In Response to Re: PATERNO ( The FRAUD ) FIRED!!!
[QUOTE]His simply reporting to school administrators and not going to authorities makes his firing mandatory. And it could well be that he never reported anything and the school administrators are covering for him.
Posted by BabeParilli[/QUOTE]
Lots of wild speculation here. In Paterno's defense, at the time this crime came about, Paterno was a 74 year old man. What's being reported is that Paterno reported what happened to his boss, the athletic director...which was the right thing for him to do. The alleged dirt-bag charged, Jerry Sandusky, had been his DC, and a close friend of his for years.
Could, and should Paterno have done more? Yes. But, put yourself in his place. If one of your closest friends was accused of raping a boy, you might have a hard time believing it to be true...even if more than one person claimed to be a witness. Telling the athletic director about it probably wasn't easy for Paterno...but he did at least do that much. It seems that the true culprits are the AD and the school president...who did nothing about it.
Paterno likely didn't immediately resign because so doing could be taken as an admission of wrongdoing. Surely, he consulted with his lawyer...who would have advised him not to resign for that reason.
Let's withhold branding Paterno a complete fraud and villain, until all the evidence about this matter comes out. By all accounts, Paterno has not only been a legendary coach, but a very fine man, whose done a lot of good for Penn State, and the men he has coached and molded over the years. To completely disregard all that, without all the facts being in, is somewhat as criminal as the alleged rape itself.
Here's what we know so far...and some pros and cons on Paterno from S.I.. My comments have been interlaced throughout the article, in bold black:
Words in standard type are the thoughts of a person attempting to evaluate every side of the story involving Penn State coach Joe Paterno's role in the case involving former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky.
Words in italics are the thoughts of a father of two young children, who, like most parents, read the news of what allegedly took place at Penn State and wondered "What if this had happened to one of my kids?"
Paterno didn't break any law. Officially speaking, he did exactly what was required when a graduate assistant told him in 2002 that he had witnessed Sandusky sexually abusing a boy (estimated age: 10) in a shower at the Penn State football complex. Paterno told his boss, athletic director Tim Curley. Paterno followed proper procedure. And doesn't he deserve the benefit of the doubt? For years, Paterno has been a paragon of athletic virtue. He has won a Division I-record 409 games, yet his program has never been
cited for a major NCAA violation. Sandusky maintains his innocence. As does Curley, who has been charged with perjury. They'll get their day in court.
Pure B.S. Paterno claims to be a teacher. He always talks about his kids when referring to his players. Someone who truly cared about kids would have done more. He would have pestered Curley for an answer about what happened to the accusation. He would have called the police. He would have confronted Sandusky. How do we know that, short of calling the police, Paterno didn't at least confront Sandusky? What if Sandusky swore to him on a stack of bibles that he didn't do it (remember, this guy was one of his closest friends)? What if Paterno did "pester" the AD? At this point, we just don't know. Instead of that, Paterno let Sandusky keep coming back. On Monday, Yahoo! reported that Sandusky was spotted in the Penn State football complex as recently as last week. Even if the accusation was false, Paterno had a responsibility to make sure it was thoroughly investigated. He didn't. He stuck by Sandusky instead of worrying about the child. No doubt, the police should have been informed of the allegations.
I waited several days to write this because my first thought was what I would do if someone did something like this to my child. My initial reaction -- and I'm fairly certain most parents would feel this way -- was homicidal. If someone molested my child, he would need the police to protect him from me. If I found him first, his death would be neither quick nor clean. I might spend the rest of my life in prison, though I'm not sure a right-thinking jury would convict me. Those were the first thoughts that popped into my head, and I'm not ashamed to say that. So why didn't Paterno, a parent and grandparent who claims to have dedicated his life to the kids, feel the same way? Why didn't he do everything in his power to ensure he helped protect a kid who couldn't protect himself? I thought if I waited a few days I could look at the situation through a more rational lens. I can't. Every time I think about it, I get more angry. And I pray that I can protect my kids from the monsters, because apparently not everyone feels the same responsibility. If Paterno would sit silently for years about this, he has no business representing a proud university. Fire him now, not in days or weeks as The New York Times is reporting. I don't give a damn how many games he's won. It was an allegation made by one person, who apparently didn't think enough about what he allegedly saw to report it to the police. Did the AD perform an internal investigation of the matter after he had been informed about it by Paterno? If so, was Paterno made privy to the results of that investigation? Was he lied to? We just don't know.
