|
It's pretty simple. JoePa heard the news a long time ago, and he should have dealt some vigilante justice and rape Sandusky.
Kidding aside though. The media/public needs a punching bag; its how the system works. Arguing over facts and speculation is irrelevant. In all outcomes JoePa is a tarnished legacy, and the whole situation blows major donkey dick.
Oh and btw, all those flaming the name of JoePa; you realize its almost the equivalent of saying that the Victims(3-5) are also to blame, because they were in the knowledge.
|
On November 11 2011 03:43 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:14 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:05 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:59 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. And It's absurd to think that he didn't know why Sandursky, under his staff during the 98 allegation and known as one of Joepa's closest pals, suddenly retired and was banned from campus after he was tabbed as being JoePa's successor. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally Oh hey look, even MORE speculation. Keep piling it up buddy. You know he knew about the 2002 case, now tell me how you know he knew about the 98 case. Don't bother if all you have is speculation. It's becoming clear that's where all your thoughts come from. Good thing you're not a judge. Everything else here isn't speculation: On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally So, your answer to whether or not he is morally responsible for the above would be...??? Risen, are you gonna answer this or no?
I thought I had, oh wait I did.
On November 11 2011 03:17 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:09 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 03:03 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:57 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:54 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:41 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:38 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:35 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:29 stokes17 wrote:
[quote]
Right if Joe was interested in the facts getting out he would have gone to the authorities so a real investigation could have occurred. Instead he kept it in house. He did this because he wanted to protect the Penn State Football Program's reputation (don't even try to say he could have had fear of losing his job)
His failure to report to the authorities the possibility of a minor being raped, is why he is morally at fault. For some reason the head of the campus police force isn't authoritative enough for you. This is where I think our disagreement comes in. I'm sorry that we have to disagree over such a matter. Of course that's not enough. Joe Paterno knew the people in power at the university would place protecting the football program's perfect record over truly investigating the allegations. He decided to take part in this protection. He is morally responsible. He KNEW that? Really? He KNEW what they would do? No, now you're talking for him as if you're omnipotent, and you're not a god. Edit: Here's an example. Let's say I'm an intern where you work. I go to your boss and say X person raped a kid two days ago, I saw it. You're saying your boss should just straight fire you, sever all contact with you, and report you to the police. Cool man. That's awesome. I don't think that's what should happen, though. No that is not even close man. Your example is also awful. Joe is not some intern at some "work" He is Joe Fucking Paterno. If he or his bosses went to the police this would never have happened. But They didn't they pushed it under the rug to protect the reputation of the program. And unless you are going to argue that Joe didn't expect them to do said pushing... he is as morally responsible as they are. There was no fact finding, there was no investigation. Everyone realized if these allegations got out the reputation of the Penn State Football Program would be at risk. So they kept it internal. I never said that PSU should have assumed what McQuerey said was fact... but I am saying you should call the god damn police when there is a report of sexual misconduct between an old man and a young boy in a shower. How can you disagree with that? I didn't say Paterno was an intern. MCQUEARY is the intern in my example. All I see is a bunch of speculation in your post. Oh, everyone KNEW X would happen if Y got out. Everyone KNEW it. Bro, everyone knew the PSU football program's reputation would be tainted if it got out that Sandusky was raping boys in their facilities. You seriously can't be arguing that? And to say that those in power at PSU would take protecting their program over protecting the children is not speculation.... that's literally what happened. The only out you have is if you are going to say Joe didn't know the administrators would cover up the allegations instead of calling the police. That is my out. That's what I've been going on about this whole time. How is he supposed to know that they would value the reputation of the Penn State football team over the protection of a little boy? He ISN'T. How is Paterno supposed to know that when he reported it to his boss and the head of campus police that they'd cover it up? Maybe he was told by his superiors that the proper channels had been informed, that an investigation was already underway. Then again, maybe he was in on it the whole time. Maybe he's the one who suggested they cover it up. Guess what? You don't know shit about what happened and you're passing your speculation off as fact. How do you know ANYTHING. You don't know jack shit. You speculate about everything and consider it "fact". I'm just sitting here calling bullshit when you and everyone else here is trying so desperately to pass this stuff off as fact. You're right I don't know for a fact that Joe knew his bosses would cover it up. But then why was no action taken against McQuerey for falsely accusing a man of such a heinous thing? Joe certainly would certainly take action against some freaking GA who is accusing his friend of 30 years of rape? Unless, keeping McQuerey on board was part of the cover up. While there is no way Joe is legally responsible here, at least I, personally, am going to hold him morally responsible. He chose to let the issue disappear (how can action be taken against neither McQuerey or Sandusky? ) instead of pursuing it. He took the easy way out here. He should have done more. Oh, fuck that shit. Get off your high horse and consider the possibilities. How are you going to take action? Please tell me how Paterno is supposed to handle this situation. They're in a grey area. As far as I know Paterno was only told (as the poster right above you stated) of touching and horsing around. Maybe the investigation discovered that the actions were inappropriate and Sandusky has to be banned from being around little kids. If that's the case, the GA hasn't lied about anything as far as Paterno knows. Sandusky is punished as much as can be for "horsing around" and action has been taken.
Applies to both of you since you made the exact same point.
Edit: Quoting this for people who can't be bothered to look at the bottom of the previous page.
On November 11 2011 03:42 Risen wrote:
To reinforce. I don't give a shit about anyone else in this case beyond the victims. The fact that the higher ups at Penn State covered this shit up is horrifying. I hope they're charged with as much as can be, and I hope Sandusky is locked in a small cell the rest of his life. Having said that, until I see evidence of actual misconduct on Paternos part, or conduct that would lead me to believe he participated in the coverup, or conduct that would lead me to believe he did not do all that was required of him by the law, I will stand firm in my conviction that he is being lynched unjustly by an unruly mob of people acting with their hearts not their heads.
|
I don't get it. Assuming the grand jury is correct, then Paterno informed the AD and the VP in charge of Campus police.
What else is he supposed to do? He did not witness the crimes himself so he is in no position to even know for sure that Sandusky is guilty and Sandusky was no longer on his staff or working for him.
These sort of allegations were old hat. State College had already failed to even charge Sandusky the last time allegations are made. There is a screwed up system here, but Paterno is not part of it.
There is a reason that the grand jury has charged the AD and VP and not Paterno.
Paterno could have gone to the media to provide a second hand account of what might or might not have happened.
He could have called the city or state police instead of just the head of the university police.
There are things he could have done, but how are we to know it would have helped.
