[Phil]

It seems to me that we will be a better society when one is judged on the whole of his career instead of on a single lapse of judgement.

[wyman]

Two thoughts:

1) In discussing what started this firestorm -- seeing as the events in question are a decade old -- it was brought up that Paterno had just become the winningest coach in CFB.

Coincidence?

2) Someone tangentially related to your business (you are a middle manager, and we'll say this guy is a vendor you've only met once) comes in and tells you that one of your subordinates -- whom you've overseen for years, and who you consider a family friend -- was diddling some kid behind the office. What's your play? What kind of odds do you set on the story being true? What kind of odds do you set on the guy's career, life, etc. being ruined if you immediately call the cops? Do you think advising the actual eyewitness to call the cops and reporting the story to your boss should suffice?

Re 1) I think this is fishy.
Re 2) I think "passing the buck" -- which is what the media has been killing Paterno for -- is totally fine when you're not an eyewitness, and when the story sounds implausible.

edit: and I agree with Phil, depending on the lapse of judgment of course.

[blackshoe]

Phil, on 2011-November-10, 10:23, said:

It seems to me that we will be a better society when one is judged on the whole of his career instead of on a single lapse of judgement.

When I was in the Navy, the relevant saying was "one 'aw, sh*t' wipes out a thousand 'atta boys'.

[bd71]

wyman, on 2011-November-10, 10:33, said:

Two thoughts:

1) In discussing what started this firestorm -- seeing as the events in question are a decade old -- it was brought up that Paterno had just become the winningest coach in CFB.

Coincidence?

Yes. If you read the grand jury report on the charges against the accused molester, the first-listed charges are much more recent (2008/2009 I believe). Reading between the lines, those more recent complaints likely instigated an investigation, through which older charges came to light. The 2-3 years since the most recent charges allegedly occurred seems like a plausible timetable for a full-scale police investigation, deliberation by prosecutors on whether to bring charges, and then following through and bringing those charges up through a grand jury.

wyman, on 2011-November-10, 10:33, said:

2) Someone tangentially related to your business (you are a middle manager, and we'll say this guy is a vendor you've only met once) comes in and tells you that one of your subordinates -- whom you've overseen for years, and who you consider a family friend -- was diddling some kid behind the office. What's your play?

I think this analogy can be improved. I would start it like this: "Someone you work with closely in your business (you are the chief executive of the most powerful and visible division of your large corporation) tells you that one of your former subordinates who is still tangentially related to your business was..."

wyman, on 2011-November-10, 10:33, said:

What kind of odds do you set on the story being true? What kind of odds do you set on the guy's career, life, etc. being ruined if you immediately call the cops?

Police can conduct these investigations quietly; so reporting this is NOT the same as destroying someone's career. Indeed, the accused in this case had been investigated in 1998 (or so) on child molestation suspicions by the Penn St. police department without it being publicized at all as far as I can tell. Also, Joe Paterno had significant influence over whether the guys career/life might be ruined by a mere investigation...if Paterno had referred this directly to the cops and they came up with nothing, he would be in a prime situation to help address any leaks or backlash from that.

wyman, on 2011-November-10, 10:33, said:

Do you think advising the actual eyewitness to call the cops and reporting the story to your boss should suffice?

No. Ethically and legally, you must look out for children where there is a chance they are being abused and report it to the authorities. This is so much more true when you personally have the power to help manage any unwarranted backlash against the accused that may emerge.

[mike777]

http://www.attorneyg...Presentment.pdf


Grand Jury Report

[wyman]

At the very least, can someone tell me how McQueary's coaching this weekend?

[bd71]

wyman, on 2011-November-10, 12:31, said:

At the very least, can someone tell me how McQueary's coaching this weekend?

Here I'm with you 100%. This guy actually saw a kid getting molested and basically ran away. Forget who should have or did report this all to the cops, he could have stopped it from happening at the time but didn't...

[hrothgar]

Phil, on 2011-November-10, 10:23, said:

It seems to me that we will be a better society when one is judged on the whole of his career instead of on a single lapse of judgement.

