Joe Paterno fired as football coach at Penn State

Joe Paterno should have alerted the police immediately. There is no excuse for this. NONE.

All of you who defend this old man who allowed children to be abused under his watch are some sick human beings, that's all I can say really.

reply to post by WarminIndy


That link does not say what you said, which is that Paterno says he knew Sandusky raped a little boy, told him not to do it again.

reply to post by Daughter2


The law states that Curley or Schultz should have done all the legwork, which they did not.

reply to post by Lemon.Fresh


And they lied under oath.

Paterno has not been implicated, and prosecutors have said he is not a target of the investigation. Curley and Schultz were each charged with perjury and failing to report the 2002 incident to authorities.

www.wpxi.com...

reply to post by illuminatislave


The grad student waited a DAY to even report this event. He didn't stop it while it was happening and was only worried about his own career. Should he be charged, too?
Joe didn't know if it was true or not and did what he should have done which was to let the administration call the police to investigate. Are you the type of person who plays policeman? Do you insert yourself into investigations and muddy the waters?

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

That link does not say what you said, which is that Paterno says he knew Sandusky raped a little boy, told him not to do it again.

Kelly said the assistant, who was extremely upset about what he had seen, immediately called his father to relate what he had discovered. Together, the two decided that the assistant should promptly report the incident to head football coach Joe Paterno. The next morning, the assistant telephoned Paterno and then went to Paterno’s home to explain what he had seen. Paterno testified that he then called Penn State Athletic Director Tim Curley and met with Curley the following day, explaining that a graduate assistant had reported seeing Sandusky involved in sexual activity with a young boy in the showers at the Lasch Building.

Did he not know?

Paterno acknowledged McQueary told him of “an incident in the shower of our locker room” involving Sandusky and that he believed McQueary clearly “saw something inappropriate involving Mr. Sandusky.” However, he said the incident wasn’t described in the same graphic detail as contained in the grand jury’s “finding of fact” released Saturday that shocked the nation.

Pennsylvania law asks employees to pass the information up their chain of command, where it fell on Curley to tell authorities. However, Paterno is no normal middle manager. He is a powerful and iconic figure across the state and Curley worked as much for him as he did for Curley.

Who really was the chain of command?

rivals.yahoo.com...

larrybrownsports.com...

And now there are 20 victims coming forward. Some incidents took place in the showers of the team that Paterno was the boss of. Did he know? Yes. Did he consult the very same people who told Sandusky about it? Yes. Was he there when the consultation happened? Yes.

reply to post by pteridine
The good news is that McQueary will not be present at the game tomorrow. It is because of death threats that he has received. Too bad he hasn't grown up enough to resign, like he should.... immediately!

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by illuminatislave

 

The grad student waited a DAY to even report this event. He didn't stop it while it was happening and was only worried about his own career. Should he be charged, too?
Joe didn't know if it was true or not and did what he should have done which was to let the administration call the police to investigate. Are you the type of person who plays policeman? Do you insert yourself into investigations and muddy the waters?

Yes, this guy is just a guilty because he is now a complicit accomplice. He did nothing and he did call Paterno.

reply to post by WarminIndy


And Curley lied under oath.
How do you know he didn't lie to Paterno, too?

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

And Curley lied under oath.
How do you know he didn't lie to Paterno, too?

edit on 11-11-2011 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)

McQueary told Paterno before Paterno told Curley. Therefore, Paterno knew before Curley.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by pteridine

 

The good news is that McQueary will not be present at the game tomorrow. It is because of death threats that he has received. Too bad he hasn't grown up enough to resign, like he should.... immediately!

I would imagine the Nebraska fans are going to make it a very difficult game for Penn State.

Nebraska has had to file a security report for the safety of the students.
www.cbssports.com...

On Thursday morning, Nebraska Regent Tim Clare asked to see a detailed security plan for the game. Tom Osborne, Nebraska's athletic director, said shortly thereafter that he had been in touch with the Penn State police department and was confident in their ability to ensure a safe environment for the game. He couldn't stop himself, however, from issuing an unthinkable caveat for Nebraska fans: Don't wear red. "If [fans] have a red sweater or red shirt on that's great," Osborne said. "Most people have a winter coat that's not red. If they want to wear that it might be a good idea. I just don't know if it's a good idea under the circumstances to stand out."

Nebraska fans are told not to wear the colors of their university because of safety issues. Nebraska did nothing, why can't they wear their colors?

More Joe news......

On Thursday, Pennsylvania's two U.S. senators, Republican Pat Toomey and Democratic Bob Casey, reversed their nomination for Paterno to receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom -- the nation's highest civilian honor

Christian Science Monitor

I heard from people a few weeks ago that they were a little perturbed that Joe was nominated for this honor, they didn't believe he deserved it because he was a winning football coach.

reply to post by WarminIndy


Paterno didn't lie under oath. Curley was above Paterno.
After Paterno had the meeting with Curley, he was not at the second meeting when Curley said everything was going to be taken care of. Why wasn't Paterno present at this meeting? Was he told not to attend by Curley?

