They would've just jumped on him as a PSU apologist and defender then.malkinshair wrote:Put it this way...what if Freeh had come out and said 'We found 2 suspicious emails and other documents, along with information gathered through hundreds of interviews, that could point to JoePa knowing about 1998, and the 4 of them knowing and covering up the 2001 incident. However, given that we did not have access to interview any of the principle people involved, and cannot determine the reasons for their actions, I cannot definitively say what these 4 men knew, or why they acted the way they did'. Read the report...this would have been a much more responsible conclusion to come to. Why hasn't the media questioned the validity of the conclusions?
Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
-
- AHL'er
- Posts: 2639
- Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 10:09 pm
- Location: Parts Unknown
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 28740
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:00 pm
- Location: From Hockey Siberia to Hockey Hell
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
I guarantee that the only way some people like malkinshair will consider it "truth" is if it's determined that everything was totally cool and no one at PSU was involved. Everything else is opinion and that's the only truth, right?
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 28740
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:00 pm
- Location: From Hockey Siberia to Hockey Hell
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
While it's not submitted in court (and I would argue what you have in the Freeh report is more fact than anything we see in court) and has his personal conclusions on there, I'd have to imagine Freeh uncovering this "cover up" would be the equivalent of Sidney Crosby playing in a pee wee game. It's not like he was unearthing some masterminded plot put together by the smartest people in the world. He had a bunch of old guys trying to cover up their buddy's escapades. I am more apt to take his "opinion" on things over some brainwashed PSU alums and the Paterno family given Freeh's experience.
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 19694
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2011 5:11 pm
- Location: BOBROVSKY!!!
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
I feel like now is a good time to re-hash this.
![Image](http://i.imgur.com/ng03c.jpg)
![Image](http://i.imgur.com/ng03c.jpg)
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 28740
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:00 pm
- Location: From Hockey Siberia to Hockey Hell
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
MRandall25 wrote:I feel like now is a good time to re-hash this.
![Thumbs Up :thumb:](./images/smilies/thumbup.gif)
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 37197
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:34 am
- Location: Manor Farm
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
People are going to believe whatever they want to believe. Freeh's report said exactly what the majority of people wanted it to say, and the only people capable of rebutting his conclusions are dead or indicted and therefore unable to say otherwise.bhaw wrote:So who's opinion can we trust if not someone who was trained to investigate much bigger and much better covered up things than this is not good enough? Some of you are ridiculous. Freeh was self-serving? Lol. He had no vested interest to have it come out one way or the other. His reputation and future isn't determined by how well he can pin it on someone(s).
I guarantee that the only way some people like malkinshair will consider it "truth" is if it's determined that everything was totally cool and no one at PSU was involved. Everything else is opinion and that's the only truth, right?
-
- NHL Healthy Scratch
- Posts: 12037
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:33 pm
- Location: Forever in blue jeans
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
Your last two posts are very well put.bhaw wrote:While it's not submitted in court (and I would argue what you have in the Freeh report is more fact than anything we see in court) and has his personal conclusions on there, I'd have to imagine Freeh uncovering this "cover up" would be the equivalent of Sidney Crosby playing in a pee wee game. It's not like he was unearthing some masterminded plot put together by the smartest people in the world. He had a bunch of old guys trying to cover up their buddy's escapades. I am more apt to take his "opinion" on things over some brainwashed PSU alums and the Paterno family given Freeh's experience.
-
- AHL All-Star
- Posts: 5956
- Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am
- Location: Admin wrote:Rooting for the Flyers is not allowed here. Seriously.
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
Did you see the people lose their minds about changing the name of Paternoville? How many people have you heard say that 'this is being blown out of proportion'? Internally things are different, but the culture of reverence for PSU Football is not gone.shafnutz05 wrote:That culture is gone, whether or not football is played
-
- AHL All-Star
- Posts: 5956
- Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am
- Location: Admin wrote:Rooting for the Flyers is not allowed here. Seriously.
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
Well said.bhaw wrote:So who's opinion can we trust if not someone who was trained to investigate much bigger and much better covered up things than this is not good enough? Some of you are ridiculous. Freeh was self-serving? Lol. He had no vested interest to have it come out one way or the other. His reputation and future isn't determined by how well he can pin it on someone(s).
I guarantee that the only way some people like malkinshair will consider it "truth" is if it's determined that everything was totally cool and no one at PSU was involved. Everything else is opinion and that's the only truth, right?
