[2BNTV]

Penn State assistant coach Mike McQueary, a key witness in the child sex abuse scandal that has engulfed the school, has been placed on administrative leave. The leave is "indefinite".

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1dRGjkkJD

[Loveithere]

Originally Posted by PennBF

It is interesting as to why some feel the need to insult, call names and use that as a defense against supporting those who point out the fact that Joe Paterno was in fact complicit in the abuse of a child. It may be because they have no facts and must rely on calling names and insulting the ones who feel that children should be protected! They should examine themselves in order to be better equipped to disucss issues and avoid the pit falls of name calling.
They should try to better understand the underpinnings of their behavior so they can grow and be a better person. When I read something from a person who uses that approach I am sad as it is clear the person does not think enough of themseleves to try to improve.
I have not and will not call names or use insults to try to shut down discussion as that would make me no better than the one who does.

Funny how some will go on about name calling and then put down half of the posters on this forum. You are right, there should be more examining.

[PennBF]

I believe there was a note which called people who critized Paterno as being "Self Righteous". That is a vain attempt to stop notes from being written and using bullying as a technique by calling names. How sad.

[graciegirl]

I will never understand WHY someone would send threats against the assistant coach's life, the one who told Joe Paterno that he saw the man raping the child.

This world doesn't make sense to me sometimes. Doing the right thing and being self righteous are two completely different things. Who in the world with any kind of ethics wouldn't have reported seeing a little boy being raped?

[Pturner]

Originally Posted by mikeod

That is not quite the case here. I think that if the graduate assistant had called the police immediately that night it would have been consistent with the school policy. (Assuming it is similar to those I have encountered at several institutions and corporations.) All policies I have seen do not restrict the ability to call the police when a crime is ongoing. But they do require notification of administration when police need to be contacted about something that happened in the past. Since Coach Paterno and subsequently the AD and others were notified of that abuse 24-48 hours later, there was no immediate need for a police presence at the school. The perpetrator and the victim were long gone. Therefore, it fell on the administration to notify the police, per policy, and get an investigation started. Whether they failed in that duty or not will be determined.

There may be a coverup in this case. But if it is determined that a cover-up did occur, I don't believe the policy caused it, rather the failure of people to do their jobs. Obviously, anyone who decided to bury this affair to protect the university's reputation failed miserably when you look at the result.

Hi Mike,
These are all good points. I can see why mgmt would want a heads up. Not sure I agree though that police should not be notified after the fact as soon as possible so they could come on campus to investigate. They could interview the witness while his memory was fresh, talk to others who were around to ascertain whether they might unknowingly have heard or seen anything relevent and, perhaps even recovered evidence at the alleged crime scene, all less likely the later they are contacted.

[Mikeod]

Originally Posted by PennBF

It is interesting as to why some feel the need to insult, call names and use that as a defense against supporting those who point out the fact that Joe Paterno was in fact complicit in the abuse of a child. It may be because they have no facts and must rely on calling names and insulting the ones who feel that children should be protected! They should examine themselves in order to be better equipped to disucss issues and avoid the pit falls of name calling.
They should try to better understand the underpinnings of their behavior so they can grow and be a better person. When I read something from a person who uses that approach I am sad as it is clear the person does not think enough of themseleves to try to improve.
I have not and will not call names or use insults to try to shut down discussion as that would make me no better than the one who does.

Since you're referring to the self-righteous comment, is that any worse than you indicating that those who disagree should "better understand the underpinnings of their behavior so they can grow and be a better person."? Does disagreement with your position make someone a lesser person?

Remember: The most persistent criticism of grand juries is that jurors are not a representative sampling of the community, and are not qualified for jury service, in that they do not possess a satisfactory ability to ask pertinent questions, or sufficient understanding of local government and the concept of due process. Unlike potential jurors in regular trials, grand jurors are not screened for bias or other improper factors. They are rarely read any instruction on the law, as this is not a requirement; their job is only to judge on what the prosecutor produced. The prosecutor drafts the charges and decides which witnesses to call. The prosecutor is not obliged to present evidence in favor of those being investigated. Grand jury witnesses have no right to have a lawyer or family in the room, and can be charged with holding the court in contempt (punishable with incarceration for the remaining term of the grand jury) if they refuse to appear before the jury and all evidence is presented by a prosecutor in a cloak of secrecy, as the prosecutor, grand jurors, and the grand jury stenographer are prohibited from disclosing what happened before the grand jury, unless ordered to do so in a judicial proceeding.

