Paterno-gate

[psuguy43]

Hi all,

I do not live in Lion Country and feel pretty unprepared to debate Paterno's involvement in the Sandusky garbage. Every time, for the past 5 years, that someone learns that I am from PSU the Sandusky stuff inevitably comes up and they either ask what I think or tear apart how disgusting Paterno is (this is coming from NE Patriot fans, speaking of morals and cheating, but I digress).

I debate what I can, and it eventually ends in them saying stuff that is inaccurate, followed by "well, he HAD to know." (Yesterday I was talking to a guy who claimed that Sandusky was molesting boys on campus, while a coach, for decade -- then he gave me the time frame of 94-09... he was befuddled when I told him that Sandusky was not a coach after 1999).

Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a rundown on some of the facts (problems with the Freeh report, etc)? I've read most of it over the past 5 years, but am too rusty on it.

I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

 

[StinkStankStunk]

Hi all,

I do not live in Lion Country and feel pretty unprepared to debate Paterno's involvement in the Sandusky garbage. Every time, for the past 5 years, that someone learns that I am from PSU the Sandusky stuff inevitably comes up and they either ask what I think or tear apart how disgusting Paterno is (this is coming from NE Patriot fans, speaking of morals and cheating, but I digress).

I debate what I can, and it eventually ends in them saying stuff that is inaccurate, followed by "well, he HAD to know." (Yesterday I was talking to a guy who claimed that Sandusky was molesting boys on campus, while a coach, for decade -- then he gave me the time frame of 94-09... he was befuddled when I told him that Sandusky was not a coach after 1999).

Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a rundown on some of the facts (problems with the Freeh report, etc)? I've read most of it over the past 5 years, but am too rusty on it.

I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

Starting law school?

Probably a good time...good exercise....to tone your research skills

Remember, you're only going to be a Law STUDENT.....not a full-blown practicing legal professional.
Until you ARE a full-blown practicing legal professional, you are SUPPOSED to have some concern with regard to actually researching and verifying facts - as opposed to relying on sound-bite conjecture, logical gymnastics, and spin.

 

[psuguy43]

Ummm, thanks for the helpful reply?

 

[getmyjive11]

Hi all,

I do not live in Lion Country and feel pretty unprepared to debate Paterno's involvement in the Sandusky garbage. Every time, for the past 5 years, that someone learns that I am from PSU the Sandusky stuff inevitably comes up and they either ask what I think or tear apart how disgusting Paterno is (this is coming from NE Patriot fans, speaking of morals and cheating, but I digress).

I debate what I can, and it eventually ends in them saying stuff that is inaccurate, followed by "well, he HAD to know." (Yesterday I was talking to a guy who claimed that Sandusky was molesting boys on campus, while a coach, for decade -- then he gave me the time frame of 94-09... he was befuddled when I told him that Sandusky was not a coach after 1999).

Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a rundown on some of the facts (problems with the Freeh report, etc)? I've read most of it over the past 5 years, but am too rusty on it.

I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

You are better off just saying that nobody knows WTF happened and will likely never know.

 

[StinkStankStunk]

Ummm, thanks for the helpful reply?

YW

 

[Zenophile]

Hi all,

I do not live in Lion Country and feel pretty unprepared to debate Paterno's involvement in the Sandusky garbage. Every time, for the past 5 years, that someone learns that I am from PSU the Sandusky stuff inevitably comes up and they either ask what I think or tear apart how disgusting Paterno is (this is coming from NE Patriot fans, speaking of morals and cheating, but I digress).

I debate what I can, and it eventually ends in them saying stuff that is inaccurate, followed by "well, he HAD to know." (Yesterday I was talking to a guy who claimed that Sandusky was molesting boys on campus, while a coach, for decade -- then he gave me the time frame of 94-09... he was befuddled when I told him that Sandusky was not a coach after 1999).

Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a rundown on some of the facts (problems with the Freeh report, etc)? I've read most of it over the past 5 years, but am too rusty on it.

