Penn State scandal (merged)

#3,801
#3,801
therealUT said:
According to the statement made by the BoT, the only details they had in making their decision to fire Paterno were those that were contained in the Grand Jury indictment. They fired Paterno without any due process, any inquiry, any further investigation. It was purely reactionary in the face of media criticism.

If they were getting rid of Paterno because they felt that he did not properly look into the matter because he was overly concerned with the reputation of the University and the football program, I see blatant hypocrisy by the BoT. They immediately fired Paterno, without looking into the matter, because they were overly concerned with the reputation of the University.

I base this assumption upon the statements made by the BoT concerning their lack of any further details.
Click to expand...

What should McQueary have done when he saw what he saw?
 
#3,804
#3,804
DrunkJohnny said:
What should McQueary have done when he saw what he saw?
Click to expand...

He should have beat him senseless and then drug him outside and nailed his member to a tree. After that he should have set the tree on fire and then given Sandusky a dull knife. He could either burn alive or cut off his own junk. If he did cut off his junk then drag him to the police station.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#3,806
#3,806
therealUT said:
Had I been in McQueary's shoes, I would have stepped in, pulled the boy away from Sandusky, and taken the boy straight to the hospital. Once there, I would have notified the police.
Click to expand...
I think we can agree on this.

Notified the police? Do you think it would have been responsible for Paterno to advise him to do so when he came to him with the info?
 
#3,807
#3,807
DrunkJohnny said:
I think we can agree on this.

Notified the police? Do you think it would have been responsible for Paterno to advise him to do so when he came to him with the info?
Click to expand...

I think the responsible thing for Paterno to say to a grown man in the situation would be:

"I am going to report this to my supervisor who will instigate an internal investigation. You should do whatever it is you feel you need to do based upon what you saw."
 
#3,809
#3,809
therealUT said:
I think the responsible thing for Paterno to say to a grown man in the situation would be:

"I am going to report this to my supervisor who will instigate an internal investigation. You should do whatever it is you feel you need to do based upon what you saw."
Click to expand...


So he shouldn't have advised him to notify police? Interesting.
 
#3,810
#3,810
^^ Joe Pa should have taken McQueary to the police as soon as he was told!

There is no defense for Joe Pa and the BOT had no other choice but to fire him. The first incedent (we know of) was in 98, the guy retires first part of 99. Don't tell me the two are not related, then in 2002 a witness came to him and told him about what he saw, still nothing happened. The guy was around the program up until a week before his arrest!!

Joe Pa ran PSU football, he had to know of at least the rumors for over a decade and could have banned him from the facilities at any time but he didn't. My belief is that this is a huge cover up with Joe Pa neck deep into it, he didn't want this to tarnish his image or legacy. He is an ego maniac that only cared about himself.
 
#3,811
#3,811
therealUT said:
According to the statement made by the BoT, the only details they had in making their decision to fire Paterno were those that were contained in the Grand Jury indictment. They fired Paterno without any due process, any inquiry, any further investigation. It was purely reactionary in the face of media criticism.

If they were getting rid of Paterno because they felt that he did not properly look into the matter because he was overly concerned with the reputation of the University and the football program, I see blatant hypocrisy by the BoT. They immediately fired Paterno, without looking into the matter, because they were overly concerned with the reputation of the University.

I base this assumption upon the statements made by the BoT concerning their lack of any further details.
Click to expand...

Will you be surprised if JP doesn't sue PSU for being fired without cause?
 
#3,812
#3,812
There seems to be a pattern he that everyone assumes that Paterno should have been the only competent adult on that campus; that he should have perceived everyone else as incapable of doing anything. An adult does not need Paterno to take his hand and walk him to the police station. An adult does not need Paterno to constantly monitor him when he has told Paterno that he would investigate the report.

If Paterno's downfall is that he trusted people, I do not see that as morally abhorrent. Some could certainly make the claim that it is naive and ideal, but trusting individuals is certainly not wicked, evil, or ego-centric.
 
#3,813
#3,813
BeecherVol said:
Will you be surprised if JP doesn't sue PSU for being fired without cause?
Click to expand...

No. I think Paterno will carry the burden of the shame and spare the University from any further harm, if he can help it. The only way I see Paterno speaking further on this matter is under oath and in court.
 
#3,814
#3,814
therealUT said:
There seems to be a pattern he that everyone assumes that Paterno should have been the only competent adult on that campus; that he should have perceived everyone else as incapable of doing anything. An adult does not need Paterno to take his hand and walk him to the police station. An adult does not need Paterno to constantly monitor him when he has told Paterno that he would investigate the report.

If Paterno's downfall is that he trusted people, I do not see that as morally abhorrent. Some could certainly make the claim that it is naive and ideal, but trusting individuals is certainly not wicked, evil, or ego-centric.
Click to expand...

