Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 01:38 PM) Why wouldn't any of those claims be reflected in the Grand Jury testimony? Why would they need to be? Paterno wasn't involved in this investigation. edit: i mean to say the subject of this investigation

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 01:34 PM) No, you can't. The distinction is that the media is trying to pretend as though the real story to them is the kids, when in all reality, it is the Penn State legendary football coach going down right in front of us all. Why not just lead the story off with a child molestation scandal has sunk Joe Paterno and then make it all about Paterno as much as they want? Instead, they are acting as though they have such heartfelt condolences for these innocent children...and then after 8 seconds of reflecting on that, we spend the next 59 minutes on just how many stakes we should drive through Joe Paterno's heart. Sorry, to me, that is just entirely disingenuous. I don't know how to make it any more clear for you. Or some bulls*** article like on grantland about how this tragedy affects ME personally. "This is a terrible tragedy....god all my thoughts are ruined. Those assholes. f*** you for making State College not seem to perfect in my mind anymore! Gah!"

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 01:22 PM) I don't care about "most Americans." I'm interested in what's being discussed itt. Stop deflecting with this media coverage stuff from what was actually being discussed, which was Paterno's and others' roles and responsibilities in this situation. Paterno's side of things are included in the GJ findings. What could you hear from him that would excuse his inaction in your mind? He could say that he followed up multiple times with the GA and AD about their meeting and investigation and they both determined that instead of a brutal rape it was just some inappropriate behavior (wrestling with no one around, maybe showering in the same room, who knows...something not to the level of rape) He could have been told that campus police performed an investigation and found nothing credible, and thus nothing needed to be reported. He could have been told that nothing credible at all was found after the investigation but that Sandusky was in the locker room with a boy by themselves, which probably wouldn't look good if people found them, so they decided to ban Sandusky from coming to the locker room with one of his kids. You have no idea what Paterno did/didn't know at that specific time, other than the fact that he was told by the GA about an act he saw (which is a he said-he said as to the specific nature of the acts). People just need to calm the f*** down. I can't believe Paterno has already gone through the media trial before anything about his involvement is really known.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 11:41 AM) You keep saying he should have trusted the AD to do the right thing, but here we are 9 years later and nothing was done. At what point do you stop trusting your AD to do the right thing when this guy has continued access to kids and the PSU facilities? Could you sit on this info for this long and do nothing about it? Honestly i'm probably going to do exactly what Paterno did. I'm going to immediately report it to the higher ups at Penn State. I'm going to trust that an AD and Senior VP of a top rated college like Penn State wouldn't try to cover it up. If the guy was banned from bringing kids to the locker room, i'm going to assume that whatever actually happened wasn't as bad as what we're finding out. Would I ask questions? Probably, but only if for some reason I don't think they did enough or that Sandusky's behavior warranted it. But the GA didn't do anything else either, so I dunno that there's any evidence that anything further happened. Rock has brought up some information that might change my mind on what Paterno knew after this incident, and if that's true then maybe Paterno deserves more of the blame. But none of that was part of the grand jury proceedings, so it's all speculation. Instead of jumping to judgment like everyone else, i'll see how it plays out.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 11:08 AM) No. If someone I've known for years comes to me in distress, describes and awful scene of someone else I've known for years (who happens to have a close relationship with numerous young boys) was raping or molesting a young boy, I wouldn't kick the matter upstairs and assume it'll shake itself out. So distressed he couldn't/didn't stop it and waited an entire night to tell Paterno. There was no "pattern" at the time. That's the problem here. Everyone is looking at this situation like Paterno knew this guy was a monster for years and years. As far as we know, that was the first Paterno heard of anything like that before. Again, hindsight makes it easier to blame. Why on earth couldn't Paterno trust his AD and a VP of the school (who happens to oversee the campus police) to do the right thing and if necessary report the allegation to the proper outside authorities? You don't know that he's credible. For all we know Paterno might have known that Sandusky and the GA had private issues and the GA was trying to get him in trouble. Pure conjecture. And "letting them sweep the matter under the rug" is bulls***. Give me a reason why Paterno shouldn't have trusted his AD to do the right thing.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 11:01 AM) At which point, he'll have been coached to perfection on what to say to cover his ass. There are no excuses here, but of course there are always going to be a couple of Devil's advocates. Probably. But if Paterno's was involved in the cover-up, I dunno why that wouldn't be included in the grand jury finding.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 10:29 AM) Well, he forced Sandusky into retirement after he first heard about it, and then still let the guy have access to both kids and his facilities for another 3-4 years before hearing about it again and finally banning Sandusky from having kids on campus (which he still did). That to me says he knew about it and basically said its ok as long as its not on campus and you arent a PSU employee. The Grad student met with Paterno at his house and told him what he saw and nobody picked up the phone and called 911 or child services or anything. Wouldnt you expect more from the most powerful man in State College? He did? That's not in the grand jury finding.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 10:29 AM) Based on that Grand Jury finding, there's no way Paterno can truly claim ignornance here. An assistant coach and former player told him what he saw and was very upset. I don't know how the information would be completely unbelievable given the source. He reported it to the top guy in charge the very next day. They had a meeting. Schultz and Curley said they would look into it, and did, and banished Sandusky from bringing children in the locker room. As far as Paterno goes, you've given the allegations to your superiors and they brought down some punishment but nothing else was done. Why should he then go straight to the police? Wouldn't you assume that those people doing the investigations would have if the claims were credible? And it's unbelievable just in the sense that it's a friend you've had for 30 years and you find out that he's at minimum fondling boys int he shower, or at worst raping him. That's not something a normal person is going to believe right away. You're going to look back and think about the 30 years you've known the guy and have real difficulty believing that he (who fostered numerous kids and had been heavily involved in helping troubled youths) would do something like that. To me this is like claiming that Paterno called the cops, they didn't follow through with any charges, the cops end up acting criminally in covering up the actual crime, and Paterno is now faulted for not reporting what he heard to a Penn child services department or the FBI. In hindsight it's easy to say that Paterno should have followed up. But I don't think his actions were really that unreasonable based on the information contained in the grand jury finding. As I've said before, if anything, the GA is the real problem here. He didn't stop what he saw, and despite telling Curley and Schultz what happened, he knew that Sandusky got away with a small punishment. He also knew that Sandusky continued to receive benefits and continued to be involved with kids. He NEVER spoke about it again until this investigation.

