Skip to content

Testimonies by Paterno, Curley, Schultz read in hearing

Tim Curley, Patrick Chambers, Graham Spanier, Courtney Chambers AP

Earlier today, we recapped the testimony by Penn State assistant coach Mike McQueary, a key figure in the Jerry Sandusky case who, in 2002, allegedly witnessed an act of sexual abuse by Sandusky on a young boy.

While McQueary’s account of the alleged incident has changed on more than one occasion, the testimonies of former coach Joe Paterno, athletic director Tim Curley and recently retired VP of Business and Finance Gary Schultz (both are facing perjury charges) provided explicit, and very disheartening, information on how the alleged incident was handled by PSU administration. Below is a recap of those testimonies.

(A huge, huge thank you to Cory Giger of the Altoona Mirror for the Twitter updates. Follow him at @corygiger)

Paterno’s testimony was read first. The meeting between McQueary and Paterno after McQueary allegedly witnessed the sexual abuse remains one of the more crucial, yet vague, components of this scandal.

“He said he had something that he wanted to discuss. I said come on over to the house,” Paterno said in the testimony. “He had seen a person, not an older but a mature person who was fondling or whatever you might call it.

“It was a sexual nature.”

Okay, so Paterno and McQueary agree that the incident was indeed sexual.

“I didn’t go any further than that,” Paterno said of the conversation. “I did tell Mike, ‘Mike, you did what was right. You told me.’”

But what Paterno said next was the bombshell of the testimony. On what his immediate reaction was after learning of the incident from McQueary:

“I ordinarily would have called people right away, but it was a Saturday morning and I didn’t want to interfere with their weekends.”

Curley, whose testimony would be read next, claimed he was contacted on Sunday, the next day, by Paterno.

“I said, ‘Hey, we’ve got a problem,’ and I explained the problem to him,” Paterno said of his conversation with Curley. “I have a tremendous amount of confidence in Mr. Curley, and I thought he would look into it.

“I do not know of anything else that Jerry would be involved with.”

That was the end of the Paterno testimony; next was Curley.

The athletic director said that he and Schultz went over and met with Paterno following the coach’s meeting with McQueary. Exactly when that meeting was on the timeline wasn’t explicitly stated.

“The individual [McQueary] heard and saw, I guess, two people in the shower,” Curley said of what he was informed. “The individual was uncomfortable.”

Curley then said he met with McQueary.

“I can’t recall the specific conversation with Mike and exactly how he said it,” Curley said. “My recollection was that they were kind of wrestling, there was body contact and they were horsing around.”

When asked if McQueary provided any explicit details, such as if there was any penetration that he witnessed, Curley said “absolutely not.”

Curley and Schultz then shared the information of that meeting to former PSU president Graham Spanier, who, in turn, made the recommendation to report the incident to Second Mile. The Grand Jury’s summary of the Sandusky scandal states that Curley did indeed inform Second Mile CEO Jack Raykovitz of the 2002 incident.

Curley, before reporting what he had heard to Raykovitz, says he met with Sandusky.

“[I] told him that we were uncomfortable with the information,” Curley said.

Sandusky, according to Curley’s testimony, did not initially admit to being in shower with boy, but later admitted that he did.

“I indicated to him… he was not to use our facilities with young people,” Curly testified, also acknowledging that there was no practical way to enforce that “punishment”. “I was the one that came forward to say that this is the appropriate action, that we need to report it to The Second Mile.”

Beyond that, Curley said he did not contact the police — that was his own decision — nor did he attempt to find out the identity of the alleged victim because he didn’t think the incident was sexual in nature (um, read the above paragraph).

“I didn’t think that it was a crime at the time.”

Curley added that he did not know about the 1998 investigation of Sandusky.

“I don’t remember any reports to me that it were sexual in nature,” Curley said.

That was the end of Curley’s testimony. Next was Schultz’s. It was particularly damning and thoroughly depressing.

