S
Scorpio79
Guest
How dare you question the Almighty Mesabildo! He is always right, and YOU are always wrong.
Old Penn State Hash
- Thread starter austinhawk
- Start date
How dare you question the Almighty Mesabildo! He is always right, and YOU are always wrong.
Billso
Well-Known Member
Are you saying the accusations mentioned above are supported by the Freeh report, after all? Please cite page numbers. Thanks.
S
Scorpio79
Guest
final words
bphawkeye
Well-Known Member
umm - the part about why no other college team (even D3) wanted to even interview/coax him after "his" decision was strange. as far as being on top of it - i assumed some cancer/disease that no one wanted leaked out there. i assumed he wanted to spend more time with his family, and help some youth club close by until the inevitable effects of cancer took him. i was wrong and certainly was not on top of it.
i get the sarcasm - but i'm a bit old and do not care to be right/wrong about this fckn asswpe - wish him the worst
EDIT - now i wonder what other people thought about his mysterious retirement 15 years ago.
Last edited:
hawkeyebob62
Well-Known Member
I never knew who the guy was until all this happened (I really only know head coaches at other schools, unless the assistants are former Hawkeyes).
I found it interesting to read that Bill O' Brien is "discouraging" any broad rejection of NCAA sanctions. I really have to respect the guy for owning the consequences> I almost hope he sticks it out and helps them bounce back.
/thread
Billso
Well-Known Member
It wasn't that mysterious, if you read the Freeh report.
Sandusky did not receive offers because he did not seek offers, he made clear he wanted to maintain contact with PSU, remain in State College, and devote himself full-time to Second Mile (sickening in retrospect, but there you go). There is much more, but it concludes:
Last edited:
Billso
I get the whole due process, credible evidence, everybody gets their day in court, innocent until proven guilty thing and that people should not be convicted without solid, credible, provable evidence, nor be swept away by a tide of revenge, outrage and irrational emotion, but I wonder about the vigor that you put into your defense of the Penn State apologist side of this.
Sandusky has been convicted 45 times over by a jury of his peers, so we know that he was not being falsely accused.
I don't know of hardly anybody that is denying that SOMEONE with some sort of standing within the Penn State hierarchy knew that Sandusky was an active pedophile as far back as 1998, certainly by 2001.
And yet Sandusky was able to roam free and unfettered through the halls of Penn State until November of 2011. Heck, he still had his key to the PSU athletic facility WHEN HE WAS ARRESTED!!!
Whatever the Freeh report states or doesn't state, proves or disproves Penn State undeniably knew Sandusky was a pedophile and did NOTHING for at LEAST 10 years to stop him, or even slow him down!
This forum is not a court of law and as such doesn't have the burden of having incorruptible evidence that proves guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt. We are free to use our (admittedly) very subjective BS detectors and cut through the usual red tape of a formal legal proceeding and surmise what probably went on and form opinions (again admittedly) to varying degrees based on emotion as well as logic and reason.
What I don't understand is if you really think Penn State is getting such a raw deal or are you just being a stickler for formality and the legal standards of evidence or are you just enjoying being a contrarian?
I don't know. Everybody deserves a vigorous and competent defense, but with what we know about this case and what seems to be quite undeniable about it, I don't see how defending PSU right now is something you'd want to put such devotion into.
I get the whole due process, credible evidence, everybody gets their day in court, innocent until proven guilty thing and that people should not be convicted without solid, credible, provable evidence, nor be swept away by a tide of revenge, outrage and irrational emotion, but I wonder about the vigor that you put into your defense of the Penn State apologist side of this.
Sandusky has been convicted 45 times over by a jury of his peers, so we know that he was not being falsely accused.
I don't know of hardly anybody that is denying that SOMEONE with some sort of standing within the Penn State hierarchy knew that Sandusky was an active pedophile as far back as 1998, certainly by 2001.
And yet Sandusky was able to roam free and unfettered through the halls of Penn State until November of 2011. Heck, he still had his key to the PSU athletic facility WHEN HE WAS ARRESTED!!!
