Joe Paterno to resign at end of season

[tw]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

These are the incompetent assholes who are more responsible than everyone but Sandusky. If they'd done they're job,....

Understand what the trustees are doing. They are staying ahead of the scandal. Otherwise they would, in mass, be also found responsible.

For example, they rushed through the Freeh report that blamed Paterno only by implication. Without any explicit facts. Then they negotiated a deal with the NCAA so that the NCAA would not investigate. Meanwhile they are castigating Paterno (who cannot defend himself) and other obviously guilty people so that nobody will look any farther. Nobody will notice a board of trustees that need all investigations and facts to end before more is discovered. My god. The brother of the assisant Chairman lived in Sandusky's basement. And he still did not know?

This is a perfect example of a controlled avalanche so that nobody can get organized and learn the whole story. Exactly what any good PR person would have them do.

Penalties on the innocent are massive. But the trustees with their well protected 15 year terms will remain untainted. If we were to apply the same penalty to the Catholic Church (that openly protected and all but condoned pedophilia), then the fines would be on the order of something less than $1 trillion. And no church services for four years.

Sandusky was dismissed from the Penn State atheltic program in 1998. But trustees and management permitted him access to campus facilities after 1998. So all Penn State accomplishments after 1998 (by other innocent people) must now be quashed from the record.

Meanwhile, Sandusky's wife who also apparently knew of the pedophilia, is also getting off without charges.

What kind of deal did the trustees rush through? One that punishes everyone except the trustees. Does that not sound suspicious? 85% of all problems are directly traceable to who? Or is that whom?

[Lamplighter]

And no church services for four years.

Show that one to anybody who says The Cellar doesn't come up with any new ideas.
.

[classicman]

I wasn't insinuating that he was faultless, but it seems that the rest of the "leadership"
are not getting slammed anywhere near as much. I personally hope they all rot in prison.

[classicman]

And the tuition increases to cover the cost of the penalties will put even more students into deeper debt.

[Cyber Wolf]

All blame for all of the fallout should ultimately rest on the shoulders of Sandusky himself. He made the choice to do what he did. Even when he was found out, he didn't decide to stop and continued for years.

After him, blame should rest on all those who saw, heard about, knew about what the pedo was doing - the janitors, Paterno, his wife, anyone else who walked in on him, talked to him about it, somehow knew about it and eventually chose self-preservation over stopping a known pedo.

All who are angry about the fine (whomever it affects), the loss of a (generally) good thing, the loss of local/small business economy, the sticky, tar black smear on the reputation, the sundering of hopes, dreams and ideals... they should not blame NCAA, they should not blame the media coverage, they should not blame the victims, they should not blame the trustees (unless they knew about it... I'm not quite clear on that). All of that is reaction, brought about by Sandusky's original actions.

They should directly blame Jerry "Uncle Touchy" Sandusky this and all those who knew and did nothing for the sake of keeping their job (janitors), keeping the stars in their eyes (authorities who knew but did not fully investigate), keeping the marketability and reputation of the football program profitable (Paterno), keeping themselves from being The One Who Exposed A Flaw At LEGENDARY PENN STATE (everyone else who knew).

Because without Sandusky's wandering hands and other bits, without the hushing and cover-ups and quiet deals, the institution of Penn State, its athletic program, faculty, alumni and fans would not be going through this now. If the authorities and the school had pursued this after the first child, Penn State could have held him up by the proverbial collar, gave a 'We found this rat in our midst and now we're kicking him out.' statement and threw him out with no parachute, and the aftermath image would have been 'They had this problem but they took care of it so it's all good.', instead of 'They had this problem, but they let it fester and grow like a cancer because they were afraid of the social implications and that's no good.'

[Sheldonrs]

My simple rules regarding cases like this:

If you knowingly harm a child - Die in a fire

If you know someone is harming a child and do nothing - Die in a fire

If you know someone is harming a child and only report it to your boss and not the police - Die in a fire

That should cover all involved.

