Soxbadger

QUOTE (MAX @ Nov 16, 2011 -> 11:54 PM) And even more ironic, is that you rushed to judgment by putting any belief in that rumor in that post. I didnt rush to any judgment. I called it a "rumor" specifically putting it into its rightful context RUMOR. Where did I say it was fact? Where did I say it was reliable? I said the new RUMOR. Lets see how rumor is defined from our good friends at Merriam Webster: So no, I did not put any belief into the report except to state that it existed. I called it a rumor to specifically indicate that I had no reason to believe it was true, but once again merely reporting its existence. I then said, Merely showing that there are going to be rumors on both sides, X person will said this happened, Y person will say it never happened. Right now there is very little to no evidence. Are you just unclear what the word rumor means?

Paterno isnt even the subject of a lawsuit yet, so he really can do whatever he wants with his assets. Even after a judgment you can move assets, provided that you have not been served with a citation restricting the movement. Collecting money on a judgment is actually harder than winning a judgment.

Larceny Arson Assault Speeding Reckless (insert) Negligence Sidebar I dont know, not really coming up with anything unique.

GT, http://www.virtuwillsolutions.com/pautc.htm#_SUBCHAPTER_E § 7745. Creditor's claim against settlor - UTC 505(a). Whether or not a trust instrument contains a spendthrift provision and notwithstanding section 7744 (relating to discretionary trusts; effect of standard - UTC 504): (1) During the lifetime of the settlor, the property of a revocable trust is subject to claims of the settlor's creditors. So it does look like Penn law allows for trust assets to be reached (at least in revocable trust). This is different than IL law.

Ha I didnt even read the article. Anyway its still the same reasoning, the only reason you put it in a trust that is run by your wife is if you want your wife to have the asset. If the asset is in the Joe Paterno and Wife Trust, its still not Paterno's asset and therefore generally not subject to a turnover order. I guess Penn law could be different and maybe there is some potential liability on a joint trust, just generally thats not the case.

Its odd. But if you were just trying to shield assets isnt the simplest plan to create a trust and put the asset in the trust? The only actual explanation is that Paterno wanted to give his wife the house so that she would have an asset of her own that she could do whatever she wanted with. Any other motive just (imo) makes no sense.

Breaking my own rule? Im saying that we should wait for the real evidence to come out. That is why I called it a "rumor" and didnt pretend it was fact. So Im adhering to my stance, you wait for the real evidence to come out. It may be a year, it may be 2, but eventually we will have all the evidence we care to sort through. And then after weve had a chance to review the evidence and come to our own conclusions based on our own independent interpretation of the evidence, will I make a judgment. I dont think Ive varied from that. Thats your opinion. Id rather wait for the facts before I decide what happened.

As Ive said consistently from the beginning, the appropriate response is to suspend (with or without pay) pending the investigation or to let them coach during the investigation. Neither McQueary or Paterno were being accused of a crime (or criminal actions) so really there was very little need for swift action. Unfortunately 40 pages or so of this thread was how absolutely awful of an idea that was and that everyone should be fired immediately.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/...ult-source-says New rumor, Mcqueary did speak with the police. This is why we dont rush to judgment based on hearsay evidence in a grand jury indictment.

Court ordered mediation is a lot different than voluntary mediation.

If it goes to court, a mediator will settle it. Its not going to trial. My guess is that its settled by next summer. No way will it drag out longer, no one can afford it. They just need a 3rd party to basically hammer it in their heads that fighting over 1-2% is stupid and they are throwing the baby out with the bath water.

http://www.rcfp.org/secretjustice/grandjuries/pg1.html It appears that access can vary by state (I dont know if that website is legitimate, but it reads legitimate)

This is what I was trying to say when I was getting shouted down last week. A Grand Jury is not close to a trial. McQuery does not get to explain the answers, the Prosecutor gets to ask questions and the person has to answer them. IE (McQueary as witness) On XYZ date did you see Sandusky inappropriately touch a child? A) Yes Did you call the police? A) No Did you tell your father? A) Yes Did you tell Paterno? A) Yes And you told him specific facts, correct? A) Yes Did you tell the President? A) Yes And you told him specific facts, correct? A) Yes No further questions. Notice how McQueary has no ability to explain himself, he simply has to answer the questions as I ask them. He gets no opportunity to explain. Based on that, I can then write a Complaint: "Grand Jury found that McQueary witnessed Sandusky committing a crime. He then reported the specifics of the crime to Joe Paterno. He also reported the specifics of the crime to the President. The President in violation of Penn law failed to report this incident." Thats why the report is so unreliable. I never said anything patently false, but I also didnt tell the world that I only based my complaint on the evidence I cared to introduce into the record.