Tex i'm in agreement here. I have no personal like of Paterno, but I don't understand the outrage towards him. I think him retiring and his otherwise flawless legacy has been ruined by all this. He'll no longer be the coach with the most wins. He'll be the coach with the most wins who left the school after a terrible scandal. Penalty enough (with the information out right now). It's not surprising that every one wants to jump to judgment here. But I dunno that any of us would have acted differently if we were Paterno. He was given second hand information, the specificity of which is in question. At the time, the information is probably completely unbelievable given his history and friendship with Sandusky. Still, he reports it to the highest person in the department (the AD) who may well have told him he'd investigate the claim and that he'd deal with it. For all we know (and can probably expect, given the perjury committed by the AD), Paterno asked what happened and the AD lied to him and said nothing happened. Why would Paterno need to do anything more? He can rightly assume that the AD looked into it and found that there was no credible claim. Until I hear from Paterno and he explains what happened and what he knew, i'm not going to have a conniption fit over him symbolically coaching a game.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Nov 9, 2011 -> 01:09 AM) This. Agreed, and that's part of the reason I hate these "OMG I loved Penn State but now I can't" articles circulating the web. That's issue number 10 on the list of what people should be focused on, the first being the kids and their families. Btw, who wants to bet me that the kid in the shower is a current Penn State player and/or student? Sandusky was known to get his "kids" onto the team.

