The Blue Board

Yeah, because that's what I said - it's the bar. Good grief.

True-you can't say he did absolutely nothing. For whatever that's worth.

"but who's responsibility is that?" All of them. They are ALL responsible. Every damn one of them should have done something, anything to stop it from happening again and yet they did nothing. Pathetic, the lot of them.
Regarding 1998.....do you really believe that Paterno wasn't aware that his defensive coordinator was under investigation for sexual assault? You really buy that? Come on. Joe was a very, very powerful guy in that community. You think nobody ever mentioned it to him? Please. It was Joe who specifically asked that Jerry NOT be allowed to bring Second Mike kids onto campus for liability reasons. Liability over what? Afraid they'd fall and skin their knee? Or affraid Jerry would go all Deliverance on one of them?
We're not in a court of law where, rightfully so, one has to be able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt what happened. We're in the real world where we're allowed to use our brains and the powers of deductive reasoning to reach logical conclusions.
Joe was a smart guy. Joe was very powerful. Joe was told, at some point, of the 1998 incident. Then a few years later he's told that Jerry was spotted in the shower with a young boy. I can draw that conclusion easily and logically from what what I know. If you can't.....nothing more that I can do to help you guys connect the dots.

I've said not one word of a coverup. I think they all knew good and well what Jerry was doing and didn't do anything to stop it. They didn't try to cover it up. They didn't much care.
I think the ALL failed miserabley to stop Jerry Sandusky. Jerry is the monster here. The powers that be at PSU, which included Paterno...were essentially enablers. That's what I believe.

Why would they not go to the police? Maybe because they had pre-existing knowledge that Jerry Sandusky had a penchant for little boys and if it came to light that they still allowed him to use their campus facilities and another kid got raped it might blow up in their faces and they might be facing massive law suits, ruined reputations and severe harm to the lifeblood of State College, PSU football? Oh wait, that's exactly what is happening now. It's come to light what was going on and it's going to cost PSU millions and millions of dollars.
You guys keep asking...but, but what about the AD...what about the president...aren't they also responsible? Hell yes. Like I've said repeatedly, it's not JUST Joe Paterno that screwed up here. They ALL did. But Joe was right in the middle of it.
And no, I don't for a minute accept your "simplest explanation theory". Because it makes zero sense. Are you saying that McQueary made it up? That he saw nothing and just conjured up some story? Why? He revered Paterno. He wanted a job on his staff. How's this going to help him with that?

I think they did exactly what you guys all said they did....they did the bare bones minimum that they HAD to do..upon being told that a known deviant had struck again, only this time on their campus. Then they sat back and waited and for 10 years, nothing came of it....until it blew up.
Their reasons for not going to the police are because what is about to happen to your university...they're going to get pummeled in civil suits. Reputations are ruined. Folks may go to jail and Penn St. football is wrecked for years to come.
Now, why didn't they try to cover it up? Arrogance. Stupidity. Take your pick.
But I know, I know....I'm illogical. The outsider, with no dog in the fight is incapable of looking at things objectively, unlike the dyed in the wool Penn St. homer. Now THAT is illogical.

Jerry wasn't charged in 1998. That is key. That is why all this 1998 stuff is bogus. Are we supposed to start taking away rights and privileges from people who have been accused of something and later it was found there was no evidence to support that claim. That is such a hind-sight BS.

I think bills question is valid... why did all these people fail to go to police if there was a clear case of child abuse? That is especially true for Dr. Dragov, the McQueary family friend. It doesn't make sense.

You have a guy that is accused of indecent activity with a child. He's not charged. I agree, you don't take away rights based on that. But, when a few years later he's spotted in the shower with another young boy does that not register with you people? Apparently not because Jerry was allowed to roam free for another decade after that.
The reason they didn't go to the cops is to avoid EXACTLY what is happening right now. You're about to get throttled by civil suits. There is CLEAR motivation for not digging too deep into this thing, from PSU's point of view.

What civil suits would there be if they turned JS in? They would sue based on what? That it happened at PSU? The University's liability would be minimal in such a situation. The image of Paterno would remain in tact because he turned in a monster. Everyone would keep their job.

You are using examples of what is happening now... these would be two vastly different scenarios.

You don't seem to understand that turning Sandusky in after the 2001 incident is not analogous to the present-day situation. The perception of how PSU handled that incident is the very reason PSU is being sued. Handling it differently means any suits against PSU (as jive mentions) would have little to no standing.

Except one jury has already cleared Sandusky of rape in the Penn State shower incident that McQueary supposedly witnessed.

If Penn State had known enough and turned in Sandusky after that night, they wouldn't be on the hook for anything after that because they turned him in, ergo he wouldn't be able to do anything after that.

These really aren't difficult concepts.

That's a criminal case. Civil cases carry no where near the burden of proof. They knew of prior allegations. They knew that he'd been spotted showring with a kid. They didn't turn him in.
These aren't difficult concepts.

If people want to use McQueary's present-day testimony as a basis for argument, I'd suggest you read up on how good eyewitness testimony really is, much less a decade after the incident.

I'm going to give a summary based on what has been discussed of the two explanations and potential holes:
1) They all knew about Sandusky being a molester/abuser and simply kept quiet without doing anything. (basically, the lazy coverup)
Holes:
-- They did do something. They informed Second Mile, and those lower in the chain of command passed it up.
-- If this got out, many of these people would be in trouble, and there's no evidence that they worked to keep it quiet. Obviously, a number of people knew about this and could have gone to the police at any time. Why wouldn't they make sure it was kept quiet?
-- There's no evidence that any of these men having prior knowledge about Sandusky being a molester/abuser.
-- There's still no explanation as to why Dranov and Mr. McQueary didn't go to the police, given that they had nothing to lose by turning Sandusky in.

2) It was all a coverup
-- There's no emails regarding covering things up, no concerns about word getting out from the people who might know about it, nothing to suggest malicious intent.
-- Covering it up usually involves not telling people. Paterno made sure his superiors were told, who also informed Second Mile.
-- Again, why didn't Dranov and Mr. McQueary go to the police?

3) They were not aware of the full extent
-- Mike McQueary's present-day testimony claims he told people it was of a sexual nature.

If there's other holes in theory #3, I'm open to hearing about them. Based on the entirety of evidence, it appears to be by far the most logical explanation.