he didn't fail to live up to his position. He reported the guy to his superior (athletic director), which is what he was supposed to do.
Doing the minimum, the sign of quality leadership. Even he admits that he should have done more.
biccat wrote:Coach Paterno had no obligation (either ethically or legally) to report the guy to the police.
Gosh, do you think that may be why he is not being charged with a crime? And I would disagree, and so would a great many other including the people who had to make the decision (and again, even Joe himself) would say that he actually did have an ethical obligation. I would also bet his contract has some sort of morals and/or ethics clause as well.
biccat wrote: If there was some evidence that Coach Paterno knew the Athletic Director was covering for this guy
No one is saying there was a deliberate cover up. It was incidental and caused by apathy, disinterest, or a combination of both.
biccat wrote:maybe you could make the case that he had an ethical obligation to report to the authorities.
The people who fired him apparently felt that he should have. Of course they also felt the other people that were fired should have as well. People keep talking like he was singled out when it wasn't just him.
biccat wrote: But I haven't seen anything that supports that.
You don't want to see anything that supports that.
Ahtman wrote:He failed to live up to his position and role of leader when he ignored a sexual predator in their midst to focus on a sports game.
The problem is that he didn't fail to live up to his position. He reported the guy to his superior (athletic director), which is what he was supposed to do.
Doing the minimum, the sign of quality leadership. Even he admits that he should have done more.
biccat wrote:Coach Paterno had no obligation (either ethically or legally) to report the guy to the police.
Gosh, do you think that may be why he is not being charged with a crime? And I would disagree, and so would a great many other including the people who had to make the decision (and again, even Joe himself) would say that he actually did have an ethical obligation. I would also bet his contract has some sort of morals and/or ethics clause as well.
biccat wrote: If there was some evidence that Coach Paterno knew the Athletic Director was covering for this guy
No one is saying there was a deliberate cover up. It was incidental and caused by apathy, disinterest, or a combination of both.
biccat wrote:maybe you could make the case that he had an ethical obligation to report to the authorities.
The people who fired him apparently felt that he should have. Of course they also felt the other people that were fired should have as well. People keep talking like he was singled out when it wasn't just him.
biccat wrote: But I haven't seen anything that supports that.
You don't want to see anything that supports that.
I hate to say it but Ahtman's 100% right on this. Is it just me or is when you see someone with a kid ina shower, you like call the cops after you've beaten the offender to death? You don't go off and report it and have it forgotten. This is gak crazy.
biccat wrote: But I haven't seen anything that supports that.
You don't want to see anything that supports that.
I'll be happy to change my opinion on this matter if you can show that Paterno knew that the issue was being covered up.
I believe that he fulfilled his ethical obligations when he reported the incident to the athletic director. I haven't seen any new facts to change this.
biccat wrote: But I haven't seen anything that supports that.
You don't want to see anything that supports that.
I'll be happy to change my opinion on this matter if you can show that Paterno knew that the issue was being covered up.
I believe that he fulfilled his ethical obligations when he reported the incident to the athletic director. I haven't seen any new facts to change this.
Imagine you find out this guy assaulted your kid (or you for that matter) and then imagine you find out that the faculty and coaching staff knew about it but nothing was ever done. A memo was made, quips were exhanged, and that was it.
If this were some small school this wouldn't be an issue and most of the people freaking out would think it was right to discharge (not arrest) the coach and President for letting it go but this is a sacred cow coach. He won a lot of football games, you see.
I don't think he is a bad guy and I'm sorry this had to happen, but he fethed up and he got fired, which is probably the right thing to do over an incident of this magnitude.
Ahtman wrote:Imagine you find out this guy assaulted your kid (or you for that matter) and then imagine you find out that the faculty and coaching staff knew about it but nothing was ever done. A memo was made, quips were exhanged, and that was it.
I can guarantee that the perp would not be on trial. He would be busy pushing up daisies.
Ahtman wrote:If this were some small school this wouldn't be an issue and most of the people freaking out would think it was right to discharge (not arrest) the coach and President for letting it go but this is a sacred cow coach. He won a lot of football games, you see.
And it would be just as wrong to do this at a small school. It's not about football games, the whole thing is a case of trying to find a big enough scapegoat. And Joe Paterno is the biggest target at Penn State.
Ahtman wrote:I don't think he is a bad guy and I'm sorry this had to happen, but he fethed up and he got fired, which is probably the right thing to do over an incident of this magnitude.
I'm still not sure how he fethed up. He did what he was supposed to do - report the incident to the AD. He didn't know that this guy had a history of abuse, that he did this to multiple kids, or that the guy was a pervert. He heard about one event and reported it appropriately. If he knew more he should have done more. But he didn't.
I originally felt much the way Biccat did on this, but as the facts ooze out, it seems more and more questionable.
The eyewitness to one of the rapes reported it to Paterno with pretty visceral detail. This eyewitness was a graduate assistant at the time and is currently head of recruiting, so he's a pretty credible witness. JoPa's legal and ethical obligations were to pass the information up, which he did.
The problem is... nobody followed up. And, in the interim, it looks like several more kids were abused. I'm neutral on if he should have been fired, but it says something about a man's character that he was content to pass information along.
I do feel bad for both Paterno and the eyewitness: both were placed in bad situations. I'm a little tired of the outrage you see in the media (sports talk radio in particular), as I think protecting a friend and colleague, even through inaction, is something that a lot of people are willing to do. If I heard that a friend and colleague did something horrible, and I reported it to who I was supposed to, and they do nothing... how hard am I supposed to work to expose a friend?
What makes this situation terrible is that the inaction resulted in further abuse. In a lot of people's minds, some of the blame for all the later abuse rests on the shoulders of people that did nothing to stop it.
And I actually disagree that JoPa is being idolized because he is high profile. I think a person in his position, absent media scrutiny, would almost always keep his job. If, say, a student teacher reported to the principal that he saw a guidance counselor molesting a student, and the principal reported this to the superintendent... nobody would care. It's public outrage, not the acutal morals of the situation, that lead to his firing.
biccat wrote:And it would be just as wrong to do this at a small school.
At least you now admit that it was wrong.
biccat wrote:It's not about football games
You can say that till your blue in the face, that won't make it true.
biccat wrote:the whole thing is a case of trying to find a big enough scapegoat. And Joe Paterno is the biggest target at Penn State.
HE WASN'T THE ONLY PERSON FIRED. He isn't a scapegoat, he was in charge and while he was in charge something criminal happened. It is funny how you want to blame Obama for everthing that happens while he is in charge but you don't apply that same standard here.
biccat wrote:I'm still not sure how he fethed up.
Because you are either willingly remaining ignorant or not paying attention.
biccat wrote:He did what he was supposed to do - report the incident to the AD.
They didn't do what they were supposed to becuase if they had, they would still have their jobs. It may help you to understand the situation if you start to realize this is seen as a fundamental failure of the staff and it's leadership and not some weird conspiracy against wacky ol' Uncle Joe.
The one detail that's often forgotten is that one of the people that JoPa reported the incident to, Gary Schultz, was a Penn State VP in charge of the campus police.
Which is one reason (the main being perjury) that Mr. Schutlz is currently indicted.
