11-09-2011, 01:44 PM
Quote:RJ, why are you putting this on Joe? You're telling me a Graduate student, puts them at most likely at least 22, doesn't know to call the cops when witnessing a rape or a janitor, at least 18, doesn't know. Joe is so far down the line and yet people are quick to call for him to step down. How do you know he didn't suggest what you say?
The facts:
In 1998, Sandusky was investigated for inappropriate sexual conduct with 2 boys, Victim 6 and B.K. (B.K. is currently serving overseas and did not testify before the grand jury). This investigation included Sandusky speaking with the mother of Victim 6 twice while police investigators listened in the next room. Sandusky admitted to detective Schreffler and Jerry Lauro that he showered naked with and hugged victim 6 and that it was wrong.
Sandusky won the Assistant Coach of the Year awards in 1986 and 1999. He was so good at his job that he coached 10 first-team All American linebackers, acquiring the name "Linebacker U". He was seen as the heir apparent for Joe Pa's head coaching job. Then he retired in 1999 at the end of the season.
Schultz testified before the grand jury that Sandusky retired in 1999 due to the fact that Paterno felt it was time to make a coaching change and to take advantage of an enhanced retirement benefit under Sandusky's state pension.
My suppositions:
Joe Pa knew about the 1998 investigation (as Sandusky's direct boss he had to have known even if not "officially"). He decide it was time for Sandusky to go. Paterno didn't want Sandusky as head coach at Penn State. He told Sandusky he would never be the head coach and why. Possibly he threatened him with exposure. Why else would he want a coaching change? Sandusky was awarded the Assistant Coach of the Year that year, why would you up and change something that was working so well? Paterno wanted him out, period. Joe Pa knew about the sexual abuse (or at least the "inappropriate contact").
When GA McQueary (age 28) told Joe about the rape in 2002, Joe had to know how serious the allegation was. Even if McQueary didn't actually say "rape" or "sodomy" Joe Pa knew about the 1998 investigation and still did nothing to stop or even report the behavior to LE. The fact that he did the minimum required by law does make him culpable in this, I am sorry to say. With ultimate power does come ultimate responsibility. He had a legal duty to report to his superiors, yes. He had a moral duty to ensure that McQueary (as the eyewitness) reported to LE. He was McQueary's superior and should have told him that he needed to report it. They could've called LE right then and there and Joe could have held McQueary's hand if needed while he related what he saw to LE.
My Opinion:
Joe Pa is morally culpable in this scandal, and shares the blame with everyone else who knew what Sandusky was doing, and did nothing directly to stop it. Legally he is off the hook as he did do the minimum required by law and U policy.