-
- AHL All-Star
- Posts: 5956
- Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am
- Location: Admin wrote:Rooting for the Flyers is not allowed here. Seriously.
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
So punish the school and NOT the football program?!BurghersAndDogsSports wrote: Find a way to punish the finances of the school or to redistribute the profits. I am ok with that.
-
- NHL Healthy Scratch
- Posts: 12037
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:33 pm
- Location: Forever in blue jeans
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
Yep. Blame everything on the dead guy and just give everyone what they want. Bring down PSU cause were all jealous haters.Rocco wrote:People are going to believe whatever they want to believe. Freeh's report said exactly what the majority of people wanted it to say, and the only people capable of rebutting his conclusions are dead or indicted and therefore unable to say otherwise.bhaw wrote:So who's opinion can we trust if not someone who was trained to investigate much bigger and much better covered up things than this is not good enough? Some of you are ridiculous. Freeh was self-serving? Lol. He had no vested interest to have it come out one way or the other. His reputation and future isn't determined by how well he can pin it on someone(s).
I guarantee that the only way some people like malkinshair will consider it "truth" is if it's determined that everything was totally cool and no one at PSU was involved. Everything else is opinion and that's the only truth, right?
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 37197
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:34 am
- Location: Manor Farm
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
"Jealous haters" are your words, not mine, though there's no denying the level of enjoyment some people have had in laughing at PSU over this. Putting as much as possible on Paterno provides a clean solution for all involved and there's no one capable of or willing to disprove it.DudeMan2766 wrote:Yep. Blame everything on the dead guy and just give everyone what they want. Bring down PSU cause were all jealous haters.Rocco wrote:People are going to believe whatever they want to believe. Freeh's report said exactly what the majority of people wanted it to say, and the only people capable of rebutting his conclusions are dead or indicted and therefore unable to say otherwise.bhaw wrote:So who's opinion can we trust if not someone who was trained to investigate much bigger and much better covered up things than this is not good enough? Some of you are ridiculous. Freeh was self-serving? Lol. He had no vested interest to have it come out one way or the other. His reputation and future isn't determined by how well he can pin it on someone(s).
I guarantee that the only way some people like malkinshair will consider it "truth" is if it's determined that everything was totally cool and no one at PSU was involved. Everything else is opinion and that's the only truth, right?
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 37197
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:34 am
- Location: Manor Farm
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--sou ... andal.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
So because 22 people say so, Emmert is going to sand-blast PSU on his own without an actual enforcement investigation or an actual hearing for PSU. This is a good thing?
So because 22 people say so, Emmert is going to sand-blast PSU on his own without an actual enforcement investigation or an actual hearing for PSU. This is a good thing?
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 28740
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:00 pm
- Location: From Hockey Siberia to Hockey Hell
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
Clean? Maybe personally, but I can't imagine how much money the team loses from sponsorship, boosters, etc by pinning all on the guy who built the football program and a good chunk of the school. Pinning it on Joe seems like the worst option for PSU out of all the potential options other than there won't be much of a fight. Sorry Rocco, in terms of "clean solutions" pinning it on JoePa is probably the least clean you could come up with. Of course, it's probably easier for people to blame it on conspiracy than the fact that it may have actually happened.
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 28740
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:00 pm
- Location: From Hockey Siberia to Hockey Hell
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
Absolutely not. NCAA shouldn't be involved until everything else is wrapped up. They are going to get the Roger Goodell reputation: "Do as I please, when I please."Rocco wrote:http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--sou ... andal.html
So because 22 people say so, Emmert is going to sand-blast PSU on his own without an actual enforcement investigation or an actual hearing for PSU. This is a good thing?
-
- NHL Healthy Scratch
- Posts: 12037
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:33 pm
- Location: Forever in blue jeans
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
I think enjoyment sometimes is getting confused with people happy that the ones who caused and allowed this to happen are being dealt with and the legacy of a fraud is rightfully being destroyed. On top of that watching the apologists squirm and desperately try to spin things even when more and more damning info was being released. Saying "Freeh's report said exactly what the majority of people wanted it to say" to me sounds just like a backhanded way of discrediting it. More spin.Rocco wrote:"Jealous haters" are your words, not mine, though there's no denying the level of enjoyment some people have had in laughing at PSU over this. Putting as much as possible on Paterno provides a clean solution for all involved and there's no one capable of or willing to disprove it.DudeMan2766 wrote:Yep. Blame everything on the dead guy and just give everyone what they want. Bring down PSU cause were all jealous haters.Rocco wrote:People are going to believe whatever they want to believe. Freeh's report said exactly what the majority of people wanted it to say, and the only people capable of rebutting his conclusions are dead or indicted and therefore unable to say otherwise.bhaw wrote:So who's opinion can we trust if not someone who was trained to investigate much bigger and much better covered up things than this is not good enough? Some of you are ridiculous. Freeh was self-serving? Lol. He had no vested interest to have it come out one way or the other. His reputation and future isn't determined by how well he can pin it on someone(s).
