0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
That is all. Disguting. http://outkickthecoverage.com/joe-paterno-is-done-at-penn-state-fans-should-boycott-nebraska-game.php
Maybe they thought they could get away with the coverup? Disgusting response from the people informed about what was happening, but they did manage to cover up the 2002 incident for 9 years and the earlier internal review from 1999 for 12 years! I can't believe someone didn't leak that stuff to the press, but it must have been only a few people that knew about it.
The sad thing is that the people who would do the firing need to be fired too. This has go to the level of whatever the board of trustees is. Everyone who knew didn't act and they need to go. I don't remember how the hierarchy there goes but essentially everyone from PSU President Graham Spanier down to Paterno needs to resign or be fired.
Quote from: NLP on November 07, 2011, 01:19:41 pmThe sad thing is that the people who would do the firing need to be fired too. This has go to the level of whatever the board of trustees is. Everyone who knew didn't act and they need to go. I don't remember how the hierarchy there goes but essentially everyone from PSU President Graham Spanier down to Paterno needs to resign or be fired.I'm not questioning the coach's guilt, but I'm not sure the testimony makes it clear that the PSU President knew. It sounds like there was a breakdown in communication and it changed from a criminal act to "something possibly inappropriate" by the time it got to the higher ups. It does sound like Paterno and a lot of people did know full well and covered it up. They do need to be fired.
Breakdown in communication? It should have been communicated directly to law enforcement and vigorously followed-up on.
Quote from: 49or bust on November 07, 2011, 06:31:13 pmI'm not questioning the coach's guilt, but I'm not sure the testimony makes it clear that the PSU President knew. It sounds like there was a breakdown in communication and it changed from a criminal act to "something possibly inappropriate" by the time it got to the higher ups. It does sound like Paterno and a lot of people did know full well and covered it up. They do need to be fired.Hey Mr President, someone saw Coach Sandusky naked in the shower with an 11 year old boy. They weren't doing anything criminal but they may hve been doing inappropriate things. Thanks Mr. AD, how is the golf game?I hope you are not a lawyer .
I'm not questioning the coach's guilt, but I'm not sure the testimony makes it clear that the PSU President knew. It sounds like there was a breakdown in communication and it changed from a criminal act to "something possibly inappropriate" by the time it got to the higher ups. It does sound like Paterno and a lot of people did know full well and covered it up. They do need to be fired.
Quote from: NLP on November 07, 2011, 06:52:30 pmBreakdown in communication? It should have been communicated directly to law enforcement and vigorously followed-up on.The people who knew are at fault for not taking this course. The testimony doesn't make it clear that the full information reached the top.Quote from: Mullins Maniac on November 07, 2011, 07:00:26 pmQuote from: 49or bust on November 07, 2011, 06:31:13 pmI'm not questioning the coach's guilt, but I'm not sure the testimony makes it clear that the PSU President knew. It sounds like there was a breakdown in communication and it changed from a criminal act to "something possibly inappropriate" by the time it got to the higher ups. It does sound like Paterno and a lot of people did know full well and covered it up. They do need to be fired.Hey Mr President, someone saw Coach Sandusky naked in the shower with an 11 year old boy. They weren't doing anything criminal but they may hve been doing inappropriate things. Thanks Mr. AD, how is the golf game?I hope you are not a lawyer .Once the message was relayed to the top, it wasn't what happened but "inappropriate conduct" termed as "horsing around." I'm not saying that is what the president was told, I'm saying that's what the testimony says. I don't know what the laws are on those communal showers. I mean people are expected to be naked in there together. So if he got a story that nothing sexual was going on, does he have something to report to the police? The others involved clearly had something to report, but the testimony and grand jury report don't make it clear that the President did.
He was in a shower, alone, naked, with an 11 year old boy at 9:30 pm. That alone is enough to report. I dont care if they were reading the Bible.
Quote from: Mullins Maniac on November 07, 2011, 10:45:42 pmHe was in a shower, alone, naked, with an 11 year old boy at 9:30 pm. That alone is enough to report. I dont care if they were reading the Bible.I'm not talking about how I feel here, just to be clear. I'm talking from a investigation or trial sense. Does this guy have a valid defense.
