Should Joe Paterno retire or step down after Jerry Sandusky alleged molestation???

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Sandusky was no longer with the program by the time the abuse occured, nor employed by Paterno, and supposedly they had very little contact with each other. If Sandusky had remained on PSU's staff then yes, Paterno gets far more scrutiny. I don't think Paterno can say "I don't want this guy using PSU facilities", though given his position, he might have been able to.

Do you really think Joe Paterno lacks the power to ban people from the football building? I suspect that Paterno had the power to force Sandusky out of Central PA if he really wanted to.

[GibbsFactor]

Absolutely. How does a man NOT intervene?

Because he is a coward. Maybe he is scared of confrontation? Maybe he was scared of who it was? Maybe he was in shock over what he had seen? Maybe he didn't want to get into the middle of it? I've seen car accident witnesses leave the scene so they wouldn't be burdoned with testifying and all that entails. I'm not defending him, just saying this is how someone would not stop it immediately.

And unfortunately, I'd be willing to bet that more people would do what he did over trying to intervene, as sick as that may sound.

---------- Post added November-8th-2011 at 05:13 PM ----------

Do you really think Joe Paterno lacks the power to ban people from the football building? I suspect that Paterno had the power to force Sandusky out of Central PA if he really wanted to.

I suspect Paterno knew of the 98 incidents which lead JoPa to make Sandusky retire in the first place. Being his friend, and out of respect, he allowed him the retirement package, which included the on-campus office.

[sportjunkie07]

Because he is a coward. Maybe he is scared of confrontation? Maybe he was scared of who it was? Maybe he was in shock over what he had seen? Maybe he didn't want to get into the middle of it? I've seen car accident victims leave the scene so they wouldn't be burdoned with testifying and all that entails. I'm not defending him, just saying this is how someone would not stop it immediately.

And unfortunately, I'd be willing to bet that more people would do what he did over trying to intervene, as sick as that may sound.

i would agree with that, and that's why ill never say that i would have stopped the confrontation. i would hope that i would, but you never know until you are in that situation.

[GibbsFactor]

i would agree with that, and that's why ill never say that i would have stopped the confrontation. i would hope that i would, but you never know until you are in that situation.

It happens all the time. When do people actually step up? Sure, this is a time when it shouldn't be in doubt, but people don't want to get caught up in other people's drama. Why do you think people refuse to be a witness in homicides when you KNOW they saw the whole thing?

[bcl05]

Didn't Sandusky have his keys/access to the locker room taken away after the 2002 incident? No way Paterno wasn't involved/aware with that. He then continued to have Sandusky around for 9 more years. No excuse at all.

[Duckus]

If he doesn't get fired it will just be another example of how out of control $$$ in college athletics has become.

[Elessar78]

I just don't know what else to say about the matter. People have made up their minds.

PSU fans are divided, from what I can tell. Support Paterno, but let Spanier, Curley, Schultz cook or they all have to go. Everyone else in the world is ready to fire/imprison all five of 'em.

McQueary will NEVER get another coaching job. That much is certain. I feel for him. He's a decent coach. While Paterno has already had his career and was just collecting "gravy," McQueary's is done before it started. He had a huge lapse of judgment not going to the police directly. That one act could've saved Paterno's, Spanier's, Schultz, and Curley's careers but most importantly likely would've taken Sandusky off the street.

For Paterno, I think his failure was to trust that Curley and Schultz would do right by him. According to my wife (Masters Degree in Adolescent Sex offender treatment), investigations like these take months or years to bear fruit. So even if one were to ask, say, Schultz "How's that investigation into Jerry going?" There could be no progress for a considerable amount of time. Which is why I think Paterno's testimony to the grand jury is absolutely crucial, but I have not been able to find out what he said. Even if PA State Police had been involved from the beginning, no one can be sure that the truth about Sandusky would've been discovered in a timely manner.

I think the biggest failure was allowing Sandusky access to campus after his retirement. But due to the nature of his "retirement" I wonder if those negotiating his settlement had no clue of why he was being let go. Understand that at that point, 1999, he'd been investigated and charges were dismissed. After the 2002 incident, they "took his keys" and I think this is where Paterno takes too much heat. Public sentiment seems to be that from here he is expected to know Sandusky's every movement-within University Park, the borough of State College, and to high schools 1.5 hours away.

Post 2002, what was Sandusky's presence and use of PSU facilities? I honestly can't remember from the GJ report.

If Sandusky continued to use the football building, it further gets dicey for me. Defensive coordinator Tom Bradley and McQueary are roommates. At least 3 football people knew (Paterno, McQueary, and Bradley). But after 2002, I'd doubt that Sandusky would have the gall to be in the building when Paterno and McQueary were there. Between 99 and 2002, I can understand Sandusky being allowed in the place... but beyond that?? On the night Sandusky was caught in the shower, illustrates that he knew when the building would be empty.