Here's an interesting article discussing the legal aspects of the case:
kronk, the rape of 10 year old children isn't a viable target for comedy mate. Let's leave that out of the thread or it's going to go downhill rapidly.
Ahtman wrote:At least you now admit that it was wrong.
wait, are you now agreeing with me?
Ahtman wrote:
biccat wrote:It's not about football games
You can say that till your blue in the face, that won't make it true.
You're making a completely baseless accusation, so please excuse me if I don't take your comment seriously.
Ahtman wrote:HE WASN'T THE ONLY PERSON FIRED. He isn't a scapegoat, he was in charge and while he was in charge something criminal happened. It is funny how you want to blame Obama for everthing that happens while he is in charge but you don't apply that same standard here.
He wasn't in charge. The guy was retired and therefore not under Paterno's control. Paterno couldn't have fired the guy. He reported it to the AD, who could revoke the guy's access to the locker rooms, etc.
Ahtman wrote:Because you are either willingly remaining ignorant or not paying attention.
Ah, of course. Because I don't believe the same thing as you do I'm ignorant.
Ahtman wrote:They didn't do what they were supposed to becuase if they had, they would still have their jobs. It may help you to understand the situation if you start to realize this is seen as a fundamental failure of the staff and it's leadership and not some weird conspiracy against wacky ol' Uncle Joe.
I'm not saying it's a conspiracy. It's a high-profile case that demands a high-profile response.
You keep obliquely referring to some secret knowledge you have of this case. If the knowledge you possess is so compelling, why not share it with the rest of us?
Oh, and thanks Polonius for noting that Paterno reported this incident to the VP in charge of the campus police. That strengthens my case even more.
Frazzled wrote:NO. When you see a rape occurring you're supposed to call the police.
He didn't see a rape, he heard about the incident from a witness to the rape. He apparently then contacted the guy in charge of the Campus Police.
MeanGreenStompa wrote:kronk, the rape of 10 year old children isn't a viable target for comedy mate. Let's leave that out of the thread or it's going to go downhill rapidly.
One of the interesting questions of fact in this incident is the nature of the reporting.
According to the eyewitness, he gave a graphic account to Joe.
Joe says he got a vague account, and related a very vague account to his boss.
That seems relevant, because if the game of telephone turned "I saw an anal rape" into "there was a report of inappropriate behavior..." that seems inappropriate.
Wow! Even Dakka is fighting over this controversial issue.
The entire state of Pennsylvania is arguing over this position... and I have argued enough about it myself.
Paterno did what was required, based off of Pennsylvania law. However in his contract there is a child protection act in which he is to call child services should it be necessary. Which it was necessary when he found out that the university was not investigating into the incident. Hence he violated his contract. I wished he didn't go out like this but unfortunately even great men can make mistakes and they come back and get them.
Joe Paterno reported it to the head of Campus police and nothing happened.
Sandusky no longer worked for JoPa in 2002, what did you want him to do...fire him?
I hope at least we can reach an agreement that the child molester is a terrible piece of filth. The fact that he was skilled as a football coach does absolute zero to change this in the slightest.
Necroshea wrote:I hope at least we can reach an agreement that the child molester is a terrible piece of filth. The fact that he was skilled as a football coach does absolute zero to change this in the slightest.
Yep, who wants to take bets on how long he survives. I think there are a few hundred Penn State students that want his head for what he did to the children and Joe.
SlaveToDorkness wrote:So if he reported it and never saw anything come of it he's totally in the clear?
If he reported it to the police and then to his boss AND HR through proper formal channels then yes. Otherwise no.
All he would have needed to do was call police... his legend could continue. Damn... 5 minutes to call the police and this would have all been different.
Now that the big wigs are outta the way we can get to helping the families.
Re reporting it.
Well, therein lies the damning or saving graces regarding Paterno, to my mind.
If the campus police got back to him and said 'naw, trumped up bs, the guy made up the allegation' then fine, Paterno did what he had to and those he reported to should be strung up.
If he said 'this guy says kids are being sodomized here, you need to do something' and then nothing ever came back to him about it and the rapist was still working with the children, then he should have taken things further and made more noise about it.
Necroshea wrote:I hope at least we can reach an agreement that the child molester is a terrible piece of filth. The fact that he was skilled as a football coach does absolute zero to change this in the slightest.
Yep, who wants to take bets on how long he survives. I think there are a few hundred Penn State students that want his head for what he did to the children and Joe.
Er... assuming the allegations are true, the coach brought it upon himself.
SlaveToDorkness wrote:So if he reported it and never saw anything come of it he's totally in the clear?
If he reported it to the police and then to his boss AND HR through proper formal channels then yes. Otherwise no.
EDIT not pussy campus rent a cops. Real cops with real guns.
Maybe it's different where you live but here the Campus Police are real cops with real guns, and work in concert with the surrounding agencies like any other municipal police force. Yes there are the fat kids on segways too.
SlaveToDorkness wrote:So if he reported it and never saw anything come of it he's totally in the clear?
If he reported it to the police and then to his boss AND HR through proper formal channels then yes. Otherwise no.
EDIT not pussy campus rent a cops. Real cops with real guns.
Maybe it's different where you live but here the Campus Police are real cops with real guns, and work in concert with the surrounding agencies like any other municipal police force. Yes there are the fat kids on segways too.
Who pays them?
The state, or the university?
If the university pays them then they are not real cops.
It's fairly obvious that Paterno knew, as did many others.
And this story isn't remotely over yet. A couple of Pittsburgh reporters tweeted last night that there's worse stuff to come. The rumor is pretty horrific. Keywords are "Second Mile" (Sandusky's charity), "kids", and "money." Hope to God it isn't true.
"Campus Police" generally refers to employees of the university, whether it's a private security firm hired by the university for doing security work or an actual security force for the campus with individuals screened and hired for that purpose.
There's also "campus Police" which are sworn law enforcement officers of the state/local government who are assigned to be what amounts to a link between the university's private police force and the public's police force.
Campus Police sometimes go out of their way to keep the campus Police in the dark if it's in the university's best interest, and the campus Police may not necessarily be the most reliable individual in some circumstances either.
gorgon wrote:It's fairly obvious that Paterno knew, as did many others.
And this story isn't remotely over yet. A couple of Pittsburgh reporters tweeted last night that there's worse stuff to come. The rumor is pretty horrific. Keywords are "Second Mile" (Sandusky's charity), "kids", and "money." Hope to God it isn't true.
I expect as much.
It's entirely likely this will lead to a pedophile ring and an iceburg situation of many children abused. He also adopted many children and was involved in several children's charities.
I can speak from personal experience. Campus cops are pawns of the university that pays them. If the university wants something quite and campus cops will keep it quiet.
If the university pays them then they are not real cops.
Utter nonsense. By this logic neither city police or sheriffs are "real" cops.
Kanluwen wrote:"Campus Police" generally refers to employees of the university, whether it's a private security firm hired by the university for doing security work or an actual security force for the campus with individuals screened and hired for that purpose.
There's also "campus Police" which are sworn law enforcement officers of the state/local government who are assigned to be what amounts to a link between the university's private police force and the public's police force.
Campus Police sometimes go out of their way to keep the campus Police in the dark if it's in the university's best interest, and the campus Police may not necessarily be the most reliable individual in some circumstances either.
I'm not sure the difference in punctuation is what you think it is.
For my part I only know the Campus police from Arizona and Montana state universities. Both employ sworn officers and have agreements with surrounding agencies allowing the Campus police to enforce state law off campus and local PD to enforce state law on campus, each only enforcing thier own specific laws individually.
My lazy Wikipedia link.
Campus Police or University police in the United States and Canada are often sworn police officers employed by a public school district, college or university to protect the campus and surrounding areas and the people who live on, work on and visit it.
My old university did not have "security officers", they had Campus Police. Sworn law enforcement officers, paid by the State of Oklahoma. Can pull you over and arrest you, write citations, and carry fancy guns on their belts.
The hospital that I work for is located on a university campus. They have a "campus security" who are not armed, do not have badges, and whose jacket says "security" on the back. They also have a "campus police" who are again sworn police officers, armed and everything. My hospital is actually a federal facility (and we have federal police officers of our own) and when gak hits the fan they will call on the University PD (which some are accusing of being rent-a-cops) to provide backup.
Most municipalities are actually pretty strict on who can call themselves "police"....
Kanluwen wrote:The thing you're referring to is what's commonly called "School Resource Officers" when you talk about the public school systems.
You are mistaken sir. We aren't talking about High School here.
Penn State Police Department wrote:
The University Police is governed by a state statute that gives our officers the same authority as municipal police officers.
gorgon wrote:It's fairly obvious that Paterno knew, as did many others.
And this story isn't remotely over yet. A couple of Pittsburgh reporters tweeted last night that there's worse stuff to come. The rumor is pretty horrific. Keywords are "Second Mile" (Sandusky's charity), "kids", and "money." Hope to God it isn't true.
I expect as much.
It's entirely likely this will lead to a pedophile ring and an iceburg situation of many children abused. He also adopted many children and was involved in several children's charities.
Yep. He didn't just suddenly get urges at age 55.
If this is as big as it appears to be, then a) there were likely many people who knew, and b) it's increasingly implausible that Paterno was in the dark. Especially when it seems that the rumors were floating around in State College for years.
Regarding "reporting to his superiors", JoePa had no real superiors at PSU. It might be hard to understand what kind of power he wielded at PSU and in the commonwealth if you aren't from PA. Back in 2004, the university president went to his house to ask him to retire. Paterno told them it wasn't happening and more or less threw them out of the house. Talkin' about the university president here.
Talk is that the other stuff may come out by the weekend. I have no love for PSU, but I certainly hope it's just rumor mill stuff.
Well, there's little chance that Paterno violated a criminal statute. Even if he did, the statute of limitations would protect him from prosectution.
But that's not the point.
This situation is as old as the legal system itself: what duty does a person have to use his power to prevent harm?
The law has historically been that most people have very little duty to get involved. The morals of society have historically said that to not stop evil is, in itself, immoral.
I think there's some serious soul searching that's being done, but it's being masked by outrage and hatred. The real question for all of us is, "what would I do in that situation."
Not, "what should I do." We all know that. It's easy to do the right thing when there are no consequences.
What this scandal shows is that even a person of great integrity, who stood above the sordid mess that is big college sports for decades, could stand idle during a moral crisis. Which is worrying for all of us, because if somebody like JoPa could falter, who else could?
There's a reason nobody is dicussing Sandusky. He's easy to dismiss as either a monster, a pervert, a very ill man, etc. He's the "other," the abnormal. He's clearly bad.
JoPa isn't. He's, by all accounts, a good man. Caring, generous, loyal. He's what we all want to be. That's why his failing is so hurtful.
Many positions that place you in charge of, or place you in contact with, vulnerable populations are often covered by mandatory reporter laws.
I have called both Child Protective Services and Adult Protective Services more often that I can count. I don't call peoples families, their friends, their bosses, or anything else. I don't even call the local police. I call the statewide hotline, tell them exactly what I learned, and they will take it from there. If they are concerned enough they will have a worker come with the police to remove/arrest pretty damn quickly, if not they will do a normal investigation. I will always err on the side of safety for the potential victim.
I don't know if his position had a legal mandate to report, from news reports it would seem so. But from common sense and an ethical sense, if you are made aware of a crime occurring you report it to the police.
Edit: US Department for Health and Human Services has this summary of state laws. PA is covered on page 43. It talks about "including but not limited to: School administrators, teachers, school nurses, social services workers, daycare center workers, or any other child • care or foster care workers". The question of course would be if this covers universities, or just High School and down.
SlaveToDorkness wrote:So if he reported it and never saw anything come of it he's totally in the clear?
If he reported it to the police and then to his boss AND HR through proper formal channels then yes. Otherwise no.
EDIT not pussy campus rent a cops. Real cops with real guns.
Maybe it's different where you live but here the Campus Police are real cops with real guns, and work in concert with the surrounding agencies like any other municipal police force. Yes there are the fat kids on segways too.
Who pays them?
The state, or the university?
If the university pays them then they are not real cops.
It does seem to be getting away from Joe making a mistake and whether or not he deserved to be fired (obliviously there is a case for both sides) and more about anger at a child molester, and how that anger is channeled. Joe and the entire staff should have to face up to what they are responsible for, but they shouldn't be lumped in with the actual criminal in this situation.
Ahtman wrote:It does seem to be getting away from Joe making a mistake and whether or not he deserved to be fired (obliviously there is a case for both sides) and more about anger at a child molester, and how that anger is channeled. Joe and the entire staff should have to face up to what they are responsible for, but they shouldn't be lumped in with the actual criminal in this situation.
True that, but nor should they be protected for what they didn't do. This was a cover up of serious long term crimes. He may not have had a legal duty to report (I'd argue that one. I can see a good prosecutor seeing if there's criminal conspiracy here) but he had a duty to the school to act appropriately. Fire his ass.
d-usa wrote:MaI don't know if his position had a legal mandate to report, from news reports it would seem so. But from common sense and an ethical sense, if you are made aware of a crime occurring you report it to the police.
Edit: US Department for Health and Human Services has this summary of state laws. PA is covered on page 43. It talks about "including but not limited to: School administrators, teachers, school nurses, social services workers, daycare center workers, or any other child • care or foster care workers". The question of course would be if this covers universities, or just High School and down.
According the article I linked to above, the actual law requires reporting either to the police or to a superior. JoPa certainly did the latter, and arguably the former.
Ahtman wrote:It does seem to be getting away from Joe making a mistake and whether or not he deserved to be fired (obliviously there is a case for both sides) and more about anger at a child molester, and how that anger is channeled. Joe and the entire staff should have to face up to what they are responsible for, but they shouldn't be lumped in with the actual criminal in this situation.
I know where you're coming from. But if we learn that Paterno and PSU were in full command of the facts and covered up the 1998 incident in exchange for Sandusky's retirement, that's a lot more than a "mistake" to me.
There's talk that this will come out eventually, and the timeline makes it plausible. Sandusky retired at age 55 in his coaching prime and at the time was thought to be JoePa's eventual successor. Months after that incident, he was out and never coached again.
