Penn State pedophilia

[Scorcho]

It is kind of odd to wish that the Church had foresight. Isn't the concept of seeng ahead part and parcel to the LDS church?

I blame Paul Dunn. During a conference talk he probably skipped over some important inspired council to talk about how he used to hit potatoes 350 feet with Harmon Kilibrew

[Green Monstah]

joePa's story doesn't pass much muster, which is probably why he was thrown overboard so quickly.

He claimed that he was told of "inappropriate behavior" ("horsing around") in the shower between Sandusky and a small boy. He also admitted that the GA was visibly upset when he told JoePa. Finally, JoePa claims that he was not given details like the ones provided in the grand jury report.

So, per JoePa, here is how it went down on that fateful night:

GA: Coach, I need to tell you something.
coach: what's up?
GA: I saw Coach Sandusky behaving inappropriately with a young boy in the showers.
Coach: you seem visibly shaken and upset. I will relay your message to the AD.
GA: ok, thanks, bye.
Coach: bye.

It is entirely unbelievable. In that instance, the natural response is to say, "what do you mean, inappropriately? What were they doing? Why is a little kid here? Why were they taking shower together?"

In other words, everyone would have asked follow up questions to one degree or another.

JoePas own testimony condemns him. He isn't credible. Nor is he a good liar.

It sounds like you're unwilling to give JoePa the benefit of the doubt, and I'm okay with that.

[TripletDaddy]

It sounds like you're unwilling to give JoePa the benefit of the doubt, and I'm okay with that.

I've laid out my reasoning, using statements and admissions made by JoePa, chief among them are his resignation, coming less than 24 hrs after his son indicated that there were no plans to step down.

I'm open to alternative theories. What is yours?

[Eddie]

Well another part of the problem is the amount of focus on sex and pornography and masturbation and stuff by religion in general. Throw in untrained (or poorly trained), lay leadership and the potential for issues is high. That is not a specific condemnation of mormonism, but rather religion in general. If I were in the church still, I would insist on being present during interviews of my children to ensure nothing innappropriate is discussed (and yes, men asking boys/teens about masturbation in a 1:1 situation is wildly innappropriate, not to mention girls though that is far less common in priesthood interviews). I know of active members that do this, and I'd encourage everyone to do so. Not because every leader is a creep, but because you rarely know who is a creep until its too late.

I think this is the biggest problem.

I also think that you've got Bishops who are trying to do the right thing for everyone involved, which can compound things. They believe in repentance and believe that things can change, but hold the idea of confidentiality close and don't want everyone to know everyone else's sins. I've talked to Bishops who don't want the state to step in and destroy a family by causing a parent to be incarcerated or lose their job, etc. And the lack of training doesn't prepare them to manage all of the issues that are to come.

But let's be honest here - it isn't just churches that have an issue. I sat Master's level social work class up at the U and listened to a licensed therapist who was the instructor tell us all that if she was counseling a family and their was an incident of physical abuse reported she would sit on it and not report it to authorities. She said she would work with the family first and only report it if it became obvious that it was a pattern and was often repeated.

Well - if a well trained professional who is in the process of training other professionals feels that she can assess and manage the situation and not report abuse to authorities...

...I don't know what to say. I know she was referring to physical abuse, but it isn't a stretch to include other forms of abuse as well.

[SoCalCoug]

It sounds like you're unwilling to give JoePa the benefit of the doubt, and I'm okay with that.

"Benefit of the doubt"? The GA walked in on an old man and a 10-year-old boy, naked, in the shower, having anal sex.

Is there a reasonable doubt in your mind that the GA did not adequately convey to JoePa the idea that he walked in on an old man having naked, anal sex with a 10-year-old boy in the shower? That there was something ambiguous about what he might have seen? How does one explain away having naked, anal sex with a 10-year-old boy?

[lambdacoug]

I think this is the biggest problem.

I also think that you've got Bishops who are trying to do the right thing for everyone involved, which can compound things. They believe in repentance and believe that things can change, but hold the idea of confidentiality close and don't want everyone to know everyone else's sins. I've talked to Bishops who don't want the state to step in and destroy a family by causing a parent to be incarcerated or lose their job, etc. And the lack of training doesn't prepare them to manage all of the issues that are to come.

But let's be honest here - it isn't just churches that have an issue. I sat Master's level social work class up at the U and listened to a licensed therapist who was the instructor tell us all that if she was counseling a family and their was an incident of physical abuse reported she would sit on it and not report it to authorities. She said she would work with the family first and only report it if it became obvious that it was a pattern and was often repeated.

Well - if a well trained professional who is in the process of training other professionals feels that she can assess and manage the situation and not report abuse to authorities...

...I don't know what to say. I know she was referring to physical abuse, but it isn't a stretch to include other forms of abuse as well.

Training isn't the solution though, since as you mentioned training doesn't keep people from trying to be helpful, but hurting instead. Also the clergy in the Catholic church are trained and it hasn't stopped their issues. However, you have to ask the question how much abuse has training prevented to get a real measure. Rather than just pointing out that it occurred in spite of the training.

[Donuthole]

I haven't read much of this thread, but has anybody done a spoof on the oft-played We Are Penn State commercial? I got a chuckle when I saw it air on ESPN last night. That thing is ripe for a SNL parody.

[YOUTUBE]4qwTQ-LEHcw[/YOUTUBE]

[TripletDaddy]

Apparently JoePa lead an impromptu We Are Penn State cheer at a rally on his front lawn last night. I read about that in some article. Sounded weird.

