It is currently Mon May 29, 2017 5:06 pm Advanced search

Sandusky and the aftermath thread

Discuss everything about Penn State and college football here.

Re: Sandusky and the aftermath thread

Postby Blue&White » Wed Mar 22, 2017 11:35 am

But the writing is on the wall now - legal told them to report and they didn't - pretty clear to me they covered this to avoid the public fallout.

If there is evidence to support that, then he is probably sunk. We will see.
#Cespedespaid!
User avatar
Blue&White
 
Posts: 8596
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 9:57 pm

Re: Sandusky and the aftermath thread

Postby Shore Lion » Wed Mar 22, 2017 11:47 am

I don't know. Spanier has an ego (and so did Joe, to be fair) and there were lots of rumblings that GS resented Joe to some point because of his influence/power whatever you want to call it. To now say Joe pressured him to do/not do something would be a tough thing for him to admit. Of course, he's looking at possible jail time and dead men tell no tales so who knows. I know Joe held a lot of sway in SOME matters but I've always wondered how much of Joe's "power" was myth vs. reality. Probably somewhere in the middle as most things are.
Shore Lion
 
Posts: 627
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 9:28 pm

Re: Sandusky and the aftermath thread

Postby Shore Lion » Wed Mar 22, 2017 1:37 pm

Well, per Curley's testimony today "coach" in the infamous emails was Paterno. Also that Joe definitely knew about the investigation in '98.
Shore Lion
 
Posts: 627
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 9:28 pm

Re: Sandusky and the aftermath thread

Postby Blue&White » Wed Mar 22, 2017 1:57 pm

Well, there goes that illusion.

Incredible they knew about 98 and did absolutely nothing. I will be forever baffled by that.
#Cespedespaid!
User avatar
Blue&White
 
Posts: 8596
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 9:57 pm

Re: Sandusky and the aftermath thread

Postby reincarnatedlama » Wed Mar 22, 2017 3:27 pm

I don't think Joe's being aware of 98 was in doubt - he didn't have direct interaction but rather was getting 2nd hand updates. I believe it was Tom Harmon (PSU PD) would update Curley/Schultz who would update Joe - so how much they transmitted / sanitized it is difficult to really know. But as B&W is basically saying - it's tough to give these guys benefit of doubt - the 98 incident put them on notice and the McQ report should have sent them to authorities.

Can't deny it anymore. This was a cover up. And it was likely done to protect the football program and $$$$ it brings in.

My Dad and a good friend's Dad loved Paterno / PSU football on a reverent level. We each say the only good thing about their passing was they didn't live to see this.
Making America Great Again
reincarnatedlama
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:47 pm

Re: Sandusky and the aftermath thread

Postby Blue&White » Wed Mar 22, 2017 4:27 pm

I don't think Joe's being aware of 98 was in doubt - he didn't have direct interaction but rather was getting 2nd hand updates.

It was in doubt to me. I recall Harmon saying that Schultz received regular updates on the 98 Sandusky investigation but I don't recall anyone confirming that Joe knew anything about it. In fact, Jay Paterno went on a national media tour where he was adamant that Joe didn't know about the 98 investigation. I don't think even Curley knew about it. And, it was also never verified that the 98 e-mail was even about the Sandusky investigation. So, if that was what was testified to, that is completely new information, at least as far as I, and Jay Paterno, are concerned.

As for the idea there was a cover up, I don't deny that is possible but I don't buy it based on that one piece of testimony.
#Cespedespaid!
User avatar
Blue&White
 
Posts: 8596
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 9:57 pm

Re: Sandusky and the aftermath thread

Postby Shore Lion » Wed Mar 22, 2017 5:25 pm

I'm not convinced (yet) that there was this great conspiracy to cover up anything. I get the feeling it was more of a "wtf do we do?" kind of thing. And I'm not absolving anybody of anything. And maybe, just maybe you can also make the argument that in 98 there was an investigation and there were no charges. The reality is these guys were told SOMETHING, what exactly, we'll never know for sure. So looking back on their knowledge of '98 that apparently for whatever reason didn't rise to criminal level maybe the whole thing just creeped them out and they didn't want anything happening on campus. Maybe they figured it was more of the same and just wanted to get it out of there. MM is the one. He's the one who SAW something. If he in fact saw a guy sodomizing a kid and didn't say "boo" after his initial report well then, that's where most of the blame lies IMHO. Not saying there isn't blame elsewhere, obviously there is. It's a tragedy all the way around and I hope that the victims are able to find peace at some point.
Shore Lion
 
