ADVERTISEMENT

Column by Joe Paterno sent to former players - Written late Dec/early Jan before he passed

T J

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
98,092
7,916
1
From the FightOnState printing, when it was released in 2012...



Photo by Dave Cole

Joe Paterno Pre-Death Column Released



Earlier this afternoon, Fight on State (@FightOnState) released a column written by Joe Paterno in “late December or early January” that addresses the Sandusky situation.

The column was sent to former Penn State football players this morning, and touts Penn State’s tradition of academic and athletic excellence, regardless of what may have occurred internally with the Sandusky scandal.

Here is the column, written by Joe Paterno, courtesy of Fight on State:

For the last two months, at the request of the Attorney General’s office, I have not discussed the specifics of my testimony regarding the pending cases. And while I will continue to honor that request, I do feel compelled to address comments made subsequent to November 9; specifically, I feel compelled to say, in no uncertain terms, that this is not a football scandal.

Let me say that again so I am not misunderstood: regardless of anyone’s opinion of my actions or the actions of the handful of administration officials in this matter, the fact is nothing alleged is an indictment of football or evidence that the spectacular collections of accomplishments by dedicated student athletes should be in anyway tarnished.

Yet, over and over again, I have heard Penn State officials decrying the influence of football and have heard such ignorant comments like Penn State will no longer be a “football factory” and we are going to “start” focusing on integrity in athletics. These statements are simply unsupported by the five decades of evidence to the contrary – and succeed only in unfairly besmirching both a great University and the players and alumni of the football program who have given of themselves to help make it great.

For over 40 years young men have come to Penn State with the idea that they were going to do something different — they were coming to a place where they would be expected to compete at the highest levels of college football and challenged to get a degree. And they succeeded — during the last 45 years NO ONE has won more games while graduating more players. The men who made that commitment and who gave of themselves to help build the national reputation of what was once a regional school deserve better than to have their hard work and sacrifice dismissed as part of a “football factory,” all in the interests of expediency.


Penn State is not a football factory and it is ALREADY a great University. We have world-class researchers, degree programs, and students in every discipline. Penn Staters have been pioneers in medical advancements, engineering, and in the humanities. Our graduates have gone on to change the world — even graduates with football lettermen sweaters.

That is why recent comments are so perplexing and damaging — Penn Staters know we are a world class University. We can recite with pride the ranks of our academic programs and the successes of our graduates. Penn Staters (and employers) know what we are and the quality of our education. Nothing that has been alleged in any way implicates that reputation; rather, it is only the inexplicable comments of our own administration doing so.

It must stop. This is not a football scandal and should not be treated as one. It is not an academic scandal and does not in any way tarnish the hard earned and well-deserved academic reputation of Penn State. That Penn State officials would suggest otherwise is a disservice to every one of the over 500,000 living alumni.

Forget my career in terms of my accomplishments and look at the last 40 years as I do: as the aggregate achievements of hundreds of young men working to become better people as they got an education and became better football players. Look at those men and what they have done in the world since they left Penn State and assess their contributions as an aggregate – is this a collection of jocks who did nothing but skate by at a football factory, or are these men who earned an education and built a reputation second to none as a place where academic integrity and gridiron success could thrive together?

Whatever failings that may have happened at Penn State, whatever conclusions about my or others’ conduct you may wish to draw from a fair view of the allegations, it is inarguable that these actions had nothing to do with this last team or any of the hundreds of prior graduates of the “Grand Experiment.”

Penn Staters across the globe should feel no shame in saying “We are…Penn State.” This is a great University with one of the best academic performing football programs in major college athletics. Those are facts — and nothing that has been alleged changes them.

http://onwardstate.com/2012/07/11/joe-paterno-authored-column-released/
 
The Mount Rushmore of Traitors to Penn State. Surma, Joyner, Suhey, Peetz, Frazier............sadly too many to name and they have skated on this to date. There was only one conspiracy @ PSU and it continues to this day. The proof is very simple......after Barron pledged to review the Freeh Report in an effort to prove that "The University" had "nothing to hide" he was silenced. No report, no explanation needed.Considering what they did to Joe....
they should never be permitted to show their faces on campus or at any university function ever again.
 
Barron is as worthless as a homeless bum's wet crapped underwear that has dried out and been worn for a week in 90 degree weather. The man is a coward and yes man. Barron needs to go, there can be no defending him.
 
For the last two months, at the request of the Attorney General’s office, I have not discussed the specifics of my testimony regarding the pending cases.

