.

^^ ty

Phildo:

I don't stare or gawk when a hetero couple is holding hands, but I'll tell you what I do do in a different circumstance.

When I'm eating at a restaurant and I see a family with mommy, daddy, and two or three young children; I will ask mom and dad's permission to address their children. The "conversation" goes something like this:

Alan: "I want you to listen very close because I'm fixing to tell you something real important. Are you listening?"

Children nod "Yes"

Alan: "Every night when mommy and daddy tuck you into bed and say "Goodnight" you hug them around the neck and say 'I love you'. You know why you do that?"

Children look at each other and then look back at me.

Alan: "Because it's no fun to grow up without a mommy and a daddy."

The DOJ investigated the tatoo parlor where it happened and passed the info along to anOSU. That's when we first heard about it. The DOJ is part of law enforcement. Similarly the Sandusky story broke from a State of PA investigation at a high school. Not because either university held a press conference

Lolawguy

We're 5 spots behind the Volkswagon discussion board Who the hell are these people that are fascinated by a Jetta?

Holy crap please tell me you don't actually do this what the I don't even

If you want to be ignorant about what actually happened, I can't force you to learn the facts. But I'll try.

The initial investigation was fairly weak, of course. The Athletic Director never said that, it was the often times foot-in-mouth President of the university that said it trying to be funny.

And yes, the initial punishment was a joke. It was based on the erroneous assumption that JT was telling them the truth that he was protecting an investigation or some other BS. But why did that story come out to begin with? Turns out, they were doing some followup work related to some other investigations, stumbled upon it, and reported it to the NCAA. In PSU world, this information is buried and destroyed and never sees the light of day. The players take their punishment (which their actions DID come from law enforcement releasing info), and all is forgotten.

As Tressel's story unravels (and as outcry grows due to him getting 1 game, players getting 5), they fire him.

But don't let the facts or the strawman arguments that I'm not making that you claim I am, get in the way of your agenda.

Now I will say it's very possible that more people knew about the initial wrongdoing of the players and Tressel was simply the fall guy for it. It's possible. But I also think Tressel was savvy enough to not tell anyone precisely because he knew it wouldn't end well (either they get suspended, or they cover it up and bring even more trouble to things). He kept his mouth shut because he thought no one would ever find out about it.

But yes, the initial investigation was a joke, the initial punishment was a joke (LOL @ NCAA and Sugar Bowl officials being in bed on that one), and Tressel's punishment was giving him a huge benefit of the doubt, but eventually came down correctly, and there is much less denial in Columbus (although a still good amount of it who think he did the right thing protecting his players from the scary drug dealer or whatever BS excuse he gave).

This is not what brought Tressel down. This is what brought Pryor and his buddies down.

You're equating pro-gay with pro-pedo, which is what got you in the hot water. I can defend Spanier's gay friendly policy while thinking his role in the cover up is horrible. I don't link the two because there is no link. You did link the two which is retarted.

Done.

Wow I go away for one day and the thread goes full ******

Spanier must be a redditor. They love pedos over there.

What he believes is idiotic and bigoted - not being able to defend it isn't an excuse. There is no coming back from "gay friendly = pro pedo".

In a sense you just did what you've been mocking ITT. Ignore what actually happened and make a charitable assumption about the guy based on your impression of his character rather than his actions.

I don't think I did any of that at all. Where did I make any claim about any arguments you were making? If anything I now think you are claiming that I am making an argument out of a strawman that I have not made except perhaps now I've gotten the modifyers in the wrong places but I blame you for that by using such odd phrasing to begin with.

Thanks for the correction from AD to President on the quote attribution. That was my initial thought, but then I thought, "Nah--that's just impossible."

Before the Sugar Bowl, tOSU's crack investigators met with Tressel and asked if he'd heard about the 'drug dealers handing out tattoos and cash (or whatever)' thing. He cryptically replied that he had and the investigators inexplicably asked no follow-up questions about how he'd heard or who told him or when (it turned out it was via email from a LEO). Correct me if I'm wrong, but they did originally report before the Sugar Bowl that Tressel had been unaware of this scandal?

It wasn't just trusting Tressel who was unexpectedly lying. tOSU was playing the game as well.

To be fair, tOSU is clearly not in PSU's cover-up league, but their track record is far from snap-reporting truly harmful info, as was originally posed. If nothing else they're way more apt than one would like to sit back for a few months and guage the public reaction before doing anything decisive.

