RockRaines

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 02:15 PM) The police, apparently, did their job but the DA failed: This then resulted in the retirement of Sandusky from PSU. However he was still allowed to keep his professor Emeritus status, was still allowed to use PSU money to take children on trips and stay in hotels, and was allowed to bring these children on campus with him without any restrictions.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 02:08 PM) Well I'm sorry, but I just don't hold him as responsible for not chasing this guy down and the vast majority of you guys. Some people just don't want to be involved in sick s*** like that. Does he deserve to lose his job. Probably so. Do I find it necessary to condemn him personally? No. I have far greater ire towards the police that turned a blind eye. I find it far more disturbing that the organization entrusted by the public and charged with preventing these sort of people from walking around amongst us did nothing than Paterno's inaction. But apparently that is not as big of a story and there are not going to be any threads created to discuss that issue. You are preaching to the choir buddy, dont forget I have watched and read several people on here and in the media call the Vest a scumbag for months because of one seemingly small (in comparison) error that he committed. I dont think Paterno is really that bad of a guy, but you have to admit he could have done more, and I'm also positive he knew more. I think the condemnation of his character is definitely something that shouldnt take place unless more evidence is uncovered, but at least it should cost him and the other people involved their jobs immediately.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 02:03 PM) That's exactly what we want. Period. Yup. PSU should be cleaning house, and Paterno's cocky statements about how the board shouldnt spend another minute thinking about his job status only make him look worse.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 02:01 PM) I agree with you on most of these points. But Paterno seems to want to present his case quite a bit. I wouldn't be shocked if he made other efforts to deal with this that we are simply unaware of at this early stage in the findings. Or his personal PR team keeps letting him make statements that will portray him in a better light somehow. He's already captured at least one person on here because he said he "wished he had done more" aka, I knew about it and didnt do anything at the time. He's been interviewed on this before and I am positive that even more negative pieces of information will come out about his knowledge of the situation if this goes to trial.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 01:53 PM) Or is the point that Joe Paterno is getting publicly slayed for being the head coach of a football team at a university where these events happened? No, its because he was directly involved in the information that was being passed around about his employee and was also directly involved in what happened to said employee more than once in regards to consequences. He's the most powerful man at an institution not only where this happened, but where it was sometime funding and enabling such acts to occur.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 01:46 PM) Sort of proving iamshack's point - ESPN has been working hard to hire Charles Robinson, an investigative reporter for Yahoo that tends to break a lot of big scandals: http://thebiglead.com/index.php/2011/11/09...arles-robinson/ In other words: scandals = audience = $$$$$$$$$$. Victims? Who cares. Well yeah, how many people have clicked on an OSU or Miami link in the past 9 months regardless of the information being rehashed. People love scandals especially those relating to a prominent entity or a figurehead of an institution.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 01:07 PM) What the hell is a "powerful" eyewitness.? lol. Did you see it happen or not? Again, the media doing what they do best. They are referring to the statement not the witness. Did you read the Grand Jury report yet?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 01:03 PM) I simply don't know enough (read: nothing) about Penn. reporting laws to make an accurate judgement, and that's not something I've seen in the articles I've read. I'm not saying I think you're wrong. From NYT CNN now reporting there have been a dozen or so additional allegations filed with the tip line offered by police. We'll see how legit those are.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 12:58 PM) If this happened at "Insert your random school here", there probably would be no hesitation on the part of the university to clean house. There'd be no "Resign at the end of the year". Tough to say really. You would think the nature of the crimes would make this definitely happen no matter where the location but you never know. These guys have been covering this up for so long they may believe the lies themselves. s***, McQueary's (the GA) letter to football prospects points to a scandal-free environment. This was a guy who witnessed first hand the actual scandal.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 12:59 PM) Legally, no. (I know Rock disagrees). Technically Pennsylvania Law disagrees depending on if you think he was given actual information.

QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 12:59 PM) What I read was this was from 2002 and Sandusky retired in 1999. Shouldn't the eye witness be the one to call police? He was first formally investigated internally in 1998.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 12:56 PM) I'm not being a devil's advocate, it was my impression of the coverage all day yesterday morning. And don't mistake what I've been typing - I've not accused anyone of the people posting in this thread of blaming Paterno for molestation. I'm merely pointing out the disingenuousness of the sports radio mouthpieces and the tv talk shows. I don't care if they want to sell their souls for the sake of money, but the story is almost entirely about Joe Paterno now, and to a far lesser degree about Sandusky. That's the problem I have with it. Welcome to the world of professional media and NCAA sports. If its a prominent program with a figurehead involved its going to be blown up regardless of the actual facts. I would stay away from anything sports related reporting this story. I am actually most interested in local news from Penn.