Let's be clear: That "single lapse of judgement" involved the rape of 10 year old boy and a subsequent cover-up.

Celebrate Paterno all you want for his achievements as a football coach, but don't pretend for a minute that he should be allowed to hold any kind of supervisory position. Moreover, given the series of lawsuits that are about to hit Penn State, its ridiculous to suggest that the organization should do anything but running him out of town on a rail.

FWIW, I think that we'll be a better society when the dismissal of a football coach doesn't eclipse the firing of the president of the university.
(Don't get me started on the fact that students are rioting in favor of an accessory to child rape)

[kenberg]

mike777, on 2011-November-10, 12:26, said:

http://www.attorneyg...Presentment.pdf


Grand Jury Report

Having read as much of this as I can without throwing up, I would say that "lapse of judgment" is an extremely generous way of describing the actions, or lack of actions, of any of the people who were in a position of responsibility.

[mikeh]

Phil, I am very disappointed in your post.

Paterno, by virtue of his position and his previously promoted, and probably justified, reputation held an almost god-like position at Penn State.

He learned, from a direct source, that his second-in-command was physically raping a young child! Not 'acting inappropriately'. Not 'displaying questionable judgement'. Not, say, smoking dope.

There is little difference, in terms of moral culpability, imo, between child rape (and this wasn't a 'child' close to the age of consent) and murder. Would you forgive Paterno if the allegation was that the witness has seen this guy murder someone?

This was, remember, Paterno's second-in-command...a man with whom Paterno worked very closely every day.....and for year after year he continued to do so, knowing or at least surely suspecting that NOTHING had been done to investigate this crime.

And, we now know, throughout this period, Sandusky was allegedly abusing more and more innocent victims. Some 'lapse of judgements' carry graver consequences than others.

Also....don't the protests in support of him say something very sad about the position of sports in US culture?

[mike777]

Just to clear up a couple of things.

This was an ex employee not his current second in command.

It is in dispute what Paterno was told but he did not follow up with the child or his parents.

He does admit he was told that a grown man was doing something sexually to what appears to be a ten year old boy in the shower area of the football locker room.

To be fair the AD after a few weeks of reflection basically told this guy to stop bringing young boys onto campus and taking naked showers with them in the football locker room and it appears Paterno agreed with this restriction.

[blackshoe]

I wonder how many kids this guy molested between the time Paterno became aware of the early case and the time he (not Paterno, the other guy) was finally caught. Is Paterno legally culpable in any such cases? Should he be?

[mike777]

blackshoe, on 2011-November-10, 13:21, said:

I wonder how many kids this guy molested between the time Paterno became aware of the early case and the time he (not Paterno, the other guy) was finally caught. Is Paterno legally culpable in any such cases? Should he be?

civil legally probably, otherwise I would guess no. He did not witness the crime and I doubt he could go to jail for failing to call the police. Since then the law has changed a bit and at some point a boss has to call in the police but it is a bit murky how high up a boss you must be even under current law.

[hrothgar]

wyman, on 2011-November-10, 10:33, said:

1) In discussing what started this firestorm -- seeing as the events in question are a decade old -- it was brought up that Paterno had just become the winningest coach in CFB.

Coincidence?

Few comments:

1. The following web site has a good timeline of the events in question: http://espn.go.com/c...-sex-abuse-case

2. Paterno broke Eddie Robinson's record on October 8th. The grand jury investigation against Sandusky was initially reported on back in March. It seems far fetched to suggest any kind of relationship between the record and the arrest.

3. Sandusky resigned as an assistant coach back in 1999, however, he was granted a position as a Professor emeritus and the university gave him full use of the sport facilities. This continued for close to 10 years after Sandusky (alledgedly) raped a 10 year old boy in the university showers.

[PassedOut]

mike777, on 2011-November-10, 12:26, said:

http://www.attorneyg...Presentment.pdf

Grand Jury Report

Absolutely disgusting that this went on for years and years. And it's hard to imagine that no one at The Second Mile had any inkling of this, especially considering that molesters often try to get involved in such organizations.

