This is away from my usual subject matter but I am so disgusted and appalled by the Penn State scandal that I must comment. The mainstream media do not seem to be asking the right questions or pointing out the obvious.
A former defensive coordinator for the Penn State football team named Jerry Sandusky was just indicted on 40 counts of child molestation spanning some 15 years. The athletic director and the head of the campus policy are facing perjury charges.
Warnings were sounded as far back as the mid-1990s and nothing was done. In 2002, then graduate assistant Mike McQueary, who is now an assistant coach there, told coach Joe Paterno that he saw Sandusky sodomizing a child in the football team’s shower. Paterno’s response was to tell his boss, the athletic director, and no law enforcement or social agency was ever contacted. The president of the school was apparently informed. Penn State’s sole action consisted of barring Sandusky from the campus, which was not enforced.
Meanwhile, Sandusky continued to run a program for at-risk [they certainly were] children, which gave him continued access to victims.
1. When he saw what was going on why didn’t McQueary simply grab Sandusky and beat the crap out of him?
2. Why didn’t the McQueary go to the authorities when it became obvious that the school was doing nothing?
3. Until a few minutes ago, the school had the audacity to tell the media that Paterno would not answer questions about the scandal during his weekly pregame press conference. They just announced that the press conference was canceled.
4. When did “We did nothing illegal” supersede “We did the right thing”?
5. Everyone involved with this [McQueary, Paterno, athletic director, campus police head, school president] is as big a scumbag as Sandusky himself. If they have not committed a crime, at least they all must lose their jobs. [Note: the head of the campus police has "retired."]
Post Script: Sandusky’s biography is entitled “Touched.” You can't make this stuff up.
2 comments:
Might you be referring to passages such as this one from a NY Times story?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/sports/ncaafootball/penn-state-said-to-be-planning-paternos-exit.html?hpw
"In explaining his actions, Mr. Paterno has publicly said he was not told of the graphic nature of an alleged 2002 assault by the assistant coach Jerry Sandusky of a young boy in the football building’s showers. He said the graduate assistant coach who reported the assault, Mike McQueary, said only that something disturbing had happened that was perhaps sexual in nature."
So you see, he didn't know the graphic nature. Only that something disturbing and perhaps sexual in nature happened between his assistant coach and a 10-year-old boy. In the shower. I mean, we've all been there. Heard a first-hand account of what is most certainly a heinous crime involving a child. But without knowing the graphic nature of it, what can you do?
Is this a serious defense? Has anyone pointed out that knowing "something disturbing had happened that was perhaps sexual in nature" is most certainly enough for most people to, I don't know, DO SOMETHING?
http://www.lostlettermen.com/11-7-2011-sandusky-ice-cream-penn-state
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.