I have read this article before, but I did not really focus on this quote. Makes me wonder if there was more to his testimony, whether in expanding on some of what he said as released, or in the manner in which he said them. No doubt others have discussed this aspect, and perhaps I am forgetting those discussion. I recall something about the inflection of his voice when mentioning 'a sexual nature'.... was it a declarative statement, or a reflective question and the important question mark was omitted from the leaked account? And based on his recollection, or based on a very recent rehash about the conversation with McQ? Or maybe this was nothing at all, just the usual protocol for an ongoing investigation. Still pisses me off that the initial statements from the OAG and others praised Joe's cooperation, and then the narrative was allowed to change without challenge.

The recent detailed speculation by a poster on what possibly transpired as the investigative and grand jury processes unfolded prior to Nov. 2011 is very plausible, imo. Looking forward to learning more.... at some point. Wouldn't we all love to know what Wick and his team and the Paternos have learned?!
 
I have read this article before, but I did not really focus on this quote. Makes me wonder if there was more to his testimony, whether in expanding on some of what he said as released, or in the manner in which he said them. No doubt others have discussed this aspect, and perhaps I am forgetting those discussion. I recall something about the inflection of his voice when mentioning 'a sexual nature'.... was it a declarative statement, or a reflective question and the important question mark was omitted from the leaked account? And based on his recollection, or based on a very recent rehash about the conversation with McQ? Or maybe this was nothing at all, just the usual protocol for an ongoing investigation. Still pisses me off that the initial statements from the OAG and others praised Joe's cooperation, and then the narrative was allowed to change without challenge.

The recent detailed speculation by a poster on what possibly transpired as the investigative and grand jury processes unfolded prior to Nov. 2011 is very plausible, imo. Looking forward to learning more.... at some point. Wouldn't we all love to know what Wick and his team and the Paternos have learned?!

Good point Bob78. Wondered that too, about JoePa testimony.

Also -
May have missed the "recent speculation" you mentioned.
Is there a link or can someone repost it here? Thanks
 
Never forget the role of the 2011 Penn State Board of Trustees in turning the Sandusky Scandal into the Penn State/Paterno Scandal
Remember their names and what they did.


These are the pimps that keep bringing us garbage at on campus events like Amaechi. WTMF? Haven't most had enough already of this garbage that's calculated to aggravate Alumni and Elected Trustees that are after their dishonest asses?
 
From the FightOnState printing, when it was released in 2012...



Photo by Dave Cole

Joe Paterno Pre-Death Column Released



Earlier this afternoon, Fight on State (@FightOnState) released a column written by Joe Paterno in “late December or early January” that addresses the Sandusky situation.

The column was sent to former Penn State football players this morning, and touts Penn State’s tradition of academic and athletic excellence, regardless of what may have occurred internally with the Sandusky scandal.

Here is the column, written by Joe Paterno, courtesy of Fight on State:

For the last two months, at the request of the Attorney General’s office, I have not discussed the specifics of my testimony regarding the pending cases. And while I will continue to honor that request, I do feel compelled to address comments made subsequent to November 9; specifically, I feel compelled to say, in no uncertain terms, that this is not a football scandal.

Let me say that again so I am not misunderstood: regardless of anyone’s opinion of my actions or the actions of the handful of administration officials in this matter, the fact is nothing alleged is an indictment of football or evidence that the spectacular collections of accomplishments by dedicated student athletes should be in anyway tarnished.

Yet, over and over again, I have heard Penn State officials decrying the influence of football and have heard such ignorant comments like Penn State will no longer be a “football factory” and we are going to “start” focusing on integrity in athletics. These statements are simply unsupported by the five decades of evidence to the contrary – and succeed only in unfairly besmirching both a great University and the players and alumni of the football program who have given of themselves to help make it great.

For over 40 years young men have come to Penn State with the idea that they were going to do something different — they were coming to a place where they would be expected to compete at the highest levels of college football and challenged to get a degree. And they succeeded — during the last 45 years NO ONE has won more games while graduating more players. The men who made that commitment and who gave of themselves to help build the national reputation of what was once a regional school deserve better than to have their hard work and sacrifice dismissed as part of a “football factory,” all in the interests of expediency.


Penn State is not a football factory and it is ALREADY a great University. We have world-class researchers, degree programs, and students in every discipline. Penn Staters have been pioneers in medical advancements, engineering, and in the humanities. Our graduates have gone on to change the world — even graduates with football lettermen sweaters.

