Penn State scandal (merged)

#3,876
#3,876
therealUT said:
Who says that Paterno did not attempt to get clarity from McQueary's statement? You are leaping. Paterno could have asked for clarification and McQueary could have continued with, "I cannot be certain, but I think I saw". Let the evidence indict Paterno; not your speculation and not some hypothetical "what I would have done in that situation".

If you have never been in that exact situation, you cannot know exactly how you would have responded. At best, you can hope you would act a certain way according to certain knowledge you are privy to at that time.
Click to expand...

Unless the GJT stated that he did, you are speculating correct? I haven't read where he did.

As to the last part. Was JP interviewed (GJT) the day after this happened?
 
#3,878
#3,878
therealUT said:
Good; now you know how you responded to the exact situation you were in when your best friend kicked his dog.
Click to expand...

Your an enablers enabler, just as bad as the crime itself. As you keep on posting, I have to wonder if this happened to you while taking showers with grown men. Honestly, I cannot see how any MAN cannot see what he did was wrong and not enough. You need to look in the mirror and ask yourself if your father would be proud of you. Of course, if I remember correctly, you took showers with him and other men at the same time, so who knows. But, I hope you never have the responsibility of monitoring kids. I have never done this, but you are going on ignore. And please don't start with the moral crap with me, I don't have many, but kids are precious and should never have any harm done to them, it is our job to protect them. When we don't protect them, what do they have. We as adults let these kids down, because of people such as yourself let monsters get away with crimes like this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,882
#3,882
BeecherVol said:
Unless the GJT stated that he did, you are speculating correct? I haven't read where he did.

As to the last part. Was JP interviewed (GJT) the day after this happened?
Click to expand...

I am saying that Paterno could have asked for clarification or he could not have; McQueary could have clarified or he could not have. I am not making conjectures, I am pointing to where the current holes are in the factual report (GJI).
 
#3,884
#3,884
paterno just thought mcqueary was "very upset" because he simply saw a man showering with a boy. because that's cool guys. along with fondling, or whatever jo pa was told.
 
#3,885
#3,885
therealUT said:
McQueary heard the slapping sounds. No where does it state that McQueary reported that to Paterno; in fact, it states only that McQueary reported what he saw, what "he believed he saw" to Curley and Schultz. Hearing is not seeing. Continue to make all the conjectures you want, though.
Click to expand...

That is not true at all. I just read this morning that McQueary stated he saw the kid in the shower with his hands against the wall being raped. You sure are opinionated about this considering you know very few facts. Makes one wonder if you don't have a skeleton or two in the closet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3,886
#3,886
therealUT said:
I am saying that Paterno could have asked for clarification or he could not have; McQueary could have clarified or he could not have. I am not making conjectures, I am pointing to where the current holes are in the factual report (GJI).
Click to expand...

If Joe Pa didn't ask for clarification then he is unfit to be the HC, if he did ask for and got clarification and did nothing beyond notifying his AD and didn't follow up he is unfit. If he didn't believe his GA and thought it was all BS then he should have fired the GA. In any case his actions or lack of demands his firing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#3,887
#3,887
#3,888
#3,888
hog88 said:
If Joe Pa didn't ask for clarification then he is unfit to be the HC, if he did ask for and got clarification and did nothing beyond notifying his AD and didn't follow up he is unfit. If he didn't believe his GA and thought it was all BS then he should have fired the GA. In any case his actions or lack of demands his firing.
Click to expand...

You have conveniently left out the possibility of asking for clarification and not receiving clarification.
 
#3,889
#3,889
therealUT said:
Where have I stated that? Or, are you just consistently applying your feelings to situations without factual evidence to back that up?
Click to expand...

By the third damn time he was made aware of the allegations, Factual evidence should not be needed to at least try to make some safeguards from allowing Sandusky on campus.

I have yet to see you say Paterno did anything wrong in this situation. I've only see you say he did enough.

Of course I'm injecting my feelings into this. Paterno doing enough is not doing anything to protect the children, and I see you continually defending Paterno's inaction.

I don't see how you can defend Paterno if the protection of children is his foremost concern.
 
#3,890
#3,890
per pg 7 joe pa knew there was something of a sexual nature going on. maybe it was just fondling therefore acceptable.

joe pa didn't know guise!
 
#3,893
#3,893
JokermanVol said:
per pg 7 joe pa knew there was something of a sexual nature going on. maybe it was just fondling therefore acceptable.

joe pa didn't know guise!
Click to expand...

Per page 7, Paterno reported to Curley what McQueary had seen.

Again, like I said above, if the transcript of Paterno's testimony demonstrates McQueary asserted his report with certainty, then there is something inconsistent with keeping both McQueary and Sandusky around. If the transcript of Paterno's testimony says McQueary reported that he thought he saw something, then there is no inconsistency.
 
#3,895
#3,895
therealUT said:
You have conveniently left out the possibility of asking for clarification and not receiving clarification.
Click to expand...

Shouldn't he demand clarification before accusing anybody of anything?

That doesn't fly. MM is on the hook for the accusation, no reason for him to refuse clarifying to make sure JP understood what he saw and or heard.
 
#3,896
#3,896
BeecherVol said:
Shouldn't he demand clarification before accusing anybody of anything?

That doesn't fly. MM is on the hook for the accusation, no reason for him to refuse clarifying to make sure JP understood what he saw and or heard.
Click to expand...

Not at all; if McQueary says, "I think I saw this and I think it needs to be looked into" it is reasonable to look into the matter. It would be perfectly reasonable for Paterno to then report to the AD and for the AD then to sit down and talk with McQueary before instigating an investigation within the department.
 
#3,897
#3,897
the only one i've heard cast doubt on what mcqueary stated he saw is joe pa. the indictment is pretty clear.

the fact that mcqueary was 'very upset', the fact that he heard 'rhythmic slapping noises", and the fact alone that it was a naked man with a naked boy just makes it incredibly unlikely that joe pa thought it was something minor.
 
#3,899
#3,899
therealUT said:
.
Click to expand...


And that response is why I think the protection of children is secondary in your thought process.

You are willing to continue to allow the possibility of children getting raped because not enough factual evidence exist?

You don't think the third time of hearing it is enough probable cause to do something?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top