Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by snap infraction on May 6, 2016 12:50:51 GMT -5
just a very short while ago, all major charges (some minor remain) were dropped against schultz/spanier/curley. this news would seemingly be major. but it made page 19 of all the major publications. it was barely talked about at a national level. last nite, an unsubstantiated claim against paterno was made with no additional details or facts or evidence or anything except one line from a judge's opinion going back forty years. and it was the top news story in many major newspaper publications and has been a topic of sports talk radio and trending on twitter, etc. the media's interest in this how thing has always been paterno and his culpability. just look at deadspins awful misleading headline for godsakes deadspin.com/court-opinion-reveals-joe-paterno-reportedly-knew-of-je-1775014993?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitter&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow how can you not say the media isn't finding him guilty of this? i didn't deny that mcqueary dad told him to talk to joe. that is fact. your opinion on his motive for doing so is pure speculation. i think he and his dad was concerned about future job opportunities which is also speculation. i don't know why you find it so amazing that after psu opened up their checkbooks in 2012 that people made claims of also being abused. i mean is that a complete shocker to you? and it's amazing for all these claims of abuse that no one thought to call the police or anyone else but the head football coach, who was supposedly easily accessible to every 15 year old in the world. after debating this long about it i am surprised you still don't know my position. i never claimed everyone is innocent. i think people fucked up big time. i just don't buy the sinister motives everyone assigned to paterno. and i dont buy freeh's claim that psu's corrupt culture (essentially blaming fans and students) was the reason sandusky did what he did. &nbs sigh. you're leaving quite a bit out of why the most serious of charges got dropped. it wasn't because they were found innocent, or for a lack of evidence. it was because the university counsel testified against them before the grand jury. they got a technicality get out of jail free card. big difference. as for the 'minor' charges still pending? you think perjury, failure to report suspected abuse and endangering the welfare of a minor are minor, in light of this string of events? an unsubstantiated claim of potential wrongdoing in '76, on its own, is just that. but when it happened again in '87? again in '88? a decade later when a grand jury did an investigation? more allegations in '01? '08? '11? i mean how long a line of bread crumbs do you need? you keep talking about the media's interest. here's my interest... children were put at risk, and if this claim is true, you could say a blind eye was turned to it for over three decades. the fact it went on for one decade is unthinkable given the circumstances. and if you think that mcqueary's dad told his son to 'talk to joe' in order to protect future job opportunities, i don't think you've ever lived in a small town that houses a single, giant organization. i didn't elaborate on why the serious charges got dropped b/c it's not relevant. my point was that the charges being dropped, whether they were merited or based on a technicality should have been a bigger story. yet no one cared. but all of a sudden, every media outlet in the country is reporting on some unsubstantiated accusation as further proof that paterno was some sort of heartless monster. paterno is all people care about. it's what gets all the clicks. i've even seen major media outlets calling for the ncaa to vacate paternos wins from 1976. notice the only topic on this very message board started by someone other than me related to this scandal occurs when paterno is involved in the story? that is not a coincidence. your interest in the children being at risk does not align with everyone else's interest. everyone enjoys grabbing pitchforks. the bigger the legend, the bigger the pitchfork. again, all the claims prior to 2012 were made after psu accepted responsibility through the freeh report. after the freeh report, psu conceded to anyone who claimed they were abused. psu took a strategy to quietly settle and move on. they did not want any of their negotiations publicized. they did not want to be seen as arguing back against sandusky's victims. they just wanted to get everything behind them. and it has failed miserably. you know have a public that is still hysterically angry and a segment of fans pigeonholed as child molester sympathizers. thanks penn state. 87 and 88 are sealed also. we have no way of knowing if psu settled with the accusers, and if they settled, if they settled at of convenience or if there was actual credibility to the claims. if paterno knew of sandusky's behavior, he deserves ridicule. but i am still not convinced that he understood based on what i have heard. 1998 was investigated and it was determined that no charges would be filed. 2001 story was relayed to the state college police force and to the head of the 2nd mile charity (the 2nd of 2 mandated reporters, dranov being the first). all parties involved determined for whatever reason (not definitely the reason concluded by freeh) to not escalate things. no one cares that these people missed the boat too. they just care about paterno. have you ever interned for a company before? and wanted to work someday for that same company? and then witnessed someone very powerful in that company do something incredibly inappropriate? do you see the internal conflict?
