Adolf Oliver Nipples: Two things before I start:

1) I hate Penn State and I always have.
2) I think that the whole situation is despicable and do not defend the behavior of the people involved.

Now, with that out of the way, let's get to it.

Joe Paterno is an old man. His financial maneuvering is nothing more than typical asset-protection planning for when he dies so that his wife won't be stuck with an enormous tax bill or be forced to sell the house they've lived in for decades. This conspiracy theory stuff that subby refers to with his headline, that Paterno was sheltering his assets in anticipation of the inevitable lawsuits, is hooey. He's doing what any intelligent old man would be doing, planning for the future of his loved ones when he's gone.

Especially when he knows what's coming down the pipe, and he doesn't want his wife to lose everything.

Macy's is having a Jerry Sandusky Sale.

/Boys' pants are half off.

Joe Paterno walks into a police station...Just Kidding!

Let's see if I can try to care about Sandusky, PSU, the "charity", Paterno, etc. (or their financial future)...nope. Not at all.

/rarely in favor of huge civil judgements
//except here
///sigh

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Two things before I start:

1) I hate Penn State and I always have.
2) I think that the whole situation is despicable and do not defend the behavior of the people involved.

Now, with that out of the way, let's get to it.

Joe Paterno is an old man. His financial maneuvering is nothing more than typical asset-protection planning for when he dies so that his wife won't be stuck with an enormous tax bill or be forced to sell the house they've lived in for decades. This conspiracy theory stuff that subby refers to with his headline, that Paterno was sheltering his assets in anticipation of the inevitable lawsuits, is hooey. He's doing what any intelligent old man would be doing, planning for the future of his loved ones when he's gone.

Yeah, I'm not a lawyer, and I don't play one on TV, but isn't a spouse responsible for any debts incurred by the other spouse? I thought that was (one of the) downside(s) of marriage.

\plus, are women even able to own property in Pennsyltucky?

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Two things before I start:

1) I hate Penn State and I always have.
2) I think that the whole situation is despicable and do not defend the behavior of the people involved.

Now, with that out of the way, let's get to it.

Joe Paterno is an old man. His financial maneuvering is nothing more than typical asset-protection planning for when he dies so that his wife won't be stuck with an enormous tax bill or be forced to sell the house they've lived in for decades. This conspiracy theory stuff that subby refers to with his headline, that Paterno was sheltering his assets in anticipation of the inevitable lawsuits, is hooey. He's doing what any intelligent old man would be doing, planning for the future of his loved ones when he's gone.

That's what these kids need these days.

amiright?

You Are All Sheep: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Two things before I start:

1) I hate Penn State and I always have.
2) I think that the whole situation is despicable and do not defend the behavior of the people involved.

Now, with that out of the way, let's get to it.

Joe Paterno is an old man. His financial maneuvering is nothing more than typical asset-protection planning for when he dies so that his wife won't be stuck with an enormous tax bill or be forced to sell the house they've lived in for decades. This conspiracy theory stuff that subby refers to with his headline, that Paterno was sheltering his assets in anticipation of the inevitable lawsuits, is hooey. He's doing what any intelligent old man would be doing, planning for the future of his loved ones when he's gone.

Especially when he knows what's coming down the pipe, and he doesn't want his wife to lose everything.

THIS

downstairs: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Joe Paterno is an old man. His financial maneuvering is nothing more than typical asset-protection planning for when he dies so that his wife won't be stuck with an enormous tax bill or be forced to sell the house they've lived in for decades. This conspiracy theory stuff that subby refers to with his headline, that Paterno was sheltering his assets in anticipation of the inevitable lawsuits, is hooey. He's doing what any intelligent old man would be doing, planning for the future of his loved ones when he's gone

Yep, this. Happens all the time. Its standard practice, especially for people with a lot of money. His wife is 13 years younger than him.

I agree that this is what the deal was.
But, you have to admit, they have to be pleased that they did it this past summer instead of waiting until next summer.

Estate planning, how does it work?

/Also, asset transfers in anticipation of litigation/judgment don't usually fly in PA
//Uniform Fraudulent Transfers Act FTW

Does that even work? Transfering property to a spouse in the same state to protect it from a civil suit?