I think the way people are they want things, nice and tidy, even blame. There's just widespread, multiple persons and levels of blame here. I think the sentiment of "harboring a pedophile" is a bit extreme and simple. I think that was the undesired outcome, but how we got there was a combination of disbelief, misplaced trust in people and systems, lack of communication, lack of courage, a lot of CYA, hubris... It isn't so nefarious as "they cared more about the football team"... I think that's BS through and through. But the intent doesn't matter much, it's the outcome isn't it? Good intentions, bad intentions the end result was that they harbored a pedophile.

I think it's the intent, though, that defines whether one is a good or evil person. It's shocking at the certainty that people paint Paterno as this guy who cares only about the program. I think throughout the years he's demonstrated that his existence as a coach is just about the program. Over the decades, he's kicked key players off the team essentially making it harder to win games. That sounds trivial compared to this, but I can't believe that a guy who's lived by a higher standard all of sudden lost his compass when he had to make "The Big Decision".

No one is purely good and no one is purely evil. Do you see the conflict in Lavar Arrington? To him, up until a few days ago Jerry Sandusky was a good guy. But in the same person, existed two vastly different personas.

[Mr. Nostril]

A. It was not a 20-year-old kid. It was a 28-year-old man and Joe's former QB. Joe also thought so highly of this man that he promoted him to assistant coach and then put him in charge of recruiting.

B. As everyone who has followed Penn State knows' date=' Joe and Jerry were not exactly best friends.

C. There never was an investigation. Joe apparently never bothered to ask why.

[/quote']

Apparently, I messed up some of the facts. Sorry, but still none of this really proves that Joe ever knew what was going on. I find it at least plausible that he never took the allegations seriously in his own mind, because he never believed them to be. So, when it happened, he fulfilled his obligation, by passing on the information, and then went about his business assuming it wasn't true.

I'm not Naiive. I certainly think it's possible that he was covering up for Sandusky as well, I just don't know. And until I do I'm not qualified to say he should or shouldn't step down.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Didn't Sandusky have his keys/access to the locker room taken away after the 2002 incident? No way Paterno wasn't involved/aware with that. He then continued to have Sandusky around for 9 more years. No excuse at all.

It seems like he was told that he couldn't bring kids around any longer after 2002, but there is a report that he did in 2007.

He wasn't banned from anything until this week. He was working out in the weight room last week apparently.

[thebluefood]

Worst case scenario: Paterno covered for a wretched pedo

Best case scenario: Paterno's such an empty, senile figure head, he doesn't actually know what's going on within his own facilities

Either way, his time is up at Penn State.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Apparently, I messed up some of the facts. Sorry, but still none of this really proves that Joe ever knew what was going on. I find it at least plausible that he never took the allegations seriously in his own mind, because he never believed them to be. So, when it happened, he fulfilled his obligation, by passing on the information, and then went about his business assuming it wasn't true.

I'm not Naiive. I certainly think it's possible that he was covering up for Sandusky as well, I just don't know. And until I do I'm not qualified to say he should or shouldn't step down.

Read the Grand Jury report. You can't really get your head around this story until you read that.

I do agree that there is a gap in this story. That is - what exactly did McQueary tell Paterno. In his testimony, Paterno said it was "fondling" and stuff of a "sexual nature," which frankly is quite enough to scare anyone. McQueary, in his grand jury testimony, called it anal rape.

Whatever McQueary told him, Paterno thought it was enough to immediately call the AD. He also clearly held McQueary in high esteem because he hired him to the staff.

---------- Post added November-8th-2011 at 07:02 PM ----------

I I think the biggest failure was allowing Sandusky access to campus after his retirement. But due to the nature of his "retirement" I wonder if those negotiating his settlement had no clue of why he was being let go. Understand that at that point, 1999, he'd been investigated and charges were dismissed. After the 2002 incident, they "took his keys" and I think this is where Paterno takes too much heat. Public sentiment seems to be that from here he is expected to know Sandusky's every movement-within University Park, the borough of State College, and to high schools 1.5 hours away.

From what I can tell, they did not take his keys. They simply told him to stop bring young boys to the facilities with him. He apparently brought a boy from his program to practice in 2007. He was still using the football facilities last week as he was seen in the weight room.

I don't care if Paterno is 116 and senile...the football weight room is the inner sanctum of a program. The only place more private is the locker room. If Sandusky had access to the weight room, he had access to everything.

[Elessar78]

I don't want to have to dig throug the GJR again. I think I lose a bit of myself each time I read it. But I think it's about a week or two after the 2002 incident. Curley and Schultz call McQueary back in and tell him that Sandusky isn't allowed access to the facilities or bring kids there (which was a lie or something they never backed up).

I think there has to be more to the story. No cameras in the football building? No card access? I was there when McQueary was the QB and all the dorms had card access (which creates a unique record of who entered at what time), also the newer buildings card access. I never tried it but I doubt you could just walk in off the street into the football building after hours.

[Bostic Hog]

OK - so I've thought alot about what happened at Penn State in the last 3 days. Humor me for a second:

The Grand Jury report discusses legalities and provides details of what happened. It does NOT address, though, moral issues. Based on the cancellation of the presser, the University doesn't want JoePa to talk (for obvious legal reasons). But what if Joe WANTS to talk - to tell specific things that DID happen, but he was never asked. Maybe Joe DID follow up with the Campus PD. Maybe Curley, Schultz, or even Spanier colluded with the Penn State PD and they told Joe that an investigation HAD been done and McQuery overreacted. Maybe everytime he saw Sandusky on campus, Joe called Curley and asked WTF???? I don't know -- this is certainly grasping -- but I'm still holding out hope for Joe. I'd like to hear what Joe has to say.

