Sandusky trial fallout: More info coming as stories grow apart

Jerry Sandusky

--UPDATED-- The family of former coach Joe Paterno released a statement late Monday afternoon asking that Penn State be completely forthcoming with any e-mails related to this story and that they be given to the Louis Freeh investigation to be in turn released to the public.
 ----------------------------------------------
Interesting.

We felt compelled to tell a story here because we just read through the grand jury testimony of former Penn State athletic director Tim Curley and former V.P Gary Schultz.

And it was a fascinating read.

But first, the explosive report from CNN about e-mail chains between the two men and school president Graham Spanier continue to add to what is a scary and immensely disappointing portrayal of how Penn State didn't react when confronted about possible Sandusky indescretions.

The e-mails, first mentioned a couple of weeks ago, talk about the group deciding after consulting former coach Joe Paterno advised them to be quiet, to do just that.

CNN is expected to release more e-mails this week.

Now...back to the Grand Jury testimony.

OSG Sports read through a large portion of the 276 page testimony of Schultz and Curley at the Dauphin County Courthouse.

You can read the testimony by following the link RIGHT HERE

Without giving away the spoilers, start on about page 173 or so. That's where the attorney's begin talking to Curley about the incident where Mike McQueary found Sandusky in the shower with a young boy.

Curley went to great lengths to say McQueary was very not specific about what he had seen. The part that stands out the is when he describes who decided not to do anything and why.

Curley essentially says it was his decision because he didn't consider it a criminal act. He talked at length about discussing it with Schultz and with Spanier, but they deferred to him. Curley says he confronted Sandusky, but believed his story. He also went to the Second Mile he says, but does not detail the outcome of that conversation.

Curley also speaks of going to Joe Paterno's home to with Schultz to discuss the incident the day after McQueary reported it.

But the scariest part is when Curley was asked if he knew of the 1998 incident Sandusky was involved with. He said he didn't.

However....that differed from Schultz's testimony. Schultz recalled meeting Paterno at his home though he did confirm that the decision on what to do was left to Curley.

Spanier was however consulted as well and signed off on everything.

What is disconcerting is this: Schultz said he was aware of the 1998 incident and in some detail. He was aware of the Police investigation and aware that it was somewhat similar to what the were dealing with in Lasch Hall that McQueary had seen.

And Schultz didn't think the two "Similar" incidents warranted getting police...or investigators involved.

Really?

We highly, highly, highly recommend you read the testimony/link above.

In case you missed it, read the full testimony RIGHT HERE

While none of this confirms "Officially" anything in the reported E-Mails, it does allude to things reported in them. It does not directly implicate Paterno in anything, but it seems to infer he may have known more at the time than he let on. Considering Paterno's penchant for at least acting absent minded about some things, it is very conceivable that he didn't remember a lot of it when he testified too.

And if this proves to be the cover-up that it appears to be; these guys need to end up in the same place Sandusky does.