You are an effin douche. You love to use the words "posting history" as if it's tour's of duty. Freaking board nerd.
Garban, Surma, Alexander, Allan, Arnelle, Broadhurst, Clemens, Corbett,
- Thread starter fairgambit
- Start date
Certainly they have engendered distain. But before one criticizes Paterno and the previous administration, please help me absolve the Board members, by investigating what they knew and when they knew it. It is hollow to blame Paterno without demonstrating transparency by opening the Freeh Report to all the trustees, engage in investigation of the board and their e-mails, the Erickson administration and any contact between the PSU Board and TSM Board. I have not treated their families cruelly or otherwise, but one has to challenge you on who is ignorant. I assume you are acknowledging that the Board made a bad choice. Be that the case, contrition not continued arrogance seems to have been and continues to be the better and proper approach. The rift between the two factions will not go away by saying "move on".
Well said. I think "it is reasonable to assume" that the resolve of the OG Trustees to keep the activities of the SITF and other Freeh related documents and communications hidden is evidence of their malfeasance, at a minimum and possible criminal activity.
Of course, anyone that disagrees with a 10,000 poster must be a troll. Get back to Sheetz, your shift is about to start.
He tried to outdo his father? That's what you consider a reasonable explanation for his behavior?
Do some research on pedophiles before making asinine arguments.
What, you think each post is its own little world? I bet you think each troll is actually a unique individual. You trolls are cute like that.
So there was never any "rape" "anal intercourse" "sodomy" or "penetration". Thank you for determining that.
He never said that; all he said was those words were never used. He said that MM said JS was molesting the young boy. The definition of molestation includes sexual assault or abuse of a person, especially a woman or a child. 18Pa.C.S. Section 3124.1, entitled Sexual Assault, provides that it is a felony to engage in sexual intercourse. MM testified that he thought there was intercourse involved although he never saw penetration. His position has never changed as to the substantive nature of the activity he observed.
PS to WeR0206; his statement was not false as you claimed.
Like Hart I didn't lose my soul. I'm not a first year law student but a retired urologic surgeon. I've been around long enough to know right from wrong and believe there was injustice in the management that was suffered by many in the Board's handling of the entire affair. I believe that I am correct in my assessment which is far better articulated by a few others who wrote before me. If there is a new TV show on this melodrama,"The Board and I", has a nice ring to it. Perhaps the "Lion Snores" would also do, I hope they will consider my screenplays. I think I could write for four or five years, using the drama, twists and turns and multiple plot lines provided over the past four years. I won't even have to work on character development.
Thank you for your explanation. I have just been trying to figure out why people do not want a new trial. To me, it is either that Jerry was a known pedophile and no one wanted to blow the whistle or Jerry is not. My first impression was that Joe suspected it, gave it to people to follow up and was mortified when people did not. This would put the blame on C/S or S. However, Joe let his grandchild go to Jerry's house, which would never happen if Joe even had a hint Jerry was a molester
I think if Meyers and Matt had testified for Jerry or if the jury did not think before hand that Jerry was a monster that he would be free. Maybe Jerry is guilty, but I want an objective jury to say that not the media trying to incite people to make a buck.
My other point is that a new trial would show the rest of the country that there was serious doubt from the professionals at DPW and 2nd Mile that Jerry was a pedophile and therefore no one around PSU knew. When Mike gave his new testimony, Joe tried his best to support Mike and that plus ten years later is why Joe's GJ testimony had so many holes in it.
Your desire for a new trial is so that answers can be provided to the questions that remain in your mind.
As I have said many times before, when I bring up Joe. The majority of people know him as the man who looked the other way. When I correct them, the nicest replies I get is that Joe was a great man who made one terrible mistake.
IMO, in Texas when you said PSU most people had respect. That is not the case any more.
I think Move On will not change perceptions for many years to come. A new trial would.
IMO, in Texas when you said PSU most people had respect. That is not the case any more.
I think Move On will not change perceptions for many years to come. A new trial would.
So you want a new trial for Jerry so that other people may become more respectful of PSU and you can feel better about yourself. Just stop it. What you're seeking would not come from that trial. What you really need is for the CSS trials to commence. That, in conjunction with the PMA trial may get you what you're looking for.
Gee, it has been almost 4 years, do you think the trials will happen in my lifetime?
I am an odd duck, I admit it. I stood up for Joe and it had zero to do about myself. Since then I believe Jerry did not have sex with anyone and stood up for him, although this is zero in it for me. A new trial and vindication for Joe and Jerry will do not profit me in the least.
As a matter of fact, in 1970 I defied the KKK and could have been killed. What did I get out of it? Earlier this year some liberal called me a racist.
