Penn State Sandusky scandal: AD arrested, Paterno, Spanier fired; coverup charged #7

[Reader]

If Joe wanted justice for the victims, back in mid-December, when it was possible to predict that through sickness or death he might not be able to testify at the trials, could he have made a formal statement (deposition?) where the defendant's lawyers could have asked questions and that statement be admissable to the coming trials, possibly after he was dead?
I can see why no one might have wanted to ask for this, but coldn't he have volunteered? That would mean putting the kids ahead of Curley and Schultz...

He did, the grand jury testimony.

No, I was referring to the above post by StellarsJay....why Paterno in the time after the scandal was revealed and up until his health became so bad, did he not make this type of statement, written or video, to expand on his testimony of 7 min. at the GJ, that could be presented during trial after his death?

I've seen this type of testimony accepted at trials before. I believe he had a lawyer, or could have gotten one, to help him get this done. Of course he would have been open to cross examination by the prosecutors, which is probably why he wouldn't agree to it. We must not let too much truth get out there about what, when and how he knew about JS and his proclivities for years, 2002 and before....IMO

 

[BigCat]

Several years later. A few weeks ago, I looked that the pattern of hiring, and McQueary's rise was similar to some of the others in the program, including Sandusky.

The difference is that McQueary has never proven himself to be anywhere near the coach Sandusky was. The lack of offensive production, particularly in the passing game, has been the number one complaint amongst Penn State football fans for several years now. (Penn State's new coach, the current offensive coordinator for the New England Patriots, was hired to address Penn State's woeful offense.) Most of the fans' ire has been directed at Jay Paterno, since he was the quarterbacks coach, but McQueary, as the receivers coach, must share some of the blame. In my opinion, Jay Paterno and McQueary, even without the scandal, would have been hard pressed to obtain equivalent positions at another division one university. They just haven't proven themselves despite being given an abundance of resources. Sandusky, on the other hand, is second only to Paterno in terms of credit due for the success of the Penn State football program. He was an outstanding. Terrible person. Great coach.

 

[Reader]

He only knew of the 2002 incident. He turned it over to Schultz (he knew about the 1998 incident).

BBM

Is there verification of this statement, other than Paterno himself and his son?

I ask because, almost every article I have read about the scandal since it began emphasizes the power and control of Paterno over his football program and the entire college and either states outright or theorizes that Paterno had to have known about the 1998 investigation, but was part of a cover up.

It's just not believable to me, personally, IMO, that Curley who did know, and who was chosen as AD by Paterno, did not report that information to him, and that the campus police, who also reported information to him about problems with his players and staff, did not advise him also. He was well known to know all that went on at the campus with his program and demanded this so he could control it. IMO

In another instance, Triponey said, Spanier told her, "You can't expect to change the culture" and that in "40 years he never saw anybody stand up to Joe Paterno."

William Britt, a police sergeant in Philadelphia's homicide division, said he's not surprised by the alleged coverup. "I see how this happens (at Penn State). We lived it," Britt said.

Britt said the school's handling of the case showed who was in charge. "The highest official in State College, Pa., is Joe Paterno. I don't care what anybody else's title is, he ran the show up there. And he knew about everything. There's no doubt in anybody's mind that it all comes back to JoePa," Britt said. "I got this from the (police) officers I dealt with. Basically they said it's a nightmare, any case that involves the football team."

Quotes from:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/coll...-11-22/11-22-11-Paterno-Discipline/51346682/1

 

[Reader]

The difference is that McQueary has never proven himself to be anywhere near the coach Sandusky was. The lack of offensive production, particularly in the passing game, has been the number one complaint amongst Penn State football fans for several years now. (Penn State's new coach, the current offensive coordinator for the New England Patriots, was hired to address Penn State's woeful offense.) Most of the fans' ire has been directed at Jay Paterno, since he was the quarterbacks coach, but McQueary, as the receivers coach, must share some of the blame. In my opinion, Jay Paterno and McQueary, even without the scandal, would have been hard pressed to obtain equivalent positions at another division one university. They just haven't proven themselves despite being given an abundance of resources. Sandusky, on the other hand, is second only to Paterno in terms of credit due for the success of the Penn State football program. He was an outstanding. Terrible person. Great coach.