Uncharted 3 has been a pretty great experience so far (about half done). Easily the best "adventure" game in a while. It's amazing what good writing/character development can add to a gaming experience.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 03:18 PM) I kinda agree with what both of you are saying. He's looking at the impact that this will have on a whole community that has strong ties to PSU and Paterno in particular, but he's probably being a little overdramatic and anyone who has so much of their identity wrapped up in a football team might want to take a step back. Btw, the title of the article is Growing Up Penn State: The end of everything at State College.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 02:07 PM) I don't know how you would have read the Grantland article, but I think you're response doesn't fit what was written Jenks. I'll admit I read about 3/4's before stopping. But what I was getting (correct me if I'm wrong) is that fantasyland of Happy Valley is now forever tainted and that his views of the people he knew or revered is now the opposite. I've just been reading a lot of those articles and it's so over the top that it's kinda dumb. Even though he's saying this isn't an indictment of the school or the students or the town, he still has to bring out this larger meaning about the life and times of the community, and I just don't buy it. s***ty people live everywhere. They don't define communities or schools or cultures. They're just s***ty people.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 01:50 PM) That is not at all similar to attacking the accuser and disparaging that person in order to deflect their claims. I just don't understand how going one direction it's a character assassination, but going the other it's justified truth-telling. I get that where there's smoke, there's fire, but right now all we have is 4 anonymous women making claims of improper conduct/harassment, and one who has come out. The one that has come out has some serious credibility issues. Why is it so wrong to question that, especially given the timing and the involvement of a known sleaze-ball Hollywood attorney? And now the morning talk show circuit?

QUOTE (zenryan @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 01:43 PM) I can think of only 2 reasons why Paterno didnt do anything more than the minimum in this situation: 1. Paterno, while knowing it wasnt right, didnt really think it was a big deal. 2. Has known for years what Sandusky does to these kids and his visit to the AD was more like, "well Sandusky is doing it again..." type visit. I really dont want to believe the first option but it is reported that Sandusky would have these kids stay with him in hotels the night before the games. How does Paterno not know that his DC has kids in his room that arent related? On a side note, am I the only one here thinking this will never go to trial because Sandusky will kill himself? As to the hotel - he's the operator of a boys and girls type club. He fostered like 6 kids because he couldn't have his own. In that situation are you really going to question the guy sharing a hotel room with one of his "kids?" There was some rumor that Sandusky had been warned about his behavior with kids way back long ago. Campus police were involved and they basically just told him to stop. Whether that info ever got to Paterno, who knows.

In my opinion his actions were much worse and much less excusable than Paterno. He's the eye witness. Not only did he fail to stop it, but he failed to notify the police. Paterno on the otherhand didn't witness anything, and he's being told a pretty crazy and probably unbelievable accusation (at the time) about his friend of 30 something years. He goes to his superiors, let's them handle it, and probably assumes (reasonably) that if no proceedings were initiated, there might not be any credible claim. Should he have had a follow-up conversation to see what happened? Sure. But for all we know he did and the assholes in charge covering it up lied to him. This turning Paterno into the ring leader and tarnishing his otherwise impeccable record, without any actual knowledge of what he knew/did, is ridiculous. As to the grantland piece, wtf. Terrible. I'm sorry, but as much of a tragedy as this is, and for as terrible as it was handled, you're still talking about a handful of people that are the bad guys here. Not the school, not the student body, not the town. Calm the f*** down. It's not like that place was the Garden of Eden. I'm sure there was crime before Sandusky arrived....

I want to know why this McQueary guy is getting such a pass. The guy (28 yrs old at the time, so not exactly a kid) walked in on a rape and did nothing but call his coach. How on earth do you not make a scene and try and protect the kid from that monster? McQueary's inaction was worse than anyone else at Penn St. IMO.

And of course she's got a completely clean history: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-20...rts-emerge.html Seriously though, the most interesting thing about that is the "rumor" that she dated Steve Stone in the 80's. Crazy.

http://www.suntimes.com/8592168-417/sneed-...-month-ago.html Turns out Bialek hugged Cain a month ago. Pretty common for victims of sexual harassment or sexual assault to be all buddy-buddy with their harasser. Makes sense.

http://news.yahoo.com/cain-accuser-stands-...-122629383.html She wasn't paid to make a statement. But she sure was paid to make all these appearances! What a crock of s***.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 8, 2011 -> 10:04 AM) Huh? lol, sorry, that was supposed to be in the football thread after McCoy ran for that 33 yd touchdown.

Bears win! Good game. Still have a shot at the playoffs.

i'd kick this out of bounds. no return. let them try and run a play for 70-80 yards

Not to jinx this game, but no sacks tonight right? O-Line really coming together nicely the last couple of weeks. Lots of good running lanes and good protection.

QUOTE (danman31 @ Nov 7, 2011 -> 10:25 PM) That's actually a very good point. We're trained for a TV solution to the story, but in reality there's a good chance you don't find out what happened. I would accept this and actually like it. If she just magically survives for 3-4 days it might be the last straw for me and that show.