KeithWassung

great post

A dilemna is a dilemma with an "N" in the middle of it

I went to the first half of the game at the watchsite, then left at halftime, went to the viewing and stayed for the memorial service--the mood at the service was more upbeat than the mood of the watchsite. I had a friend texting me the scores, but there was no service available and so when i walked out, all of the updates hit me all at once.

Sorry, I am skeptical on this one, the PSU timing on everything shows a pattern, the indictment comes right after the 409th win, etc, etc. Now I am guessing (just a guess here) that he has some issue with his lungs that he knew about-or they had been watching and the report gets released now---why now--its a PR spin, a ploy for sympathy, a chance to get the public back on this side. JoePa transferred his assets a few months ago--i cant help but believe he knows he is a serious trouble with all of the allegations and maybe, just maybe, this softens the hearts of the prosecutors who do not wish to charge him with anything or as much---again, I just find the timing of this very curious.

Here is my dilemna, looking forward to the game tomorrow and we meet at a nice watch site here in Charleston. However, a friend, not a close friend, but a friend died this past week--funeral is at 2pm (game here starts at 12) Dont know whether to skip it entirely, go to the first half and then leave, etc. In 1973 I had a great uncle die and it was the same time that Nebraska was playing Army on TV and of course it was a big deal back then to get a game on tv--so my uncles and cousins hid a small portable tv in the downstairs bathroom of the church and took turns going to the bathroom and then coming back and writing the score on paper and passing it down the row of guys. any thoughts?

i have a theory about the Sandusky/Costa interview. Not a single legal expert in the world will say that it is a good idea for a defendant to go public and do an interview--there is simply no benefit to it whatsoever--so why would he do it--why would his attorney allow it? Here is my theory--he is borrowing a page from the Michael Jackson defense playbook. Prior to this trial, I did not meet a SINGLE person who did not think MJ was guilty of molesting little boys--the evidence was overwhelming--how could he deny the sleepovers--but MJ goes on tv and says 'Yeah, I sleep with little boys, but that is all we did was sleep-I have a special relationship with them, etc, etc and that was the end of it. By saying that, he sort of difused the situation--it was poor judgment, but hardly criminal and he was aquitted because there was no real physical evidence--just the testimony of boys ( and their families likely had a financial agenda) So Sandusky, who is probably throwing up a hail mary here, decides to do the same thing---he admits to showering, he will admit to horsing around in the pool and cracking their back and will admit to enjoying their company, but will end up saying the criminal allegations are all made up--there is no physical evidence---and they can even say the families are only doing this for the money and surely PSU has deep pockets. How does he dismiss the eyewitness account---he can say that were goofing around and McQ was unclear what he saw--the FACT that McQ did not try to stop it--actually helps Sandusky-he can say, hey, what full grown man in their right mind would not stop a kid from being raped---I was washing his back or something-- anyway, just a theory

one more thing to watch----if its "watchable or trackable---see how many PSU officials/coaches-past and present over the past 15 years begin quietly hiring attorneys.

Here is the problem with the 'JoePa did'nt do anything wrong, he did what he was required to do"----This was going on LONG before the 2002 incident,, at least as early as 1994 and I am betting that it goes back even further than that. The first reported case ( thus far) was the 1998 case--the facts are there that JS had a thing for little boys--he admitted as much--JoePa wold have known this and I am willing to bet that was the reason for the 1999 retirement. If the 2002 incident was the VERY TIME that JoePa was ever aware of a problem with Sandusky--then maybe, just maybe the "techically did enough" would work, but JoePa had been ignoring or overlooking this for so long, that to know fully report it or investigate would immediately call into question the actions of his defensive coordiator from at least 1994-1998. These questions will be asked and must be answered during the on-going investigation. Imagine them ignoring or covering up what they thought was a minor problem (inappropriate behavior) for years, because maybe they had no real proof, hard to confront someone with that --the 2nd mile was running, etc, etc. Then when something worse happens--more than inappropriate behavior, now you have naked fondling) well, if you publicly bust him on that, now you have to admit you have been covering his behaviors up for years--so you quietly get him to retire--and now Sandusky has some leverage with JoePa and the school--now if they ever bust him, he will take them down with him because of what they knew and covered--and so he stays close to the program and continues his actions and they get worse--then in 02 he openly rapes a kid in the showers--it gets reported-well sort of, some version of it gets reported--but it does not go anywhere and NOBODY really wants the investigation to go anywhere because of the can of worms it will open up--and so on and so on and so on. We have not even covered the involvement of the 2nd mile boys and their leverage against the school.......but that is coming soon.

