That’s the entire point genius. Had they made sure someone followed up and spoke to the kid we wouldn’t be here one way or the other.
Here’s an idea, instead of going over MM’s story for the 10,000th time looking for a new way to question it, why not look at reasonable explanations based on facts rather than speculation?
For instance, what could have happened for Tim Curley to change his mind on February 27th? Was there a specific event that could explain deciding not going to DPW?
As it turns out something did happen on February 27th:
Legislators Join Fray On Penn State Sex Faire
February 28, 2001|By Thomas Fitzgerald INQUIRER HARRISBURG BUREAU
HARRISBURG — The furor over an explicit student-run sex-education fair in State College - a furor ignited by Rep. John Lawless (R., Montgomery County) - overwhelmed the normally wonkish annual discussion of Pennsylvania State University's budget yesterday.Lawmakerswanted to know what university president Graham Spanier knew about the sex conference, when he knew it, and what he intended to do to keep it from happening again.
"I hope you're embarrassed, because I'm angered and embarrassed," said Rep. Samuel Rohrer (R., Berks). "This incident was reprehensible . . . debauched . . . wrong."
Sex Faire, sponsored by a student group called Womyn's Concerns, was held Feb. 3 in the commons of the Pollock Hall dormitory. Sponsors said that they had hoped to educate students about date rape, healthy sexual relationships, and reproductive health.
After taking a beating from the state House Appropriations Committee, Spanier said that his administration already had begun to tighten up its oversight of student activities on campus. From now on, he said, all banners that go up in public places will have to be reviewed, approved and hung by the university.
"This will allow us to screen words that might not meet community standards," Spanier said.
Lawless was outraged by a feminist rally last November that was named for an obscene term for women's genitalia. The word was prominently displayed on posters and banners around campus.
Spanier said that Penn State was considering other changes, such as requiring student groups to reserve space in university buildings and to disclose the content of their events in advance. Some programs also should be confined to students with I.D., to avoid exposing youngsters to offensive material, he said.
"I am confident we can, with a few policy changes, put this behind us," Spanier told lawmakers considering the university's $362 million budget request. "I am very sorry for the consternation, confusion and anger that this has caused many individuals."
But more than a few legislators on the appropriations panel were not willing to let go.
Lawless, who is seeking to suspend Penn State's funding, confronted Spanier with two e-mails he had received from students.
One called him an "ass" who was too dim to go to Penn State. Another writer said Lawless was a "selfish bastard" and made fun of his eyes. Lawless had surgery for a brain tumor 15 years ago that left him slightly disfigured.
At that point, Lawless broke down and said: "I'll get to my further questions as soon as I get myself together."
Spanier looked down at the witness table in front of him. The room fell silent.
The hearing began with a screening of a video that Lawless had made while visiting the Sex Faire. Among other things, the tape showed a risque bingo game, a woman talking about marital aids, a catalog of sex toys and anatomically correct gingerbread cookies at a table of "erotic foods."
Since the hearing was broadcast live on Pennsylvania Cable Network, it was probably the only legislative proceeding ever to carry a parental warning label.
Taking the microphone before the tape began, one lawmaker urged people watching at home to change the channel if children were present.
Questions about budget matters - funding for the medical school, the racial makeup of Penn State's student body, the rising cost of tuition, and retirement funds for university employees - broke up the sex talk. But then, Sex Faire and the earlier feminist rally would come back up again, and Spanier and another legislator would spar.
At one point, Rep. David J. Mayernik (D., Allegheny) bored in, trying to get Spanier to denounce the Sex Faire.
"Was it wrong, yes or no?" he asked.
Spanier demurred, saying that portions of it were inappropriate.
"Former President Clinton went through this with what the meaning of 'is' is," Mayernik said.
"I'm not trying to be evasive, but to give an honest answer," Spanier said. "I'm not understanding what you mean by 'wrong.' "
Finally, the university president said, "I don't think my personal view of morality should be the subject of this appropriation hearing."
Countered Mayernik, "I find it odd, Mr. President, that you want to wash your hands of this."
Spanier said that balancing the free-speech rights of students with diverse viewpoints at a large university "is always a very difficult line to walk."
Other lawmakers came to Spanier's defense, in what became a lively debate on constitutional law.
Rep. Dan Frankel (D., Allegheny) praised his "measured and restrained" response to the issue.
"In the marketplace of ideas, sometimes you have to tolerate these things," Frankel said.
This is something that actually happened and could easily explain Curley’s actions. It also kills the narrative that Joe had anything to do with Curley’s decision to alter the plan.
There’s little doubt those same politicians would use a report of suspected sexual abuse on campus to go after Spanier and Penn State again.
If Curley was unsure about what MM saw in the shower it’s not a stretch to believe he would take a different course of action based on this.
But you guys keep chasing shadows. I’m sure Ziegler will find that crucial piece of evidence to prove MM really saw Sandusky and the kid fully clothed playing cards.
}
