Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 25041
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:34 pm
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
You can only use that gif if you're not in the extreme minority
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 17885
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:24 am
- Location: The card table
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
So I see Louis Freeh has joined LGP.shmenguin wrote:And yet nothing changes the factual accuracy that paterno and co. enabled child rape.
![Popcorn :pop:](./images/smilies/popcorn.gif)
(Sandusky was acquitted of that charge in the McQueary incident -- so even if in your opinion Paterno could have done more (which by law he could not), it still makes your statement false on its face)
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 25041
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:34 pm
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
this thread occasionally needs brought back down to earth. i'm happy to do that.
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 25041
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:34 pm
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
also, this is a funny statement.relantel wrote:so even if in your opinion Paterno could have done more (which by law he could not)
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 25043
- Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:03 pm
- Location: Good night, sweet prince...
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
I don't really see how either side can stake full claim of being right in this situation... Joe Paterno knew something. The extent of which he knew is unclear. He had to have at least known that Spanier, Schultz and Curley were doing something strange. On the other hand there are the people that have totally bought into Paterno knowing every detail of the cover-up or even actively participating in it. They've eaten up the Freeh report like it was The Gospel according to Louis. As with most things, the truth is likely somewhere in the middle, but carry on...
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 20587
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:31 am
- Location: Shutter Island
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
shmenguin wrote:You can only use that gif if you're not in the extreme minority
![Image](http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120904161949/victorious/images/1/12/Jlaw-okay.gif)
-
- NHL Healthy Scratch
- Posts: 12037
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:33 pm
- Location: Forever in blue jeans
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
That's the thing tho. I don't think many people believe Joe was holding these secret meetings like a super villain scheming how to destroy evidence, etc. I even cringe a bit when I hear some people (Madden) say, "Joe enabled child rape." No one believes he was handing Sandusky keys to the facility on the down low, but he knew something was going on, they all did, and did turned a blind eye. The backlash was and is occurring when people like SDD have been going out the way to discredit anything that paints Joe in a bad light, but its strange how no one cares about Spanier, Shultz, or Curley's reputations. No one cares. Joe was the only person on that entire campus that didn't know anything.count2infinity wrote:I don't really see how either side can stake full claim of being right in this situation... Joe Paterno knew something. The extent of which he knew is unclear. He had to have at least known that Spanier, Schultz and Curley were doing something strange. On the other hand there are the people that have totally bought into Paterno knowing every detail of the cover-up or even actively participating in it. They've eaten up the Freeh report like it was The Gospel according to Louis. As with most things, the truth is likely somewhere in the middle, but carry on...
-
- AHL All-Star
- Posts: 7478
- Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:35 pm
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
Exactly. There are some times when you have to go above the law if something that heinous is happening. A man of JoePa's former stature would have been heralded as a hero - even more so than he already was if that's even possible - if he was the one who spearheaded the campaign to take down a child rapist.shmenguin wrote:also, this is a funny statement.relantel wrote:so even if in your opinion Paterno could have done more (which by law he could not)
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 25041
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:34 pm
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
he didn't need to go above the law to do more.
-
- AHL All-Star
- Posts: 7478
- Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:35 pm
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
Valid point.
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 17885
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:24 am
- Location: The card table
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
So you would advocate breaking the law? That would have jeopardized the entire prosecution.Crankshaft wrote:Exactly. There are some times when you have to go above the law if something that heinous is happening. A man of JoePa's former stature would have been heralded as a hero - even more so than he already was if that's even possible - if he was the one who spearheaded the campaign to take down a child rapist.shmenguin wrote:also, this is a funny statement.relantel wrote:so even if in your opinion Paterno could have done more (which by law he could not)
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 20587
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:31 am
- Location: Shutter Island
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
I have defended Spanier, Curley, and Schultz as well. There is less evidence that Paterno did anything wrong then they did, but Paterno gets the most focus because he was the biggest name of the four.
When the majority, if not all, of the evidence against Spanier, Curley, and Schultz, is from the Freeh report, and Freeh has a history of questionable investigations, not only with the FBI but also now as his own entity, you should then question the whole narrative that these guys knew and/or conspired to cover up Sandusky's actions.
When the majority, if not all, of the evidence against Spanier, Curley, and Schultz, is from the Freeh report, and Freeh has a history of questionable investigations, not only with the FBI but also now as his own entity, you should then question the whole narrative that these guys knew and/or conspired to cover up Sandusky's actions.
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 28922
- Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:10 am
- Location: Pittsburgh
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
So is the idea that the ginger didn't see anything or wasn't specific enough about what was going for Paterno to be responsible?
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 28922
- Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:10 am
- Location: Pittsburgh
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
The grand jury investigation was before the Freeh Report..no?Sam's Drunk Dog wrote:I have defended Spanier, Curley, and Schultz as well. There is less evidence that Paterno did anything wrong then they did, but Paterno gets the most focus because he was the biggest name of the four.
When the majority, if not all, of the evidence against Spanier, Curley, and Schultz, is from the Freeh report, and Freeh has a history of questionable investigations, not only with the FBI but also now as his own entity, you should then question the whole narrative that these guys knew and/or conspired to cover up Sandusky's actions.
