|
On November 11 2011 06:59 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 06:57 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:41 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:30 InvincibleRice wrote:http://thatlawyerdude.blogspot.com/2011/11/strong-defense-of-joe-paterno-why.htmlPaterno reported the incident to someone who was essentially (according to state statute that gives campus police the same authority as SC municipal police officers) the commissioner of a several-hundred strong police force; he didn't just "pass off the shit to the AD," he gave it to the highest ranking police officer in the area, who called in the actual witness and spoke to him. It sucks, hindsight is 20/20, etc, etc, but JoePa is not the monster that the media made him out to be. OMG thats not even close to being enough. When he sees Sandusky again and again over the next 9 years at PSU with children in his company. He never once asks whats going on? He never looks into it again? He never demands to know if the wheels of justice are turning on this? Worst yet he never looks Sandusky in the face, calls him a sick fuck, and tells him to get the fuck off his football field? No instead he does children's charities events for this guy. Are you fucking kidding me? He lucky he not in jail forget losing his job. Or maybe he assumed that the investigation had turned up nothing? Maybe he assumed that when called in some other act had happened, that McQuerey had not exactly lied but just been wrong and so was allowed to stay and advance through the ranks of the PSU staff? Maybe that happened? Can you tell me it didn't? No, you can not. You can sit there and speculate, though. You seem to be doing a fine job of it. He can't assume there, not with kids lives at stake. He has a moral obligation to follow up and make sure those kids are protected. He didn't do that. He washed his hands of it and shame on him for the rest of his life for that. Shame on you for being judgemental as fuck. He saw an investigation take place, then he saw no real actions taken as a result of said investigation. How do you know he didn't follow up? How do you know whether or not he asked about it and was told they had found nothing? You DON'T. And that's all I've been trying to point out. Nobody knows jack shit right now. Reserve judgement for when you do. After all the statements have been given. Paterno own statement says he did not do enough. There no need to reserve judgement in this. There is already more then enough facts to condemn joepa as morally bankrupt. If there wasn't, he still be the coach at PSU today. I know that none of that matters to you. You'll simply cry "speculation!" to any facts presented to you, or somehow rationalize Paternos actions away. How much evidence is needed before we can pass judgment on this? Please tell us.
|
On November 11 2011 07:12 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:11 itsjustatank wrote:On November 11 2011 07:06 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 07:02 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:55 darthfoley wrote:On November 11 2011 06:48 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 06:39 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:35 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 06:30 JinNJuice wrote:
[quote]
Not really actually. There's also something called slander and/or defamation, which is a crime as well. You can't just announce to people that someone is a serial child rapist without evidence. What if McQuerey decided to keep quiet after telling Paterno and Paterno announced it? How would calling child services to investigate a claim of inappropriate conduct between a 60YO and a 10YO in a shower make Paterno guilty of defamation or slander? Do you know what those words mean? Slander-from wikipedia "Defamation" is the general term used internationally, and is used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "slander" and "libel". Libel and slander both require publication.[12] The fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending material is published in some fleeting form, as by spoken words or sounds, sign language, gestures and the like, then this is slander. Calling child services would not constitute publishing a claim. ....Did you seriously just copy-paste the definition without even reading it? As the definition states THAT YOU JUST LINKED, slander is something that you SAY about someone, aka calling child services which i'm sure calls are monitored and recorded.... Good lord. This eclipses every other dumb thing said in this thread. Reporting someone you suspect to be fucking little kids to child services is not slander or libel. My fucking brain ughhhhhhhhghghghghasdfsa So if I called child services and told them that YOU were molesting little kids, those accusations turned out to be false, you lose your job, your reputation, and your life due to this accusation, I'm pretty fucking sure you'd take me to the fucking bank for slander. If those accusations turned out to be false, then i wouldn't lose my reputation. And stop being an idiot, going to authorities about it isn't like you're publishing it in a newspaper for everyone to see. God the amount of bullshit in this thread is amazing. And if I said I had an eyewitness who saw it happen? And then they charge you with sexual assault based on that eyewitness? And then the eyewitness recants their testimony? I had skipped a few steps but I'll spell it out for you if you want. Paterno had no idea to know if McQuerey's accusations were true or not. He simply had the word of a graduate assistant versus the word of a 30-year old friend. He reported what he was told and let the "investigation" play out. I don't understand how calling child services would've made a lick of difference. a lick of difference? You don't see how calling in a 3rd party (who's #1 priority is not protecting PSU football) to investigate the claims made against Sandusky would have made a lick of difference? Seriously? Like seriouslyI've held my tongue all day.... but this one completely deserves a GTFO Kids calm down and read my post on the previous page. School admins had a statutory obligation to report. Failure to report is a misdemeanor under state law. Reporters are given legal immunity from what you guys are yammering on about. They have an obligation to report to their superiors under the law you linked... As Paterno received only reports from the GA and did not witness the event or receive the statement from the victim it is accepted that he only need pass on said information to his superior.
yea idn why he said that to me, I am saying nothing of legal obligations, simply that calling CPS in 2002 would have certainly made at least "a lick of difference"
|
On November 11 2011 06:59 stokes17 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 06:55 Battleaxe wrote:On November 11 2011 06:48 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 06:46 Battleaxe wrote:On November 11 2011 06:44 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 06:39 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:35 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 06:30 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:27 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 06:23 Risen wrote:
[quote]
I didn't mean to peg you as saying he failed legally. I apologize for that interpretation.
How do you know Joe wouldn't have lost his job? If McQuerey can lose his job from this so can Paterno. Maybe McQuerey was lying about the whole thing and Paterno goes forward and announces it publicly, he's fucked. He doesn't know whether there's an investigation occuring or not, and he has no right to deny Sandusky anything. He also can't just out of the blue fire McQuerey. He has to sit tight and do nothing, which is exactly what he did. I am beyond certain that if Paterno called child services to investigate Sandusky he would not have lost his job. If you are going to tell me Joe " had to sit tight and do nothing" when child's lives were at risk. Then we are done talking I'm afraid. Not really actually. There's also something called slander and/or defamation, which is a crime as well. You can't just announce to people that someone is a serial child rapist without evidence. What if McQuerey decided to keep quiet after telling Paterno and Paterno announced it? How would calling child services to investigate a claim of inappropriate conduct between a 60YO and a 10YO in a shower make Paterno guilty of defamation or slander? Do you know what those words mean? Slander-from wikipedia "Defamation" is the general term used internationally, and is used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "slander" and "libel". Libel and slander both require publication.[12] The fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending material is published in some fleeting form, as by spoken words or sounds, sign language, gestures and the like, then this is slander. Calling child services would not constitute publishing a claim. ....Did you seriously just copy-paste the definition without even reading it? As the definition states THAT YOU JUST LINKED, slander is something that you SAY about someone, aka calling child services which i'm sure calls are monitored and recorded.... No it wouldn't. Spoken word can be published if it becomes public record. If he went on TV and said something that would be publishing spoken word. Political rhetoric at a rally is publishing spoken word. Calling child services to report possible sexual misconduct between an old man and young boy would never, ever, EVER , be considered publishing a claim. It would be difficult to even say that calling child services to investigate possible sexual misconduct is even making a claim, let alone publishing it. Even if the call was recorded for internal review, and private record, it would never be considered as publishing a claim You are certainly making a claim if you say that someone is molesting and sodomizing young children based on something someone told you. I'll give you the publishing part though Calling child services to investigate a claim made by one of your assistants in no way attaches you to that claim. Conceded. We're on the same page that it would be a claim made by someone though right? Yes, but an unpublished claim can never be slander
Not arguing anything about the slander, just wanted to make sure I was on the same page there.
