Penn State still doesn't get it.

[hwk23]

Call me crazy for respecting the opinion of Sandusky's prosecutor. He interviewed all those children who testified that they were abused. He was in court every day at trial, reviewed all the evidence, listened to the testimony. He was the one in the interrogation room who looked into their eyes and heard their tragic stories the first time they were told to anyone. Who could possibly have more sympathy for victims of child sexual abuse than a lifetime prosecutor who got 45 guilty convictions against Jerry Sandusky? You of course remember his answer when he was asked on CBS last year if he thought Joe Paterno was involved in a coverup.

“I do not…And I’m viewing this strictly on the evidence, not any kind of fealty to anybody. I did not find that evidence.”

http://onwardstate.com/2013/09/04/s...-no-evidence-paterno-participated-in-coverup/

That's because the prosecution's perjury case hinges on Paterno's testimony. Paterno answered "yes" when asked if he had reported everything that McQueary told him. This contradict's Schultz's testimony that Paterno portrayed the situation as "not serious" and "not of a sexual nature". Somebody's lying, that's true but the biggest fibber is gone permanently. Therefore, I doubt there will be a conviction for perjury.

 

[Sparky]

 

[Sparky]

Come on DKing14 and hawks67. Don't just go through and thumbs down every post because you're upset people want to hold pedophiles and their protectors responsible. At least have the guts to give an opinion.

 

[Billso]

That's because the prosecution's perjury case hinges on Paterno's testimony. Paterno answered "yes" when asked if he had reported everything that McQueary told him. This contradict's Schultz's testimony that Paterno portrayed the situation as "not serious" and "not of a sexual nature". Somebody's lying, that's true but the biggest fibber is gone permanently. Therefore, I doubt there will be a conviction for perjury.

Schultz's testimony not only contradicts Paterno's testimony, but McQueary's, and written evidence. That's why he's on trial for perjury. Yet you insist without evidence that Paterno is "the biggest fibber". Mm-kay. Some people hear what they want to hear.

 

[hwk23]

Schultz's testimony not only contradicts Paterno's testimony, but McQueary's, and written evidence. That's why he's on trial for perjury. Yet you insist without evidence that Paterno is "the biggest fibber". Mm-kay. Some people hear what they want to hear.

I'm guessing you are a Paterno fan (I used to be one to) and you are the one hearing what you want to hear. It's actually Paterno's word (and somewhat McQueary's) against Schultz and Curley. There won't be a conviction and there hasn't even been a trial yet.

Paterno's own testimony is full of holes (even if you don't consider how it contradicts Schultz and Curley's testimony). Paterno says "I don't know what you call it" and "it's was of a sexual nature". Hey Joe, it's called child molestation. Joe says McQueary was visibly very upset. I guess Joe thought it was from all the "wrestling activities" he witnessed. Also, Paterno said "I didn't want to interrupt their weekend". Oh really Joe, how thoughtful. Kinda fits with Schultz's testimony that "it wasn't that serious".

There's a reason the PSU board of trustees fired Paterno and tore down his statue and they're dealing with more info than the general public.

 

[Sparky]

Schultz's testimony not only contradicts Paterno's testimony, but McQueary's, and written evidence. That's why he's on trial for perjury. Yet you insist without evidence that Paterno is "the biggest fibber". Mm-kay. Some people hear what they want to hear.

You sure are putting a lot of time into trying to convince people Paterno wasn't a dirt bag liar that was friends with a rapist.

 

[Billso]

I'm guessing you are a Paterno fan (I used to be one to) and you are the one hearing what you want to hear. It's actually Paterno's word (and somewhat McQueary's) against Schultz and Curley. There won't be a conviction and there hasn't even been a trial yet.

Paterno's own testimony is full of holes (even if you don't consider how it contradicts Schultz and Curley's testimony). Paterno says "I don't know what you call it" and "it's was of a sexual nature". Hey Joe, it's called child molestation. Joe says McQueary was visibly very upset. I guess Joe thought it was from all the "wrestling activities" he witnessed. Also, Paterno said "I didn't want to interrupt their weekend". Oh really Joe, how thoughtful.

There's a reason the PSU board of trustees fired Paterno and tore down his statue and they're dealing with more info than the general public.

I'm not a "fan" of anyone. I'm an advocate of fact over emotion. I'm also considering how I'd react if the very same facts came up around Hayden Fry.

I don't have a problem with firing Paterno, or of heavy sanctions on PSU due to the coverup by Schulz, Curley and Spanier. But your prior factual errors and now your BOT trustee comment indicate your lack of knowledge of the case: they had virtually no details at the time Paterno was fired. Most had not even seen the Freeh report or met to discuss it at the time PSU's president accepted the NCAA's sanctions - an incredible abdication of duty by the president, but he felt forced by NCAA who were threatening the death penalty if he didn't capitulate THAT DAY. As for the statue removal, it was a response to the general media and public hysteria, like yours, not actual facts.