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by mscott59 on May 6, 2016 13:40:05 GMT -5
sigh. you're leaving quite a bit out of why the most serious of charges got dropped. it wasn't because they were found innocent, or for a lack of evidence. it was because the university counsel testified against them before the grand jury. they got a technicality get out of jail free card. big difference. as for the 'minor' charges still pending? you think perjury, failure to report suspected abuse and endangering the welfare of a minor are minor, in light of this string of events? an unsubstantiated claim of potential wrongdoing in '76, on its own, is just that. but when it happened again in '87? again in '88? a decade later when a grand jury did an investigation? more allegations in '01? '08? '11? i mean how long a line of bread crumbs do you need? you keep talking about the media's interest. here's my interest... children were put at risk, and if this claim is true, you could say a blind eye was turned to it for over three decades. the fact it went on for one decade is unthinkable given the circumstances. and if you think that mcqueary's dad told his son to 'talk to joe' in order to protect future job opportunities, i don't think you've ever lived in a small town that houses a single, giant organization. i didn't elaborate on why the serious charges got dropped b/c it's not relevant.imho the why part is extremely relevant. my point was that the charges being dropped, whether they were merited or based on a technicality should have been a bigger story. yet no one cared. again, imho, that's part of why the 'why' is relevant. the technicality aspect makes a lot of us roll our eyes. the 'haves' get off again. harry brought it up right from the start. paterno got his own legal counsel when the shit started hitting the fan... now whether that was just cya or did he have a different perspective, based on what he knew about all things sandusky? that would be speculation. but all of a sudden, every media outlet in the country is reporting on some unsubstantiated accusation as further proof that paterno was some sort of heartless monster. and once again, you insert your own hyperbole to accentuate your point. not one article out of the half dozen i scanned on this since last night used those words, or those kind of words, to describe paterno paterno is all people care about. it's what gets all the clicks. and i would claim the reverse is true for you. kids lives were ruined and yet protecting paterno's legacy is atop many a psu fan's list of priorities.i've even seen major media outlets calling for the ncaa to vacate paternos wins from 1976. notice the only topic on this very message board started by someone other than me related to this scandal occurs when paterno is involved in the story? that is not a coincidence. your interest in the children being at risk does not align with everyone else's interest. everyone enjoys grabbing pitchforks. the bigger the legend, the bigger the pitchfork. again, all the claims prior to 2012 were made after psu accepted responsibility through the freeh report. after the freeh report, psu conceded to anyone who claimed they were abused. psu took a strategy to quietly settle and move on. they did not want any of their negotiations publicized. they did not want to be seen as arguing back against sandusky's victims. they just wanted to get everything behind them. and it has failed miserably. you know have a public that is still hysterically angry and a segment of fans pigeonholed as child molester sympathizers. thanks penn state. psu took a strategy to settle, but now they want someone else, ie insurance, to cover the settlement costs. do you not have an issue with how that looks? just curious. 87 and 88 are sealed also. we have no way of knowing if psu settled with the accusers, and if they settled, if they settled at of convenience or if there was actual credibility to the claims. if paterno knew of sandusky's behavior, he deserves ridicule. but i am still not convinced that he understood based on what i have heard. 1998 was investigated and it was determined that no charges would be filed. 2001 story was relayed to the state college police force and to the head of the 2nd mile charity (the 2nd of 2 mandated reporters, dranov being the first). all parties involved determined for whatever reason (not definitely the reason concluded by freeh) to not escalate things. no one cares that these people missed the boat too. they just care about paterno. you need to stop this. people care that so many of those with the power to do something missed the boat. for some reason, you fail to see that paterno, by his own admission, was one of those peoplehave you ever interned for a company before? and wanted to work someday for that same company? and then witnessed someone very powerful in that company do something incredibly inappropriate? do you see the internal conflict? yes i did intern somewhere. no i didn't witness anyone powerful doing something which might have seemed so wrong. that said, did you grow up in a small town? i did til i was 14, little farm town of 1100 an hour north of columbus. my dad was a minister there. he didn't make much money, and with 5 kids the money he did make got spread thin right quick. dad had no nose for business whatsoever, but he was a very good counselor. one of the more prominent, and giving, families in our church was headed by a man who ran the local bank. one night he called dad asking him to stop by their house. it was late but dad went. when he got there, the man told my dad that he had been stealing $$ from the bank, and was fearful he was being investigated by the feds for embezzlement, which wasn't known by anyone. turns out his wife had suggested he talk to my dad. they did for a couple hours, him listening to advice that he should get ahead of it, admit his guilt and turn himself in. he said he'd sleep on it. dad got in his car and drove home. when he walked in the door 10 minutes later, my mom was crying on the phone. the banker's wife had found her husband dead from a gunshot to his head in their backyard. not a fun memory... but my point is that not everyone goes to the police when common sense says they should. sometimes they seek out a person of authority, feeling they might know better what to do, whether it's the religion people celebrate on sunday or the religion they celebrate on saturdays. since dad retired a decade ago, he's shared quite a few stories about people, now long passed, who confided in him things that have surprised me, sometimes by people he really didn't know that well. but they knew him, and what he did/represented.