Whatever the Freeh report states or doesn't state, proves or disproves Penn State undeniably knew Sandusky was a pedophile and did NOTHING for at LEAST 10 years to stop him, or even slow him down!
This forum is not a court of law and as such doesn't have the burden of having incorruptible evidence that proves guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt. We are free to use our (admittedly) very subjective BS detectors and cut through the usual red tape of a formal legal proceeding and surmise what probably went on and form opinions (again admittedly) to varying degrees based on emotion as well as logic and reason.
What I don't understand is if you really think Penn State is getting such a raw deal or are you just being a stickler for formality and the legal standards of evidence or are you just enjoying being a contrarian?
I don't know. Everybody deserves a vigorous and competent defense, but with what we know about this case and what seems to be quite undeniable about it, I don't see how defending PSU right now is something you'd want to put such devotion into.
S
Scorpio79
Guest
Excellent post, UP.
BILLBUCKNER
Well-Known Member
Good old Joe left his family to face the music.
Billso
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure you do, I hope so, but in any event, many of the posters here contradict this statement.
Huh? I don't defend "Penn State apologists". I think a lot of their fanbase is delusional - there are still people on Scout claiming there are NO facts in the Freeh report (!) and I thought it was appropriate they were heavily sanctioned, as I've said repeatedly.
Never said otherwise. He can burn in hell.
Certainly by 2001, no question about it.
Totally agree, although nobody seems to mention here that Second Mile (his actual employer after 1999) and the State of PA are every bit as culpable, likely much moreso.
I simply don't think it's right when people post false and/or unsupported statements. I think it's sad when people's emotions remove their ability to think critically.
The Freeh Report conducted 430 interviews and sifted through over 3 million emails, yet found ZERO evidence Sandusky's retirement was related to the 1998 incident. Indeed, they found his retirement planning began well BEFORE then, driven by a tight window in the state plan. And yet, people on a message board "just know" it must be suspicious. Is that your definition of "logic and reason"?
Last edited:
S
Scorpio79
Guest
^ mesaclown's identical twin ^
There is no bigger supporter of the ACLU, The Innocence Project and other organizations that deal with people's civil rights and protecting the rights we all have as Americans. It is my strongest conviction that emotion has NO PLACE in a court of law. People should be judged solely on solid, credible, proven evidence. I believe very strongly that people absolutely must be truly considered innocent and their guilt proven beyond a reasonable doubt. I, personally, would rather let 100 guilty people go than convict one innocent person. Believe me, I am with you for much of what you say.
I am just an anonymous internet poster living 900 miles away from State College who has no direct evidence of anything that went on there. I have gotten all of my information via internet and television media. All of my opinions are based on my trust that those reports have been credible and accurate. I think this statement speaks for the vast majority of people here. We have no insider information or any direct knowledge. The posts we make about this topic are merely a way of self expression, commiseration and entertainment. None of us are qualified to make any official rulings on this case, and thankfully, we won't have to because no one will be asking us to.
To varying extents I think everybody here would have to admit to at least some appreciation of people like you, Billso, who champion legal rights and civil liberties, because when you do it for one person, you do it for all Americans. I am not necessarily saying this about you, but I think the disconnect is that maybe it seems like the so called "Penn State apologists" on this board are getting a little caught up in the minutiae and are not seeing the forest for the trees.
Irregardless of whether anyone or any institution has been justly convicted in acourt of law, or whether enough valid, credible evidence has been presented to convict in a court of law, it seems blatantly obvious, even to an ardent civil libertarian as myself, that Penn State knowingly aided and abetted a serial child rapist for at least ten years. That fact seems to be beyond debate. The specific people within Penn State who knew about this and carried this out are still up for debate, but the fact that people within the university did this seems to me to be a closed case.
Personally, even though it strains credibility for me to think that JoePa wasn't neck deep in this, I honestly am not all that concerned with proving his culpability. He is beyond human justice and has either disappeared into the ether or is being judged by a higher power now.
My main concern right now, and I assume it is the same for most people, is to find out what would make intelligent, educated, and otherwise upstanding, conscientious and moral people make a conscious decision to allow a serial child rapist to roam free and unfettered in the same community that they lived in and allow him to keep using their university and football team to make his ghastly crimes easier.
