Posted on 11/10/2011 1:31:44 PM PST by Colofornian
Edited on 11/10/2011 1:42:30 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Folks, this is Joe Paterno's legacy.
E-mails jump into my inbox defending Paterno...
I won't remember what Paterno did, but what he didn't do. What he didn't do is what got him fired...
Firing Joe Paterno doesn't fix everything, but it's a great start.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
I share his amazement that anyone could read the GJ presentment and GJ findings and not find that Joe Paterno failed by every possible standard by which we measure moral behavior.
And if you read my early posts on this topic, I was a True Believer in Joe Paterno from youth until Monday.
I believe, however, that our ire should be directed at the man who actually perpetrated these atrocities.
You say “I also wonder if Paterno is being scapegoated to keep the homosexual angle off the headlines”.
Paterno isn’t being scapegoated any more than the Catholic bishops who protected pedophile priests were scapegoated. Paterno and the Penn State administration did EXACTLY the same thing the bishops did, and for EXACTLY the same reasons.
is a witness and is obliged to report and testify about it.
and someone who KNOWS someone raped
and has nothing about which to testify doesn't "know" someone was raped. And remember, hearsay is generally not admissible in court.
AND PROTECTS THEM FOR YEARS
Is a pretty rotten person but how, specifically, did Paterno protect Sandusky? He pushed Sandusky out after the '98 investigation ended with no charges being filed, and he passed on the information regarding the 2002 case to people who should be presumed to be have been better able to investigate it than an 80-year-old football coach. And while they didn't take him out to the woods and shoot him like they should have, or call police like the should have, they did put new restrictions on his behavior to the point which appears to at least have been somewhat effective as there were no further reports of locker room abuse as per the Grand Jury report.
The act that brought Sandusky down occurred off campus.
First, calling the police has nothing to do with hearsay. Hearsay is a rule of evidence.
Second, unless something said out of court is offered to prove the truth of the utterance, it's not hearsay. I can testify that I heard Bob tell me he saw John rape Mary. If that testimony is offered as evidence that I heard John say that, then it's not hearsay. If that testimony is offered as evidence that John raped Mary, then it's hearsay.
For Paterno to report that somebody told him that Sandusky abused somebody isn't hearsay if it's offered to prove that somebody told Joe about Sandusky. It's only hearsay if it's offered as proof of the rape.
Third, you would be surprised. There are so many exceptions to the hearsay rule that in Evidence class your professor will joke that the rule is actually an exception to the exceptions to the rule.
Fourth, most state's child abuse laws mandate reporting in school and similar situations by people in authority who hear a creditable claim of abuse. Yeah. So does Pennsylvania. The only question is who has the obligation to report that abuse that he or she didn't see.
I've actually posted the link to Pennsylvania's reporting statute on a couple of your posts about hearsay. Have you missed it?
Finally, Curley reporting it, under your analysis, would be double hearsay. So . . . wow, we have a bigger problem.
You keep bringing up hearsay.
What am I missing?
Ok- I finally understand now. The real victims here are the officials of the university, Paterno, Sandusky,whatever audience the rape had etc, etc.
Nothing to do with boys being sodomized.
Nothing to do with a foundation to HELP disadvantaged kids being used to molest them instead.
The tragedy is what bad press the university is getting. The shame is firing a poor, old man who never did nothin’ but make everyone happy.
The people rioting in the streets aren’t horrified by the sexual molestation of children( after all, maybe they consented and sex is natural and its nobody’s business, and, and...) those kids probably enticed the venerable, respected Sandusky. Dirty little punks to hurt the U. of Pennsylvania and ruin everyones enjoyment of football!
I get it- I’m done.
Paterno is a victim, Sandusky is a victim, everyone who knew is a victim and we’re picking on them!
Forget the anally ruptured children.They shoulda had witnesses. All hail the god Football.
May God help this country.
I know you're not an attorney, but do you realize that under this hearsay piffle you've been posting on every thread, if somebody at worked yelled to me from the breakroom "quick, call the cops - Susie's boyfriend just came in and stabbed her!", I'd have to say:
"Sorry, I didn't see it, so it would be hearsay. Quit putting pressure on that artery and call them yourself. I'm going to report it to my supervisor."
And it wasn't to a post regarding reporting crimes to police but a response to someone claiming that someone "KNOWS" someone raped someone and "PROTECTS THEM FOR YEARS".
You seem to really, really want to believe the worst but you don't even know if McQueary even told Paterno the boy was raped.
Link to a previous post in which I mentioned hearsay.
Oh. I have plenty of ire for Sanduksy. He is the most culpable. But ire is not something that is limited. I've saved some ire for the enablers. For whatever reason, McQueary has been given a pass. The man made eye contact with a preteen boy who was being raped, and walked away. As an attorney, I can read the Grand Jury presentment and the Grand Jury report and tell that there was an attempt to give Joe Paterno a pass. We already know about Schultz, Curley, and Spanier. And the attorney for Penn State who reviewed the 1998 "shower" file and then went on to The Second Mile. And before this is over, we'll know other names, I'm afraid.
Just as ire is not limited my compassion is not limited. When I pause, I'm not filed with hatred for Sandusky or Paterno or McQueary. I'm filled with emptiness and sorrow for unnamed and unnumbered boys.
As an attorney I would think you’d be more inclined to wait for all the pertinent facts to come in before drawing conclusions about individual culpability.
No, you clearly don't understand.
Saying someone KNOWS someone has raped someone and PROTECTS THEM FOR YEARS, when the someone probably doesn't know that someone has raped someone, and has appeared to have never protected him, is wrong. You shouldn't do it.
FYI, the University of Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania State University are different schools
Heck, forget pertinent facts. Please . . . use your imagination. Create a scenario that justifies the facts in the Grand Jury findings; even Joe Paterno's testimony?
I'll consider them.
Are you wearing a home or away Penn State jersey as you type these things?
I just try to avoid the herd mentality and think for myself.
THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES IS NOT AN OUTSIDE AGENCY as would be the local police, sheriffs dept, etc. Everything was to be handled within the auspiced of the Indiana Dopt of Correction.....I have no problem with that, it roots out those who would accuse someone they didn't like. Even the kids in the juvenile system could call that 800 number if they had this type of problem. If an investigation was held concerning leaked information, the staff was also prohibited from issueing statements to the press or anyone else.
Why do feel obliged to post these stupid and insulting things to people who disagree with you?
For some reason...which I don't know for the life of me...you have seemed to pre-conclude that facts derived from actual testimony made before a Grand Jury aren't "facts."
If you would but bother to look at the Grand Jury Presentment you would only have to skip past a one-paragraph "Introduction" before coming to the section headlined, "Findings of Fact."
A Grand Jury's role includes determining if there is enough individual culpability to move forward toward indicting him or her. Otherwise, why bother having people testify under oath?
Some people, like Joe Paterno, upon testifying -- leave no doubt as to their sins of omission -- their moral and unethical culpability. They may be able to cover their legal butt to avoid jail time...
...all the while provoking a public verdict that wishes there was a greater punishment somewhere between losing-your-job and jail time to inflict upon you...
...as recompense for the pain and degradation these coaches enabled in their community.
How many homosexuals will this generate due to moral lapses from people who have rec'd Penn State paychecks in the past/present?
Joe Paterno was an degradating enabler. Get over it.
I'm done with this thread.
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.