That is why recent comments are so perplexing and damaging — Penn Staters know we are a world class University. We can recite with pride the ranks of our academic programs and the successes of our graduates. Penn Staters (and employers) know what we are and the quality of our education. Nothing that has been alleged in any way implicates that reputation; rather, it is only the inexplicable comments of our own administration doing so.

It must stop. This is not a football scandal and should not be treated as one. It is not an academic scandal and does not in any way tarnish the hard earned and well-deserved academic reputation of Penn State. That Penn State officials would suggest otherwise is a disservice to every one of the over 500,000 living alumni.

Forget my career in terms of my accomplishments and look at the last 40 years as I do: as the aggregate achievements of hundreds of young men working to become better people as they got an education and became better football players. Look at those men and what they have done in the world since they left Penn State and assess their contributions as an aggregate – is this a collection of jocks who did nothing but skate by at a football factory, or are these men who earned an education and built a reputation second to none as a place where academic integrity and gridiron success could thrive together?

Whatever failings that may have happened at Penn State, whatever conclusions about my or others’ conduct you may wish to draw from a fair view of the allegations, it is inarguable that these actions had nothing to do with this last team or any of the hundreds of prior graduates of the “Grand Experiment.”

Penn Staters across the globe should feel no shame in saying “We are…Penn State.” This is a great University with one of the best academic performing football programs in major college athletics. Those are facts — and nothing that has been alleged changes them.

http://onwardstate.com/2012/07/11/joe-paterno-authored-column-released/
From the FightOnState printing, when it was released in 2012...



Photo by Dave Cole

Joe Paterno Pre-Death Column Released



Earlier this afternoon, Fight on State (@FightOnState) released a column written by Joe Paterno in “late December or early January” that addresses the Sandusky situation.

The column was sent to former Penn State football players this morning, and touts Penn State’s tradition of academic and athletic excellence, regardless of what may have occurred internally with the Sandusky scandal.

Here is the column, written by Joe Paterno, courtesy of Fight on State:

For the last two months, at the request of the Attorney General’s office, I have not discussed the specifics of my testimony regarding the pending cases. And while I will continue to honor that request, I do feel compelled to address comments made subsequent to November 9; specifically, I feel compelled to say, in no uncertain terms, that this is not a football scandal.

Let me say that again so I am not misunderstood: regardless of anyone’s opinion of my actions or the actions of the handful of administration officials in this matter, the fact is nothing alleged is an indictment of football or evidence that the spectacular collections of accomplishments by dedicated student athletes should be in anyway tarnished.

Yet, over and over again, I have heard Penn State officials decrying the influence of football and have heard such ignorant comments like Penn State will no longer be a “football factory” and we are going to “start” focusing on integrity in athletics. These statements are simply unsupported by the five decades of evidence to the contrary – and succeed only in unfairly besmirching both a great University and the players and alumni of the football program who have given of themselves to help make it great.

For over 40 years young men have come to Penn State with the idea that they were going to do something different — they were coming to a place where they would be expected to compete at the highest levels of college football and challenged to get a degree. And they succeeded — during the last 45 years NO ONE has won more games while graduating more players. The men who made that commitment and who gave of themselves to help build the national reputation of what was once a regional school deserve better than to have their hard work and sacrifice dismissed as part of a “football factory,” all in the interests of expediency.


Penn State is not a football factory and it is ALREADY a great University. We have world-class researchers, degree programs, and students in every discipline. Penn Staters have been pioneers in medical advancements, engineering, and in the humanities. Our graduates have gone on to change the world — even graduates with football lettermen sweaters.

That is why recent comments are so perplexing and damaging — Penn Staters know we are a world class University. We can recite with pride the ranks of our academic programs and the successes of our graduates. Penn Staters (and employers) know what we are and the quality of our education. Nothing that has been alleged in any way implicates that reputation; rather, it is only the inexplicable comments of our own administration doing so.

It must stop. This is not a football scandal and should not be treated as one. It is not an academic scandal and does not in any way tarnish the hard earned and well-deserved academic reputation of Penn State. That Penn State officials would suggest otherwise is a disservice to every one of the over 500,000 living alumni.

Forget my career in terms of my accomplishments and look at the last 40 years as I do: as the aggregate achievements of hundreds of young men working to become better people as they got an education and became better football players. Look at those men and what they have done in the world since they left Penn State and assess their contributions as an aggregate – is this a collection of jocks who did nothing but skate by at a football factory, or are these men who earned an education and built a reputation second to none as a place where academic integrity and gridiron success could thrive together?