More Links (not ESPN) http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/10/sports/n...son.html?src=tp http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/sports/the...on_paterno.html

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 12:50 PM) Have you read the thread? Have you listened to the radio? Have you watched the talk shows? Everyone is entirely positive that they would have immediately run in and stopped everything they witnessed, called the police, then if the police didn't handle it, they would have called in the National Guard, and if it was appropriately handled then, they would have devoted their life to following this child molester around everywhere he goes so as to ensure he never so much as looked at a child again because we all owe it to the potential victims. Again, I'm not condoning anything that was done, but the degree of outrage towards Joe Paterno right now is simply out of control right now because everyone is fixated on the hero getting slayed in public...if this happened on the campus of Montana State or something, it would be a story for 3 days and then we would all forget about it. And yet the kids who were the victims of it would still be just as real. Last I checked none of us were on the radio. So what does that have to do with this thread and our discussion? And I'm familiar with a figurehead getting blasted by the media regardless of the facts in a situation. However in this situation and on this board, I think we have taken into account the facts and the different amounts of blame that need to go around. Thats why I think 90 percent of the people on this boards have the position that they need to clean house entirely.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 12:46 PM) He met his minimum legal obligations and did nothing else. Not unless he called the Police.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 12:45 PM) No, the problem is that Paterno is the story now. And if you don't take the time to actually read the facts, you might think Paterno actually molested children himself. And then 20 years from now, Paterno's name is going to come up, and someone is going to say "isn't that that old geezer who coached Penn State for 50 years and was caught molesting kids?" The media needs to be more responsible with the story instead of just irresponsibly making this into what will get the biggest ratings or website hits. With all due respect that is total bulls***. Nobody is going to make the mistake of saying Paterno is the one who was the criminal in this (outside of perjury). Our discussion has nothing to do with the media and everything to do with the facts presented so far in this case. Joe Paterno is by far the most powerful man in State College. His direct report was investigated for molestation over 13 years ago. This man then mysteriously retired from his position. This man was then implicated by another one of Joe's employees of molestation first hand 4 years later. The dept then banned this man from having children on PSU property. All of the higher ups who made these decisions and then lied to the Grand Jury are in the wrong. Its clear that the most powerful man at the University who was also directly involved in the chain of information and decision making is going to take ALOT of heat.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 12:40 PM) Yes, because the media doesn't try to sensationalize EVERYTHING. Read the Grand Jury report which has nothing to do with the Media. Then try and blame them.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 12:39 PM) Sandusky admitted molesting a child to the police and they did nothing themselves! But we're going to persecute Paterno more for not telling the police, than the actual police, who were told by the criminal himself and did nothing! How is that not the bigger story here? I don't care if he loses his job; it's time for him to move on anyways. And honestly, it's probably good for us as a society that the shortcomings of these godlike figures on college campuses are being brought to light, because maybe it will open their eyes to the fact that these are just people, capable of making mistakes just like the rest of us. But of course right now, everyone else feels the need to stand up and tell the world how much of a "moral failure" Joe Paterno is, and how we all would have risen to the occasion and handled the situation perfectly. We're all also qualified to damn Paterno to hell, since the media and the rest of us commentators are all such "moral superstars." Give me a break. Is anyone saying that at all? Each person involved in the ignoring and covering up of what happened should pay some sort of price should they not? Paterno, Schultz and Curley also lied to a Grand Jury based on the evidence provided up to this point.

Wow, SMH

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 12:36 PM) I don't give a s*** what he heard. "Hey Boss, I heard from somebody the other day that Rowand44 was dry-humping a 10-year old." I'm not sprinting over to the police station over some s*** like that. What about when there was an investigation first in 1998 that he was molesting boys and then an assistant of yours 4 years later first hand sees him raping a boy in the shower. Do you do nothing then?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 12:13 PM) Not if you violate the stated chain of command. It is the law in Penn to report these types of situations to the Police regardless of your occupation and some sort of half-military based chain of command rule.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 12:00 PM) Rock, The article you quoted does not show any evidence Parterno had first hand knowledge. If the graduate assistance thought he saw a crime, he should have called the police. The second the GA didnt call the police, waited until the next day, you have a serious credibility issue. If I see someone being murdered on the street, I call 9-11. I dont go home call my dad, think about what we should do, and then report it to my boss. I just dont see how its logical that Paterno should have called the police (the next day when he saw nothing), when the actual eye witness did not call the police. It makes it seem like the eyewitness maybe is exaggerating, its hard to tell. No one has shown any evidence that Paterno ever witnessed any wrongdoing of any kind. There was an investigation of wrongdoing first in 1998. As the supervisor of Sandusky, you dont think he would have known why he was being investigated? Mysteriously he was then made to retire right after. After 2002 was discussed internally between the GA, Paterno, Curley and Schultz, Sandusky was then barred from being with kids on PSU property. Doesnt that seem like a pretty evident pattern of sweeping this under the rug?

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 11:48 AM) If anything Paterno is really the one with the least culpability. He didnt witness the crime, when told about it, he reported it to the people who could do something about it. You can say he should have been more active etc, but there is no evidence (so far) that Paterno ever witnessed these actions. Putting yourself in Paterno's shoes, hes known the guy for years hes never seen anything, now hes being told the guy is raping kids in the locker room? Twice, he was told at least twice. You cant tell me that Paterno wasnt aware of HIS employee's actions both in 1998 and clearly in 2002. All of those in power in State College including Paterno need to be let go. This was either one of the laziest investigations of all time or a coverup. Either way it was wrong.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 11:35 AM) I probably should not say anything else on this topic as my wife is a Miami grad. LOL. Thats awesome.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 11:26 AM) Id have to see the law, because Paterno did not have first hand knowledge, he only had "hearsay" evidence. He reported it, hearing about an alleged crime is a lot different than witnessing an alleged crime. Its a bad situation, but its not that easy to say everyone should call the police with really weak evidence. What about hearing about it more than once? Would that then qualify?