|
|
mark scott tosu 81
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by AlaCowboy on May 6, 2016 13:46:04 GMT -5
There were a lot of us who found it very difficult to believe that, in a town as small as state college, leading a program as big as Psu, that paterno wasn't in the know about either whispers or accusations about Sandusky. If these reports are true, these dates go back 20 years prior to the first grand jury investigation, prior to the political maneuvering of that era beginning in the late 90s, and would certainly indicate that not only did paterno know, but previous athelletic administrators (and, you'd think, previous university presidents) knew about Sandusky as well. And, apparently, did nothing, putting dozens and dozens of future area children in danger. Again, if true, that goes beyond sad. That's criminal. it is so frustrating to read these reports....philly daily news & philly inquirier (main philly paper run by son of ex psu trustee who was on the psu board of trustees in 2011) led with this too. it's the top topic on morning sports radio here. think about this for just one second. #1. this claim is made by an insurance company seeking to deny penn state tens of millions for the victim settlements just keep the source in mind as they have incentive to list every single unsubstantiated claim that paints penn state in a negative way. #2. under what circumstance does a kid report to paterno that he was molested by sandusky? did a 15 year kid back in 1976 just walk into paterno's office? why did he not call the police? tell his parents? tell a teacher? a guidance counselor? friend? anyone else in the universe besides the head football coach at penn state?? #3. in 1976, sandusky was a position coach. he wasn't even a coordinator. why the hell would paterno risk everything to protect a lowly position coach? #4. penn state has given millions of dollars to every child who has claimed to share the same air as sandusky over the last 25 years. there is obvious tremendous financial incentive to make a claim of abuse that was ignored by penn state. people literally have nothing to lose and everything to gain by telling someone they were abused and penn state ignored it. #5. the accuser will never be identified. the accuser will never be asked any additional questions. yet the media, and posters here and people in general just assume any claim is guilt. since everyone assumes every claim that is made is 100% factual, paterno has the burden of disproving something that is impossible to disprove. To any 12 year old boy in a small town like State College, Pa., going to Joe Paterno was like going to God Himself and asking for a blessing. If Uncle Joe told the kid (and I'm not saying he did), "Sorry, son. I'll talk to him and tell him not to do it again. Just don't tell anyone and I'll handle it. Here's a football jersey." That kid would have felt like he was on top of the world and Uncle Joe will take care of everything. As for Sandusky being just a position coach, he was Paternos position coach, and whatever he did reflects on Ole Joe. So Joe would either stop it or cover it up. Maybe he talked to Sandusky and thought the problem was solved. It's just that Joes claim that he never knew anything about anything before 2011 is ridiculous. The rumor was discussed among us on the old AOL Board about 2006. Is that about the right time, Mark?
|
|
56-43-2* OVER FLORIDA. ALWAYS IN THE LEAD. THE CRYBABY LIZARDS WOULD ACCEPT THIS IF THEY WERE HONEST *2020 Is Negated By Covid-19 15 SEC CHAMPIONSHIPS FOR GEORGIA FLORIDA HAS ONLY 8 SEC CHAMPIONSHIPS BACK-TO-BACK NATIONAL CHAMPIONS 2021! 2022! FOUR NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS!
AMERICAN BY BIRTH. SOUTHERN BY THE GRACE OF GOD!!!
2017 GRAND DOUCHE AWARD WINNER
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by oujour76 on May 6, 2016 14:20:41 GMT -5
No doubt that it's hearsay and is impossible to prove or disprove. But, FWIW, you are incorrect about Penn State not having something to protect in 1976. They were a well established national program at that point.
From '67 thru '76 they played in seven (7) major bowl games like the Orange, Sugar and Cotton. They won about 90% of their games in that period with 5 or 6 top ten finishes. I watched OU play PSU in the 1972 Sugar Bowl...Paterno and Penn State were household names. they had no reason to protect sandusky. he was an obscure position coach in 1976. If it did happen in 1976, the protection would be for the program, not the individual. The program always comes first.
Joe Paterno understood that, which is why he got a private attorney when the shit hit the fan. And, when said shit hit said fan, Paterno became expendable and was fired by telephone. The program comes first. It's that way in all corporations.
|
|
Full Season 2022 Douche Champion
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by snap infraction on May 6, 2016 15:54:16 GMT -5
i didn't elaborate on why the serious charges got dropped b/c it's not relevant.imho the why part is extremely relevant. my point was that the charges being dropped, whether they were merited or based on a technicality should have been a bigger story. yet no one cared. again, imho, that's part of why the 'why' is relevant. the technicality aspect makes a lot of us roll our eyes. the 'haves' get off again. harry brought it up right from the start. paterno got his own legal counsel when the shit started hitting the fan... now whether that was just cya or did he have a different perspective, based on what he knew about all things sandusky? that would be speculation. but all of a sudden, every media outlet in the country is reporting on some unsubstantiated accusation as further proof that paterno was some sort of heartless monster. and once again, you insert your own hyperbole to accentuate your point. not one article out of the half dozen i scanned on this since last night used those words, or those kind of words, to describe paterno paterno is all people care about. it's what gets all the clicks. and i would claim the reverse is true for you. kids lives were ruined and yet protecting paterno's legacy is atop many a psu fan's list of priorities.i've even seen major media outlets calling for the ncaa to vacate paternos wins from 1976. notice the only topic on this very message board started by someone other than me related to this scandal occurs when paterno is involved in the story? that is not a coincidence. your interest in the children being at risk does not align with everyone else's interest. everyone enjoys grabbing pitchforks. the bigger the legend, the bigger the pitchfork. again, all the claims prior to 2012 were made after psu accepted responsibility through the freeh report. after the freeh report, psu conceded to anyone who claimed they were abused. psu took a strategy to quietly settle and move on. they did not want any of their negotiations publicized. they did not want to be seen as arguing back against sandusky's victims. they just wanted to get everything behind them. and it has failed miserably. you know have a public that is still hysterically angry and a segment of fans pigeonholed as child molester sympathizers. thanks penn state. psu took a strategy to settle, but now they want someone else, ie insurance, to cover the settlement costs. do you not have an issue with how that looks? just curious. 