So I think I'm really going to make my final post in the thread, as I don't have much more to contribute here. My final word is that despite everything, I think it was a poor decision by the board to fire Paterno when they did and how they did. If not letting him finish out the season, at least letting him coach one last game seems like the classy thing to do, but maybe I'm in the minority there too.
|
On November 11 2011 07:14 JinNJuice wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:06 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 07:02 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:55 darthfoley wrote:On November 11 2011 06:48 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 06:39 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:35 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 06:30 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:27 stokes17 wrote:
[quote]
I am beyond certain that if Paterno called child services to investigate Sandusky he would not have lost his job.
If you are going to tell me Joe "had to sit tight and do nothing" when child's lives were at risk. Then we are done talking I'm afraid. Not really actually. There's also something called slander and/or defamation, which is a crime as well. You can't just announce to people that someone is a serial child rapist without evidence. What if McQuerey decided to keep quiet after telling Paterno and Paterno announced it? How would calling child services to investigate a claim of inappropriate conduct between a 60YO and a 10YO in a shower make Paterno guilty of defamation or slander? Do you know what those words mean? Slander-from wikipedia "Defamation" is the general term used internationally, and is used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "slander" and "libel". Libel and slander both require publication.[12] The fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending material is published in some fleeting form, as by spoken words or sounds, sign language, gestures and the like, then this is slander. Calling child services would not constitute publishing a claim. ....Did you seriously just copy-paste the definition without even reading it? As the definition states THAT YOU JUST LINKED, slander is something that you SAY about someone, aka calling child services which i'm sure calls are monitored and recorded.... Good lord. This eclipses every other dumb thing said in this thread. Reporting someone you suspect to be fucking little kids to child services is not slander or libel. My fucking brain ughhhhhhhhghghghghasdfsa So if I called child services and told them that YOU were molesting little kids, those accusations turned out to be false, you lose your job, your reputation, and your life due to this accusation, I'm pretty fucking sure you'd take me to the fucking bank for slander. If those accusations turned out to be false, then i wouldn't lose my reputation. And stop being an idiot, going to authorities about it isn't like you're publishing it in a newspaper for everyone to see. God the amount of bullshit in this thread is amazing. And if I said I had an eyewitness who saw it happen? And then they charge you with sexual assault based on that eyewitness? And then the eyewitness recants their testimony? I had skipped a few steps but I'll spell it out for you if you want. Paterno had no idea to know if McQuerey's accusations were true or not. He simply had the word of a graduate assistant versus the word of a 30-year old friend. He reported what he was told and let the "investigation" play out. I don't understand how calling child services would've made a lick of difference. a lick of difference? You don't see how calling in a 3rd party (who's #1 priority is not protecting PSU football) to investigate the claims made against Sandusky would have made a lick of difference? Seriously? Like seriouslyI've held my tongue all day.... but this one completely deserves a GTFO Lol....I don't know if you live in the real world or not, but you don't call in 3rd parties when you have internal processes/procedures for reporting this stuff. He reported it to the head of a state-recognized campus police force. That should have been enough on Paterno's end if the system worked. The system failed and now Paterno is PARTLY responsible because of that fact. Like we said, hindsight is 20/20, of course looking back we can say if he reported it to childs services it would've been looked at more closely and Sandusky would've been brought to justice.... lol....gtfo indeed.
So you say if Paterno called CPS in 2002 it would have not made a lick of difference, then you say it would have made a difference....
what are you saying?
|
On November 11 2011 07:15 itsjustatank wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:12 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:11 itsjustatank wrote:On November 11 2011 07:06 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 07:02 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:55 darthfoley wrote:On November 11 2011 06:48 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 06:39 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:35 stokes17 wrote:
[quote]
How would calling child services to investigate a claim of inappropriate conduct between a 60YO and a 10YO in a shower make Paterno guilty of defamation or slander? Do you know what those words mean?
Slander-from wikipedia
"Defamation" is the general term used internationally, and is used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "slander" and "libel". Libel and slander both require publication.[12] The fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending material is published in some fleeting form, as by spoken words or sounds, sign language, gestures and the like, then this is slander.
Calling child services would not constitute publishing a claim.
....Did you seriously just copy-paste the definition without even reading it? As the definition states THAT YOU JUST LINKED, slander is something that you SAY about someone, aka calling child services which i'm sure calls are monitored and recorded.... Good lord. This eclipses every other dumb thing said in this thread. Reporting someone you suspect to be fucking little kids to child services is not slander or libel. My fucking brain ughhhhhhhhghghghghasdfsa So if I called child services and told them that YOU were molesting little kids, those accusations turned out to be false, you lose your job, your reputation, and your life due to this accusation, I'm pretty fucking sure you'd take me to the fucking bank for slander. If those accusations turned out to be false, then i wouldn't lose my reputation. And stop being an idiot, going to authorities about it isn't like you're publishing it in a newspaper for everyone to see. God the amount of bullshit in this thread is amazing. And if I said I had an eyewitness who saw it happen? And then they charge you with sexual assault based on that eyewitness? And then the eyewitness recants their testimony? I had skipped a few steps but I'll spell it out for you if you want. Paterno had no idea to know if McQuerey's accusations were true or not. He simply had the word of a graduate assistant versus the word of a 30-year old friend. He reported what he was told and let the "investigation" play out. I don't understand how calling child services would've made a lick of difference. a lick of difference? You don't see how calling in a 3rd party (who's #1 priority is not protecting PSU football) to investigate the claims made against Sandusky would have made a lick of difference? Seriously? Like seriouslyI've held my tongue all day.... but this one completely deserves a GTFO Kids calm down and read my post on the previous page. School admins had a statutory obligation to report. Failure to report is a misdemeanor under state law. Reporters are given legal immunity from what you guys are yammering on about. They have an obligation to report to their superiors under the law you linked... As Paterno received only reports from the GA and did not witness the event or receive the statement from the victim it is accepted that he only need pass on said information to his superior. Nope. Reporting Procedures Individual Responsibility Citation: Cons. Stat. Tit. 23 §§ 6311; 6313 A mandated reporter who has reasonable cause to suspect that a child is an abused or neglected child shall make a report to the Department of Public Welfare.An oral report shall be made immediately, to be followed by a written report within 48 hours.Written reports shall be made to the appropriate county agency in a manner and on forms the department prescribes by regulation.Content of Reports Citation: Cons. Stat. Tit. 23 § 6313 The written reports shall include the following information if available: [list][*]The names and addresses of the child and the child's parents or other persons responsible for the care of the child, if known [*]Where the suspected abuse occurred [*]The age and sex of subjects of the report [*]The nature and extent of the suspected abuse, including any evidence of prior abuse to the child or siblings of the child [*]The name and relationship of the person responsible for causing the suspected abuse, if known, and any evidence of prior abuse by that person [*]Family composition [*]The source of the report [*]The name and contact information of the person making the report [*]Any actions taken by the source source: childwelfare.gov
You're cute. Now accept the fact that a "distraught" witness who comes and reports the incident after going to sleep, and not going to police, is not considered enough to provide reasonable cause.