I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

Kevin Horne's open letter to Keith Olbermann is as good a Reader's Digest version of the facts as is available. It can be viewed at this link: http://onwardstate.com/2015/01/20/an-open-letter-to-keith-olbermann/

Feel free to skip past the first 2 paragraphs.

 

[psuro]

Ummm, thanks for the helpful reply?

Forget Stink Stank....he is probably drunk.

 

[LionDeNittany]

Hi all,

I do not live in Lion Country and feel pretty unprepared to debate Paterno's involvement in the Sandusky garbage. Every time, for the past 5 years, that someone learns that I am from PSU the Sandusky stuff inevitably comes up and they either ask what I think or tear apart how disgusting Paterno is (this is coming from NE Patriot fans, speaking of morals and cheating, but I digress).

I debate what I can, and it eventually ends in them saying stuff that is inaccurate, followed by "well, he HAD to know." (Yesterday I was talking to a guy who claimed that Sandusky was molesting boys on campus, while a coach, for decade -- then he gave me the time frame of 94-09... he was befuddled when I told him that Sandusky was not a coach after 1999).

Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a rundown on some of the facts (problems with the Freeh report, etc)? I've read most of it over the past 5 years, but am too rusty on it.

I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

I really don't know what living in lion country means relative to being asked about this topic.

If someone insists something made up is a fact, then you need to use a different method to appeal to them, if you choose to appeal to them. The other alternative is to walk away.

LdN

 

[john4psu]

Wasn't there something recently that came out and gave a good synopsis of the whole thing? I seem to recall that.

 

[bwifan]

Hi all,

I do not live in Lion Country and feel pretty unprepared to debate Paterno's involvement in the Sandusky garbage. Every time, for the past 5 years, that someone learns that I am from PSU the Sandusky stuff inevitably comes up and they either ask what I think or tear apart how disgusting Paterno is (this is coming from NE Patriot fans, speaking of morals and cheating, but I digress).

I debate what I can, and it eventually ends in them saying stuff that is inaccurate, followed by "well, he HAD to know." (Yesterday I was talking to a guy who claimed that Sandusky was molesting boys on campus, while a coach, for decade -- then he gave me the time frame of 94-09... he was befuddled when I told him that Sandusky was not a coach after 1999).

Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a rundown on some of the facts (problems with the Freeh report, etc)? I've read most of it over the past 5 years, but am too rusty on it.

I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

First thing is follow through with Zenophile's link .... Other thing I would add is do not refer to it as Paterno Gate and correct anyway else that does.... This was about Sandusky not Joe. You can then include the recap and facts that you have from that link.

 

[Zenophile]

Wasn't there something recently that came out and gave a good synopsis of the whole thing? I seem to recall that.

My best guess is it may have been this one: http://onwardstate.com/2016/09/02/why-honoring-paterno-still-matters/

 

[Pardlion]

Hi all,

I do not live in Lion Country and feel pretty unprepared to debate Paterno's involvement in the Sandusky garbage. Every time, for the past 5 years, that someone learns that I am from PSU the Sandusky stuff inevitably comes up and they either ask what I think or tear apart how disgusting Paterno is (this is coming from NE Patriot fans, speaking of morals and cheating, but I digress).

I debate what I can, and it eventually ends in them saying stuff that is inaccurate, followed by "well, he HAD to know." (Yesterday I was talking to a guy who claimed that Sandusky was molesting boys on campus, while a coach, for decade -- then he gave me the time frame of 94-09... he was befuddled when I told him that Sandusky was not a coach after 1999).

Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a rundown on some of the facts (problems with the Freeh report, etc)? I've read most of it over the past 5 years, but am too rusty on it.

I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

Keep it simple. Turn the adversary into the kook:

"Look, like most serial pedophiles, Sandusky was able to get away with his crimes by using trickery and deceit. Those people who think that people at Penn State actually wanted to help Sandusky hurt kids are crazier than a nut cake."