I guarantee that the only way some people like malkinshair will consider it "truth" is if it's determined that everything was totally cool and no one at PSU was involved. Everything else is opinion and that's the only truth, right?
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 37197
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:34 am
- Location: Manor Farm
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
I'd say not having much of a fight is something noteworthy. That's why supposedly PSU won't appeal any penalties they get from Emmert pulling a Roger Goodell. So far anyone who's disagreed with the Freeh report or the conclusion that it's on Paterno has been condescendingly told to stop talking (which is ironic, because not talking was the problem here).bhaw wrote:Clean? Maybe personally, but I can't imagine how much money the team loses from sponsorship, boosters, etc by pinning all on the guy who built the football program and a good chunk of the school. Pinning it on Joe seems like the worst option for PSU out of all the potential options other than there won't be much of a fight. Sorry Rocco, in terms of "clean solutions" pinning it on JoePa is probably the least clean you could come up with. Of course, it's probably easier for people to blame it on conspiracy than the fact that it may have actually happened.
It's much cleaner to have it all pinned on one football coach who was in his position too long and grew too powerful than it is to have more people involved. After all, if Paterno was the problem and the only problem, Paterno's gone now so the problem is solved. There's a reason why the focal point of everything has been Paterno. And it's entirely possible everything about his involvement is true, and that he was the mastermind. It's also true that he gave sworn testimony saying otherwise and everything contradicting his testimony came out after his death. That's why I wrote that Paterno's last act for PSU will be to take as much blame for this as he can posthumously.
-
- ECHL'er
- Posts: 1243
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:27 pm
- Location: about 455 yards away...with a 2 iron, I think.
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
bhaw wrote:So who's opinion can we trust if not someone who was trained to investigate much bigger and much better covered up things than this is not good enough? Some of you are ridiculous. Freeh was self-serving? Lol. He had no vested interest to have it come out one way or the other. His reputation and future isn't determined by how well he can pin it on someone(s).
I guarantee that the only way some people like malkinshair will consider it "truth" is if it's determined that everything was totally cool and no one at PSU was involved. Everything else is opinion and that's the only truth, right?
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Again, I'm not defending these 4 people. I don't think they were blameless. I don't think that they knew nothing. I also don't think that they knew JS was raping little boys in their showers and decided to cover it up to keep a cash cow up and running. Did you read the Freeh report? What exists within that report that proves that last statement? 1 vague email?
As far as Freeh's opinion being self-serving...what do you think the reaction to him would've been had he reported he found 'nothing definitive'? I'm not saying that his conclusions were inaccurate. For all I know, he nailed it...but when you declare truth when you've connected dots with assumptions and 'most likelys', I have a time using that to determine an appropriate level of punishment.
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 28740
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:00 pm
- Location: From Hockey Siberia to Hockey Hell
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
There are a lot of people taking sick enjoyment out of it, but so what? The proper way to deal with that is to come up with conspiracy theories?
I was at CU when they get in trouble for the girls getting raped at recruitment parties. I had to deal with people enjoying that and mocking us while we played (tennis). Doesn't mean I pretended it didn't happen to compensate for their asinine jokes.
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
Absolutely. People make it sound like Freeh is some blogger.Saying "Freeh's report said exactly what the majority of people wanted it to say" to me sounds just like a backhanded way of discrediting it.
-
- NHL Healthy Scratch
- Posts: 12037
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:33 pm
- Location: Forever in blue jeans
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
You have got to be kidding me.malkinshair wrote:I also don't think that they knew JS was raping little boys in their showers and decided to cover it up to keep a cash cow up and running. .bhaw wrote:So who's opinion can we trust if not someone who was trained to investigate much bigger and much better covered up things than this is not good enough? Some of you are ridiculous. Freeh was self-serving? Lol. He had no vested interest to have it come out one way or the other. His reputation and future isn't determined by how well he can pin it on someone(s).