87 and 88 are sealed also. we have no way of knowing if psu settled with the accusers, and if they settled, if they settled at of convenience or if there was actual credibility to the claims. if paterno knew of sandusky's behavior, he deserves ridicule. but i am still not convinced that he understood based on what i have heard. 1998 was investigated and it was determined that no charges would be filed. 2001 story was relayed to the state college police force and to the head of the 2nd mile charity (the 2nd of 2 mandated reporters, dranov being the first). all parties involved determined for whatever reason (not definitely the reason concluded by freeh) to not escalate things. no one cares that these people missed the boat too. they just care about paterno. you need to stop this. people care that so many of those with the power to do something missed the boat. for some reason, you fail to see that paterno, by his own admission, was one of those peoplehave you ever interned for a company before? and wanted to work someday for that same company? and then witnessed someone very powerful in that company do something incredibly inappropriate? do you see the internal conflict? yes i did intern somewhere. no i didn't witness anyone powerful doing something which might have seemed so wrong. that said, did you grow up in a small town? i did til i was 14, little farm town of 1100 an hour north of columbus. my dad was a minister there. he didn't make much money, and with 5 kids the money he did make got spread thin right quick. dad had no nose for business whatsoever, but he was a very good counselor. one of the more prominent, and giving, families in our church was headed by a man who ran the local bank. one night he called dad asking him to stop by their house. it was late but dad went. when he got there, the man told my dad that he had been stealing $$ from the bank, and was fearful he was being investigated by the feds for embezzlement, which wasn't known by anyone. turns out his wife had suggested he talk to my dad. they did for a couple hours, him listening to advice that he should get ahead of it, admit his guilt and turn himself in. he said he'd sleep on it. dad got in his car and drove home. when he walked in the door 10 minutes later, my mom was crying on the phone. the banker's wife had found her husband dead from a gunshot to his head in their backyard. not a fun memory... but my point is that not everyone goes to the police when common sense says they should. sometimes they seek out a person of authority, feeling they might know better what to do, whether it's the religion people celebrate on sunday or the religion they celebrate on saturdays. since dad retired a decade ago, he's shared quite a few stories about people, now long passed, who confided in him things that have surprised me, sometimes by people he really didn't know that well. but they knew him, and what he did/represented. the "haves" got off b/c the prosecution made a mistake. even those of us who did not attend law school should know that you can't represent someone in a grand jury hearing and then testify against them. my speculation (take it for what its worth) is that corbett was hell bent on embarrassing spanier and when your boss is the governor wants something done, you better pull out all stops to get it done even if you have to bend some corners. i think it is likely that in his older age, paterno has advisors who knew better than to trust university counsel. the headlines on most publications today were purposely misleading and inflammatory. they strongly insinuated that it was a fact that paterno knew about 1976 without acknowledging how flimsy the claim is. i think the truth is the top priority of many psu fans wish list. we feel as though many people evaded scrutiny and blame. if you want to assign blame (which everyone wants to do regarding paterno), why is there no outrage against sandusky's actual employer over the decade (2nd mile)? the 2nd mile is where he identified and groomed victims. the 2nd mile was employed with various highly qualified and trained social workers and psychologists. why is there no outrage against the state college DA's office that didn't press charges in 1998 when sandusky all but admitted on tape he did something wrong? fwiw i am not ignoring paterno or saying he should off the hook. it's just that paterno is what drives the story. if paterno wasn't involved, no one would care. would matt rhule potentially covering up for child molestation by an ex employee be discussed by the national media? and it's frustrating b/c the same people that put paterno on such a lofty pedastal are the first people to absolutely tear him down with zero benefit of the doubt and consideration for any nuance in his culpability. you accuse me of making hyperboles but you do not acknowledge the countless people calling for penn state to receive the death penalty. throughout the duration of this scandal, optics have been the primary variable in penn state's decision making. i think psu leadership did not want to pay 90 million dollars out of its own funds but they didnt' want prolonged battles with child abuse victims. they were hoping to make insurance claims quietly behind the scenes b/c who would actually care where the money came from? once again, it looks like they miscalculated and taxpayers & students will be on the hook.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by mscott59 on May 7, 2016 10:40:32 GMT -5
