there are a lot of variables to consider when looking at the sandusky issue. i'm not sure of any details. the age of the young men would have a lot to do with how i view paterno. if these were college boys then he may well have considered them consenting adults. that's assuming he knew anything at all. however his dedication to education and giving everyone a second chance to get that education will always stand out as excellent in my book
McQueary told Paterno that it was a 10-year old boy but I'm guessing your account isn't genuine anyway.
actually my account is pretty ignorant. i have lived the last four months with only netflix. haven't really read up on the paterno issues. i don't know who mcreary is or that he told paterno those things. or if it was a second hand thing whether those accusations were hearsay and just dismissed or whether paterno admitted knowing. i have nothing. educate me but do so with facts to back them up. hearsay doesn't work for me.
It clearly doesn't look good for Paterno's legacy. It really looks like he knew about Sandusky's activities all along and swept it all under the rug. I don't think there's a real issue with consenting adults doing what they want with one another, but a guy in Sandusky's position appears predatory and looks like he abused his position of authority over the boys.
what i'm not understanding is why Joe Paterno would know anything about what happened to a ten year old boy when he and sandusky were in positions of authority over a college. . . clearly would have had to have happened somewhere other than the campus. there are details i'm missing here. i have all sorts of questions about that. send me a link to something incriminating paterno. all i have seen are hearsay and rumors. i want to see something saying he knew it.
okay. by reading that statement an fbi agent said that several people including joe paterno knew of "allegations" of sexual abuse. now if these men were made aware of a sexual charge against sandusky then it could easily be assumed that it had already been reported. it might be easy to assume that since someone called the university and told them about it that there were reports to the police about it and if there was not then there was probably nothing to it. they may have decided together that the fewer people who knew about the allegations the better unless he was found guilty of the charge. i'm not assigning those guys guilt until i see a legitimate case that involves more than 'hey. these guys heard he might have molested somebody and didn't tell anyone'. these allegations even when false can ruin a man's job and life. i'll have to say that when they did question paterno about it he readily told them what he knew.
Witnesses of a crime are expected to come forward and report what they've seen if they can. This is especially the case when you're talking about abuse that can continue rather than a one-off incident. McQueary witnessed the abuse of victim #2 (of 8+) and reported it to his superiors. They tried to handle it internally--not to ensure that Sandusky wasn't being accused wrongly as you seem to infer--but to keep it quiet. It was beyond their means and moral obligations to do so. They put the school and the program ahead of victimized children. Whether or not you can lay criminal blame on Paterno's grave it was an unforgivable, immoral action and he died in shame. In his own words, "with the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more."
okay. now that's information i had not read about. as i said before i have been without television (other than netflix) for four months. also i didn't infer anything. i only said that based on what information i had read in the link sent to me that they may have only known of allegations. this is the clearest explanation of what went on that actually implicates serious wrongdoing by paterno. still send me a link to a public article stating this please. i like to read those things myself.
wow. reading up on testimony Sandusky is a real creep! if he is guilty of those things as convicted then he really isn't getting bad enough a punishment.
http://articles.cnn.com/2012-07-12/...erry-sandusky-sandusky-trial-sandusky-scandal http://wap.yahoo.com/w/sports/home/...id=YrvwsCSswypAL.sUbZLwWEwk&.intl=US&.lang=en
okay. speed. now i'm pissed. lying by omission is still lying. your quote of paterno was cut off at the half point. and that's aggrevating. also i don't see any quotes of exactly what Mcreary told his superiors. it could range from.. "hey, y'all need to talk to sandusky. that man's sick" to "hey he raped that kid" ... i'm sure that he may have been hesitant to go all out in the initial accusation being intimidated by sandusky's reputation. give me accurate information... i mean all of it or don't give it. paterno said, "i don't listen to rumors" all i know is what mcreary told me" and "i wish i had done more...to investigate" did he know something? absolutely. was it substantial? that isn't even clear to you. guilty by association is what's happening here. jump on the bandwagon
I quoted the Wiki article, which parsed the original quote from Paterno, that I haven't read in it's entirety. You can probably find McQueary's grand jury testimony somewhere. I think he would state exactly what he told Paterno in his testimony. You seem pretty enthusiastic about this topic so I'll leave the rest up to you.
