For anyone that doesn't know me, I am a controversial person. That is to say the very least. I don't care if I hurt someones feelings or offend them. When I have something to say, I learned to speak up and say what I feel. This didn't happen til I was at the end of my high school career. I used to let people walk all over me and say whatever they wanted and I never fought back. I never defended myself and all I wanted in high school was to be accepted. I had many people that I talked to, but few I could call friends. It took a lot for me to grow out of this but I did. I guess you could thank the people that picked on me for me becoming such a sarcastic guy.
Also, for anyone that doesn't know, I am a PENN STATE graduate. The proudest moment of my life was first, being accepted to Penn State and second, for graduating from there. I bleed blue and white, I sing my alma mater with 110,000 brothers and sisters at Beaver Stadium. I danced for those kids at Hershey who need it.
Unless you live under a rock, you know about everything involving Jerry Sandusky, the defensive coordinator from Penn State. I get very annoyed when the media and people keep referring to the Penn State Scandal and Penn State raped little boys and Penn State did this. PENN STATE DID NOT DO ANY OF THIS! The man who did all of this allegedly, is named Jerry Sandusky. It was not Joe Paterno, nor was it me, or any of my friends. When people mention Penn State did this, you are talking about my friends and family and myself. That is not true. What we did do as a University, is raise over $400,000 dollars for RAINN (rape abuse incest national network). We held a candlelight vigil for the abused victims and pray for the best for them. We also stand behind Joe Paterno. He was scapegoated by the media because he is the legend and his name would sell more papers and make more people tune into the news. That is unfair to him. He did what he was supposed to do in this situation. I am going to write what Joe Pa did do as opposed to what others did not do and you can see, if you don't already, how I can defend Joe Paterno and also can feel for the victims in this scandal as well.
Mike McQueery, the graduate assistant, walked in to the shower and allegedly saw Jerry Sandusky horsing around and performing oral sex on a minor. McQueery walked out of the shower and called his father to tell him what he saw. The next day, McQueery called Joe Paterno to tell him of what he saw. Paterno then set up a meeting between McQueery, Curly and Schultz. Curly is the athletic director of Penn State and Schultz is the VP of Business and Finance at Penn State. McQueery told them everything he saw. At this point, Joe Pa had also told the head of Unviersity Police about the alligations by McQueery. Curly and Schultz had spoke to Graham Spanier, our President, about what had happened. After that, there was no further action taken. No one from Univeristy Police talked to McQueery about the incident. In the Grand Jury report, McQueery's testimony, which defends Joe Paterno, was considered credible. Curly and Schultz's testimonies were not credible.
Now here are my thoughts on the situation. If McQueery, who was 28 at the time, saw this going on, why didn't he 1. Knock Sandusky out and take the child? 2. Call 911 and inform them on what's going on? Other than that, he told Paterno about what he saw. So now Paterno has "hearsay" evidence about a sex abuse scandal. Paterno, could not have gone to the police when Curly and Schultz decided to do nothing. The police would have asked Paterno if he saw it or heard it. He would have answered 'no.' The police can not go off of hearsay evidence to investigate a crime. Other people then said, well why didn't Joe Pa go to the media? I answer that with, because the media does not but cause problems. If Joe Pa would have gone to the media and these alligations turned out to be false, Joe Pa could have been sued by Sandusky for libel. Paterno did what he was morally and legally obligated to do. He told his superior and his superior's superior. He set up a meeting with the three of them to figure out what was going on. Joe Pa actually told someone, much more than I can say for Curly or Schultz.
By law in PA, when sexual alligations are made on a University or Institution, the head of the institution, in this case Graham Spanier, has 48 hours to report it either verbally or by written statement. Spanier did not report this. So, if you are going to fire someone, why was it Joe Pa? Oh right, because like I said before, Joe Pa's name and legacy would sell more papers and get more national media attention. No! No! No! You fire Graham Spanier, for legally not fulfilling his responsibility as the President of Penn State. You also fire Curly and Schultz for not doing anything either! Yet Curly is on administrative leave and Schultz resigned after this B.O.T. meeting.
I understand the Board of Trustees wanted to take action. Because of media hype, the wrong action was taken. Joe Pa was fired, by phone!!! By phone?! Are you kidding me? This man coached for 47 years at Penn State. He donated over 4 million dollars to this university. There is a library and an ice cream named after him. You don't have the decency to fire him face-to-face? That is childish and unfair. Also, Board of Trustees, if you are going to "clean house" because that is the right thing to do, um, you actually need to clean house! ALL OF IT! You would then need to get rid of not only Joe Pa, and Spanier (who has sinced resigned), but you also need to get rid of Curly, Schultz and McQueery. McQueery is on administrative leave and is in "protective custody." He, along with Curly are still on the PSU payroll b/c Curly is on admin leave as well. That doesn't make sense either. McQueery I understand taking leave but Curly should have either resigned or been let go.