|
On November 11 2011 07:19 stokes17 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:14 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 07:06 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 07:02 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:55 darthfoley wrote:On November 11 2011 06:48 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 06:39 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:35 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 06:30 JinNJuice wrote:
[quote]
Not really actually. There's also something called slander and/or defamation, which is a crime as well. You can't just announce to people that someone is a serial child rapist without evidence. What if McQuerey decided to keep quiet after telling Paterno and Paterno announced it? How would calling child services to investigate a claim of inappropriate conduct between a 60YO and a 10YO in a shower make Paterno guilty of defamation or slander? Do you know what those words mean? Slander-from wikipedia "Defamation" is the general term used internationally, and is used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "slander" and "libel". Libel and slander both require publication.[12] The fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending material is published in some fleeting form, as by spoken words or sounds, sign language, gestures and the like, then this is slander. Calling child services would not constitute publishing a claim. ....Did you seriously just copy-paste the definition without even reading it? As the definition states THAT YOU JUST LINKED, slander is something that you SAY about someone, aka calling child services which i'm sure calls are monitored and recorded.... Good lord. This eclipses every other dumb thing said in this thread. Reporting someone you suspect to be fucking little kids to child services is not slander or libel. My fucking brain ughhhhhhhhghghghghasdfsa So if I called child services and told them that YOU were molesting little kids, those accusations turned out to be false, you lose your job, your reputation, and your life due to this accusation, I'm pretty fucking sure you'd take me to the fucking bank for slander. If those accusations turned out to be false, then i wouldn't lose my reputation. And stop being an idiot, going to authorities about it isn't like you're publishing it in a newspaper for everyone to see. God the amount of bullshit in this thread is amazing. And if I said I had an eyewitness who saw it happen? And then they charge you with sexual assault based on that eyewitness? And then the eyewitness recants their testimony? I had skipped a few steps but I'll spell it out for you if you want. Paterno had no idea to know if McQuerey's accusations were true or not. He simply had the word of a graduate assistant versus the word of a 30-year old friend. He reported what he was told and let the "investigation" play out. I don't understand how calling child services would've made a lick of difference. a lick of difference? You don't see how calling in a 3rd party (who's #1 priority is not protecting PSU football) to investigate the claims made against Sandusky would have made a lick of difference? Seriously? Like seriouslyI've held my tongue all day.... but this one completely deserves a GTFO Lol....I don't know if you live in the real world or not, but you don't call in 3rd parties when you have internal processes/procedures for reporting this stuff. He reported it to the head of a state-recognized campus police force. That should have been enough on Paterno's end if the system worked. The system failed and now Paterno is PARTLY responsible because of that fact. Like we said, hindsight is 20/20, of course looking back we can say if he reported it to childs services it would've been looked at more closely and Sandusky would've been brought to justice.... lol....gtfo indeed. So you say if Paterno called CPS in 2002 it would have not made a lick of difference, then you say it would have made a difference.... what are you saying?
It was meant to be a hyperbole, but I guess everything we say has to be taken completely seriously. My point was that Paterno shouldn't have had to report it to childs services in the first place.
Also
Standards for Making a Report
Citation: Cons. Stat. Tit. 23, § 6311
A report is required when a person, who in the course of employment, occupation, or practice of a profession, comes into contact with children, has reasonable cause to suspect, on the basis of medical, professional, or other training and experience, that a child is a victim of child abuse.
Paterno had none of these, just a secondary account of what happened. By your guys' arguments, McQuerey should be the one charged as well.
|
On November 11 2011 07:15 InToTheWannaB wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 06:59 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:57 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:41 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:30 InvincibleRice wrote:http://thatlawyerdude.blogspot.com/2011/11/strong-defense-of-joe-paterno-why.htmlPaterno reported the incident to someone who was essentially (according to state statute that gives campus police the same authority as SC municipal police officers) the commissioner of a several-hundred strong police force; he didn't just "pass off the shit to the AD," he gave it to the highest ranking police officer in the area, who called in the actual witness and spoke to him. It sucks, hindsight is 20/20, etc, etc, but JoePa is not the monster that the media made him out to be. OMG thats not even close to being enough. When he sees Sandusky again and again over the next 9 years at PSU with children in his company. He never once asks whats going on? He never looks into it again? He never demands to know if the wheels of justice are turning on this? Worst yet he never looks Sandusky in the face, calls him a sick fuck, and tells him to get the fuck off his football field? No instead he does children's charities events for this guy. Are you fucking kidding me? He lucky he not in jail forget losing his job. Or maybe he assumed that the investigation had turned up nothing? Maybe he assumed that when called in some other act had happened, that McQuerey had not exactly lied but just been wrong and so was allowed to stay and advance through the ranks of the PSU staff? Maybe that happened? Can you tell me it didn't? No, you can not. You can sit there and speculate, though. You seem to be doing a fine job of it. He can't assume there, not with kids lives at stake. He has a moral obligation to follow up and make sure those kids are protected. He didn't do that. He washed his hands of it and shame on him for the rest of his life for that. Shame on you for being judgemental as fuck. He saw an investigation take place, then he saw no real actions taken as a result of said investigation. How do you know he didn't follow up? How do you know whether or not he asked about it and was told they had found nothing? You DON'T. And that's all I've been trying to point out. Nobody knows jack shit right now. Reserve judgement for when you do. After all the statements have been given. Paterno own statement says he did not do enough. There no need to reserve judgement in this. There is already more then enough facts to condemn joepa as morally bankrupt. If there wasn't, he still be the coach at PSU today. I know that none of that matters to you. You'll simply cry "speculation!" to any facts presented to you, or somehow rationalize Paternos actions away. How much evidence is needed before we can pass judgment on this? Please tell us.
All we know is that Paterno reported the incident to his superior and made sure the head of the Campus police force not only knew, but was investigating the matter.
The end. That's all we know.
Now you wanna tell me that's enough to call him morally bankrupt? Must be a lot of morally bankrupt people in your life man.
|
On November 11 2011 07:21 JinNJuice wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:19 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 07:14 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 07:06 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 07:02 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:55 darthfoley wrote:On November 11 2011 06:48 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 06:39 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:35 stokes17 wrote:
[quote]
How would calling child services to investigate a claim of inappropriate conduct between a 60YO and a 10YO in a shower make Paterno guilty of defamation or slander? Do you know what those words mean?
Slander-from wikipedia
"Defamation" is the general term used internationally, and is used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "slander" and "libel". Libel and slander both require publication.[12] The fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending material is published in some fleeting form, as by spoken words or sounds, sign language, gestures and the like, then this is slander.
Calling child services would not constitute publishing a claim.
