Penn State Sex Abuse Scandal (Indictment Post #144, "Pimping" Allegations Post #442)

[JBond]

Especially since the university has already cleaned house from top to bottom.

That is very premature. I don't think anyone knows how many people were involved in the cover up. McQueary is still drawing a check. Not to mention the board. How much did they know? How about the keystone campus cops? Penn State has done little at this point to correct the underlying issues that allowed a predator free reign.

I would be fine with canceling the remaining schedule. As far as the athletes...it is a good life lesson for them. Life ain't fair. Pick your leaders wisely.

 

[zrinkill]

There ought to be a little slack cut for Cajun...

The guy stuck up for a person and an institution he believed in, and there's no harm in that.

And once he apparently came up with additional information, he came out and said he no longer supported all the actions made by some of the decision makers at PSU.

Why not just leave it at that?

Yup Cajun has always been a standup guy.

I believe him.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Police: Penn State asst. didn't tell us of abuse

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP) — Penn State police and their counterparts in State College said they had no record of a former graduate assistant reporting a sexual assault by former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky on a 10-year-old boy in a campus shower, a detail that runs counter to claims made in an email to former teammates.


=====

Sounds like one side is lying. Either he lied about reporting it or the police are lying about it being reported. I tend to think the first is the case since it was not mentioned in the grand jury report.

 

[Stautner]

I just don't get the thinking that the way to deal with what Sandusky, Paterno, the AD and the administratioin did, and for something that had nothing to do with NCAA practices relating to running a football program, is to punish the athletes by telling them they can't play football for the next 9 months. These players came to Penn State with the understanding that as long as they abided by the rules of the NCAA, and the university abided by the rules of the NCAA in recruiting them, and if they mainatained a passing GPA, they would be able to play football. I'm all for coming down on the parties that deserve blame in the Sandusky incident, but I don't see how it makes sense to reneg on the promise made to the athletes.

Someone said playing football is a priviledge, and not a right. I think that is true only to a point. When a university recruits a player, they are not only asking the player to commit to the university, they are also making a commitment to the player. They are asking the player to attend their school based on the promise that as long as they don't violate NCAA or team rules, and as long as they maintain their GPA and work hard on the field they will be able to participate and compete as a member of the football team. These kids have fulfilled their end of the bargain, and the school should fulfill theirs.

 

[03EBZ06]

Police: Penn State asst. didn't tell us of abuse

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP) — Penn State police and their counterparts in State College said they had no record of a former graduate assistant reporting a sexual assault by former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky on a 10-year-old boy in a campus shower, a detail that runs counter to claims made in an email to former teammates.


=====

Sounds like one side is lying. Either he lied about reporting it or the police are lying about it being reported. I tend to think the first is the case since it was not mentioned in the grand jury report.

Yeah, I agree with you. I don't think he notified state police. He may have notified VP who is in charge of campus police but VP probably didn't take actions. I also don't believe he stopped Sandusky from assaulting little boy on Jan 2002, but that's just my opinion, nothing more.

 

[casmith07]

Police: Penn State asst. didn't tell us of abuse

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP) — Penn State police and their counterparts in State College said they had no record of a former graduate assistant reporting a sexual assault by former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky on a 10-year-old boy in a campus shower, a detail that runs counter to claims made in an email to former teammates.


=====

Sounds like one side is lying. Either he lied about reporting it or the police are lying about it being reported. I tend to think the first is the case since it was not mentioned in the grand jury report.

The police certainly aren't lying. Why would State Police blow a chance to crack a huge case and potentially bring down a statewide pedophilia ring?

They might look the other way if an influential guy is embezzling some funds, or committing a white collar crime, but I would think that 1000 replies to a thread, even on a Dallas Cowboys forum, is evidence of how our society feels about child abuse crimes.

 

[casmith07]

I just don't get the thinking that the way to deal with what Sandusky, Paterno, the AD and the administratioin did, and for something that had nothing to do with NCAA practices relating to running a football program, is to punish the athletes by telling them they can't play football for the next 9 months. These players came to Penn State with the understanding that as long as they abided by the rules of the NCAA, and the university abided by the rules of the NCAA in recruiting them, and if they mainatained a passing GPA, they would be able to play football. I'm all for coming down on the parties that deserve blame in the Sandusky incident, but I don't see how it makes sense to reneg on the promise made to the athletes.

Someone said playing football is a priviledge, and not a right. I think that is true only to a point. When a university recruits a player, they are not only asking the player to commit to the university, they are also making a commitment to the player. They are asking the player to attend their school based on the promise that as long as they don't violate NCAA or team rules, and as long as they maintain their GPA and work hard on the field they will be able to participate and compete as a member of the football team. These kids have fulfilled their end of the bargain, and the school should fulfill theirs.