Schultz testified that doesn’t remember Paterno’s exact words about the shower incident when he met with the coach along with Curley… that it was spoken of “in a very general way… that maybe Jerry might have grabbed the young boy’s genitals.

“The allegations came across as not that serious,” continued Schultz. “There was no indication that it was [criminal]… Not all inappropriate conduct is criminal.

“I can imagine instances where an adult man would be in a shower with young boys.”

When asked if he thought it was criminal for a man to grab a boy’s genitals, Schultz replied “I don’t know.”

When asked to describe the definition of sexual conduct, Schultz replied “I don’t know.”

However, Schultz agreed that with the assessment that no adult male should grab the genitals of a young boy.

“I don’t recall him telling us what he observed specifically.” said Schultz of McQueary’s description of the alleged incident (although the term “horsing around” was thrown around quite a bit).  Schultz added that no one went back to McQueary and asked for specifics.

Schultz, like Curley, was asked about the 1998 investigation of Sandusky. However, unlike Curley, Schultz claimed to have a recollection of at least some information involving the case.

“I thought it had some basis of inappropriate behavior but without any specifics at all,” Schultz said.

Schultz did not meet with Sandusky over any of the alleged incidents, nor did he seek out the 1998 report after hearing about the 2002 incident.

“I had the impression that Tim did follow through [with Child Protective Services]” on making sure Sandusky couldn’t bring kids to football facilities. “The incident in 2002, again, I recall that it was also turned over to the same agency for investigation” as ’98 case.

“As far as I know the university asked the other agency to follow up, as they did in ’98.”

Schultz added that he agreed with Curley’s recommendation for how things should be handled after hearing about 2002 incident, and like Curley, did not attempt to discover the identity of Victim 2.

When asked if there was anything strange about Sandusky retirement, Schultz replied “No, I candidly have recollections that Coach Paterno and Jerry had reached a point where Coach Paterno felt it was necessary to make a coaching change.”

Permalink 22 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Big Ten Conference, Penn State Nittany Lions, Rumor Mill, Top Posts
22 Responses to “Testimonies by Paterno, Curley, Schultz read in hearing”
  1. dkhhuey says: Dec 16, 2011 4:45 PM

    Amazing! How PSU personnel swept this under the rug in less than 2 weeks:

    Step 1: GA walks into the shower – hears and sees Sandusky anally raping a you boy in the shower

    Step 2: Call dad then sleep on it.

    Step 3: Call Paterno

    Step 4: Tell Paterno a less graphic story of what you saw out of respect for Joe Pa (scrub scrub scrub) so he can now say he didn’t realize it was anal rape involved.

    Step 5: Call Curley and Schultz a day or two later.

    Step 6: Paterno, Curley, and Schultz all meet up and formulate a game plan how to ‘handle it internally’

    Step 7: Curley and Schultz meet with GA McQueary and hear the entire story about Sandusky anally raping the young boy and tell GA they will handle it!

    Step 8: Give GA McQueary a brand new job that was amazingly not there when this all started.

    Step 9: Tell Spanier the matter has been scrubbed clean.

    Step 10: Spanier tells Sandusky no more anally raping young boys on PSU campus and facilities

    Step 11: Call Second Mile and tell them Sandusky was horsing around with kids.

    Step 12: No more scandal! Continue about business like no children were molested, abused, and anally raped.

  2. Deb says: Dec 16, 2011 5:15 PM

    All three of them should be locked up. That’s the most disgusting lack of concern for public and child welfare I’ve ever read. It’s the institutional equivalent of the Kitty Genovese case.

    Schultz is supposed to be in charge of campus police, but doesn’t understand how to define sexual conduct?? Does that ignorance extend to investigating campus rapes and assaults, too? Would he think it was unwanted sexual sexual conduct if some guy grabbed his son’s genitals?

    Curley can’t imagine how they could enforce keeping Sandusky–who was no longer a school official–from using their showers for a rape lair? Aside from calling the police and putting him in prison … do they let just anyone have the run of their showers?

