Video: Savages riot over Paterno’s firing at Penn State as scandal threatens to get worse; Update: PSU students plan vigil, fundraiser for sex-abuse victims

posted at 3:42 pm on November 10, 2011 by Allahpundit

Is it worth passing along a rumor about where this might be heading? Wait, let me rephrase. Is it worth passing along a rumor about where this might be heading if it’s being pushed by a guy who saw the whole Sandusky scandal coming back in April?

Just how vast was this vast conspiracy of silence?

“I can give you a rumor and I can give you something I think might happen,” [Pittsburgh radio host Mark] Madden told John Dennis and Gerry Callahan. “I hear there’s a rumor that there will be a more shocking development from the Second Mile Foundation — and hold on to your stomachs, boys, this is gross, I will use the only language I can — that Jerry Sandusky and Second Mile were pimping out young boys to rich donors. That was being investigated by two prominent columnists even as I speak.”…

“The other thing I think that may eventually become uncovered, and I talked about this in my original article back in April, is that I think they’ll find out that Jerry Sandusky was told that he had to retire in exchange for a cover-up,” Madden said. “If you look at the timeline, that makes perfect sense, doesn’t it?

“My opinion is when Sandusky quit, everybody knew — not just at Penn State,” Madden added. “I think it was a very poorly kept secret about college football in general, and that is why he never coached in college football again and retired at the relatively young age of 55. [That's] young for a coach, certainly.”

What he’s suggesting here, plainly, is that Sandusky might have founded his charity in order to create a conveyor belt of underprivileged kids for him (and others?) to molest. If that’s true, he’s one of the most diabolical predators in American history. And Madden’s totally right about the oddness of Sandusky retiring and then never catching on anywhere as a head coach. If you don’t follow football, you might be under the impression that he was some random assistant to Paterno at PSU. Not so: He was one of the most celebrated assistant coaches in America, having won two national titles and two awards as national assistant of the year. He was the guy who turned Penn State into “Linebacker U.” An assistant that renowned is normally a lock to be head coach somewhere at the NCAA level or in the NFL, but Sandusky drifted into retirement in middle age and somehow stayed there, which I guess freed him up to spend more time on his “charity work.” That doesn’t prove that other programs knew through the grapevine what Sandusky was up to and kept mum — he’d been investigated in 1998, a year before his very-coincidentally-timed retirement, so maybe that was enough to scare them away — but if I’m the local U.S. Attorney, I’d sure like to know what was circulating on the rumor circuit among national coaching staffs at the time.

Here’s video of Penn State students going berserk last night at the news that their school allegedly covered up for a serial child rapist for years. No no, just kidding: They went berserk over the fact that Paterno had to end his coaching career a few games early. Fun fact: The sister of one of Sandusky’s alleged victims is now a junior at PSU and keeps hearing students on campus making jokes about being “Sanduskied.” So there’s your status report on what the Leaders of Tomorrow are up to these days. As further reading, I recommend this John Scalzi post zeroing in on the cowardice of those involved in not doing more to stop Sandusky when they could. Assistant coach Mike McQueary, who allegedly walked in on Sandusky raping a boy, will actually be coaching this weekend if you can believe it. I’d never defend him, but every time I read about his reaction during that incident, I think of the Milgram experiments. McQueary was PSU’s quarterback in the late 90s, when Sandusky was still on staff and already established as a legendary defensive coordinator. When he walked in on him in the showers with the boy, he was face to face with a consummate authority figure in the act of doing something atrocious. I don’t think he left the scene out of cowardice, I think he left because, like Milgram’s subjects, he defaulted to authority even in the midst of grave immorality, convincing himself that what had just happened somehow couldn’t be quite as horrible as it appeared. (It’s telling that his first move after catching Sandusky in the act was to go talk to his father.) He’ll hear about it every day for the rest of his life, needless to say.

Update: Read Deadspin’s post offering three reasons to be skeptical of the rumor being pushed by Madden — and one reason not to be.

Update: Penn State students who still have their moral bearings are planning to undo some of the damage done last night with a candlelight vigil for Sandusky’s alleged victims and a fundraiser for sex-abuse charities.

While some Penn State students rioted in downtown State College last night, others began to plan a candlelight vigil for Friday night and to help alumni raise money to help survivors of sexual abuse. Some students changed their Facebook profile photo from something football-related to an image of a candle, while others wore light blue lapel ribbons.

“I’ve heard many, many people express that not enough is being done for the sexual assault victims,” said Kyle Harris, 21, a senior public relations major from Massachusetts who is helping to plan the vigil. “We want to support these victims. We’re just horrified.”