....Did you seriously just copy-paste the definition without even reading it? As the definition states THAT YOU JUST LINKED, slander is something that you SAY about someone, aka calling child services which i'm sure calls are monitored and recorded.... Good lord. This eclipses every other dumb thing said in this thread. Reporting someone you suspect to be fucking little kids to child services is not slander or libel. My fucking brain ughhhhhhhhghghghghasdfsa So if I called child services and told them that YOU were molesting little kids, those accusations turned out to be false, you lose your job, your reputation, and your life due to this accusation, I'm pretty fucking sure you'd take me to the fucking bank for slander. If those accusations turned out to be false, then i wouldn't lose my reputation. And stop being an idiot, going to authorities about it isn't like you're publishing it in a newspaper for everyone to see. God the amount of bullshit in this thread is amazing. And if I said I had an eyewitness who saw it happen? And then they charge you with sexual assault based on that eyewitness? And then the eyewitness recants their testimony? I had skipped a few steps but I'll spell it out for you if you want. Paterno had no idea to know if McQuerey's accusations were true or not. He simply had the word of a graduate assistant versus the word of a 30-year old friend. He reported what he was told and let the "investigation" play out. I don't understand how calling child services would've made a lick of difference. a lick of difference? You don't see how calling in a 3rd party (who's #1 priority is not protecting PSU football) to investigate the claims made against Sandusky would have made a lick of difference? Seriously? Like seriouslyI've held my tongue all day.... but this one completely deserves a GTFO Lol....I don't know if you live in the real world or not, but you don't call in 3rd parties when you have internal processes/procedures for reporting this stuff. He reported it to the head of a state-recognized campus police force. That should have been enough on Paterno's end if the system worked. The system failed and now Paterno is PARTLY responsible because of that fact. Like we said, hindsight is 20/20, of course looking back we can say if he reported it to childs services it would've been looked at more closely and Sandusky would've been brought to justice.... lol....gtfo indeed. So you say if Paterno called CPS in 2002 it would have not made a lick of difference, then you say it would have made a difference.... what are you saying? It was meant to be a hyperbole, but I guess everything we say has to be taken completely seriously. My point was that Paterno shouldn't have had to report it to childs services in the first place.
Of course he had no legal obligation; he had a moral one, and he failed it.
He was not compelled in anyway, legally or contractually, to have done anything more than he did. He did the bare minimum to protect himself legally.
That is not good enough for me. That is not good enough for the victims of Sandusky's actions. He failed them in a moral sense.
|
I'd like to take a moment to state that the only evidence we have that Sandusky raped a child in 2002 is the word of McQueary. Nothing else. No one knows who this child is, no one knows whether it happened or not.
We have one mans word. That's it. Victim 2 is, and likely will forever be, nameless. If someone can find me a source where victim 2 is known that changes quite a bit in relation to McQueary.
AS IT STANDS. We must consider the possibility that McQueary lied then, and is lying now to advance his career.
|
Kind of sick that all of the focus is on whether or not Paterno has been treated fairly. All of the coverage is on how this hurts his legacy - so fucking what? The board made its decision. The university isn't the victim here. The actual victims of the child abuse are.
|
On November 11 2011 07:21 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:15 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:59 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:57 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:41 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:30 InvincibleRice wrote:http://thatlawyerdude.blogspot.com/2011/11/strong-defense-of-joe-paterno-why.htmlPaterno reported the incident to someone who was essentially (according to state statute that gives campus police the same authority as SC municipal police officers) the commissioner of a several-hundred strong police force; he didn't just "pass off the shit to the AD," he gave it to the highest ranking police officer in the area, who called in the actual witness and spoke to him. It sucks, hindsight is 20/20, etc, etc, but JoePa is not the monster that the media made him out to be. OMG thats not even close to being enough. When he sees Sandusky again and again over the next 9 years at PSU with children in his company. He never once asks whats going on? He never looks into it again? He never demands to know if the wheels of justice are turning on this? Worst yet he never looks Sandusky in the face, calls him a sick fuck, and tells him to get the fuck off his football field? No instead he does children's charities events for this guy. Are you fucking kidding me? He lucky he not in jail forget losing his job. Or maybe he assumed that the investigation had turned up nothing? Maybe he assumed that when called in some other act had happened, that McQuerey had not exactly lied but just been wrong and so was allowed to stay and advance through the ranks of the PSU staff? Maybe that happened? Can you tell me it didn't? No, you can not. You can sit there and speculate, though. You seem to be doing a fine job of it. He can't assume there, not with kids lives at stake. He has a moral obligation to follow up and make sure those kids are protected. He didn't do that. He washed his hands of it and shame on him for the rest of his life for that. Shame on you for being judgemental as fuck. He saw an investigation take place, then he saw no real actions taken as a result of said investigation. How do you know he didn't follow up? How do you know whether or not he asked about it and was told they had found nothing? You DON'T. And that's all I've been trying to point out. Nobody knows jack shit right now. Reserve judgement for when you do. After all the statements have been given. Paterno own statement says he did not do enough. There no need to reserve judgement in this. There is already more then enough facts to condemn joepa as morally bankrupt. If there wasn't, he still be the coach at PSU today. I know that none of that matters to you. You'll simply cry "speculation!" to any facts presented to you, or somehow rationalize Paternos actions away. How much evidence is needed before we can pass judgment on this? Please tell us. All we know is that Paterno reported the incident to his superior and made sure the head of the Campus police force not only knew, but was investigating the matter. The end. That's all we know. Now you wanna tell me that's enough to call him morally bankrupt? Must be a lot of morally bankrupt people in your life man.
When it is with concerns to possible sexual misconduct between an older man, in power who runs a charity where he deals with young children and is routinely seen hanging out with young boys without the accompaniment of those boys's parents, and a young boy. Yes I think that's enough to hold him morally responsible.
|
Hong Kong9179 Posts
On November 11 2011 07:19 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:15 itsjustatank wrote:On November 11 2011 07:12 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:11 itsjustatank wrote:On November 11 2011 07:06 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 07:02 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:55 darthfoley wrote:On November 11 2011 06:48 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 06:39 JinNJuice wrote:
[quote]
....Did you seriously just copy-paste the definition without even reading it? As the definition states THAT YOU JUST LINKED, slander is something that you SAY about someone, aka calling child services which i'm sure calls are monitored and recorded.... Good lord. This eclipses every other dumb thing said in this thread. Reporting someone you suspect to be fucking little kids to child services is not slander or libel. My fucking brain ughhhhhhhhghghghghasdfsa So if I called child services and told them that YOU were molesting little kids, those accusations turned out to be false, you lose your job, your reputation, and your life due to this accusation, I'm pretty fucking sure you'd take me to the fucking bank for slander. If those accusations turned out to be false, then i wouldn't lose my reputation. And stop being an idiot, going to authorities about it isn't like you're publishing it in a newspaper for everyone to see. God the amount of bullshit in this thread is amazing. And if I said I had an eyewitness who saw it happen? And then they charge you with sexual assault based on that eyewitness? And then the eyewitness recants their testimony? I had skipped a few steps but I'll spell it out for you if you want. Paterno had no idea to know if McQuerey's accusations were true or not. He simply had the word of a graduate assistant versus the word of a 30-year old friend. He reported what he was told and let the "investigation" play out. I don't understand how calling child services would've made a lick of difference. a lick of difference? You don't see how calling in a 3rd party (who's #1 priority is not protecting PSU football) to investigate the claims made against Sandusky would have made a lick of difference? Seriously? Like seriouslyI've held my tongue all day.... but this one completely deserves a GTFO Kids calm down and read my post on the previous page. School admins had a statutory obligation to report. Failure to report is a misdemeanor under state law. Reporters are given legal immunity from what you guys are yammering on about. They have an obligation to report to their superiors under the law you linked... As Paterno received only reports from the GA and did not witness the event or receive the statement from the victim it is accepted that he only need pass on said information to his superior. Nope. Reporting Procedures Individual Responsibility Citation: Cons. Stat. Tit. 23 §§ 6311; 6313 A mandated reporter who has reasonable cause to suspect that a child is an abused or neglected child shall make a report to the Department of Public Welfare.An oral report shall be made immediately, to be followed by a written report within 48 hours.Written reports shall be made to the appropriate county agency in a manner and on forms the department prescribes by regulation.Content of Reports Citation: Cons. Stat. Tit. 23 § 6313 The written reports shall include the following information if available: [list][*]The names and addresses of the child and the child's parents or other persons responsible for the care of the child, if known [*]Where the suspected abuse occurred [*]The age and sex of subjects of the report [*]The nature and extent of the suspected abuse, including any evidence of prior abuse to the child or siblings of the child [*]The name and relationship of the person responsible for causing the suspected abuse, if known, and any evidence of prior abuse by that person [*]Family composition [*]The source of the report [*]The name and contact information of the person making the report [*]Any actions taken by the source source: childwelfare.gov You're cute. Now accept the fact that a "distraught" witness who comes and reports the incident after going to sleep, and not going to police, is not considered enough to provide reasonable cause.