    And why would Paterno want to ruin someone’s weekend by reporting their pal was a child rapist? It takes so long to book a tee time. :roll:

  3. righton989 says: Dec 16, 2011 5:53 PM

    You don’t want to interfer with the multi-million business deals that JVP had going with PSU and Second Mile. The kids were always expendable to JVP, Slap Happy Jerry, PSU and Second Mile.

  4. pricecube says: Dec 16, 2011 5:56 PM

    @dkhhuey

    Well done. When the facts are put together in such a concise way it is really difficult to understand how anyone could defend the obvious cover up. Sad. Those still doing so are proof positive that college football fanaticism is truly a mental illness for some people.

  5. viceburgh says: Dec 16, 2011 6:00 PM

    “I didn’t want to interfere with their weekends.”

    They should inscribe this on his statue.

  6. thefiesty1 says: Dec 16, 2011 6:10 PM

    Did JoePa actually testify today or was only his statement read into the record? This coverup stinks to high heaven. Just from this “preliminary” hearing, they ALL need to go to jail.

  7. deadeye says: Dec 16, 2011 6:53 PM

    JoePa is being protected at all costs.

    McQueary claims that he told JoePa that “It was extremely sexual.” This of course allows Paterno to claim that he didn’t really know what precisely happened between Sandusky and the boy. How about some simple followup questions for Paterno:

    What did you think McQueary had witnessed in the showers after talking to him the day after the incident?

    If it was unclear, did you ask for further details or clarification?

    If you didn’t ask for further details, why didn’t you?

    According to McQueary, after telling Paterno what he saw, JoePa “was shocked and saddened, slumped back in his chair and said sorry you had to see that, it’s terrible.” The statement “sorry you had to see that, it’s terrible” tells me Paterno knew darn well what it was. If it was unclear, why would he say “sorry you had to see that”?

    All of these guys are falling on their swords for JoePa. Does the prosecutor even have the marbles to call Paterno to the stand to testify?

  8. firedude7160 says: Dec 16, 2011 7:07 PM

    It was only his testimony from the grand jury investigation. JoePa is still in the hospital recovering from re-injuring his pelvic fracture/receiving cancer treatments. He probably would have had to testify personally otherwise.

  9. effjohntaylornorelation says: Dec 16, 2011 7:54 PM

    How inappropriate they are all acting “Schultz” from Hogan’s Hereos. Disheartening cowards they are. All of them. They feared for the revenue streams they were each benefitting from.

  10. 6ball says: Dec 16, 2011 8:01 PM

    .

    Because of this case I turned the name of the individual who abused me over to authorities today. Feeling better, thank you.

    .

  11. frug says: Dec 16, 2011 8:57 PM

    “I can imagine instances where an adult man would be in a shower with young boys.”

    I’d love to hear Schultz describe some of these circumstances.

  12. rgledz says: Dec 16, 2011 9:09 PM

    Where are all of the Joepa/PSU apologists on this post??? My God, this is about a horrible as one could imagine. To think of all the reader comments that I have seen on this site in which people are sticking up for these A-hole’s, it makes me sick to my stomach. These guys should all be facing jail time for what they’ve done……..or rather didn’t do.

  13. realitypolice says: Dec 16, 2011 9:37 PM

    Child Molestation is typically a Class B felony.

    If you want to know how ridiculous all of these fools sound as they try to defend their response to what was reported by McQueary, let’s substitute some other Class B felonies and see if it makes sense:

    “He said he had something that he wanted to discuss. I said come on over to the house,” Paterno said in the testimony. ”He had seen a person, not an older but a mature person who was KIDNAPPING someone”

    “He had seen a person who was ROBBING someone.”

    “He had seen a person who was ASSAULTING someone”.

    “He had seen a person who was KILLING someone”.

    “I ordinarily would have called people right away, but it was a Saturday morning and I didn’t want to interfere with their weekends.”