Quote from: Mullins Maniac on November 07, 2011, 10:45:42 pmHe was in a shower, alone, naked, with an 11 year old boy at 9:30 pm. That alone is enough to report. I dont care if they were reading the Bible.So this Sandusky guy has a good reputation right? And a clean record as far as the Pres knows? If football people like Sandusky are all comfortable with communal showers, and, as far as the Pres knows, Sandusky is a saint, maybe it didn't seem like a red alert situation. Maybe Sandusky is just a father figure to the kid and it's all totally innocent. It's awkward to the majority for sure, but not everyone is the same way about nudity. However, it's not the kind of thing that is publically accepted so telling him to stop may have seemed acceptable.When you are the leader of something and have the person's and your school's reputation at stake, you can't just accuse them without being quite sure it is valid. Because if this guy is respected, and you are wrong, and he was unjustly made part of a child sexual abuse investigation, there's going to be some serious trouble.
Quote from: 49or bust on November 08, 2011, 12:04:02 amQuote from: Mullins Maniac on November 07, 2011, 10:45:42 pmIn 1998 allegations were brought against Sandusky for similiar actions. At that time he hd been at PSU 20 plus years and was the heir apparent to Joe Pa. He abruptly resigned in 1999. Coincedence? So know he was not clean and am sure the Pres was informed as to why the heir apparent resigned.You have to remember that in 2002 Sandusky no longer worked for PSU. Sorry for the typos above. Forget the legal aspect of this, the moral void is disgusting and worthy of termination of all involved. One last note, when the lawsuits begin (and they will) I believe few will be left standing. This will have the effect at PSU that the Patrick Dennehy scandal had at Baylor.
Quote from: Mullins Maniac on November 07, 2011, 10:45:42 pmIn 1998 allegations were brought against Sandusky for similiar actions. At that time he hd been at PSU 20 plus years and was the heir apparent to Joe Pa. He abruptly resigned in 1999. Coincedence? So know he was not clean and am sure the Pres was informed as to why the heir apparent resigned.You have to remember that in 2002 Sandusky no longer worked for PSU. Sorry for the typos above. Forget the legal aspect of this, the moral void is disgusting and worthy of termination of all involved. One last note, when the lawsuits begin (and they will) I believe few will be left standing. This will have the effect at PSU that the Patrick Dennehy scandal had at Baylor.
In 1998 allegations were brought against Sandusky for similiar actions. At that time he hd been at PSU 20 plus years and was the heir apparent to Joe Pa. He abruptly resigned in 1999. Coincedence? So know he was not clean and am sure the Pres was informed as to why the heir apparent resigned.You have to remember that in 2002 Sandusky no longer worked for PSU.
Quote from: 49or bust on November 08, 2011, 12:04:02 amQuote from: Mullins Maniac on November 07, 2011, 10:45:42 pmHe was in a shower, alone, naked, with an 11 year old boy at 9:30 pm. That alone is enough to report. I dont care if they were reading the Bible.I'm not talking about how I feel here, just to be clear. I'm talking from a investigation or trial sense. Does this guy have a valid defense. Bust, and I mean this in the most respectful way possible. What the flying f*** are you babbling about?
There's no gray area here. Naked. In Shower. With 11 year old. (who he happened to be anally raping). There's no way you have ever been in a leadership/mangement position.
You don't give him the benefit of the doubt. You don't write it off as horseplay. At the bare minimum, you immediately drag the witness and the accused in your office and get their stories, in detail, before deciding if the cops need to be called. And when you hear that this guy was in the shower, naked, with a kid, you immediately take the high road, report the incident to the authorities for them to investigate and place the individual on suspension, pending the results. You do not take his key away and write the whole thing off.
I know you like to take the opposing side for a good debate but this is not one to do that with. This is absolutely egregious, and S9er is absolutely right. The entire PSU AD and probably a few more folks are dead men walking.