Don't be a dolt, the reason the janitors didn't take it to the police in the 90's was to protect the program and Joe PA, not to mention their jobs. When a low level employee fears reporting sexual abuse will cost them their job, there is a major problem in the organization.

McQueary went to Joe Pa for the same reason, afraid of his job and career, Joe Pa went to his co-conspiritors to sweep it under the rug.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,816
#3,816
hog88 said:
Don't be a dolt, the reason the janitors didn't take it to the police in the 90's was to protect the program and Joe PA, not to mention their jobs. When a low level employee fears reporting sexual abuse will cost them their job, there is a major problem in the organization.

McQueary went to Joe Pa for the same reason, afraid of his job and career, Joe Pa went to his co-conspiritors to sweep it under the rug.
Click to expand...

I do not jump to this conclusion. According to the GJ indictment, it is a fact that Paterno reported it up; it is a fact that Curley told Paterno he would investigate; it is a fact that Curley and Schultz spoke with McQueary the following week; it is a fact that Curley and Schultz made statements to the effect that they had reported it to outside authorities and that an investigation was being conducted.

It is not an established fact that Paterno was in any way part of or privy to Curley and Schultz's attempt to cover this up.

If that fact comes out, then you can make such an assertion. Prior to that, it is simple speculation.

But, I am the dolt.
 
#3,818
#3,818
therealUT said:
No. I think Paterno will carry the burden of the shame and spare the University from any further harm, if he can help it. The only way I see Paterno speaking further on this matter is under oath and in court.
Click to expand...

PSUs "image" is what it is right now, why should he go down with them if he was in the right.

I think he will eventually speak on the matter, it may be later on after he has testified and this calms down. Which also goes along with the above statement. If he's in the right and was fired for no reason he will want the public to know this.
 
#3,819
#3,819
therealUT said:
There seems to be a pattern he that everyone assumes that Paterno should have been the only competent adult on that campus; .
Click to expand...

No, but that doesn't excuse him for being completely incompetent.

You can't even say he should have told McQueary to notify police. I'm assuming because it would ruin your position. But it really is common sense.

Tell me, why do you think Paterno, Curly, and Shultz never suggested the (extremely) obvious?
 
#3,820
#3,820
therealUT said:
I do not jump to this conclusion. According to the GJ indictment, it is a fact that Paterno reported it up; it is a fact that Curley told Paterno he would investigate; it is a fact that Curley and Schultz spoke with McQueary the following week; it is a fact that Curley and Schultz made statements to the effect that they had reported it to outside authorities and that an investigation was being conducted.

It is not an established fact that Paterno was in any way part of or privy to Curley and Schultz's attempt to cover this up.

If that fact comes out, then you can make such an assertion. Prior to that, it is simple speculation.

But, I am the dolt.
Click to expand...

Yes you are. Joe, after two reports that we know of, that he knew of, still let the guy use AND bring kids to the football facilities. Come on now, ask yourself what would you have done?
 
#3,821
#3,821
therealUT said:
I do not jump to this conclusion. According to the GJ indictment, it is a fact that Paterno reported it up; it is a fact that Curley told Paterno he would investigate; it is a fact that Curley and Schultz spoke with McQueary the following week; it is a fact that Curley and Schultz made statements to the effect that they had reported it to outside authorities and that an investigation was being conducted.

It is not an established fact that Paterno was in any way part of or privy to Curley and Schultz's attempt to cover this up.

If that fact comes out, then you can make such an assertion. Prior to that, it is simple speculation.

But, I am the dolt.
Click to expand...
Very odd lack of any follow up. Odd to the point of having to question his concern for the molested kids, no?

I don't care if he HAD to legally. It's the point that he knew and what he was told corroborated what he already suspected. To have sat idly on that after passing the buck is reprehensible to me and in no way defensible.
 
#3,822
#3,822
therealUT said:
There seems to be a pattern he that everyone assumes that Paterno should have been the only competent adult on that campus; that he should have perceived everyone else as incapable of doing anything. An adult does not need Paterno to take his hand and walk him to the police station. An adult does not need Paterno to constantly monitor him when he has told Paterno that he would investigate the report.

If Paterno's downfall is that he trusted people, I do not see that as morally abhorrent. Some could certainly make the claim that it is naive and ideal, but trusting individuals is certainly not wicked, evil, or ego-centric.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. That is obvious. But just because the guy above is not competent doesn't excuse him to be.
 
#3,823
#3,823
hog88 said:
Come on now, ask yourself what would you have done?
Click to expand...

You have to understand that he thinks preteens showering with strange grown men is a-ok. What he would have done, is most likely exactly what happened. Hence why he's defending the actions of those involved.
 
#3,824
#3,824
hog88 said:
Yes you are. Joe, after two reports that we know of, that he knew of, still let the guy use AND bring kids to the football facilities. Come on now, ask yourself what would you have done?
Click to expand...

It is not about what I would have done, it is about what actions I see to be within the limits of reason.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top