Absolutely well-said. 100%.

 

[JBond]

I just don't get the thinking that the way to deal with what Sandusky, Paterno, the AD and the administratioin did, and for something that had nothing to do with NCAA practices relating to running a football program, is to punish the athletes by telling them they can't play football for the next 9 months. These players came to Penn State with the understanding that as long as they abided by the rules of the NCAA, and the university abided by the rules of the NCAA in recruiting them, and if they mainatained a passing GPA, they would be able to play football. I'm all for coming down on the parties that deserve blame in the Sandusky incident, but I don't see how it makes sense to reneg on the promise made to the athletes.

Someone said playing football is a priviledge, and not a right. I think that is true only to a point. When a university recruits a player, they are not only asking the player to commit to the university, they are also making a commitment to the player. They are asking the player to attend their school based on the promise that as long as they don't violate NCAA or team rules, and as long as they maintain their GPA and work hard on the field they will be able to participate and compete as a member of the football team. These kids have fulfilled their end of the bargain, and the school should fulfill theirs.

I can see your point, but if the administration and the football program covered for a predator, as appears to be the case right now, they all must go. It will take time to build a program from the ground up.

If the NCAA suspends the program, then they should make allowances for players to transfer and be able to play immediately, without the one year waiting period penalty.

 

[WV Cowboy]

Sometimes in football practice someone on the team screws up, .. but the whole team has to run extra laps.

Sometimes in a game the LG jumps, but everyone get penalized.

The RT holds, everybody moves back 10 yards.

That is part of being on a team.

One person's mistakes can impact the entire team.

If they penalize the entire PSU "Football Program", and some of these players get screwed, .. that is part of the deal.

"The Program" is why this was not dealt with initially, ... and "The Program" is why the whole thing was covered up for so long.

If "The Program" gets penalized and impacts players that didn't do anything wrong, they will have to live with that, ... fair or not.

Like someone else said, pick your leaders wisely.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I just don't get the thinking that the way to deal with what Sandusky, Paterno, the AD and the administratioin did, and for something that had nothing to do with NCAA practices relating to running a football program, is to punish the athletes by telling them they can't play football for the next 9 months. These players came to Penn State with the understanding that as long as they abided by the rules of the NCAA, and the university abided by the rules of the NCAA in recruiting them, and if they mainatained a passing GPA, they would be able to play football. I'm all for coming down on the parties that deserve blame in the Sandusky incident, but I don't see how it makes sense to reneg on the promise made to the athletes.

Someone said playing football is a priviledge, and not a right. I think that is true only to a point. When a university recruits a player, they are not only asking the player to commit to the university, they are also making a commitment to the player. They are asking the player to attend their school based on the promise that as long as they don't violate NCAA or team rules, and as long as they maintain their GPA and work hard on the field they will be able to participate and compete as a member of the football team. These kids have fulfilled their end of the bargain, and the school should fulfill theirs.

Brilliant post.

I have nothing against the institution being beaten up over this, but I have a tough time seeing student athletes suffer considering they had absolutely nothing to do with it.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I can see your point, but if the administration and the football program covered for a predator, as appears to be the case right now, they all must go. It will take time to build a program from the ground up.

If the NCAA suspends the program, then they should make allowances for players to transfer and be able to play immediately, without the one year waiting period penalty.

The NCAA has already said they are not going even consider doing anything until the dust settles.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Sometimes in football practice someone on the team screws up, .. but the whole team has to run extra laps.

Sometimes in a game the LG jumps, but everyone get penalized.

The RT holds, everybody moves back 10 yards.

That is part of being on a team.

One person's mistakes can impact the entire team.

If they penalize the entire PSU "Football Program", and some of these players get screwed, .. that is part of the deal.

"The Program" is why this was not dealt with initially, ... and "The Program" is why the whole thing was covered up for so long.

If "The Program" gets penalized and impacts players that didn't do anything wrong, they will have to live with that, ... fair or not.

Like someone else said, pick your leaders wisely.

I don't see it as a "program" problem, but an administration problem.

And that being the case, maybe they should shut down the entire college right now and send all the kids home (as he says tongue in cheek).

