MORALLY BANKRUPT PSU - Jury Hears McQueary and Dranov Again

The verdict isn't even in on the counts against Jerry Sandusky and The Philadelphia Inquirer goes after Penn State as morally bankrupt

the forces that conspired to allow Sandusky free rein on the campus of Pennsylvania State University for way too long are just as guilty as Sandusky. If prosecuted and convicted, they will be found guilty of different crimes, but had they acted differently fewer children would have been molested.

That's about as clearly as it can be put. If people had done the right thing, fewer children would have been hurt. Getting that side of the equation brought to justice will be the difficult part, however, because the walls of power are high, and those who inhabit them have resources that enable them to remain inside.

Well perhaps that is technically correct Bob but if by some miracle an investigation had resulted in something different than the 1998 situation there were as far as we know only 2 "victims" following that Feb 2001 Mike McQueary incident who claim abuse from 2006 thru 2007. The 1998 investigation did nothing to stop JS yet Bob Ford is somehow convinced the 2 "1 or 2" second glances by MM of JS backside and an unknown 2M boy standing upright in a shower would have somehow kept PSU from being "morally bankrupt"

While Sandusky can be easily put away as a rogue freak who passed among us, Schultz, Curley, and Spanier were the very cloth of the community, and if that can be rended, what does it say about the community? If the all-encompassing influence over the region - Penn State - can be demonstrated to be morally bankrupt at its core, then what about the rest of us? A jury can slam the door on Sandusky, who was willing to answer fully to Bob Costas but not to the people of the commonwealth, but what will happen when Schultz, Curley, and Spanier ask their peers to understand how difficult it is to steer this large ship that carries so much that is good?

Morally bankrupt at it's core? Because Mike McQueary failed to take the initiative to substantiate his suspicions or make them clear?

Yes, that will be the difficult part, and twice difficult because it will once again take the conversation in the vicinity of Joe Paterno, a place where emotion has trumped common sense in the past.

Self righteous certainly trumped common sense in most of the national media since last November.

Schultz and Curley told much the same story, that they knew only about the 2001 incident in the Lasch Football Building that was reported to them, through Paterno, by assistant coach Mike McQueary. While it was worth looking into, McQueary's version didn't sound like anything took place aside from a little "horseplay," according to Schultz and Curley, who didn't report it to child-protection authorities.

So Bob Ford knows what MM said to Schultz and Curley in a 10 to 12 minute meeting over a decade ago? Mr. Ford knows that it was not reported to child protection authorities as Mr. Schultz recalls?

It all sounded very reasonable until former FBI director Louie Freeh was able to recover e-mails between Spanier and Schultz that were thought to have been deleted permanently. The evidence was turned over to the Attorney General's Office, and, according to published reports, the e-mails make it clear that Spanier might not have been accurate in his recollection to the grand jury. In one e-mail, Spanier is alleged to have written that turning in Sandusky wouldn't be the "humane" thing to do. Oh, boy. It also turns out that Schultz, who was in charge of the campus police force, kept a detailed file on Sandusky.

So Mr. Ford somehow knows the context of the word "humane" in a deleted email and has insight on the "detail" in an old file?

We've seen a parade of 28 witnesses claiming that Jerry Sandusky was almost Saint like. People who knew JS well and several who were much the same as the 8 'victims' who took the stand - none of which is the 'victim' Ford claims makes PSU "morally bankrupt".

We heard Dr. Jonathan Dranov tell the jury that on the night of this Feb 2001 incident Mike McQueary could not tell his father or the good Doctor that he had witnessed a sex act - only that he heard "sexual" sounds that consisted of 2 or 3 slapping sounds. Somehow those 2 or 3 slapping sounds and 2 "one or two second glances of JS backside" should have resulted in the end of any abuse done by the founder of The Second Mile so highly regarded for his work with underprivileged kids?

Mr. Ford and many other superior folk seem to know they would have been all over these 'suspicions' by a young grad assistant who was clearly not certain of anything based on what he has said under oath. Yes he saw something he thought was "inappropriate" and Schultz and Curley agreed. They put an end to that inappropriate behavior at Penn State.

Did they contact child protective services? Schultz believes they did. But if they called and spoke to anyone saying that a grad assistant had heard a couple of slapping sounds and glanced for a couple of seconds JS and a boy in the shower following the 1998 investigation what would the child protective person who took the call have done? Was there really enough to launch and investigation by an understaffed agency? Could such a call have been forgotten?

Or is it so clear to you that whatever Mike McQueary might have said in those 10 to 12 minutes in Feb 2001 should have resulted in the end of Jerry Sandusky that you are willing to declare an entire community and university as "morally bankrupt"? I look at you Bob Ford and I see a writer who is morally bankrupt.

Where does the power lie in this situation Bob? With an Attorney General who has singled out Penn State over the vague recollections of brief glances and slapping sounds a decade ago in an incident with no known victim? With a media that bought the Attorney Generals presentment without any critical thought? With a Governor who investigated much more serious allegations for 2 years without action? Or with a retired VP and an Athletic Director who don't recall this grad assistant telling them any more than what he told his father, Dr. Dranov, or Joe Paterno?

The jury will decide the fate of Jerry Sandusky who is clearly an accomplished predator who fooled a great many people or *far less likely - the target of a conspiracy to extract big lawsuit payoffs. But people like you are willing to claim some moral failure of an entire community and university because this monster or (far less likely) "martyr" happened to end up in State College?

Morally Bankrupt? I see a lot of that going around lately mainly from members of the media whose self-righteous bullshit knows no bounds.

UPDATE Jury to rehear the MM and Dranov testimony today

The jury of seven women and five men will return to the courthouse in Bellefonte, Pa., at 9 a.m., when they will rehear testimony from Mike McQueary, a former graduate assistant coach who said he saw Sandusky abusing a boy in the showers at Penn State’s football training facility. They will also rehear the testimony of the friend he talked to that night, Dr. Jonathan Dranov. Testifying as a defense witness, Dranov described a less graphic version that he said McQueary told him in 2001.

Judge John Cleland told the jurors that McQueary's testimony was about two hours long and Dranov's was about 20 minutes.

McQueary testified that he had returned to the locker room on a winter night in 2001 and saw Sandusky in the showers with a naked boy, about 10 to 12 years old. McQueary told jurors that he saw Sandusky directly behind the boy’s back, moving in a way that convinced him that a sex act was in progress. He said he heard the sound of skin slapping against skin.

Dranov, however, testified that McQueary gave no such graphic description that night, saying only that he heard sounds he considered sexual. The boy in the case has never been identified and is known in court papers only as Victim 2.