Punishment much too severe.
Posted on 07/27/2012 12:47:44 PM PDT by FlJoePa
MM testified that he was never told not to discuss the matter by anyone. Does that sound like a “cover up” to you?
...in no way,shape or form does that MM testimony disprove the existence of a cover up...besides, by the time Paterno heard of the MM incident, he knew that cat was already out of the bag, as MM told his father and a family friend...
Where’s the testimony or email or hand written note that says “Joe Paterno says to bury this! This could hurt our image!”
...are you so obtuse as to think that if his bosses wanted to cover up, they would have recorded such an obvious proof of the cover up?...again, the lack of such a document as you cite, in no way detracts from the possibility of a cover up...
...look, for what it matters, I don’t think Paterno knowingly tried to cover up...I don’t think he was that devious or illogical as to think he could succeed at it...however, lack of concerted cover up doesn’t at all excuse lack of common sense and moral terpitude, neither of which Paterno or his compatriots showed a scintilla’s worth...you asked for proof of cover up, I responded that he denied, under oath, an incident which should have triggered a more responsible action on his part when MM broke the news, more than to just kick the matter upstairs and then sit back and do no follow up at all...a blinding lack of moral courage on his part, and to an unbiased mind, evidence that he acted to minimize his, and by extension, the football program’s involvment...
Punishment much too severe.
The only punishment severe enough for my taste would be razing that entire complex and sowing the ground with salt.
js was unfortunately cleared by multiple agencies and police departments of any crimes in 1998. For Paterno to answer your question the way you wanted him to, would have been perjury.
...Good Lord, but you are fun to debate...but really, you ought to tell the truth...Sandusky was not cleared by multiple agencies, such a clearance could only have been accomplished in a legal setting...the ‘agencies’ you refer to determined that insufficient evidence existed to gain a conviction, and the case was dropped...Sandusky was neither then or at any other time ‘cleared’ of anything...and as to how you think Paterno would be guilty of perjury by refencing the 1998 incident when asked under oath about it, well, how do you arrive at that conclusion...?
“Furthermore, if Mr. Paterno had reported the McQueary information to me (were I, like Schultz, the official in charge of the University Police), I would have told him to keep his mouth shut going forward and let the authorities handle the matter. Otherwise, Mr. Paterno could have tainted the investigation. And, because he was a potential trial witness (to McQueary’s prior consistent statements, see Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) and Pennsylvania Rule of Evidence613(c)), any further statements or action by Mr. Paterno could have become cross-examination fodder for the defense. Any further action by Mr.Paterno could only have damaged the integrity of the investigation and any prosecution against Sandusky.
Indeed, Mr. Paterno explained his actions before he died by saying that “I was afraid to do something that might jeopardize what the University procedure was. So I backed away and turned it over to some other people, people I thought would have a little more expertise than I did.” Freeh Report at 77-78. This statement makes perfect sense, and the notion of a football coach supervising a criminal investigation is ridiculous. It is very possible that Curley or Schultz or both told Mr. Paterno to stay out of the matter; in fact, Schultz should have told him as much. But we don’t know because Schultz and Curley are under indictment and not talking, Paterno is dead, and the Freeh Report did not find any information about this issue.”
I admit I made my last post in haste, and it WAS worded incorrectly/unclearly. Also I don't believe that Joe knew anything about 1998. My response to you was made in a manner that admits that Joe knew about 1998. That hasn't been proven to me, so I just should have bitten my lip.
Here's an interesting link I found (just an hour ago) that puts the freeh report (regarding the 1998 investigationi) into a timeline where it is much easier to navigate and make some conclusions.
Penn Staters want the truth. We want MORE blame assigned, not less. All we ask is that it be administered fairly and not at the alter of espn.
I’m not quite sure why you directed this post at me, inasmuch as I’ve stated that I don’t believe Paterno acted criminally, but he did in fact use poor judgement and exhibit lack of moral terpitude regarding McQueary’s witnessing Sandusky in the shower...which is as much as I hold Paterno responsible for the scandal...I base this upon his denying the 1998 incident to the grand jury, and a week before he died, denying it again in a Sally Jenkins interview...the report you attached to your post, if it was designed to indicate Paterno did indeed not know about 1998, in reality says nothing about it, except speculation that if he did know, so what?