Posts: 627
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 9:28 pm

Re: Sandusky and the aftermath thread

Postby Blue&White » Wed Mar 22, 2017 8:58 pm

Reading some press reports, Curley testified that he did tell Joe about the investigation in 98 but did not tell Spanier about it. Then in 2001 he wrote an email to Spanier about that incident and referenced the 98 investigation because he thought Spanier had to have known about it. But, Spanier claims he did not and was never told.

Why would Curley tell Joe and not Spanier? For that matter, why would the cops have told Curley? The 98 investigation had nothing to do with PSU so why would Sandusky's employer know about an investigation? None of this makes any sense to me. It's really hard for me to believe that Joe actually knew about 98. Not because I want to give Joe the benefit of the doubt but because it just makes no logical sense why Sandusky's direct supervisor would have been notified about a criminal investigation about him? Why would that have happened? Of course, it doesn't help that Sandusky soon after announced his retirement and left after the next season.

I don't know what to think, to be honest.
#Cespedespaid!
User avatar
Blue&White
 
Posts: 8596
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 9:57 pm

Re: Sandusky and the aftermath thread

Postby reincarnatedlama » Thu Mar 23, 2017 9:08 am

The 98 incident was investigated by campus police in conjunction with Centre County DA. Harmon informed Curley (I am not sure if Sandusky was still on staff at time or had just retired) and I believe Curley asked to be kept updated because Paterno wanted to be kept updated of situation - Paterno didn't have direct contact with Harmon.

And I agree B&W - if Sandusky was still on staff this has all the implications that he was pushed out because of concerns of his behavior with kids.

But if I do the math
They knew about 98 + McQ reports at minimum he witnessed Jerry showering with a boy + legal said go to cops + Schultz is claiming he recommended going to authorities - they didn't go to authorities - they didn't even enforce their own in house measures = they didn't want this getting out publicly.

There is no other plausible reason they didn't report unless they are revealed to actually be the Three Stooges.
Making America Great Again
reincarnatedlama
 
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:47 pm

Re: Sandusky and the aftermath thread

Postby Blue&White » Thu Mar 23, 2017 9:25 am

The 98 incident was investigated by campus police in conjunction with Centre County DA

Are you sure about that? I thought it was investigated by the SC police. Why would campus police be involved? It didn't happen on campus. And, Sandusky was still on staff at that time. The DA decided not to push for an indictment either just before or during the 98 season and a few months later Sandusky said he was retiring after the 99 season. And, while there is an explanation for the timing, it's getting increasingly difficult to believe that 98 investigation didn't play a part in that decision process.

As for Paterno wanting to be kept updated, this is still the first time I recall hearing any of that. I specifically remember that Shultz was kept updated by Harmon. I don't remember Curley even knowing but this has been going on for over 5 years now and it's tough to keep track of everything. The one thing I am positive about is, prior to yesterday, I had not heard once that Joe knew about 1998 outside of that one cryptic email. Everyone had been saying he did not know and I don't recall anyone saying during Sandusky's trial that he did (that was when it came out that Harmon had briefed Schultz). Jay went on a media tour where he swore up and down that Joe did not know about 98. So, as far as I'm concerned, that is new information.

As for your math, I don't know. It's hard for me to believe that 3 or 4 men with children and grandchildren conspired to let a predator like Sandusky walk around free to avoid bad press, but sicker things than that have certainly happened in our society.
#Cespedespaid!
User avatar
Blue&White
 
Posts: 8596
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 9:57 pm

PreviousNext

Return to The Locker Room

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest