Former Penn State president Graham Spanier addressed the Sandusky scandal  an interview with Jeffrey Toobin in the New Yorker. Spanier was implicated as part of a coverup in the Freeh Report (he disputes it). He has not been charged with a crime related to the case. He has finally spoken publicly, though his account still has major holes.

Spanier says he has no recollection of an issue with Sandusky in 1998. He claims he found out later he was copied on two e-mails, five weeks apart.  The first email did not mention Sandusky by name.

He claims Penn State’s servers at that point were perpetually losing large number of emails. He does not reference any interactions that did not occur over emails not already in the public domain.

I had no recollection of 1998, didn’t in 2001, have no recollection now, what I’m telling you I’m only for the sake of not wanting people to think that I’m hiding something. I apparently was copied on those two e-mails, but it obviously didn’t raise any awareness in my mind to the point where I went back and said, “Who are we talking about? What’s the issue? Is there a problem with somebody, do we need to push further?”

Spanier pins what happened in 2001 on Schultz and Curley. He claims the two informed him of “horsing around” or “horseplay” and only that (both testified McQueary told them it was sexual in nature). He claims he only became aware of the specifics of McQueary’s report or the fact it came from McQueary until after the grand jury presentment in November 2011.

Now they either used the word “horsing around” or “horseplay.” And the staff member wasn’t sure what he saw, because it was indirect and around a corner. And I remember asking two questions. “Are you sure that’s how it was described to you, as ‘horsing around’?” And the answer was yes from both Gary and Tim. And, “Are you sure that’s all that was said to you?” And the answer was yes.

Spanier tried to explain the following email: “This approach is acceptable to me…. The only downside for us is if the message isn’t ‘heard’ and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it. But that can be assessed down the road. The approach you outline is humane and a reasonable way to proceed.”

What I meant by “humane” was I thought it was very humane of Tim to want to go the extra mile by meeting with Jerry and saying, “Jerry, I hope you understand that we don’t want this to happen, and we’re going to tell this to Second Mile, and if you want to accompany me to that meeting with Second Mile you may come with me. ” I thought that’s a very humane way to follow up on something like that….

Crucially, Spanier does not explain what he felt Penn State would be “vulnerable” for not reporting. That does not mesh with the claim it was just “horsing around.”

[Photo via Getty]