Sandusky is free as of this moment! He is still not behind bars. That is a problem with the system not Paterno.
|
On November 11 2011 03:42 Risen wrote:
To reinforce. I don't give a shit about anyone else in this case beyond the victims. The fact that the higher ups at Penn State covered this shit up is horrifying. I hope they're charged with as much as can be, and I hope Sandusky is locked in a small cell the rest of his life. Having said that, until I see evidence of actual misconduct on Paternos part, or conduct that would lead me to believe he participated in the coverup, or conduct that would lead me to believe he did not do all that was required of him by the law, I will stand firm in my conviction that he is being lynched unjustly by an unruly mob of people acting with their hearts not their heads.
He is most likely not legally at fault. I've said that numerous times. It is still the opinion of the general public, or at least the media, and the board of trustees that Paterno did fail a moral obligation.
|
On November 11 2011 03:45 stokes17 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:42 Risen wrote:
To reinforce. I don't give a shit about anyone else in this case beyond the victims. The fact that the higher ups at Penn State covered this shit up is horrifying. I hope they're charged with as much as can be, and I hope Sandusky is locked in a small cell the rest of his life. Having said that, until I see evidence of actual misconduct on Paternos part, or conduct that would lead me to believe he participated in the coverup, or conduct that would lead me to believe he did not do all that was required of him by the law, I will stand firm in my conviction that he is being lynched unjustly by an unruly mob of people acting with their hearts not their heads. He is most likely not legally at fault. I've said that numerous times. It is still the opinion of the general public, or at least the media, and the board of trustees that Paterno did fail a moral obligation.
I think he did all that he could do. You don't. I think that's where this discussion will end. You still haven't brought me any evidence that he knew about anything except the 2002 incident in which he reported the issue to his boss and the head of campus police.
I say he fulfilled his moral obligation there, you say he hasn't. The end.
|
The response made by the Board of Trustees is always in the best interest of the University. At the point of last night, they had to remove Paterno because of the media coverage of this scandal, and how many new organizations and their readers blamed Paterno for it. Their decision was to cut ties as quickly as possible in order to save some face for the University.
None of that proves that the Board felt that Paterno was at a moral fault or not. Strictly from a business standpoint firing Paterno was the correct decision.
|
I agree; standard political damage control. Distance yourself from the name in the media, start the spin game, and hope it blows over.
|
On November 11 2011 03:44 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:14 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:05 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:59 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. And It's absurd to think that he didn't know why Sandursky, under his staff during the 98 allegation and known as one of Joepa's closest pals, suddenly retired and was banned from campus after he was tabbed as being JoePa's successor. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally Oh hey look, even MORE speculation. Keep piling it up buddy. You know he knew about the 2002 case, now tell me how you know he knew about the 98 case. Don't bother if all you have is speculation. It's becoming clear that's where all your thoughts come from. Good thing you're not a judge. Everything else here isn't speculation: On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally So, your answer to whether or not he is morally responsible for the above would be...??? Risen, are you gonna answer this or no? I thought I had, oh wait I did. Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:17 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:09 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 03:03 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:57 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:54 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:41 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:38 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:35 Risen wrote:
[quote]
For some reason the head of the campus police force isn't authoritative enough for you. This is where I think our disagreement comes in. I'm sorry that we have to disagree over such a matter. Of course that's not enough. Joe Paterno knew the people in power at the university would place protecting the football program's perfect record over truly investigating the allegations. He decided to take part in this protection. He is morally responsible. He KNEW that? Really? He KNEW what they would do? No, now you're talking for him as if you're omnipotent, and you're not a god. Edit: Here's an example. Let's say I'm an intern where you work. I go to your boss and say X person raped a kid two days ago, I saw it. You're saying your boss should just straight fire you, sever all contact with you, and report you to the police. Cool man. That's awesome. I don't think that's what should happen, though. No that is not even close man. Your example is also awful. Joe is not some intern at some "work" He is Joe Fucking Paterno. If he or his bosses went to the police this would never have happened. But They didn't they pushed it under the rug to protect the reputation of the program. And unless you are going to argue that Joe didn't expect them to do said pushing... he is as morally responsible as they are. There was no fact finding, there was no investigation. Everyone realized if these allegations got out the reputation of the Penn State Football Program would be at risk. So they kept it internal. I never said that PSU should have assumed what McQuerey said was fact... but I am saying you should call the god damn police when there is a report of sexual misconduct between an old man and a young boy in a shower. How can you disagree with that? I didn't say Paterno was an intern. MCQUEARY is the intern in my example. All I see is a bunch of speculation in your post. Oh, everyone KNEW X would happen if Y got out. Everyone KNEW it. Bro, everyone knew the PSU football program's reputation would be tainted if it got out that Sandusky was raping boys in their facilities. You seriously can't be arguing that? And to say that those in power at PSU would take protecting their program over protecting the children is not speculation.... that's literally what happened. The only out you have is if you are going to say Joe didn't know the administrators would cover up the allegations instead of calling the police. That is my out. That's what I've been going on about this whole time. How is he supposed to know that they would value the reputation of the Penn State football team over the protection of a little boy? He ISN'T. How is Paterno supposed to know that when he reported it to his boss and the head of campus police that they'd cover it up? Maybe he was told by his superiors that the proper channels had been informed, that an investigation was already underway. Then again, maybe he was in on it the whole time. Maybe he's the one who suggested they cover it up. Guess what? You don't know shit about what happened and you're passing your speculation off as fact. How do you know ANYTHING. You don't know jack shit. You speculate about everything and consider it "fact". I'm just sitting here calling bullshit when you and everyone else here is trying so desperately to pass this stuff off as fact. You're right I don't know for a fact that Joe knew his bosses would cover it up. But then why was no action taken against McQuerey for falsely accusing a man of such a heinous thing? Joe certainly would certainly take action against some freaking GA who is accusing his friend of 30 years of rape? Unless, keeping McQuerey on board was part of the cover up. While there is no way Joe is legally responsible here, at least I, personally, am going to hold him morally responsible. He chose to let the issue disappear (how can action be taken against neither McQuerey or Sandusky? ) instead of pursuing it. He took the easy way out here. He should have done more. Oh, fuck that shit. Get off your high horse and consider the possibilities. How are you going to take action? Please tell me how Paterno is supposed to handle this situation. They're in a grey area. As far as I know Paterno was only told (as the poster right above you stated) of touching and horsing around. Maybe the investigation discovered that the actions were inappropriate and Sandusky has to be banned from being around little kids. If that's the case, the GA hasn't lied about anything as far as Paterno knows. Sandusky is punished as much as can be for "horsing around" and action has been taken. Applies to both of you since you made the exact same point. Edit: Quoting this for people who can't be bothered to look at the bottom of the previous page. Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:42 Risen wrote:
To reinforce. I don't give a shit about anyone else in this case beyond the victims. The fact that the higher ups at Penn State covered this shit up is horrifying. I hope they're charged with as much as can be, and I hope Sandusky is locked in a small cell the rest of his life. Having said that, until I see evidence of actual misconduct on Paternos part, or conduct that would lead me to believe he participated in the coverup, or conduct that would lead me to believe he did not do all that was required of him by the law, I will stand firm in my conviction that he is being lynched unjustly by an unruly mob of people acting with their hearts not their heads.
