On Penn State

Voluminous ink has been spilled on this topic so I will stick to loosely organized observations without setting out the basic facts. McQueary is going to be the focal point of much of this, and his behavior is quite difficult to sort through, and I don't think it will be possible to simply blame the administrators for failing to act on detailed reports provided by him. McQueary is a part of the whole rotten system there and the more I think about it, the more I find it plausible that he either sugar coated his story or was nudged into downplaying what he saw. This is not to say that the administrators behaved correctly, merely that McQueary possibly didn't tell them the graphic details that he revealed to the grand jury.

Then there's the recent development of McQueary claiming in an email or some other medium that he actually did contact the police. To me this smells like a response to public criticism. It smells like an attempt by McQueary to retell history and to defend his actions. Just now I read a report that the police have no record of any report by McQueary or anyone else. So just what the hell was McQueary talking about?

At any rate, I'm sure all of the participants in this drama have lawyers smartly telling them to shut the fuck up in no uncertain terms, and already two of the critical figures have made public statements. Sandusky, for his part, gave a cryptic media interview via telephone that did nothing to help his case. Years from now when this thing is mostly sorted out I am confident that writers approaching the topic will find much symbolism and significance in that interview, none of it flattering to Sandusky or Penn State University.

And with Paterno, I'm not even sure what to say.