Paterno released a statement Sunday night saying the graduate assistant was distraught and did not describe the specific act mentioned in the grand jury presentment. Maybe Paterno didn't grasp the seriousness of the allegation. Maybe he didn't understand. Perhaps so.
Or maybe Paterno has hidden behind a wall of lawyer-speak because he knows he failed in his duty as a human being. Maybe that's why Penn State President Graham Spanier -- who also needs to be fired for the same reason as Paterno -- canceled Paterno's regularly scheduled press conference Tuesday. Paterno can't stand up to tough questions, because he has no moral leg on which to stand. If no one had made an accusation, it would be completely believable that Paterno didn't know. His inaction would make sense.What attorney would advise his client to make comments about his involvement in an on-going criminal investigation...or potential huge civil suit? Surely, the Penn State did not want Paterno saying anything that might increase the liability of the school. If Paterno spoke and merely stated, that yes...I should have, in hindsight, called the police...such a statement is an admission of liability against other alleged victims of Sandusky...subsequent to this incident.
But someone did tell Paterno, and Paterno has admitted to that. According to the grand jury, Paterno testified that the graduate assistant reported seeing Sandusky "fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy." Those are the exact words from the presentment, but they are not an exact quote from Paterno. Grand jurors clearly came away thinking Paterno -- a man not known for mincing words -- had heard a report of sexual activity between a grown man and a young boy. Setting aside what the graduate assistant actually reported to the grand jury -- an act so heinous that the mere mention of it should cause any normal person to retch -- exactly how extensive a report of sexual activity does Paterno need to do the right thing and make sure the report gets investigated thoroughly? No one gets a little bit fondled. Beyond that, a grown man and a young boy were naked together in a shower. That isn't normal. That requires an inquiry. Yet Paterno did nothing except kick the accusation upstairs. In this case, "upstairs" is a relative term. Curley was nominally Paterno's boss, but Paterno has long been the most powerful man on Penn State's campus. If Paterno wanted the claim investigated, he could have made an investigation happen. He didn't. Who can say how they would have reacted in a similar situation? Again, we don't know exactly what Paterno was told...we don't know what investigation, if any, was conducted by the school. Again...the police should have been contacted. But, based just upon what is known so far, should we be tar and feathering Paterno at this time? I think not.
Still, we need to wait until the facts come out before judging Paterno. Maybe there is some reasonable, rational explanation for his silence. This is a misstatement, Paterno wasn't "silent". He reported the matter to his bosses. Can I honestly say that I would go to the police if a subordinate reported something like that to me about a longtime friend? Which person would I believe?
Remember that we're talking about a 10-year-old. Someone's son who stands no chance to live a normal life. And let's not forget anyone else who might have been harmed in the years between the graduate assistant's report and Sandusky's arrest. If the charges against Sandusky are true, any molestation that took place between the graduate assistant's report and Sandusky's arrest is on the hands of everyone who knew. That includes Paterno. Unfair. We have no idea what Paterno knew. If Paterno had actually seen this, a different story. It's hard to believe that a close friend would do something so vile, and in a public place.
Forget it. There is no defense. There is no rational explanation. I hope, if placed in the same situation, I would protect the child. If I didn't, may God have mercy on my soul. It's fair to sharply criticize Paterno for not doing more...but he did do something. There's absolutely no proof that he participated in some sort of cover-up.
The Penn State alma mater includes this line: "May no act of ours bring shame." Someone wrote those words on a poster Monday and hung them from a statue of Paterno on Penn State's campus. If Sandusky pleads guilty or is convicted of these accusations, that statue of Paterno should be torn down. BS. If Paterno participated in some sort of a cover-up, then yes...tear the statue down. But, to completely destroy the reputation of a great man based on the incomplete and insufficient facts currently before us, is grossly unfair, and, even criminal.
Paterno has won 409 games. He has helped usher thousands of young men into adulthood. But if Paterno's inaction allowed a monster to continue preying on children, those victories don't mean a thing.If Paterno contributed to a cover-up, yes. But, until we are made aware of what he was told, what he reported, and what he was led to believe by his bosses, let's reserve judgment on him at this time.
Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/andy_staples/11/08/penn-state-joe-paterno-scandal/index.html#ixzz1dGyK32HJ