• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Sandusky Gets 30 Years

Is it ok to wait and see for all the facts to get out before we burn any of these guys? Although it seems pretty obvious that Sandusky has 'pound you in the ass' prison in his near future...

I have grown to love JOEPA, so it's hard for me to burn him. I'm not apologizing for him, I'm just waiting till the facts come out. The timing and exactly what everyone did in reaction is very merky at this time. I'm not letting anyone off the hook, just want to understand everything first.
 
Facts are out. See the presentment.
 
Unreal that someone would worry more about their job than stopping a 10 yo getting raped. He called his dad for advice? Grab the closest heavy object and stop it. How anyone could allow that to continue is pathetic.
 
I've tried to relate the chain of McQueary -> Paterno -> Curley to how things work in my company.

In terms of position/power within the company at the time of the incident, consider McQueary level 1, Paterno level 2, and Curley level 3 (the highest level).

IMO:

McQueary not going to the cops is the biggest mistake made by anyone other than Sandusky. I think Paterno then did the right thing by going to Curley.

But, that's where things fall apart. I don't think Paterno is to blame here... but I think McQueary's actions need to be scrutinized further (as Curley's already have).

You have the person who saw and initially reported the incident... you have the people who moved it up the chain... you have the people at the top of the chain.

Its probably a bad analogy, but it reminds me of pendulum balls:

images


McQueary is the first ball, Paterno is in the middle somewhere, and Curley is the one on the far right.

Paterno wasn't the ball that got pulled back (witnessing the rape)... He couldn't have even known who pulled it back (whether or not the claims were false or exaggerated). All he could do was pass it on to the ball on the far right (Curley) who could actually move.

When Sandusky is still walking around the campus a decade later; its pretty obvious that the right people did not receive the transfer of energy (McQueary's claims)... I really want to know why McQueary (or at least his father) wasn't insistent on bringing more attention to this once Curley seemingly balked.

Does it all come down to McQueary's allegiance to PSU Football/Paterno?
 
Where does Sanduskey's wife figure into this whole thing? She HAD to know in that he was more interested in dudes than her. Is there any possible way that she didn't know?

PSU is gonna burn hard for this regardless of whoever the guilt is laid on.
 
TBR said:
Facts are out. See the presentment.
Click to expand...

Ok. The facts are that a grand jury did not indict joepa on anything. Sandusky was not on his staff when it was brought to his attention. So he informed the administrators who oversee what Sandusky does at this time. It was investigated by AD/President, etc. It's not like he was still on Joepa's staff, and in the next meeting Joepa said 'well, I heard you may have raped a little boy.... what is your plan to stop wisconsin's offense.'

If they did their own investigation, which I guess later the story began to change, what is joepa supposed to do? Be the lawyer/jury/police? No, he didn't say he saw it and did nothing. Someone told him that they saw it, and then he informed the people he is supposed to.

No one is blameless, and they all need to be held accountable, but it just seems to me that since he used to work with JoePa, it's now on him to take sandusky down? doesn't seem fair
 
Last edited:
vtwhat etc said:
I've tried to relate the chain of McQueary -> Paterno -> Curley to how things work in my company.

In terms of position/power within the company at the time of the incident, consider McQueary level 1, Paterno level 2, and Curley level 3 (the highest level).

IMO:

McQueary not going to the cops is the biggest mistake made by anyone other than Sandusky. I think Paterno then did the right thing by going to Curley.

But, that's where things fall apart. I don't think Paterno is to blame here... but I think McQueary's actions need to be scrutinized further (as Curley's already have).

You have the person who saw and initially reported the incident... you have the people who moved it up the chain... you have the people at the top of the chain.

Its probably a bad analogy, but it reminds me of pendulum balls:

images


McQueary is the first ball, Paterno is in the middle somewhere, and Curley is the one on the far right.

Paterno wasn't the ball that got pulled back (witnessing the rape)... He couldn't have even known who pulled it back (whether or not the claims were false or exaggerated). All he could do was pass it on to the ball on the far right (Curley) who could actually move.

When Sandusky is still walking around the campus a decade later; its pretty obvious that the right people did not receive the transfer of energy (McQueary's claims)... I really want to know why McQueary (or at least his father) wasn't insistent on bringing more attention to this once Curley seemingly balked.

Does it all come down to McQueary's allegiance to PSU Football/Paterno?
Click to expand...

I think you are pretty spot on with the 'whats confusing about the information'... and McQuery can keep his allegance. He was the QB when I was there, and he SUCKED!
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
Joe Pa believed that Sandusky was investigated and found innocent, or he is a terrible human being. No grey area there. There is no way that any conscious person with a soul lets that situation get buried without a legal investigation.
Click to expand...