Curley testified that that he was told there was "horsing around". This was a lie. The witness said he saw Sandusky raping the boy. If Curley can lie about this under oath, I think he is capable of lying to Paterno in order to proceed with the cover up.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Paterno didn't lie under oath. Curley was above Paterno.
After Paterno had the meeting with Curley, he was not at the second meeting when Curley said everything was going to be taken care of. Why wasn't Paterno present at this meeting? Was he told not to attend by Curley?

Curley testified that that he was told there was "horsing around". This was a lie. The witness said he saw Sandusky raping the boy. If Curley can lie about this under oath, I think he is capable of lying to Paterno in order to proceed with the cover up.

Yes, he did. It is in all the sources.

While Pennsylvania Attorney General Linda Kelly says that her office won't file charges against Joe Paterno for not reporting the alleged child sexual abuse by former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky, the 84-year-old coach could eventually face criminal charges for perjury, obstruction of justice and violating the state's Child Protective Services Law. Paterno could also become a defendant in civil lawsuits filed by Sandusky's alleged victims. Those lawsuits could allege that Paterno negligently failed to prevent a third party with whom he had a supervisory relationship (Sandusky) from committing abuse. Read more: sportsillustrated.cnn.com...

Under Pennsylvania law, as in other jurisdictions, perjury refers to knowingly lying while under oath. Obstruction of justice describes interference with the administration of justice, such as by concealing evidence or delaying or frustrating a criminal investigation. While Paterno has thus far escaped these criminal charges, his statements and behavior suggest that he remains vulnerable to them. That is particularly evident when considering troubling inconsistencies between Paterno's testimony to the grand jury that investigated Sandusky and the testimony of Penn State assistant Mike McQueary.

So yes, the state attorney general says Paterno lied under oath, meaning perjury and committed obstruction of justice.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Paterno didn't lie under oath. Curley was above Paterno.
After Paterno had the meeting with Curley, he was not at the second meeting when Curley said everything was going to be taken care of. Why wasn't Paterno present at this meeting? Was he told not to attend by Curley?

Curley testified that that he was told there was "horsing around". This was a lie. The witness said he saw Sandusky raping the boy. If Curley can lie about this under oath, I think he is capable of lying to Paterno in order to proceed with the cover up.

We don't know that Paterno did NOT lie under oath. All of the grand jury proceedings have not been released, at least they haven't to my knowledge. The jury votes on what they believe needs to be either investigated further or whether indictments should be handed down on the basis of the information heard. I have sat on federal grand juries and had witnesses lying their butts off in front of us and had no action taken because the judge and the prosecuting attorney wanted the 'big fish' and weren't worried about the 'little fish'.

reply to post by WarminIndy


I'd like to know exactly what he testified that was foudn to be a lie.
According to the grand jury report, Paterno did not commit perjury.

On the Sunday he had the meeting at this house, he told Curley about the incident as a rape, Curley testified that this was not what Paterno reported to him. McQueary testified that he did report it to Paterno as a rape. Why would Curley be throwing them both under the bus?

reply to post by WarminIndy


Your right Nebraska has nothing to do with this but when your talking about college kids anything can happen. They rioted in the streets and will probably be drunk at the game and they will want to take this out on someone. I am a Husker fan and if I were going to the game I would be very careful. Security will be tight though. I would still wear my red proudly. Its not our fault Penn state has a pedophile ring. We just wanna watch some football.

If Paterno is found to be guilty of perjury or having more involvement in this whole debacle, I'll be the first to eat my words.

As it stands now, I honestly believe that men more powerful than Paterno are using him to keep all eyes off of the true slimeballs like those in the DA's office and LE. The ones who chose to not pursue charges in 1998, which allowed it to get to this point.

The more I read about the 98' allegations, I am becoming more inclined to believe Joe did need to be fired.
Paterno had to now at least about this one to be true and fire Sandusky . Just showering alone with the boy on campus should have been enough to can him.
As for McQueary, he really needs to go, he is the direct witness and did nothing to stop it in the act. Shame on him.

In 1998, the mother of a young boy designated by the grand jury as "Victim 6" became suspicious when her son and Sandusky showed up at her home with wet hair. The boy, according to the grand jury report, acknowledged that he had showered with Sandusky, prompting the mother to call Penn State University police. In a later conversation with Sandusky — with two university detectives listening in — the coach allegedly admitted hugging the boy while both were naked in the shower, the grand jury reported. "I was wrong," Sandusky allegedly told the mother. "I wish I could get forgiveness. I know I won't get it from you. I wish I were dead."

USAToda y

reply to post by mugger


When Paterno made the coaching change after first learning about Sandusky's actions, he did force Sandusky into early retirement. It was then up to the college executives to make sure that Sandusky didn't come back on campus.

If I were Paterno, knowing that I couldn't change the DA's minds or those above me on campus, I think I'd have threatened to leave and go to another school if they didn't forbid Sandusky from coming on Penn State property. In my eyes, this is all Paterno would've been able to do in regards to how the law and college were handling things.

So, maybe there was something he could've done to sway them, but I still feel that we need to focus on the real people who need to give us answers and stop thinking of Paterno as G_d and/or the arm of the law like the witnesses did.