You seem unable to hold two ideas in your mind at the same time: that PSU is guilty of covering up a pedophile on campus, AND that Joe Paterno was not the primary problem. It's not me saying that, it's people who've seen 100x more evidence than you or me - see above.

Sadly, it also seems homophobia is clouding the minds of many. People on this board joked about Mary Kay Letourneau having sex with her 12-year old student - "she's hawt", "I'd hit that" - but have a disproportionate reaction to the Sandusky case, believing PSU should be burnt to the ground, its history erased, all good things discounted or mocked.

 

[hwk23]

I'm not a "fan" of anyone. I'm an advocate of fact over emotion. I'm also considering how I'd react if the very same facts came up around Hayden Fry.

I don't have a problem with firing Paterno, or of heavy sanctions on PSU due to the coverup by Schulz, Curley and Spanier. But your prior factual errors and now your BOT trustee comment indicate your lack of knowledge of the case: they had virtually no details at the time Paterno was fired. Most had not even seen the Freeh report or met to discuss it at the time PSU's president accepted the NCAA's sanctions - an incredible abdication of duty by the president, but he felt forced by NCAA who were threatening the death penalty if he didn't capitulate THAT DAY. As for the statue removal, it was a response to the general media and public hysteria, like yours, not actual facts.

You seem unable to hold two ideas in your mind at the same time: that PSU is guilty of covering up a pedophile on campus, AND that Joe Paterno was not the primary problem. It's not me saying that, it's people who've seen 100x more evidence than you or me - see above.

Sadly, it's also clear homophobia is clouding the minds of many. People on this board joked about Mary Kay Letourneau having sex with her 12-year old student - "she's hawt", "I'd hit that" - but have a disproportionate reaction to the Sandusky case, believing PSU should be burnt to the ground, its history erased, all good things discounted or mocked.

Since you brought it up, if this were Hayden Fry there would be a whole lot of people irrationally supporting Hayden Fry and looking for someone else to blame. That's what's happening here.

 

[Billso]

Since you brought it up, if this were Hayden Fry there would be a whole lot of people irrationally supporting Hayden Fry and looking for someone else to blame. That's what's happening here.

I agree with that. It cuts both ways, though. Because it's natural for PSU fans to defend their coach vehemently, even irrationally, people tend to dismiss their defense, and be less open minded as the actual facts emerge.

That's why I think it's helpful to listen to voices who aren't invested in the university's defense, like the prosecutor above.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

Come on DKing14 and hawks67. Don't just go through and thumbs down every post because you're upset people want to hold pedophiles and their protectors responsible. At least have the guts to give an opinion.

Yeah, those two gave me thumbs down on all my posts. I wonder if they're both registered with their Hawkeye Nation names listed as their nicknames? This topic appears to hit too close to home, for some.

 

[Sparky]

I love how many thumbs down that Hawke and myself have received in this thread by absolutely disgusting people who think Penn St. was wronged. If hating child rapists results in thumbs down then keep them coming.

 

[Sparky]

Yeah, those two gave me thumbs down on all my posts. I wonder if they're both registered with their Hawkeye Nation names listed as their nicknames? This topic appears to hit too close to home, for some.

Need to add Hawksrule98 and AlexHidell to your list of people rejoicing in that dead guy getting his wins back.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

I'm not a "fan" of anyone. I'm an advocate of fact over emotion. I'm also considering how I'd react if the very same facts came up around Hayden Fry.

I don't have a problem with firing Paterno, or of heavy sanctions on PSU due to the coverup by Schulz, Curley and Spanier. But your prior factual errors and now your BOT trustee comment indicate your lack of knowledge of the case: they had virtually no details at the time Paterno was fired. Most had not even seen the Freeh report or met to discuss it at the time PSU's president accepted the NCAA's sanctions - an incredible abdication of duty by the president, but he felt forced by NCAA who were threatening the death penalty if he didn't capitulate THAT DAY. As for the statue removal, it was a response to the general media and public hysteria, like yours, not actual facts.

You seem unable to hold two ideas in your mind at the same time: that PSU is guilty of covering up a pedophile on campus, AND that Joe Paterno was not the primary problem. It's not me saying that, it's people who've seen 100x more evidence than you or me - see above.

Sadly, it also seems homophobia is clouding the minds of many. People on this board joked about Mary Kay Letourneau having sex with her 12-year old student - "she's hawt", "I'd hit that" - but have a disproportionate reaction to the Sandusky case, believing PSU should be burnt to the ground, its history erased, all good things discounted or mocked.

Paterno allowed Sandusky the ability to continue his ways after an eye witness report from an assistant coach of an incident was reported to him. He reported nothing. True?

 

[Billso]

Paterno allowed Sandusky the ability to continue his ways after an eye witness report from an assistant coach of an incident was reported to him. He reported nothing. True?

No. He met with McQueary Saturday, February 10, 2001 and reported it to Curley & Schulz the next day, Sunday February 11.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/07/12/sports/ncaafootball/13pennstate-document.html