 

[Yakuza Rich]

I just don't get the thinking that the way to deal with what Sandusky, Paterno, the AD and the administratioin did, and for something that had nothing to do with NCAA practices relating to running a football program, is to punish the athletes by telling them they can't play football for the next 9 months. These players came to Penn State with the understanding that as long as they abided by the rules of the NCAA, and the university abided by the rules of the NCAA in recruiting them, and if they mainatained a passing GPA, they would be able to play football. I'm all for coming down on the parties that deserve blame in the Sandusky incident, but I don't see how it makes sense to reneg on the promise made to the athletes.

Someone said playing football is a priviledge, and not a right. I think that is true only to a point. When a university recruits a player, they are not only asking the player to commit to the university, they are also making a commitment to the player. They are asking the player to attend their school based on the promise that as long as they don't violate NCAA or team rules, and as long as they maintain their GPA and work hard on the field they will be able to participate and compete as a member of the football team. These kids have fulfilled their end of the bargain, and the school should fulfill theirs.

I disagree.

Schools revoke scholarships from players for poor play *only* all of the time. I played on a golf scholarship and this happens all of the time. In fact, many coaches...like the one I had...would hang that threat over your head.

That's why they are trying to institute a new rule where a coach can more or less guarantee a scholarship to a player for 4 years (unless they break rules or get in trouble with the law).

Football and basketball programs don't do this as much as other sports because it hurts recruiting too much. But, they CAN do it. For instance, that's what the downfall of Bobby Knight was with Neil Reed back in 1997. Knight threatned Reed and Reed eventually went to the media *in* 1997 about the abuse he suffered under Knight and eventually it was uncovered again by Sports Illustrated in 2000.

Anyway, you're painting a rosy picture of how college sports works...but it doesn't work that way. It's not to say that I think college sports are horrible. Quite the contrary. But, playing sports is still a privilige, not a right in college.

Always has been, and likely....always will be.









YR

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Police: Penn State asst. didn't tell us of abuse

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP) — Penn State police and their counterparts in State College said they had no record of a former graduate assistant reporting a sexual assault by former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky on a 10-year-old boy in a campus shower, a detail that runs counter to claims made in an email to former teammates.


=====

Sounds like one side is lying. Either he lied about reporting it or the police are lying about it being reported. I tend to think the first is the case since it was not mentioned in the grand jury report.

Yes, but actually they said there isn't a record of it. So he could have told someone with the cops but nobody did anything about it.

 

[baj1dallas]

How is it possible that you find someone that you didn't rape? If it's false, then there should be no one to find? I get the feeling that his attorney got some random 20 year old to say that was me in the shower and he didn't rape me.

the boy he was alleged to have raped, genius.

 

[JBond]

Yes, but actually they said there isn't a record of it. So he could have told someone with the cops but nobody did anything about it.

Maybe the DA was in the predator club. I wonder how many more there were/are?

 

[burmafrd]

Yes, but actually they said there isn't a record of it. So he could have told someone with the cops but nobody did anything about it.

Sorrry but that does not wash. Maybe with other crimes- but child molestation? Nope. There would be some kind of record.

 

[WV Cowboy]

I don't see it as a "program" problem, but an administration problem.

So you are saying that nothing was done initially when Sandusky was suspected of sexual child abuse, .. and then the whole coverup too was to protect the administration ?

That's where we disagree then.

This is ALL about "The Program".

Every regretable decision was made to protect "The Program".

Paterno, Bradley, McQueary all knew about Sandusky, .. how many other coaches or members of the PS football family knew?

This whole mess is so grimy, slimy, indecent, perverted and disgusting, ... this is as "dark" a story that I can ever remember.

I don't really have an opinion either way, but if they decide to punish the entire PSU football program, I will have no problem with that.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

So you are saying that nothing was done initially when Sandusky was suspected of sexual child abuse, .. and then the whole coverup too was to protect the administration ?

That's where we disagree then.

Nope, not saying that at all.

What I am saying is that it may have started with the program, or should I say in the program, but quickly escalated up to the administration of the entire campus. I say if you're going to punish, punish those culpable and consider punishing those that allowed others to be culpable.

I think the football program turning down a bowl bid would be enough punishment for this group of student athletes.

 

[Vtwin]

So you are saying that nothing was done initially when Sandusky was suspected of sexual child abuse, .. and then the whole coverup too was to protect the administration ?

That's where we disagree then.

This is ALL about "The Program".

Every regretable decision was made to protect "The Program".

Paterno, Bradley, McQueary all knew about Sandusky, .. how many other coaches or members of the PS football family knew?

This whole mess is so grimy, slimy, indecent, perverted and disgusting, ... this is as "dark" a story that I can ever remember.

I don't really have an opinion either way, but if they decide to punish the entire PSU football program, I will have no problem with that.

The current players didn't know.