It is a horrible thing to make that decision, so for them the alternative must've been even more horrible. What, for them, was more horrible than aiding and abetting a serial child rapist, loose in their home town??? Sadly, it seems to have been the endangerment of the reputation, glory and continued success of Penn State football and Joe Paterno.
Just think of that. Penn State football and Joe Paterno were more important to them than the children of the very city they lived in.
Sandusky, Curley, Schultz and probably Spanier eventually, as well have and will face both criminal and civil justice. I think we are assured of that. That is not what we are up in arms about. Its the football first culture at Penn State and the cult of Joe Paterno that we are up in arms about that made this whole sordid mess possible, and we don't need to read the Freeh report to realize that.
This could not have happened in Iowa City or Ames or 90% of the university towns with NCAA football programs, but Lincoln, NE? Austin, TX? Tuscaloosa, AL? Baton Rouge, LA? South Bend, IN? Columbus, OH? Or even Lawrence, KS, Lexington, KY or Durham, NC in basketball?
Sally Mason would laugh Kirk Ferentz out of her office if he tried to protect a child rapist on his staff and ask for his resignation on his way out. We love our Hawks greatly here and have a lot of passion for our team, but no Hawk fan I know would choose Kirk Ferentz over protecting our children. Sadly, that wasn't the case in State College.
This is why all of the "innocent" people within the greater Penn State nation must suffer these penalties, to reset their priorities and substantially change the culture that made this ugliness possible. They also must suffer without a hearing or a trial or a jury of their peers so the same message is sent to every other big time program across the country where sports have taken over and corrupted the culture.
I am just an anonymous internet poster living 900 miles away from State College who has no direct evidence of anything that went on there. I have gotten all of my information via internet and television media. All of my opinions are based on my trust that those reports have been credible and accurate. I think this statement speaks for the vast majority of people here. We have no insider information or any direct knowledge. The posts we make about this topic are merely a way of self expression, commiseration and entertainment. None of us are qualified to make any official rulings on this case, and thankfully, we won't have to because no one will be asking us to.
To varying extents I think everybody here would have to admit to at least some appreciation of people like you, Billso, who champion legal rights and civil liberties, because when you do it for one person, you do it for all Americans. I am not necessarily saying this about you, but I think the disconnect is that maybe it seems like the so called "Penn State apologists" on this board are getting a little caught up in the minutiae and are not seeing the forest for the trees.
Irregardless of whether anyone or any institution has been justly convicted in acourt of law, or whether enough valid, credible evidence has been presented to convict in a court of law, it seems blatantly obvious, even to an ardent civil libertarian as myself, that Penn State knowingly aided and abetted a serial child rapist for at least ten years. That fact seems to be beyond debate. The specific people within Penn State who knew about this and carried this out are still up for debate, but the fact that people within the university did this seems to me to be a closed case.
Personally, even though it strains credibility for me to think that JoePa wasn't neck deep in this, I honestly am not all that concerned with proving his culpability. He is beyond human justice and has either disappeared into the ether or is being judged by a higher power now.
My main concern right now, and I assume it is the same for most people, is to find out what would make intelligent, educated, and otherwise upstanding, conscientious and moral people make a conscious decision to allow a serial child rapist to roam free and unfettered in the same community that they lived in and allow him to keep using their university and football team to make his ghastly crimes easier.
It is a horrible thing to make that decision, so for them the alternative must've been even more horrible. What, for them, was more horrible than aiding and abetting a serial child rapist, loose in their home town??? Sadly, it seems to have been the endangerment of the reputation, glory and continued success of Penn State football and Joe Paterno.
Just think of that. Penn State football and Joe Paterno were more important to them than the children of the very city they lived in.
Sandusky, Curley, Schultz and probably Spanier eventually, as well have and will face both criminal and civil justice. I think we are assured of that. That is not what we are up in arms about. Its the football first culture at Penn State and the cult of Joe Paterno that we are up in arms about that made this whole sordid mess possible, and we don't need to read the Freeh report to realize that.
