All auditors, like Judges are honest. All people like you want is something to be hung on Penn State and Paterno, whether true or not. Your act is old, JJbot.
Sandusky Scandal Costs Approach 1/4 Billion.
- Thread starter moofafoo
- Start date
All auditors, like Judges are honest. All people like you want is something to be hung on Penn State and Paterno, whether true or not. Your act is old, JJbot.
No one can be that STOOPID .......could they?
From ENRON to WorldComm to Bernie Madoff to Adelphia to...............every damn corruption / vice / financial malfeasance case in 100 years
Everything was "verified" - by folks with all kinds of letters after their names - as being A-OK.........
until, amazingly, someone realized that no one was paying attention for 20 years........
even though ALL of those situations were subjected to 10 X the amount of "oversight" as T2M - and, MUCH MORE IMPORTANTLY - 100 X the oversight applied to Penn State ($6,000,000,000 times more important)
Gee, I wonder why Rodney the Dickless in his sworn deposition - said:
"We hired Louis Freeh so that other agencies would not come in and conduct an investigation"
Now:
The original question remains - "ARE you that STOOPID?" Or, is there some other reason for your idiotic contention?
Last edited:
Wow, you are such a great debater and self trainer. You also know CDK's occupation and place of employment just from his opinions. You are obviously a seer. That's why you are such an expert on this case. You have a crystal ball.
Last edited:
It had nothing to do with knowing whether or not Sandusky was a pedo and has everything to do with Paterno stating that MM told him he witnessed something of a sexual nature.
It's more than that. If she's right, she's arguing facts & details that she can only guess about (or I guess psychically determine) with someone who'd be in a position to know as a first-hand source. If she was right about that poster's occupation and place of employment, it'd be kind of silly to be making that argument.
1. Thank you! 2. Didn't say that, way to eliminate qualifying terms. 3. Sometimes. 4. Nobody's claiming that, but it's clear who has more research completed than others around here.
Have you reach the 1,000 mark - on how many times you repeat the exact same meaningless tripe ...... In this one thread alone?
1. Didn't say it was public information. Asked if you were privy to it, to provide it.
2. You're not focusing on evidence, but others are seeking it. Why does that bother you so much? Nowhere was proof mentioned. (Focus on the evidence you are word-twisting again and adding things that aren't there)
3. Well, I was called in on one case to find all the things the State Auditors didn't find- and found a lot of it. But no one was accused of any crimes or ethics violations. Do you know how serious it is to insinuate someone is accusing anyone of anything when they are not?
Good! You can go back to selectively complaining about people posting music links...
Okay.
Sandusky "truthers" -100
World population - 7.5 billion
Percentage of non-deniers - 99.9999986666667%
Maybe it ties into those imaginary screams and gunshots your a-hole buddy Osprey heard that convinced him that Penn State was covering up for Sandusky.
MM and Paterno both testified about MM witnessing something of a sexual nature. The police should have been contacted.
Sexual nature... not "horseplay."
Let's go with the worst case scenario and say JVP inferred some kind of vague, inappropriate activity ("I don't know what you'd call it") between Jerry and the boy in the shower.
1. Joe opened his policy & procedures book and met his reporting duty by reporting to Tim Curley.
2. Joe then went above & beyond his reporting duty by looping in the head of Police for good measure.
3. Joe followed up with McQueary a few times thereafter to ask if he was comfortable with everything.
4. PSU reported outside the University to The Second Mile, which had a state mandate to suspend Jerry from all kids-related activities and notify CYS/DPW. PSU also banned Jerry from bringing kids into PSU facilities.
5. TSM director Bruce Heim admitted that PSU's report died with him at The Second Mile.
1. Joe opened his policy & procedures book and met his reporting duty by reporting to Tim Curley.
2. Joe then went above & beyond his reporting duty by looping in the head of Police for good measure.
3. Joe followed up with McQueary a few times thereafter to ask if he was comfortable with everything.
4. PSU reported outside the University to The Second Mile, which had a state mandate to suspend Jerry from all kids-related activities and notify CYS/DPW. PSU also banned Jerry from bringing kids into PSU facilities.
5. TSM director Bruce Heim admitted that PSU's report died with him at The Second Mile.
- Anyone who actually gives a rip about the welfare of kids would be curious about TSM killing the chain of command in reporting and giving Jerry license to continue preying on kids via alternative access to the pool/showers/facilities at Bruce Heim's Hilton Garden Inn.
- They would wonder why TSM had to tell Jerry to "back off of other kids before."
- They would wonder why and how Jerry was able to have at-risk kids court-ordered into his own custody with a simple phone call to TSM director Judge Grine.