"Nothing indicts like denial." -P.J. O'Rourke

I wonder if the person who filed the lawsuit had to give it a lot of thought, or was it a no-brainer?
For example: How much money will Mr. Sandusky and his insurance carriers (business and personal) have access to?
Will this plaintiff have to stand in line with lots of other plaintiffs, or is he guaranteed something by virtue of having filed first?
Will this expose him to public scrutiny in uncomfortable ways? (Granted, the private discomfort has already occurred ...)
How does the plaintiff calculate damages, and how much will his attorney be enriched in the process? (Hopefully he has an attorney who's a friend, so he won't begrudge him/her his/her fee.)

Pedifiles are farking immature a-holes

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Two things before I start:

1) I hate Penn State and I always have.
2) I think that the whole situation is despicable and do not defend the behavior of the people involved.

Now, with that out of the way, let's get to it.

Joe Paterno is an old man. His financial maneuvering is nothing more than typical asset-protection planning for when he dies so that his wife won't be stuck with an enormous tax bill or be forced to sell the house they've lived in for decades. This conspiracy theory stuff that subby refers to with his headline, that Paterno was sheltering his assets in anticipation of the inevitable lawsuits, is hooey. He's doing what any intelligent old man would be doing, planning for the future of his loved ones when he's gone.

It's hardly a conspiracy theory.

From the New York Times: (new window)

Experts in estate planning and tax law, in interviews, cautioned that it would be hard to determine the Paternos' motivation simply from the available documents. It appears the family house had been the subject of years of complex and confusing transactions.

Lawrence A. Frolik, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh who specializes in elder law, said that he had "never heard" of a husband selling his share of a house for $1 to his spouse for tax or government assistance purposes.

"I can't see any tax advantages," Frolik said. "If someone told me that, my reaction would be, 'Are they hoping to shield assets in case if there's personal liability?' " He added, "It sounds like an attempt to avoid personal liability in having assets in his wife's name."

Two lawyers examined the available documents in recent days. Neither wanted to be identified because they were not directly involved in the case or the property transaction. One of the experts said it appeared to be an explicit effort to financially shield Joe Paterno. The other regarded the July transaction, at least on its face, as benign.

The transfer could have nothing to do with the scandal, but it could also have everything to do with it.

We'll never know, but the timing is pretty coincidental.

/subby

The bigger question is if the "It could cost half PSU's endowment" and other such doom and gloom predictions come true. If so PSU is going to be crippled academically for awhile. Be interesting to see how they handle that and if they can recover.

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Two things before I start:

1) I hate Penn State and I always have.
2) I think that the whole situation is despicable and do not defend the behavior of the people involved.

Now, with that out of the way, let's get to it.

Joe Paterno is an old man. His financial maneuvering is nothing more than typical asset-protection planning for when he dies so that his wife won't be stuck with an enormous tax bill or be forced to sell the house they've lived in for decades. This conspiracy theory stuff that subby refers to with his headline, that Paterno was sheltering his assets in anticipation of the inevitable lawsuits, is hooey. He's doing what any intelligent old man would be doing, planning for the future of his loved ones when he's gone.

Done in one.

/Except that I LOVE Penn State and always have. ('02 B.S. - Biol.)
//But I also think the whole situation is despicable and do not defend the behavior of the people involved.

triplenickel03: Joe Paterno walks into a police station...Just Kidding!

South park wants their joke back.

For the last time. PA has something called: tenancy by the entirety.

Even if Joe loses everything in a lawsuit no one could get their hands on the house (assuming they bought the house when they were married). If, on the other hand, he bought the house before they got married or they went out of they way not to take title as a tenancy by the entirety but rather joint tenants - then it's a different story. It boggles my mind that anyone wouldn't want to take title as a tenancy by the entirety since it's such a powerful way to protect property.

His car, bank accounts etc. on the other hand, are fair game so it wouldn't surprise me if he did something like sell his house to his wife so she has all the money and transfer all the other assets to her as well.

This idea that he did it in case he died is silly. She would get if he died anyway. Also, any lien on the house that resulted from this law suit (so long as it was a tenancy by the entirety) would extinguish with him.

Krymson Tyde: "he was sexually abused as a young boy more than 100 times"

In a row?

Only on Saturday nights.

Krymson Tyde: "he was sexually abused as a young boy more than 100 times"

In a row?

All at once, actually.

Which explains a lot.

Adolf Oliver Nipples: His financial maneuvering is nothing more than typical asset-protection planning for when he dies so that his wife won't be stuck with an enormous tax bill or be forced to sell the house they've lived in for decades.

Wow, does it hurt to be so wrong? Just wondering.