[Lamplighter]

CyberWolf, thank you... that's extremely well-said and hits all the marks

http://www.cellar.org/showpost.php?p...&postcount=119

[Clodfobble]

Also...

If you know someone is harming a child, and you report it to the police and notice that charges have not been filed in a timely manner... set up a goddamn camera for next time, and give the footage to the press. Out-of-state press, if necessary. We live in a world where hard evidence is easy to procure.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Also...

If you know someone is harming a child, and you report it to the police and notice that charges have not been filed in a timely manner... set up a goddamn camera for next time, and give the footage to the press. Out-of-state press, if necessary. We live in a world where hard evidence is easy to procure.

um... no.

Respectfully, this Nancy Drew approach just means more damage. Letting a child be bait like this ranks as either your worst idea ever or your worst joke ever. I like you Clodfobble, but this one's a dud. If you didn't get the right response you know should happen from other professionals, say, doctors, you wouldn't wait for another meltdown or toxic toilet incident to be captured on camera like you describe.

Just go to the next doctor and hope for a non-idiot. There *are* people who care and who are effective when it comes to child welfare. And if you're one of them, and I know you are, just keep knocking until the right door opens. If you don't see action happening, file again, file with another agency, hell, call the press as you suggest. But don't wait for another crime to be committed against a child.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by BigV

Letting a child be bait like this ranks as either your worst idea ever or your worst joke ever.

How about setting up a camera while going around to different officials? Would you approve of that? That way, if it takes a couple months to find someone to take you seriously, and he strikes again, then you have solid proof this time.

[Spexxvet]

I'm still upset that the authorities didn't take care of it in 1998.

[BigV]

Look, I'm not opposed to cameras. Really, I'm all into this YouTube generation and sh*t, yo. But what a waste of effort. What are you going to do with the camera? Pin it to his underwear? How can you do this, logically? Some of the crimes Sandusky was convicted of happened in the shower at the gym facility (I think, I did not follow the specific details very closely, but I remember hearing about "teaching the kids about hygiene, how to shower (wtf)). Are you thinking the camera should be monitoring the shower area? Locker rooms? You can see, I'm sure, that as appealing as video proof of this crime would be as a hammer to motivate the authorities the actual logistical details of doing this effectively are ... impossible.

Clodfobble's original wording might be my problem "If you know someone's harming a child..". I have a problem *right there*. If *I* know, I have an obligation to make it stop. I might not be the judge that pounds the gavel, or the jailer that turns the key, etc, but I have a crucial role in seeing to it that it stops and is taken care of. This USUALLY consists of reporting to the police, or to child protective services, or both. In my case, I have an additional obligation as a scouting leader to inform the leaders of my organization. I've never had to do this, thank god. But informing the parents would also be an option.

I don't think it's a very useful direction for the conversation to go from here into what if it was a parent harming? Or what if it was the scout leadership that was harming? Or what if it was the police officer, etc etc. These are all real, tragic scenarios. Not just possibilities, real examples, sadly. There are tons of others, and all of them could have exception this and counter example that, ad infinitum.

What **I** believe is best is a strategy that involves strengthening the kid's ability to defend themselves and to be comfortable reporting harm. This I believe is the best, not infallible, strategy to reduce the chance of harm and to reduce the harm. This kind of defense will be with the child, even if he's in camera range or not.

Just telling and leaving it at that could have lots of bad consequences. There's a senior church figure in PA (I think) that has just been convicted of doing too little to prevent harm to children. We've heard a lot in this thread about the accessory culpability of those around the perpetrator. Telling, not getting a response, then farting around with a camera seems a bit like that. Be more active. Get something done. If you want to drag your camera around with you while you're finding someone who can and will respond appropriately, by all means, record away. But passively sitting around watching my teddy-bear-cam for another molestation is wrong.

[tw]

Lynn Abraham, Philadelphia's DA, made the problem obvious. She confiscated a list of over 100 known pedophiles only from the Philadelphia Archdiocese files. Had the list published even in the Philadelphia Inquirer. Made it obvious that this was only one of many Archdiocese in the Philly area that openly protected their pedophiles. And still the Pennsylvania Legislature refused to make pedophile prosecution reasonably possible.