This could not have happened in Iowa City or Ames or 90% of the university towns with NCAA football programs, but Lincoln, NE? Austin, TX? Tuscaloosa, AL? Baton Rouge, LA? South Bend, IN? Columbus, OH? Or even Lawrence, KS, Lexington, KY or Durham, NC in basketball?
Sally Mason would laugh Kirk Ferentz out of her office if he tried to protect a child rapist on his staff and ask for his resignation on his way out. We love our Hawks greatly here and have a lot of passion for our team, but no Hawk fan I know would choose Kirk Ferentz over protecting our children. Sadly, that wasn't the case in State College.
This is why all of the "innocent" people within the greater Penn State nation must suffer these penalties, to reset their priorities and substantially change the culture that made this ugliness possible. They also must suffer without a hearing or a trial or a jury of their peers so the same message is sent to every other big time program across the country where sports have taken over and corrupted the culture.
The previous post was much longer than I originally intended, so I will summarize and respond to Billso by saying that we don't need the Freeh report to tell us that PSU harbored a child rapist and the culture at PSU is why they did it. The penalties must be harsh and so called "innocents" must be punished because the culture MUST change and every other athletic department around the country must receive the same message. I don't think anyone really needs evidence that would stand up in a court of law to come to that conclusion.
DwayneTwill
Well-Known Member
Fo sho!
hawkdrummer1
Well-Known Member
It seems to me that:
1. Even if Paterno was an ignorant figurehead by 2012, he surely wasn't in 1998, when Sandusky's perversion was clearly known, followed closely by his "retirement". So Paterno's status in 2012 does not exempt him from guilt in 1998, when much of this manifested and the single best opportunity to stop it... was clearly in front of him.
2. If Paterno was just a figurehead , completely disconnected from the power structure by 2012, and the Admins are responsible for the coverup. He's still culpable for letting his image be used and taking a paycheck. and if he was simply a "senile old man" who was just being used by the Penn St power.. his family allowed it to happen. So the name Paterno is still POS in my eyes.
1. Even if Paterno was an ignorant figurehead by 2012, he surely wasn't in 1998, when Sandusky's perversion was clearly known, followed closely by his "retirement". So Paterno's status in 2012 does not exempt him from guilt in 1998, when much of this manifested and the single best opportunity to stop it... was clearly in front of him.
2. If Paterno was just a figurehead , completely disconnected from the power structure by 2012, and the Admins are responsible for the coverup. He's still culpable for letting his image be used and taking a paycheck. and if he was simply a "senile old man" who was just being used by the Penn St power.. his family allowed it to happen. So the name Paterno is still POS in my eyes.
Last edited:
Billso
Well-Known Member
Many of them have not, as the actual Freeh report makes clear. Compounding the problem is that the Freeh report summary in several instances goes far beyond the underlying facts within. This is my point. You have developed the narrative in your mind, and by God no actual facts can change it now.
Yes, although "the specific people" and their families care quite a lot about who the "specific people" are, and that's where facts and the "narrative" have begun to diverge.
And here is the other area where true facts and "narrative" diverge. For all PSU's failures, the failure of Second Mile's administration and board, the PA State Dept of Public Welfare, the PA AG, and local police is much worse - yet PSU and Paterno are getting ALL the blame right now. And that AG is now Governor, and evidence is emerging of a political coverup. This is what has the (non-delusional) PSU alumni, faculty and supporters upset right now, and it is a legitimate point.
Yeah, that "football first" culture that put Penn State #1 among large NCAA in graduating football and bball players, including virtually no difference between white and black athletes. That "football first" culture that resulted in no major NCAA violations, ever. We should reject that culture and embrace that of Auburn, Tuscaloosa, Los Angeles and Eugene.
And let's get that playoff rolling so we can pull in more $$$. Emmert's invocation of "culture" is so hypocritical it makes me want to hurl.There's a culture problem, alright, but it's a nationwide one that has hurt children at Second Mile, the Catholic Church, the Boy Scouts, dozens of public school district, and virtually every place where vulnerable children may encounter predatory adults. And that culture problem is a culture of reluctance to report child abuse. A culture that just doesn't want it to be true, doesn't want to get involved, wishes it could go away. Five (at least) of my high school classmates experienced it firsthand from our homeroom teacher. To say this was a "Penn State culture problem" is false, convenient and endangers more children, because it allows the rest of us to say (like you just did) "phew, that could never happen in Iowa City".