yes i did intern somewhere. no i didn't witness anyone powerful doing something which might have seemed so wrong. that said, did you grow up in a small town? i did til i was 14, little farm town of 1100 an hour north of columbus. my dad was a minister there. he didn't make much money, and with 5 kids the money he did make got spread thin right quick. dad had no nose for business whatsoever, but he was a very good counselor. one of the more prominent, and giving, families in our church was headed by a man who ran the local bank. one night he called dad asking him to stop by their house. it was late but dad went. when he got there, the man told my dad that he had been stealing $$ from the bank, and was fearful he was being investigated by the feds for embezzlement, which wasn't known by anyone. turns out his wife had suggested he talk to my dad. they did for a couple hours, him listening to advice that he should get ahead of it, admit his guilt and turn himself in. he said he'd sleep on it. dad got in his car and drove home. when he walked in the door 10 minutes later, my mom was crying on the phone. the banker's wife had found her husband dead from a gunshot to his head in their backyard. not a fun memory... but my point is that not everyone goes to the police when common sense says they should. sometimes they seek out a person of authority, feeling they might know better what to do, whether it's the religion people celebrate on sunday or the religion they celebrate on saturdays. since dad retired a decade ago, he's shared quite a few stories about people, now long passed, who confided in him things that have surprised me, sometimes by people he really didn't know that well. but they knew him, and what he did/represented. the "haves" got off b/c the prosecution made a mistake. even those of us who did not attend law school should know that you can't represent someone in a grand jury hearing and then testify against them. my speculation (take it for what its worth) is that corbett was hell bent on embarrassing spanier and when your boss is the governor wants something done, you better pull out all stops to get it done even if you have to bend some corners. i think it is likely that in his older age, paterno has advisors who knew better than to trust university counsel. the headlines on most publications today were purposely misleading and inflammatory. they strongly insinuated that it was a fact that paterno knew about 1976 without acknowledging how flimsy the claim is. i think the truth is the top priority of many psu fans wish list. we feel as though many people evaded scrutiny and blame. if you want to assign blame (which everyone wants to do regarding paterno), why is there no outrage against sandusky's actual employer over the decade (2nd mile)? the 2nd mile is where he identified and groomed victims. the 2nd mile was employed with various highly qualified and trained social workers and psychologists. why is there no outrage against the state college DA's office that didn't press charges in 1998 when sandusky all but admitted on tape he did something wrong? fwiw i am not ignoring paterno or saying he should off the hook. it's just that paterno is what drives the story. if paterno wasn't involved, no one would care. would matt rhule potentially covering up for child molestation by an ex employee be discussed by the national media? and it's frustrating b/c the same people that put paterno on such a lofty pedastal are the first people to absolutely tear him down with zero benefit of the doubt and consideration for any nuance in his culpability. you accuse me of making hyperboles but you do not acknowledge the countless people calling for penn state to receive the death penalty. throughout the duration of this scandal, optics have been the primary variable in penn state's decision making. i think psu leadership did not want to pay 90 million dollars out of its own funds but they didnt' want prolonged battles with child abuse victims. they were hoping to make insurance claims quietly behind the scenes b/c who would actually care where the money came from? once again, it looks like they miscalculated and taxpayers & students will be on the hook. new stories out today... some past assistant psu coaches saying they were aware of sandusky's transgressions. and another older victim, now 62 years old, who says he was raped by sandusky at age 15 back in the early 70s, says a 'jim' and a 'joe' talked to him on the phone about his claims. why is there no outrage re 2nd mile? i wouldn't say there's no outrage, but that's not where this sordid time line began. it began at psu, and continued, it appears, during his entire coaching career there. plus, psu allowed 2nd mile lots of access on campus after sandusky 'retired', right? and, if the truth is what psu fans really want, and i think that's fair, then why do you come up with so many rationalizations and deflections whenever the news reports uncover, at the least, indications that paterno had knowledge of multiple accusations against sandusky?
|
|
mark scott tosu 81
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by snap infraction on May 9, 2016 7:16:22 GMT -5
they had no reason to protect sandusky. he was an obscure position coach in 1976. If it did happen in 1976, the protection would be for the program, not the individual. The program always comes first.
Joe Paterno understood that, which is why he got a private attorney when the shit hit the fan. And, when said shit hit said fan, Paterno became expendable and was fired by telephone. The program comes first. It's that way in all corporations.
putting aside the pure evilness of putting the program ahead of the abuse of children, the risk alone in hiding the crimes of an assistant coach is nowhere close to the benefits. you always cite paternos intelligence as reason to believe that paterno wasn't fooled...but if paterno were so smart, how could he not see the dangers his program and reputation faced in protecting a pedophile?
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by snap infraction on May 9, 2016 7:27:28 GMT -5
the "haves" got off b/c the prosecution made a mistake. even those of us who did not attend law school should know that you can't represent someone in a grand jury hearing and then testify against them. my speculation (take it for what its worth) is that corbett was hell bent on embarrassing spanier and when your boss is the governor wants something done, you better pull out all stops to get it done even if you have to bend some corners. i think it is likely that in his older age, paterno has advisors who knew better than to trust university counsel. the headlines on most publications today were purposely misleading and inflammatory. they strongly insinuated that it was a fact that paterno knew about 1976 without acknowledging how flimsy the claim is. i think the truth is the top priority of many psu fans wish list. we feel as though many people evaded scrutiny and blame. if you want to assign blame (which everyone wants to do regarding paterno), why is there no outrage against sandusky's actual employer over the decade (2nd mile)? the 2nd mile is where he identified and groomed victims. the 2nd mile was employed with various highly qualified and trained social workers and psychologists. why is there no outrage against the state college DA's office that didn't press charges in 1998 when sandusky all but admitted on tape he did something wrong? fwiw i am not ignoring paterno or saying he should off the hook. it's just that paterno is what drives the story. if paterno wasn't involved, no one would care. would matt rhule potentially covering up for child molestation by an ex employee be discussed by the national media? and it's frustrating b/c the same people that put paterno on such a lofty pedastal are the first people to absolutely tear him down with zero benefit of the doubt and consideration for any nuance in his