That is called an either/or fallacy. False logic, bro.
 
PhillyDeac said:
Ok. The facts are that a grand jury did not indict joepa on anything. Sandusky was not on his staff when it was brought to his attention. So he informed the administrators who oversee what Sandusky does at this time. It was investigated by AD/President, etc. It's not like he was still on Joepa's staff, and in the next meeting Joepa said 'well, I heard you may have raped a little boy.... what is your plan to stop wisconsin's offense.'

If they did their own investigation, which I guess later the story began to change, what is joepa supposed to do? Be the lawyer/jury/police? No, he didn't say he saw it and did nothing. Someone told him that they saw it, and then he informed the people he is supposed to.

No one is blameless, and they all need to be held accountable, but it just seems to me that since he used to work with JoePa, it's now on him to take sandusky down? doesn't seem fair
Click to expand...

Call the damn police or at least tell McQueary to do so.

McQueary wasn't charged either, but who here thinks he fulfilled his moral obligation? There's legally right and morally right. Paterno and McQueary might be legally right, but they aren't morally right.
 
BillBrasky said:
pendulum balls...really?
Click to expand...


Ha... yeah, i acknowledged it was probably a bad analogy... my point was this:

Paterno was put in a situation where he wasn't the witness & had been close to the accused for decades. Paterno moving the claims up the ladder is all he should have been expected to do in that spot. McQueary, given the circumstances, should not even have to be told to take it to the police.

I'm just really interested in what actions McQueary took after Curley had adequate time to attempt to 'investigate' it internally.
 
Schultz was very unsure about what he remembered the graduate assistant telling him and Curley about the shower incident. He testified that he had the impression that Sandusky might have inappropriately grabbed the young boy's genitals while wrestling and agreed that such was inappropriate sexual conduct between a man and a boy. While equivocating on the definition of "sexual" in the context of Sandusky wrestling with and grabbing the genitals of the boy, Schultz conceded that the report the graduate assistant made was of inappropriate sexual conduct by Sandusky. However, Schultz testified that the allegations were "not that serious" and that he and Curley "had no indication that a crime had occurred." Schultz agreed that sodomy between Sandusky and a child would clearly be inappropriate sexual conduct. He denied having such conduct reported to him either by Paterno or the graduate assistant.
Click to expand...

This is pretty confusing.
A first, he doesn't really remember but then he has an "impression" that Sandusky grabbed the boy's genitals. Then he admits that the GA said it was "inappropriate sexual conduct" but at the same time Schultz believed that the allegations were "not that serious".
 
TBR said:
Call the damn police or at least tell McQueary to do so.

McQueary wasn't charged either, but who here thinks he fulfilled his moral obligation? There's legally right and morally right. Paterno and McQueary might be legally right, but they aren't morally right.
Click to expand...

Bingo. JoePa should GTFO.
 
Oh, and Schultz "believed" that he had asked the child protective services agency to look in to it. You wouldn't remember having done that?
 
awakeandready said:
This is pretty confusing.
A first, he doesn't really remember but then he has an "impression" that Sandusky grabbed the boy's genitals. Then he admits that the GA said it was "inappropriate sexual conduct" but at the same time Schultz believed that the allegations were "not that serious".
Click to expand...

This is my only point about why JoePa probably should be taken out of this scandal.... notice JoePa didn't say 'well, I heard the allegation and it didn't seem that serious..' He apparently didn't know what to make of anything, so told the people who oversee Sandusky at the time for them to perform the proper investigation. He's not in a position to be judge/jury.
 
PhillyDeac said:
This is my only point about why JoePa probably should be taken out of this scandal.... notice JoePa didn't say 'well, I heard the allegation and it didn't seem that serious..' He apparently didn't know what to make of anything, so told the people who oversee Sandusky at the time for them to perform the proper investigation. He's not in a position to be judge/jury.
Click to expand...

Calling the police or telling his employee to call the police is not the same thing as being judge/jury.
 
PhillyDeac said:
This is my only point about why JoePa probably should be taken out of this scandal.... notice JoePa didn't say 'well, I heard the allegation and it didn't seem that serious..' He apparently didn't know what to make of anything, so told the people who oversee Sandusky at the time for them to perform the proper investigation. He's not in a position to be judge/jury.
Click to expand...

Are you serious? He is Penn State football. If he wanted Sandusky gone because he raped little boys, he would have been gone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top