Ahtman wrote:He failed to live up to his position and role of leader when he ignored a sexual predator in their midst to focus on a sports game.
The problem is that he didn't fail to live up to his position. He reported the guy to his superior (athletic director), which is what he was supposed to do. Coach Paterno had no obligation (either ethically or legally) to report the guy to the police.
If there was some evidence that Coach Paterno knew the Athletic Director was covering for this guy, maybe you could make the case that he had an ethical obligation to report to the authorities. But I haven't seen anything that supports that.
so if you knew of boys being raped you wouldn't have an ethical obligation to tell the authorities?
you have terrible ethics then
my ethical obligation would be to tell the boys fathers first, then the cops when he got what was coming to him first
d-usa wrote:MaI don't know if his position had a legal mandate to report, from news reports it would seem so. But from common sense and an ethical sense, if you are made aware of a crime occurring you report it to the police.
Edit: US Department for Health and Human Services has this summary of state laws. PA is covered on page 43. It talks about "including but not limited to: School administrators, teachers, school nurses, social services workers, daycare center workers, or any other child • care or foster care workers". The question of course would be if this covers universities, or just High School and down.
According the article I linked to above, the actual law requires reporting either to the police or to a superior. JoPa certainly did the latter, and arguably the former.
However thats the legal standard. the corporate standard is far higher, else you get whacked, which is what happened and is what is appropriate if you don't act properly.
d-usa wrote:But from common sense and an ethical sense, if you are made aware of a crime occurring you report it to the police.
Some of us can't do that, ethically speaking.
Are we speaking about scenarios where there is an implied sense of confidentiality (doctors/clergy/etc)?
If your client is the person committing the crime, then you are actually still required to report in order to protect the victim AFAIK. The knowledge of an acute and real threat outweighs the privilege of confidentiality.
If your client is the one being abused, then stuff does get more cloudy.
d-usa wrote:But from common sense and an ethical sense, if you are made aware of a crime occurring you report it to the police.
Some of us can't do that, ethically speaking.
Are we speaking about scenarios where there is an implied sense of confidentiality (doctors/clergy/etc)?
If your client is the person committing the crime, then you are actually still required to report in order to protect the victim AFAIK. The knowledge of an acute and real threat outweighs the privilege of confidentiality.
If your client is the one being abused, then stuff does get more cloudy.
Any specific scenario you are considering here?
Lawyers have no duty to inform authorities of any criminal acitivity, past, present, or future involving a confidence.
Ohio, at least, allows for the reporting of active or future crimes revealed in confidence, but not past.
Meaning, if somebody told me, in confidence, that they committed a horrible crime, I not only have no duty to inform, i would lose my license if I did so.
The clergy privilege works the same way legally (meaning no duty to report) as there is a 1st amendment issue as to the practice of religion. A Catholic Priest that breaches the seal of confession, for any reason, can be excommunicated, and even in a best case scenario is never allowed to hear confession again.
d-usa wrote:But from common sense and an ethical sense, if you are made aware of a crime occurring you report it to the police.
Some of us can't do that, ethically speaking.
Are we speaking about scenarios where there is an implied sense of confidentiality (doctors/clergy/etc)?
If your client is the person committing the crime, then you are actually still required to report in order to protect the victim AFAIK. The knowledge of an acute and real threat outweighs the privilege of confidentiality.
If your client is the one being abused, then stuff does get more cloudy.
Any specific scenario you are considering here?
Lawyers have no duty to inform authorities of any criminal acitivity, past, present, or future involving a confidence.
Ohio, at least, allows for the reporting of active or future crimes revealed in confidence, but not past.
Meaning, if somebody told me, in confidence, that they committed a horrible crime, I not only have no duty to inform, i would lose my license if I did so.
Interesting scenario that I did not consider. Does this apply to any random person that decides to pour out their heart to you, or do you have to have an attorney/client relationship with that person? If some random person that didn't know you were a lawyer was sitting in the bar next to you, doesn't know who you are or what you do, and in his drunken stupor decided that they killed someone (extreme scenario I know), would that qualify?
DIDM wrote:so if you knew of boys being raped you wouldn't have an ethical obligation to tell the authorities?
Depends on who told me.
I have had people tell me in confidence about crimes that they have committed. If I were to inform the authorities I would be in violation of my ethical duties as a lawyer and would probably be disbarred.
However, if someone were to say that they are going to commit a crime there may be a duty to report (although considering I'm subject to several sets of ethical rules, I could end up in trouble either way).
DIDM wrote:you have terrible ethics then
Says you. The people who determine them have decided that such an ethical rule is important to the sanctity of the legal system.
d-usa wrote:But from common sense and an ethical sense, if you are made aware of a crime occurring you report it to the police.
Some of us can't do that, ethically speaking.
Are we speaking about scenarios where there is an implied sense of confidentiality (doctors/clergy/etc)?
If your client is the person committing the crime, then you are actually still required to report in order to protect the victim AFAIK. The knowledge of an acute and real threat outweighs the privilege of confidentiality.
If your client is the one being abused, then stuff does get more cloudy.
Any specific scenario you are considering here?
Lawyers have no duty to inform authorities of any criminal acitivity, past, present, or future involving a confidence.
Ohio, at least, allows for the reporting of active or future crimes revealed in confidence, but not past.
Meaning, if somebody told me, in confidence, that they committed a horrible crime, I not only have no duty to inform, i would lose my license if I did so.
The clergy privilege works the same way legally (meaning no duty to report) as there is a 1st amendment issue as to the practice of religion. A Catholic Priest that breaches the seal of confession, for any reason, can be excommunicated, and even in a best case scenario is never allowed to hear confession again.
personally if I were a priest and told of a man raping boys and was excommunicated or never allowed to hear confession again I wouldn't really care. Being part of a club and having a clear conscious are 2 different things, one is a want, the other is more of a need. I could not sleep at night thinking that someone I knew could be out hurting someone and I could stop it. IMO God would rather you do the right thing and be kicked out of a club than let bad things happen to anybody. By not telling you are letting it continue.
I hope that this taints everyone involved as much as those poor boys are now tainted
d-usa wrote:
Interesting scenario that I did not consider. Does this apply to any random person that decides to pour out their heart to you, or do you have to have an attorney/client relationship with that person? If some random person that didn't know you were a lawyer was sitting in the bar next to you, doesn't know who you are or what you do, and in his drunken stupor decided that they killed someone (extreme scenario I know), would that qualify?
Nope. And it's not that extreme a situation, we spend a semester of law school going over this stuff. The general rule of thumb is that if the person talking to you thought, at the time, that they enjoyed attorney/client privilige, than keep your mouth shut.
I'll say this in general: lawyers tend to keep stuff they don't have a duty to report to themselves, just to protect themselves.
biccat wrote:
DIDM wrote:so if you knew of boys being raped you wouldn't have an ethical obligation to tell the authorities?
Depends on who told me.
I have had people tell me in confidence about crimes that they have committed. If I were to inform the authorities I would be in violation of my ethical duties as a lawyer and would probably be disbarred.
However, if someone were to say that they are going to commit a crime there may be a duty to report (although considering I'm subject to several sets of ethical rules, I could end up in trouble either way).