Whatever failings that may have happened at Penn State, whatever conclusions about my or others’ conduct you may wish to draw from a fair view of the allegations, it is inarguable that these actions had nothing to do with this last team or any of the hundreds of prior graduates of the “Grand Experiment.”

Penn Staters across the globe should feel no shame in saying “We are…Penn State.” This is a great University with one of the best academic performing football programs in major college athletics. Those are facts — and nothing that has been alleged changes them.

http://onwardstate.com/2012/07/11/joe-paterno-authored-column-released/
These are the pimps that keep bringing us garbage at on campus events like Amaechi. WTMF? Haven't most had enough already of this garbage that's calculated to aggravate Alumni and Elected Trustees that are after their dishonest asses?
From the FightOnState printing, when it was released in 2012...



Photo by Dave Cole

Joe Paterno Pre-Death Column Released



Earlier this afternoon, Fight on State (@FightOnState) released a column written by Joe Paterno in “late December or early January” that addresses the Sandusky situation.

The column was sent to former Penn State football players this morning, and touts Penn State’s tradition of academic and athletic excellence, regardless of what may have occurred internally with the Sandusky scandal.

Here is the column, written by Joe Paterno, courtesy of Fight on State:

For the last two months, at the request of the Attorney General’s office, I have not discussed the specifics of my testimony regarding the pending cases. And while I will continue to honor that request, I do feel compelled to address comments made subsequent to November 9; specifically, I feel compelled to say, in no uncertain terms, that this is not a football scandal.

Let me say that again so I am not misunderstood: regardless of anyone’s opinion of my actions or the actions of the handful of administration officials in this matter, the fact is nothing alleged is an indictment of football or evidence that the spectacular collections of accomplishments by dedicated student athletes should be in anyway tarnished.

Yet, over and over again, I have heard Penn State officials decrying the influence of football and have heard such ignorant comments like Penn State will no longer be a “football factory” and we are going to “start” focusing on integrity in athletics. These statements are simply unsupported by the five decades of evidence to the contrary – and succeed only in unfairly besmirching both a great University and the players and alumni of the football program who have given of themselves to help make it great.

For over 40 years young men have come to Penn State with the idea that they were going to do something different — they were coming to a place where they would be expected to compete at the highest levels of college football and challenged to get a degree. And they succeeded — during the last 45 years NO ONE has won more games while graduating more players. The men who made that commitment and who gave of themselves to help build the national reputation of what was once a regional school deserve better than to have their hard work and sacrifice dismissed as part of a “football factory,” all in the interests of expediency.


Penn State is not a football factory and it is ALREADY a great University. We have world-class researchers, degree programs, and students in every discipline. Penn Staters have been pioneers in medical advancements, engineering, and in the humanities. Our graduates have gone on to change the world — even graduates with football lettermen sweaters.

That is why recent comments are so perplexing and damaging — Penn Staters know we are a world class University. We can recite with pride the ranks of our academic programs and the successes of our graduates. Penn Staters (and employers) know what we are and the quality of our education. Nothing that has been alleged in any way implicates that reputation; rather, it is only the inexplicable comments of our own administration doing so.

It must stop. This is not a football scandal and should not be treated as one. It is not an academic scandal and does not in any way tarnish the hard earned and well-deserved academic reputation of Penn State. That Penn State officials would suggest otherwise is a disservice to every one of the over 500,000 living alumni.

Forget my career in terms of my accomplishments and look at the last 40 years as I do: as the aggregate achievements of hundreds of young men working to become better people as they got an education and became better football players. Look at those men and what they have done in the world since they left Penn State and assess their contributions as an aggregate – is this a collection of jocks who did nothing but skate by at a football factory, or are these men who earned an education and built a reputation second to none as a place where academic integrity and gridiron success could thrive together?

Whatever failings that may have happened at Penn State, whatever conclusions about my or others’ conduct you may wish to draw from a fair view of the allegations, it is inarguable that these actions had nothing to do with this last team or any of the hundreds of prior graduates of the “Grand Experiment.”

Penn Staters across the globe should feel no shame in saying “We are…Penn State.” This is a great University with one of the best academic performing football programs in major college athletics. Those are facts — and nothing that has been alleged changes them.

http://onwardstate.com/2012/07/11/joe-paterno-authored-column-released/
 
From the FightOnState printing, when it was released in 2012...



Photo by Dave Cole

Joe Paterno Pre-Death Column Released



Earlier this afternoon, Fight on State (@FightOnState) released a column written by Joe Paterno in “late December or early January” that addresses the Sandusky situation.