It appears the major portion of the invective posted on several online boards is directed toward Paterno, and less toward the perpetrator and/or the graduate assistant who witnessed the event and failed to do anything to stop/rescue the youth. Paterno may be involved in this up to his eyeballs, but everything I have read about this man from people who played for him indicates that integrity was a major point with him. It is noteworthy that Penn State is one of only 4 Division 1 schools that has never had an NCAA violation. I think if his sole driving force was to win at all costs and maximize revenue for the school, that there would be issues that resulted in sanctions from the NCAA.

It is entirely possible to disagree with those who portray Paterno as complicit or an enabler and still find the actions of Sandusky reprehensible.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by mikeod

Since you're referring to the self-righteous comment, is that any worse than you indicating that those who disagree should "better understand the underpinnings of their behavior so they can grow and be a better person."? Does disagreement with your position make someone a lesser person?

Remember: The most persistent criticism of grand juries is that jurors are not a representative sampling of the community, and are not qualified for jury service, in that they do not possess a satisfactory ability to ask pertinent questions, or sufficient understanding of local government and the concept of due process. Unlike potential jurors in regular trials, grand jurors are not screened for bias or other improper factors. They are rarely read any instruction on the law, as this is not a requirement; their job is only to judge on what the prosecutor produced. The prosecutor drafts the charges and decides which witnesses to call. The prosecutor is not obliged to present evidence in favor of those being investigated. Grand jury witnesses have no right to have a lawyer or family in the room, and can be charged with holding the court in contempt (punishable with incarceration for the remaining term of the grand jury) if they refuse to appear before the jury and all evidence is presented by a prosecutor in a cloak of secrecy, as the prosecutor, grand jurors, and the grand jury stenographer are prohibited from disclosing what happened before the grand jury, unless ordered to do so in a judicial proceeding.

It appears the major portion of the invective posted on several online boards is directed toward Paterno, and less toward the perpetrator and/or the graduate assistant who witnessed the event and failed to do anything to stop/rescue the youth. Paterno may be involved in this up to his eyeballs, but everything I have read about this man from people who played for him indicates that integrity was a major point with him. It is noteworthy that Penn State is one of only 4 Division 1 schools that has never had an NCAA violation. I think if his sole driving force was to win at all costs and maximize revenue for the school, that there would be issues that resulted in sanctions from the NCAA.

It is entirely possible to disagree with those who portray Paterno as complicit or an enabler and still find the actions of Sandusky reprehensible.

There are so many issues involved and they all come back to one thing. All of us, no matter how many good things we do and how often we accomplish great things and even if we have continued to win the approval of friends, family and the public for decades are capable of making a choice that could have been better in hindsight.

I believe Joe Paterno is a good man, a great man and it is just so sad that his career in the public eye has ended like this. Now he will have an opportunity to be really great, because many of us have suffered awful things that are heartbreaking, unexpected and unsolvable.

I believe that he will do the right thing.

I do not know how Jerry Sullivan will fare. It seems obvious to me that from the get go he set up that foundation to have a lot of little ones to have sex with. Little ones who didn't have a stable home or protectors. I would like to be alone in a room with Jerry Sullivan for five minutes.

I also think that people couldn't really believe what they were thinking about him, if they had suspicions early on..but I hope and pray that no one looked the other way because he was a good coach and helped the football program or they didn't want to besmirch that program.

We come into this world alone and we leave it alone and most of us believe we will have to answer to someone eventually.

[Loveithere]

Originally Posted by mikeod

Since you're referring to the self-righteous comment, is that any worse than you indicating that those who disagree should "better understand the underpinnings of their behavior so they can grow and be a better person."? Does disagreement with your position make someone a lesser person?

Remember: The most persistent criticism of grand juries is that jurors are not a representative sampling of the community, and are not qualified for jury service, in that they do not possess a satisfactory ability to ask pertinent questions, or sufficient understanding of local government and the concept of due process. Unlike potential jurors in regular trials, grand jurors are not screened for bias or other improper factors. They are rarely read any instruction on the law, as this is not a requirement; their job is only to judge on what the prosecutor produced. The prosecutor drafts the charges and decides which witnesses to call. The prosecutor is not obliged to present evidence in favor of those being investigated. Grand jury witnesses have no right to have a lawyer or family in the room, and can be charged with holding the court in contempt (punishable with incarceration for the remaining term of the grand jury) if they refuse to appear before the jury and all evidence is presented by a prosecutor in a cloak of secrecy, as the prosecutor, grand jurors, and the grand jury stenographer are prohibited from disclosing what happened before the grand jury, unless ordered to do so in a judicial proceeding.