Lawrence A. Frolik, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh who specializes in elder law, said that he had "never heard" of a husband selling his share of a house for $1 to his spouse for tax or government assistance purposes.

"I can't see any tax advantages," Frolik said. "If someone told me that, my reaction would be, 'Are they hoping to shield assets in case if there's personal liability?' " He added, "It sounds like an attempt to avoid personal liability in having assets in his wife's name." (new window)

Hyperbolic Hyperbole: Guys, I love laughing at the rape of children and the people who shield them as much as the next guy, but we've sort of run out of gas on this topic.

Perhaps we can all agree to jump up to the next news story and debate that instead.


Absolutely not. The best disinfectant for this garbage is exposure in a very public (and expensive) way. I hope any lawsuits financially brutalize Sandusky, Paterno, the charity, etc. and put a massive dent in PSU's endowment. Not for the financial gain of the victims (although that is needed), but to make it VERY clear to all institutions that hiding the rape of children will not be tolerated. Ever.

/my two cents

CheekyMonkey: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Two things before I start:

1) I hate Penn State and I always have.
2) I think that the whole situation is despicable and do not defend the behavior of the people involved.

Now, with that out of the way, let's get to it.

Joe Paterno is an old man. His financial maneuvering is nothing more than typical asset-protection planning for when he dies so that his wife won't be stuck with an enormous tax bill or be forced to sell the house they've lived in for decades. This conspiracy theory stuff that subby refers to with his headline, that Paterno was sheltering his assets in anticipation of the inevitable lawsuits, is hooey. He's doing what any intelligent old man would be doing, planning for the future of his loved ones when he's gone.

Yeah, I'm not a lawyer, and I don't play one on TV, but isn't a spouse responsible for any debts incurred by the other spouse? I thought that was (one of the) downside(s) of marriage.

\plus, are women even able to own property in Pennsyltucky?

Pennsylvania is not a community property state. It is equitable property. One spouse is not responsible for the debts of the other unless they voluntarily assumed that responsibility.

CheekyMonkey: Yeah, I'm not a lawyer, and I don't play one on TV, but isn't a spouse responsible for any debts incurred by the other spouse? I thought that was (one of the) downside(s) of marriage.

Only in community property states, WHERE YOU SHOULD NEVER, EVER GET MARRIED. Community property states are Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin.

For example: When Linda's business fails, she owes $45,000 to suppliers and other creditors. Because Linda and her husband live in a community property state, these creditors can sue both her and her husband to collect the money owed. Linda no longer has an income to take, but her husband's is significant, and her creditors are able to garnish $3,000 of her husband's income per month until the debts are paid off. (new window)

Adolf Oliver Nipples: If by "coincidental" you mean "several months before" you're right on top of it. Of course, this scandal has been simmering for over a decade, what else did Joe Paterno do over that decade to "shield" his assets? Nothing.

Dude, stop digging.

"Wick Sollers, a lawyer for Paterno, said in an e-mail that the Paternos had been engaged in a "multiyear estate planning program," and the transfer "was simply one element of that plan." He said it had nothing to do with the scandal. "

I'm guessing that multiyear means about the same time as the Grand Jury had been investigating.

Hyperbolic Hyperbole: GuyFawkes: make it VERY clear to all institutions that hiding the rape of children will not be tolerated. Ever.

but.. hiding the rape of children IS tolerated. thats why this keeps happening

at the end of the day, most people aren't going to let a few kids being raped get in the way of their shiat, despite what they may say in internet forums


Oh, I know, and I agree. My point is that...well I suppose that IF you get busted hiding that you (personally and as a company, school, etc.) will have to pay dearly. That will never heal the wounds of the victims but the lesson should be that it may destroy you and your company/school in the process.

/wouldn't feel bad if PSU had to shut down their football program

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Joe Paterno is an old man. His financial maneuvering is nothing more than typical asset-protection planning for when he dies so that his wife won't be stuck with an enormous tax bill or be forced to sell the house they've lived in for decades. This conspiracy theory stuff that subby refers to with his headline, that Paterno was sheltering his assets in anticipation of the inevitable lawsuits, is hooey. He's doing what any intelligent old man would be doing, planning for the future of his loved ones when he's gone.

It isn't hooey. You and I (and everyone else not directly involved) don't know enough about his financial situation to say why he is shielding assets. He might be doing it for estate planning purposes, he might be doing it for legal settlement reasons, or a combination of the two, or completely unrelated reasons. I see no reason to give the creepy old bastard the benefit of the doubt ever again.