The column was sent to former Penn State football players this morning, and touts Penn State’s tradition of academic and athletic excellence, regardless of what may have occurred internally with the Sandusky scandal.

Here is the column, written by Joe Paterno, courtesy of Fight on State:

For the last two months, at the request of the Attorney General’s office, I have not discussed the specifics of my testimony regarding the pending cases. And while I will continue to honor that request, I do feel compelled to address comments made subsequent to November 9; specifically, I feel compelled to say, in no uncertain terms, that this is not a football scandal.

Let me say that again so I am not misunderstood: regardless of anyone’s opinion of my actions or the actions of the handful of administration officials in this matter, the fact is nothing alleged is an indictment of football or evidence that the spectacular collections of accomplishments by dedicated student athletes should be in anyway tarnished.

Yet, over and over again, I have heard Penn State officials decrying the influence of football and have heard such ignorant comments like Penn State will no longer be a “football factory” and we are going to “start” focusing on integrity in athletics. These statements are simply unsupported by the five decades of evidence to the contrary – and succeed only in unfairly besmirching both a great University and the players and alumni of the football program who have given of themselves to help make it great.

For over 40 years young men have come to Penn State with the idea that they were going to do something different — they were coming to a place where they would be expected to compete at the highest levels of college football and challenged to get a degree. And they succeeded — during the last 45 years NO ONE has won more games while graduating more players. The men who made that commitment and who gave of themselves to help build the national reputation of what was once a regional school deserve better than to have their hard work and sacrifice dismissed as part of a “football factory,” all in the interests of expediency.


Penn State is not a football factory and it is ALREADY a great University. We have world-class researchers, degree programs, and students in every discipline. Penn Staters have been pioneers in medical advancements, engineering, and in the humanities. Our graduates have gone on to change the world — even graduates with football lettermen sweaters.

That is why recent comments are so perplexing and damaging — Penn Staters know we are a world class University. We can recite with pride the ranks of our academic programs and the successes of our graduates. Penn Staters (and employers) know what we are and the quality of our education. Nothing that has been alleged in any way implicates that reputation; rather, it is only the inexplicable comments of our own administration doing so.

It must stop. This is not a football scandal and should not be treated as one. It is not an academic scandal and does not in any way tarnish the hard earned and well-deserved academic reputation of Penn State. That Penn State officials would suggest otherwise is a disservice to every one of the over 500,000 living alumni.

Forget my career in terms of my accomplishments and look at the last 40 years as I do: as the aggregate achievements of hundreds of young men working to become better people as they got an education and became better football players. Look at those men and what they have done in the world since they left Penn State and assess their contributions as an aggregate – is this a collection of jocks who did nothing but skate by at a football factory, or are these men who earned an education and built a reputation second to none as a place where academic integrity and gridiron success could thrive together?

Whatever failings that may have happened at Penn State, whatever conclusions about my or others’ conduct you may wish to draw from a fair view of the allegations, it is inarguable that these actions had nothing to do with this last team or any of the hundreds of prior graduates of the “Grand Experiment.”

Penn Staters across the globe should feel no shame in saying “We are…Penn State.” This is a great University with one of the best academic performing football programs in major college athletics. Those are facts — and nothing that has been alleged changes them.

http://onwardstate.com/2012/07/11/joe-paterno-authored-column-released/
 
For the record I truly believe that Joe knew Jerry had a problem but did not want to deal with it like he would a players drinking or drug problem

In talking to several former players I do know personally Joe would have helped said players with those related troubles and get them help and in many ways help them after college to restart their lives

The problem with the m Jerry deal is this when in Ponarskis book when his son George Scott and Guido Delia asked Joe if he knew anything about what was going on Joe said don't bother me with this s tuff I got football to worry not Jerry

Knowing full well or forgetting ? about the breakfast conversation with Mike Mcquerry twelve years before . For that point and Jay who was recentely asked on Jeds Donahue show about his book and Ponarskis book and claims about the conversation I question what Joe knew and didn't know And from all that There is no way Joe didn't know Jerry had aproblem that and the fact that Jerrys sudden retirement after the Alamo bowl which was a stunnere but to those who knew .

I do believe Joe That knew and passed it on to Curly and the others because as former players have stated he simply did not want to deal with it I feel for Joe here because he had to deal something he did not want to A rotten place to be in Imagine how Mcquerry felt walking in on something that probably shocked him as well Just a sad situation that shou8ld have never been allowed to occur
 
  • Like
Reactions: bamasota
Good point Bob78. Wondered that too, about JoePa testimony.