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

As pointless as rewriting Jersey Shore endings… « Finding Ponies…

Comments

Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 5 6 7

…that a theft law clear someone of theft because they don’t fit the law’s definition of a thief.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:20 PM

…that a theft law doesn’t clear someone…

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:21 PM

NO DUH. Isn’t that what everyone has been trying to tell YOU?

Missy on November 10, 2011 at 9:19 PM

Not at all, Missy. Plenty of people have been claiming that Paterno would have been ok if he had merely reported the case to police.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:22 PM

And far too many people in our society feel justified in their actions merely because the actions are legal. Far too many.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:09 PM

This forum concedes this point. However, it is a lame point that is irrelevant. Now that you’ve been granted the point, please stop repeating it as if it matters. It doesn’t.

Nobody here gives a crap what internal motivation led Paterno to let a scumbag off with a slap on the wrist for raping 10 year old boys under his nose. His thought process is really not relevant, as there is no such thought process that justifies his inaction. So PLEASE stop repeating it.

deadrody on November 10, 2011 at 9:22 PM

I have no idea what you are trying to accomplish here, but I refuse to dance to your tune any longer. This is just sick.

Missy on November 10, 2011 at 9:19 PM

Are you an idiot? How exactly is it sick? I’ve been asking people to define what they believe was Paterno’s obligation. Very few people were able to answer that question. I’ve answered what I would have done. I’ve stated that I don’t think Paterno did enough. So how exactly is it sick? What’s wrong with you?

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:24 PM

Now that you’ve been granted the point, please stop repeating it as if it matters. It doesn’t.

deadrody on November 10, 2011 at 9:22 PM

Please stop telling me what to stop repeating.

Nobody here gives a crap what internal motivation led Paterno to let a scumbag off with a slap on the wrist

This is obviously untrue. Plenty of people have been making claims about his motivation in all of these related threads.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:26 PM

Plenty of people have been claiming that Paterno would have been ok if he had merely reported the case to police.

Nice try, you try baiting people all thread to give you the exact little answer you want so you can pounce with some obscure law that doesn’t even apply to Paterno.

Keep playing your little legalese gotcha games.

It doesn’t change the fact that Paterno enabled children to be raped on his campus without consequence.

Pablo Honey on November 10, 2011 at 9:26 PM

There’s a whole world of reality situated between WANTING a cover-up and WANTING Sanduskey’s head. One is apathy. Paterno might not have been trying to cover-up anything. Paterno was definitely not trying to protect Sanduskey. Paterno was probably too self-centered to care to do anything more than dump this problem into the laps of university administrators.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:15 PM

Again, does.not.matter. You are obsessed with Paterno’s mindset. Nobody else here cares what his mindset is. His inaction is inexcusable. I don’t care who he was trying to protect, how big his ego is, none of it. At worst he was an active participant in a coverup, at best he the coverup went on with his tacit approval through inaction.

deadrody on November 10, 2011 at 9:26 PM

Paterno told only the athletic director. It was McQueary who told the VP.

Scrutineer on November 10, 2011 at 7:40 PM

Page 8 of the grand jury report.

Send_Me on November 10, 2011 at 9:27 PM

Then that would make you an idiot.
Knucklehead on November 10, 2011 at 7:14 PM

Please explain without the ad hominems. Thanks.

Send_Me on November 10, 2011 at 9:30 PM

Nice try, you try baiting people all thread to give you the exact little answer you want so you can pounce…

Pablo Honey on November 10, 2011 at 9:26 PM

I didn’t do anything so that I could pounce.

with some obscure law that doesn’t even apply to Paterno.

Well, that’s the states only reporting law so if it doesn’t apply to Paterno, then nothing does.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:31 PM

You are obsessed with Paterno’s mindset.

deadrody on November 10, 2011 at 9:26 PM

I’m not obsessed with Paterno’s mindset at all. I’m challenge those that are claiming to be capable of reading Paterno’s mind.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:33 PM

Keep playing your little legalese gotcha games.

Pablo Honey on November 10, 2011 at 9:26 PM

I haven’t played any gotcha games.

Go join your cult. Your brain isn’t strong enough to live independently.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:35 PM

I haven’t played any gotcha games.

Go join your cult. Your brain isn’t strong enough to live independently.

Do you enjoy your NAMBLA meetings.

Pablo Honey on November 10, 2011 at 9:40 PM

I’m not obsessed with Paterno’s mindset at all. I’m challenge those that are claiming to be capable of reading Paterno’s mind.

