- 21,151
- 37
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2004
Originally Posted by OGMIKEY
Ok...here's my thinking now. Suppose McQueary's statement IS true about trying to stop Sandusky. What's his (McQueary's) angle for staying at Penn State? Promises??? Blackmail??? And then, what's Paterno's rationale for KEEPING Sandusky around in addition to the year overlap between telling him he won't be the coach in waiting and when he was discovered to have showered w. the boy???Originally Posted by DoubleJs07
cRazy dav0 wrote:
if mcqueary did stop it ... then %#+ .... b/c everyone saw sandusky w/ the little boys on campus years later ... so what gives ... this is the wildest thing ever
i need to get back to skyrim ...
Sandusky was told he would not be Paterno's successor in 98', this is the incident he admitted to the child's mother with cops hiding in the house and overheard his admission of guilt. McQueary caught him in the shower in 2002.
Correct. But I think the university was aware of Sandusky showering w. the boy....which I believe is the main reason WHY he wasn't considered the coach in waiting.