DIDM wrote:you have terrible ethics then
Says you. The people who determine them have decided that such an ethical rule is important to the sanctity of the legal system.
While biccat is correct on the ethics of the legal system, nothing in the Penn State story involved confidentiality. While it's an interesting tangent, I think that it's a stretch to call a decision to not investigate rape in your progam a sound ethical decision.
DIDM wrote:personally if I were a priest and told of a man raping boys and was excommunicated or never allowed to hear confession again I wouldn't really care. Being part of a club and having a clear conscious are 2 different things, one is a want, the other is more of a need. I could not sleep at night thinking that someone I knew could be out hurting someone and I could stop it. IMO God would rather you do the right thing and be kicked out of a club than let bad things happen to anybody. By not telling you are letting it continue.
The reason we have privileges isn't to protect perpetrators, it's to encourage communication. Lawyers can't tell on their murder clients because then clients wouldn't tell lawyers everything they need to know to defend them. Doctors can't relate medical information because then people would be discouraged from telling doctors everything about their conditions. Priests protect the confidences of the penitent because it encourages confession.
Without these types of confidential communications society would be worse off.
DIDM wrote:personally if I were a priest and told of a man raping boys and was excommunicated or never allowed to hear confession again I wouldn't really care. Being part of a club and having a clear conscious are 2 different things, one is a want, the other is more of a need. I could not sleep at night thinking that someone I knew could be out hurting someone and I could stop it. IMO God would rather you do the right thing and be kicked out of a club than let bad things happen to anybody. By not telling you are letting it continue.
Well... I can't speak for all professionals, but I'll say that for myself, there is very little I'd consider more valuable than my ability to practice law. You make a choice to follow the ethics of that profession, and if you don't like it, you know the consequences.
Confession, not unlike attorney/client privilege, works for overall betterment of society. If you can't trust you priest or lawyer to keep quiet, you won't tell him things, and then he can't help you.
I hope that this taints everyone involved as much as those poor boys are now tainted
we/they were not sitting in a law office, and no one was getting paid to represent anyone.
is your lawyer brain always on? does everything that happen appear to go on in a court of law for you?
if you were told randomly that a guy was raping boys, you better damn well have an ethical obligation to tell someone, if not you aren't human, you have been tainted by the chaos.
d-usa wrote:
Interesting scenario that I did not consider. Does this apply to any random person that decides to pour out their heart to you, or do you have to have an attorney/client relationship with that person? If some random person that didn't know you were a lawyer was sitting in the bar next to you, doesn't know who you are or what you do, and in his drunken stupor decided that they killed someone (extreme scenario I know), would that qualify?
Nope. And it's not that extreme a situation, we spend a semester of law school going over this stuff. The general rule of thumb is that if the person talking to you thought, at the time, that they enjoyed attorney/client privilige, than keep your mouth shut.
I'll say this in general: lawyers tend to keep stuff they don't have a duty to report to themselves, just to protect themselves.
(didn't quote the rest of your post to avoid a long post pyramid)
So the closest scenario that we could come up with in this story involving lawyers would be if you guys ran some lawyer summer retreat with interns, and one of your paralegals came to you and told you that he witnessed one of your partners sodomizing an intern in the shower. (really not trying to troll or argue, I hope it doesn't come across that way)
I would think that in that scenario you would report?
Now if the sodomizing lawyer told you first, then we would have the confidentiality thing again, I understand that.
AustonT wrote:Has anyone else noticed the guy who told JoPa still has his job at PSU despite the fact he basically did what JoPa did and tell his boss?
Yeah, this was a tough one. Not only did he not report it to the police, he didn't do anything to stop it when he saw it in person.
I'm going to give more of a pass to that guy, if only because he was a grad assistant who didn't want to get blackballed for ratting out a respected former coach.
I wouldn't want to be in his moral shoes right now, knowing exactly how much further things went due to his inaction, but this is one of those "buck stops here" moments.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote: (didn't quote the rest of your post to avoid a long post pyramid)
So the closest scenario that we could come up with in this story involving lawyers would be if you guys ran some lawyer summer retreat with interns, and one of your paralegals came to you and told you that he witnessed one of your partners sodomizing an intern in the shower. (really not trying to troll or argue, I hope it doesn't come across that way)
I would think that in that scenario you would report?
Now if the sodomizing lawyer told you first, then we would have the confidentiality thing again, I understand that.
Well, I don't work in a firm, but I understand the analogy.
This is something I've been wrestling with alot as this story broke. If I were a senior managing partner, and a paralegal reported a rape by retired partner of the firm... I dunno. I'd probably do what JoPa did, to be honest. Report it to my suprerior. I don't know. I know I wouldn't want to get involved.
How is he more sacrosanct than an 80 year old man who told the University head of Campus PD? Did we expect a 70 something JoPa to don his cape and mask and take up the mantle of Batman?
AustonT wrote:How is he more sacrosanct than an 80 year old man who told the University head of Campus PD? Did we expect a 70 something JoPa to don his cape and mask and take up the mantle of Batman?
DIDM wrote:Where the hell does a lawyer fit in here?
we/they were not sitting in a law office, and no one was getting paid to represent anyone.
is your lawyer brain always on? does everything that happen appear to go on in a court of law for you?
if you were told randomly that a guy was raping boys, you better damn well have an ethical obligation to tell someone, if not you aren't human, you have been tainted by the chaos.
Well, there was some cross wires, and people began discussing the nature of duty to report vs. duty of confidentiality.
But, yes. Once you start practicing law, you start thinking differently. It's the nature of the beast.
And dont' confuse an ethical duty with a moral one.
AustonT wrote:How is he more sacrosanct than an 80 year old man who told the University head of Campus PD? Did we expect a 70 something JoPa to don his cape and mask and take up the mantle of Batman?
He's not more sancrosanct, just less culpable.
Most people aren't willing to report a trusted and respected person to the police. It's human nature.
Polonius wrote:This is something I've been wrestling with alot as this story broke. If I were a senior managing partner, and a paralegal reported a rape by retired partner of the firm... I dunno. I'd probably do what JoPa did, to be honest. Report it to my suprerior. I don't know. I know I wouldn't want to get involved.
We've got the advantage of discussing this with the state ethics board.
If I were in this situation, I'd certainly get a second opinion.
AustonT wrote:How is he more sacrosanct than an 80 year old man who told the University head of Campus PD? Did we expect a 70 something JoPa to don his cape and mask and take up the mantle of Batman?
He's not a popular football coach, obviously.
I also would not be shocked if JoPa knew of the rumors regarding Sandusky, including the report in the late 90's that the campus police were involved in.
The more authority you have, and the more information you have, the more morally culpable you are for the consequences of your inaction.
JoPa also could have rolled and Sandusky and not endangered his career (quite the opposite, apparently).
The eyewitness could have seriously mess up his career by calling the police. That sounds like a terrible set of priorities, but careers like that are hard to come by.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
biccat wrote:
Polonius wrote:This is something I've been wrestling with alot as this story broke. If I were a senior managing partner, and a paralegal reported a rape by retired partner of the firm... I dunno. I'd probably do what JoPa did, to be honest. Report it to my suprerior. I don't know. I know I wouldn't want to get involved.
