StrangeSox

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 01:50 PM) Id bet that if they thought the CEO was stealing money theyd bring in his wife. Brother is not equal to wife. The law provides for spousal immunity because most people share information with their husband/wife. There is no "family immunity" because it doesnt work that way. So yes Id bet they bring in the wife. I bet they brought in Sandusky's wife to ask her what she knew, I bet they brought in Madoff's wife. Even in a civil lawsuit, you depose the wife, just in case. You keep shifting from institutional (PSU, Barclays) to individual (Paterno, CEO). It doesn't make any sense. SEC regulators are not going to call in Jamie Dimon's family to investigate what went wrong on JPM trades because that would be dumb.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 01:46 PM) The Paternos have been venting. If they had any extra relevant information to provide or a reasonable defense of JoePa, they'd have given it. But instead, they just say "NUH UH!" over and over. The Paterno family dog is being held in a secret prison by Sandusky's affiliates to ensure their silence.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 01:41 PM) Some law blogs are saying they violated Federal Law. I am not that well versed in it, and I am not going to read the entire NCAA Rule Book to find out. link?

This whole thing would not be "wrapped up," the Paternos would still be whining to anyone and everyone about how great of a person JoePa was and how he's being unfairly treated. You keep analogizing Penn State University Football and the sanctions handed down by the NCAA to a criminal individual and their family. It's nonsense. If Barclays gets heavily sanctioned over the LIBOR manipulation, are they going to bring in the CEO's brother before they determine what to do?

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 01:39 PM) Its not about what his wife thinks. Its about does his wife have relevant information to the investigation. You cant willfully ignore witnesses who may have information that hurts your case. How do you know this? How do you know that Paterno's wife didnt have information that could exculpate her husband? What if Sandusky threatened to kill Paterno's family if he didnt cover up the abuse? You dont think that would have impacted whether they would have vacated Paterno's wins? It doesnt really matter, most American's are convict first ask questions later, I understand that I will always be in the minority. It sucks, but whatever, I really dont care that much on this subject. :lolhitting good troll

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 01:32 PM) I dont know, you are trying to disprove my argument, go find the facts yourself. Nah, I'll safely assume that the NCAA does not give one s*** what a coach's wife/family thinks before handing down sanctions for improper behavior. The answer is yes* they did not interview them, the reason is because it doesn't matter what Joe's wife or his son think. Their input into sanctions on PSU football would be useless. They do not have additional facts or information relevant to the NCAA's decision that the NCAA would not have already had from independent and internal investigations.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 01:28 PM) So NCAA didnt vacate paterno's wins? News to me. They vacated PSU Football's wins. They did not specifically remove Paterno's name from the records while leaving everything else intact. Did the NCAA invite Tressle's wife in for an interview before determining what to do with OSU? Did they talk to Glena Carroll before handing down USC's punishment?

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 01:24 PM) I dont know, how would I know unless they are given the chance to present their evidence. Even a criminal at a sentencing hearing can have his family testify about why he is a good person and doesnt deserve to go to jail for X years. This was about the PSU Football program, not NCAA sanctions on the former, now-deceased coach.

This wasn't a trial or a legal process. Did the NCAA invite Tressle's wife in for an interview before determining what to do with OSU? Did they talk to Glena Carroll before handing down USC's punishment?

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 01:16 PM) Why would the family of an accused want to have a fair trial, hearing or have their day in the sun? I dont know, but Im sure you can figure it out. What valid input into NCAA institutional sanctions would the Paterno family have?

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 01:14 PM) One thing I noticed about these three movies is that Gotham looks different in each movie. I don't know if that was done on purpose or what. BB was filmed in England, TDK was filmed in Chicago, TDKR was in New York.

Why does the Paterno family think they should have had any input into the NCAA sanctions?

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Jul 22, 2012 -> 07:19 PM) Personal opinion: Gatorade is only to be drank during physical activity or when hungover. Because it's miraculous in both situations. ProTip: Drink it before passing out

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 12:06 PM) No, but I probably should have clarified that I'm a cop first did not know this

They shouldn't be operating in an extra-legal world.

It's an NCAA sanction-it's meant to impact the program as a whole and to serve as an example to anyone who might ever contemplate similar actions.

me, jenks and ss2k5 all on the same side?!

@beardedstoner: To everyone mad about Joe Paterno’s statue being taken down – just look the other way & pretend it’s not happening.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 10:15 AM) And that was a terrible decision made by a very small number of people in secret. People in charge of their favorite sports team actively making decisions to protect the reputation of that sports team at the expense of children. Children who lost more than 6-8 years of their "sports life."

Best-case scenario is that the employers are sanctioned and fined and stop exploiting their employees.

The whole reason the thing was covered up was to preserve the shiny, moral image of their favorite sports team and their God-Coach.

Cheat, lie and steal? f*** that, there's no future in an abusive company.

I think the argument is that the cover-up was done to protect the reputation of PSU. With no cover-up, their reputation is damaged and their recruiting abilities are lessened.

Wouldn't it be illegal to fire an employee who reported you to the NLRB/whoever handles that stuff for illegally withholding wages? edit: like G&T said, it depends on your classification. If you're salary-exempt, you get paid a set wage regardless of hours worked. But it's not legal to classify anyone and everyone as salary-exempt.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 23, 2012 -> 09:48 AM) I wouldn't do that...then they'll just pay him his money and fire him and hire a bunch of unpaid "interns" instead. You have to make a decision as to whether you think there is any kind of future with this company or not. If yes, then keep working hard. If not, get the hell out of there first chance you get. They're already breaking the law and stealing money from him.