...i hold that Paterno certainly was aware of 1998, and that knowing this, MM’s story should have triggered a more urgent effort on Paterno’s part to resolve the matter than to simply kick it up the chain, and go on his way...
...finally, if you’re attempting to tell me that Paterno was told to keep his mouth shut in 2001, I sure hope you don’t think that would relate to grand jury testimony in 2011 that is subject to perjury charges...
Can you go deeper here with me here Irish? I'm not entirely certain as to what you are saying here.
Well, you seem reasonable...
...whether I’m reasonable or not is immaterial...
Also I don’t believe that Joe knew anything about 1998
...so you truly believe that a coach as controlling as Paterno was said to have been would be unaware of a police investigation of his defensive coordinator and heir apparent to his job? I say that’s a ludicrous position...
and also, I still don’t know why you made the statement Paterno would be subject to perjury if he answered affirmatively to the grand jury...
this is my last word on this matter (I promise)...I stipulated I believe he never acted criminally, and it is not my intention to further sully his name in the unseemly way that it has already been...but neither is it my intention to blithely assert that he is free from any guilt in this insidious scandal...
I think you overlooked this important sentence:
“Any further action by Mr.Paterno could only have damaged the integrity of the investigation and any prosecution against Sandusky.”
His coach is also direcltly linked to an actual death of a student - - but I'm sure he won't want to discuss that.
I think you overlooked this important sentence:...
...I overlooked nothing...that phrase regards Paterno’s involvment after the 2001 incident, and says absolutely nothing, as does the entire article you posted, about the seminal issue of whether Paterno knew about 1998, thus throwing his response to McQueary’s revelation into question...furthrermore, the sentence is conjuecture on the part of the author, and subject to disagreement...Paterno certainly could have alerted authorities without damaging the integrity of anything, upon hearing a second incident regarding Sandusky and boys in shower rooms...
He wants to spout how right and truthful he may be, all the while ignoring what is happening at his own program...
...sure am glad I revisited this thread, though the inanity of your comment hardly deserves response...you make the blithe assumption, based on the name IrishBrigade, that I am representing the University of Notre Dame with it...in fact the term Irish Brigade refers to a number of Union regiments, whose ranks were filled predominently by Irishmen, my ancestors perhaps among them, who often performed brilliantly upon the field of honor, such as the 68th New York at Gettysburg, who against overwhelming odds and abysmal loss of life held the line until Union troops gained a foothold on Little Round Top...that is the derivation of my screen name...
...you then go on to post an article about a college girl who committed suicide after an alleged rape...and your source is the National Catholic Reporter, a vitriolic rag that hates the Catholic Church and will do anything to see it destroyed, even speculate rape where none was proved...you yourself have whined on this board about over the top venom spewed agaisnt Paterno, and I have agreed with you, then in an effort to paint me as a hypocrite, you resort to the same tactics by referencing this disgusting publication that would make Goebbels proud in its bigotry...
but if I’m not mistaken, the article, for all its blather, indicates that maybe the girl had her breast touched and fondled...boorish to be sure, but the same happens on college campuses all over and girls do not kill themselves...that, and she was 19, past the age of consent, which Sandusky’s boys were not...look, no one denies the tragedy of a lovely young women killing herself over something like this, least of all myself, but your equation of the two issues is utterly ludicrous...
...and your second link didn’t work, but I’m sure you’re talking about the student who was killed when the platform he was on was toppled by wind...and you’re attempting to pin the blame on Kelly (my coach, as you describe him...I’d never heard of him until ND hired him)...if so, you really do exceed your own ignorance, unless you are positing that Kelly knew the platform was going to fall, and that the fall would kill the young man, and that he forced him at gunpoint to go up there in the first place...again, this is a tragedy, nobody’s fault, but in your fevered attempt to expose hypocrisy on my part you expect me to say that ND football should be shut down for these two incidents, as if the institutional failures rivals that of PSU’s...unfortunately, tragedy and studied, tacit accpetance of deviancy aren’t the same things, are they???
