[Husker] In defense of JoePa

[Scott Stewart]

I will probably upset some people and get nasty responses to this, but I
think Joe Pa is not being treated fairly. He will likely lose his job, but
I think he is going to be caught up just because he was close to the
situation than because he did something wrong.

I am a mandatory reporter. That means that under state law, I am legally
obligated to report child abuse if it comes to my attention. I don't know
what Penn. law is, but I don't think JoePa would be a mandatory reporter
under Georgia law. Therefore, what he did or didn't do did not break any
laws.

As a mandatory reporter, hearsay is not subject to mandatory reporting. So
if Grad Student told me he saw something, I am not under any obligation to
report; though it might be smart to do so (You have to weigh the cost of
being sued for breaking confidentiality vs. the cost of being sued for not
breaking confidentiality. The sad thing is you will likely get sued and
lose either way).

So I don't think it was illegal. Now the tougher subject. Was it immoral or
unethical to not report? I think he did the appropriate thing. He was not
Sandusky's boss. This was a matter for the Athletic Director to handle.
Why, because it is the Athletic Director's facilities. To report on his own
is not his place in the business of college athletics. If Sandusky had been
his employee, I think things could have been different.

So when nothing happened, should he have reported. I think that WOULD have
been inappropriate, and would be considered undermining the Athletic
Directors responsibilities.

I have been involved in several cases of mandatory reporting. They are
always very difficult and the ethics are never as simple as it appears
after the fact. Once you have handed it off to the appropriate person, you
have done what you should have done. Does that mean that the outcome is
always what I expect or want, No. In fact, I often have felt that things
were not handled correctly, but that is not my call. My call is to report
it again if I learn of something else.

Scott





On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Andy Knipp <andy at knipp.com> wrote:

> JoePa did not see anything.  The GA did.  You can argue that person (who I
> think is now an assistant coach) should have called the police.  I think
> what JoePa did was reasonable, because he assumed his boss would make
> certain if there was any basis, the authorities would be contacted.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: husker-bounces at tssi.com [mailto:husker-bounces at tssi.com] On Behalf
> Of
> RJ Wessel
> Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2011 1:55 PM
> To: Tommy Thompson; Huskers List
> Subject: Re: [Husker] In defense of JoePa
>
> Sorry, I have to disagree here.
>
> Someone, anyone comes to me and says that they saw something inappropriate
> between and adult and a minor. I would feel obligated to ask at least what
> you saw.  JoePa is making it sound like he did not ask a darn thing about
> what was saw. was it sex, drinking what was it. Come On Man.
>
> For some reason this crime seems to be reported to superiors first and not
> to the police?  if you saw a person getting robbed or assualted or rape -
> would you call your dad? no you call the police.
>
> Yet in child sexual assault cases it seems the police are the last to be
> called by any institute.
>
>
> ---- Tommy Thompson <huskertt at charter.net> wrote:
> > I don't have all of the facts on the Sandusky scandal, but I wonder if
> Joe
> Paterno isn't getting wrongly vilified.  From what I have read, the grad
> student informed JoePa of what he had seen, and JoePa reported it to his
> superiors.  After his superiors "investigated" the incident, including
> speaking with the grad student, they cleared Sandusky of any wrong doing.
> Following that trail of logic, JoePa would have assumed it was a false
> allegation and would have (rightly) done nothing further.
> >
> > Again, I don't know all of the facts, so JoePa may have known: 1) that
> the
> allegations were not really investigated; 2) that the university was
> covering it up; and/or 3) that the grad student have given him specific
> information that should have led him to contact the police (or at least
> instructed the grad student to do that)
> >
> > Bottom line is that I'm not going to judge anyone in this until all of
> the
> facts come out.  It's very possible that JoePa did due diligence, which is
> why he is not under investigation.
> >
> > Tommy Thompson (Pa)
> > "GO BIG RED"
> > _______________________________________________
> > husker site list
> > husker at tssi.com
> > http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
>
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
>
> _______________________________________________
> husker site list
> husker at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/husker
>