We've got the advantage of discussing this with the state ethics board.
If I were in this situation, I'd certainly get a second opinion.
Very true.
I guess... more than anything, I'd want to just not deal with it, if that makes sense. It'd be easier to just report it, and pretend it didn't happen and go back to work.
I could never be a lawyer, it just seems like you would have to wrangle with your own morality at times. Even the ones we would class into "good" lawyers (aka: DA and such) who seem to get pushed into meeting numbers and convictions and may end up throwing innocent people under the bus to get convictions.
Of course defense attorneys are always evil
But honestly, I respect the profession, and I believe that even the biggest scumbag in the world is only accused of being the biggest scumbag in the world and deserves a fair trial. If you don't give the slime of the earth a trial then the system that protects all of us simply isn't working. So thanks for doing a job that I don't think I could ever do.
I am happy that my job is a lot more clear cut with the hole duty to report business and I don't have to worry about having to make decisions like that.
AustonT wrote:Has anyone else noticed the guy who told JoPa still has his job at PSU despite the fact he basically did what JoPa did and tell his boss?
Yeah, this was a tough one. Not only did he not report it to the police, he didn't do anything to stop it when he saw it in person.
I'm going to give more of a pass to that guy, if only because he was a grad assistant who didn't want to get blackballed for ratting out a respected former coach.
I wouldn't want to be in his moral shoes right now, knowing exactly how much further things went due to his inaction, but this is one of those "buck stops here" moments.
There was talk that the Board of Trustees was treading carefully regarding McQueary because he might be protected under PA's whistleblower law. You guys know the law better than me...I'm just passing along what I heard.
I can't give the man any benefit of the doubt given that Sandusky was on campus all the time after he retired, sometimes with kids in tow. In fact, a few years back PSU told Sandusky not to bring any more kids to campus. Which is more or less the same thing as saying "just don't do it here." How can McQueary have lived with himself knowing what he knew and seeing that monster parade around campus with children?
gorgon wrote:There was talk that the Board of Trustees was treading carefully regarding McQueary because he might be protected under PA's whistleblower law. You guys know the law better than me...I'm just passing along what I heard.
That makes sense. There was also apparently some talk that McQueary was promoted partially to help keep him quiet. By all accounts he's done a good job, so that seems less likely, but it still stinks.
As for whistleblower protection, bascially that prevents a company from retaliating when a person reports a wrong doing. Since McQuery did, in fact, report it, any later termination might be seen as retaliation (after all, his report lead to the scandal).
Firing him for not doing more would also set a chilling precedent to junior staffers nationwide. Imagine losing your not because after telling your boss about a problem, you didn't than call the cops! No organization wants to encourage whistleblowing!
I can't give the man any benefit of the doubt given that Sandusky was on campus all the time after he retired, sometimes with kids in tow. In fact, a few years back PSU told Sandusky not to bring any more kids to campus. Which is more or less the same thing as saying "just don't do it here." How can McQueary have lived with himself knowing what you knew and seeing that monster parade around campus with children?
biccat wrote:Some guy that worked for Joe Paterno molested some kids. The coach may have known about it (although IIRC he's the one who reported him). The school fired him.
Joe Paterno is the greatest college football coach in the history of college football, and for him to be thrown out on his behind and remembered solely for this scandal is outrageous.
I'm not a fan of Penn State, but he deserved far more than what he got from the Board.
B, i don't think i've agreed with anything you've ever posted on Dakka. today is no different. i'm sure you're going to lose lots of sleep over that.
JoPa's (and frankly your) position on this is indefensible, period.
You hear that a child is being/has been raped, and you:
1) stop it
2) make sure it never happens again.
everything happening to JoPa is self inflicted. and he'll be lucky if his job is all that is taken.
That's the part that bothers me. He told JoPa and then saw Sandusky and these kids for YEARS afterwards and didn't do anything else...sounds a lot like what JoPa did to me, and he was far more personally involved in the situation.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
alarmingrick wrote: everything happening to JoPa is self inflicted. and he'll be lucky if his job is all that is taken.
AustonT wrote:That's the part that bothers me. He told JoPa and then saw Sandusky and these kids for YEARS afterwards and didn't do anything else...sounds a lot like what JoPa did to me, and he was far more personally involved in the situation.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
alarmingrick wrote: everything happening to JoPa is self inflicted. and he'll be lucky if his job is all that is taken.
are you threatening violence against JoPa?
How and the hell did you get ME threatening him, out of that?
No, i mean legally speaking. I mean 8 + families(at this point) sueing him in civil court.
Generally, "he'll be lucky if that's all they do" is a treat.
I think you'd have to stretch pretty far to find any kind of civil suit against JoPa relating to these incidents, as the earliest reported awareness he had was after Sandusky was no longer an employee of PSU. That's purely an opinion and not legally grounded.
AustonT wrote:Generally, "he'll be lucky if that's all they do" is a treat.
I think you'd have to stretch pretty far to find any kind of civil suit against JoPa relating to these incidents, as the earliest reported awareness he had was after Sandusky was no longer an employee of PSU. That's purely an opinion and not legally grounded.
So now i speak for a vigilante Penn State group?
I'd say knowing about something that happened 8 YEARS ago, and not telling anyone other than your boss would be pretty damning in itself.
AustonT wrote:Generally, "he'll be lucky if that's all they do" is a treat.
I think you'd have to stretch pretty far to find any kind of civil suit against JoPa relating to these incidents, as the earliest reported awareness he had was after Sandusky was no longer an employee of PSU. That's purely an opinion and not legally grounded.
There was an incident reported in 1998, while Sandusky was employed. Soon after the fact, he was no longer employed. Coincidence? You decide...at least until the investigative reporters dig it all up.
alarmingrick wrote:
I'd say knowing about something that happened 8 YEARS ago, and not telling anyone other than your boss would be pretty damning in itself.
I find it comically amusing that no matter how much of a douche you are, people love you if your good at stuff.
It doesn't matter if your a singer, artist, director, sportsman.. If your the top of your game you can get caught plugging an 8 year old and people will still roar your name with passion.
I'm a proper bastard as well and people love me, merely because im handsome and have a penis like a baby's arm.
alarmingrick wrote:
I'd say knowing about something that happened 8 YEARS ago, and not telling anyone other than your boss would be pretty damning in itself.
It is isn't it?
I never said i thought he was innocent either.....
Just that i don't see him being held up as some Saint like JoPa.
alarmingrick wrote:B, i don't think i've agreed with anything you've ever posted on Dakka. today is no different. i'm sure you're going to lose lots of sleep over that.
No, actually I'm not.
See, I accept that people will disagree with me. I don't call their disagreement "indefensible." I don't take it as a personal insult that some people think differently than I do, or have different personal, professional, religious, or moral perspectives.
So I'm not going to lose any sleep because some anonymous internet Joe Schmoe disagrees with me.
mattyrm wrote: It doesn't matter if your a singer, artist, director, sportsman.. If your the top of your game you can get caught plugging an 8 year old and people will still roar your name with passion.