culpability. you accuse me of making hyperboles but you do not acknowledge the countless people calling for penn state to receive the death penalty. throughout the duration of this scandal, optics have been the primary variable in penn state's decision making. i think psu leadership did not want to pay 90 million dollars out of its own funds but they didnt' want prolonged battles with child abuse victims. they were hoping to make insurance claims quietly behind the scenes b/c who would actually care where the money came from? once again, it looks like they miscalculated and taxpayers & students will be on the hook. new stories out today... some past assistant psu coaches saying they were aware of sandusky's transgressions. and another older victim, now 62 years old, who says he was raped by sandusky at age 15 back in the early 70s, says a 'jim' and a 'joe' talked to him on the phone about his claims. why is there no outrage re 2nd mile? i wouldn't say there's no outrage, but that's not where this sordid time line began. it began at psu, and continued, it appears, during his entire coaching career there. plus, psu allowed 2nd mile lots of access on campus after sandusky 'retired', right? and, if the truth is what psu fans really want, and i think that's fair, then why do you come up with so many rationalizations and deflections whenever the news reports uncover, at the least, indications that paterno had knowledge of multiple accusations against sandusky? the stories that came out on friday are b.s. cnn sat on the story for over a year and waited until psu name was in the mud to release it. the corroborating witness in the cnn story is cited as some sort of credible person. sara ganan who wrote the article of course did not mention that not only is bernie mccue (The witness) a delusional crackpot who writes insane things like this pbs.twimg.com/media/Ch8lITjU4AABFmi.jpg:large, but he is also more than twice the age of the alleged victim at the time of the assault. mccue has also tweeted that he respected paterno until 2011 which makes no sense if he knew of this awful story this entire time.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by mscott59 on May 9, 2016 7:56:50 GMT -5
If it did happen in 1976, the protection would be for the program, not the individual. The program always comes first.
Joe Paterno understood that, which is why he got a private attorney when the shit hit the fan. And, when said shit hit said fan, Paterno became expendable and was fired by telephone. The program comes first. It's that way in all corporations.
putting aside the pure evilness of putting the program ahead of the abuse of children, the risk alone in hiding the crimes of an assistant coach is nowhere close to the benefits. you always cite paternos intelligence as reason to believe that paterno wasn't fooled...but if paterno were so smart, how could he not see the dangers his program and reputation faced in protecting a pedophile? because paterno, like all of us, was a human being. he wasn't perfect. he had flaws and made mistakes. good people do that. maybe like a lot of people, at first he simply thought the accusers were making something up. maybe he didn't want to admit that he erred in keeping sandusky on, or hoped/was promised he'd seek help. maybe his public persona and private persona weren't exactly the same... wouldn't be the first time that happened. maybe it was easier to live the lie. i still think the fact that paterno had virtually no presence in sandusky's retirement party (99?) spoke volumes... the two had worked together for a quarter century but the head coach doesn't even make a formal speech recognizing his top assistant? arrived and left within 5-10 minutes or so? in the context of what we now know... maybe i'm in the minority but i think that's telling.
|
|
mark scott tosu 81
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by oujour76 on May 9, 2016 9:36:15 GMT -5
If it did happen in 1976, the protection would be for the program, not the individual. The program always comes first.
Joe Paterno understood that, which is why he got a private attorney when the shit hit the fan. And, when said shit hit said fan, Paterno became expendable and was fired by telephone. The program comes first. It's that way in all corporations.
putting aside the pure evilness of putting the program ahead of the abuse of children, the risk alone in hiding the crimes of an assistant coach is nowhere close to the benefits. you always cite paternos intelligence as reason to believe that paterno wasn't fooled...but if paterno were so smart, how could he not see the dangers his program and reputation faced in protecting a pedophile? That's just it...nobody acknowledges the pure evil until after the fact. Along the way, going along with the company line is viewed as showing loyalty. And, that's easier to do when the victims are nameless, faceless and powerless. I don't think Paterno woke up one morning and said "I think I'll protect a pedophile today." But, I do think he (and all the powers at be at PSU) knew what they wanted to know and they acted accordingly...because in their minds their everyday actions were for the greater good of Penn State and the football program.
Frankly, we're plowing old ground here...you have your view and I have mine. I don't know exactly when Joe Paterno and the powers that be "discovered" that Jerry Sandusky liked little boys. But, I don't believe for one second that is was 1997 or 1998.
Right before he died, Paterno said he could have done or should have done more, or something to that effect. At the time, the sadness and remorse reflected (to me) reflected something far deeper...I thought then, and I believe now, that he knew he had been keeping the secret for a long time. He was a beaten man at that time and I don't think it was just the cancer he was carrying.
|
|
Full Season 2022 Douche Champion
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by snap infraction on May 9, 2016 12:46:10 GMT -5
putting aside the pure evilness of putting the program ahead of the abuse of children, the risk alone in hiding the crimes of an assistant coach is nowhere close to the benefits. you always cite paternos intelligence as reason to believe that paterno wasn't fooled...but if paterno were so smart, how could he not see the dangers his program and reputation faced in protecting a pedophile? That's just it...nobody acknowledges the pure evil until after the fact. Along the way, going along with the company line is viewed as showing loyalty. And, that's easier to do when the victims are nameless, faceless and powerless. I don't think Paterno woke up one morning and said "I think I'll protect a pedophile today." But, I do think he (and all the powers at be at PSU) knew what they wanted to know and they acted accordingly...because in their minds their everyday actions were for the greater good of Penn State and the football program.