No, they must suffer these penalties to SEND A MESSAGE TO THE REST OF US. That when a child is endangered, you call the cops or ensure the cops are called. Period.
Billso
Well-Known Member
The retirement conversations began prior to the 1998 incident. But in your view, what should Joe have done in 1998 after Sandusky was cleared?
Many of us manage others, so I think it's a useful question to consider for our own work lives.
Billso, what exactly is it again that you are arguing for?
Yes, Penn State is getting the vast majority of the heat right now, but that is only because the Freeh report, which only investigated PSU's involvement, is the only investigation to have been completed and presented so far. All of the other investigations are still ongoing and haven't presented their conclusions to the public yet.
Believe me, when all of the other investigations and criminal trials and civil suits have run their course, which may very well spur other investigation, criminal trials and civil suits, there will be plenty of heat left over for anybody else culpable in this mess. Certainly, if the rumors are true, the Second Mile will soon be taking its turn spinning rotisserie style over the fire.
Exactly. That is what we all have been saying and why we are so outraged and disgusted with JoePa and the rest of the PSU hierarchy that allowed this to happen.
Just because the "culture problem" that allowed this to happen exists and more places than at Penn State doesn't mean that Penn State should skate on this. You may disagree with me, but I am convinced that this could have never happened at Iowa, or at the vast majority of NCAA institutions. Sure, football probably gets too much emphasis here as well, but the problem here isn't anywhere near so bad that it could endanger the safety of children.
Yes, the problem of athletics run amok and unchecked exists in other places besides State College, PA, but it still does exist there and it needs to be addressed.
Even if the athletes are more scholarly than most and graduate at a higher rate that doesn't excuse the fact that protecting the football program was so important that they not only decided to cover up the crimes of a serial child rapist, but that they had enough power, given to them by the fans of Penn State football, to get away with it for at least 10 years.
Can you imagine the people within the Iowa hierarchy deciding that the football program was more important that the safety of the children of Iowa City, not the least having enough power to get away with it??? Even the thought is ludicrous. It would and could never happen here because football just doesn't have that much clout. It did in State College.
Yes, Penn State is getting the vast majority of the heat right now, but that is only because the Freeh report, which only investigated PSU's involvement, is the only investigation to have been completed and presented so far. All of the other investigations are still ongoing and haven't presented their conclusions to the public yet.
Believe me, when all of the other investigations and criminal trials and civil suits have run their course, which may very well spur other investigation, criminal trials and civil suits, there will be plenty of heat left over for anybody else culpable in this mess. Certainly, if the rumors are true, the Second Mile will soon be taking its turn spinning rotisserie style over the fire.
Exactly. That is what we all have been saying and why we are so outraged and disgusted with JoePa and the rest of the PSU hierarchy that allowed this to happen.
Just because the "culture problem" that allowed this to happen exists and more places than at Penn State doesn't mean that Penn State should skate on this. You may disagree with me, but I am convinced that this could have never happened at Iowa, or at the vast majority of NCAA institutions. Sure, football probably gets too much emphasis here as well, but the problem here isn't anywhere near so bad that it could endanger the safety of children.
Yes, the problem of athletics run amok and unchecked exists in other places besides State College, PA, but it still does exist there and it needs to be addressed.
Even if the athletes are more scholarly than most and graduate at a higher rate that doesn't excuse the fact that protecting the football program was so important that they not only decided to cover up the crimes of a serial child rapist, but that they had enough power, given to them by the fans of Penn State football, to get away with it for at least 10 years.
Can you imagine the people within the Iowa hierarchy deciding that the football program was more important that the safety of the children of Iowa City, not the least having enough power to get away with it??? Even the thought is ludicrous. It would and could never happen here because football just doesn't have that much clout. It did in State College.
