OT: Schiano Knew Too
- Thread starter mikemarc1
- Start date
Yes he did but it has not done a damn thing positive for him yet. He needs to do more then that
Schiano response:
"I never saw any abuse, nor had reason to suspect any abuse, during my time at Penn State," Schiano, a onetime head coach at Rutgers University and in the NFL, who now serves as defensive coordinator for Ohio State, tweeted Tuesday afternoon.
"I never saw any abuse, nor had reason to suspect any abuse, during my time at Penn State," Schiano, a onetime head coach at Rutgers University and in the NFL, who now serves as defensive coordinator for Ohio State, tweeted Tuesday afternoon.
Realistically, what more can he do at this point? If he keeps his head down and focuses on football and Ohio State has a good season, it will eventually blow over if nothing else comes to light. Even Penn State ended up having their sanctions rolled back and Paterno even got his wins back.
It's hard to prove a negative. There is no court case with testimony in the future.
It's 2 guys words with impeccable records for honesty vs 1 shaky guy.
I think McQueary did see something in the locker room, he did talk to Paterno. After that, I'm not sure what you can believe from McQueary.
It's 2 guys words with impeccable records for honesty vs 1 shaky guy.
I think McQueary did see something in the locker room, he did talk to Paterno. After that, I'm not sure what you can believe from McQueary.
Sorry, but you got into one of those "everything you just said here is wrong" situations.
It's entirely possible that the Ginger Gambler is telling the truth. However, he does, in fact, have something to gain by lying - as has been pointed out in this thread repeatedly. And his statements over the course of several depositions have not, in fact, been consistent.
He's a poor witness. That doesn't mean he's not telling the truth now, but there's definitely reason to doubt him.
How the he** did grown men walk past the showers seeing Sandusky lathering up and showering with little boys and not beat the crap out of him? They also saw the pedophile travelling with different little boys all the time. Rather odd. How did Sandusky's wife stay silent for so many years when she watched him dragging those kids into their home for years? As far as Paterno goes he is as guilty as Sandusky because he enabled the abuse for years. Anyone really believe he never said a word to his wife? I know he had a football season to worry about. Hope he is burning in he**.
Squeeky clean Bradley just lied if you believe McQueary story. If Bradley was so close to Schiano, why didn't he tell McQueary the story without mentioning Schiano by name but to calm McQueary ?
One of two things as it relates to Schiano:
1. He never saw anything or heard anything. If that is the case, McQueary pulling his name out of a hat in the deposition in pretty low. Not sure what McQueary has to gain in that environment by throwing Schiano under the bus. In all honesty, his testimony seems credible enough to me, and I would be shocked if he mixed up the names over something like this.
2. Schiano did see something. I won't kill him for not doing something at the time, but I think the years of silence afterwards...particularly when the Sandusky stuff came out...looks very bad for him. At that point, with all that came out, he stays silent for one of a few reasons: 1) to try and not get involved with Penn State and Paterno's problem, 2) he doesn't want to kick Paterno when he is down, or 3) he doesn't want his name/reputation getting dragged down with this whole mess...particularly as he may not have done anything at the time.
To me, the 2nd scenario seems more plausible than the first. I doubt this ever gets proven one way or the other, but I'm guessing he knew.
1. He never saw anything or heard anything. If that is the case, McQueary pulling his name out of a hat in the deposition in pretty low. Not sure what McQueary has to gain in that environment by throwing Schiano under the bus. In all honesty, his testimony seems credible enough to me, and I would be shocked if he mixed up the names over something like this.
2. Schiano did see something. I won't kill him for not doing something at the time, but I think the years of silence afterwards...particularly when the Sandusky stuff came out...looks very bad for him. At that point, with all that came out, he stays silent for one of a few reasons: 1) to try and not get involved with Penn State and Paterno's problem, 2) he doesn't want to kick Paterno when he is down, or 3) he doesn't want his name/reputation getting dragged down with this whole mess...particularly as he may not have done anything at the time.
To me, the 2nd scenario seems more plausible than the first. I doubt this ever gets proven one way or the other, but I'm guessing he knew.
I disagree. If Paterno was covering up the scandal, then it's easy to believe he's not going to be talking about it at all with anybody. Each person he told we be a huge risk.
It's a running joke on this board. A few years back on a televised RU game some doofus ESPN Announcer kept calling our coach Gary Schiano during the game.