I'm not talking about legal. He's been cleared of that thus far. You asked if Paterno had a moral obligation to do something more, if he morally failed and I gave my reasons that he absolutely and you've yet to say anything to beyond cursing a whole lot and giving your shift button a lot of work
|
On November 11 2011 03:47 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:45 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 03:42 Risen wrote:
To reinforce. I don't give a shit about anyone else in this case beyond the victims. The fact that the higher ups at Penn State covered this shit up is horrifying. I hope they're charged with as much as can be, and I hope Sandusky is locked in a small cell the rest of his life. Having said that, until I see evidence of actual misconduct on Paternos part, or conduct that would lead me to believe he participated in the coverup, or conduct that would lead me to believe he did not do all that was required of him by the law, I will stand firm in my conviction that he is being lynched unjustly by an unruly mob of people acting with their hearts not their heads. He is most likely not legally at fault. I've said that numerous times. It is still the opinion of the general public, or at least the media, and the board of trustees that Paterno did fail a moral obligation. I think he did all that he could do. You don't. I think that's where this discussion will end. You still haven't brought me any evidence that he knew about anything except the 2002 incident in which he reported the issue to his boss and the head of campus police. I say he fulfilled his moral obligation there, you say he hasn't. The end.
Yea basically. I can agree to disagree.
|
On November 11 2011 03:53 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:14 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:05 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:59 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. And It's absurd to think that he didn't know why Sandursky, under his staff during the 98 allegation and known as one of Joepa's closest pals, suddenly retired and was banned from campus after he was tabbed as being JoePa's successor. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally Oh hey look, even MORE speculation. Keep piling it up buddy. You know he knew about the 2002 case, now tell me how you know he knew about the 98 case. Don't bother if all you have is speculation. It's becoming clear that's where all your thoughts come from. Good thing you're not a judge. Everything else here isn't speculation: On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally So, your answer to whether or not he is morally responsible for the above would be...??? Risen, are you gonna answer this or no? I thought I had, oh wait I did. On November 11 2011 03:17 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:09 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 03:03 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:57 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:54 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:41 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:38 stokes17 wrote:
[quote]
Of course that's not enough. Joe Paterno knew the people in power at the university would place protecting the football program's perfect record over truly investigating the allegations. He decided to take part in this protection. He is morally responsible. He KNEW that? Really? He KNEW what they would do? No, now you're talking for him as if you're omnipotent, and you're not a god. Edit: Here's an example. Let's say I'm an intern where you work. I go to your boss and say X person raped a kid two days ago, I saw it. You're saying your boss should just straight fire you, sever all contact with you, and report you to the police. Cool man. That's awesome. I don't think that's what should happen, though. No that is not even close man. Your example is also awful. Joe is not some intern at some "work" He is Joe Fucking Paterno. If he or his bosses went to the police this would never have happened. But They didn't they pushed it under the rug to protect the reputation of the program. And unless you are going to argue that Joe didn't expect them to do said pushing... he is as morally responsible as they are. There was no fact finding, there was no investigation. Everyone realized if these allegations got out the reputation of the Penn State Football Program would be at risk. So they kept it internal. I never said that PSU should have assumed what McQuerey said was fact... but I am saying you should call the god damn police when there is a report of sexual misconduct between an old man and a young boy in a shower. How can you disagree with that? I didn't say Paterno was an intern. MCQUEARY is the intern in my example. All I see is a bunch of speculation in your post. Oh, everyone KNEW X would happen if Y got out. Everyone KNEW it. Bro, everyone knew the PSU football program's reputation would be tainted if it got out that Sandusky was raping boys in their facilities. You seriously can't be arguing that? And to say that those in power at PSU would take protecting their program over protecting the children is not speculation.... that's literally what happened. The only out you have is if you are going to say Joe didn't know the administrators would cover up the allegations instead of calling the police. That is my out. That's what I've been going on about this whole time. How is he supposed to know that they would value the reputation of the Penn State football team over the protection of a little boy? He ISN'T. How is Paterno supposed to know that when he reported it to his boss and the head of campus police that they'd cover it up? Maybe he was told by his superiors that the proper channels had been informed, that an investigation was already underway. Then again, maybe he was in on it the whole time. Maybe he's the one who suggested they cover it up. Guess what? You don't know shit about what happened and you're passing your speculation off as fact. How do you know ANYTHING. You don't know jack shit. You speculate about everything and consider it "fact". I'm just sitting here calling bullshit when you and everyone else here is trying so desperately to pass this stuff off as fact. You're right I don't know for a fact that Joe knew his bosses would cover it up. But then why was no action taken against McQuerey for falsely accusing a man of such a heinous thing? Joe certainly would certainly take action against some freaking GA who is accusing his friend of 30 years of rape? Unless, keeping McQuerey on board was part of the cover up. While there is no way Joe is legally responsible here, at least I, personally, am going to hold him morally responsible. He chose to let the issue disappear (how can action be taken against neither McQuerey or Sandusky? ) instead of pursuing it. He took the easy way out here. He should have done more. Oh, fuck that shit. Get off your high horse and consider the possibilities. How are you going to take action? Please tell me how Paterno is supposed to handle this situation. They're in a grey area. As far as I know Paterno was only told (as the poster right above you stated) of touching and horsing around. Maybe the investigation discovered that the actions were inappropriate and Sandusky has to be banned from being around little kids. If that's the case, the GA hasn't lied about anything as far as Paterno knows. Sandusky is punished as much as can be for "horsing around" and action has been taken. Applies to both of you since you made the exact same point. Edit: Quoting this for people who can't be bothered to look at the bottom of the previous page. On November 11 2011 03:42 Risen wrote:
To reinforce. I don't give a shit about anyone else in this case beyond the victims. The fact that the higher ups at Penn State covered this shit up is horrifying. I hope they're charged with as much as can be, and I hope Sandusky is locked in a small cell the rest of his life. Having said that, until I see evidence of actual misconduct on Paternos part, or conduct that would lead me to believe he participated in the coverup, or conduct that would lead me to believe he did not do all that was required of him by the law, I will stand firm in my conviction that he is being lynched unjustly by an unruly mob of people acting with their hearts not their heads. I'm not talking about legal. He's been cleared of that thus far. You asked if Paterno had a moral obligation to do something more, if he morally failed and I gave my reasons that he absolutely and you've yet to say anything to beyond cursing a whole lot and giving your shift button a lot of work
As I previously stated, I think informing the police and your boss is enough. You and many others don't. The end.