Present this in a stern, serious voice, like you are trying to teach the challenger a lesson. If they try to keep arguing, raise your eyebrows and tell them that they had better to read up on the facts.

If they keep going, kick the ignorant SOB in the balls.

 

[john4psu]

My best guess is it may have been this one: http://onwardstate.com/2016/09/02/why-honoring-paterno-still-matters/

You got it, thanks Zeno.

 

[Rip_E_2_Joe_PA]

I usually ask them this question....
how many Child molesters do you do business with each month, how many belong to your church, how many live within 30 miles of your homes, how many, how many do do you bump into at work, how many frequent you local parks, how many are teachers or administrators in your children's, grand children's, nieces or nephews school? You have to know and what have you done about it?

That sometimes actually flips a switch in their dormant doormat heads.....not always.... the screamers stay what they are.....

 

[fairgambit]

Hi all,..........................
I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

Speaking as a lawyer of over 40 years, let me give you some advice. Forget law school. There are too many lawyers already. 95 percent of this board has a law degree (or act like they do). Go to med school, or take the tuition money and invest in ostrich farming. You will be happier, wealthier, and probably live a longer life.

 

[psuguy43]

Speaking as a lawyer of over 40 years, let me give you some advice. Forget law school. There are too many lawyers already. 95 percent of this board has a law degree (or act like they do). Go to med school, or take the tuition money and invest in ostrich farming. You will be happier, wealthier, and probably live a longer life.

I'm not intending to go for anything less than a full-ride, so just some COL loans to repay. I am currently debt-free. What I probably REALLY want to do is get my DPT, but I chose the wrong undergrad major and would have about 30 pre-req credits I would need to complete before starting... At 30, is not worth starting for a 15 year career (I don't see too many older PTs).

I've been considering law since high school. I at least want to get a JD at an affordable price (last cycle I was offered substantial ships, but am holding off a year), and go from there.

 

[fairgambit]

I'm not intending to go for anything less than a full-ride, so just some COL loans to repay. I am currently debt-free. What I probably REALLY want to do is get my DPT, but I chose the wrong undergrad major and would have about 30 pre-req credits I would need to complete before starting... At 30, is not worth starting for a 15 year career (I don't see too many older PTs).

I've been considering law since high school. I at least want to get a JD at an affordable price (last cycle I was offered substantial ships, but am holding off a year), and go from there.

Well, good luck. If you're determined to go (Ostrich farming is really very profitable) study your ass off. The worst thing you can do is go to law school and finish in the bottom half of your class.

 

[psuguy43]

Well, good luck. If you're determined to go (Ostrich farming is really very profitable) study your ass off. The worst thing you can do is go to law school and finish in the bottom half of your class.

Thank you - will do. I have really enjoyed the thinking (logic) that the LSAT tests, and preparing for that. I am going in open-minded (which I regret going into PSU with the wrong major, and not wanting to change it), but am leaning toward disability law... We'll see where I'm leaning after 1L.

 

[fairgambit]

Thank you - will do. I have really enjoyed the thinking (logic) that the LSAT tests, and preparing for that. I am going in open-minded (which I regret going into PSU with the wrong major, and not wanting to change it), but am leaning toward disability law... We'll see where I'm leaning after 1L.

If you ever need any help, just stop in here. Like I said, the board is awash with lawyers.

 

[psuguy43]

If you ever need any help, just stop in here. Like I said, the board is awash with lawyers.

Awash with lawyers that have too much free time on this board bc they are unemployed, or filled with employed lawyers? ;-)

Just joking, thank you - I'll keep this in mind during 1L. I appreciate it

 

[BigNittanyLion]

Speaking as a lawyer of over 40 years, let me give you some advice. Forget law school. There are too many lawyers already. 95 percent of this board has a law degree (or act like they do). Go to med school, or take the tuition money and invest in ostrich farming. You will be happier, wealthier, and probably live a longer life.