I agree with this.

acl's "explanation" post was also quite cringeworthy imo. It was tinged with anti-gay undertones that bubbled up with word choices like "flagrant" and "prance" imo. Flagrant... maybe defensible, but using prance there is a clear shot at flighty, light-in-the-loafers, flamboyant, effeminate homosexual gheyboys.

I could add more, but acl has already been outed.

Sorry for the continued derail.

How can you not have Lawyerin' Joe for the defense?

ACL is the Jay Paterno of the thread; his position is pretty much indefensible, but it sure doesn't stop him from trying.

Never covered for any pedophiles.

I was never claiming Ohio State handled itself perfectly. Just that it was a different environment than Penn State, simply by the fact that, although imperfectly, it eventually handled things, and the right people were fired and an internal investigation found this.

He said he was unaware of it.


It's more they weren't about to dig up everything immediately, but when they got to it, they did report it immediately. The only thing you are complaining about is not investigating enough initially and not enough trying to back up Tressel's story that he knew nothing. There was too much trust there (or rather don't ask, don't tell type stuff). But once they found stuff (even if not actively looking for it), it got reported. Their lacking of digging was the problem, not lack of reporting.

Sadly, that is a very good analogy. If our zealotry towards football was put towards something like curing cancer or stopping world hunger instead, the world would be a far better place.

The most zealous students and followers are still in denial and those numbers aren't going to go down any more. If institutionalized child abuse doesn't drive these people away, nothing will. Joe Paterno could have coached all his games while drenched in children's blood and those people would be dumping red paint all over themselves before games.

You know, I jumped in here with the notion that PSU should not get the death penalty. But the more I read and see what's going on, the more I understand and agree with the opposing view. This is a problem with the culture of Penn State. While I am not sure that the death penalty will work, it's definitely something worth trying. It may not fix PSU's athletic culture, but it will be a heavy wake-up call for everybody else to follow.

Come on now, you're an alum. I am sure you know that PSU has already cured cancer.

http://www.pennlive.com/bodyandmind/...ncer_cell.html

Ok, here Is some of it. I still think it makes some good points. Btw, its just a fan comment, not original content at the website.


First I apologize as some of this you may have seen before. I will refer to Paterno, Shulz, Curly and Spanier as the "Gang of 4' in this. So here goes

Lets make our acquaintance with the "Independent Investigator".



Freeh's report is about 40% to 50% suspicions and assumptions. Shouldn't that report have been qualified as such and just say draw your own conclusions? But no he spoke as if everything in that report was a proven fact and not any speculation at all.

Freeh starts with the premise the GJ report is fact when it is Bull****.

He says "The most glaring part of the investigation was that none of the leaders at Penn State showed the slightest concern or regard for Sandusky's victims in 14 years" Well DuH!! The leaders at Penn State never believed they were dealing with a pedophile.



He was supposed to find out how and why it happened.

Not one word on how Pedophiles deceive everybody, even those you would think would know better. I would think an investigation on how a pedophile was able to go undetected for another 8 years after 2001 without getting caught would deserve some mention.Shouldn't a report on a pedophile have a preamble to the report explaining how pedophiles are hard to catch, nobody believes they would do that, etc.? There's only a couple hundred thousand pages and upteen books on the subject and I think the report in general should have explained how JS, and other pedophiles in general, get/got away with it for so long and just not blame the gang of 4 for not stopping the monster in 2001 based solely on what we know in 2012.

His damnation assumes JS would have been investigated and convicted in 2001 if a report was filed. This is based in the belief, apparently, they would have found the boy in the shower and he would have said he was assaulted. That is a big assumption putting a boy, by himself, up against the word of JS in 2001 whether he was assaulted or not. Or Freeh thinks that JS would have been convicted only on MM's testimony if they couldn't find the boy. Another big assumption. Its is highly unlikely JS would have been convicted on this one charge back then. This is not an excuse for the gang of 4 but just questioning Freeh's bold assumptions 10 years after the fact. Would more have come forward back then without all the publicity assuming it would have been a quiet investigation because it was Saint Jerry in 2001? We'll and he'll will never know what would have happened. But I would put my money on JS not being convicted in 2001. Would Js have stopped if he was investigated? Well he was investigated in 1998 and didn't stop so draw your own conclusion.

Freeh apparantly dismissed all the inconsistencies in Gj report as compared to the 12/16/11 Preliminary hearing. Wonder why? Would his report be that more confusing or would his accusations become watered down?