Guess you aren't a reasonable person. The legal standard for what determines reasonable cause is pretty low. As a prosecutor, I'd be willing to take your scenario and prosecute for willful neglect of reporting duty.
Still haven't answered how school admins there failed to report to the Department of Public Welfare, either.
The bottom line is if you are a required reporter and you hear of pretty much anything resembling child abuse, you are statutorially obligated to report. Because such a statute could potentially get you into civil suit trouble, it has built in immunity.
|
On November 11 2011 07:29 itsjustatank wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:19 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:15 itsjustatank wrote:On November 11 2011 07:12 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:11 itsjustatank wrote:On November 11 2011 07:06 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 07:02 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:55 darthfoley wrote:On November 11 2011 06:48 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:43 Hawk wrote:
[quote]
Good lord. This eclipses every other dumb thing said in this thread.
Reporting someone you suspect to be fucking little kids to child services is not slander or libel. My fucking brain ughhhhhhhhghghghghasdfsa So if I called child services and told them that YOU were molesting little kids, those accusations turned out to be false, you lose your job, your reputation, and your life due to this accusation, I'm pretty fucking sure you'd take me to the fucking bank for slander. If those accusations turned out to be false, then i wouldn't lose my reputation. And stop being an idiot, going to authorities about it isn't like you're publishing it in a newspaper for everyone to see. God the amount of bullshit in this thread is amazing. And if I said I had an eyewitness who saw it happen? And then they charge you with sexual assault based on that eyewitness? And then the eyewitness recants their testimony? I had skipped a few steps but I'll spell it out for you if you want. Paterno had no idea to know if McQuerey's accusations were true or not. He simply had the word of a graduate assistant versus the word of a 30-year old friend. He reported what he was told and let the "investigation" play out. I don't understand how calling child services would've made a lick of difference. a lick of difference? You don't see how calling in a 3rd party (who's #1 priority is not protecting PSU football) to investigate the claims made against Sandusky would have made a lick of difference? Seriously? Like seriouslyI've held my tongue all day.... but this one completely deserves a GTFO Kids calm down and read my post on the previous page. School admins had a statutory obligation to report. Failure to report is a misdemeanor under state law. Reporters are given legal immunity from what you guys are yammering on about. They have an obligation to report to their superiors under the law you linked... As Paterno received only reports from the GA and did not witness the event or receive the statement from the victim it is accepted that he only need pass on said information to his superior. Nope. Reporting Procedures Individual Responsibility Citation: Cons. Stat. Tit. 23 §§ 6311; 6313 A mandated reporter who has reasonable cause to suspect that a child is an abused or neglected child shall make a report to the Department of Public Welfare.An oral report shall be made immediately, to be followed by a written report within 48 hours.Written reports shall be made to the appropriate county agency in a manner and on forms the department prescribes by regulation.Content of Reports Citation: Cons. Stat. Tit. 23 § 6313 The written reports shall include the following information if available: [list][*]The names and addresses of the child and the child's parents or other persons responsible for the care of the child, if known [*]Where the suspected abuse occurred [*]The age and sex of subjects of the report [*]The nature and extent of the suspected abuse, including any evidence of prior abuse to the child or siblings of the child [*]The name and relationship of the person responsible for causing the suspected abuse, if known, and any evidence of prior abuse by that person [*]Family composition [*]The source of the report [*]The name and contact information of the person making the report [*]Any actions taken by the source source: childwelfare.gov You're cute. Now accept the fact that a "distraught" witness who comes and reports the incident after going to sleep, and not going to police, is not considered enough to provide reasonable cause. Guess you aren't a reasonable person. The legal standard for what determines reasonable cause is pretty low. As a prosecutor, I'd be willing to take your scenario and prosecute for willful neglect of reporting duty. Still haven't answered how school admins there failed to report to the Department of Public Welfare, either.
You're late to the conversation, so I'll fill you in. I am fully supporting the prosecution of both the Athletic Director and the head of the police force. I am NOT for a mob lynching of Paterno based on pure speculation, and the reports of one man. Especially when that one man has only stood to gain from this whole situation, is the sole witness, and a victim has never been found.
Edit: If what you say is true, then why don't Pennsylvania's prosecutors charge Paterno as well? It looks to me like I am in the right here and you are in the wrong.
|
On November 11 2011 07:21 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:15 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:59 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:57 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:41 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:30 InvincibleRice wrote:http://thatlawyerdude.blogspot.com/2011/11/strong-defense-of-joe-paterno-why.htmlPaterno reported the incident to someone who was essentially (according to state statute that gives campus police the same authority as SC municipal police officers) the commissioner of a several-hundred strong police force; he didn't just "pass off the shit to the AD," he gave it to the highest ranking police officer in the area, who called in the actual witness and spoke to him. It sucks, hindsight is 20/20, etc, etc, but JoePa is not the monster that the media made him out to be. OMG thats not even close to being enough. When he sees Sandusky again and again over the next 9 years at PSU with children in his company. He never once asks whats going on? He never looks into it again? He never demands to know if the wheels of justice are turning on this? Worst yet he never looks Sandusky in the face, calls him a sick fuck, and tells him to get the fuck off his football field? No instead he does children's charities events for this guy. Are you fucking kidding me? He lucky he not in jail forget losing his job. Or maybe he assumed that the investigation had turned up nothing? Maybe he assumed that when called in some other act had happened, that McQuerey had not exactly lied but just been wrong and so was allowed to stay and advance through the ranks of the PSU staff? Maybe that happened? Can you tell me it didn't? No, you can not. You can sit there and speculate, though. You seem to be doing a fine job of it. He can't assume there, not with kids lives at stake. He has a moral obligation to follow up and make sure those kids are protected. He didn't do that. He washed his hands of it and shame on him for the rest of his life for that. Shame on you for being judgemental as fuck. He saw an investigation take place, then he saw no real actions taken as a result of said investigation. How do you know he didn't follow up? How do you know whether or not he asked about it and was told they had found nothing? You DON'T. And that's all I've been trying to point out. Nobody knows jack shit right now. Reserve judgement for when you do. After all the statements have been given. Paterno own statement says he did not do enough. There no need to reserve judgement in this. There is already more then enough facts to condemn joepa as morally bankrupt. If there wasn't, he still be the coach at PSU today. I know that none of that matters to you. You'll simply cry "speculation!" to any facts presented to you, or somehow rationalize Paternos actions away. How much evidence is needed before we can pass judgment on this? Please tell us. All we know is that Paterno reported the incident to his superior and made sure the head of the Campus police force not only knew, but was investigating the matter. The end. That's all we know. Now you wanna tell me that's enough to call him morally bankrupt? Must be a lot of morally bankrupt people in your life man.
