I haven't blogged in almost a year. I don't know why I bother. But I bother now. By now everyone who has or has not been under a rock has heard about the Sandusky scandal and read about the fallout at Penn State. I'm lucky in that I'm outside the state and don't have to put up with rude comments or Sandusky jokes on a daily basis from PSU haters (i.e., Pitt fans). But I have my fair share here in the Souf'. (South, south).
I was sitting at work, working along, ok, working as much as I could, and was periodically checking into the PSU live tweets coming out of the initial hearings on Tim Curley, former Athletic Director and former VP Gary Schultz (technically head of campus security). Mike McQueary, the assistant coach who at the time of the 2002 incidents was a grad assistant, is the only witness to Sandusky's madness.
I was relaying how I was following the tweets today, and how McQueary's testimony today is the key - could make or break the perjury charges for Curley and Schultz, and could clear or damn what Paterno has already said. Simple as that.
My coworker immediately launched into how "Paterno was the most despicable person in all of this mess."
I was stunned. Stunned that someone believed this way? Yes, a little. Stunned that still, people are continuing to villify Paterno above Sandusky, the child predator? Yes. Stunned that someone well educated and media savvy in the communications business said this? Yes, in a way. Stunned that someone would shed basic human etiquette and knowing full well that I care about this university, say something like that - that he knew would make a coworker upset or distressed? Yes.
I'm not saying Paterno is an angel here. He's at fault just like McQueary, Curley, Schultz, even Spanier. They didn't do enough. Hindsight is 50- 50. We're all armchair quarterbacks on this case. This isn't an easy case, though, about absolutes - it's about degrees. Not degrees of separation; degrees of action versus inaction.
I'm still struggling to understand why people aren't directing the full force of their anger at Sandusky who is the "alleged" pedophile here. Or at McQueary, who was the actual witness but didn't get the child out of the situation or contact university or town police right away, and may have changed his story. But instead choose the figurehead, who, as we're hearing today, may not have heard explicit explanations of what McQueary heard or saw.
Paterno himself said "I didn't do enough." Does that make him the most despicable in this case? In my mind, no. Frustrating? Bewildering? Yes.
The coworker and I traded some tense yet courteous words about who knew what and who did or didn't do what. He even went as far as to quote and bring up Barry Switzer, who recently said "Joe had to have known what was going on," which is then when I slipped and said that Switzer "was an uneducated douchebag" - not my most professional moment. Joe may not have known what was going on before that day in 2002 when McQueary came to his house to tell him in hushed tones. Did Joe Pa clearly know AFTER that day in 2002? It's STILL unclear. One thing's for sure - Switzer wouldn't know anything because he's clearly NOT part of the Penn State football program or in any kind of position to know.
For about 5 minutes this went on until it was clear we had reached an impasse: he's a biased Penn State Hater and I'm a biased Penn State Alum. And nothing's going to be resolved.
All I could do was acknowledge that we wouldn't agree, and and then sit and seethe silently while I attempted to work for an hour or so, plotting my revenge against him with a silent but deadly fart bomb the next time I ate Mexican in the cafeteria. (Don't think I won't, either). I bit my tongue, and about an hour later it was better. But somehow, I don't think it's over, not for a long shot, nor do I think it's the last time this will happen with this person or others.
Trying to stay classy, Penn State, while I defend you, but it's hard.