[DU Ute]

Training isn't the solution though, since as you mentioned training doesn't keep people from trying to be helpful, but hurting instead. Also the clergy in the Catholic church are trained and it hasn't stopped their issues. However, you have to ask the question how much abuse has training prevented to get a real measure. Rather than just pointing out that it occurred in spite of the training.

If training and putting protective measures in place isn't the answer, what is?

[lambdacoug]

If training and putting protective measures in place isn't the answer, what is?

Oops, I meant to say that training isn't the only solution, as in more is needed. I guess I'd say training is a necesary to the solution, but not sufficient.

I don't have an answer. We should be skeptical of anyone that says they do. I don't know if there is an answer, people are people. As such, they are capable of horrific things, just as they are capable of laudable things. Religion clearly isn't the answer, nor is the lack of religion since you find pedophiles in all walks of life.

[Pheidippides]

"Benefit of the doubt"? The GA walked in on an old man and a 10-year-old boy, naked, in the shower, having anal sex.

Is there a reasonable doubt in your mind that the GA did not adequately convey to JoePa the idea that he walked in on an old man having naked, anal sex with a 10-year-old boy in the shower? That there was something ambiguous about what he might have seen? How does one explain away having naked, anal sex with a 10-year-old boy?

I would like to say that I would have intervened had I actually seen that. Walked over and punched Sandusky out, that sort of thing. Tried to stop it in some way. But who knows what you will do in such a situation? And I can understand the concept of being shocked beyond your capacity to think in a "wtf did I just see?" sort of way. It takes a day to process maybe. You panic and don't know what to do. Not that this makes anything better for the victim, but I understand it.

I get lost after that. First of all, you have pretty damn conclusive evidence that a serious crime has been committed. This isn't somebody saying hey, guess what I heard - you saw it and know it happened. Why do you go to JoePa to report anyway? You would report any other crime directly to the police, no? If you saw a guy breaking into a car in the parking lot you may not try to stop it but you'd dial 911, right? And that's a crime against property, not a crime against humanity.

But okay, you're young and you may not know much about who to talk to, so you go to your superior. That's more appropriate for minor sexual harassment issues maybe, but okay. And you tell him what you saw. At what point when the cops haven't called to ask you about it do you go back and find out what was done? At what point do you see Sandusky again and say "what in the name of fuck are you doing here you three week old pile of spicy burrito shit?"

That is what is inexcusable to me. Not stopping it, well, okay. Not going to the right authorities but going up the chain, sort of understandable. Sitting on your hands for several years with the knowledge of what happened? You are dirt.

[Scorcho]

I would hope that on Saturday Beaver Stadium would be less than full and that a majority of students and fans would at least use Saturday's game as a statement of protest.

[SeattleUte]

I would like to say that I would have intervened had I actually seen that. Walked over and punched Sandusky out, that sort of thing. Tried to stop it in some way. But who knows what you will do in such a situation? And I can understand the concept of being shocked beyond your capacity to think in a "wtf did I just see?" sort of way. It takes a day to process maybe. You panic and don't know what to do. Not that this makes anything better for the victim, but I understand it.

I get lost after that. First of all, you have pretty damn conclusive evidence that a serious crime has been committed. This isn't somebody saying hey, guess what I heard - you saw it and know it happened. Why do you go to JoePa to report anyway? You would report any other crime directly to the police, no? If you saw a guy breaking into a car in the parking lot you may not try to stop it but you'd dial 911, right? And that's a crime against property, not a crime against humanity.

But okay, you're young and you may not know much about who to talk to, so you go to your superior. That's more appropriate for minor sexual harassment issues maybe, but okay. And you tell him what you saw. At what point when the cops haven't called to ask you about it do you go back and find out what was done? At what point do you see Sandusky again and say "what in the name of fuck are you doing here you three week old pile of spicy burrito shit?"

That is what is inexcusable to me. Not stopping it, well, okay. Not going to the right authorities but going up the chain, sort of understandable. Sitting on your hands for several years with the knowledge of what happened? You are dirt.

I'd pick up something big and heavy and try to cave his head in. It's that simple. I'm sure that's what I'd do. I'd maximize the chances of incapacitating him, and not worry about killing him or permanent injury. There must be something heavy that could be turned into a deadly weapon in a DI sports locker room (one of those automatic shoe polishers? A baseball bat?) . I mean, what are we talking about here? It's almost like he was murdering the kid.

This is one thing that maybe cuts in Paterno's favor. Maybe Paterno was only told they were "horsing around" and he drew a conclusion that it was just a concern about an appearance of things, and that would make sense given that the grad ass didn't do anything.

(Of course with this comment I'm accepting the Grand Jury report at face value. And I'm speculating.)

[Dwight Schr-ute]

What I will find interesting is how the tv commentators that call the PSU-Nebraska game on Saturday. I have a feeling that they'll be fairly muzzled on what they'll be allowed to say about Paterno but will be allowed to discuss his retirement. It seems like it is just going to be the most awkward dance around the dirty old pedophilic elephant in the room.

[cougjunkie]

Apparently JoePa lead an impromptu We Are Penn State cheer at a rally on his front lawn last night. I read about that in some article. Sounded weird.

Jim Rome has audio of it and it was very funny. It was like he forgot what he was doing and started talking about praying for the "alleged victims" families and that Sandusky has his full support but before he finished he shouts out "We Are......." and the crowd yells back "Penn State".

Then they start doing a version of the White Stripes Seven Nation Army chanting; "Jooooo-oooooooooooohhhhhhhhhh-aaaaaaaaaaaaaa" Really weird.