Why would anyone report pedophilia? McQuery did. Look what it got him? Condemnation by so many. A large lawyer bill.

Why would janitors not report what they saw? The Board of Trustees would have never protected whistle blowers. Why would anyone in PA in 1998 report such crimes? The PA government would not fix the laws even after is was proven - without doubt and a decade ago - that the Catholic Church was a major racketeering operation that protected pedophiles.

Again, just down the street from the Cellar is a Catholic home for boys called St Gabriel’s. Only two years ago, Sister Strange reported a known pedophile priest was still practicing sexual perversions there. What did the Church and the 'powers that be' do? Well the Church fired Sister Strange. And the local authorities did nothing.

This was only two years ago. How much greater was the contempt for such whistle blowers twelve years ago - in 1998? Come on folks. Why are the Board of Trustees rushing through condemnation of the lesser people (including one who is dead and cannot defend himself)? Otherwise you might learn what the attitude was among Penn State's trustees and clearly in the State Legislature. They rushed into an agreement with the NCAA that hurts everyone except the trustees and Mrs Sandusky.

If pedophilia was really a problem, then PA would have long ago prosecuted hundreds of Catholic priests for Pedophilia. Monsignor Lynn, who virtually made pedophilia possible and safe only in Philadelphia (that’s at least many hundreds of kids), only got three to six years. (PA has seven more archdioceses. Just across the river are another six in New Jersey.) Why such little sentence? PA made prosecution difficult. Maximum sentence is that little. Six years maximum for protecting hundreds of pedophiles even ten years after Lynn Abraham demonstrated the size of the problem?

Double standards. If the punishment of Penn State is that severe, the entire American Catholic Church, at minimum, should be under court supervised probation. Even the mafia does not protect pedophiles. But the Church did - with all but the blessing of the State Legislature.

[classicman]

Take it to your church thread.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by BigV

I don't think it's a very useful direction for the conversation to go from here into what if it was a parent harming? Or what if it was the scout leadership that was harming? Or what if it was the police officer, etc etc. These are all real, tragic scenarios.

But that's the thing... if you know it's been reported to every university authority available, and also the police, and the police have clearly engaged in the coverup... What can you do when you know the police are involved? That becomes some scary shit right there. You need the evidence to protect yourself, at that point.

Sure, you could maybe hang around the field until you see the kid you recognize, and follow them to their car to tell the parent what you saw going on. But you also have to consider the fact that the child obviously hasn't told the parent--or maybe they have, and the parent, sickeningly, brushed off the child's complaints. More than one parent still let their kids sleep over at Michael Jackson's place, after all. So say you tell the parent what you saw, and they say, "Is this true Jimmy?!" and Jimmy, embarrassed, or scared that the abuser is going to punish them, says, "Jeez, Mom! Of course not!"

And now you are labeled an offender yourself, for making up sick stories about kids and harassing their families. You are probably removed from your job, and have no chance at all of helping the kids who are still being hurt.

Originally Posted by BigV

If you didn't get the right response you know should happen from other professionals, say, doctors, you wouldn't wait for another meltdown or toxic toilet incident to be captured on camera like you describe.

Have done, actually. More than once. Because there are situations where, without proof, it is just a fact that no one is going to believe you. I had some idiot doctors actually challenge me to take video, because they were so certain I couldn't do so. I admit, I probably jump to the camera solution faster than normal people, precisely because of my experience with this sort of situation.

Of course you would want to continue working on other avenues, every avenue available to you, while you wait to catch something on footage. And realistically, putting a camera in the lockerroom showers is a very dangerous thing to do, for obvious reasons. You might have to, instead, keep your camera on your person, and when you see it happening again, whip it out then and start recording. Of course this all happened in the days before cameraphones, so options would have been different then, maybe even impossible. My point was, once you know the police are involved in covering up child abuse, you must proceed in a drastic and yet completely irrefutable manner.