thank you for your service, GO BIG RED

a couple of thursday morning tidbits about all of this seems like its quieted down a bit--at least in the media--today was the first day that none of the ESPN/sports radio talk shows were not covering wall to wall. I have a good friend, who is in a major media corporation who insists that there is much, much bigger things to come--would not elaborate past that point--you have to wonder if they are waiting to get past this final home game or if the web is so large, that the authorities are getting a lot of things in place--several people have suggested that this is much much bigger than what we presently know. Really surprised that I have seen little or no coverage about this on the major networks, just a mention--that is strange. Here is something that I find strange about the McQuearys testimony of the shower incident--he says he entered the facility and heard strange sounds that sounded "sexual" in nature--dont mean to be graphic here, but if a ten year old boy was being raped by a large man---wouldnt the kid be screaming his lungs out and begging for help? no mention of that--would'nt there be a ton of physical trauma to the boy--I mean hospital level-intensive care--yet later he says he saw JS and the boy walking out of the building together. Dont really know how to feel about this game--I sure hope the PSU team plays hard and for the pride of the their school and not "win one for JoePa" that would be revolting. just some thoughts

nm

I dont know if this is the biggest scandal in our nations history, but its at least the most disturbing. I have not felt this numb since the Jonestown/Guyana story broke in the lake 70's and each day the papers kept coming out with more and more shocking data. I think this thing is huge---if it were just one sicko doing things for all those years...and PSU did not do a whole lot to stop it--just sort of looked the other way--I think they could survive--and just sort of plead ignorance. I just have the sick feeling that there is a much wider circle of people involved in this thing

Weird, un-chartered waters here. We have a nice watch site here in Charleston with a good group of folks--I take some of my kids with me, but to be honest, thinking about not going and not even having it on at the house--never felt like that before, ever. I would be worried about safety of our players--I mean they tipped over a media truck--and that is sort of neutral territory. Btw, I have gotten wind of some info from a reliable source that says there is much more in the way of new allegations and a larger involvement at PSU, but its been held until after this game, which is their last game for security reasons. I hope they wait until the Huskers and fans are on the place and have left PA airspace if that is true.

If the incident in 02 was the ONLY ONE that JoePa was made aware of....then I could almost give him a pass or at least go along with his comments that he wises he could have done more in response to that situation.....but this was not the only incident...there was a very well documented incident in 98 that received a complete investigation and was eventually dropped ( whic was stupid) but JoePa KNEW of that event and I am willing to bet that he knew about a lot of events. Think about it-if you were a criminal and did not want to get caught, would you commit your crimes in the open or if had the choice--in secret. Sandusky could have easily done his crimes in his basement, off campus, etc, etc, but for whatever reason, he chose to do at least some of them right on site--he either wanted to get caught or was flaunting his untouchable position. You cant tell me that JoePa did not know what was going on. I mean this goes back to 1994 and the guy seemed to make no effort to hide his behavior. So when told about an incident in 02--JoePa not only did the bare minimum for that situation, but for the entire body of work--and this continued for another seven years. If you screw up or exercise bad judgment..and then say your sorry, you made a mistake, ok, I get that...but when the mistake (chosing to ignore the obvious) goes on for decades, dont give me this "I wish I could have done more" crap---not at all.

(taking deep breath) I have felt all along that this goes much deeper than just one rogue coach pedophile. I have been told by people who at least should be "in the know" that pedophiles are well connected with others and there is often a ring involved. I dont know if that is true, but given the lack of attention given to this, it seems plausible. The dead DA has not really hit the mainstream news yet, but I think that is the next big shoe to drop. JoePa stated (in GJ testimony) that the details that the GA gave him were not that explicit-----However, and here is what I would ask him. There was a shower incident that occurred 4 years earlier when Sandusky was an active coach. It was investigated and dropped--but JoePa clearly knew about the allegations--and I am betting that is why Sandusky resigned. So JoePa had that incident in his head--combined with Sandusky bringing little boys to bowl games, etc. He HAD A FRAME OF REFERENCE. So when the GA comes to him--I dont care how much of the details were left out--it should have triggered a huge frigging alarm in his head. The mere FACT that Sandusky and the boy were alone in a building late at night after hours--would have been enough to warrant immediate action...and that is the line of questions I would ask JoePa.

I think this gets a lot worse for Paterno and here is why/ In 1998, there was a documented incident of Sandusky in the shower with a boy. His mother called the police. Two detectives listened in on a conversation between the mother and Sandusky. Sandusky admitted what he had done--not quite rape, but it would certainly be labled as "sexual deviant behavior" for anyone, let alone a coach. It was investigated and was later dropped. Now, are you telling me that JoePa KNEW NOTHING ABOUT THIS INCIDENT? He has to have known and I am betting that is why Sandusky "retired" in 1999. This would be the first question I would ask JoePa today---what did you know about the 1998 incident.---Now, Sandusky was taking little boys on bowl trips with the team, having them sleeping with him in his room--they were on the official roster--and JoePa was not concerned about this. This is the key issue, because JoePa's defense is that when the GA came to him in 2002--he did not get the graphic details of the rape and so he really did not know the gravity of the situation--but he still had the 1998 incident in his mind--and I am betting there were other things that happened. You hear about a second incident---and you go with the full court press to the authorities

I am glad that I am not the only who who read the account of the eyewitness and did not think that If I was in that same situation, I would have screamed for help, called 911, picked up the heaviest object I could find and rush the coach and bit the living crap out of him--as opposed to just "reporting it". I dont get that at all,