[Elessar78]

BH, this is WHY I want to read Joe's testimony.

The thing that has probably annoyed me the most is that what hasn't been stated, has been assumed. Meaning it doesn't say anything about Joe following up, so the standing assumption has been that he didn't.

[GoSkins561]

From what I've read Paterno had a GA tell him what he saw in the showers and he kicked it up the chain of command. I don't see a problem with that. The GA should have gone to the police (and stopped the assault). After that Paterno was told something about a coach not in his employ and turned it over to school authorities one of which oversees campus police (according to what I've read).

Are we really saying Paterno is an evil person because he didn't call the police personally with 2nd hand information? He told the people in charge at the school, one of which was connected to campus police. Why is everyone calling for him to step down, be arrested, etc and no Mike McQueary? Isn't he the one that walked away from a rape, waited until the next day to say anything, and never went to the police?

What am I missing?

This is how I see it, also, didn't a mother of a victim confront Sandusky after finding out her son was being molested but never called the police?

[TradeTheBeal!]

84 is 84. Know when to get out, Joe. Your legacy is what to protect, not the 2011 season.

[Spartacus87]

Sandusky was no longer with the program by the time the abuse occured, nor employed by Paterno, and supposedly they had very little contact with each other. If Sandusky had remained on PSU's staff then yes, Paterno gets far more scrutiny. I don't think Paterno can say "I don't want this guy using PSU facilities", though given his position, he might have been able to.

Paterno probably could have prevented Sandusky from ever stepping foot on Penn State's campus, if he wanted. Not allowing him access to the athletics facilities would hardly have been out of the question.

Another question is - if this had happened at a DIII no name college, would the HC get as much heat as Paterno is getting now?

If the situation unfolded exactly the same, I'm sure the actions of the HC would be questioned and scrutinized, yes.

But that's apples to oranges anyway.

Just look at the outrage and shock that many Penn State fans are feeling right now over this story - Penn State's program, led by Paterno, was built on the idea of defining the moral bar for every other football program to try and meet. To be able to contend for, and win, national championships while still doing everything the "right way," even if it wasn't the easy way.

No other athletic program in the country has built up a tradition of maintaining the moral high ground like Penn State has, and that was because of Paterno.

It wouldn't be the same if this happened at another D1 program, let alone a random DIII program, since no other program in the country has had Joe Paterno and Penn State's supposed standards of behavior leading the way for everyone else.

[skinsforlife101]

After looking at all of the TV reports today here is what I think is going to happen Joe will finsh out the year and then will resign even though I think he should step down. I think as of Friday Mike McQueary may be fired think about it if the 28 year old McQueary would have just called 911 when the molestation happened we would not be having this conversation today.

[Kilmer17]

How bad do you think the crowds will be at Ohio State and Wisconsin if Paterno is still there?

If my kid was on the team, he'd be heading home today.

[Heisenberg]

The rumors are starting to come in on the various Penn State message boards that Paterno will be allowed to finish the season and then retire. They also seem to believe that Spanier will be fired tomorrow or Thursday.

These rumors are apparently coming from several well-connected PSU donors.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

84 is 84. Know when to get out, Joe. Your legacy is what to protect, not the 2011 season.

They are in this trouble because they tried to protect the legacy.

[Skin'emAlive]

More interesting information about the DA that dismissed the case, and then went missing...

http://www.centredaily.com/2011/11/06/2976046/gricar-had-final-say-in-ending.html

[TradeTheBeal!]

[John Lydon]

I will say it.

The man who laughed when the university president told him it was time for him to stop coaching would have been stonewalled? Reporting a crime would have opened the college up for a lawsuit? Man, I hope you are never on a jury in any compacity.

I guess I could say the same to you.

http://www.myemploymentlawyer.com/sexual-harassment-accused.htm

"an employer may not defame an employee. Although employers generally have a defense against defamation suits for disclosing an employee's performance related information, the employer can lose that defense by maliciously publishing false information or by disclosing the false information to people who do not "need to know" the results of the investigation."

So again, Paterno would have been stonewalled if the college had any shred of knowledge about the law (which I think is safe to assume).

Reporting an "alleged" crime it not what would have got them in trouble. Pushing the issue is what may have opened the college up to a lawsuit. See the above cited legal precident. It's called defimation of character.

[Corcaigh]

If my kid was on the team, he'd be heading home today.

Two local HS football players received scholarship offers from Penn State on Monday.

I would imagine the offer is not quite as attractive as if it had been received just a few days ago.

---------- Post added November-9th-2011 at 08:15 AM ----------

Reporting an "alleged" crime it not what would have got them in trouble. Pushing the issue is what may have opened the college up to a lawsuit. See the above cited legal precident. It's called defimation of character.

Who are the people who "do not need to know" who would have been involved for defamation to be an issue?