It is not about feeling better for myself, it is about doing the right thing.
Most people won't do the right thing unless there is something in it for them and that is where PSUNormal is right. I am telling the PSU alumni that a new trial is beneficial for them in the hope of getting them to do something.
I am an odd duck, I admit it. I stood up for Joe and it had zero to do about myself. Since then I believe Jerry did not have sex with anyone and stood up for him, although this is zero in it for me. A new trial and vindication for Joe and Jerry will do not profit me in the least.
As a matter of fact, in 1970 I defied the KKK and could have been killed. What did I get out of it? Earlier this year some liberal called me a racist.
It is not about feeling better for myself, it is about doing the right thing.
Most people won't do the right thing unless there is something in it for them and that is where PSUNormal is right. I am telling the PSU alumni that a new trial is beneficial for them in the hope of getting them to do something.
So it truly has nothing to do with Jerry's guilt or innocence, it's all about our reputation.
By the way, I don't think the CSS trials will ever happen, but that's another story.
Judge Cleland's ruling today doesn't seem to promising for a successful PCRA appeal.
I had the opportunity to speak to Clemens at a social function this past homecoming. He is even more upset than I am about how everything went down. If you remember, he resigned from the Board because (as he stated publicly when he resigned) the board was mistaken in the way it handled the whole situation... and specifically Paterno. I learned a lot from listening to him and came away more convinced than ever that the record needs to be cleared up. I would not include his name as part of the infamous group listed above.
Unfortunately, as the saying goes, you cannot unring a bell. Clemens name will be forever linked with all the rest because the vote to fire Joe Paterno was unanimous. I accept his regret at what happened, or how it happened, but that does not exonerate him. I would think it would mitigate the contempt shown toward him, as opposed to the others. If he continues to speak out, I would expect his status in the Penn State community to further improve but he will always be remembered as one of those who rushed to judgment and fired an honorable and decent man.
Sure, those guys know they screwed up. They aren't brain dead. However, it is wishful thinking that we will all Move On and just forget what they did. It is not happening. If they think that they have already paid the price, well, they are mistaken. They haven't come close to getting what they deserve, but they will. They will, or their children will, or their children's children. The truth will come out, and those families are going to have the spotlight on them when that happens. If these men had any balls, they would stand up and take their medicine and tell the truth, and perhaps their families would not be treated as poorly. But they are cowards. And liars. And cheats.
As one of them said, there are no do-overs. And there is no Moving On. Lots of criminals wish they could go back and erase their mistakes, to get out of jail and get their reputations back. Too bad it doesn't work that way.
As one of them said, there are no do-overs. And there is no Moving On. Lots of criminals wish they could go back and erase their mistakes, to get out of jail and get their reputations back. Too bad it doesn't work that way.
Really? Then why are you here lecturing us?
Moving On is a joke. Nobody has Moved On. It's four years later, and we're still talking about it. Barron still hears it. The AD still hears it. The elephant in the room isn't going away: it's just getting bigger. Every single day. That elephant ain't going nowhere.
I hope and would like to think it is getting bigger and won't go away, but I'm not certain that's the case. My gut tells me that the statement about "it will all be forgotten by 2014" was obviously wrong but that the time line on that date was just underestimated. I sense that the pursuit of the truth is loosing steam, just at a much slower pace than the OG BOT and their partners in crime would like. That's why its critical that there needs to be some landmark successes in one of these legal proceedings that will make "the world" take notice about the corruption that is rampant in PA. That's why Corman's sellout, which was sold as a "win", was really a big negative. It had legs with Covey presiding.
Could the last two sentences of 10 Years After's post, "That's why Corman's sellout, which was sold as a "win", was really a big negative. It had legs with Covey presiding," be the reason that Corman was moved to a more powerful position in the PA legislature and Covey was denied a recommendation by the PA Bar Association. Was one of those actions a reward for services rendered and the other a warning to anyone considering an action which would threaten the present narrative?
I disagree strongly. Clemens has done the honorable thing. He's apologized, he's spoken up for Paterno, and he signed onto the Paterno lawsuit. We should be applauding anyone who does that. I really hope that Garban will grow a pair and do that someday.
"Of course, WRONG" How articulate?!? Abnormal, I just love the way you support your little "sound bite" responses with facts.
If you've moved on, like you claim, then why don't you just move the F**K on! Just go away and crawl back under your rock!
If you've moved on, like you claim, then why don't you just move the F**K on! Just go away and crawl back under your rock!
Corman's a self serving idiot, but with the multitude of lawsuits pending this is more like the calm before the storm.