Also -
May have missed the "recent speculation" you mentioned.
Is there a link or can someone repost it here? Thanks

TJ, I looked and cannot find it. Now I'm not even 100% sure it on BWI. Could have been a link from a Twitter post. Sorry I don't have a definitive answer.
It was detailed in its speculation, but followed a logical progression of possibilities/probabilities. I hope that perhaps ChiTown or another regular on both Twitter and here have a better recall of the details. All that said, it was pieced together and speculative based on what we've all read over the years, not based on facts or inside knowledge of events.
 
For the record I truly believe that Joe knew Jerry had a problem but did not want to deal with it like he would a players drinking or drug problem

In talking to several former players I do know personally Joe would have helped said players with those related troubles and get them help and in many ways help them after college to restart their lives

The problem with the m Jerry deal is this when in Ponarskis book when his son George Scott and Guido Delia asked Joe if he knew anything about what was going on Joe said don't bother me with this s tuff I got football to worry not Jerry

Knowing full well or forgetting ? about the breakfast conversation with Mike Mcquerry twelve years before . For that point and Jay who was recentely asked on Jeds Donahue show about his book and Ponarskis book and claims about the conversation I question what Joe knew and didn't know And from all that There is no way Joe didn't know Jerry had aproblem that and the fact that Jerrys sudden retirement after the Alamo bowl which was a stunnere but to those who knew .

I do believe Joe That knew and passed it on to Curly and the others because as former players have stated he simply did not want to deal with it I feel for Joe here because he had to deal something he did not want to A rotten place to be in Imagine how Mcquerry felt walking in on something that probably shocked him as well Just a sad situation that shou8ld have never been allowed to occur

You think Joe knew and still let his grandkids go swimming with him? Please, put down the spoiled eggnog.
 
For the record I truly believe that Joe knew Jerry had a problem but did not want to deal with it like he would a players drinking or drug problem

In talking to several former players I do know personally Joe would have helped said players with those related troubles and get them help and in many ways help them after college to restart their lives

The problem with the m Jerry deal is this when in Ponarskis book when his son George Scott and Guido Delia asked Joe if he knew anything about what was going on Joe said don't bother me with this s tuff I got football to worry not Jerry

Knowing full well or forgetting ? about the breakfast conversation with Mike Mcquerry twelve years before . For that point and Jay who was recentely asked on Jeds Donahue show about his book and Ponarskis book and claims about the conversation I question what Joe knew and didn't know And from all that There is no way Joe didn't know Jerry had aproblem that and the fact that Jerrys sudden retirement after the Alamo bowl which was a stunnere but to those who knew .

I do believe Joe That knew and passed it on to Curly and the others because as former players have stated he simply did not want to deal with it I feel for Joe here because he had to deal something he did not want to A rotten place to be in Imagine how Mcquerry felt walking in on something that probably shocked him as well Just a sad situation that shou8ld have never been allowed to occur

In the same book you cite, joe is quoted as saying he DID NOT KNOW Jerry was harming kids, and if he had he would have stopped it. By the way I know former players and a former high level assistant coach who completely disagree with your belief.
 
In the same book you cite, joe is quoted as saying he DID NOT KNOW Jerry was harming kids, and if he had he would have stopped it. By the way I know former players and a former high level assistant coach who completely disagree with your belief.

My guess is that there are more than a few regulars here who are friends of former players and or coaches. I concur that I have never heard anyone indicate that Joe knew of or ignored Jerry's "problem."
 
  • Like
Reactions: FHSPSU67
In the same book you cite, joe is quoted as saying he DID NOT KNOW Jerry was harming kids, and if he had he would have stopped it. By the way I know former players and a former high level assistant coach who completely disagree with your belief.
I am sure they do as to which I say it depends on who you listen to and what they want to believe In essence Joe himself he admitted he should have done more and he should have as stated don't bother me with this stuff , There are those that will always believe what they want to and no matter what will never change their minds I for one do not drink egg nog but that is besides the point I know this would happen but I am sick of all this If Mcquerry came to Joe which he did and told what he told him and Joe passed this on to Curly which he did then Joe knew , he knew , Legally Joe was ok which everyone has concurred reason being no charges were filed against him for perjury But Curly and Spanier and Shultz when they get their day in court have a lot of explaining to do