LOL. As a fellow barrister, I agree. Go into Finance, don't be a crook in the courts, be a crook on Wall Street it is easier to get rich! LOL

 

[BigNittanyLion]

It is tough call. People have their minds made up. People always ask me or tell me "Joe knew" he had to "know". And I always responded, "know what"?

Did he hear about rumors? Maybe, but what can you do? No one can demand actions on rumors or hearsay. Think about all of the legal proceedings for criminals where police know for sure an actor is guilty, but you can't do anything until they are caught in the act. Secondly, Sandusky retired from PSU football in 1999. He was out of Joe's jurisdiction.

Joe obviously knew something when McQueary told him about "something sexual" happening in 2001 but knew what? And Joe reported up the command. The bigger question, if the "something sexual" was so nefarious and everyone in PSU knew about Sandusky's pedophilic antics, why the hell didn't Big 6'4" Red plant Sandusky into the lockers, save the kid and call the cops? I would think that is pretty much what any man would do. So who knows what really was seen and therefore said to Joe.

You aren't going to change minds, not at this point. Perhaps if the trial for the Administrators ever happens and further evidence is shed exonerating Joe in the court of law, under oath, finally people may back off. But even then, I doubt it.

 

[Zenophile]

It is tough call. People have their minds made up. People always ask me or tell me "Joe knew" he had to "know". And I always responded, "know what"?

Did he hear about rumors? Maybe, but what can you do? No one can demand actions on rumors or hearsay. Think about all of the legal proceedings for criminals where police know for sure an actor is guilty, but you can't do anything until they are caught in the act. Secondly, Sandusky retired from PSU football in 1999. He was out of Joe's jurisdiction.

Joe obviously knew something when McQueary told him about "something sexual" happening in 2001 but knew what? And Joe reported up the command. The bigger question, if the "something sexual" was so nefarious and everyone in PSU knew about Sandusky's pedophilic antics, why the hell didn't Big 6'4" Red plant Sandusky into the lockers, save the kid and call the cops? I would think that is pretty much what any man would do. So who knows what really was seen and therefore said to Joe.

You aren't going to change minds, not at this point. Perhaps if the trial for the Administrators ever happens and further evidence is shed exonerating Joe in the court of law, under oath, finally people may back off. But even then, I doubt it.

Yup. And Kevin Horne nails it in his recent article. Per Mr. Horne,

I’ll say this without qualification: Anyone who is 100 percent certain (or near 100 percent certain) that a coverup occurred is not a serious thinker or interpreter of the facts.​

It's from an article that I linked above, but it's absolutely worth posting again:
http://onwardstate.com/2016/09/02/why-honoring-paterno-still-matters/

 

[ChiTownLion]

Away from my comp right now, but some quick points:
1. Refer to quotes in my sig pic.
2. 1998 and 2001 were both reported outside the university. 1998 was investigated by about 5 different authorities and the OAG closed the case. Jerry's retirement was initiated before 1998 incident and he formally retired after 1999 season. 2001 incident was reported to The Second Mile.
3. Joe Paterno did not turn a blind eye in 2001. He referred to his PSU handbook of policies and procedures which directed him to report to Tim Curley (who then reported to The Second Mile), which he did. Paterno took it a step further by also reporting to the Head of Police, Gary Schultz. Paterno also followed up with McQueary to ask if he felt the matter was handled appropriately.
4. Second Mile director Bruce Heim wrote an open letter in the CDT and admitted that the chain of command in reporting died with him in 2001.
5. As far as the 1970s allegations are concerned, the OAG previously announced that they didn't find those allegations credible and John Doe 150's (1978) own lawyer Michael Boni said in Spring 2016 that he didn't see any evidence that Joe Paterno had any awareness of the allegations in the 1970s.
6. Perhaps of greater concern, why was Jerry able to use his TSM buds to court-order kids out of their natural homes into his custody? Why was Jerry allowed to pull kids from class at Central Mountain HS without any parental consent? Why was Joe blamed for 2001 when the report died with TSM director Bruce Heim, who set up alternative access to pool and gym for Jerry and guests at Hilton Garden Inn in 2001? Why did the OAG let CMHS off the hook after Aaron Fisher told them Jerry was abusing him and they said no he wasn't. Why was Jerry's "victim factory" ignored despite shredding evidence and TSM director Katherine Genovese admitting they've had to tell Jerry to back off of other kids before.