Frankly, we're plowing old ground here...you have your view and I have mine. I don't know exactly when Joe Paterno and the powers that be "discovered" that Jerry Sandusky liked little boys. But, I don't believe for one second that is was 1997 or 1998.
Right before he died, Paterno said he could have done or should have done more, or something to that effect. At the time, the sadness and remorse reflected (to me) reflected something far deeper...I thought then, and I believe now, that he knew he had been keeping the secret for a long time. He was a beaten man at that time and I don't think it was just the cancer he was carrying. at this point, no one is going to change their minds on paterno. some people are going to believe that paterno peacefully slept at night knowing that sandusky was sodomizing children going all the way back to 1971. some people are going to believe paterno was fooled by a master deceiver. others somewhere in the middle. this middle is just not discussed often b/c the middle requires nuance and a slightly deeper level of thinking. and the internet has turned this whole thing into a giant kangaroo court. fwiw, paterno said "with the benefit of hindsight" immediately prior to saying he wish he'd done more. that often gets overlooked. paterno was sad at the end. he was fired in the most unceremonious way possible. he realized his legacy was forever tarnished. he was under going chemotherapy.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by mscott59 on May 9, 2016 13:10:13 GMT -5
That's just it...nobody acknowledges the pure evil until after the fact. Along the way, going along with the company line is viewed as showing loyalty. And, that's easier to do when the victims are nameless, faceless and powerless. I don't think Paterno woke up one morning and said "I think I'll protect a pedophile today." But, I do think he (and all the powers at be at PSU) knew what they wanted to know and they acted accordingly...because in their minds their everyday actions were for the greater good of Penn State and the football program.
Frankly, we're plowing old ground here...you have your view and I have mine. I don't know exactly when Joe Paterno and the powers that be "discovered" that Jerry Sandusky liked little boys. But, I don't believe for one second that is was 1997 or 1998.
Right before he died, Paterno said he could have done or should have done more, or something to that effect. At the time, the sadness and remorse reflected (to me) reflected something far deeper...I thought then, and I believe now, that he knew he had been keeping the secret for a long time. He was a beaten man at that time and I don't think it was just the cancer he was carrying. at this point, no one is going to change their minds on paterno. some people are going to believe that paterno peacefully slept at night knowing that sandusky was sodomizing children going all the way back to 1971. some people are going to believe paterno was fooled by a master deceiver. others somewhere in the middle. this middle is just not discussed often b/c the middle requires nuance and a slightly deeper level of thinking. and the internet has turned this whole thing into a giant kangaroo court. fwiw, paterno said "with the benefit of hindsight" immediately prior to saying he wish he'd done more. that often gets overlooked. paterno was sad at the end. he was fired in the most unceremonious way possible. he realized his legacy was forever tarnished. he was under going chemotherapy. what the hell do you think we're doing here???
|
|
mark scott tosu 81
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Godlike Member
|
Post by oujour76 on May 9, 2016 22:05:06 GMT -5
at this point, no one is going to change their minds on paterno. some people are going to believe that paterno peacefully slept at night knowing that sandusky was sodomizing children going all the way back to 1971. some people are going to believe paterno was fooled by a master deceiver. others somewhere in the middle. this middle is just not discussed often b/c the middle requires nuance and a slightly deeper level of thinking. and the internet has turned this whole thing into a giant kangaroo court. fwiw, paterno said "with the benefit of hindsight" immediately prior to saying he wish he'd done more. that often gets overlooked. paterno was sad at the end. he was fired in the most unceremonious way possible. he realized his legacy was forever tarnished. he was under going chemotherapy. I think he realized his legacy was tarnished, and I think he also realized he was a big part of the reason why. I guess that is where we part company.