This directely involved the BOT as we all know and where the main fault lies , As for Joe sorry guys between 2002 and 2012 hard to forget a break fast conversation and telling your AD what happened and in the deposition Mike claimed Joe said I am sorry you had to see that So again which is correct ? But for crying out loud AFTER THE MORNING BREAKFAST JOE DIDN'T KNOW ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bamasota
I am sure they do as to which I say it depends on who you listen to and what they want to believe In essence Joe himself he admitted he should have done more and he should have as stated don't bother me with this stuff , There are those that will always believe what they want to and no matter what will never change their minds I for one do not drink egg nog but that is besides the point I know this would happen but I am sick of all this If Mcquerry came to Joe which he did and told what he told him and Joe passed this on to Curly which he did then Joe knew , he knew , Legally Joe was ok which everyone has concurred reason being no charges were filed against him for perjury But Curly and Spanier and Shultz when they get their day in court have a lot of explaining to do

This directely involved the BOT as we all know and where the main fault lies , As for Joe sorry guys between 2002 and 2012 hard to forget a break fast conversation and telling your AD what happened and in the deposition Mike claimed Joe said I am sorry you had to see that So again which is correct ? But for crying out loud AFTER THE MORNING BREAKFAST JOE DIDN'T KNOW ?

McQueary didn't even know and he was the witness. And by the way Joe didn't say he "should" have done more. Don't take this the wrong way, but you are FOS.
 
I am sure they do as to which I say it depends on who you listen to and what they want to believe In essence Joe himself he admitted he should have done more and he should have as stated don't bother me with this stuff , There are those that will always believe what they want to and no matter what will never change their minds I for one do not drink egg nog but that is besides the point I know this would happen but I am sick of all this If Mcquerry came to Joe which he did and told what he told him and Joe passed this on to Curly which he did then Joe knew , he knew , Legally Joe was ok which everyone has concurred reason being no charges were filed against him for perjury But Curly and Spanier and Shultz when they get their day in court have a lot of explaining to do



This directely involved the BOT as we all know and where the main fault lies , As for Joe sorry guys between 2002 and 2012 hard to forget a break fast conversation and telling your AD what happened and in the deposition Mike claimed Joe said I am sorry you had to see that So again which is correct ? But for crying out loud AFTER THE MORNING BREAKFAST JOE DIDN'T KNOW ?

You know what I am sick of? Idiots quoting JVP improperly. WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT...........please quote, comprehend and insert as appropriate.
 
I have read this article before, but I did not really focus on this quote. Makes me wonder if there was more to his testimony, whether in expanding on some of what he said as released, or in the manner in which he said them. No doubt others have discussed this aspect, and perhaps I am forgetting those discussion. I recall something about the inflection of his voice when mentioning 'a sexual nature'.... was it a declarative statement, or a reflective question and the important question mark was omitted from the leaked account? And based on his recollection, or based on a very recent rehash about the conversation with McQ? Or maybe this was nothing at all, just the usual protocol for an ongoing investigation. Still pisses me off that the initial statements from the OAG and others praised Joe's cooperation, and then the narrative was allowed to change without challenge.

The recent detailed speculation by a poster on what possibly transpired as the investigative and grand jury processes unfolded prior to Nov. 2011 is very plausible, imo. Looking forward to learning more.... at some point. Wouldn't we all love to know what Wick and his team and the Paternos have learned?!
Ray Blehar had written about this in the past.
Joe' s testimony was taped then transcribed to document. Ray explains that Joe frequently answered a question with a question. Rays thoughts on the testimony was it a mistake in transcribing or intentially played by the AG's office.

"It was of a sexual nature."
Or
"Was it of a sexual nature?"
 
Last edited:
Ray Blehar had written about this in the past.
Joe' s testimony was taped the transcribed to document. Ray explains that Joe frequently answered a question with a question. Rays thoughts on the testimony was it a mistake in transcribing or intentially played by the AG's office.

"It was of a sexual nature."
Or
"Was it of a sexual nature?"

He didn't even say "of" according to the transcript. "It was a sexual nature". What does that even mean? Birds and bees and deer having sex perhaps?o_O
 
He didn't even say "of" according to the transcript. "It was a sexual nature". What does that even mean? Birds and bees and deer having sex perhaps?o_O
Drawing from past memory:

Maybe he said, " It was sexual in nature "
Or
"Was it sexual in nature?"

Do you have the doc?
Joe certainly did not talk broken English
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95
Ray Blehar had written about this in the past.
Joe' s testimony was taped then transcribed to document. Ray explains that Joe frequently answered a question with a question. Rays thoughts on the testimony was it a mistake in transcribing or intentially played by the AG's office.

"It was of a sexual nature."
Or
"Was it of a sexual nature?"
That is one way to spin it. Doesn't necessarily make it true though.
 