Gotta run now. Wish I could offer some links. Oh, also check out Jim Clemente's page on Paterno.com. Good luck.

 

[artsandletters]

I really don't know what living in lion country means relative to being asked about this topic.

If someone insists something made up is a fact, then you need to use a different method to appeal to them, if you choose to appeal to them. The other alternative is to walk away.

LdN

You only care selectively about facts vs something made up.

 

[BigNittanyLion]

Away from my comp right now, but some quick points:
1. Refer to quotes in my sig pic.
2. 1998 and 2001 were both reported outside the university. 1998 was investigated by about 5 different authorities and the OAG closed the case. Jerry's retirement was initiated before 1998 incident and he formally retired after 1999 season. 2001 incident was reported to The Second Mile.
3. Joe Paterno did not turn a blind eye in 2001. He referred to his PSU handbook of policies and procedures which directed him to report to Tim Curley (who then reported to The Second Mile), which he did. Paterno took it a step further by also reporting to the Head of Police, Gary Schultz. Paterno also followed up with McQueary to ask if he felt the matter was handled appropriately.
4. Second Mile director Bruce Heim wrote an open letter in the CDT and admitted that the chain of command in reporting died with him in 2001.
5. As far as the 1970s allegations are concerned, the OAG previously announced that they didn't find those allegations credible and John Doe 150's (1978) own lawyer Michael Boni said in Spring 2016 that he didn't see any evidence that Joe Paterno had any awareness of the allegations in the 1970s.
6. Perhaps of greater concern, why was Jerry able to use his TSM buds to court-order kids out of their natural homes into his custody? Why was Jerry allowed to pull kids from class at Central Mountain HS without any parental consent? Why was Joe blamed for 2001 when the report died with TSM director Bruce Heim, who set up alternative access to pool and gym for Jerry and guests at Hilton Garden Inn in 2001? Why did the OAG let CMHS off the hook after Aaron Fisher told them Jerry was abusing him and they said no he wasn't. Why was Jerry's "victim factory" ignored despite shredding evidence and TSM director Katherine Genovese admitting they've had to tell Jerry to back off of other kids before.

Gotta run now. Wish I could offer some links. Oh, also check out Jim Clemente's page on Paterno.com. Good luck.

Again, I do think Joe after 1998 had some trust issues with Jerry and maybe was a bit concerned about his dedication not just to football, but his activities with the Second Mile Children and basically told Jerry that he should move on.

Someone will say that is admission of guilt and he knew, no. It is just I am guessing Joe sensed something wasn't right but there was nothing he could do, nothing anyone could do until they actually had witnesses come forward. And I am not even saying Joe knew or had thoughts that Sandusky was raping kids, just that perhaps there was an unhealthy obsession.

 

[sluggo72]

Wasn't there something recently that came out and gave a good synopsis of the whole thing? I seem to recall that.

was this it?? anyway I think this is really great. What you need to remember is the timeline at trail wasn't the timeline in reality.

http://notpsu.blogspot.com/2013_03_01_archive.html

 

[hagberg]

Hi all,

I do not live in Lion Country and feel pretty unprepared to debate Paterno's involvement in the Sandusky garbage. Every time, for the past 5 years, that someone learns that I am from PSU the Sandusky stuff inevitably comes up and they either ask what I think or tear apart how disgusting Paterno is (this is coming from NE Patriot fans, speaking of morals and cheating, but I digress).