That's not nearly all we know. We know that after all this Paterno never batted a eye lash as Sandusky a now twice accused pedophile. Walked around his football field with children in his company. He even attended PSU bowl games and had children stay with him in his hotel room. Paterno at the least is guilty of being a extremely naive fool, or at worst a enabler of this.
|
On November 11 2011 07:33 InToTheWannaB wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:21 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:15 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:59 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:57 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:41 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:30 InvincibleRice wrote:http://thatlawyerdude.blogspot.com/2011/11/strong-defense-of-joe-paterno-why.htmlPaterno reported the incident to someone who was essentially (according to state statute that gives campus police the same authority as SC municipal police officers) the commissioner of a several-hundred strong police force; he didn't just "pass off the shit to the AD," he gave it to the highest ranking police officer in the area, who called in the actual witness and spoke to him. It sucks, hindsight is 20/20, etc, etc, but JoePa is not the monster that the media made him out to be. OMG thats not even close to being enough. When he sees Sandusky again and again over the next 9 years at PSU with children in his company. He never once asks whats going on? He never looks into it again? He never demands to know if the wheels of justice are turning on this? Worst yet he never looks Sandusky in the face, calls him a sick fuck, and tells him to get the fuck off his football field? No instead he does children's charities events for this guy. Are you fucking kidding me? He lucky he not in jail forget losing his job. Or maybe he assumed that the investigation had turned up nothing? Maybe he assumed that when called in some other act had happened, that McQuerey had not exactly lied but just been wrong and so was allowed to stay and advance through the ranks of the PSU staff? Maybe that happened? Can you tell me it didn't? No, you can not. You can sit there and speculate, though. You seem to be doing a fine job of it. He can't assume there, not with kids lives at stake. He has a moral obligation to follow up and make sure those kids are protected. He didn't do that. He washed his hands of it and shame on him for the rest of his life for that. Shame on you for being judgemental as fuck. He saw an investigation take place, then he saw no real actions taken as a result of said investigation. How do you know he didn't follow up? How do you know whether or not he asked about it and was told they had found nothing? You DON'T. And that's all I've been trying to point out. Nobody knows jack shit right now. Reserve judgement for when you do. After all the statements have been given. Paterno own statement says he did not do enough. There no need to reserve judgement in this. There is already more then enough facts to condemn joepa as morally bankrupt. If there wasn't, he still be the coach at PSU today. I know that none of that matters to you. You'll simply cry "speculation!" to any facts presented to you, or somehow rationalize Paternos actions away. How much evidence is needed before we can pass judgment on this? Please tell us. All we know is that Paterno reported the incident to his superior and made sure the head of the Campus police force not only knew, but was investigating the matter. The end. That's all we know. Now you wanna tell me that's enough to call him morally bankrupt? Must be a lot of morally bankrupt people in your life man. That's not nearly all we know. We know that after all this Paterno never batted a eye lash as Sandusky a now twice accused pedophile. Walked around his football field with children in his company. He even attended PSU bowl games and had children stay with him in his hotel room. Paterno at the least guilty of being a extremely naive fool, or at worst a enabler of this.
WE now know he was twice accused, and so does Sandusky, NOW. You do not KNOW that Paterno was aware of the first time Sandusky was accused at the time of the 2002 incident. And did Paterno KNOW about those children staying with Sandusky? He did NOT, and you can not prove to me that he did.
|
On November 11 2011 07:24 stokes17 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:21 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 07:19 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 07:14 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 07:06 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 07:02 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:55 darthfoley wrote:On November 11 2011 06:48 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:43 Hawk wrote:On November 11 2011 06:39 JinNJuice wrote:
[quote]
....Did you seriously just copy-paste the definition without even reading it? As the definition states THAT YOU JUST LINKED, slander is something that you SAY about someone, aka calling child services which i'm sure calls are monitored and recorded.... Good lord. This eclipses every other dumb thing said in this thread. Reporting someone you suspect to be fucking little kids to child services is not slander or libel. My fucking brain ughhhhhhhhghghghghasdfsa So if I called child services and told them that YOU were molesting little kids, those accusations turned out to be false, you lose your job, your reputation, and your life due to this accusation, I'm pretty fucking sure you'd take me to the fucking bank for slander. If those accusations turned out to be false, then i wouldn't lose my reputation. And stop being an idiot, going to authorities about it isn't like you're publishing it in a newspaper for everyone to see. God the amount of bullshit in this thread is amazing. And if I said I had an eyewitness who saw it happen? And then they charge you with sexual assault based on that eyewitness? And then the eyewitness recants their testimony? I had skipped a few steps but I'll spell it out for you if you want. Paterno had no idea to know if McQuerey's accusations were true or not. He simply had the word of a graduate assistant versus the word of a 30-year old friend. He reported what he was told and let the "investigation" play out. I don't understand how calling child services would've made a lick of difference. a lick of difference? You don't see how calling in a 3rd party (who's #1 priority is not protecting PSU football) to investigate the claims made against Sandusky would have made a lick of difference? Seriously? Like seriouslyI've held my tongue all day.... but this one completely deserves a GTFO Lol....I don't know if you live in the real world or not, but you don't call in 3rd parties when you have internal processes/procedures for reporting this stuff. He reported it to the head of a state-recognized campus police force. That should have been enough on Paterno's end if the system worked. The system failed and now Paterno is PARTLY responsible because of that fact. Like we said, hindsight is 20/20, of course looking back we can say if he reported it to childs services it would've been looked at more closely and Sandusky would've been brought to justice.... lol....gtfo indeed. So you say if Paterno called CPS in 2002 it would have not made a lick of difference, then you say it would have made a difference.... what are you saying? It was meant to be a hyperbole, but I guess everything we say has to be taken completely seriously. My point was that Paterno shouldn't have had to report it to childs services in the first place. Of course he had no legal obligation; he had a moral one, and he failed it. He was not compelled in anyway, legally or contractually, to have done anything more than he did. He did the bare minimum to protect himself legally. That is not good enough for me. That is not good enough for the victims of Sandusky's actions. He failed them in a moral sense.
Yes I agree with you, but again remember you're speaking in hindsight. If the system had worked, Paterno would've been held up as a fighting force for good. Because it hasn't, Paterno is being cast as a heartless bastard who helps sickos rape kids, with no moral compass at all. You all are so quick to judge, and all I'm saying is that greater focus should be placed on the process that failed that allowed this tragedy happened, not who should be held responsible. Not sure if anyone can see the fine difference but there is one.
It's like an engine failure. You can fix the root of the problem, but if you don't fix the process that allowed the failiure to occur, then another similar failure could slip through and happen again.
|
Hong Kong9179 Posts
On November 11 2011 07:31 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:29 itsjustatank wrote:On November 11 2011 07:19 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:15 itsjustatank wrote:On November 11 2011 07:12 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:11 itsjustatank wrote:On November 11 2011 07:06 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 07:02 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:55 darthfoley wrote:On November 11 2011 06:48 JinNJuice wrote:
[quote]
So if I called child services and told them that YOU were molesting little kids, those accusations turned out to be false, you lose your job, your reputation, and your life due to this accusation, I'm pretty fucking sure you'd take me to the fucking bank for slander. If those accusations turned out to be false, then i wouldn't lose my reputation. And stop being an idiot, going to authorities about it isn't like you're publishing it in a newspaper for everyone to see. God the amount of bullshit in this thread is amazing. And if I said I had an eyewitness who saw it happen? And then they charge you with sexual assault based on that eyewitness? And then the eyewitness recants their testimony? I had skipped a few steps but I'll spell it out for you if you want. Paterno had no idea to know if McQuerey's accusations were true or not. He simply had the word of a graduate assistant versus the word of a 30-year old friend. He reported what he was told and let the "investigation" play out. I don't understand how calling child services would've made a lick of difference. a lick of difference? You don't see how calling in a 3rd party (who's #1 priority is not protecting PSU football) to investigate the claims made against Sandusky would have made a lick of difference? Seriously? Like seriouslyI've held my tongue all day.... but this one completely deserves a GTFO Kids calm down and read my post on the previous page. School admins had a statutory obligation to report. Failure to report is a misdemeanor under state law. Reporters are given legal immunity from what you guys are yammering on about. They have an obligation to report to their superiors under the law you linked... As Paterno received only reports from the GA and did not witness the event or receive the statement from the victim it is accepted that he only need pass on said information to his superior. Nope. Reporting Procedures Individual Responsibility Citation: Cons. Stat. Tit. 23 §§ 6311; 6313 A mandated reporter who has reasonable cause to suspect that a child is an abused or neglected child shall make a report to the Department of Public Welfare.An oral report shall be made immediately, to be followed by a written report within 48 hours.Written reports shall be made to the appropriate county agency in a manner and on forms the department prescribes by regulation.Content of Reports Citation: Cons. Stat. Tit. 23 § 6313 The written reports shall include the following information if available: [list][*]The names and addresses of the child and the child's parents or other persons responsible for the care of the child, if known [*]Where the suspected abuse occurred [*]The age and sex of subjects of the report [*]The nature and extent of the suspected abuse, including any evidence of prior abuse to the child or siblings of the child [*]The name and relationship of the person responsible for causing the suspected abuse, if known, and any evidence of prior abuse by that person [*]Family composition [*]The source of the report [*]The name and contact information of the person making the report [*]Any actions taken by the source source: childwelfare.gov You're cute. Now accept the fact that a "distraught" witness who comes and reports the incident after going to sleep, and not going to police, is not considered enough to provide reasonable cause. Guess you aren't a reasonable person. The legal standard for what determines reasonable cause is pretty low. As a prosecutor, I'd be willing to take your scenario and prosecute for willful neglect of reporting duty. Still haven't answered how school admins there failed to report to the Department of Public Welfare, either. You're late to the conversation, so I'll fill you in. I am fully supporting the prosecution of both the Athletic Director and the head of the police force. I am NOT for a mob lynching of Paterno based on pure speculation, and the reports of one man. Especially when that one man has only stood to gain from this whole situation, is the sole witness, and a victim has never been found. Edit: If what you say is true, then why don't Pennsylvania's prosecutors charge Paterno as well? It looks to me like I am in the right here and you are in the wrong.
Straw man is cool. I never made arguments of being morally wrong or right; I'm just injecting actual PA law to the conversation. In my opinion, everyone involved who did not report is potentially guilty of a misdemeanor. No evidence exists thus far that Paterno or anyone for that matter reported to the Department of Public Welfare.
|
On November 11 2011 07:34 Risen wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:33 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 07:21 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:15 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:59 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:57 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:41 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:30 InvincibleRice wrote:http://thatlawyerdude.blogspot.com/2011/11/strong-defense-of-joe-paterno-why.htmlPaterno reported the incident to someone who was essentially (according to state statute that gives campus police the same authority as SC municipal police officers) the commissioner of a several-hundred strong police force; he didn't just "pass off the shit to the AD," he gave it to the highest ranking police officer in the area, who called in the actual witness and spoke to him. It sucks, hindsight is 20/20, etc, etc, but JoePa is not the monster that the media made him out to be. OMG thats not even close to being enough. When he sees Sandusky again and again over the next 9 years at PSU with children in his company. He never once asks whats going on? He never looks into it again? He never demands to know if the wheels of justice are turning on this? Worst yet he never looks Sandusky in the face, calls him a sick fuck, and tells him to get the fuck off his football field? No instead he does children's charities events for this guy. Are you fucking kidding me? He lucky he not in jail forget losing his job. Or maybe he assumed that the investigation had turned up nothing? Maybe he assumed that when called in some other act had happened, that McQuerey had not exactly lied but just been wrong and so was allowed to stay and advance through the ranks of the PSU staff? Maybe that happened? Can you tell me it didn't? No, you can not. You can sit there and speculate, though. You seem to be doing a fine job of it. He can't assume there, not with kids lives at stake. He has a moral obligation to follow up and make sure those kids are protected. He didn't do that. He washed his hands of it and shame on him for the rest of his life for that. Shame on you for being judgemental as fuck. He saw an investigation take place, then he saw no real actions taken as a result of said investigation. How do you know he didn't follow up? How do you know whether or not he asked about it and was told they had found nothing? You DON'T. And that's all I've been trying to point out. Nobody knows jack shit right now. Reserve judgement for when you do. After all the statements have been given. Paterno own statement says he did not do enough. There no need to reserve judgement in this. There is already more then enough facts to condemn joepa as morally bankrupt. If there wasn't, he still be the coach at PSU today. I know that none of that matters to you. You'll simply cry "speculation!" to any facts presented to you, or somehow rationalize Paternos actions away. How much evidence is needed before we can pass judgment on this? Please tell us. All we know is that Paterno reported the incident to his superior and made sure the head of the Campus police force not only knew, but was investigating the matter. The end. That's all we know. Now you wanna tell me that's enough to call him morally bankrupt? Must be a lot of morally bankrupt people in your life man. That's not nearly all we know. We know that after all this Paterno never batted a eye lash as Sandusky a now twice accused pedophile. Walked around his football field with children in his company. He even attended PSU bowl games and had children stay with him in his hotel room. Paterno at the least guilty of being a extremely naive fool, or at worst a enabler of this. WE now know he was twice accused, and so does Sandusky, NOW. You do not KNOW that Paterno was aware of the first time Sandusky was accused at the time of the 2002 incident. And did Paterno KNOW about those children staying with Sandusky? He did NOT, and you can not prove to me that he did.
If you don't believe that the most powerful man at PSU did not know that campus police were investing Joepa right hand man. Then your very naive and I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
|
On November 11 2011 07:35 itsjustatank wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:31 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:29 itsjustatank wrote:On November 11 2011 07:19 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:15 itsjustatank wrote:On November 11 2011 07:12 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:11 itsjustatank wrote:On November 11 2011 07:06 stokes17 wrote:On November 11 2011 07:02 JinNJuice wrote:On November 11 2011 06:55 darthfoley wrote:
[quote]
If those accusations turned out to be false, then i wouldn't lose my reputation. And stop being an idiot, going to authorities about it isn't like you're publishing it in a newspaper for everyone to see. God the amount of bullshit in this thread is amazing. And if I said I had an eyewitness who saw it happen? And then they charge you with sexual assault based on that eyewitness? And then the eyewitness recants their testimony? I had skipped a few steps but I'll spell it out for you if you want. Paterno had no idea to know if McQuerey's accusations were true or not. He simply had the word of a graduate assistant versus the word of a 30-year old friend. He reported what he was told and let the "investigation" play out. I don't understand how calling child services would've made a lick of difference. a lick of difference? You don't see how calling in a 3rd party (who's #1 priority is not protecting PSU football) to investigate the claims made against Sandusky would have made a lick of difference? Seriously? Like seriouslyI've held my tongue all day.... but this one completely deserves a GTFO Kids calm down and read my post on the previous page. School admins had a statutory obligation to report. Failure to report is a misdemeanor under state law. Reporters are given legal immunity from what you guys are yammering on about. They have an obligation to report to their superiors under the law you linked... As Paterno received only reports from the GA and did not witness the event or receive the statement from the victim it is accepted that he only need pass on said information to his superior. Nope. Reporting Procedures Individual Responsibility Citation: Cons. Stat. Tit. 23 §§ 6311; 6313 A mandated reporter who has reasonable cause to suspect that a child is an abused or neglected child shall make a report to the Department of Public Welfare.An oral report shall be made immediately, to be followed by a written report within 48 hours.Written reports shall be made to the appropriate county agency in a manner and on forms the department prescribes by regulation.Content of Reports Citation: Cons. Stat. Tit. 23 § 6313 The written reports shall include the following information if available: [list][*]The names and addresses of the child and the child's parents or other persons responsible for the care of the child, if known [*]Where the suspected abuse occurred [*]The age and sex of subjects of the report [*]The nature and extent of the suspected abuse, including any evidence of prior abuse to the child or siblings of the child [*]The name and relationship of the person responsible for causing the suspected abuse, if known, and any evidence of prior abuse by that person [*]Family composition [*]The source of the report [*]The name and contact information of the person making the report [*]Any actions taken by the source source: childwelfare.gov You're cute. Now accept the fact that a "distraught" witness who comes and reports the incident after going to sleep, and not going to police, is not considered enough to provide reasonable cause. Guess you aren't a reasonable person. The legal standard for what determines reasonable cause is pretty low. As a prosecutor, I'd be willing to take your scenario and prosecute for willful neglect of reporting duty. Still haven't answered how school admins there failed to report to the Department of Public Welfare, either. You're late to the conversation, so I'll fill you in. I am fully supporting the prosecution of both the Athletic Director and the head of the police force. I am NOT for a mob lynching of Paterno based on pure speculation, and the reports of one man. Especially when that one man has only stood to gain from this whole situation, is the sole witness, and a victim has never been found. Edit: If what you say is true, then why don't Pennsylvania's prosecutors charge Paterno as well? It looks to me like I am in the right here and you are in the wrong. Straw man is cool. I never made arguments of being wrong or right; I'm just injecting actual PA law to the conversation. In my opinion, everyone involved who did not report is potentially guilty of a misdemeanor. No evidence exists thus far that Paterno or anyone for that matter reported to the Department of Public Welfare.
You said "Still haven't answered how school admins there failed to report to the Department of Public Welfare, either."
That to me is saying, "Hey Risen, respond to this" That's what my post did. I responded to that. I didn't say you had an argument, you ASKED me to answer to the other administrators, which clearly means you haven't been reading the thread since the start of this or you would have seen my responses. I gave you a summary of what I had said earlier.
To this you respond that I am using a straw man, wtf? How am I misrepresenting you? You said, "Guess you aren't a reasonable person. The legal standard for what determines reasonable cause is pretty low. As a prosecutor, I'd be willing to take your scenario and prosecute for willful neglect of reporting duty." I responded that I am a reasonable person or else Penn's prosecutors would be all over Paterno.
|
On November 11 2011 07:38 InToTheWannaB wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2011 07:34 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:33 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 07:21 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 07:15 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:59 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:57 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:44 Risen wrote:On November 11 2011 06:41 InToTheWannaB wrote:On November 11 2011 06:30 InvincibleRice wrote:http://thatlawyerdude.blogspot.com/2011/11/strong-defense-of-joe-paterno-why.htmlPaterno reported the incident to someone who was essentially (according to state statute that gives campus police the same authority as SC municipal police officers) the commissioner of a several-hundred strong police force; he didn't just "pass off the shit to the AD," he gave it to the highest ranking police officer in the area, who called in the actual witness and spoke to him. It sucks, hindsight is 20/20, etc, etc, but JoePa is not the monster that the media made him out to be. OMG thats not even close to being enough. When he sees Sandusky again and again over the next 9 years at PSU with children in his company. He never once asks whats going on? He never looks into it again? He never demands to know if the wheels of justice are turning on this? Worst yet he never looks Sandusky in the face, calls him a sick fuck, and tells him to get the fuck off his football field? No instead he does children's charities events for this guy. Are you fucking kidding me? He lucky he not in jail forget losing his job. Or maybe he assumed that the investigation had turned up nothing? Maybe he assumed that when called in some other act had happened, that McQuerey had not exactly lied but just been wrong and so was allowed to stay and advance through the ranks of the PSU staff? Maybe that happened? Can you tell me it didn't? No, you can not. You can sit there and speculate, though. You seem to be doing a fine job of it. He can't assume there, not with kids lives at stake. He has a moral obligation to follow up and make sure those kids are protected. He didn't do that. He washed his hands of it and shame on him for the rest of his life for that. Shame on you for being judgemental as fuck. He saw an investigation take place, then he saw no real actions taken as a result of said investigation. How do you know he didn't follow up? How do you know whether or not he asked about it and was told they had found nothing? You DON'T. And that's all I've been trying to point out. Nobody knows jack shit right now. Reserve judgement for when you do. After all the statements have been given. Paterno own statement says he did not do enough. There no need to reserve judgement in this. There is already more then enough facts to condemn joepa as morally bankrupt. If there wasn't, he still be the coach at PSU today. I know that none of that matters to you. You'll simply cry "speculation!" to any facts presented to you, or somehow rationalize Paternos actions away. How much evidence is needed before we can pass judgment on this? Please tell us. All we know is that Paterno reported the incident to his superior and made sure the head of the Campus police force not only knew, but was investigating the matter. The end. That's all we know. Now you wanna tell me that's enough to call him morally bankrupt? Must be a lot of morally bankrupt people in your life man. That's not nearly all we know. We know that after all this Paterno never batted a eye lash as Sandusky a now twice accused pedophile. Walked around his football field with children in his company. He even attended PSU bowl games and had children stay with him in his hotel room. Paterno at the least guilty of being a extremely naive fool, or at worst a enabler of this. WE now know he was twice accused, and so does Sandusky, NOW. You do not KNOW that Paterno was aware of the first time Sandusky was accused at the time of the 2002 incident. And did Paterno KNOW about those children staying with Sandusky? He did NOT, and you can not prove to me that he did. If you don't believe that the most powerful man at PSU did not know that campus police were investing Joepa right hand man. Then your very naive and I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
OH HEY LOOK! Your argument falls apart and you resort to speculation AGAIN. I'm shocked, really, I am.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