Not one word on how 2nd Mile had trained counselors who KNEW what signs to pay attention to and they were working with all the kids that turned out to be victims and didn't realize JS was a pedophile. Not one of these kids or their parents ever said anything to anybody at 2nd Mile or did Freeh not bother to interview anybody from that organization? How can any investigation be complete without talking to the people at 2nd Mile who worked with JS from 2nd Mile’s inception and would know firsthand how he interacted with kids?

Not one word on how JS was considered a Saint in State College and everywhere else in 2001. Not one word on how he and 2nd Mile had been honored by President Bush and Senator Santorum for the work they did with troubled youths.

Not one word on Corbett's statement that you just don''t go off willy nilly accusing someone like JS, especially in 2001 with word against word, and Corbett and his crew had interviewed actual victims in 2009 and 2010 and knew a hell of a lot more than in 2001.


Something anybody would realize especially if they had any legal sense of comprehension which Freeh obviously lacks:

VULNERABLE. Is this in the context of knowing about a rape or something that was troubling but did not rise to a crime? Spanier has a Phd in Child Psychology. He would know they would be more than just VULNERABLE if they didn't report a sexual assault. They would be a heck of lot more than just vulnerable. He would know you don't think you can kick a Child Sexual Assault or the Rape of a girl down the road and think you can explain those actions away later. Only a halfwit would think that and they are not halfwits. These men were discussing a troubling event that was not a crime trying to figure out the best course of action. MM never told them in enough detail to justify going after Saint Jerry, at least these e-mails read like that.

Getting him help. Is this in the context of trying to reform a pedophile who was ramming young boys in the showers late at night or is it to get him help in that he thinks its Ok to shower and hug or horse play with young boys at night in the showers? That his antics just might be taken the wrong way by someone, like MM? I think a little common sense would suggest it was the latter. Does anyone really think every single member of the gang of 4 wouldn't have put their foot down to report the former?

One janitor said "I was scared of losing my job. I know they would have have circled the wagons around the football team." Did I miss something or was this the only person Freeh mentioned? I don't recall him saying alot of people felt that way. Well one person is a culture for the 1,000's of other employees? Bull****.

No this report set out from beginning to be simply a who do we blame report and that didn't answer how it happened just who supposedly did it and did not consider one mitigating factor. Reading this report it felt nothing like a fact finding report but instead a blame report. It was never an investigation to find out why and how it happened but an accusatory report using much of what we know now as a point of reference and not the reality that existed in 2001.

They Concealed It.

If they did they forgot to tell MM to keep his mouth shut. Fail

Shulz forgot to take his files or destroy them. Either that or he came back after 2 years later and hid them. FAIL

They forgot to make sure those e-mails were destroyed. Fail

Forgot to have a pre GJ meeting to get their stories straight. Fail.

Told Dr. Ray about it. You shouldn't take a cover up to people outside the University. The more people who aren't told to keep their mouth shut the worse your cover up is (Common sense, not knowledge). Fail

To name a few.

Red Flags all over the place. Easy to say people who aren't trained in recognizing pedophile grooming techniques 10 years after the fact. and what seemed odd to anyone? JS always showered with kids, probably for years before this. It looked normal to all these novice pedophile identifiers because nothing unusual happened over those years.

Yep. He really did find out how it could have happened and we got a truly unbiased report. BULL****

Nope, its not a flawed investigation. Pleeese.

This report was bought and paid for by the BOT and they got exactly what they wanted and most likely contracted for IMO. Throw a few stones our way and throw everyone else to the wolves to further justify how they handled this case. "We'll take the high road, take a little heat, but we did the right thing." Well they got what they paid for in spades. What blackwash and a load of crap.

Plus, is this comment correct about the total findings againt J P

Does anyone know of more information in the Freeh report implicating Joe than this:
Some say Freeh proved Joe Paterno was very aware of the 1998 investigation because he was mentioned in two emais
The mention by Curley that after he met with Joe in 2001 he had reconsidered the plan after speaking with Joe to notify the Second Mile and CYS and he wanted to get with Sandusky first?

Has anyone found something other than these things said by Curley that implicate Joe in anything?

Is there more than ths against JP?

Yeah, the fact he was worshiped as saint and consulted on everything of any kind of importance for like 50 years makes it exceedingly unlikely he didn't participate in the coverup.

At minimum, that makes it essentially impossible for him to not know about the coverup.

Wow, this thread was so much better when it was about rap battles. Can't it just be about the music man?