I debate what I can, and it eventually ends in them saying stuff that is inaccurate, followed by "well, he HAD to know." (Yesterday I was talking to a guy who claimed that Sandusky was molesting boys on campus, while a coach, for decade -- then he gave me the time frame of 94-09... he was befuddled when I told him that Sandusky was not a coach after 1999).

Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a rundown on some of the facts (problems with the Freeh report, etc)? I've read most of it over the past 5 years, but am too rusty on it.

I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

I just had a conversation with a girl in my office today about this (her husband is a Pitt guy, so she's biased by marriage). The one thing I kept trying to impress upon her is that all the "Joe MUST have known" people are confusing facts (in the sense of things that are true vs scientific) with emotions. She kept saying that if it had been she McQ approached, she would have done much more, even to the extent of killing Sandusky. She also has a 1-year-old daughter, so the emotional aspect of it is magnified for her.

I doubt I made any inroads, but rather than inundate her with actual facts instead of opinions, I simply corrected the things she "knew" - which were those "truths" espoused by ESPN and the rest of the mediots - and explained as best I could why they were wrong. Like I said, it probably did no good, but at least it got her thinking a little bit.

BTW, she said - a couple times - that we'd "just have to agree to disagree.....agreeably." I told her I couldn't do that, as this (child abuse, sexual or otherwise) was too important an issue to agreeably let someone wallow in ignorance. As you can imagine, that won me exactly zero points!

 

[Zenophile]

BTW, she said - a couple times - that we'd "just have to agree to disagree.....agreeably." I told her I couldn't do that, as this (child abuse, sexual or otherwise) was too important an issue to agreeably let someone wallow in ignorance. As you can imagine, that won me exactly zero points!

I love the "agree to disagree" response from the "Joe Knew" Paterno bashers. It has the same legitimacy it would if coming from Flat-Earthers.

 

[crm114psu]

I just had a conversation with a girl in my office today about this (her husband is a Pitt guy, so she's biased by marriage). The one thing I kept trying to impress upon her is that all the "Joe MUST have known" people are confusing facts (in the sense of things that are true vs scientific) with emotions. She kept saying that if it had been she McQ approached, she would have done much more, even to the extent of killing Sandusky. She also has a 1-year-old daughter, so the emotional aspect of it is magnified for her.

I doubt I made any inroads, but rather than inundate her with actual facts instead of opinions, I simply corrected the things she "knew" - which were those "truths" espoused by ESPN and the rest of the mediots - and explained as best I could why they were wrong. Like I said, it probably did no good, but at least it got her thinking a little bit.

BTW, she said - a couple times - that we'd "just have to agree to disagree.....agreeably." I told her I couldn't do that, as this (child abuse, sexual or otherwise) was too important an issue to agreeably let someone wallow in ignorance. As you can imagine, that won me exactly zero points!

"Wallow in ignorance" is certainly a phrase to be used when attempting to appeal to another persons sense of reason. That is a sure thing to lower any barriers to getting your message across.

Straight from the John Ziegler school of how to win friends and influence people.

 

[BigNittanyLion]

I rarely get into it with people about this subject. I just say "there's a lot of misinformation."

But just to briefly address your questions, the Freeh Report was written by Louis Freeh, who has no credibility. He botched countless investigations in the past. He now says the report's findings were just his "opinions."
He didn't talk to a single person who was directly involved except Graham Spanier, who he only interviewed after the report was already written. The emails in the report were extremely vague and proved absolutely nothing etc. It also seems obvious that the BOT just wanted to justify their rash decisions by hiring Freeh to pin it on the people implicated. How can you have an honest investigation after they already fired Paterno/Spanier and effectively plead guilty to the media's accusations?
.

The Freeh Report simply had a conclusion before one second of investigation was put forth. All Freeh did was support that conclusion. It was not an investigation, it was a thesis. A novel. A wish, hope and a prayer.

Also, it is called a travesty of justice.

