Here's the problem. I suspect they have a weak case against Sandusky. The more this goes on, the more I think that. The prosecution has already tried this case in public and they usually don't do that without a good reason. I suspect they've had trouble getting witnesses. Stranger things have happened on the way from the grand jury to the empaneled jury. If Sandusky walks, it's a big problem for the University. Not predicting it, but there's way too much that just smells wrong.
I think I'd be more upset at Paterno if McQueary came hauling ass to find him right after it happened and he didn't react. But It seems as though McQueary didn't stop a child rape in progress, didn't call the police, didn't even tell Paterno until the next fucking day. McQueary puzzles me. If it turns out McQueary is the one with a bad memory or exaggerated a bit, this whole thing unravels. It seems odd that nobody recalls hearing him say this until he says this in 2011 to a grand jury. And folks, don't get too worked up about anything a grand jury does it's just something to determine if they're going to bring an indictment or not.
What also troubles me is that Sandusky was there last week. If they really think he's going around diddling kids, he's a huge liability. You don't let him around. I'm having trouble thinking there's any cover up. So far it appears that people just did nothing. A few folks went and interviewed McQueary and seemed to think it was no big deal. A cover up would easily be done. You get rid of Sandusky, move him to the country and he becomes a recluse and you start paying victims and getting confidentiality settlement agreements. The National Restaurant Association covered up for Herman Cain by getting those confidentiality agreements. They did a pisspoor job by thinking this wouldn't come up later if he ran for fucking president. No, they needed to reign him in. I really don't know what Penn State had to gain by keeping a guy around who was this huge of a liability. It seems that if anyone is really so obsessed with their football program they have this guy vanish.
Matt Millen. Loved his interview. He's another guy always around the campus too. On the board of the Second Mile to boot. How the fuck does he not know anything if everybody knows about it. It's peculiar that in 40 years the only person who sees anything is Mike McQueary and he does fucking nothing except tell the coach the next day? Didn't stop it, didn't call the police, didn't report it immediately. Nobody else has ever seen anything except I've something about a janitor somewhere saw something, but that appears to be a phantom janitor.
I really don't know what Paterno should have done. Looking back, if a kid is getting raped and McQueary is jumping up and down screaming "Sandusky is raping a little boy in the shower! Sandusky is raping a little boy in the shower!" to Paterno, then yeah he fucked up big time. If it's "hey yesterday, I saw Sandusky and a kid yesterday and it freaked me out." I kinda think we draw a different conclusion. All we have is a grand jury report. Really, it took them how long to investigate this and they didn't lock Sandusky up? Fuck he's out on bond right now.
Paterno isn't going to jail. He's not charge with anything. In fact, the two guys charged, Curley and Shultz, seem to be saying the same thing Paterno says: "McQueary didn't put it in those terms when we talked to him." Paterno did report it, he's not accused of doing it or even witnessing it, so it's not as if he's really covering for Sandusky. It would be very different if he witnessed it and did nothing. But that's not what appears to have happened. It could be that Sandusky his this shit very, very well. And how he never got caught until he's damn near 60 years old is a mystery to me. Jesus Christ, I'd feel better if LaVar Arrington came out and said, "yeah I always thought that homo was hanging around little boys was weird." In 40 years, nobody, who can be identified by name, ever saw anything except McQueary who I think it's being insinuated that what he said in 2011 was different from 2002.
Short answer to the question. Yeah, I think you're correct. However, what's not clear is what's the suspicion? A teacher, hospital worker, etc. is in a different position because you can identify the victim in these instances. You can't do that in this case without the abused. The investigation is essentially "Mike says he saw you ass fucking a little kid a few days ago." "Well, Mike is wrong." With the state employers you start getting into tricky issues about reporting things and process does become more important. I really don't know the specifics about that, especially in Pennsylvania, I'll surely defer to Stab on that one as I think I heard he went to Law School in PA.
Interestingly though, I think Penn State might have opened themselves up to whistle blower liability for firing people who did report it internally.
Just too many pieces are out of place and too much just doesn't make sense on this prosecution. Granted a flag always goes up when to me when the prosecution starts talking to the media and releases info that isn't just handed out with a freedom of info act request. I take it to mean that they need people to come forward. There's a long list of those who weren't convicted after the press conferences died down. Kobe and the Duke lacrosse players didn't even go to trial. I do think Curly and Shultz get off scott free if nothing else comes out about them. They're charged with perjury and obstruction (I think).
Lawyer hat off.
That said and all, if it's true and as bad as it has been made out to be in a worst case situation, I wouldn't feel a damn bit of sympathy for any of those who contributed to it.
tl;dr
AP doesn't know shit and neither does anyone else. But thinks too many things are odd about the way this is proceeding.
|