Joe Paterno dies?

[Knottscott]

Do you feel that there should have been any consequences for Mr. Paterno?

Absolutely...consequences that were proportionate to his misdoing. He didn't commit the crime in question, nor was he an accomplice. I think his punishment was disproportionate for his deeds, and I would have preferred to see it handled differently than it was.

[herb fellows]

I haven't read the above inputs and probably should before posting this, however, I was wrong in saying it was FEDERAL. It is a Pennsylvania State law and most states have STATE Laws for similar reporting as the Penn law.

The Penn Law is Pennsylvania Code 049 4242. It can be found by Googling: Pennsylvania Mandated Reporting.

My daughter says that in general and for most states, a person (teacher/coach/assistant at an educational institution) knowledgeable of such acts is responsible for reporting it to the law enforcement or Department of Public Welfare. 'a person (teacher/coach/assistant at an educational institution) knowledgeable of such acts is responsible for reporting it to the law enforcement or Department of Public Welfare.'

'There is a huge difference in here-say and direct reporting by a subordinate. What we know is hearsay. What Paterno heard, if it was reported to him by his assistant - was not hearsay, and he (Paterno) was under obligation to report it to the Law or DOPW and or his Supervisor (Chancellor) and then followup to see if the Chancellor did report it.

'

While it is not hearsay, it is second hand knowledge. Paterno only knows what someone told him. I'm still not really clear about why he would be responsible when he is not personally knowledgeable about such acts, which nobody suggests he was.

So you are saying that Paterno was obliged to tell his superiors (which by all accounts I've heard, he did), and then to monitor his superiors action on the matter? That just doesn't ring true, that a 'worker' is responsible to check up on his 'boss'.

[herb fellows]

Okay, for the Paterno supporters:

Would you have done anything differently? Or, would reporting it to your "supervisor" (no follow-up) be it for you?

I don't think anyone is saying he did the right thing, but please remember that hindsight is a wonderful thing. I think he acted in what he believed was the proper manner, considering that he knew nothing personally.
If someone tells you your neighbor robbed a bank, do you automatically assume it is true and call the police and have them investigate it?
Maybe not the best analogy, but the point is he only knew what someone else told him. Unless there are specific laws that he was aware of and violated willfully (sort of a 'i don't want to get involved attitude), I'm hard pressed to put a lot of the blame on him.

[All Thumbs]

If someone tells you your neighbor robbed a bank, do you automatically assume it is true and call the police and have them investigate it?

If someone I don't know from Adam tells me my neighbor robbed a bank, probably not. Now if my neighbor quits his job, buys new cars, and starts taking nice vacations, I might get suspicious.

If an employee or a friend comes to my house or office, and says he was in the bank when my neighbor entered and robbed the place, I would absolutely call the police.

[leehljp]

'

So you are saying that Paterno was obliged to tell his superiors (which by all accounts I've heard, he did), and then to monitor his superiors action on the matter? That just doesn't ring true, that a 'worker' is responsible to check up on his 'boss'.

No, I am not saying that, the Pennsylvania (and other state's) law says that.

"Second hand information" - I am not 100% positive but I don't think that is the point. IMO, from my understanding from my daughter, technically it is not the second hand information that is the point at this time but fact that someone is known to have first hand information in child abuse situations (and similarly in national security such as 9/11 for that matter). Paterno would not be reporting "second hand" information - He would be reporting what his "subordinate" said, and in child abuse situations, that is required by the law. In the case of child abuse, this is a requirement. Not the second "hand information" but another person's knowledge of a crime. It is up to the Law Enforcement or DOPW or Counselor to follow up with the second hand to first hand to actual interviews of child. I know that to us, this is "splitting hairs" but in child sexual abuse and severe physical abuse, that is the way the law works.

When we have knowledge of a "general?" crime and the possibility of someone doing something and it gets reported, that is the same way "crime stoppers" work. Only it is not a "requirement" in those situations. In most educational institutions in most (if to all states) it is a requirement in child abuse situations.

"monitor his superiors actions" - Yes, in children sexual and obvious visible physical abuse situations.

Going above a superior's head - This is not without precedence. There are whistle blower laws in which we can go above our superior's head if they don't report it. National security laws allow for this and in some cases require it. If we or you had second hand knowledge of 9/11 type of security from someone you trusted or someone under your authority, would you remain silent or report it? If your superior did not report it, what would you do? It is up to the authorities to determine the IF there is actually a crime. This is where many folks got into trouble with 911. They had knowledge before hand but didn't think it was a "real" threat. And look what it cost us.

Child sexual abuse and several physical abuse (requiring doctor's vista or hospitalization) situations are taken by most state laws in this fashion. In the physical abuse situations, a doctor is required to report it to superiors who report or call in DOPW. IF the doctor's superior does not report it, it is still the doctor's responsibility to make sure it is done.

In the vernacular: Rank goes out the window and results become paramount because of safety's sake.

I have to leave in about 2 minutes I hope I get this right - Bank robbery - Crime stoppers type of reporting. The Knowledge OF is NOT under the same "requirement" in most cases as Child Abuse, so I have understood it.

Children and National Security issues take precedent and are on different levels from other laws - in general.

[LCHIEN]

In retrospect, Joe Paterno's biggest mistake in life was dying 6 months too late. If he died last Summer he would have been accorded a hero's sendoff.

[os1kne]

If he died 6 months ago, he would have received a hero's sendoff - but in November he probably would have gotten stuck with the blame for everything. Tim Curley (AD), Gary Schultz (VP) and Graham Spanier (Pres.) would have denied that Paterno ever reported anything to them.

[Knottscott]

In retrospect, Joe Paterno's biggest mistake in life was dying 6 months too late. ....

What was he thinking!?