You are not challenging anything, you are defending and excusing enablers of child rape.

Pablo Honey on November 10, 2011 at 9:41 PM

Do you enjoy your NAMBLA meetings.

Pablo Honey on November 10, 2011 at 9:40 PM

That’s you, Pablo Honey. You’re the card carrying member of NAMBLA.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:41 PM

You are not challenging anything, you are defending and excusing enablers of child rape.

Pablo Honey on November 10, 2011 at 9:41 PM

No, I’m not, but you’re brain is so small and weak that I’m not surprised you would reach such an erroneous conclusion.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:42 PM

Pablo Honey, you are incredibly despicable, and I wouldn’t be surprised if your attacks on me are based on guilt about who you truly are.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:43 PM

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:41 PM

Hours of you going on and on. You’re best comeback is essentially-” I know you are but what am I” You know kind of liked when I asked for your name. Who are you Pee Wee Herman?

Congrats sicko you can tell everyone how you spent 3 or 4 hours defending a “man” who enabled child rape . You should be proud./

You’re ill.

CW on November 10, 2011 at 9:46 PM

The bottom line for me is that Penn State and anyone associated with them (including Paterno) deserves all the misery they get (sorry Penn State alums).

I don’t actually believe in karma, but this certain seems like a candidate.

They covered up Michael Mann’s fraud, but hurting their football program certainly hurts them more than hurting their science department.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:47 PM

Pablo Honey, you are incredibly despicable, and I wouldn’t be surprised if your attacks on me are based on guilt about who you truly are.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:43 PM

And the projection is in print.

CW on November 10, 2011 at 9:47 PM

CW, I wouldn’t be surprised if your just trying to cover for the guilt you feel for your past actions/crimes.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:48 PM

You know something? I’m really starting to miss csdeven.

katy the mean old lady on November 10, 2011 at 9:48 PM

And the projection is in print.

CW on November 10, 2011 at 9:47 PM

Ha ha. You’re Projectionist Suspect B, CW.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:49 PM

You know something? I’m really starting to miss csdeven.

katy the mean old lady on November 10, 2011 at 9:48 PM

Please, katy. You didn’t even TRY to post anything thoughtful in this thread.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:50 PM

Really,really nissing him.

katy the mean old lady on November 10, 2011 at 9:51 PM

I think Blink is incredibly bored and lonely. Ignore it.

ORconservative on November 10, 2011 at 10:02 PM

can we let this disgusting, sad, and pretty much uninteresting story go to bed forever.

I thought we closed the book on this last night.

We have larger more pressing issues at hand.

amend2 on November 10, 2011 at 10:02 PM

Paterno effed up. He might be convicted of what he’s done. People are probably going to prison over the rape of young boys, and you’re prancing around with your legalistic bullshit.
Missy on November 10, 2011 at 7:53 PM

Actually, he was cleared by the grand jury.

Send_Me on November 10, 2011 at 10:06 PM

I don’t know, but Paterno did terminate Sanduskey in 1999.

Which is somewhat interesting in the question of why. Why did he terminate him? Could it be for any reason related to what took place in the showers in 2002?

Also, if the 1999 investigation conducted by real police officers (according to the state of PA) didn’t yield any results in 1999, then what makes you think a 2002 investigation would have been any better?

blink on November 10, 2011 at 9:12 PM

Eyewitness account and with an established, documented pattern of behavior.

anuts on November 10, 2011 at 10:08 PM

can we let this disgusting, sad, and pretty much uninteresting story go to bed forever.

I thought we closed the book on this last night.

We have larger more pressing issues at hand.

amend2 on November 10, 2011 at 10:02 PM

I don’t know. I believe I’ll have a difficult time letting this go as long as Paterno and McQuery are still breathing free air.

anuts on November 10, 2011 at 10:11 PM

I think Blink is incredibly bored…

ORconservative on November 10, 2011 at 10:02 PM

I was certainly bored of all the sophomoric attacks on me.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 10:22 PM

ANYONE who has any longstanding alibi for this should rot.

All the great games, all the wins and frat parties, all the millions in ticket sales, all the awards, grandeur, and kudos, all the screaming fans . . . all the nitanny bumper stickers, just all of it..

is not worth the slightest perverse injustice to someone’s little boy.

If the entire Penn program was shut down it would never fix all the broken lives in it’s wake.

amend2 on November 10, 2011 at 10:24 PM

I don’t know, but Paterno did terminate Sanduskey in 1999.