|
On November 11 2011 03:55 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:53 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:14 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:05 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:59 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. And It's absurd to think that he didn't know why Sandursky, under his staff during the 98 allegation and known as one of Joepa's closest pals, suddenly retired and was banned from campus after he was tabbed as being JoePa's successor. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally Oh hey look, even MORE speculation. Keep piling it up buddy. You know he knew about the 2002 case, now tell me how you know he knew about the 98 case. Don't bother if all you have is speculation. It's becoming clear that's where all your thoughts come from. Good thing you're not a judge. Everything else here isn't speculation: On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally So, your answer to whether or not he is morally responsible for the above would be...??? Risen, are you gonna answer this or no? I thought I had, oh wait I did. On November 11 2011 03:17 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:09 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 03:03 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:57 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:54 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:41 Risen wrote:
[quote]
He KNEW that? Really? He KNEW what they would do? No, now you're talking for him as if you're omnipotent, and you're not a god.
Edit: Here's an example. Let's say I'm an intern where you work. I go to your boss and say X person raped a kid two days ago, I saw it.
You're saying your boss should just straight fire you, sever all contact with you, and report you to the police. Cool man. That's awesome.
I don't think that's what should happen, though. No that is not even close man. Your example is also awful. Joe is not some intern at some "work" He is Joe Fucking Paterno. If he or his bosses went to the police this would never have happened. But They didn't they pushed it under the rug to protect the reputation of the program. And unless you are going to argue that Joe didn't expect them to do said pushing... he is as morally responsible as they are. There was no fact finding, there was no investigation. Everyone realized if these allegations got out the reputation of the Penn State Football Program would be at risk. So they kept it internal. I never said that PSU should have assumed what McQuerey said was fact... but I am saying you should call the god damn police when there is a report of sexual misconduct between an old man and a young boy in a shower. How can you disagree with that? I didn't say Paterno was an intern. MCQUEARY is the intern in my example. All I see is a bunch of speculation in your post. Oh, everyone KNEW X would happen if Y got out. Everyone KNEW it. Bro, everyone knew the PSU football program's reputation would be tainted if it got out that Sandusky was raping boys in their facilities. You seriously can't be arguing that? And to say that those in power at PSU would take protecting their program over protecting the children is not speculation.... that's literally what happened. The only out you have is if you are going to say Joe didn't know the administrators would cover up the allegations instead of calling the police. That is my out. That's what I've been going on about this whole time. How is he supposed to know that they would value the reputation of the Penn State football team over the protection of a little boy? He ISN'T. How is Paterno supposed to know that when he reported it to his boss and the head of campus police that they'd cover it up? Maybe he was told by his superiors that the proper channels had been informed, that an investigation was already underway. Then again, maybe he was in on it the whole time. Maybe he's the one who suggested they cover it up. Guess what? You don't know shit about what happened and you're passing your speculation off as fact. How do you know ANYTHING. You don't know jack shit. You speculate about everything and consider it "fact". I'm just sitting here calling bullshit when you and everyone else here is trying so desperately to pass this stuff off as fact. You're right I don't know for a fact that Joe knew his bosses would cover it up. But then why was no action taken against McQuerey for falsely accusing a man of such a heinous thing? Joe certainly would certainly take action against some freaking GA who is accusing his friend of 30 years of rape? Unless, keeping McQuerey on board was part of the cover up. While there is no way Joe is legally responsible here, at least I, personally, am going to hold him morally responsible. He chose to let the issue disappear (how can action be taken against neither McQuerey or Sandusky? ) instead of pursuing it. He took the easy way out here. He should have done more. Oh, fuck that shit. Get off your high horse and consider the possibilities. How are you going to take action? Please tell me how Paterno is supposed to handle this situation. They're in a grey area. As far as I know Paterno was only told (as the poster right above you stated) of touching and horsing around. Maybe the investigation discovered that the actions were inappropriate and Sandusky has to be banned from being around little kids. If that's the case, the GA hasn't lied about anything as far as Paterno knows. Sandusky is punished as much as can be for "horsing around" and action has been taken. Applies to both of you since you made the exact same point. Edit: Quoting this for people who can't be bothered to look at the bottom of the previous page. On November 11 2011 03:42 Risen wrote:
To reinforce. I don't give a shit about anyone else in this case beyond the victims. The fact that the higher ups at Penn State covered this shit up is horrifying. I hope they're charged with as much as can be, and I hope Sandusky is locked in a small cell the rest of his life. Having said that, until I see evidence of actual misconduct on Paternos part, or conduct that would lead me to believe he participated in the coverup, or conduct that would lead me to believe he did not do all that was required of him by the law, I will stand firm in my conviction that he is being lynched unjustly by an unruly mob of people acting with their hearts not their heads. I'm not talking about legal. He's been cleared of that thus far. You asked if Paterno had a moral obligation to do something more, if he morally failed and I gave my reasons that he absolutely and you've yet to say anything to beyond cursing a whole lot and giving your shift button a lot of work As I previously stated, I think informing the police and your boss is enough. You and many others don't. The end.
Stop treating campus police like the actual police. Idn if you aren't familiar with the how public universities work in America. But the campus police =/= the real police. Not even close.
Joe Paterno DID NOT report what he knew to the Police. That is why is he morally at fault.
|
Can't really make a judgement on morality until we know the literal words that he heard from the witness.
Imagine this report to the actual state police:
"Yeah so my GA saw one of my fellow coaching staff showering (in open showers) with a younger male touching and horsing around! Get that mothafucka in prison!!"
edit: I meant to illustrate that the above statement doesn't exactly hold the same weight as "Yeah so my GA witnessed first hand Sandusky having anal intercourse with an underage boy."
|
On November 11 2011 04:03 tronix wrote:
Can't really make a judgement on morality until we know the literal words that he heard from the witness.
Imagine this report to the actual state police:
"Yeah so my GA saw one of my fellow coaching staff showering (in open showers) with a younger male touching and horsing around! Get that mothafucka in prison!!"
Um, you are aware the younger male in question is a 10 year old? So yea I think one can argue, pretty easily, that any fondling, touching, or horsing around between a 60 year old and 10 year old, naked in a shower is something worth reporting.
Yes you should get that "mothafucka" in jail. And yes a failure to report that leaves one morally responsible.
|
On November 11 2011 03:58 stokes17 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:55 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:53 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:14 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:05 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:59 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. And It's absurd to think that he didn't know why Sandursky, under his staff during the 98 allegation and known as one of Joepa's closest pals, suddenly retired and was banned from campus after he was tabbed as being JoePa's successor. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally Oh hey look, even MORE speculation. Keep piling it up buddy. You know he knew about the 2002 case, now tell me how you know he knew about the 98 case. Don't bother if all you have is speculation. It's becoming clear that's where all your thoughts come from. Good thing you're not a judge. Everything else here isn't speculation: On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally So, your answer to whether or not he is morally responsible for the above would be...??? Risen, are you gonna answer this or no? I thought I had, oh wait I did. On November 11 2011 03:17 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:09 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 03:03 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:57 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:54 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 stokes17 wrote:
[quote]
No that is not even close man. Your example is also awful.
Joe is not some intern at some "work" He is Joe Fucking Paterno. If he or his bosses went to the police this would never have happened. But They didn't they pushed it under the rug to protect the reputation of the program. And unless you are going to argue that Joe didn't expect them to do said pushing... he is as morally responsible as they are.
There was no fact finding, there was no investigation. Everyone realized if these allegations got out the reputation of the Penn State Football Program would be at risk. So they kept it internal.
I never said that PSU should have assumed what McQuerey said was fact... but I am saying you should call the god damn police when there is a report of sexual misconduct between an old man and a young boy in a shower. How can you disagree with that? I didn't say Paterno was an intern. MCQUEARY is the intern in my example. All I see is a bunch of speculation in your post. Oh, everyone KNEW X would happen if Y got out. Everyone KNEW it. Bro, everyone knew the PSU football program's reputation would be tainted if it got out that Sandusky was raping boys in their facilities. You seriously can't be arguing that? And to say that those in power at PSU would take protecting their program over protecting the children is not speculation.... that's literally what happened. The only out you have is if you are going to say Joe didn't know the administrators would cover up the allegations instead of calling the police. That is my out. That's what I've been going on about this whole time. How is he supposed to know that they would value the reputation of the Penn State football team over the protection of a little boy? He ISN'T. How is Paterno supposed to know that when he reported it to his boss and the head of campus police that they'd cover it up? Maybe he was told by his superiors that the proper channels had been informed, that an investigation was already underway. Then again, maybe he was in on it the whole time. Maybe he's the one who suggested they cover it up. Guess what? You don't know shit about what happened and you're passing your speculation off as fact. How do you know ANYTHING. You don't know jack shit. You speculate about everything and consider it "fact". I'm just sitting here calling bullshit when you and everyone else here is trying so desperately to pass this stuff off as fact. You're right I don't know for a fact that Joe knew his bosses would cover it up. But then why was no action taken against McQuerey for falsely accusing a man of such a heinous thing? Joe certainly would certainly take action against some freaking GA who is accusing his friend of 30 years of rape? Unless, keeping McQuerey on board was part of the cover up. While there is no way Joe is legally responsible here, at least I, personally, am going to hold him morally responsible. He chose to let the issue disappear (how can action be taken against neither McQuerey or Sandusky? ) instead of pursuing it. He took the easy way out here. He should have done more. Oh, fuck that shit. Get off your high horse and consider the possibilities. How are you going to take action? Please tell me how Paterno is supposed to handle this situation. They're in a grey area. As far as I know Paterno was only told (as the poster right above you stated) of touching and horsing around. Maybe the investigation discovered that the actions were inappropriate and Sandusky has to be banned from being around little kids. If that's the case, the GA hasn't lied about anything as far as Paterno knows. Sandusky is punished as much as can be for "horsing around" and action has been taken. Applies to both of you since you made the exact same point. Edit: Quoting this for people who can't be bothered to look at the bottom of the previous page. On November 11 2011 03:42 Risen wrote:
To reinforce. I don't give a shit about anyone else in this case beyond the victims. The fact that the higher ups at Penn State covered this shit up is horrifying. I hope they're charged with as much as can be, and I hope Sandusky is locked in a small cell the rest of his life. Having said that, until I see evidence of actual misconduct on Paternos part, or conduct that would lead me to believe he participated in the coverup, or conduct that would lead me to believe he did not do all that was required of him by the law, I will stand firm in my conviction that he is being lynched unjustly by an unruly mob of people acting with their hearts not their heads. I'm not talking about legal. He's been cleared of that thus far. You asked if Paterno had a moral obligation to do something more, if he morally failed and I gave my reasons that he absolutely and you've yet to say anything to beyond cursing a whole lot and giving your shift button a lot of work As I previously stated, I think informing the police and your boss is enough. You and many others don't. The end. Stop treating campus police like the actual police. Idn if you aren't familiar with the how public universities work in America. But the campus police =/= the real police. Not even close. Joe Paterno DID NOT report what he knew to the Police. That is why is he morally at fault.
So if he picked up his office phone and dialed 911 who answers? If its campus police then they are the police.
|
On November 11 2011 03:55 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:53 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:14 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:05 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:59 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. And It's absurd to think that he didn't know why Sandursky, under his staff during the 98 allegation and known as one of Joepa's closest pals, suddenly retired and was banned from campus after he was tabbed as being JoePa's successor. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally Oh hey look, even MORE speculation. Keep piling it up buddy. You know he knew about the 2002 case, now tell me how you know he knew about the 98 case. Don't bother if all you have is speculation. It's becoming clear that's where all your thoughts come from. Good thing you're not a judge. Everything else here isn't speculation: On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally So, your answer to whether or not he is morally responsible for the above would be...??? Risen, are you gonna answer this or no? I thought I had, oh wait I did. On November 11 2011 03:17 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:09 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 03:03 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:57 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:54 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:41 Risen wrote:
[quote]
He KNEW that? Really? He KNEW what they would do? No, now you're talking for him as if you're omnipotent, and you're not a god.
Edit: Here's an example. Let's say I'm an intern where you work. I go to your boss and say X person raped a kid two days ago, I saw it.
You're saying your boss should just straight fire you, sever all contact with you, and report you to the police. Cool man. That's awesome.
I don't think that's what should happen, though. No that is not even close man. Your example is also awful. Joe is not some intern at some "work" He is Joe Fucking Paterno. If he or his bosses went to the police this would never have happened. But They didn't they pushed it under the rug to protect the reputation of the program. And unless you are going to argue that Joe didn't expect them to do said pushing... he is as morally responsible as they are. There was no fact finding, there was no investigation. Everyone realized if these allegations got out the reputation of the Penn State Football Program would be at risk. So they kept it internal. I never said that PSU should have assumed what McQuerey said was fact... but I am saying you should call the god damn police when there is a report of sexual misconduct between an old man and a young boy in a shower. How can you disagree with that? I didn't say Paterno was an intern. MCQUEARY is the intern in my example. All I see is a bunch of speculation in your post. Oh, everyone KNEW X would happen if Y got out. Everyone KNEW it. Bro, everyone knew the PSU football program's reputation would be tainted if it got out that Sandusky was raping boys in their facilities. You seriously can't be arguing that? And to say that those in power at PSU would take protecting their program over protecting the children is not speculation.... that's literally what happened. The only out you have is if you are going to say Joe didn't know the administrators would cover up the allegations instead of calling the police. That is my out. That's what I've been going on about this whole time. How is he supposed to know that they would value the reputation of the Penn State football team over the protection of a little boy? He ISN'T. How is Paterno supposed to know that when he reported it to his boss and the head of campus police that they'd cover it up? Maybe he was told by his superiors that the proper channels had been informed, that an investigation was already underway. Then again, maybe he was in on it the whole time. Maybe he's the one who suggested they cover it up. Guess what? You don't know shit about what happened and you're passing your speculation off as fact. How do you know ANYTHING. You don't know jack shit. You speculate about everything and consider it "fact". I'm just sitting here calling bullshit when you and everyone else here is trying so desperately to pass this stuff off as fact. You're right I don't know for a fact that Joe knew his bosses would cover it up. But then why was no action taken against McQuerey for falsely accusing a man of such a heinous thing? Joe certainly would certainly take action against some freaking GA who is accusing his friend of 30 years of rape? Unless, keeping McQuerey on board was part of the cover up. While there is no way Joe is legally responsible here, at least I, personally, am going to hold him morally responsible. He chose to let the issue disappear (how can action be taken against neither McQuerey or Sandusky? ) instead of pursuing it. He took the easy way out here. He should have done more. Oh, fuck that shit. Get off your high horse and consider the possibilities. How are you going to take action? Please tell me how Paterno is supposed to handle this situation. They're in a grey area. As far as I know Paterno was only told (as the poster right above you stated) of touching and horsing around. Maybe the investigation discovered that the actions were inappropriate and Sandusky has to be banned from being around little kids. If that's the case, the GA hasn't lied about anything as far as Paterno knows. Sandusky is punished as much as can be for "horsing around" and action has been taken. Applies to both of you since you made the exact same point. Edit: Quoting this for people who can't be bothered to look at the bottom of the previous page. On November 11 2011 03:42 Risen wrote:
To reinforce. I don't give a shit about anyone else in this case beyond the victims. The fact that the higher ups at Penn State covered this shit up is horrifying. I hope they're charged with as much as can be, and I hope Sandusky is locked in a small cell the rest of his life. Having said that, until I see evidence of actual misconduct on Paternos part, or conduct that would lead me to believe he participated in the coverup, or conduct that would lead me to believe he did not do all that was required of him by the law, I will stand firm in my conviction that he is being lynched unjustly by an unruly mob of people acting with their hearts not their heads. I'm not talking about legal. He's been cleared of that thus far. You asked if Paterno had a moral obligation to do something more, if he morally failed and I gave my reasons that he absolutely and you've yet to say anything to beyond cursing a whole lot and giving your shift button a lot of work As I previously stated, I think informing the police and your boss is enough. You and many others don't. The end.
To bad he never informed the police.
He did the legal thing by telling his boss but he didn't do the moral thing but following up on it.
|
On November 11 2011 03:58 stokes17 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:55 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:53 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:14 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:05 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:59 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. And It's absurd to think that he didn't know why Sandursky, under his staff during the 98 allegation and known as one of Joepa's closest pals, suddenly retired and was banned from campus after he was tabbed as being JoePa's successor. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally Oh hey look, even MORE speculation. Keep piling it up buddy. You know he knew about the 2002 case, now tell me how you know he knew about the 98 case. Don't bother if all you have is speculation. It's becoming clear that's where all your thoughts come from. Good thing you're not a judge. Everything else here isn't speculation: On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally So, your answer to whether or not he is morally responsible for the above would be...??? Risen, are you gonna answer this or no? I thought I had, oh wait I did. On November 11 2011 03:17 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:09 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 03:03 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:57 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:54 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 stokes17 wrote:
[quote]
No that is not even close man. Your example is also awful.
Joe is not some intern at some "work" He is Joe Fucking Paterno. If he or his bosses went to the police this would never have happened. But They didn't they pushed it under the rug to protect the reputation of the program. And unless you are going to argue that Joe didn't expect them to do said pushing... he is as morally responsible as they are.
There was no fact finding, there was no investigation. Everyone realized if these allegations got out the reputation of the Penn State Football Program would be at risk. So they kept it internal.
I never said that PSU should have assumed what McQuerey said was fact... but I am saying you should call the god damn police when there is a report of sexual misconduct between an old man and a young boy in a shower. How can you disagree with that? I didn't say Paterno was an intern. MCQUEARY is the intern in my example. All I see is a bunch of speculation in your post. Oh, everyone KNEW X would happen if Y got out. Everyone KNEW it. Bro, everyone knew the PSU football program's reputation would be tainted if it got out that Sandusky was raping boys in their facilities. You seriously can't be arguing that? And to say that those in power at PSU would take protecting their program over protecting the children is not speculation.... that's literally what happened. The only out you have is if you are going to say Joe didn't know the administrators would cover up the allegations instead of calling the police. That is my out. That's what I've been going on about this whole time. How is he supposed to know that they would value the reputation of the Penn State football team over the protection of a little boy? He ISN'T. How is Paterno supposed to know that when he reported it to his boss and the head of campus police that they'd cover it up? Maybe he was told by his superiors that the proper channels had been informed, that an investigation was already underway. Then again, maybe he was in on it the whole time. Maybe he's the one who suggested they cover it up. Guess what? You don't know shit about what happened and you're passing your speculation off as fact. How do you know ANYTHING. You don't know jack shit. You speculate about everything and consider it "fact". I'm just sitting here calling bullshit when you and everyone else here is trying so desperately to pass this stuff off as fact. You're right I don't know for a fact that Joe knew his bosses would cover it up. But then why was no action taken against McQuerey for falsely accusing a man of such a heinous thing? Joe certainly would certainly take action against some freaking GA who is accusing his friend of 30 years of rape? Unless, keeping McQuerey on board was part of the cover up. While there is no way Joe is legally responsible here, at least I, personally, am going to hold him morally responsible. He chose to let the issue disappear (how can action be taken against neither McQuerey or Sandusky? ) instead of pursuing it. He took the easy way out here. He should have done more. Oh, fuck that shit. Get off your high horse and consider the possibilities. How are you going to take action? Please tell me how Paterno is supposed to handle this situation. They're in a grey area. As far as I know Paterno was only told (as the poster right above you stated) of touching and horsing around. Maybe the investigation discovered that the actions were inappropriate and Sandusky has to be banned from being around little kids. If that's the case, the GA hasn't lied about anything as far as Paterno knows. Sandusky is punished as much as can be for "horsing around" and action has been taken. Applies to both of you since you made the exact same point. Edit: Quoting this for people who can't be bothered to look at the bottom of the previous page. On November 11 2011 03:42 Risen wrote:
To reinforce. I don't give a shit about anyone else in this case beyond the victims. The fact that the higher ups at Penn State covered this shit up is horrifying. I hope they're charged with as much as can be, and I hope Sandusky is locked in a small cell the rest of his life. Having said that, until I see evidence of actual misconduct on Paternos part, or conduct that would lead me to believe he participated in the coverup, or conduct that would lead me to believe he did not do all that was required of him by the law, I will stand firm in my conviction that he is being lynched unjustly by an unruly mob of people acting with their hearts not their heads. I'm not talking about legal. He's been cleared of that thus far. You asked if Paterno had a moral obligation to do something more, if he morally failed and I gave my reasons that he absolutely and you've yet to say anything to beyond cursing a whole lot and giving your shift button a lot of work As I previously stated, I think informing the police and your boss is enough. You and many others don't. The end. Stop treating campus police like the actual police. Idn if you aren't familiar with the how public universities work in America. But the campus police =/= the real police. Not even close. Joe Paterno DID NOT report what he knew to the Police. That is why is he morally at fault.
If you say so, my experience says otherwise.. I'll expand it.
I think informing the Athletic Director and the head of the fairy police as enough. You and many others don't. Then end.
As to them being fairy police.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campus_police
http://blog.odmp.org/2010/11/yes-campus-police-are-real-cops-too.html
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2011/11/penn_state_scandal_should_campus_cops_have_reported_the_allegations_of_abuse_.html
I think you and many others need to take a look at whether "fairy" police are real police. They are. The officers at Penn State are armed and according to state law, these have both the power and the duty "to prevent crime, investigate criminal acts … and carry the offender before the proper alderman, justice of the peace, magistrate or bail commissioner."
Taken from the last link.
So you and many others saying campus police aren't "real"... Well ya know that's just like, uhh, your opinion, man.
|
On November 11 2011 04:06 meadbert wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:58 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 03:55 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:53 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:14 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:05 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:59 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:
[quote]
Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. And It's absurd to think that he didn't know why Sandursky, under his staff during the 98 allegation and known as one of Joepa's closest pals, suddenly retired and was banned from campus after he was tabbed as being JoePa's successor. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally Oh hey look, even MORE speculation. Keep piling it up buddy. You know he knew about the 2002 case, now tell me how you know he knew about the 98 case. Don't bother if all you have is speculation. It's becoming clear that's where all your thoughts come from. Good thing you're not a judge. Everything else here isn't speculation: On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally So, your answer to whether or not he is morally responsible for the above would be...??? Risen, are you gonna answer this or no? I thought I had, oh wait I did. On November 11 2011 03:17 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:09 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 03:03 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:57 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:54 Risen wrote:
[quote]
I didn't say Paterno was an intern. MCQUEARY is the intern in my example. All I see is a bunch of speculation in your post. Oh, everyone KNEW X would happen if Y got out. Everyone KNEW it. Bro, everyone knew the PSU football program's reputation would be tainted if it got out that Sandusky was raping boys in their facilities. You seriously can't be arguing that? And to say that those in power at PSU would take protecting their program over protecting the children is not speculation.... that's literally what happened. The only out you have is if you are going to say Joe didn't know the administrators would cover up the allegations instead of calling the police. That is my out. That's what I've been going on about this whole time. How is he supposed to know that they would value the reputation of the Penn State football team over the protection of a little boy? He ISN'T. How is Paterno supposed to know that when he reported it to his boss and the head of campus police that they'd cover it up? Maybe he was told by his superiors that the proper channels had been informed, that an investigation was already underway. Then again, maybe he was in on it the whole time. Maybe he's the one who suggested they cover it up. Guess what? You don't know shit about what happened and you're passing your speculation off as fact. How do you know ANYTHING. You don't know jack shit. You speculate about everything and consider it "fact". I'm just sitting here calling bullshit when you and everyone else here is trying so desperately to pass this stuff off as fact. You're right I don't know for a fact that Joe knew his bosses would cover it up. But then why was no action taken against McQuerey for falsely accusing a man of such a heinous thing? Joe certainly would certainly take action against some freaking GA who is accusing his friend of 30 years of rape? Unless, keeping McQuerey on board was part of the cover up. While there is no way Joe is legally responsible here, at least I, personally, am going to hold him morally responsible. He chose to let the issue disappear (how can action be taken against neither McQuerey or Sandusky? ) instead of pursuing it. He took the easy way out here. He should have done more. Oh, fuck that shit. Get off your high horse and consider the possibilities. How are you going to take action? Please tell me how Paterno is supposed to handle this situation. They're in a grey area. As far as I know Paterno was only told (as the poster right above you stated) of touching and horsing around. Maybe the investigation discovered that the actions were inappropriate and Sandusky has to be banned from being around little kids. If that's the case, the GA hasn't lied about anything as far as Paterno knows. Sandusky is punished as much as can be for "horsing around" and action has been taken. Applies to both of you since you made the exact same point. Edit: Quoting this for people who can't be bothered to look at the bottom of the previous page. On November 11 2011 03:42 Risen wrote:
To reinforce. I don't give a shit about anyone else in this case beyond the victims. The fact that the higher ups at Penn State covered this shit up is horrifying. I hope they're charged with as much as can be, and I hope Sandusky is locked in a small cell the rest of his life. Having said that, until I see evidence of actual misconduct on Paternos part, or conduct that would lead me to believe he participated in the coverup, or conduct that would lead me to believe he did not do all that was required of him by the law, I will stand firm in my conviction that he is being lynched unjustly by an unruly mob of people acting with their hearts not their heads. I'm not talking about legal. He's been cleared of that thus far. You asked if Paterno had a moral obligation to do something more, if he morally failed and I gave my reasons that he absolutely and you've yet to say anything to beyond cursing a whole lot and giving your shift button a lot of work As I previously stated, I think informing the police and your boss is enough. You and many others don't. The end. Stop treating campus police like the actual police. Idn if you aren't familiar with the how public universities work in America. But the campus police =/= the real police. Not even close. Joe Paterno DID NOT report what he knew to the Police. That is why is he morally at fault. So if he picked up his office phone and dialed 911 who answers? If its campus police then they are the police.
No, the campus police would not respond to 911. Campus police are more analogous to mall security than the actual police. They are employees of the university, not the Police force.
|
I went to a public school, all of my campus police officers were state cops with the power to arrest, carry firearms, all that good stuff. Perhaps it speaks to a larger issue that other public universities should stop hiring bullshit rent a cops and get a real police force so they have the power to do something. Also, campus police would still have the power to do some sort of investigation and turn the findings over to the "actual" police.
|
On November 11 2011 04:06 meadbert wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 03:58 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 03:55 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:53 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:14 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 03:05 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:59 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:
[quote]
Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. And It's absurd to think that he didn't know why Sandursky, under his staff during the 98 allegation and known as one of Joepa's closest pals, suddenly retired and was banned from campus after he was tabbed as being JoePa's successor. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally Oh hey look, even MORE speculation. Keep piling it up buddy. You know he knew about the 2002 case, now tell me how you know he knew about the 98 case. Don't bother if all you have is speculation. It's becoming clear that's where all your thoughts come from. Good thing you're not a judge. Everything else here isn't speculation: On November 11 2011 02:52 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:51 Hawk wrote:
Twice accused and investigated. Also with two eye witness reports of child abuse, with at least one that was directly reported to him. And this man was around football activities as recently as a few weeks ago. Sandursky brought in many kids since the 2002 allegations after McQueary told JoePa..... Keep in mind this current investigation had been cooking for three years, and was known by PSU brass and JoePa.
you see no moral wrong doing in that?? Great, now link that to Paterno having any knowledge of it. One more step for you, buddy. Go read any of the report? he clearly knew about the 2002 investigation since McQueary told him of it and he reported it up. That is a fact. If that's not enough for you, please explain how McQueary reports that he saw a 60 year old man raping a kid in a shower and it gets pushed up by Paterno. Nothing comes of it. So JoePa either would presumably fire McQueary for being a liar who tried to get his friend in trouble, or he is either someone who looked the other way when Sandursky was back on campus with kids after that. It's a pretty damn clear cut case of turning a blind eye to it morally So, your answer to whether or not he is morally responsible for the above would be...??? Risen, are you gonna answer this or no? I thought I had, oh wait I did. On November 11 2011 03:17 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 03:09 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 03:03 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 02:57 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 02:54 Risen wrote:
[quote]
I didn't say Paterno was an intern. MCQUEARY is the intern in my example. All I see is a bunch of speculation in your post. Oh, everyone KNEW X would happen if Y got out. Everyone KNEW it. Bro, everyone knew the PSU football program's reputation would be tainted if it got out that Sandusky was raping boys in their facilities. You seriously can't be arguing that? And to say that those in power at PSU would take protecting their program over protecting the children is not speculation.... that's literally what happened. The only out you have is if you are going to say Joe didn't know the administrators would cover up the allegations instead of calling the police. That is my out. That's what I've been going on about this whole time. How is he supposed to know that they would value the reputation of the Penn State football team over the protection of a little boy? He ISN'T. How is Paterno supposed to know that when he reported it to his boss and the head of campus police that they'd cover it up? Maybe he was told by his superiors that the proper channels had been informed, that an investigation was already underway. Then again, maybe he was in on it the whole time. Maybe he's the one who suggested they cover it up. Guess what? You don't know shit about what happened and you're passing your speculation off as fact. How do you know ANYTHING. You don't know jack shit. You speculate about everything and consider it "fact". I'm just sitting here calling bullshit when you and everyone else here is trying so desperately to pass this stuff off as fact. You're right I don't know for a fact that Joe knew his bosses would cover it up. But then why was no action taken against McQuerey for falsely accusing a man of such a heinous thing? Joe certainly would certainly take action against some freaking GA who is accusing his friend of 30 years of rape? Unless, keeping McQuerey on board was part of the cover up. While there is no way Joe is legally responsible here, at least I, personally, am going to hold him morally responsible. He chose to let the issue disappear (how can action be taken against neither McQuerey or Sandusky? ) instead of pursuing it. He took the easy way out here. He should have done more. Oh, fuck that shit. Get off your high horse and consider the possibilities. How are you going to take action? Please tell me how Paterno is supposed to handle this situation. They're in a grey area. As far as I know Paterno was only told (as the poster right above you stated) of touching and horsing around. Maybe the investigation discovered that the actions were inappropriate and Sandusky has to be banned from being around little kids. If that's the case, the GA hasn't lied about anything as far as Paterno knows. Sandusky is punished as much as can be for "horsing around" and action has been taken. Applies to both of you since you made the exact same point. Edit: Quoting this for people who can't be bothered to look at the bottom of the previous page. On November 11 2011 03:42 Risen wrote:
To reinforce. I don't give a shit about anyone else in this case beyond the victims. The fact that the higher ups at Penn State covered this shit up is horrifying. I hope they're charged with as much as can be, and I hope Sandusky is locked in a small cell the rest of his life. Having said that, until I see evidence of actual misconduct on Paternos part, or conduct that would lead me to believe he participated in the coverup, or conduct that would lead me to believe he did not do all that was required of him by the law, I will stand firm in my conviction that he is being lynched unjustly by an unruly mob of people acting with their hearts not their heads. I'm not talking about legal. He's been cleared of that thus far. You asked if Paterno had a moral obligation to do something more, if he morally failed and I gave my reasons that he absolutely and you've yet to say anything to beyond cursing a whole lot and giving your shift button a lot of work As I previously stated, I think informing the police and your boss is enough. You and many others don't. The end. Stop treating campus police like the actual police. Idn if you aren't familiar with the how public universities work in America. But the campus police =/= the real police. Not even close. Joe Paterno DID NOT report what he knew to the Police. That is why is he morally at fault. So if he picked up his office phone and dialed 911 who answers? If its campus police then they are the police.
You've clearly never been to a unversity have you...
Campus police are like mall cops. There rent-a-cops so to speak.
|
Um, you are aware the younger male in question is a 10 year old? So yea I think one can argue, pretty easily, that any fondling, touching, or horsing around between a 60 year old and 10 year old, naked in a shower is something worth reporting.
Yes you should get that "mothafucka" in jail. And yes a failure to report that leaves one morally responsible.
Considering both of us (im assuming) don't have law degrees; making an off-the-cuff judgement potentially placing a man in jail off a vague description of something that might have been misinterpreted, exaggerated, or just outright a lied about is really quite irresponsible on your part.
edit: fail quote
|
|
|
|
|
|
4267
722
39
226
1
EPT