If Paterno had known about the 1998 incident he would have expected that once he notified his superior that the incident would be fully investigated by Curry, Schultz, Spanier, the PSU Police Chief, the child protective services, the police department, and the County DA -- none of whom conspired together to cover up the 1998 incident.
So then with that knowledge in hand why would he not expect this 2001 incident to likewise be fully investigated??? The 1998 incident was not covered up. So why should he expect different treatment regarding the 2001 incident from all the players that would now be involved???
Whether he knew or didn't know should not have affected how and to whom he reported the incident. Freeh's argument that he knew of 1998 and should have done more is really an argument the other way. By contacting Curry and knowing that he and Schultz had met with MM, he would have expected that all the rest would then be invited to the party for a full investigation.
So which way do you want to argue it now???
Glad you revisited it. You do realize that I’m trying to expose absurdity by confronting it with absurdity, no?
All the incidents - they’re all tragic (as well as today’s incredible story about the Penn Economics department).
I’m aiming this at the media and the group think that they promote (and some here sadly suck it up just as easily as an O voter sucks up stories on someone like Sarah Palin).
While ND isn’t on PSU’s future schedule, I have always considered them a worthy opponent over the years, and we had some unbelievable games over the various series’. Some of my best memories have been ND home games and tailgating in the early 80’s.
I consider their athletic department one of the best in the country at educating their student athletes (along with Stanford, PSU, and a few others). I wish the athletic department was larger so they could comfortably join the B1G in the near future.
What I asked you for initially was some sort of concrete, lead-pipe lock proof that Joe Paterno actively took part in a conspiracy to cover up for a known pedophile in some sort of effort to aid his football program (because that’s what is reported in the media and parroted).
I need concrete proof because 61 years of work and legacy are at stake. “He must’ve known” doesn’t really cut it for me - especially when some idiot like freeh is involved.
You haven’t provided me with any because there isn’t any. All that’s there are news headlines and a fictional summary written by the same guy who ruined Richard Jewel’s life and admitted he ran the FBI without the knowledge of how to turn a computer on.
You can take his word for it. You can take Mike and Mike’s word for it. That doesn’t mean I have to.
I asked you for proof and you don’t have any. 61 years. I need proof.
...not espn stuff either. Do you find it odd that Roger Cossack hasn’t been seen or heard on espn regarding his thoughts on the freeh report?
johnziegler.com (a conservative blogger used here at Free Republic) has written a lot about it. The University of Pennsylvania Economics scandal breaking today actually brought out even more conversation about Penn State - a lot of it that points to the freeh report as an incredibly flawed document - especially considering it’s summary.
Ziegler went back and forth with a blogger today and almost exposed a source, but held back. I think you are going to see something like this come out after the Curley and Schultz trials:
I think it comes from Scott P, but Ziegler denies that it comes from the family. The theory is that MM told everyone horseplay in 2001.
Once the AG’s office found MM in the walmart parking lot at 10PM in early 2011 and told him about other victims, he starts rethinking the incident.
Curley, Schultz, Spanier, and Paterno are all asked to testify before the GJ. Paterno doesn’t remember his meeting with MM 10 years earlier and is embarrassed by it, so he calls MM to refresh his memory (something he shouldn’t have done). He doesn’t want to testify that “he doesn’t remember”. MM tells Joe his NEW version - something sexual, fondling, etc. and Joe plugs that into his memory. Remember, there are (I think) 5 more victims at this point and Joe and MM probably both want js to fry.
Baldwin is given to Curley, Schultz, and Spanier as representation for the trip to Harrisburg to testify and Paterno decides to use his own attorney - so their stories don’t match and all hell breaks lose.
That’s not as believable as Joe acting as Don Paterno - overseeing an entire state, and seeing that his pedophile friend has anytime access to young boys and showers at Penn State?
Yeah. And all this from a supposedly informed forum that has read the actual report (not the summary) at a rate of likely much less than 5%.
Read the freeh report. Or maybe have someone read it to you.
Join the rest of us in reality. Joe let you down, now you need to get over it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.