Hide Yo Kids. Paterno/Sandusky Trial/Penn State Megathread

[Kuzzy Powers]

This should be hilariously bad...


1. Campus cops are more often than not, especially at large universities, real police officiers that are employed by the school. They aren't glorified mall cops. So "lol at campus cops" means virtually nothing.

2. Morally, no I wouldn't be ok with it. Then again I've never stated I think JoePa was in the right or that he didn't fail morally so your question is pointless.

Yeah, hilariously bad, would be a solid way to describe each and every one of your posts in this thread.

You've stated SEVERAL times that Joe Pa did what he was supposed to do, go and multi quote yourself and find that yourself. My question is only pointless because you want to dance around the real answer. Because this is a bunch of butt-holes you couldnt give a fuck about Paterno took the right steps, but if this was someone you cared about you wouldnt feel like Paterno, or anyone else did. And thats reality.

So go ahead and reply with another mindless reply because you're too hard headed to just ease up on a blatantly retarded stance.

 

[Kuzzy Powers]

They are real cops, even at my university but still. Major crimes that occur on campus are reported through the area authorities. They can handle emergencies like real officers but investigations are handled externally.

Oh noez! I called campus cops rent-a-cops. How much you wanna bet this is what Firstitmers argument is gonna hinge on for another 10 pages, me calling campus cops rent-a-cops. :yao:

They obviously did a poor job of carrying out any type of real authority in this case.

 

[FirstTimer]

Yeah, hilariously bad, would be a solid way to describe each and every one of your posts in this thread.

Ok canuck.

You've stated SEVERAL times that Joe Pa did what he was supposed to do

Legally.

Learn to read.

I've said he failed miserabley on a moral level and deserves to lose his job quite a few times in here.

So just like blade your blabbering on about nothing.

 

[SethMode]

My lord. It's funny to me that guys like Firsttimer get called demented or stupid or what have you in this thread at this point. You might not agree with him or W2B, but all of their posts have been well-argued and to the point, and none of them have consisted of a fucking borderline meltdown like numerous people in this thread. I swear I've never seen an argument go on for so long where one side keeps saying the same thing and then continues to be shocked when the opposition says "That's fine, I just want more information on *blank*." It makes some of you sound like you're 15 years old or silly. And the not-so-clever sarcastic little barbs do nothing for anyone.

The moral of the story is though, there is nothing new being argued here. You can throw in any number of hypothetical situations or guesses, but literally at this point it's nothing that anyone hasn't already heard. Now we wait and see what Paterno has to say for himself, and we go from there.

 

[ralaw]

My lord. It's funny to me that guys like Firsttimer get called demented or stupid or what have you in this thread at this point. You might not agree with him or W2B, but all of their posts have been well-argued and to the point, and none of them have consisted of a fucking borderline meltdown like numerous people in this thread. I swear I've never seen an argument go on for so long where one side keeps saying the same thing and then continues to be shocked when the opposition says "That's fine, I just want more information on *blank*." It makes some of you sound like you're 15 years old or silly. And the not-so-clever sarcastic little barbs do nothing for anyone.

The moral of the story is though, there is nothing new being argued here. You can throw in any number of hypothetical situations or guesses, but literally at this point it's nothing that anyone hasn't already heard. Now we wait and see what Paterno has to say for himself, and we go from there.

The nature of a messageboard is that people post their opinion and generally others debate those ideas. So, W2B and FT have every right to state their opinion and others have a right to debate those ideas....this is the soul of what makes messageboards work.

The issue people are having with W2B and FT is that they're using the "lets wait and see" argument in a passive way to avoid criticizing Paterno. The both of them have used "we don't know what they knew" in the context of defending him. The point that most are trying to make is that their obviously was a culture of impropriety going on at the campus and Paterno in all of his accolades and accomplishments is the head of it all. So, while he may not necessarily being directly involved with the situation....he certainly was privy to something and did nothing. The argument of "I want to hear what he knew" is pointless in that regardless of whether he knew or not doesnt matter. He's basically the CEO of the football program and as such is responsible for what goes on.

 

[FirstTimer]

The argument of "I want to hear what he knew" is pointless in that regardless of whether he knew or not doesnt matter.

It absolutely matters when trying to determine how much moral blame/outrage I should direct at somebody.

 

[webbi]

absolutely agree with this..

It absolutely matters when trying to determine how much moral blame/outrage I should direct at somebody.

 

[NAHSTE]

For those saying "I want to know what JoePa knew" ... It's nearly impossible for him to not have known.

This goes beyond the 2002 incident. This was a pattern of behavior that was enabled by the Penn State athletic dept. and administration for at least a decade. You really expect us to believe things were happening in the Penn State athletic dept. without the most powerful man in the Penn State athletic dept. ever catching wind?

He did not do nearly enough. No debate there. We don't need to wait on any more info, or any more statements from JoePa. The time to make a statement was anytime between 1998 and now.

 

[ralaw]

It absolutely matters when trying to determine how much moral blame/outrage I should direct at somebody.

absolutely agree with this..

In figuring the legalities of it you are correct; however, morally it doesn't matter. If you know of someone doing these sorts of things you have a moral responsiblity to make sure it doesn't happen again. In Paterno's case that would be to not allow Sandusky to continue to use the facilities. Due to the nature of the crime there is are no degrees of culpability.