Which is somewhat interesting in the question of why. Why did he terminate him? Could it be for any reason related to what took place in the showers in 2002?

anuts on November 10, 2011 at 10:08 PM

No, anuts, Paterno didn’t terminate Sanduskey in 1999 for anything that was going to occur in 2002, since, you know, Paterno would have no idea what would occur three years later.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 10:27 PM

CHILD RAPE MUST HAVE ALOT OF SUPPORT AT PENN STATE.

Mark7788 on November 10, 2011 at 10:29 PM

DO THE STUDENTS AT PENN STATE SUPPORT THE RAPING OF CHILDREN?

Mark7788 on November 10, 2011 at 10:30 PM

No, anuts, Paterno didn’t terminate Sand*skey in 1999 for anything that was going to occur in 2002, since, you know, Paterno would have no idea what would occur three years later.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Did Paterno terminate him for what went on in 1998? That is the question being asked as you well know. Either that or you are a moron, and I choose to be charitable and believe you are deflecting.

a 1998 University Police investigation that also involved allegations of sexually inappropriate behavior involving Sandusky and young boys in the football showers, but did not pursue the matter further

If Paterno knew in 1998 what was going on and its hard to believe he couldn’t have known the nature of the investigation, then are we to really believe he didn’t cover up in 2002 as well?

sharrukin on November 10, 2011 at 10:38 PM

No, anuts, Paterno didn’t terminate Sand*skey in 1999 for anything that was going to occur in 2002, since, you know, Paterno would have no idea what would occur three years later.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Did Paterno terminate him for what went on in 1998? That is the question being asked as you well know. Either that or you are a moron, and I choose to be charitable and believe you are deflecting.

a 1998 University Police investigation that also involved allegations of sexually inappropriate behavior involving Sand*sky and young boys in the football showers, but did not pursue the matter further

If Paterno knew in 1998 what was going on and its hard to believe he couldn’t have known the nature of the investigation, then are we to really believe he didn’t cover up in 2002 as well?

sharrukin on November 10, 2011 at 10:39 PM

Tell you what, I’ll see you guys back on here when the next piece of the scandal hits the fan, and it will.
McQueary (Ha, that’s as odd as the title of Sandusky’s book) and family grew up on the same street as the Sandusky’s, allegedly. The son told his dad and it was about a guy he knew all his life and looked up to. McQueary should have saved the victim and then reported Sandusky. He didn’t.
Sandusky went on to abuse countless boys since and no one lifted a finger until a mom got upset.
There are a lot of victims. They will sue, and although I hate suits, they should. And if this reaches further than these lowlifes we currently know about, there’s a whole lot of big men about to fall.
Welcome to moral relativism. At some point though a felony is a felony and multiple felonies are going to be tough for Penn State to survive.
I haven’t even begun to research this charity. Yikes. Welcome to Thailand………..oops sorry Pennsylvannia.

ORconservative on November 10, 2011 at 10:40 PM

Exit question: Is this a gay sex scandal?

faraway on November 10, 2011 at 10:41 PM

No, anuts, Paterno didn’t terminate Sanduskey in 1999 for anything that was going to occur in 2002, since, you know, Paterno would have no idea what would occur three years later.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Okay, fine. Correction:

Do you believe Paterno fired Sandusky for activity(ies) that are similar in nature to the same activity that occured in the showers in 2002?

anuts on November 10, 2011 at 10:47 PM

Exit question: Is this a gay sex scandal?

Was the Roman Polaski rape case a heterosexual scandal?

Pablo Honey on November 10, 2011 at 10:48 PM

Was the Roman Polaski rape case a heterosexual scandal?

Pablo Honey on November 10, 2011 at 10:48 PM

Yes.

sharrukin on November 10, 2011 at 10:49 PM

McQueary not coaching this weekend due to threats.
This story gets sadder by the minute.
It is right that he is out, at least for this game but this Sandusky guy ruined an enormous number of lives.

ORconservative on November 10, 2011 at 10:55 PM

No, anuts, Paterno didn’t terminate Sanduskey in 1999 for anything that was going to occur in 2002, since, you know, Paterno would have no idea what would occur three years later.

blink on November 10, 2011 at 10:27 PM

Okay, fine. Correction:

Do you believe his termination had anything to do with activity(ies) that are similar in nature to what took place in the showers in 2002?

anuts on November 10, 2011 at 10:56 PM

absolutely.