Re-read the testimony:
McQueary: "He (Bradley) said another assistant coach had come to him in the early 90's about a very similar situation to mine, . . . "
McQueary: "Greg had come into his (Bradley's) office white as a ghost and said he just saw Jerry doing something to a boy in the shower. And that's it. That's all he ever told me."
What is "very similar?" And what was "doing something?"
Not saying this behavior is acceptable, but what if Gary saw Jerry washing the boy's back? For any normal person, this would be considered odd behavior, but it would comport with Gary's Twitter statement that "I never saw any abuse, nor had reason to suspect any abuse, during my time at Penn State."
Anyone who draws anything out of this that Gary witnessed rape or abuse a child in the shower is stretching McQueary's double hearsay testimony. The only person who knows what he saw is Gary.
McQueary: "He (Bradley) said another assistant coach had come to him in the early 90's about a very similar situation to mine, . . . "
McQueary: "Greg had come into his (Bradley's) office white as a ghost and said he just saw Jerry doing something to a boy in the shower. And that's it. That's all he ever told me."
What is "very similar?" And what was "doing something?"
Not saying this behavior is acceptable, but what if Gary saw Jerry washing the boy's back? For any normal person, this would be considered odd behavior, but it would comport with Gary's Twitter statement that "I never saw any abuse, nor had reason to suspect any abuse, during my time at Penn State."
Anyone who draws anything out of this that Gary witnessed rape or abuse a child in the shower is stretching McQueary's double hearsay testimony. The only person who knows what he saw is Gary.
This is not about Gary hearing about Jerry 2nd or 3rd hand. The morning paper says
he walked in on Jerry and saw the abuse. Just like Paterno should have called the
police, Gary should have done the same. But he was more concerned about his job?
He was an actual witness to the abuse, and should have his precious football career
ended, at the very least. If he did the right thing Jerry's abuse could have ended right there
and then. Shame on you Mr. Schiano.
he walked in on Jerry and saw the abuse. Just like Paterno should have called the
police, Gary should have done the same. But he was more concerned about his job?
He was an actual witness to the abuse, and should have his precious football career
ended, at the very least. If he did the right thing Jerry's abuse could have ended right there
and then. Shame on you Mr. Schiano.
That's not what McQueary's testimony said at all. Stretching to make a point. IIRC, you seem to not like Gary, and you are showing your bias.
You should change the title of your thread, as it is misleading. You infer that he knew Sandusky raped children. The deposition testimony does not even remotely infer that. But if you want to go on double hearsay and vast stretching of what was seen and said, that is your prerogative.
Actually the deposition does "infer" that? It "infers" that he was a first hand witness to a child being raped.
You didn't need Paterno to tell anybody. That kind of persistent behavior in an athletic environment is not going to go unnoticed & unwhispered about.
Then you have a vivid imagination. Depositions don't infer anything. People draw inferences from evidence presented in depositions, and reasonable minds can make different inferences.
McQueary: "He (Bradley) said another assistant coach had come to him in the early 90's about a very similar situation to mine, . . . "
McQueary: "Greg had come into his (Bradley's) office white as a ghost and said he just saw Jerry doing something to a boy in the shower. And that's it. That's all he ever told me."
You have double hearsay on the "very similar" comment. Did Bradley say "very similar" or is that the way McQueary wanted to remember it or present it in his testimony? What was "very similar" about the situation? Sandusky in the shower with a boy?
McQueary testified that Bradley told him that Schiano saw "Jerry doing something to a boy in the shower." We don't know what that "something" was, and by McQueary's own words, that all he ever told him.
Kind of a long stretch by you to make an inference that Gary saw a child being raped.
Your problem is one of the English language variety. To "infer" something has nothing to do with "proving beyond a reasonable doubt." I can go on about depositions because although I am not a lawyer I have a few deposition findings on my desk right now, but you are really going off the deep end in your defense of Gary.
It's pretty easy to pick your defense of Gary apart but you seem to have the kind of loyalty to him that the Joebots have to Paterno, so wht would really be the point?
Agree that we don't know enough to know what Schiano saw, but it was enough to turn him white as a ghost....so presumably it was something obviously inappropriate.
Now is the part of the story where the quasi lawyer nonsense kicks is. Parsing words, twisted logic. Wonderful.
The reality - we will never know who saw what and who said what to who. Some of this stuff was 40 years ago. The poor boys that were raped, where just that - young boys. Hardly expected to remember everything.
