Hello guys. I know it's your board but since your commenting on Penn State I figured I'd chime in.
I'm not sure why jay should be banned or ostracized from doing what he wants to do with his life. And this is coming from someone who thought jay was an awful coach and recruiter. Does that really sound fair? I don't think any of us would punish innocent people because they had a family member do something bad. I think you guys understand that.
Additionally, and I'm not trying to convince anyone because you're entitled to your opinion as am I, but the admin trials are over. After five years, 22 charges, 14 of which were felonies, two admins pled guilty to one misdemeanor each and spanier was found guilty of one misdemeanor. He's appealing. The jury found no evidence of a cover-up. None. No felonies.
The misdemeanors were for reporting to second mile instead of cys. That was a mistake and I'm glad they accepted blame for it.
That said please read the excerpt below from a book by Joe Posnanski called "Paterno."
I would just ask you read it with an open mind. It deals with what mike reported. Thanks.
"The presentment, as such things do, made black and white what was a smoggy gray.
When questioned, Mcqueary admitted that he did not see anything very clearly.He also said under oath that "out of respect," he had not used graphic terms and had not gone into much detail with Paterno. In this their memories coincided: Paterno said what Mcqueary told him was not even close in specifics or in brutality to what was in the presentment.
There is strong evidence that Mcqueary was much less certain about what he saw in the aftermath of the incident. According to testimony, that Friday night, after he left the Lasch Building, he went to his father's house to ask for advice. The two of them talked at some length, and then they called over a family friend, Dr. Jonathan Dranov. Dranov, a prominent doctor in the community, told Paterno family investigators in 2011, and a Pennsylvania jury in 2012, that
Mcqueary said he heard some "sexual sounds" but could offer no more detail.
Dranov said that three times he pressed Mcquery to describe what he actually saw, and three times Mcquery said that he did not see anything in the shower. Dranov conceded that Mcqueary might have been holding back; he too remembered just how upset Mcqueary was, which was why
he kept pressing the issue.
But at the end of the conversation Mcqueary continued to say that he did not see any act but that he heard those noises.
Dranov said Mcqueary's visual description was of a naked young boy, in the doorway of the shower. Mcqueary then said he saw an arm pull the boy back out of the way, and seconds later Sandusky walked around the corner with a towel wrapped around his waist.
Dranov and the Mcquearys agreed that Mike had not seen enough to go to the police, and Dranov recommended that Mcqueary go to Paterno on that Saturday morning. Dranov conceded all those years later that, though the incident sounded bad, Sandusky's reputation as a community icon was still in tact.
He said he never heard any rumors about Sandusky and that what Mcqueary had seen led to the possibility of a misunderstanding and "an innocent explanation."
Paterno would later say that if Mcqueary had told him he saw Sandusky raping a young boy, "We would have gone to the police right then and there, no questions asked." End of except