|
|
Full Season 2022 Douche Champion
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Now THIS here...is a member
|
Post by snap infraction on May 10, 2016 7:27:55 GMT -5
at this point, no one is going to change their minds on paterno. some people are going to believe that paterno peacefully slept at night knowing that sandusky was sodomizing children going all the way back to 1971. some people are going to believe paterno was fooled by a master deceiver. others somewhere in the middle. this middle is just not discussed often b/c the middle requires nuance and a slightly deeper level of thinking. and the internet has turned this whole thing into a giant kangaroo court. fwiw, paterno said "with the benefit of hindsight" immediately prior to saying he wish he'd done more. that often gets overlooked. paterno was sad at the end. he was fired in the most unceremonious way possible. he realized his legacy was forever tarnished. he was under going chemotherapy. what the hell do you think we're doing here??? about a year ago, i was called to jury duty in the city of philadelphia. entering the day, i expected that if i were called, it'd likely be for some sort of non violent petty drug crime. i didn't expect to be selected for anything more serious. when my number was called, i had to go to the trial room where the judge was going to review the case with all the potential jurors. i saw a young man sitting in the defendants seat. when i saw him, i figured it was likely he was being accused of selling or possession of some sort of illegal substance. the judge went on to explain that he was accused of sexual assault of a 7 year old girl. as soon as i heard the charge, i became furious. w/o hearing any evidence or testimony, i made up my mind that he was guilty. after the judge went over the charges, we all went into a room where we had to wait to be called to be questioned by the lawyers. i was one of a small handful of people not even selected to be questioned. i think it was b/c i was by far the best dressed person (seriously, it is unbelievable how sloppy and little pride people take in their appearance). i sat in that room as about 40 people were being called one by one w/o access to my phone or a magazine or anything to help pass the time besides making quiet small talk with random strangers. i have no idea if that guy was found guilty or not. but the lesson i learned that day was that he as guilty in my eyes just baed on the accusation crimes against children are the worst. they enrage us and they blind us. they are so awful that even the accusation of it removes any benefit of the doubt. joe paterno could have been accused of literally anything else and everybody would have given him the benefit of the doubt. but he was accused of helping someone hurt children which (rightly) infuriates people. based on recent media accounts, joe paterno found out about sandusky is about 1971 when sandusky was an assistant linebackers coach. but paterno didn't just conceal and harbor sandusky... paterno actually promoted him to the most 2nd most highly visible coaching positions on the coaching staff of a big time program. even though paterno was not the only one who knew about sandusky. he still took this risk. paterno is a guy who passed up multiple opportunities to coach elsewhere for more money, who donated a significant portion of his net worth to build a library, who lived in the same modest house for his entire adult life and spent his entire career teaching college aged men how to be contributors to society and he did all this while knowingly concealing a pedophile for decades. i'm sorry if i don't buy the narrative. i'm sorry that i fine this all to be preposterous. maybe i have a blind spot b/c i grew up as an ardent penn state fan. i just don't see it.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by mscott59 on May 10, 2016 8:08:45 GMT -5
what the hell do you think we're doing here??? about a year ago, i was called to jury duty in the city of philadelphia. entering the day, i expected that if i were called, it'd likely be for some sort of non violent petty drug crime. i didn't expect to be selected for anything more serious. when my number was called, i had to go to the trial room where the judge was going to review the case with all the potential jurors. i saw a young man sitting in the defendants seat. when i saw him, i figured it was likely he was being accused of selling or possession of some sort of illegal substance. the judge went on to explain that he was accused of sexual assault of a 7 year old girl. as soon as i heard the charge, i became furious. w/o hearing any evidence or testimony, i made up my mind that he was guilty. after the judge went over the charges, we all went into a room where we had to wait to be called to be questioned by the lawyers. i was one of a small handful of people not even selected to be questioned. i think it was b/c i was by far the best dressed person (seriously, it is unbelievable how sloppy and little pride people take in their appearance). i sat in that room as about 40 people were being called one by one w/o access to my phone or a magazine or anything to help pass the time besides making quiet small talk with random strangers. i have no idea if that guy was found guilty or not. but the lesson i learned that day was that he as guilty in my eyes just baed on the accusation crimes against children are the worst. they enrage us and they blind us. they are so awful that even the accusation of it removes any benefit of the doubt. joe paterno could have been accused of literally anything else and everybody would have given him the benefit of the doubt. but he was accused of helping someone hurt children which (rightly) infuriates people. based on recent media accounts, joe paterno found out about sandusky is about 1971 when sandusky was an assistant linebackers coach. but paterno didn't just conceal and harbor sandusky... paterno actually promoted him to the most 2nd most highly visible coaching positions on the coaching staff of a big time program. even though paterno was not the only one who knew about sandusky. he still took this risk. paterno is a guy who passed up multiple opportunities to coach elsewhere for more money, who donated a significant portion of his net worth to build a library, who lived in the same modest house for his entire adult life and spent his entire career teaching college aged men how to be contributors to society and he did all this while knowingly concealing a pedophile for decades. i'm sorry if i don't buy the narrative. i'm sorry that i fine this all to be preposterous. maybe i have a blind spot b/c i grew up as an ardent penn state fan. i just don't see it. first, congrats on serving jury duty when asked. there are many people who do all they can to opt out of that responsibility as a u.s. citizen. i'm glad you didn't. re sandusky, here are my final comments on this thread. 1. i touched upon this when this first resurfaced; there is some irony that psu, who's made no secret of its effort to reach confidential financial settlements with many of the alleged victims, to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, got into more hot water because the university tried to pawn off that bill to its insurance company. that move takes away much of the 'magnanimous' aspect in my eyes. it also opened the door for more information, no matter how trite, to get aired back in the public domain. if judged on nothing else but pr strategy, that was a horrible mistake, compounded by the psu president basically saying any claims aren't true because, well, paterno is gone and can't defend himself against them. 2. based on your stance all along that sandusky 'fooled' people for decades, hiding his inner demons (which is becoming harder and harder to believe imho)... take the last paragraph you wrote about paterno, and substitute sandusky's name; how does it read now? sandusky passed up multiple opportunities to coach elsewhere (true), donated a significant part of his net worth (2nd mile instead of library), lived in the same modest house (true, i believe), and spent his entire career teaching college aged men how to be contributors to society (again, until his retirement and then the abuse becoming public, true). all the while knowingly concealing that he was a pedophile (instead of concealing one... rue). you find that entire narrative preposterous when it comes to paterno, but for sandusky you found it plausible.
|
|
mark scott tosu 81
|