BBM

Perhaps reason enough for Sandusky to be kept on the 'team' even after certain, uh 'problems' became apparent but someone wanted to break a win record?

 

[Tipstaff]

First, and this complicates matters, the department that would be the reporting agency was the one headed by Schultz. Usually, any report to another agency would get referred back to the department with jurisdiction.

Second, without evidence, I doubt if the press would touch it. There was no Facebook at the time and I'm not sure about MySpace. In 2002, Sandusky was a respected individual, head of a major charity, with an excellent record. McQueary was a TA, at the bottom of totem poll, not an assistant coach.

Third, the 2002 incident was weak; even today, it is not the strongest of the charges. It is one witness, no victim. Amendola claim he has the victim, who will testify that nothing happened (and he may).

I was, and still am, very critical of the DA in regard to the 1998 incident. If it was the 2002 incident, I wouldn't be. It came down to just one witness, who may not come off as credible and, even if he is credible, could have misinterpreted something he saw.

Now, the circumstances in 2002 begged for further investigation, but that didn't happen. So did 1998, where LE was greatly involved, but that didn't happen either.

Have you seen today's news regarding Greg Kelly ....the son of the NY Police Commissioner Ray Kelly? Because of the conflict the case has been turned over to Manhattan District Attorneys Office.

I firmly believe that if the powers that be wanted to investigate the Sandusky allegations there were avenues.

My Space was founded in 2003 and became popular in 2006 - just for the record.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

And the responsibility for each one of those 1,826 days of respect afforded to that rapist rest squarely on the shoulders of all who knew, yet did nothing to protect those children.

Starting with Joe Paterno.

And, very potentially, it would have made no difference. Paterno certainly didn't witness any activity.

The 2002 incident is one of the weaker ones. No victim to testify, so far. Possibly a victim who says he wasn't a victim.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Have you seen today's news regarding Greg Kelly ....the son of the NY Police Commissioner Ray Kelly? Because of the conflict the case has been turned over to Manhattan District Attorneys Office.

I firmly believe that if the powers that be wanted to investigate the Sandusky allegations there were avenues.

My Space was founded in 2003 and became popular in 2006 - just for the record.

There is a victim to the Kelly case, and Kelly is the son of the police commissioner. Sandusky wasn't related to anyone.

The 2002 incident is one of the weaker ones, just one witness, who in 2002, wasn't established. The claim was against, in 2002, a prominent and respected individual. It would have been difficult.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

BBM

Is there verification of this statement, other than Paterno himself and his son?

I don't recall anyone saying Paterno was told about the 1998 incident. I just checked the GJ report and no body indicates Paterno was told (pp. 12-13). The transcript of the preliminary hearing indicated that Schultz was told about the 1998 incident by Harmon .

I ask because, almost every article I have read about the scandal since it began emphasizes the power and control of Paterno over his football program and the entire college and either states outright or theorizes that Paterno had to have known about the 1998 investigation, but was part of a cover up.

He had a lot of control over the football program, but 1998 was a University Police matter.

It's just not believable to me, personally, IMO, that Curley who did know, and who was chosen as AD by Paterno, did not report that information to him, and that the campus police, who also reported information to him about problems with his players and staff, did not advise him also. He was well known to know all that went on at the campus with his program and demanded this so he could control it. IMO

There is no suggestion that Curry knew about the 1998 incident; Schultz, yes, but not anyone else. According Harmon, he told Schultz, and indicated that the DA and CYS would not be pressing charges.

 

[BigCat]

He had a lot of control over the football program, but 1998 was a University Police matter.

Sandusky was the defensive coordinator of in 98. (Correct me if I'm wrong) Schreffler and Ralston interviewed Sandusky in the Lasch football building. Are we to believe Paterno wasn't aware of the investigation? If Paterno had been pressed on the subject, I imagine he would have given a Clintonian response about what it really means to "to know." JMO.