ORconservative on November 10, 2011 at 10:57 PM

If the entire Penn program was shut down it would never fix all the broken lives in it’s wake.

amend2 on November 10, 2011 at 10:24 PM

Dear god, repent quickly or the Ivy League Defamation League will be down on you with a lawsuit of their own for confusing Penn with Penn State. They keep spamming Twitter in outrage over MoDo doing the same thing in her NYT column. Because we know the only thing more egregious than child rape is that someone might confuse their ivory towers for a state school.

evergreen on November 10, 2011 at 11:00 PM

I think of the Milgram experiments.

wow. I’m impressed that you’ve heard of these.

ted c on November 10, 2011 at 11:11 PM

Kick Penn State out of the Big Ten. Replace them with Pitt.

Nelsen on November 10, 2011 at 11:54 PM

Don’t they ever learn?

It’s the lying and the cover-up that always ends up destroying them.

Call 911 and let the police handle it.

Or they’ll end up handling you, too.

profitsbeard on November 11, 2011 at 12:23 AM

Savages riot over Paterno’s firing at Penn State as scandal threatens to get worse; Update: PSU students

Do they think football is islam and paterno is mohammad and they are doing a jihad over insults to their prophet? Sure seems like it.

InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on November 11, 2011 at 12:31 AM

One thing I don’t understand. McCreary and Paterno did essentially the same thing-reported the incident to the next higher up in the chain of command. Yet, at least to Penn State students, Paterno gets lionezed (no pun intended) and McCreary gets death threats.

Why didn’t McCreary attempt to stop the rape you say? What could be worse than a poor boy being sodomized? (If that’s what occurred-the Grand Jury report wasn’t clear on that point) Because, I say, when you attack someone bad things happen-almost all of them bad-including the possibility boy being killed in the scuffle. Even though McCreary is big, have you seen Sandusky? He looks like he could go one-on-one with King Kong-with a face even uglier.. Confucious said “if the battle can’t be won, don’t fight it.” It’s easy for Maidee or any other blogger, hiding safely behind a pseudonym, (the Walter Mittys of the Keyboards) to say how brave we would be theoretically.

But McCreary does deserve censure for calling daddy instead of 911.

MaiDee on November 11, 2011 at 1:27 AM

Not just a rumour…

I feel sick to my stomach thinking about all of the people that knew or suspected this was happening and did nothing.

Siren46 on November 11, 2011 at 2:15 AM

Do you enjoy your NAMBLA meetings.

Pablo Honey on November 10, 2011 at 9:40 PM

Oh, did you see him there?

hawkdriver on November 11, 2011 at 3:34 AM

“It’s not that he’s not willing,” John McQueary, his father, told the New York Times. “I think it’s eating him up not to be able to tell his side, but he’s under investigation by the grand jury. He’ll make it. He’s a tough kid.”

Who the hell cares? “He’s a tough kid.” What the f kind of mindblowingly obtuse statement is that in light of his son’s testimony? HOW ABOUT THAT CHILD HE ALLOWED TO BE RAPED? THAT HE SAW AND DIDN’T RESCUE??? Was he a “tough kid?” Who is the victim here??? (I really shouldn’t have to ask that, but since it appears that some have a difficult time discerning that, I must.) That little boy needed someone to step in…and no one did. And for that, McQueary is as guilty as the rapist himself.

I don’t know. I believe I’ll have a difficult time letting this go as long as Paterno and McQuery are still breathing free air.

anuts on November 10, 2011 at 10:11 PM

I’m all for the death penalty in these cases, no question. These are COUNTLESS lives virtually destroyed, then pimped–with charitable donations, THEN COVERED UP. Draw and quarter them. They are disgusting subhumans incapable of rehabilitation.

Bee on November 11, 2011 at 5:31 AM

I feel sick to my stomach thinking about all of the people that knew or suspected this was happening and did nothing.

Siren46 on November 11, 2011 at 2:15 AM

ditto

cmsinaz on November 11, 2011 at 6:34 AM

Allah’s best posts are those where he tells us how he really feels.

Good one, AP.

fiatboomer on November 10, 2011 at 3:50 PM

Had to go back to page 1 of comments to find this gem. Very interesting point. I find most of what AP writes to be great reading, but maybe you’re right. This headline is priceless. Savages, indeed.

Jaibones on November 11, 2011 at 6:42 AM

If this was mentioned upstream I apologize, but
McQueary is not coaching on Saturday because of “Threats”.

Glad someone finally thought twice about trotting him out on the field.

