Ex PSU player Justin Williams with Ziegler
- Thread starter NoBareFeet
- Start date
Joe did indeed know what MM saw was inappropriate sexual behavior. The only thing he was legally required to do was tell someone who was up the chain (on paper) from him. This he did and so CSS took the bullet. Morally, and based on his own mythological image, demanded he do more and insure that the proper authorities (Police or CYS) were notified. He failed and let his "on paper" superiors take the fall. Not very noble and while he did win a lot of football games, he failed some kids and they paid.
More idiocy from the Pitt emoji catamite.
No real proof there of what Seasock claims as he doesn't mention any names. Seasock was under qualified to make any such diagnosis but was well rewarded later by PSU for his efforts here.
I think there are basically three options; with none of them being good or reflective of competence:
1. Someone, either Seasock or otherwise, determined that there was likely another coach or adult in the building. If so, there is no documentation in any of the publicly-available records that there was ever any attempt to identify that person or speak to them about what they might have observed. Which would be an odd way to perform a criminal investigation if you were actually interested in figuring out what happened.
2. Seasock just figured that there was probably someone else there because it’s a public building, and assumed that a pedophile probably wouldn’t put himself in that kind of risky situation. Which seems like a heck of an assumption for a professional to make (unless, of course, he was working backwards from conclusion to evidence).
3. Seasock made it up, used it as “proof” that there wasn’t anything to worry about with Sandusky, and submits his report. Mission accomplished.
Only in the record interpreted by you.
There's absolutely nothing in the record that says Joe, Curley, & Shultz were told about things like anal rape but that Dad and Dranov weren't told anything.
Many of these records aren't publicly available, including the COMPLETE police report. Only select portions of the police report were leaked.
Seasock's report mentions after his interview with the child, he had the opportunity to read the interviews the child had with CYS and the local police. So when he mentions in #7, "through previous interviews it was apparent that there had been another coach present..." those are the interviews he was referring to.
If Seasock made up that part in '98 he would have lost his job, his license and likely been arrested.
Edit: Seasock's report
Last edited:
The tool has been blowing this crap out of his *** for over ten years.
You have more loose screws than a hardware store during an earthquake. Stop projecting your beliefs and behaviors on others.
Are we having a renewed battle between attorneys and other law enforcement people who were involved in and profited from the Sandusky incident? 
You claim that Joe was morally bankrupt because he followed university and NCAA policy. Yet you support McQueary for not doing more even though he was the person who made a report at age 28. You also seem to support Dad and Dranov who was a mandatory reporter.
Joe was not the eyewitness, Mike was. But the clown already knows that.
The police would have told Joe to move along as he was a witness to nothing.
How deep you in so far today, Edward?
You're like the old "gas" joke....the voice changed, but the breath remains the same.
This just isn't true. The NCAA later developed it's CSA reporting standards based on the example set by Joe in 2001. I think they even gave him credit in the rule change. People conveniently forget this fact
If you know the layout of that locker room....you know that McQueary saw nothing. He was an "ear" witness.
I'll agree with that. That's why it's retarded to state Joe should've reported it. It's asinine. But that's what the troll is.
Nope you're wrong. It's all in the sworn testimony of Dranov, CSS and Joe. Dad too.
Seasock was not licensed then, not sure he is now. Also, he doesn't mention who the coach is so I think he is speculating. He would not be arrested since he did not definitely state another coach was there.
Simply following policy when Joe could have and should have done more is legally sufficient to avoid jail but not the public scorn he now gets because of his contrived image he cultivated. Dranov was not a mandatory reported in that situation. The others were like CSS.
Joe participated in the decision not to report Sandusky and handle it "internally". That is not what the NCAA policy says today. Nor did it ever.
That's made up by Ziegler. MM testified he saw Sandusky doing CSA.
Nothing to do with Ziegler. The locker room no longer exists but the layout can still be accessed if you care to follow the facts. From the entrance to his locker and then the mirror over the sink......McQueary saw nothing. For amateurs, who are relying on the presentment....it's acknowledged fiction. Even by Jonelle Eshbach. At best Mike McQueary was an ear witness.
Dranov and Dad heard the story first hand. Empirical evidence is clear and unambiguous. They heard nothing that needed to be reported to law enforcement or child protective services.
Did Jack Raykovitz make a report? Or get Jerry keys to the Hotel fitness room down the street?
The sworn testimony of Dranov, CSS, Joe, and Dad all said Mike told them about anal rape? Really? Can you post that for me?
But Mike did all he could have or should have done? Same with his family & Dranov? Really?
Joe was a great man. I am insanely jealous of him, so I post this insane drivel to feel better about myself. Sorry, have to go. Mom just made me hot cocoa and a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. I'll post morelater, I promise.
Tirdsmelling is the Pennlive half wit Judas Shuttlesworth.
MM's testimony at trial and Joe's as well refute what you are saying. He saw Sandusky doing CSA to the child. The "ear witness" narrative is false and was promulgated by Ziegler.
As detailed in my report, the e-mails and contemporary documents from 2001 show that, despite Mr. Paterno's knowledge and McQueary's observations, four of the most powerful officials at Penn State agreed not to report Sandusky's activity to public officials. As made clear in the attachments to our report, on February 25, 2001, Messrs. Spanier, Curley and Schulz agreed to report Sandusky's abuse to the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare. On February 27, 2001, these men agreed that reporting to DPW was not required, reasoning in the words of Graham Spanier that "[t]he only downside for us is if the message isn't 'heard' and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it." The only known, intervening factor between the decision made on February 25, 2001 and the agreement not to report on February 27, 2001, was Mr. Paterno's February 26th conversation with Mr. Curley regarding what to do about Sandusky. Again, this conversation was memorialized in the contemporary email, where Mr. Curley said "[a]fter giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday -- I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps."
Louis Freeh