Adolf Oliver Nipples: thornhill: The transfer could have nothing to do with the scandal, but it could also have everything to do with it.

We'll never know, but the timing is pretty coincidental.


If by "coincidental" you mean "several months before" you're right on top of it. Of course, this scandal has been simmering for over a decade, what else did Joe Paterno do over that decade to "shield" his assets? Nothing.

Paterno testified to the grand jury -- he knew what was in the pipeline and his lawyers understood the possible civil suit implications.

My immediate response to the Paterno house thing was much like Subby suggests...but then I learned some things and realize he is very old (and much older than his wife) and people in that situation will do this often times.

Cauchy_Riemann_equations: This idea that he did it in case he died is silly. She would get if he died anyway.

Doing when he is alive does mean there is no way to even attempt to challenge it during probate. So there is that.

Hyperbolic Hyperbole: "at the end of the day, most people aren't going to let a few kids being raped get in the way of their shiat, despite what they may say in internet forums"

The media just gives disproportionate attention to cover-up scandals.
Not unlike the way it may seem that only young pretty blonde women get kidnapped.

It ain't reality, it's just selective reporting.

I wonder what Mike Krzyzewski has in his closet. He's next on my list of famous coaches to get nailed for some sort of coverup. In fact I hear that he used to hide in the closet while Christian Laettner and Bobby Hurley dped Grant Hill.

MirandaMM: You Are All Sheep: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Two things before I start:

1) I hate Penn State and I always have.
2) I think that the whole situation is despicable and do not defend the behavior of the people involved.

Now, with that out of the way, let's get to it.

Joe Paterno is an old man. His financial maneuvering is nothing more than typical asset-protection planning for when he dies so that his wife won't be stuck with an enormous tax bill or be forced to sell the house they've lived in for decades. This conspiracy theory stuff that subby refers to with his headline, that Paterno was sheltering his assets in anticipation of the inevitable lawsuits, is hooey. He's doing what any intelligent old man would be doing, planning for the future of his loved ones when he's gone.

Especially when he knows what's coming down the pipe, and he doesn't want his wife to lose everything.

THIS

Don't think it works that way in Pennsylvania.

srhp29: ...he is very old (and much older than his wife) and people in that situation will do this often times.

No, they don't There is no reason, none, other than asset protection for this type of transaction.

Again, Lawrence A. Frolik, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh who specializes in elder law, said that he had "never heard" of a husband selling his share of a house for $1 to his spouse for tax or government assistance purposes.

"I can't see any tax advantages," Frolik said. (new window)

There continues to be an exemption for transferring to the spouse. Yet, there continues to be people saying that he did this purely for tax reasons.

You Are All Sheep: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Two things before I start:

1) I hate Penn State and I always have.
2) I think that the whole situation is despicable and do not defend the behavior of the people involved.

Now, with that out of the way, let's get to it.

Joe Paterno is an old man. His financial maneuvering is nothing more than typical asset-protection planning for when he dies so that his wife won't be stuck with an enormous tax bill or be forced to sell the house they've lived in for decades. This conspiracy theory stuff that subby refers to with his headline, that Paterno was sheltering his assets in anticipation of the inevitable lawsuits, is hooey. He's doing what any intelligent old man would be doing, planning for the future of his loved ones when he's gone.

Especially when he knows what's coming down the pipe, and he doesn't want his wife to lose everything.

I think he's getting out in front of it, but considering that there's going to a giant pile of bulls**t suits heaped on top of the legit ones, I'm not sure i"m completely down on this.

As much as I dislike what sandusky (allegedly^TM) did, I also dislike money-grubbing class action attorneys who work their way up the blame chain until they find the target with the highest cash reserves and represent clients who may or may not have actually been involved and media whores who are going to spend months feigning outrage when all they're really thinking is "thank god I've got a juicy story I can milk for months!".

I think the number of real victims is going to be quickly dwarfed by the number of a$$holes looking to profit while acting like they care about anything besides the money when we all know that's why they're there. I'm already sick of the whole thing, and it's barely started.

/yes, I have a high horse
//his name is Ted

Let's clear this up once and for all - Paterno moved the property into his wife's name in Nov 2010, way before the GJ questioning began. The sidenote that occurred in July, which everyone wanted to jump all over, was a correction to the financial transaction that occurred way before.