Quisp on November 11, 2011 at 7:02 AM

If Paterno knew in 1998 what was going on and its hard to believe he couldn’t have known the nature of the investigation, then are we to really believe he didn’t cover up in 2002 as well?

sharrukin on November 10, 2011 at 10:38 PM

What I can’t understand is why Paterno, or anybody else at the school, would have been letting this guy bring young boys into the school’s locker room (or onto any school property at all), given what they already knew or suspected about him following the 1998 investigation.

AZCoyote on November 11, 2011 at 7:02 AM

Was the Roman Polaski rape case a heterosexual scandal?

Pablo Honey on November 10, 2011 at 10:48 PM

Yes.

sharrukin on November 10, 2011 at 10:49 PM

and yes.

Sheesh Pablo.

CW on November 11, 2011 at 7:05 AM

As someone who works at a Big 10 school, I think what I might do if I witnessed something improper is go through the right channels to my supervisor, but tell them that if they don’t have me talking to a police officer in two days, I’m calling them myself. Of course if I witnessed what Sandusky was doing, we’d be talking to the police immediately, because I’d shove a bar of soap down his throat.

Scott P on November 11, 2011 at 7:09 AM

Death penalty.

MNHawk on November 11, 2011 at 7:30 AM

I merely stated that everyone who claimed that Paterno would have been ok if he had called a uniformed police officer are actually setting the bar fairly low for fulfillment of moral obligation since their claims wouldn’t even prevent a violation of State Law. Don’t you think that’s strange?

No, not really. In the first place, few people probably know all the particulars of State Law. Second, the moral outrage has little to do with legalisms of what he did do, but rather what he didn’t do. And third, most people who say he should have called police aren’t really arguing that he shouldn’t also have contacted school authorities. So I don’t think this is strange in the least. If he’d done all the things he should have done, put a stop to this, AND also advised school authorities, no one would be criticizing him for those school contacts.

Yours is what is known as a “straw man” argument. It has nothing to do with the point in contention.

I think Paterno’s compliance with the law gave him a sense of moral compliance, too. I see this every day – people think that it’s ok to do something merely because it’s not illegal.

And if that’s the case with Paterno, it’s truly frightening and evidence that he had no business remaining in his position. If his reaction to a child rape is only to think “Hey, I didn’t myself commit a crime, my moral duties are now fully discharged,” then he is a morally bankrupt individual.

Chuckles3 on November 11, 2011 at 8:36 AM

sharrukin on November 10, 2011 at 10:39 PM

After the 98 investigation, even with a tape -recording by the police with the mom of the victim #6 confronting Sandusky on what went on in the shower, the DA ended the case as unsubstantiated.

In May 99, in front of victim #4, Paterno told Sandusky he would NEVER be head coach. Sandusky retired soon thereafter.

IMO Paterno in 98 probably thought that Sandusky would be going away to prison. When it came back unsubstantiated, he made the call that he didn’t want Sandusky ever to follow him and be head coach and told S that in point blank terms.

They took his keys to the locker room and told him no boys allowed. Remember, Sandusky wasn’t charged in 98. He was a retired faculty member of Penn St. I don’t know if the university could have barred him from campus without charges/conviction.

The rape that the janitors saw in 2000, victim #8, was never reported by the janitors to anyone. They discussed it amongst themselves, and being new/temps felt they would be fired. That rape happened when the team was at an away game and Paterno wasn’t even there.

journeyintothewhirlwind on November 11, 2011 at 9:19 AM

Do you believe his termination had anything to do with activity(ies) that are similar in nature to what took place in the showers in 2002?

anuts on November 10, 2011 at 10:56 PM

Probably, yes.

blink on November 11, 2011 at 10:36 AM

And if that’s the case with Paterno, it’s truly frightening and evidence that he had no business remaining in his position. If his reaction to a child rape is only to think “Hey, I didn’t myself commit a crime, my moral duties are now fully discharged,” then he is a morally bankrupt individual.

Chuckles3 on November 11, 2011 at 8:36 AM

I certainly would have done more to punish Sanduskey if I had been Paterno.

But keep in mind. Sanduskey was not an employee of Paterno. Paterno was the football coach – he wasn’t the facilities manager. Paterno wasn’t on the board of Second Mile. Paterno didn’t witness the act himself so any testimony by him is heresay.

Feel free to draw and quarter Paterno like Bee wants – I don’t care. Terminate Penn State’s football program – I don’t care. Revoke the university’s charter – I don’t care. A university which takes such little action against its staff (or emeritus staff) needs to be punished harshly. This lack of action is consistent with their lack of action against Michael Mann for the academic fraud he perpetrated. Penn State needs to learn their lesson.