I guarantee that the only way some people like malkinshair will consider it "truth" is if it's determined that everything was totally cool and no one at PSU was involved. Everything else is opinion and that's the only truth, right?
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 37197
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:34 am
- Location: Manor Farm
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
You're naive if you think there aren't people who enjoy that this happened to PSU. And it's understandable given how Paterno and PSU occupied moral high ground that people now would delight in pointing the finger back at PSU, though it doesn't make it better.DudeMan2766 wrote:I think enjoyment sometimes is getting confused with people happy that the ones who caused and allowed this to happen are being dealt with and the legacy of a fraud is rightfully being destroyed. On top of that watching the apologists squirm and desperately try to spin things even when more and more damning info was being released. Saying "Freeh's report said exactly what the majority of people wanted it to say" to me sounds just like a backhanded way of discrediting it. More spin.
So basically anyone who asks questions here is an apologist who is deploying the haters defense? You're making my point for me better than I could make it. Freeh's report threw the majority of blame on the one person completely incapable of rebutting it. That can't be disputed. His conclusions could very well be true, but they are not legal fact. Freeh said as much. Yet they're treated as fact.
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 28740
- Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:00 pm
- Location: From Hockey Siberia to Hockey Hell
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
I don't think anyone has used the word "mastermind" and JoePa together. Freeh also didn't say, in any way, that JoePa was the ring leader. It actually blamed all those guys equally. So I'm not sure how the report points to Joe as being the only guy involved.Rocco wrote:I'd say not having much of a fight is something noteworthy. That's why supposedly PSU won't appeal any penalties they get from Emmert pulling a Roger Goodell. So far anyone who's disagreed with the Freeh report or the conclusion that it's on Paterno has been condescendingly told to stop talking (which is ironic, because not talking was the problem here).bhaw wrote:Clean? Maybe personally, but I can't imagine how much money the team loses from sponsorship, boosters, etc by pinning all on the guy who built the football program and a good chunk of the school. Pinning it on Joe seems like the worst option for PSU out of all the potential options other than there won't be much of a fight. Sorry Rocco, in terms of "clean solutions" pinning it on JoePa is probably the least clean you could come up with. Of course, it's probably easier for people to blame it on conspiracy than the fact that it may have actually happened.
It's much cleaner to have it all pinned on one football coach who was in his position too long and grew too powerful than it is to have more people involved. After all, if Paterno was the problem and the only problem, Paterno's gone now so the problem is solved. There's a reason why the focal point of everything has been Paterno. And it's entirely possible everything about his involvement is true, and that he was the mastermind. It's also true that he gave sworn testimony saying otherwise and everything contradicting his testimony came out after his death. That's why I wrote that Paterno's last act for PSU will be to take as much blame for this as he can posthumously.
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 19694
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2011 5:11 pm
- Location: BOBROVSKY!!!
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
I am going to run that image into the ground if you keep this up.malkinshair wrote: I also don't think that they knew JS was raping little boys in their showers and decided to cover it up to keep a cash cow up and running.MRandall25 wrote:
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 35917
- Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 5:29 pm
- Location: Pingvin na vsyu zhizn
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
The PSU administration failed to explore if, in fact convicted child abuser, coach jerry sandusky,(JS) was using their facilities for abuse. Their only thought was towards their coach, the program, reputation, and football.
They didn't cut Sandusky's lifeline to penn state; from using Penn State as the carrot dangling in front of children. They failed to do right by the victims.
They didn't cut Sandusky's lifeline to penn state; from using Penn State as the carrot dangling in front of children. They failed to do right by the victims.
-
- ECHL'er
- Posts: 1243
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 10:27 pm
- Location: about 455 yards away...with a 2 iron, I think.
Re: Jerry Sandusky Trial
Funny, but my eyes are wide open on this issue. I'm looking for who knew what and when. I want reasons for their behavior, if they knew definitely what was going on. I want to hear from the people involved before passing judgement. I want the Feds to determine whether Schultz and Curley perjured themselves. I want the NCAA to initiate their own due process before determining what punishment should be handed down. I want the media to do their job. What, exactly, is wrong with that line of thinking? Since when is wanting all the facts on the table considered burying your head in the sand?MRandall25 wrote:I feel like now is a good time to re-hash this.