 

[Steely Dan]

Sandusky was the defensive coordinator of in 98. (Correct me if I'm wrong) Schreffler and Ralston interviewed Sandusky in the Lasch football building. Are we to believe Paterno wasn't aware of the investigation? If Paterno had been pressed on the subject, I imagine he would have given a Clintonian response about what it really means to "to know." JMO.

Also, wasn't '98 the year JS stepped down as DC and took the emeritus job?

 

[Tipstaff]

There is a victim to the Kelly case, and Kelly is the son of the police commissioner. Sandusky wasn't related to anyone.

The 2002 incident is one of the weaker ones, just one witness, who in 2002, wasn't established. The claim was against, in 2002, a prominent and respected individual. It would have been difficult.

There are victims in the Sandusky case that have been ignored for years. But they are just poor kids who went to The Second Mile.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

There are victims in the Sandusky case that have been ignored for years. But they are just poor kids who went to The Second Mile.

Most were unknown, at least by LE, not ignored.

I agree with those people that say Paterno wasn't a demigod. I don't advocate the idea that he was perfect.

But not being a demigod also means that Paterno wasn't omniscient. He didn't know everything.

I'm very critical of the DA, Gricar, in the 1998 incident, largely for the same reasons. He should have done more in 1998. I don't give him one milligram of blame for 2002 (or 2000), because he didn't know about those. I don't expect Gricar to be a demigod either.

I agree that Paterno should have done more follow-up, because of the issue, and because he had the clout within the university to press Curley, Schultz, and Spanier. Some of the suggestions of what should be done are flights of fancy, however.

Going to the White House? The President doesn't prosecute cases. Even going to the press, what would he say? There was an incident for which he didn't know the details, that may or may not have been accurate? It is an accusation by a low level employee against a pillar of the community, which Sandusky was in 2002. He had neither the skills nor the authority to investigate it on his own.

Yes, absolutely, Paterno should have pushed Curley and Schultz more strongly and gone to Spanier if that didn't work. He seriously couldn't have done too much more.

 

[Reader]

I don't recall anyone saying Paterno was told about the 1998 incident. I just checked the GJ report and no body indicates Paterno was told (pp. 12-13). The transcript of the preliminary hearing indicated that Schultz was told about the 1998 incident by Harmon .



He had a lot of control over the football program, but 1998 was a University Police matter.



There is no suggestion that Curry knew about the 1998 incident; Schultz, yes, but not anyone else. According Harmon, he told Schultz, and indicated that the DA and CYS would not be pressing charges.

Paterno, Schultz and Curley did not communicate with each other about what was going on in the AD? Riiiiighhhhttt.....

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Paterno, Schultz and Curley did not communicate with each other about what was going on in the AD? Riiiiighhhhttt.....

Curley and Paterno did, but there is no evidence Curley knew. Harmon indicated Schultz didn't see the report in 1998 or ask about it in 2002. Schultz knew about the incident and that CYS and the DA were not charging.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Sandusky was the defensive coordinator of in 98. (Correct me if I'm wrong) Schreffler and Ralston interviewed Sandusky in the Lasch football building.

From the presentment, no. Sandusky was at the mother's house for the admission; I think the interview with CYS was at their office, but the presentment is not clear.

Are we to believe Paterno wasn't aware of the investigation? If Paterno had been pressed on the subject, I imagine he would have given a Clintonian response about what it really means to "to know." JMO.

Looking at the details, yes.

Schultz was barely aware of it, and never looked at the report, so yes.

 

[Reader]

Most were unknown, at least by LE, not ignored.

I agree with those people that say Paterno wasn't a demigod. I don't advocate the idea that he was perfect.

But not being a demigod also means that Paterno wasn't omniscient. He didn't know everything.

I'm very critical of the DA, Gricar, in the 1998 incident, largely for the same reasons. He should have done more in 1998. I don't give him one milligram of blame for 2002 (or 2000), because he didn't know about those. I don't expect Gricar to be a demigod either.