- They would wonder how Jerry had the power to overrule a recommendation by CYS (CYS wanted Matt out of Jerry's home) by calling in a favor from his pal Dr. Fox.
- They would wonder why Steve Turchetta pulled kids out of class for personal time with Jerry and told Aaron Fisher he was FOS with his allegations against Jerry, only to be PROMOTED TO PRINCIPAL at Central Mountain High School to this day.
If you want to know who is enabling abuse right now, look no further than those promoting the Paterno meme. They don't give a single rip about the kids.[/QUOTE]
That says it al!!!
You are all going to great lengths here to push your view of the situation, but I would love to know how going to police (in your mind) is not appropriate when MM told these people about the sexual nature of what he witnessed?
You can state anything if you MAKE IT UP.
Proof - your cornerstone of your post is ".... MM told these people about the sexual nature of what he witnessed...".
Based upon what information do you KNOW that the term sexual was use by MM in 2001??? If you look at everyone that talked to MM in 2001 - INCLUDING HIS GIRLFRIEND - no one supports the statements you make that MM reported a criminally sexual event. Don't try that cheap trick that the "situation was sexual"....legally it was not. The context for reporting a crime ONLY comes FROM THE OAG version which "constructed" a false "rape of a 10 yr old" out of the situation. This version of the shower incident in 2001 IS a 100% PROVEN LIE!
Face it....you want MM's testimony to be sexual so badly that you need diapers. Without the sexual label, no one can even remotely believe the OAG "Story".
That Illusion is what you personally are protecting - NOTHING ELSE.
To do that you need to ignore the time of the "testimonies" you quote and then also ignore that the "Victim" himself confirmed that there was nothing sexual happened in that shower incident.
FACT....The "sexual" testimony existed ONLY after 2010 and then only after major prodding by OAG-driven questioning.
The missed issue here is TIME....statements involving the term "sexual" did not exist in 2001.
Why do people struggle with the word fact so much? The ones that go on and on, but don't know the meaning of the word.
So either JM is saying that child rape isn't a reason to call 911, or JM had no reason to suspect child rape had occurred.
still waiting for Roxine to show up and lecture us, while NOT commenting on Dr Nassar.
have these idiots relentlessly peppered the MSU boards with their nonsense??
Was there a reason to necessarily contact the police? No. Dranov and Sr McQ told you that in court testimony.
That is the crux of the matter. MikeMcQ completely underplayed everything in 2001. Your hindsight is brilliant. But, your hindsight now includes much more information that was not available in 2001.
And, to add to your hindsight, police were effectively contacted in 1998 when a similar situation played out. What happened when the Police, Mother of child, CYS, DPW and DA were involved?
Most of the "Roxines" of the world showed their colors - - - $$$$ and Agendas - - - a long time ago
Those folks who ARE truly concerned with providing a better, safer world for kids have seen this fiasco for what it is worth.....from the beginning
THOSE folks are to be admired (and better people than I......for sure), but they are relatively few and far between, relative to the "turning victims into cash" industry
C/S/&S and Joe WERE NOT REQUIRED IN 2001 to call the police. They had nothing to report based upon Mike's watered down, bullshit tale.
Enough with 1998. It means nothing in 2001 when McQueary witnessed something sexual.
I find it amazing that you people can pretend to care about victims of child abuse while at the same time you defend Sandusky and attack his victims by calling them liars.
I know they weren't required to contact police. I'm not talking about their legal liability, I'm talking about them screwing Penn State and future victims by not doing anything other than contacting Sandusky's own enabling organization.
I never claimed to be a "child advocate"......or even to be capable of "curing cancer"
Ain't none of that within my realm of abilities to "solve"
My "cause", if there is one, is accountability for those who's actions have prostituted PSU
So go spew your never-ended steam of idiocy and bullshit - with 100% confidence that you are completely wrong about EVERYTHING you masturbate over
You are 100% certain with nothing concrete to back you conspiracy theory. Good for you.I never claimed to be a "child advocate"......or even to be capable of "curing cancer"
Ain't none of that within my realm of abilities to "solve"
My "cause", if there is one, is accountability for those who's actions have prostituted PSU
So go spew your never-ended steam of idiocy and bullshit - with 100% confidence that you are completely wrong about EVERYTHING you masturbate over
No, it means nothing. Two different incidents. No 3rd party witness in 1998 who claims to have witnessed something sexual.
1st line: Dept to do an investigation - not locals
4th line: Police will do in conjuction with DPW turn facts over to DA who will determine if crime was committed.