And most importantly, other than the assh@le ginger, nobody is talking. Not surprising. These gutless wonders were taught well by their masters - the scum running psu. Keep it in house, boys will be boys, I don't have time for that - I've got football games to worry about. And around and around we go.
The reality - we will never know who saw what and who said what to who. Some of this stuff was 40 years ago. The poor boys that were raped, where just that - young boys. Hardly expected to remember everything.
And most importantly, other than the assh@le ginger, nobody is talking. Not surprising. These gutless wonders were taught well by their masters - the scum running psu. Keep it in house, boys will be boys, I don't have time for that - I've got football games to worry about. And around and around we go.
So let me get this straight. McQueary talked to Bradley who (allegedly) talked to Schiano about a situation that was similar to what McQueary reported to Paterno. We don't know what was similar about the incident that allegedly Schiano saw, but according to some on this board this is enough for them to make Schiano guilty of not reporting child rape even though we don't know first hand what Schiano saw or didn't see. I will reserve my judgment on Schiano until I hear his first person account of what he saw.
You missed my post above. I have zero loyalty to Schiano. If anything, I am slightly negative about him, but that will not cloud my judgement and let armchair lawyers Gary haters crucify him and try him on double hearsay testimony of McQueary, someone who had 2 or 3 different versions of what he saw himself.
Exactly. There is a vocal contingent of Gary-haters here, or people who react quickly by connecting a few dots that don't provide a full picture of what went on.
The newpaper article said he walked in and saw abuse, a witness
said he came in the office white as a ghost. Did you actually see
the testimony?
Seriously.. Jerry soaping up a boys back??? Really? Would that make someone turn white as a ghost? Unlikely.
Yes, I quoted it in three separate posts, and it is in the first post on this topic. I don't care what a newspaper says about what someone else said.
Gary haters my ass, how many years has gone by, and it is
just being looked into now? When was the testimony? This
wasn't a priority, somebody or somebodies f'd up. These poor
children, suffered because of a large scale cover up?
Here you go. The court transcript of McQueary testifying about his discussion with Bradley was posted at http://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/i...gers_coach_and_current_ohio_state_assist.html
Here is the direct question-and-answer session between McQueary and Paul Gagne, the lawyer representing Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association Co. over reimbursement for civil settlements paid to 32 people who presented themselves as Sandusky victims, that pertains to Schiano:
Q: "Did he tell you that he had information concerning Gerald Sandusky and children?''
McQueary: "He said he knew of some things.''
Q: "And did he tell you what he knew of?''
McQueary: "Yeah.''
Q: "What did he tell you?''
McQueary: "He said another assistant coach had come to him in the early '90s about a very similar situation to mine, and he said that he had — someone had come to him as far back as the early '80s about seing Jerry doing something with a boy.''
Q: "Did he identify who the other coaches were that had given him this information?''
McQueary: "The one in the early '90s, yes.''
Q: "And who was that?''
McQueary: "Greg Schiano.''
Q: "Greg Schiano?''
McQueary: "Yes.''
Q: "And did he give you any details about what Coach Schiano had reported to him?''
McQueary: "No, only that he had — I can't remember if it was one night or one morning, but that Greg had come into his office white as a ghost and said he just saw Jerry doing something to a boy in the shower. And that's it. That's all he ever told me.''
Q: "Did he tell you what, if anything, he had done about that.
(Following an objection) McQueary said: "No, he didn't share that with me.''
Q: "Did he tell you that he had information concerning Gerald Sandusky and children?''
McQueary: "He said he knew of some things.''
Q: "And did he tell you what he knew of?''
McQueary: "Yeah.''
Q: "What did he tell you?''
McQueary: "He said another assistant coach had come to him in the early '90s about a very similar situation to mine, and he said that he had — someone had come to him as far back as the early '80s about seing Jerry doing something with a boy.''
Q: "Did he identify who the other coaches were that had given him this information?''
McQueary: "The one in the early '90s, yes.''
Q: "And who was that?''
McQueary: "Greg Schiano.''
Q: "Greg Schiano?''
McQueary: "Yes.''
Q: "And did he give you any details about what Coach Schiano had reported to him?''
McQueary: "No, only that he had — I can't remember if it was one night or one morning, but that Greg had come into his office white as a ghost and said he just saw Jerry doing something to a boy in the shower. And that's it. That's all he ever told me.''
Q: "Did he tell you what, if anything, he had done about that.
(Following an objection) McQueary said: "No, he didn't share that with me.''