Wisconsin is playing in some crappy tournament at the Sears Center.

just some wrassling in the showers amongst friends. Here is what I imagine Sandusky's response would be: Bob, I know that youve never been an athlete, at 4'3 your only hope was to be a jockey, but if you were an athlete youd know that in the showers we sometimes like to get our WWF on. And yes Bob I know that its now WWE, but Ill be damned if I let the World Wildlife Federation take way the name of the greatest sport in the world. So let me explain, I was in the shower giving a kid a pile driver, and that just happens to put my face in his junk and my junk in his face. And if you were an athlete youd know that physical exertion makes you need to breathe heavy. So Im out of breathe about to put the Sandusky (my finishing move) on this kid, when his penis slips into my mouth. Now Im sure youve seen the South Park where Butter's penis happens to get in Cartman's mouth, so this isnt the first time a penis has slipped into a mouth. So because the kid is upside down, I cant just drop him on the floor, so I gently take him to the floor. Since his penis had been in my mouth, I offer to clean it so he doesnt get any germs. --- Best thing he could have done was take the 5th and keep his mouth shut. Proving these cases is going to be difficult with out a confession (young children dont have very reliable memories). No clue why the guy went on tv.

If Colts get 1, they can trade down get a ridiculous stock pile of picks and pick another QB later on. Brees for Vick worked out well.

Wisconsin looked good yesterday (from what I could see on the computer), Brust was pretty hot from beyond the arc (I think he was the leading scorer), so while it was against Kennesaw St., its nice to see them making shots.

Its windy in Chicago (haha) so that could be a benefit for the Bears.

My only feeling is that some how the pimping kids rumor has some merit, and one of those people was either very powerful in PSU, a big time donor, or someone really powerful in the state. Basically Sandusky at that point would threaten to expose the other person. That is the only logical answer, that someone way more powerful than Sandusky was involved.

If Sandusky was really recruiting, we arent even talking cover up. This is just mind blowing stupidity. The investigation has been going on for months, at minimum you suspend the guy during an investigation.

Journey, Thanks, just wanted to make sure that I wasnt completely crazy.

Iamshack, Honestly you shouldnt even bother, otherwise your just going to be lumped with me.

Journey, Do you agree that charging papers are entirely different in factual nature as compared to a transcript?

Balta, A Grand Jury report, is the govts interpretation of the facts. It is entirely 1 sided to prove their case. They do not present any evidence to contrary, even if it may exist. This is a very important distinction, that people must understand. A Grand Jury report is not fact, its hearsay and considered so unreliable that it can not be even used as evidence. So I assume that is admitting you have not seen the transcript, and therefore you do not know exactly what was said. Notice the report does not use quotes, that is because they are editorializing the witnesses testimony. It is not to be used as a fact, it is not to be considered fact, it is the gotvs best/most persuasive argument so that they will not lose on a motion to dismiss. They must plead a prima facie case. That is what this pleading is.

Its not a generalization. So far no one in this thread has said theyve read the transcript. So you are relying entirely on the medias portrayal, unless you are saying you were one the jurors and actually witnessed the testimony. Iamshack, Im a piece of s*** human being because I said that I think the appropriate response was that Paterno was suspended pending the outcome of the investigation. Unlike Milkman, Im not just going to blindly believe that Saint McQueary went to Paterno and gave him graphic details. Im a terrible human being because I believe that every person, regardless of how terrible the accusations, deserves to tell their side, before we make judgments. I dont know how many times I have to say it, but I dont know what Paterno was told. Therefore I cant say whether or not he should have told the police, until I am able to actually see the facts myself.