 

[hagberg]

"Wallow in ignorance" is certainly a phrase to be used when attempting to appeal to another persons sense of reason. That is a sure thing to lower any barriers to getting your message across.

Straight from the John Ziegler school of how to win friends and influence people.

Wow. Thank you! Consider me straightened out!

 

[EPC FAN]

Hi all,

I do not live in Lion Country and feel pretty unprepared to debate Paterno's involvement in the Sandusky garbage. Every time, for the past 5 years, that someone learns that I am from PSU the Sandusky stuff inevitably comes up and they either ask what I think or tear apart how disgusting Paterno is (this is coming from NE Patriot fans, speaking of morals and cheating, but I digress).

I debate what I can, and it eventually ends in them saying stuff that is inaccurate, followed by "well, he HAD to know." (Yesterday I was talking to a guy who claimed that Sandusky was molesting boys on campus, while a coach, for decade -- then he gave me the time frame of 94-09... he was befuddled when I told him that Sandusky was not a coach after 1999).

Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a rundown on some of the facts (problems with the Freeh report, etc)? I've read most of it over the past 5 years, but am too rusty on it.

I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

First thing you did wrong was to headline your thread "Paterno-gate."

 

[BUFFALO LION]

Hi all,

I do not live in Lion Country and feel pretty unprepared to debate Paterno's involvement in the Sandusky garbage. Every time, for the past 5 years, that someone learns that I am from PSU the Sandusky stuff inevitably comes up and they either ask what I think or tear apart how disgusting Paterno is (this is coming from NE Patriot fans, speaking of morals and cheating, but I digress).

I debate what I can, and it eventually ends in them saying stuff that is inaccurate, followed by "well, he HAD to know." (Yesterday I was talking to a guy who claimed that Sandusky was molesting boys on campus, while a coach, for decade -- then he gave me the time frame of 94-09... he was befuddled when I told him that Sandusky was not a coach after 1999).

Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a rundown on some of the facts (problems with the Freeh report, etc)? I've read most of it over the past 5 years, but am too rusty on it.

I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

This case is too convoluted to get into in great detail with someone not familiar with it. Simply tell them the kid in the shower (Victim 2) says nothing bad happened up until he was given $3 million dollars to keep his mouth shut. If you need more, just tell them:

1.) On May 1, 2011, he writes a letter to then acting Pennsylvania State Attorney General William Ryan and basically says Sandusky was like a father to him and he lived with Jerry and Dottie for three months. Said Jerry would never do anything bad.

2.) On September 22, 2011 he gives a police statement that Sandusky never did anything bad or inappropriate, and that he lived with the Sandusky's until he entered the Marine Corps.

3.) On November 9, 2011, after Sandusky was arrested, Victim 2 gives a statement to Sandusky's Attorney's Defense Investigator, with his Mom and brother present, that he was the boy in the shower, and nothing bad happened.

4.) Sometime I believe in mid to late December 2011, he gets involved with a crooked Attorney named Andrew Shubin (Pitt Grad) that flips him to the bad side with the promise of a big payday, which he got.

This is all documented and I (along with many others on this site) can give you links and locations as to where this documentation exists, if you are really interested.

 

[psuguy43]

First thing you did wrong was to headline your thread "Paterno-gate."

Disagreed. I am not interested in the Sandusky stuff in this post, hence "Paterno-gate" correctly refers to what I am looking for... not Sandusky-Gate

 

[LafayetteBear]

Speaking as a lawyer of over 40 years, let me give you some advice. Forget law school. There are too many lawyers already. 95 percent of this board has a law degree (or act like they do). Go to med school, or take the tuition money and invest in ostrich farming. You will be happier, wealthier, and probably live a longer life.

I heard this ^^^^^^ advice when I was applying to law school. But only from practicing attorneys, like Gambit here. There is still plenty of opportunity to succeed as an attorney if you are willing to work hard.