It appears the major portion of the invective posted on several online boards is directed toward Paterno, and less toward the perpetrator and/or the graduate assistant who witnessed the event and failed to do anything to stop/rescue the youth. Paterno may be involved in this up to his eyeballs, but everything I have read about this man from people who played for him indicates that integrity was a major point with him. It is noteworthy that Penn State is one of only 4 Division 1 schools that has never had an NCAA violation. I think if his sole driving force was to win at all costs and maximize revenue for the school, that there would be issues that resulted in sanctions from the NCAA.

It is entirely possible to disagree with those who portray Paterno as complicit or an enabler and still find the actions of Sandusky reprehensible.

I am the one who wrote the term self-righteous and I wrote it in anger as I was reading posts after posts of people piling on saying basically the same thing. But know that I think about it, everybody was writing while angry, right?
As to the poster who called that expression "bullying", please explain the term "bullying" If one of the meanings of "bullying" when a bunch of people pick on one individual, well, nuff said.

[PennBF]

Could not add or remove anything from this statement from Barry Switzed. Will
no longer respond to any further comments as this, in my opinion says it all.

Former Oklahoma University and Dallas Cowboys coach Barry Switzer says members of the Penn State coaching staff had to be aware of former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky’s alleged behavior.

“Having been in this profession a long time and knowing how close coaching staffs are, I knew that this was a secret that was kept secret. Everyone on that had to have known, the ones that had been around a long time,” Switzer said in an interview with The Oklahoman newspaper.

Former Oklahoma University and Dallas Cowboys coach Barry Switzer says members of the Penn State coaching staff had to be aware of former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky’s alleged behavior. (AP Photo)Switzer added that others outside the Penn State program had to have known as well.

“You think that a 13-year assistant ... hasn’t told someone else? His wife? His father? People knew. The community knew,” Switzer said.

Switzer said the tragedy of the situation was that no one stepped up to put a stop to Sandusky.

“There are more people culpable than just Joe Paterno and the athletic director. There are so many other people that have thought, ‘I could’ve done something about this, too’ that didn’t come forward. That’s the tragedy of it,” he said.

Switzer said that the university's trustees did the right thing by firing by Paterno on Wednesday night, but added that "there are no winners here.”

A grand jury indicted Sandusky on 40 charges of sexual abuse involving minors.

Switzer was forced to resign from Oklahoma in 1989 after the NCAA placed the football program on probation. The problems that drove Switzer out at OU, however, were nothing like what is going on at Penn State.

The Hall of Fame coach also had sharp words for Penn State students and fans who reacted violently to Paterno's firing.

"These students the other night, I watched 'em occupy State College, and I thought, ‘They don't understand.' If they stopped and thought about ... how many people were involved and knew this and did nothing, they just haven't lived long enough. And what they've done is try to support somebody the university can't support," he said.

Comments


Read more: http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-foo...#ixzz1dVSIqCnB

[Loveithere]

Enough said? So, an opinion from a Dallas Cowboy Coach is the last word?

[tpop1]

In an attempt to get this thread back on track...........

My inner voice will not stop whispering to me that the dismissal of the 1998 charges against Sandusky by dint of the DA not charging him,
is going to unfold into even darker incidents being reveiled.

That D.A. Ray Gricar disappeared in 2005 under very suspisious conditions....body or man never found.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/sp...r-mystery.html

This nagging inner voice is often on target......."Follow the story of the missing D.A.!!! - I bet more will be coming"

Call me a conspiracy theorist, but.......
.

[PennBF]

Yes !!

[rubicon]

There is a quote in today's WSJ that essentially says "that those with sympathies for those individuals include Joe Pread the sickening 23 page Grand Jury report.....It wiil transfer one's initial sense of deep sadness to one of burning rage." Obviously too many officials at Penn State thought Penn State football sacrosant. Sandusky actions should have immediately been reported to the police.

[duffysmom]

I too believe that there is much more to this horrible story and more will be revealed. Joe Pa is personally responsible for every little boy who was raped after he found out and chose to keep silent and allow the brutality to continue.

[Mikeod]

Here's a different perspective on the situation.

http://lewrockwell.com/anderson/anderson326.html