    And how McQueary is not indicted for failure to report defies imagination. If he had walked into that locker room and seen Sandusky beating that kid with a claw hammer, would it have been acceptable to call JoePa instead of 911?

  14. 10of14 says: Dec 16, 2011 10:07 PM

    The photo that accompanies this article is in VERY bad taste, or at least lacks tact. In fact, l love this site, but your photo selections with ALL stories are just flat out bizarre…just say’in.

  15. 10of14 says: Dec 16, 2011 10:13 PM

    Joe’s “cancer diagnosis” is very convenient…he can’t appear in person??!! In all seriosness, a good attorney for Sandusky, combined with immature prosecutors will get Sandusky little to no time…mark my word. McQeury is wavering and not credible now. Paterno claims he heard nothing and now is sympathetically battling cancer so prosecutors are asked to back off….I smell a pervert getting set free.

  16. dafc0n says: Dec 16, 2011 11:05 PM

    When sandusky goes to prison he’ll get whats coming to him. Convicts don’t like child molestors, and he’ll get what mcquery should have done, which is require the paramedics to remove him from the shower!

  17. bamasleeper13 says: Dec 16, 2011 11:38 PM

    Just stunning! How do these guys look at themselves in the mirror? Who acts like this? Ruin their weekend???!!!!!

  18. aomn says: Dec 17, 2011 8:32 AM

    Talk about circling the wagon! This is disgusting. They knew but didn’t want to know. Reminds me of people who close their eyes, plug their ears and chant, “la, la, la”. So sorry this was an uncomfortable topic for everyone to deal with, wonder if the victim was uncomfortable. In light of the ages and positions of Paterno, Shultz and Curley – they are the ones who should be vilified. Yes, Mike McQueary did not do what we all profess we would do in this situation. However, as of yesterday he is the only one who is being a man about this and trying to right a wrong. The rest of these guys are still in denial about what they know they know! This case will never go to trial. Enjoy your final days of freedom Sandusky.

  19. revspinnaker says: Dec 17, 2011 9:19 AM

    Regarding the 1998 investigation of Sandusky.

    “I don’t remember any reports to me that it were sexual in nature,” Curley said.

    Sounds like legalese to me. They all guarded their responses as if anticipating cross examination.

    In McQueary’s defense, he has been around the Penn State football “family” long enough where he may have been molested by Sandusky himself. He’s 38 and Sandusky is 67. So when he was 10 or 12, Sandusky would have been 39 to 41. It’s plausable and may explain his demeanor and possible fear of confronting his own molester. And the reason he confided in his father first.

    If that were the case, now would be the time to speak up.

    I’d also like to know if McQueary ever uttered the words “horsing around” in his original testimony.

  20. jerruhjones21 says: Dec 17, 2011 9:20 AM

    “I ordinarily would have called people right away, but it was a Saturday morning and I didn’t want to interfere with their weekends.”

    We are – Ped State!

  21. manhorse69 says: Dec 17, 2011 10:59 AM

    Question: Can McQueary save his reputation by helping nail Sandusky on all the charges?

    After this most recent round of testimony it sounds as though McQueary was given every reason to believe the situation would be handled properly. Certainly won’t appease people who think he should have gone and beaten up Sandusky upon discovering him in the shower, but the testimony doesn’t paint McQuaery as someone attempting to cover up the situation. Starting to look worse for JoePa though

  22. corvusrex96 says: Dec 17, 2011 4:04 PM

    Question: Can McQueary save his reputation by helping nail Sandusky on all the charges?

    Answer: No, because he said that he witnessed, what he believed, was rape and discussed it THE NEXT DAY with a football coach rather than calling police. It is just inexcusable.

    The fact that he said the situation was “delicate in nature” shows he was more worried about other people’s reputations and possible retaliation to him rather than the welfare of the child.

    ..and as a FYI I am a PSU alum

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!