I agree that Paterno should have done more follow-up, because of the issue, and because he had the clout within the university to press Curley, Schultz, and Spanier. Some of the suggestions of what should be done are flights of fancy, however.

Going to the White House? The President doesn't prosecute cases. Even going to the press, what would he say? There was an incident for which he didn't know the details, that may or may not have been accurate? It is an accusation by a low level employee against a pillar of the community, which Sandusky was in 2002. He had neither the skills nor the authority to investigate it on his own.

Yes, absolutely, Paterno should have pushed Curley and Schultz more strongly and gone to Spanier if that didn't work. He seriously couldn't have done too much more.

That's laughable that Paterno couldn't have done more...he got all this veneration and accolades from the entire country but he had no influence on the outside world?....there is a world outside of Penn St.

A lot of people thought he could have done more..here's one example:

Of course, there was nothing preventing Paterno from doing more, and some sexual abuse experts and those who have represented young sex victims over the years have begun questioning why he did not take more immediate, aggressive action.

“He reported what he knew and he had reason to expect that others would do their jobs,” said Nicholas P. Cafardi, who is dean emeritus and professor of law at Duquesne University School of Law and an expert on the Roman Catholic Church’s sexual abuse scandal. “I don’t know if he knew no action was taken after he reported it, but if he did, and if he believed the story he heard was credible, he had a moral obligation to do something more — to report it to civil officials.

“In many past cases with the Catholic Church, priests who reported incidents to bishops and then saw nothing happened took it upon themselves to contact the civil authorities,” Cafardi said. “It’s not enough to say you have done all that the law requires of you. If you know nothing is being done to stop the abuse, the moral obligation kicks in. One of the reasons child-protection laws exist is to prevent additional abuse.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/07/s...-how-paterno-reacted.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

 

[Reader]

Curley and Paterno did, but there is no evidence Curley knew. Harmon indicated Schultz didn't see the report in 1998 or ask about it in 2002. Schultz knew about the incident and that CYS and the DA were not charging.

Somebody thought Curley knew:

The prosecutors, though, do assert that at least one prominent Penn State official, a lawyer for the university, was told of the 1998 allegations and investigation. That official, Wendell Courtney, said in an interview Sunday that he had learned of allegations about Sandusky in 1998, but had left it to the police and prosecutors to investigate.

“Whatever they did, they did,” he said of the campus police and local district attorney.

Courtney said he never sought to find out why no action had been taken. He said he believed that Penn State’s athletic director, Curley, knew of the allegation and the investigation, but was unsure whether other people in senior positions at the university knew of the episode.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/07/s...-how-paterno-reacted.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

 

[J. J. in Phila]

That's laughable that Paterno couldn't have done more...he got all this veneration and accolades from the entire country but he had no influence on the outside world....there is a world outside of Penn St.

I said he could have done more, but really the only thing he could have done was to press university officials.

The person who he reported it to (and I think all parties agree) was the guy who oversaw the police force, Schultz.

This would be like, to use your example, a priest, after going to a bishop, going to the police, and the police doing nothing.

 

[Reader]

I said he could have done more, but really the only thing he could have done was to press university officials.

The person who he reported it to (and I think all parties agree) was the guy who oversaw the police force, Schultz.

This would be like, to use your example, a priest, after going to a bishop, going to the police, and the police doing nothing.

I'll just refer you back to my previous post on this subject:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7530448&postcount=276"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Penn State Sandusky scandal: AD arrested, Paterno, Spanier fired; coverup charged #7[/ame]


This persistence in not recognizing any police dept. except Penn St.'s is disturbing and revealing of the cocoon that surrounds the school and community.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Somebody thought Curley knew:

Thinking Curley knew isn't evidence that Curley knew; Schultz did know.

Schultz indicated that, in regard to the 1998 incident he talked with Courtney, Harmon, Gricar, and Spanier, but not Curley or Paterno (from the GJ testimony read at preliminary, p. 217). Harmon indicated he didn't talk to Gricar directly.

On p. 190, Curley said he had not heard about the 1998 until the grand jury told him. He did tell Spanier about the incident.