I feel for these victims in this sex abuse scandal. If these alligations turn out to be true, because in America, you are innocent until proven guilty, I hope Sandusky rots in hell. He deserves anything and everything he will get. Sandusky is the real criminal here, not Joe Pa and certainly not Penn State. So I would appreciate it, if the media and people would stop saying that, by proxy, I had anything to do with it.
As always, all feedback, is greatly appreciated. As long as it's written in a mature way, even if you disagree, be educated about what you are saying before you say it.
While I understand that you did graduate from PSU and you have pride for your Alma mater, I am sitting here scratching my head after reading your post. I'm trying to figure out if the grand jury report I read is the same one you read since the one I read differs a bit from the story you tell above.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I read:
McQueery observed a young child pinned against a wall with Sandusky behind him, sodomizing the child. The next day he met with Paterno and told Paterno what he observed. Then the day after that, Paterno contacted Curley and informed him.
Curley told Schultz etc etc. Eventually everyone got back to McQueery and told him that Sandusky had been banned from having children at the PSU facilities.
Once all this started to come out, Curley and Schultz resigned. Which would keep them eligable for pensions and benefits etc. So you cannot fire someone who is no longer an employee. McQueery is protected by the Whistle Blower act so that left Paterno and Spanier who were both terminated prior to the Board of Trustees Press Conference. And while phone calls to both individuals may not have seemed appropriate, the person speaking on behalf of the trustees did clarify the reason they chose to do so was because of all the media surrounding the University and they were trying to protect the personal safety of both men.
So while the alleged abuse is only against Sandusky, the scandal involves the University officials. Regardless if the trustees were too quick to react or not, it is my opinion that there would have been some backlash whether individuals were terminated or not. If they did not address all parties involved, its possible it could have cause a (different) media frenzy around why only certain people were "protected" etc.
Again, I respect your pride and understand that the students and other University organizations and officials should not be blamed. But for those of us looking at it from a perspective that these are all real people and not "living legends" it all does make sense that everyone should receive equal treatment and not the "Hollywood treatment."
That's not the report we all read. Curly and Schultz were still employed by Penn State when Joe Paterno was fired. Sandusky had retired from Penn State by that point. Spanier had resigned as well.
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm not saying that only Sandusky should be blamed. I said that if they were to clean house that everyone had to go and I agree with that. Everyone being anyone that was involved from McQueery to Spanier and all in between. I don't have a real problem with them firing Joe Paterno if they got rid of everyone else too. I understand McQueery not being let go b/c of the Whitstle Blower act as well.
I was/am mad at the way they fired Joe Paterno. Like I said, I understand why he had to go, but the way was childish. You are going to fire a man over the phone? At least have the balls to do it face-to-face. The guy earned that.
And I'm not okay with the hollywood treatment that the media gave. The media scapegoated Joe Pa b/c he was the living legend. Sandusky was the scumbag who did all these acts, he should be the one whose name was all over the media. But it wasn't. It was Joe Pa this and Penn State that. And that's unfair when really, Joe Pa had nothing to do with it. He was told. He didn't see it nor did he hear it. Sandusky's name needed to be reported in the media more and it wasn't. That's what uspet a lot of people and including me.
we don't know what joe was told in that meeting and that's what we need to know
ReplyDeleteYou say, "As always, all feedback, is greatly appreciated. As long as it's written in a mature way, even if you disagree, be educated about what you are saying before you say it." Yet you deleted my second comment giving some sources to back up my first comment. It was maturely written, albeit a conflicting opinion. Simply asking what you based your opinion on since we seem to have read/watched/heard different stories.
ReplyDeleteCould you please explain? Or at least show me some of the things you have read that are different from what I may have read? I feel as though you misread my original comment towards the bottom as well, which was explained in the deleted one as well, so I hope you did read the whole of it before you deleted.
If you do not wish to share, then I ask that you please delete my original comment as well since it doesn't make much sense without the cited articles to back it up.
Merci beaucoup!
I got the email that you responded afterwards but it never appeared. I was going to comment to say that you were right about Schultz not being on the pay roll anymore. I didn't see that he had stepped down, that was my bad. And I changed that in the blog. Curly though is still on admin leave and is employed by the university.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't have deleted your comment, I don't know why it didn't appear. You didn't say anything bad or disgraceful that would warrant them.
And trust me, I do appreicate the feedback. You have read and kept up with the stories and I appreciate it from another perspective.
Aha! I found the comment. For some reason, blogger.com does "spam comments." It was moved to there so they never posted it thinking it was spam.
ReplyDeleteSorry about that. Still new to this site!!