 

[fairgambit]

I heard this ^^^^^^ advice when I was applying to law school. But only from practicing attorneys, like Gambit here. There is still plenty of opportunity to succeed as an attorney if you are willing to work hard.

Who is better prepared to provide the advice than practicing attorneys? Those who drive cabs? Some do, but their advice would be suspect. Really, it depends on your market and your area of practice. Working hard helps but if you practice criminal law, for example, in an area where the market is saturated, you may have a problem. I am not looking to discourage competition. I am nearing retirement, but I personally know a lot of overworked, underpaid, burned out attorneys. Certainly everyone should follow their dream, but I know people who have gone to law school for the wrong reasons and regretted it. If you go only for the anticipated financial rewards, think again. There are easier ways to make a good living.

 

[wensilver]

Hi all,

I do not live in Lion Country and feel pretty unprepared to debate Paterno's involvement in the Sandusky garbage. Every time, for the past 5 years, that someone learns that I am from PSU the Sandusky stuff inevitably comes up and they either ask what I think or tear apart how disgusting Paterno is (this is coming from NE Patriot fans, speaking of morals and cheating, but I digress).

I debate what I can, and it eventually ends in them saying stuff that is inaccurate, followed by "well, he HAD to know." (Yesterday I was talking to a guy who claimed that Sandusky was molesting boys on campus, while a coach, for decade -- then he gave me the time frame of 94-09... he was befuddled when I told him that Sandusky was not a coach after 1999).

Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a rundown on some of the facts (problems with the Freeh report, etc)? I've read most of it over the past 5 years, but am too rusty on it.

I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

I'll play.

First off - this saga has waaaay too many moving parts and does not follow a linear argument.

I find that if you look at via the lens of a botched political assassination on Dr. Spanier by Tom Corbett & his head gunslinger Frank Fina to set the Main Storyline.

Everything flows from there.

Corbett intends to torch Dr. Spanier --> Franky "Pervert Porn Dog" Fina escalates Mike's testimony to "anal rape" --> John Surma steps over Steve Garban's body & axes Joe ---> Sports Media flares up with Paterno name --> Epic National Firestorm --> Corbett & Fina run for cover ---> Shitstorm happens ---> Everyone who effed up goes into bunker mode --> NCAA waltzes in ---> Shitstorm happens --> Lather, Rinse, Repeat.

And here we are. Half a BILLION dollars later. The OAG never needed Mike, it never needed "Penn State" - yet because Tom Corbett f*cked up and used Napalm instead of a sniper rifle - we ALL got it.

 

[creamery freak]

Hi all,

I do not live in Lion Country and feel pretty unprepared to debate Paterno's involvement in the Sandusky garbage. Every time, for the past 5 years, that someone learns that I am from PSU the Sandusky stuff inevitably comes up and they either ask what I think or tear apart how disgusting Paterno is (this is coming from NE Patriot fans, speaking of morals and cheating, but I digress).

I debate what I can, and it eventually ends in them saying stuff that is inaccurate, followed by "well, he HAD to know." (Yesterday I was talking to a guy who claimed that Sandusky was molesting boys on campus, while a coach, for decade -- then he gave me the time frame of 94-09... he was befuddled when I told him that Sandusky was not a coach after 1999).

Can someone point me in the right direction, or give me a rundown on some of the facts (problems with the Freeh report, etc)? I've read most of it over the past 5 years, but am too rusty on it.

I am also starting law school next fall, so I imagine that that will lead to some debates on the subject... I want to be better prepared.

Thanks for any help!

I think this came out of Jay Paterno's latest book. Jay stated that he would let his kids go to Jerry and Dottie's house to visit. He asked, " do you think my father would have allowed me to send my kids into Jerry's home if he knew he was a pedophile?" I don't think so.

 

[MAGAZINEE]

I tell them how I truly feel. That I'm disturbed by what happened, I am really torn and undecided about Paterno's handling / involvement in everything, and black and definitive evidence will probably never come out, either way