I'm pretty sure that no one was roaring Sandusky's name with passion.
mattyrm wrote: It doesn't matter if your a singer, artist, director, sportsman.. If your the top of your game you can get caught plugging an 8 year old and people will still roar your name with passion.
I'm pretty sure that no one was roaring Sandusky's name with passion.
Pretty poor choice of words, imho.
Seeing that children were raped, i doubt there was much passion.
I hate to say it but Ahtman's 100% right on this. Is it just me or is when you see someone with a kid ina shower, you like call the cops after you've beaten the offender to death? You don't go off and report it and have it forgotten. This is gak crazy.
This! A thousand times this. And now Penn state is rioting? You're an embarassment to our entire civilization penn state.
The district attorney that investigated the incidents in 1998 (and was on the record as wantign to bring numerous high profle Pennstate types to justice) has gone missing and his laptop was found in a river with the hard drive missing.
It is also rumored that the charity foundation for young boys that the predator ran might have been used to cover sex trade. His golf tournament fund raisers may have been used as a cover to hook up pedaphiles with kids (high paying boosters may have been paying for more then the chance to play in a celebrity golf event...).
And Pennstate made millions off of this guys fund raising...
CT GAMER wrote:This story goes deeper then it looks at first.
The district attorney that investigated the incidents in 1998 (and was on the record as wantign to bring numerous high profle Pennstate types to justice) has gone missing and his laptop was found in a river with the hard drive missing.
It is also rumored that the charity foundation for young boys that the predator ran might have been used to cover sex trade. His golf tournament fund raisers may have been used as a cover to hook up pedaphiles with kids (high paying boosters may have been paying for more then the chance to play in a celebrity golf event...).
And Pennstate made millions off of this guys fund raising...
CT GAMER wrote:This story goes deeper then it looks at first.
The district attorney that investigated the incidents in 1998 (and was on the record as wantign to bring numerous high profle Pennstate types to justice) has gone missing and his laptop was found in a river with the hard drive missing.
It is also rumored that the charity foundation for young boys that the predator ran might have been used to cover sex trade. His golf tournament fund raisers may have been used as a cover to hook up pedaphiles with kids (high paying boosters may have been paying for more then the chance to play in a celebrity golf event...).
And Pennstate made millions off of this guys fund raising...
Yeah, there are also rumors that Second Mile was a slush fund for PSU football. This might answer the question why PSU covered for Sandusky and enabled his behavior...because it was a mutually assured destruction scenario. At least if you put football legacies and image ahead of basic human decency.
The DA story has been out there for a while. I tend to think he ran afoul of some drug dealers, etc. Still, it does appear things are going to get worse for PSU and everyone involved. Lots of bad rumors floating around. Including that families were paid off to remain silent.
CT GAMER wrote:This story goes deeper then it looks at first.
The district attorney that investigated the incidents in 1998 (and was on the record as wantign to bring numerous high profle Pennstate types to justice) has gone missing and his laptop was found in a river with the hard drive missing.
It is also rumored that the charity foundation for young boys that the predator ran might have been used to cover sex trade. His golf tournament fund raisers may have been used as a cover to hook up pedaphiles with kids (high paying boosters may have been paying for more then the chance to play in a celebrity golf event...).
And Pennstate made millions off of this guys fund raising...
Do you have a link?
This is stuff I have heard dscussed on talk/sports radio for the past few days. Thus no links.
CT GAMER wrote:This story goes deeper then it looks at first.
The district attorney that investigated the incidents in 1998 (and was on the record as wantign to bring numerous high profle Pennstate types to justice) has gone missing and his laptop was found in a river with the hard drive missing.
It is also rumored that the charity foundation for young boys that the predator ran might have been used to cover sex trade. His golf tournament fund raisers may have been used as a cover to hook up pedaphiles with kids (high paying boosters may have been paying for more then the chance to play in a celebrity golf event...).
And Pennstate made millions off of this guys fund raising...
CT GAMER wrote:This story goes deeper then it looks at first.
The district attorney that investigated the incidents in 1998 (and was on the record as wantign to bring numerous high profle Pennstate types to justice) has gone missing and his laptop was found in a river with the hard drive missing.
It is also rumored that the charity foundation for young boys that the predator ran might have been used to cover sex trade. His golf tournament fund raisers may have been used as a cover to hook up pedaphiles with kids (high paying boosters may have been paying for more then the chance to play in a celebrity golf event...).
And Pennstate made millions off of this guys fund raising...
He was saying no one is saying Sandusky s name in passion they are rallying around Paterno
I know. and it was a HORRID choice of words given the gravity of the situation, IMHO.
I do read and comprehend the big and the little words.
PS
as to the McQueary pic you posted. I've heard so much crap flying over this today that
i wouldn't be surprised to see him be the next, and probably not the last, to go over this
nightmare. I'm really surprised he hasn't resigned, let alone get fired. If i found out what he
did, and didn't do the correct thing, i'd have a hard time living with my actions. or lack there of.
look guys the fact of the matter is Joe Paterno knew that it happened. He knew, and he sat there and did nothing. Like a coward. If I was dictator of america i would jail Paterno too, (it might not be the "legal" thing to do, but in my humble opinion he could use 6 months in a low security prison to think about it)
I mean common guys what would you do if you saw someone being raped? walk away?
I wasn't saying paterno saw it, I'm saying he knew about it. I understand that you like the football coach. But he's a person and people are capable of making the wrong decision. Because he failed to act (along with others) more people had to have a hard road of recover. Paterno deserved to be fired. I thought he was a good guy, but he has no honor that i can see of.
Why didn't McQuery just call the police immediately?
He should have.
But Big Joe is second only to Jesus Christ around those parts, and not much happened without his consent in those days if you wanted to keep your big time job in the big time that is/was Penn State footbal.
Penn State ininiated a cover up as directed by Big Joe.
The campus police in fact knew everything but did not arrest or press any charges.
Police also listened to the guy confess to one mother and yet still made no arrests nor took any action.
Why didn't McQuery just call the police immediately?
He should have.
But Big Joe is second only to Jesus Christ around those parts, and not much happened without his consent in those days if you wanted to keep your big time job in the big time that is/was Penn State footbal.
Penn State ininiated a cover up as directed by Big Joe.
The campus police in fact knew everything but did not arrest or press any charges.
Police also listened to the guy confess to one mother and yet still made no arrests nor took any action.
Why didn't McQuery just call the police immediately?
He should have.
But Big Joe is second only to Jesus Christ around those parts, and not much happened without his consent in those days if you wanted to keep your big time job in the big time that is/was Penn State footbal.
Penn State ininiated a cover up as directed by Big Joe.
The campus police in fact knew everything but did not arrest or press any charges.
Police also listened to the guy confess to one mother and yet still made no arrests nor took any action.
This stuff has been discussed for days on talk radio/sports radio, written about in numerous blogs, and news columns. Daily show was a little late to the party tbh...
CT GAMER wrote:Penn State ininiated a cover up as directed by Big Joe.
The campus police in fact knew everything but did not arrest or press any charges.
Police also listened to the guy confess to one mother and yet still made no arrests nor took any action.
Interesting, I don't suppose you have any support for this.