[wyman]

hrothgar, on 2011-November-10, 13:52, said:

Paterno broke Eddie Robinson's record on October 8th. The grand jury investigation against Sandusky was initially reported on back in March. It seems far fetched to suggest any kind of relationship between the record and the arrest.

I thought he broke the record when they beat the Illini on Oct 29, only a week before the arrest.

[billw55]

The thread title is misleading.

This situation is not about one man who could, and should, have done more than he did. It is about many adults who could, and should, have done more. Focusing predominantly on one individual due to his fame relative to the others is misguided.

Worst of all (if I have read everything in the news correctly), Penn State banned Sandusky from bringing youth on to the campus following the reported incident. This is an inherent admission that one or more individuals in authority found the information reported to be credible. This is far beyond offensive.

Legally, nobody involved was a mandatory reporter, as far as I know. Morally .. it is hard to find words.

[Phil]

I don't doubt the severity of the allegations. Nor the duration.

What I still am struggling with is the response by the trustees. There is a spectrum of possible responses between "do nothing" and "put Paterno in jail as an accessory to a crime" (assuming the State College, PA DA feels this way). From the university's standpoint, there is certainly an abundance of mitigating circumstances related to his long tenure and his good deeds at Penn State. Firing Paterno on the spot seems to be an extreme responses that does not take into any consideration his history.

In the end, this seems to be a criminal matter. If he were to be convicted of a crime, then I think that firing would be justified.

Maybe I'm wrong, but an assistant coach really reports to the AD and the university president in terms of his job. I do not think that a head coach can summarily fire an assistant coach. On NPR this morning, the new coach Tom Bradley would not answer questions about his knowledge of Sandusky's crimes, which is lawyerspeak for "he knew too".

Quote

Legally, nobody involved was a mandatory reporter, as far as I know. Morally .. it is hard to find words.

Indeed. This stains anyone that knew about it. How many are there that knew that didn't lose their jobs today?

[mike777]

This is far from over. It would not shock me if there are University trustees who are part of the coverup. What did they know and when did they know it? We are told the Univ. President knew about this stuff. I hope the Press, Police and DA ask them.

I expect this guy will end up talking to the cops and he may not have been a lone actor preying on young boys in Happy Valley.

[hrothgar]

Phil, on 2011-November-10, 15:36, said:

What I still am struggling with is the response by the trustees. There is a spectrum of possible responses between "do nothing" and "put Paterno in jail as an accessory to a crime" (assuming the State College, PA DA feels this way). From the university's standpoint, there is certainly an abundance of mitigating circumstances related to his long tenure and his good deeds at Penn State. Firing Paterno on the spot seems to be an extreme responses that does not take into any consideration his history.

In the end, this seems to be a criminal matter. If he were to be convicted of a crime, then I think that firing would be justified.

Cynical old me thinks that Paterno (and for that matter the former President of the University) are being fired for two reasons:

1. Their inaction are going to expose Penn State to massive lawsuits. Paterno may have won a lot of football games and brought in money for the football program. But that's all in the past. The lawsuits are coming up.
2. The trustees probably believe that failure to take aggressive action will increase their exposure. In contrast, ***** canning the coach and the President gives the appearance of action and might play well with a jury.

If I'm feeling a little less cynical, I'd hope that the trustees also fired these individuals because its the right thing to do.

You don't sweep rapes under the rug, especially when you know that the individual involved is running a children's charity...
And telling the ex coach that he is no longer allow to shower with prepubescent boys on university property hardly seems like sufficient action.

Quote

How many are there that knew that didn't lose their jobs today?

Probably a fair number. However, firing a random janitor or three doesn't have the same deterrent effect, nor is it as effective at sending a message to the media.
On the other hand, firing a beloved coach and removing the President is a powerful mea culpa.

Quote

There is a spectrum of possible responses between "do nothing" and "put Paterno in jail as an accessory to a crime"

Some of these responses are outside the control of the trustees. For example, they can't put Paterno in jail.
On the other hand, they probably have the ability to dismiss him with cause and potentially rescind retirement benefits, ban him from the campus, and a wide variety of other such actions.

I, personally, would find these sorts of actions entirely appropriate...