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 20587
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:31 am
- Location: Shutter Island
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
The grand jury investigation focused on Sandusky and didn't include the emails that were used in the Freeh report. Also the language regarding what McQuery saw was greatly exaggerated in the Grand Jury report compared to what McQuery stated he actually saw in subsequent testimony (pretrial hearing for Schultz, Spanier, and Curley).Troy Loney wrote:The grand jury investigation was before the Freeh Report..no?Sam's Drunk Dog wrote:I have defended Spanier, Curley, and Schultz as well. There is less evidence that Paterno did anything wrong then they did, but Paterno gets the most focus because he was the biggest name of the four.
When the majority, if not all, of the evidence against Spanier, Curley, and Schultz, is from the Freeh report, and Freeh has a history of questionable investigations, not only with the FBI but also now as his own entity, you should then question the whole narrative that these guys knew and/or conspired to cover up Sandusky's actions.
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 20587
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:31 am
- Location: Shutter Island
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
If McQuery wasn't specific about what he saw, it should make a difference between following the law and university policy or going above and beyond that.Troy Loney wrote:So is the idea that the ginger didn't see anything or wasn't specific enough about what was going for Paterno to be responsible?
Don't you think it is odd for Paterno to have testified that it was something sexual and for Schultz, Curley, and Spanier to not testify in that way? If it truly was a conspiracy wouldn't they all be on the same page?
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 25041
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:34 pm
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
and remember folks, when people at PSU simply use the moniker "Coach" in an e-mail, they aren't referring to Paterno. and when Paterno admitted to hearing about funny business with sandusky and some little kid, he actually didn't admit that because things and stuff.
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 17885
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:24 am
- Location: The card table
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
Paterno was always "Joe".shmenguin wrote:and remember folks, when people at PSU simply use the moniker "Coach" in an e-mail, they aren't referring to Paterno. and when Paterno admitted to hearing about funny business with sandusky and some little kid, he actually didn't admit that because things and stuff.
-
- AHL All-Star
- Posts: 7478
- Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:35 pm
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
SDD - what is your goal with continuing this conversation?
Are you trying to convince people that JoePa and the administration acted appropriately? Even if the Freeh report had flaws, does that take away from what actually happened? Most of the football sanctions were raised.
What do you want to see happen with this situation?
Are you trying to convince people that JoePa and the administration acted appropriately? Even if the Freeh report had flaws, does that take away from what actually happened? Most of the football sanctions were raised.
What do you want to see happen with this situation?
-
- NHL Second Liner
- Posts: 51889
- Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 11:13 pm
- Location: دعنا نذهب طيور البطريق
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 25041
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:34 pm
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
correct. there's no reason i can think of why someone would refer to him as coach.relantel wrote:Paterno was always "Joe".shmenguin wrote:and remember folks, when people at PSU simply use the moniker "Coach" in an e-mail, they aren't referring to Paterno. and when Paterno admitted to hearing about funny business with sandusky and some little kid, he actually didn't admit that because things and stuff.
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 25043
- Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:03 pm
- Location: Good night, sweet prince...
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
I think this is what he's trying to do... he wants to know and for everyone else to know what actually happened. He feels the story laid out by the media is not what actually happened. That's all well and good, but we're never going to know. Ever. Paterno is dead, Sandusky... well who's going to believe a word out of his mouth, Curley, Schultz, and Spanier aren't going to say a word. Paterno never used e-mail or any sort of traceable communication. The 100% true story is never going to come out.Crankshaft wrote:does that take away from what actually happened?
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 20587
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:31 am
- Location: Shutter Island
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
I'd like for people to at least question what they have heard in the media, and dig into the details, and hopefully see that there wasn't a culture at PSU that would put football above the well-being of children.Crankshaft wrote:SDD - what is your goal with continuing this conversation?
Are you trying to convince people that JoePa and the administration acted appropriately? Even if the Freeh report had flaws, does that take away from what actually happened? Most of the football sanctions were raised.
What do you want to see happen with this situation?
I agree we don't need to debate this again. I realize I'm not going to change a lot of your minds, but if I find an article that is relevant to the thread, I'm to continue to post it here.
-
- NHL Third Liner
- Posts: 25043
- Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:03 pm
- Location: Good night, sweet prince...
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
It was a handful of people responsible... I don't necessarily think anyone (save for Mark Madden) actually thinks the PSU as a whole condones the raping or molestation of children, and if they truly do feel that way, I think it says more about how absurd they may be than anything else. This relentless crusade; however, to try to convince people Joe didn't do anything wrong, I mean, come on, it's over. Joe could have and likely should have done more.
-
- NHL Fourth Liner
- Posts: 20587
- Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:31 am
- Location: Shutter Island
Re: Jerry Sandusky and Related Trials
Why 'Happy Valley' May Change Your Mind About the Penn State Scandal
At a New York screening last night, NBC sportscaster Bob Costas introduced Amir Bar-Lev's latest documentary on the Penn State scandal and challenged us all to open our minds to all perspectives of the events that occurred.
Bar-Lev's film aims to expose the deep complexities and moral ambiguity of a narrative that the public didn't seem to fully understand at the time.
http://www.indiewire.com/article/why-ha ... l-20141031" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Costas prefaced the film by explaining, "What much of America and what much of the media decided was the truth a couple of years ago is largely in doubt right now. There are so many areas of gray. There are so many areas of nuance that were passed over. There are so many questions as yet unanswered."