However, I see this type of apathy from people everyday. Many people distance themselves from important issues (especially work issues – and this was most certainly a “work” issue – yes, a crime that you hear was committed at work is a work issue) by denying that they have any responsibility. Given what I stated above, I think Paterno denied any responsibility.

Sadly, I would bet that several commenters here with the pitchforks and torches, who are seeking a scorched earth type of vengeance, probably would deny responsibility, too, given similar circumstances. Of course they would never admit their own hypocrisy (and they probably fool themselves into not believing it), but you won’t convince me otherwise.

blink on November 11, 2011 at 11:00 AM

Sadly, I would bet that several commenters here with the pitchforks and torches, who are seeking a scorched earth type of vengeance, probably would deny responsibility, too, given similar circumstances. Of course they would never admit their own hypocrisy (and they probably fool themselves into not believing it), but you won’t convince me otherwise.

Yes, the commentators are the ones with the problem, not the actual school administrators (Paterno included) who allowed a child rapist free range on their campus.

Pablo Honey on November 11, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Yes, the commentators are the ones with the problem,

Pablo Honey on November 11, 2011 at 11:46 AM

If, given similar circumstances, they denied responsibility, too, then, YES. They are just as much of a problem.

not the actual…

Why on earth would you think that it’s an either-or situation? Both are a problem. How on earth couldn’t you agree?

blink on November 11, 2011 at 11:50 AM

Sadly, I would bet that several commenters here with the pitchforks and torches, who are seeking a scorched earth type of vengeance, probably would deny responsibility, too, given similar circumstances. Of course they would never admit their own hypocrisy (and they probably fool themselves into not believing it), but you won’t convince me otherwise.

blink on November 11, 2011 at 11:00 AM

No doubt.

I do think, however, that what sets this apart is the nature of the crime. I don’t know whether you’re a a parent, but if you are, like the rest of us you probably spend a lot of time worrying about to protect your child from the bad people out there, and you have to constantly deal with the anxiety that even ONE slip can ruin a child’s life. In that context, reading the 23-page grand jury report is a terrifying exprience. This guy was effectively caught red- well, let’s say “handed” — on multiple times, but each repeated horror was glossed over. The red lights should have been flashing with the first inappropriate touch — it took a huge amount of moral abdication to get to multiple authority figures looking callously away from child rape.

No doubt there are a lot of uncomfortable situations in which people would like to believe they’d intervene, but in which they might fail to step up to the plate. Maybe an abusive neighbor, maybe witnessing an armed robbery, etc. etc.

But NOT this. This is so far on one side of the line I do think that most people are justified in saying they would have acted differently. A naked man raping a child. Absolutely nothing would have prevented or even deterred the witness from phoning 911, from getting the child out of there, from phoning the parents, or from giving in to his rage, grabbing a bat and bashing the guy. Sandusky was in an absolutely vulnerable position at that moment, and it is indeed hard to fathom why others wouldn’t move swiftly on him either in the moment or immediately after the fact. This is NOT one of those “would you have done anything?” dilemmas. It’s easy.

In fact, what would have been hard for most normal people is retraining their rage. Had McQueary bludgeoned Sandusky we would have had an interesting discussion about how understandable that was, how would you have acted — and on that one, most people might not correctly predict how they would act. But I truly think few people would have been as callous and manipulative as the powers that be at Penn State were.

Chuckles3 on November 11, 2011 at 11:53 AM

Do you believe his termination had anything to do with activity(ies) that are similar in nature to what took place in the showers in 2002?

anuts on November 10, 2011 at 10:56 PM

Probably, yes.

blink on November 11, 2011 at 10:36 AM

So in your estimation, would allowing him to continue to bring children into the facilities which are under your direct control be:

1. wise
2. prudent
3. enabling

anuts on November 11, 2011 at 12:08 PM

d. criminal.

Pablo Honey on November 11, 2011 at 12:14 PM

If, given similar circumstances, they denied responsibility, too, then, YES. They are just as much of a problem.

So the commentators on HotAir who find the administrators actions criminal and repugnant are AS MUCH of a problem as the actual administrators who did nothing about a known child rapist on their campus.

That is your argument right?

Pablo Honey on November 11, 2011 at 12:17 PM

So in your estimation, would allowing him to continue…

anuts on November 11, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Who allowed him to continue to do anything? The police that led the investigation?

blink on November 11, 2011 at 12:42 PM

So the commentators on HotAir who find the administrators actions criminal and repugnant are AS MUCH of a problem as the actual administrators who did nothing about a known child rapist on their campus.

That is your argument right?