If Paterno did direct a cover-up (one might even say it's a conspiracy), then he should lose his job and go to jail. If the campus police knew what was going on and didn't contact the police, they should lose their jobs and go to jail. If the cops heard this guy confess and didn't take any action, they should lose their jobs and go to jail.
CT GAMER wrote:Penn State ininiated a cover up as directed by Big Joe.
The campus police in fact knew everything but did not arrest or press any charges.
Police also listened to the guy confess to one mother and yet still made no arrests nor took any action.
Interesting, I don't suppose you have any support for this.
If Paterno did direct a cover-up (one might even say it's a conspiracy), then he should lose his job and go to jail. If the campus police knew what was going on and didn't contact the police, they should lose their jobs and go to jail. If the cops heard this guy confess and didn't take any action, they should lose their jobs and go to jail.
bicatt I assume with as much time as you spend on the internet that you know how to google some of the massive amounts of stories, reports and discusssion that has happened in just the past few days on this, many of which discuss the points I made above if you really wanted to research the case.
But since you are struggling here is a link to one very interesting piece for starters: part of the Grand Jury report that was generated in one of the prior investigations that was then buried:
I don't know about you, but if I have an employee, and if that employee has been the subject of a grand jury investigation for child sexual abuse, and other employees have reported to me seeing him rape children in my own facility, I certainly don't continue to allow him to be in my facility.
The predator was still working out and showering in the Penn State Facility up until last week, and given an office, etc.
This column lays out the timeline going back to the ninties for those not up to speed on how far back this story goes, or the scope of penn State's/ Joes involvement:
CT GAMER wrote:biccat I assume with as much time as you spend on the internet that you know how to google some of the massive amounts of stories, reports and discusssion that has happened in just the past few days on this, many of which discuss the points I made above if you really wanted to research the case.
I've read quite a bit about this case, and haven't seen anything even close to the massive Paterno-centric conspiracy you claimed. Like I said upthread, if there is new information that comes out about Paterno's involvement (yes, I've seen the grand jury report) I'm happy to change my mind. But you didn't provide any new information.
(fixed name in quote)
CT GAMER wrote:I don't know about you, but if I have an employee, and if that employee has been the subject of a grand jury investigation for child sexual abuse, and other employees have reported to me seeing him rape children in my own facility, I certainly don't continue to allow him to be in my facility.
I agree completely. In fact, even if he wasn't my employee (and Sandusky wasn't Paterno's employee), I'd make every effort to get him the hell out of the facility or at the very least have him supervised every minute that he's in the facility.
But this isn't about what I would do, it's about what Paterno did.
CT GAMER wrote:biccat I assume with as much time as you spend on the internet that you know how to google some of the massive amounts of stories, reports and discusssion that has happened in just the past few days on this, many of which discuss the points I made above if you really wanted to research the case.
I've read quite a bit about this case, and haven't seen anything even close to the massive Paterno-centric conspiracy you claimed. Like I said upthread, if there is new information that comes out about Paterno's involvement (yes, I've seen the grand jury report) I'm happy to change my mind. But you didn't provide any new information.
I'm honestly not sure what you're talking about.
Sandusky is Paterno's DC in 1998. Has been for quite some time. Everyone sees him as the likely heir to JoePa's coaching gig. In 1998, Sandusky allegedly has inappropriate sexual contact with a kid in the PSU showers. Two State College Police detectives eavesdrop on conversations between Sandusky and the victim's mother, in which Sandusky admits to wrongdoing. PA Department of Public Welfare investigators interview Sandusky, who admits wrongdoing to them.
Paterno tells Sandusky he's not getting the head coaching job sometime in 1998/99. Paterno is reported to have known about the 1998 incident investigation.
The same thing, only worse, happens in 2002. He gets an eye witness report from a 28 year-old graduate assistant coach. Said coach, by the way, is a coward. That's two reported incidents in four years. JoePa does nothing beyond the legal minimum in the nine years subsequent, despite Sandusky being a fixture of the PSU football complex. Sandusky's no longer JoePa's employee, but...so what? Who cares?
I've drawn the conclusion that JoePa, along with a hell of a lot of other people, made the conscious decision to protect the Penn State brand rather than defenseless boys.
As far as the ethics arguments...sorry, but no. If one of my employees reports that he just saw Brad raping Jen out back, I don't kick it up the chain. I call the cops, then I call my boss. Things might work differently in the very, very, very few professions that have laws to protect confidentiality, but out in the rest of the world, you report suspected criminal activity to the cops.
I've drawn the conclusion that JoePa, along with a hell of a lot of other people, made the conscious decision to protect the Penn State brand rather than defenseless boys.
And that is the most disgusting aspect of this story. Multiple people had a chance to report what was going on, to confront the predator, and make a general stink, and instead they chose to dummy up and forget in the interest of Penn State Football ( a multi-million dollar enterprise).
On top of that people with the power to remove him allowed him to continue to have access to the facilities and associate with the program up until last week when the feth began to hit the fan.
We saw this general lack of common sense and derranged loyalty in the video footage of moronic Penn students chanting Joe's name and ignoring the crimes against children that have been on the news in the past 48 hours and we will likely see the circus continue on Saturday at the game.
Personally I hope the morons riot and get clubbed down by police...
It appears that Sandusky was recruiting for PSU as recently as this spring. I believe that's an NCAA violation, but more importantly it's pretty weird that he was still representing the university even with the grand jury investigation underway.
Of course, he was the commencement keynote speaker at PSU as recently as 2007, years after he was told by PSU not to bring kids to campus anymore.
Here's a good summary of the overall story from the paper that's been leading the charge (IMO they'll win the Pulitzer). Be prepared to get upset and angry.
gorgon wrote:It appears that Sandusky was recruiting for PSU as recently as this spring. I believe that's an NCAA violation, but more importantly it's pretty weird that he was still representing the university even with the grand jury investigation underway.
Of course, he was the commencement keynote speaker at PSU as recently as 2007, years after he was told by PSU not to bring kids to campus anymore.
Here's a good summary of the overall story from the paper that's been leading the charge (IMO they'll win the Pulitzer). Be prepared to get upset and angry.
So McQueary can break up a knife fight between 2 college football athletes, but couldn't stop an old man from raping a young boy? Wow.
i really, really don't see how he lives with himself after that?
Thanks for the links gorgon. Pennlive was a great article.
I hate to say it but Ahtman's 100% right on this. Is it just me or is when you see someone with a kid ina shower, you like call the cops after you've beaten the offender to death? You don't go off and report it and have it forgotten. This is gak crazy.
This! A thousand times this. And now Penn state is rioting? You're an embarassment to our entire civilization penn state.
Agreed. Did you know at one point, Pennsylvania had more militias per capita than any location in the US?
The judge who gave Sandusky a bargain basement bail (1/5th of what prosecution seeked) donated to and worked for his "charity". Quite the tangled web down there.
KamikazeCanuck wrote:The judge who gave Sandusky a bargain basement bail (1/5th of what prosecution seeked) donated to and worked for his "charity". Quite the tangled web down there.
Money is like water on pavement, and football there is big money. It is so pervasive it would probably be hard to find anyone in some decently high office that isn't connected in some way to the program.
