CNN Headline on Paterno
- Thread starter Lion8286
- Start date
Of course. You are in the rabid minority. I've shared that with you already.
Not at all. Most welcome a first hand opinion. They don't know. There is more outrage about the narrative than there is the victims. I typically have to remind them that a tragedy did in fact occur. As noted earlier, they only know what they are fed by the agenda driven media.
I don't understand how anyone saw all that and didn't beat the living shit out of Jer-Bear. Glimpse in a bathroom mirror? That's a tough one to believe.
McQueary difficult to believe? You don't say.... BTW, dare I point out that there are multiple versions of his experiences that night, some include portions of what you claim - others don't, none of them are consistent with each other (or the actions of the people he supposedly in 2001 while the incident was in progress or even after the fact for that matter).
And Wendall Courney knew all of this from both sides, TSM and PSU and his wife, yet skated with no repercussions? Mmmmmk
OK, I agree with you there.
It just seems very likely to me that he remembered things a hell of a lot more clearly 10 years later than he saw things and reported them at the time.
I don't know because I wasn't there. With him knowing all of the legalities, and also working Pro Bono for TSM, why didn't he "call the real police"?
The point is you say 2 words. Jack failed. While you posted 10,000 times Paterno testimony sexual nature or some combination there of.
The point is Jack was required to notify Childline or the "real" police. Joe was not.
The point is Joe's reputation is destroyed, and that talentless little bitch Ganim every now and then removes her face from Stacy's buttocks to type another garbage story to reinforce that. While Jack who failed gets to live his life unrecognized, still maintaining his practice and making money, advising pedophiles that it's OK to grope children as long as they put swimming trunks on.
If only that child somehow knew an adult who was legally responsible for him who could be notified once the identity of the child was known.
Excellent. Just refer me to the proper page & citation, and we'll be square.
Last edited:
For your reference: http://www.psu.edu/ur/2012/REPORT_FINAL_071212.pdf
Chapter 9 starts on page 120.
Background checks for sports camps are ever so important. But that's not the policy in question.
That's my experience. Evidently, you have had a different experience where everyone comes together to note how "Paterno failed". My guess is that you don't get out much.
How many victims occurred after the 2001 MM shower incident? What were their names or victim #? Where did the abuse of these victims occur? What was charges in relation to these victims was JS convicted of? You seem to think you are an expert on this topic, time to prove it.
You do realize that EVERY victim occurred after the "professionals" cleared JS in 1998. Every victim is on them, yet they receive no scrutiny.
So he is using the completely debunked Freeh Report, the admitted opinion of a man with a shattered reputation that did not have subpoena power and didn't interview any of the key individuals?
If I'm not mistaken, Freeh's key find was that (paraphrasing) "top university officials covered up abuse to protect the football program"? That not only never made any logical sense, it has also been disproven in a court of law. But that is what GMJ11 wants to lean on? That's almost as bad as him assigning biased meaning to a few parsed words in Joe's non-cross examined GJ testimony that we've never heard to verify it's accuracy!
Why didn't he call the police? So you are saying he knew about abuse and ignored it? Why is it that in your head, only C/S/S/P should have called the police?
So any crime that is witnessed where the victim can not be identified cannot be reported to police? Is that what you are saying?
This board gets dumber by the day.
It should be clear to you by now that they didn't believe it to be a crime. Once again, it's foolish to judge a situation for which you know already know the outcome.
Back to "the public", next time you are out and about and the subject comes up, ask this question, "do you really think 4, 5 or 6 grown men knew Sandusky was sucking off young boys, and freely elected to ignore it?".
You will get the very same response I get. Every time.
The policy in question, as stated by you, was that employees at Penn State were prohibited from contacting the police and other authorities without the consent of the victim.
Freeh concluded that children had not been adequately protected in the past by existing policy set forth in AD 39 and HR 99 which he reviewed in the report.
I posted that the simplest answer to your question was that there was no formalized policy in existence in 2001 which could have been reported and Freeh's report appears to support that. So the "disappearance" in the Freeh Report which you allege, is not accurate.
Have we been talking past each other; perhaps.
No problem.
Another "content rich" reply by the King of the Trolls (KOTT)!!!
What good does reporting a"crime" to police when you give them nothing to confirm the existence of that crime??? Is it a real "Crime" without any real evidence??? Do you like wasting police time on chasing after situations which they have no chance of prevention or solution???
Good work - another comment without real world substance....something that "almost" sound good, but is factually worthless....but what can you expect when you KNOW that you are REALLY only supporting a band of REAL criminals who have hijacked an entire STATE. What is the victim count for stealing justice in an entire state like PA - how many MILLIONS???
I hope you are getting well paid for promoting the PACORN's agenda of hiding crimes by keeping this absurd manufactured and illegal PSU Scandal visible to the public!
I await your personal attacks on this post because .....that is all you got!
They probably would have thought that it was a prank call.
"This is Joe Paterno, someone told me that they saw JS possibly committing a crime last night. No I don't have any further details. Can you guys handle it?
I will say this. In my experience you can't report the abuse or neglect of a child to protective services without the child's name. At least, not with any success.
Freeh listed 8 policies designed to protect the campus community on p.36-37. Why did he only discuss two in Chapter 9, neither of which would have likely been consulted after McQueary's report. Freeh quoted Paterno's interview with Jenkins in which he said he was afraid to jeopardize university procedure, so he backed away. Why didn't he report on what his investigation uncovered with respect to what procedure Paterno was talking about.
What did policy AD12 say in February 2001? What other document does it refer to for reporting sexual assault? What does that document say? Why did Freeh's report not answer these questions?
people who say "this is what Mike saw" with any sense of certainty REALLY need to read his actual testimony at Sandusky's trial
That's what you talk about in public? Ehhhh... like I said, I don't think you realize that people are just being nice to the crazy person.
Correct. He advised them to contact DPW, not the police. Which is a perfectly fine COA because it should lead to an investigation.
Similar threads