Pablo Honey on November 11, 2011 at 12:17 PM

No, that’s not my argument at all. Not even close. How could you think that? Why are you so stupid?

My argument is that some of the commenters here would probably have been just as lax as Paterno in the same situation – even though they will swear that they would have done so much more. And that is just as bad! And you’re probably one of them because you’re so weak minded.

blink on November 11, 2011 at 12:45 PM

Who allowed him to continue to do anything? The police that led the investigation?

blink on November 11, 2011 at 12:42 PM

I readily admit Paterno does not have the power to arrest anyone himself. That’s out of his control. Providing secure facilities with showers for a known pedophile is well within his control.

anuts on November 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM

My argument is that some of the commenters here would probably have been just as lax as Paterno in the same situation

Ridiculous hypotheticals to defend the indefensible.

Pitiful excuses to defend and excuse enablers of child rape.

Pablo Honey on November 11, 2011 at 1:18 PM

Providing secure facilities with showers for a known pedophile is well within his control.

anuts on November 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM

You do realize that Paterno wasn’t facilities manager, right?

blink on November 11, 2011 at 1:26 PM

Ridiculous hypotheticals to defend the indefensible.

Pitiful excuses to defend and excuse enablers of child rape.

Pablo Honey on November 11, 2011 at 1:18 PM

Wow, you really are stupid.

Nothing is a defense or an excuse.

I’m basically saying that many of the commenters here are hypocrites because they would probably be just as bad as Paterno.

Also, someone can hate a criminal defendant and still criticize the prosecutor for being a stupid idiot. Criticizing the prosecutor for being a stupid idiot doesn’t mean that you’re enabling the defendant. You are like the prosecutor that’s a stupid idiot.

blink on November 11, 2011 at 1:30 PM

Also, someone can hate a criminal defendant and still criticize the prosecutor for being a stupid idiot. Criticizing the prosecutor for being a stupid idiot doesn’t mean that you’re enabling the defendant. You are like the prosecutor that’s a stupid idiot.

Pretty soon you will be blaming “society” for Paterno’s cruel indifference.

Keep up with the excuses. Continue to defend the enablers.

Or better yet, blame the victims…

Your next tact I imagine.

Pablo Honey on November 11, 2011 at 2:04 PM

Pablo Honey, you’re the exact type of person that I think would be actually much worse than Paterno.

You’re a very weak individual that would probably simply want to turn a blind eye as you let someone else do all the work in correcting a wrong.

In fact, you’d probably be Hot Air’s LT Tom Keefer. Strawberries? I don’t remember anything about any Strawberries – the Captain seemed perfectly normal to me.

blink on November 11, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Pablo Honey, keep pretending that any criticism of your comments are somehow enabling pedophiles.

Terp Mole tried that strategy about Qaddafi, and he became a laughing stock.

blink on November 11, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Or better yet, blame the victims…

Your next tact I imagine.

Pablo Honey on November 11, 2011 at 2:04 PM

Too late. You’ve already become Terp Mole.

blink on November 11, 2011 at 2:23 PM

You’re a very weak individual that would probably simply want to turn a blind eye as you let someone else do all the work in correcting a wrong.

That is what Paterno did and you haven’t stop defending him for for 2 days now…except no wrong was corrected, it was covered up so his rapist colleague would not tarnish the Joe Paterno brand.

Pablo Honey on November 11, 2011 at 2:59 PM

That is what Paterno did…

Pablo Honey on November 11, 2011 at 2:59 PM

And you would do the same thing.

you haven’t stop defending him for for 2 days now

I’ve never defended him, and I wouldn’t defend you.

Congratulations on becoming another Terp Mole with your super stupid strawman.

blink on November 11, 2011 at 3:21 PM

Pablo Honey, you’re like a really stupid prosecutor that claims that his critics are enabling the defendants. This describes you extremely well.

blink on November 11, 2011 at 3:22 PM

You do realize that Paterno wasn’t facilities manager, right?

blink on November 11, 2011 at 1:26 PM

I never claimed such. He’s also not the linebackers coach but if he doesn’t want a linebacker doing x, linebacker will not be doing x. Do you think otherwise?

anuts on November 11, 2011 at 4:06 PM

He’s also not the linebackers coach but if he doesn’t want a linebacker doing x, linebacker will not be doing x.

anuts on November 11, 2011 at 4:06 PM

He was most certainly the head linebacker coach, the head safety coach, the head line coach, etc. Have you ever heard the term Head Coach?

blink on November 11, 2011 at 4:21 PM

Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 5 6 7