 

[Blade]

For the ones who want to know what Paterno knew....

These inconsistencies related to Paterno's and McQueary's statements about "Victim 2" in the grand jury's statement of facts. According to the grand jury's findings of fact, McQueary detailed how in 2002 he saw a naked Sandusky sexually abusing a young boy in the showers in the Penn State football locker room. McQueary also testified that he told Paterno what he saw the following day.

After hearing from McQueary, Paterno alerted athletic director Tim Curley. Yet instead of relaying what McQueary claims to have told him, Paterno conveyed a milder and vaguer description. Specifically, Paterno testified under oath that McQueary had said that Sandusky was engaged in fondling or "doing something of a sexual nature" to a boy.



Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...nn/11/09/joe.paterno/index.html#ixzz1dEGdoRQe

That one report should rile anyone's morality.

 

[MvP]

A kid I used to work with goes to Penn State and he told me that the campus is in the middle of nowhere. The campus is technically the town of State College, PA. So the "quality" of the police officers is irrelevant.

 

[FirstTimer]

For those saying "I want to know what JoePa knew" ... It's nearly impossible for him to not have known.

Ok. Thanks Creskin.

ralaw...see again.

however, morally it doesn't matter.

Yes it does.

To me at least.

If you know of someone doing these sorts of things you have a moral responsiblity to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Did JoePa try? Yes. Did he try enough? No. He's not as morally culpable as his superiors, he's not as morally culpable as McQueery, IMO.

He fucked up morally. Enough to cost him his job. But not as badly as others.

There are degrees here to me.

Sorry.


The Sandusky stuff still using the facilities I want to hear more on. I really want to know whe/if Paterno followed up on his reporting and depending if he did, what he was told.

 

[FirstTimer]

For the ones who want to know what Paterno knew....



That one report should rile anyone's morality.

Wow.

Thanks.

Too bad this was already in the Grand Jury report

I'd also like to point this out:

Right after the paragraph you have this

To be sure, the phrase "doing something of a sexual nature" technically includes forcibly subjecting a child to anal intercourse, meaning Paterno may have been more evasive than untruthful. Then again, Paterno's hazy choice of words could encompass a band of sexual acts, from raping a 10-year-old boy to inappropriately touching or patting a child, that ranges too widely in heinousness to be deemed consistent with McQueary's allegedly more specific statements. The phrase unnecessarily imports ambiguity and generality where none had existed, and dubiously invites the listener -- Curley -- to assign a lack of severity to the incident. From that lens, Paterno appears to have told Curley a different account than what McQueary had told him.

The inconsistent testimonies raise several questions:

• Did McQueary lie to the grand jury about what he saw or told Paterno?

• Did Paterno lie to the grand jury about what McQueary had told him?

• If neither witness lied, did Paterno intentionally misrepresent what McQueary had told him in order to discourage Curley from aggressively investigating the matter or alerting the police? If so, did Paterno conceal the severity of the evidence or delay the onset of a criminal investigation to such an extent that he obstructed justice?

Wow look! More questions that need to be answered(all valid and legit)!

 

[EmpireWF]

For the ones who want to know what Paterno knew....



That one report should rile anyone's morality.

:yep:

The inconsistent testimonies raise several questions:
• Did McQueary lie to the grand jury about what he saw or told Paterno?
• Did Paterno lie to the grand jury about what McQueary had told him?
• If neither witness lied, did Paterno intentionally misrepresent what McQueary had told him in order to discourage Curley from aggressively investigating the matter or alerting the police? If so, did Paterno conceal the severity of the evidence or delay the onset of a criminal investigation to such an extent that he obstructed justice?


Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...nn/11/09/joe.paterno/index.html#ixzz1dEJcUuwC

 

[NAHSTE]

IMO people are getting way too caught up on the 2002 incident and ignoring that Sandusky was holding hands with kids in the Penn State locker room, bringing them to closed practices, etc. as recently as 2007.

At what point do we stop saying "ohhh Paterno had no idea"?

He knew enough to do more.

 

[ralaw]

As DJ Rhude said before I just hope the "lets wait and see crowd" upholds that sort of ideology with every single case that comes up from now on. I'm looking at you W2B and FT.

 

[Kuzzy Powers]

IMO people are getting way too caught up on the 2002 incident and ignoring that Sandusky was holding hands with kids in the Penn State locker room, bringing them to closed practices, etc. as recently as 2007.

At what point do we stop saying "ohhh Paterno had no idea"?

He knew enough to do more.

We have to wait and see what Paterno has to say about that!! Surely theres a reasonable explanation. :facepalm:

 

[Kuzzy Powers]

As DJ Rhude said before I just hope the "lets wait and see crowd" upholds that sort of ideology with every single case that comes up from now on.

LOL yeah, right. Miami OH's coach would be hanging from a tree right now.

 

[FirstTimer]

At what point do we stop saying "ohhh Paterno had no idea"?

When we hear/see/get evidence that he did.

/Merica

 

[NAHSTE]

When we hear/see/get evidence that he did.

/Merica

Can you not draw a conclusion for yourself? He fucking knew. Sandusky was bringing kids into the Penn State locker room for years, was caught raping them three times, and was continued to be allowed to bring kids into the Penn State locker room for years beyond that.

You are awaiting evidence that would somehow prove that the head football coach of Penn State, aka the guy who grants locker room access, has no culpability here?