You think Joe knew and still let his grandkids go swimming with him? Please, put down the spoiled eggnog.

No one knew exactly what Sandusky was doing. Everyone found out when the GJ presentment was made public. Only then did everyone find out the depths of his depravity. To sit there and say "Joe knew" needs a bit more refinement.

Secondly, he was the only one who had balls enough to say he should have done more when he found out exactly what Sandusky was doing. Did anyone from CYS? TSM?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95 and WeR0206
Drawing from past memory:

Maybe he said, " It was sexual in nature "
Or
"Was it sexual in nature?"

Do you have the doc?
Joe certainly did not talk broken English

You would have to look in the transcript of the December 16, 2011 Preliminary hearing in Dauphin Co. That transcript definitely quotes Joe as saying "it was a sexual nature" which always seemed like an odd phrase to me. Was it a statement or a question? Regardless, on each side of that quote he said "I I don't know what you would call it" and "I don't know what it was." Clear as mud...
 
I am sure they do as to which I say it depends on who you listen to and what they want to believe In essence Joe himself he admitted he should have done more and he should have as stated don't bother me with this stuff , There are those that will always believe what they want to and no matter what will never change their minds I for one do not drink egg nog but that is besides the point I know this would happen but I am sick of all this If Mcquerry came to Joe which he did and told what he told him and Joe passed this on to Curly which he did then Joe knew , he knew , Legally Joe was ok which everyone has concurred reason being no charges were filed against him for perjury But Curly and Spanier and Shultz when they get their day in court have a lot of explaining to do

This directely involved the BOT as we all know and where the main fault lies , As for Joe sorry guys between 2002 and 2012 hard to forget a break fast conversation and telling your AD what happened and in the deposition Mike claimed Joe said I am sorry you had to see that So again which is correct ? But for crying out loud AFTER THE MORNING BREAKFAST JOE DIDN'T KNOW ?

You don't know what the hell you're talking about.

The only thing MM reported to Joe or anyone else at PSU was a late night inappropriate shower that made him uncomfortable. From the 12/16/11 prelim JM's own testimony says the following re: what his son told him that night:

Q: In this meeting with Mr. Schultz, did you tell Mr. Schultz that what Mike had seen was a crime?
A: I never used the word crime, I made it, Im sure, clear that it was at least a very inappropriate action and what Mike described to me led me to believe it was sexual in nature.

Since when is certain child abuse "at least a very inappropriate action"??? If MM thought a kid was getting abused why would Dr D and JM tell MM to inform a football coach the next day (and not immediately call police) and why would MM never even so much as make a written statement to UPPD (so they could start a criminal investigation) or make an anonymous call to childline?

Also when the one and only witness never expresses dissatisfaction or says more needs to be done when Curley followed up with him a few weeks later then the failure of JS not being criminally investigated lies with MM, not Joe or anyone else.

Some more testimony by MM at the 12/16/11 prelim:

Q: Okay, now when you talked with Mr. Paterno and he told you what he was going to do, he was going to – did he tell you what he was going to do?
A: Yes ma’am. As I already stated, he said that he needed to think and contact some other people and that he would get back to me.
Q: Okay, and did you ask Coach Paterno if those other people meant the police?
A: No ma’am. I did not ask him that.
Q: And did you say to Coach Paterno, coach, I really appreciate it and I also think we should call the police
A: No, I did not

So apparently MM didn't even feel strongly enough about what he THOUGHT was happening the night before to state the police needed to be invovled during his discussion with Joe.

Chew on that for a while...
 
Last edited:
No one knew exactly what Sandusky was doing. Everyone found out when the GJ presentment was made public. Only then did everyone find out the depths of his depravity. To sit there and say "Joe knew" needs a bit more refinement.

Secondly, he was the only one who had balls enough to say he should have done more when he found out exactly what Sandusky was doing. Did anyone from CYS? TSM?

Not to parse, but he said "with the benefit of hindsight I wish I had done more."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95
There you go again..you're spinning it:rolleyes:
818568
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95
You would have to look in the transcript of the December 16, 2011 Preliminary hearing in Dauphin Co. That transcript definitely quotes Joe as saying "it was a sexual nature" which always seemed like an odd phrase to me. Was it a statement or a question? Regardless, on each side of that quote he said "I I don't know what you would call it" and "I don't know what it was." Clear as mud...

The person who read Joe's GJ testimony into the record at the 12/16/11 prelim was James Barker, the same guy Kane fired a few months ago. Hes a corbett/fina crony.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT