If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Deadspin)   Inmates serenade Jerry Sandusky with Pink Floyd as he enters jail   (deadspin.com) divider line 447
    More: Weird, Jerry Sandusky, Hey, guilty verdicts, jail  
•       •       •

44938 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jun 2012 at 10:11 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



447 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-25 12:41:32 AM

gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: you assume he knew it was true. Assume for a moment that JoePa went to his bosses or the head of Hr and said "I think I should call the police" and they told him "No, Joe we will investigate this and if it is true we will make sure it is handled correctly." and they blow some smoke up his butt citing some legal liability crap. Joe says okay, see's Jerry still around and ask and is told "we found nothing"

Nobody ever comes back to Joe to say it is still going on, so he figures it was not true.

what would you expect him to do that point. defy his bosses based on hearsay. I would agree if JoePa saw it himself and PSU covered it up.


Oh, and McQueary's account was NOT hearsay. He told Paterno that he saw Sandusky farking a boy in the butt. That's a direct account. Anyone who doesn't call the cops after hearing such a thing, particularly a man of such power and prestige, is evil.

//No, the guy who orders Post-its for the cops is not a cop.


McQueary going to the cops is a direct account, if Joe goes to the cops with what McQueary said is that not hearsay?

the fault lies with McQueary and not Joe.

I'm not saying I personally think Joe made the right call (or no call) but I give some leeway to someone who has worked at the same place for 50 years and is well into his 70's or 80s at the time. I've worked for the same place for almost 20 year and we have had a few different owners, with different policies on how to handle major issues and even bosses have different ways then the policy to handle major issues.

might be he just reverted back to some old school policy in his head that said you go to "this person" for these types of issues.
 
2012-06-25 12:41:44 AM

gimmegimme: Oh, and McQueary's account was NOT hearsay.


Oh, I see. Yes, McQueary's account wasn't hearsay, but JoePa telling the police would have been.

/Not that that should have stopped him
 
2012-06-25 12:42:09 AM
And if your
Takin' your gf
Out tonight
You better park the car
Well out of sight
'Cos if they catch you in the back seat
Trying to pick her locks
They're gonna send you back to mother
In a cardboard box
You better run


always thought these were pretty close to the cleverest song lyrics ever

/pick her locks (sigh)
 
2012-06-25 12:42:11 AM

evaned: gimmegimme: Oh, and McQueary's account was NOT hearsay. He told Paterno that he saw Sandusky farking a boy in the butt. That's a direct account. Anyone who doesn't call the cops after hearing such a thing, particularly a man of such power and prestige, is evil.

I tend to agree with you on the second point, but Paterno's knowledge was second-hand -- through McQuery. He did not experience it himself. Hence, hearsay:

"Hearsay is information gathered by one person [JoePa] from another person [McQuery] concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person [JoePa] had no direct experience." (wikipedia)


Riiiiiiiight...that's why, if you hear someone tell you they just saw some adult farking a boy in the shower, you pick up the phone and dial 9-1-1 and tell the witness, "Jesus Christ. Tell them what you saw!"

Cardinal Paterno did nothing.
 
2012-06-25 12:42:32 AM
bossip.files.wordpress.com
Oh shiat Spiderman, how do I stopped rape?


static.tumblr.com
 
2012-06-25 12:43:09 AM
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$???????????????$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $ $$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$P""""    zdhu               `""??$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $ $$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$P""           d"  "Ru                    ""?$$$$$$$$$ $ $$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$P"'      .,.     $"   ,d$hcccu..                 `"?$$$$$ $ $$$$
$$$$$$$$$P"     .ud$P"'     dF  ud$$$$$$$$$$$$$hou.              "?$$ $ $$$$
$$$$$$$"    .ud$$$"        d$ ;$$$$$$$$$PPPPP"""????$c             `? $ $$$$
$$$$$"    ud$$$P"          d$$$$P"""                 "$u              ` $$$$
$$$F    d$$$$P            `??"               .uc$$c    "?hu.            ?$$
$$P   ;$$$$$"                               ""???R$hccu.  `"?hc,        $$
$R   s$$$$$                                        `"?$$$ho.  "?$o      `$
$F   $$$$$"                                            `?$$$$u   "$;    $
$>  d$$$$$                                                "$$$h   $F    ,$
$L  $$$$$C                                                 ?$$$c,dP     d$
$H  `$$$$$                                                ,$$$$$P"      ;$$
$$h  ?$$$$L                                             ,d$P""          ;$$$
$$$h.`$$$$h            .                           .ucdh,uod$P      , d $$$$
$$$$$h"$$$$h          `$hu.                   .udd$$NW$$$$$$F      z$ $ $$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$c         "$$$$$hcuuuuuuuoccmdP"""?????$$$$$$R"    ,d$$$ $ $$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$u         `""???????"""                      .ud$$$$$$ $ $$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ho.                                    .uc$$$$$$$$$$ $ $$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$cu..                       ..uoc$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $ $$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$hccouuu,,uuuocccd$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $ $$$$
 
2012-06-25 12:44:05 AM

doglover: OgreMagi: That same god that killed people for trivial transgressions and committed genocide a few times.

Hey. All those Jews Moses killed were totally not the same kind of Jews as their brothers and fathers... who killed them... for being traditional Jews... as opposed to Moses' new kind. . .

Yeah, the god of Abraham is like half Crom and half The Joker.


There's a reason you're one my favourites list.
 
2012-06-25 12:45:19 AM

Waldo Pepper: the fault lies with McQueary and not Joe.


I don't disagree that McQueary holds the primary responsibility for not going to the police. But that said, JoePa also didn't -- and he definitely should have. (Assuming that McQueary gave as specific of a description as he says and not just some super-duper-watered-down thing.) Everyone in the chain is responsible, and it's not a zero-sum game either: JoePa, Curly, Schultz, Spanier not doing anything doesn't diminish McQueary's guilt. (At least not much.)
 
2012-06-25 12:45:21 AM

Waldo Pepper: gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: you assume he knew it was true. Assume for a moment that JoePa went to his bosses or the head of Hr and said "I think I should call the police" and they told him "No, Joe we will investigate this and if it is true we will make sure it is handled correctly." and they blow some smoke up his butt citing some legal liability crap. Joe says okay, see's Jerry still around and ask and is told "we found nothing"

Nobody ever comes back to Joe to say it is still going on, so he figures it was not true.

what would you expect him to do that point. defy his bosses based on hearsay. I would agree if JoePa saw it himself and PSU covered it up.


Oh, and McQueary's account was NOT hearsay. He told Paterno that he saw Sandusky farking a boy in the butt. That's a direct account. Anyone who doesn't call the cops after hearing such a thing, particularly a man of such power and prestige, is evil.

//No, the guy who orders Post-its for the cops is not a cop.

McQueary going to the cops is a direct account, if Joe goes to the cops with what McQueary said is that not hearsay?

the fault lies with McQueary and not Joe.

I'm not saying I personally think Joe made the right call (or no call) but I give some leeway to someone who has worked at the same place for 50 years and is well into his 70's or 80s at the time. I've worked for the same place for almost 20 year and we have had a few different owners, with different policies on how to handle major issues and even bosses have different ways then the policy to handle major issues.

might be he just reverted back to some old school policy in his head that said you go to "this person" for these types of issues.


McQueary's failure was in not immediately calling the cops when the rape was taking place. Paterno's failure was not calling the cops when McQueary left him with no doubt that child rape was taking place under the same roof.

Why are you making excuses for people who facilitated child rape?
 
2012-06-25 12:45:43 AM

JasonOfOrillia: Shine on You Crazy Diamond?



Anybody ever notice? (unrelated to sandusky)

Shine on You crazy Diamond.

every other letter spells out SYD
 
2012-06-25 12:48:04 AM

gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: is there proof Joe was told multiple times over the past decade? if so, then had I been Joe i would think he had a way of getting the word out to the cops. heck some of them might have played for him.

if there is no proof Joe was told multiple times over the past decade well then hard to say what he knew or didn't know.


Paterno knew about the previous investigations. As I pointed out, he also had eyewitness testimony from McQueary. He most certainly had a way to contact the cops. He could have picked up the phone and dialed 9-1-1.

He didn't.


told about previous investigations (that come up negative) is not proof that he knew Sandusky raped kids. spin it however you want but that is not the same as proof that Joe was told multiple times.

eyewitness testimony often times is found to be incorrect. Joe is neither a Judge, Cop or Lawyer.

I still say his age plays into this greatly.
 
2012-06-25 12:49:34 AM

gimmegimme: Riiiiiiiight...that's why, if you hear someone tell you they just saw some adult farking a boy in the shower, you pick up the phone and dial 9-1-1 and tell the witness, "Jesus Christ. Tell them what you saw!"


Read what I said. I specifically said I agreed with you. (Okay, there was a little bit of a weasel word in there, but I still should have been clear.) And then in a followup (which may not have been there when you posted) said he should have called anyway.

I was merely commenting on the use of the term hearsay -- JoePa's knowledge was hearsay.
 
2012-06-25 12:51:47 AM

Waldo Pepper: gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: is there proof Joe was told multiple times over the past decade? if so, then had I been Joe i would think he had a way of getting the word out to the cops. heck some of them might have played for him.

if there is no proof Joe was told multiple times over the past decade well then hard to say what he knew or didn't know.


Paterno knew about the previous investigations. As I pointed out, he also had eyewitness testimony from McQueary. He most certainly had a way to contact the cops. He could have picked up the phone and dialed 9-1-1.

He didn't.

told about previous investigations (that come up negative) is not proof that he knew Sandusky raped kids. spin it however you want but that is not the same as proof that Joe was told multiple times.

eyewitness testimony often times is found to be incorrect. Joe is neither a Judge, Cop or Lawyer.

I still say his age plays into this greatly.


If Paterno was old and feeble, why was he still a well-paid employee of a state university? (I love how you folks think that Paterno was simultaneously a steadfast and brilliant general and a blithering, drooling incompetent.)

Hmmm...so let me get this straight. You hear multiple times that your friend is raping children, but the investigation did not result in a conviction. You would give your friend the benefit of the doubt when another person you respect claims he saw your friend raping a boy in the shower?

I agree that Joe was not a cop. His job and his moral duty was to call the cops.
 
2012-06-25 12:52:44 AM

GAT_00: And it's time once again for people who claim to be human to abandon their humanity for their version of "justice." Justice does not involve death, and it never has. Even God said so. Funny that Christians forget that.


Agreed. As much as I really despise some of the worst offenders, we're punishing them to time incarcerated, not assault, or rape or death. I have no problems if we want to change our justice system around to include torturing of terrible people, or assaulting or killing them, but lets at least be honest and upfront about it.
 
2012-06-25 12:53:29 AM

GAT_00: And it's time once again for people who claim to be human to abandon their humanity for their version of "justice." Justice does not involve death, and it never has. Even God said so. Funny that Christians forget that.



I want this f*cker to suffer extreme pain, and I guarantee that those of us who feel that way have a billion times more humanity than he does.
 
2012-06-25 12:53:44 AM

gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: you assume he knew it was true. Assume for a moment that JoePa went to his bosses or the head of Hr and said "I think I should call the police" and they told him "No, Joe we will investigate this and if it is true we will make sure it is handled correctly." and they blow some smoke up his butt citing some legal liability crap. Joe says okay, see's Jerry still around and ask and is told "we found nothing"

Nobody ever comes back to Joe to say it is still going on, so he figures it was not true.

what would you expect him to do that point. defy his bosses based on hearsay. I would agree if JoePa saw it himself and PSU covered it up.


Oh, and McQueary's account was NOT hearsay. He told Paterno that he saw Sandusky farking a boy in the butt. That's a direct account. Anyone who doesn't call the cops after hearing such a thing, particularly a man of such power and prestige, is evil.

//No, the guy who orders Post-its for the cops is not a cop.

McQueary going to the cops is a direct account, if Joe goes to the cops with what McQueary said is that not hearsay?

the fault lies with McQueary and not Joe.

I'm not saying I personally think Joe made the right call (or no call) but I give some leeway to someone who has worked at the same place for 50 years and is well into his 70's or 80s at the time. I've worked for the same place for almost 20 year and we have had a few different owners, with different policies on how to handle major issues and even bosses have different ways then the policy to handle major issues.

might be he just reverted back to some old school policy in his head that said you go to "this person" for these types of issues.

McQueary's failure was in not immediately calling the cops when the rape was taking place. Paterno's failure was not calling the cops when McQueary left him with no doubt that child rape was taking place under the same roof.

Why are you making excuses for people who facilitated child rape?


how do you know what was in JoePa mind. How do you know if he had "no doubt"?

how long after McQueary seeing what happen and when he told JoePa.

I might think that if the guy who saw what happen didn't think to call the police maybe he wasn't quite sure what he saw. Might be wise to talk to others before calling the police.

lets be honest in today's media, if this wasn't true and it got out everyone is ruined.
 
2012-06-25 12:53:57 AM

Generation_D: Penn State is the reverse. It did some reprehensible things not to win, but to keep a coach who could easily have been replaced and prosecuted in 2002 and the program cleaned up, and probably not take any long term damage at all.


Organizational psychology is weird. Organizations almost always behave this way - closing ranks to protect the organization and it's leaders from scrutiny / harm. Much moreso than individuals, tight-knit groups of people react to external threats in extremely predictable ways. Whether it's police departments protecting bad cops, or the Catholic church sheltering pedophile priests, or any other group faced with scandal, organizations (especially male-dominated ones with a strict pecking order) will invariably try to protect the organization's reputation by covering up or protecting the misdeeds of the faithful.

I'm sure there's been some scholarly research on the subject but I'm too drunk to bother looking it up.
 
2012-06-25 12:54:10 AM

Gdalescrboz: Amazing. Libs find capital punishment terrible, but getting raped and murdered by inmates gives them the lulz


Yeah, becuase Jerry Sandusky is in the slammer for unpaid traffic tickets and missing a court date. I mean, it's not like he molested kids, right?
 
2012-06-25 12:55:55 AM

gimmegimme: You hear multiple times that your friend is raping children, but the investigation did not result in a conviction


Now you're the one spinning facts. He didn't hear multiple times that Sandusky was raping anyone. At least if my memory of the grand jury indictment holds, we only know for certain that he knew of the previous investigation (1997) which was "just" for showering with a kid. Definitely inappropriate and should be ringing huge alarm bells, but it's also about as far from there to actual rape as Earth is from Alpha Centauri. And he also knew that investigation didn't bring up anything.

As I've said in several earlier posts, he definitely should have reported this incident to the actual police. And his legacy in my mind has suffered dramatically for it. You don't need to go making up crap.
 
2012-06-25 12:58:31 AM

evaned: And he also knew that investigation didn't bring up anything.


"anything criminal" is what that meant to say.
 
2012-06-25 01:00:27 AM

Waldo Pepper: Why are you making excuses for people who facilitated child rape?

how do you know what was in JoePa mind. How do you know if he had "no doubt"?

how long after McQueary seeing what happen and when he told JoePa.

I might think that if the guy who saw what happen didn't think to call the police maybe he wasn't quite sure what he saw. Might be wise to talk to others before calling the police.

lets be honest in today's media, if this wasn't true and it got out everyone is ruined.


I don't care whether Paterno had "no doubt." His job and moral duty was to call the police so the court system could figure out whether there was doubt.

McQueary slithered into JoePa's office only a day after seeing Sandusky rape a boy. JoePa was the one who waited until the weekend was over to call his co-conspirators instead of the cops.

I would give you leeway on the "you have to be sure" argument if there weren't a million other raped children in Sandusky's past. Paterno knew about this history, even if there were no convictions. Further, McQueary did not tell Paterno an ambiguous story. It wasn't as though he said, "Geez...I saw Jerry buy a kid an ice cream cone and he just had this glint in his eye." No. He described a naked senior citizen pressing his body against a naked youngster.

You continue to make excuses for facilitators of child rape.
 
2012-06-25 01:01:11 AM

gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: is there proof Joe was told multiple times over the past decade? if so, then had I been Joe i would think he had a way of getting the word out to the cops. heck some of them might have played for him.

if there is no proof Joe was told multiple times over the past decade well then hard to say what he knew or didn't know.


Paterno knew about the previous investigations. As I pointed out, he also had eyewitness testimony from McQueary. He most certainly had a way to contact the cops. He could have picked up the phone and dialed 9-1-1.

He didn't.

told about previous investigations (that come up negative) is not proof that he knew Sandusky raped kids. spin it however you want but that is not the same as proof that Joe was told multiple times.

eyewitness testimony often times is found to be incorrect. Joe is neither a Judge, Cop or Lawyer.

I still say his age plays into this greatly.

If Paterno was old and feeble, why was he still a well-paid employee of a state university? (I love how you folks think that Paterno was simultaneously a steadfast and brilliant general and a blithering, drooling incompetent.)

Hmmm...so let me get this straight. You hear multiple times that your friend is raping children, but the investigation did not result in a conviction. You would give your friend the benefit of the doubt when another person you respect claims he saw your friend raping a boy in the shower?

I agree that Joe was not a cop. His job and his moral duty was to call the cops.


I never said Joe was a brilliant general, I think i have been quite clear that I feel his age has played into his failure to handle this correctly. I think after 50 years or whatever it was, Joe put PSU first and did whatever he thought was right to protect the uni and the students and like the old horse who knows the trail by heart, i don't think Joe knew how to handle such a horrible situation as it was a path he never dreamed he would have to face.

part of me thinks maybe those above Joe who truly knew what was going on and who were benefiting from it might also have been playing the old man as a scapegoat if it ever hit the fan.

now if JoePa knew about it and ignore it for all the horrible reasons everyone has stated, I do hope his name is removed from everything at the school and in the NCAA records. like his time at PSU never existed.
 
2012-06-25 01:03:27 AM

evaned: evaned: And he also knew that investigation didn't bring up anything.

"anything criminal" is what that meant to say.


Link

So what you're saying is that Paterno was an oblivious moron who spent hours pushing on a door that says "pull." Did Paterno count to potato?
 
2012-06-25 01:03:59 AM

The_Sponge: GAT_00: And it's time once again for people who claim to be human to abandon their humanity for their version of "justice." Justice does not involve death, and it never has. Even God said so. Funny that Christians forget that.


I want this f*cker to suffer extreme pain, and I guarantee that those of us who feel that way have a billion times more humanity than he does.


A billion times zero is still zero, and being a billion times better than Jerry Sandusky does not make you a good person.

/not claiming to be that much better myself
//The way I would put it is, I would rather see all prison rape put to an end, even if that happens to spare Sandusky too.
 
2012-06-25 01:04:38 AM

SpinStopper: Dry as a funeral drum.


and night after night
we pretend its alright
as you have grown older
and i have grown colder
and nothing makes very
much sense, any more

/dark side regular doses
//now's good
 
2012-06-25 01:05:01 AM

The_Sponge: I want this f*cker to suffer extreme pain, and I guarantee that those of us who feel that way have a billion times more humanity than he does.


And a billion times less humanity than those who don't have sadistic revenge fantasies.

He's locked in a cage and will remain so for the remainder of his life. Justice has been done and the threat has been neutralized. Unnecessary cruelty inflicted on helpless prisoners is immoral and unconscionable.

I wouldn't be opposed to the death penalty in his case, although I think that would be giving him the easy way out. That said, there's a big difference between a quick and painless death by lethal injection and something like being broken on the wheel.

It's called a JUSTICE system not a VENGEANCE system for a reason.
 
2012-06-25 01:06:38 AM

evaned: gimmegimme: You hear multiple times that your friend is raping children, but the investigation did not result in a conviction

Now you're the one spinning facts. He didn't hear multiple times that Sandusky was raping anyone. At least if my memory of the grand jury indictment holds, we only know for certain that he knew of the previous investigation (1997) which was "just" for showering with a kid. Definitely inappropriate and should be ringing huge alarm bells, but it's also about as far from there to actual rape as Earth is from Alpha Centauri. And he also knew that investigation didn't bring up anything.

As I've said in several earlier posts, he definitely should have reported this incident to the actual police. And his legacy in my mind has suffered dramatically for it. You don't need to go making up crap.


so gimmie which is it, had JoePa been told multiple times or was it just the showering thing from 97?
 
2012-06-25 01:07:19 AM

Waldo Pepper: I never said Joe was a brilliant general, I think i have been quite clear that I feel his age has played into his failure to handle this correctly. I think after 50 years or whatever it was, Joe put PSU first and did whatever he thought was right to protect the uni and the students and like the old horse who knows the trail by heart, i don't think Joe knew how to handle such a horrible situation as it was a path he never dreamed he would have to face.

part of me thinks maybe those above Joe who truly knew what was going on and who were benefiting from it might also have been playing the old man as a scapegoat if it ever hit the fan.

now if JoePa knew about it and ignore it for all the horrible reasons everyone has stated, I do hope his name is removed from everything at the school and in the NCAA records. like his time at PSU never existed.


At the VERY least, he knew about the kid McQueary saw being raped in the shower. He saw Sandusky in the hall of the same building and didn't raise hell to keep Sandusky from going into the luxury boxes and on recruiting trips. What kind of a horrible person can deal with a child rapist being so close without calling the cops?

How many raped children should Paterno have kept quiet about to deserve having his name removed from the school?
 
2012-06-25 01:09:00 AM

clyph: It's called a JUSTICE system not a VENGEANCE system for a reason.


it's called the 'just us' system.

/certain people are excluded
//among them high ranking US officials, former presidents
 
2012-06-25 01:09:12 AM

gimmegimme: So what you're saying is that Paterno was an oblivious moron who spent hours pushing on a door that says "pull." Did Paterno count to potato?


I think you're the one counting to potato.

That timeline is of allegations that we know now, in retrospect. The only thing that isn't speculation about what Paterno knew prior to McQueary's report is the 1997 showering incident. In fact, Paterno's name only appears twice on that timeline, both relating to the McQuery incident.
 
2012-06-25 01:09:13 AM

Waldo Pepper: evaned: gimmegimme: You hear multiple times that your friend is raping children, but the investigation did not result in a conviction

Now you're the one spinning facts. He didn't hear multiple times that Sandusky was raping anyone. At least if my memory of the grand jury indictment holds, we only know for certain that he knew of the previous investigation (1997) which was "just" for showering with a kid. Definitely inappropriate and should be ringing huge alarm bells, but it's also about as far from there to actual rape as Earth is from Alpha Centauri. And he also knew that investigation didn't bring up anything.

As I've said in several earlier posts, he definitely should have reported this incident to the actual police. And his legacy in my mind has suffered dramatically for it. You don't need to go making up crap.

so gimmie which is it, had JoePa been told multiple times or was it just the showering thing from 97?


From my link:

1998 - Penn State police and the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare investigate an incident in which the mother of an 11-year-old boy reports Sandusky had showered with her son.

June 1, 1998 - Sandusky is interviewed and admits showering naked with the boy, saying it was wrong and promising not to do it again. The district attorney advises investigators that no charges will be filed, and the university police chief instructs that the case be closed.


Was the all-powerful Paterno too old to understand what was happening?
 
2012-06-25 01:10:44 AM

evaned: gimmegimme: So what you're saying is that Paterno was an oblivious moron who spent hours pushing on a door that says "pull." Did Paterno count to potato?

I think you're the one counting to potato.

That timeline is of allegations that we know now, in retrospect. The only thing that isn't speculation about what Paterno knew prior to McQueary's report is the 1997 showering incident. In fact, Paterno's name only appears twice on that timeline, both relating to the McQuery incident.


I'll modify my question to Waldo:

How many little boys is it acceptable for a friend to shower with alone before you call the cops?
 
2012-06-25 01:11:22 AM
And the sea isn't green
And I love the Queen
And what exactly is a dream
And what exactly is a joke



/R.I.P. Syd.
 
2012-06-25 01:12:29 AM

gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: evaned: gimmegimme: You hear multiple times that your friend is raping children, but the investigation did not result in a conviction

Now you're the one spinning facts. He didn't hear multiple times that Sandusky was raping anyone. At least if my memory of the grand jury indictment holds, we only know for certain that he knew of the previous investigation (1997) which was "just" for showering with a kid. Definitely inappropriate and should be ringing huge alarm bells, but it's also about as far from there to actual rape as Earth is from Alpha Centauri. And he also knew that investigation didn't bring up anything.

As I've said in several earlier posts, he definitely should have reported this incident to the actual police. And his legacy in my mind has suffered dramatically for it. You don't need to go making up crap.

so gimmie which is it, had JoePa been told multiple times or was it just the showering thing from 97?

From my link:

1998 - Penn State police and the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare investigate an incident in which the mother of an 11-year-old boy reports Sandusky had showered with her son.

June 1, 1998 - Sandusky is interviewed and admits showering naked with the boy, saying it was wrong and promising not to do it again. The district attorney advises investigators that no charges will be filed, and the university police chief instructs that the case be closed.

Was the all-powerful Paterno too old to understand what was happening?


showering is not rape. if the DA and Police Chief tell me that the case is closed no charges are filed. why would I think any more about it.

do we have any clue as to how either the DA or Chief told what happen to JoePa. Was he involved in the investigations?
 
2012-06-25 01:12:52 AM

gimmegimme: Was the all-powerful Paterno too old to understand what was happening?


The only people portraying Paterno as "all-powerful" are the ones deriving pleasure from his disgrace.
 
2012-06-25 01:16:19 AM

urban.derelict: clyph: It's called a JUSTICE system not a VENGEANCE system for a reason.

it's called the 'just us' system.

/certain people are excluded
//among them high ranking US officials, former presidents


Whatever could you be talking about?
 
2012-06-25 01:17:05 AM

urban.derelict: clyph: It's called a JUSTICE system not a VENGEANCE system for a reason.

it's called the 'just us' system.

/certain people are excluded
//among them high ranking US officials, former presidents


Didn't say it was perfect...

The high and mighty have almost always been above justice. There have only been a handful of times and places where justice has been applied evenly from top to bottom; we do a better job than most. (Granted, that just means we get a D- when most societies get an F)
 
2012-06-25 01:17:42 AM

GoldSpider: gimmegimme: Was the all-powerful Paterno too old to understand what was happening?

The only people portraying Paterno as "all-powerful" are the ones deriving pleasure from his disgrace.


To be fair, I am not pleased about Paterno's disgrace. I am hoping that, in the future, what Paterno is suffering will lead people to call the cops.

I just have a lot of trouble listening to people make excuses for very powerful people who turn a blind eye to child rape. (I'm looking at you, Cardinal Law. And the guy in Milwaukee who literally paid bonuses to pedophile priests.)
 
2012-06-25 01:17:54 AM

gimmegimme: evaned: gimmegimme: So what you're saying is that Paterno was an oblivious moron who spent hours pushing on a door that says "pull." Did Paterno count to potato?

I think you're the one counting to potato.

That timeline is of allegations that we know now, in retrospect. The only thing that isn't speculation about what Paterno knew prior to McQueary's report is the 1997 showering incident. In fact, Paterno's name only appears twice on that timeline, both relating to the McQuery incident.

I'll modify my question to Waldo:

How many little boys is it acceptable for a friend to shower with alone before you call the cops?


since I have no details on what "showering with" means in this case (at that time).

it might have simply been a mom overreacting to her son being in the locker room shower at the same time as a grown man.

the rec center near me has men's locker room with showers, not that I use the showers but if I did and was showering and some 10 year boy came in the showers at the same time. is that to showering with.

if nothing is found with the investigation on the surface that means there is nothing there. if the DA and/or Chief thought there was something going on and only reason they didn't file charges is not enough proof. I would think they would have suggested taking his keys at that time
 
2012-06-25 01:17:57 AM

gimmegimme: How many little boys is it acceptable for a friend to shower with alone before you call the cops?


Read my f'ing posts. It's pretty clear that "immediately when you hear about it" is going to be my answer. I'm not excusing Paterno's (in)action. I'm just saying you don't need to go make crap up.

You specifically said, about what Paterno knew at the time McQueary showed up at his door: "You hear multiple times that your friend is raping children, but the investigation did not result in a conviction."

This statement, to my knowledge, is unsupported by evidence. And when I called you on it, you gave a link that also doesn't support your statement.

Now are you going to admit that you made up that statement, or at the very least that it's a tremendous amount of hyperbole? ("multiple times" = "once", "raping" = "showering with", and "did not result in a conviction" = "wasn't even charged")
 
2012-06-25 01:19:56 AM

Waldo Pepper: gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: evaned: gimmegimme: You hear multiple times that your friend is raping children, but the investigation did not result in a conviction

Now you're the one spinning facts. He didn't hear multiple times that Sandusky was raping anyone. At least if my memory of the grand jury indictment holds, we only know for certain that he knew of the previous investigation (1997) which was "just" for showering with a kid. Definitely inappropriate and should be ringing huge alarm bells, but it's also about as far from there to actual rape as Earth is from Alpha Centauri. And he also knew that investigation didn't bring up anything.

As I've said in several earlier posts, he definitely should have reported this incident to the actual police. And his legacy in my mind has suffered dramatically for it. You don't need to go making up crap.

so gimmie which is it, had JoePa been told multiple times or was it just the showering thing from 97?

From my link:

1998 - Penn State police and the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare investigate an incident in which the mother of an 11-year-old boy reports Sandusky had showered with her son.

June 1, 1998 - Sandusky is interviewed and admits showering naked with the boy, saying it was wrong and promising not to do it again. The district attorney advises investigators that no charges will be filed, and the university police chief instructs that the case be closed.

Was the all-powerful Paterno too old to understand what was happening?

showering is not rape. if the DA and Police Chief tell me that the case is closed no charges are filed. why would I think any more about it.

do we have any clue as to how either the DA or Chief told what happen to JoePa. Was he involved in the investigations?


Okay. Just do me this favor. If you ever see one of my future children showering alone with an adult (myself included)...call the cops. Please. Especially if the old guy is "horsing around" with my kid. Please.
 
2012-06-25 01:19:59 AM
at least it wasn't "Several Species of Small Furry Animals Gathered Together in a Cave and Grooving with a Pict"
 
2012-06-25 01:22:01 AM

GoldSpider: gimmegimme: Was the all-powerful Paterno too old to understand what was happening?

The only people portraying Paterno as "all-powerful" are the ones deriving pleasure from his disgrace.


May I remind you the man had a statue erected by his followers at PSU. He is famous for telling the board to back off, he was going to stay another year despite repeated flirtations with retirement. If he wasn't all-powerful no one dared to tell him otherwise.

Until recently, that is. He was fired, died, and is now worm food. Best possible outcome.
 
2012-06-25 01:23:49 AM

gimmegimme: Okay. Just do me this favor. If you ever see one of my future children showering alone with an adult (myself included)...call the cops. Please. Especially if the old guy is "horsing around" with my kid. Please.


I feel kind of bad laughing at anything connected to this whole event, but this actually did it.
 
2012-06-25 01:24:11 AM

evaned: gimmegimme: How many little boys is it acceptable for a friend to shower with alone before you call the cops?

Read my f'ing posts. It's pretty clear that "immediately when you hear about it" is going to be my answer. I'm not excusing Paterno's (in)action. I'm just saying you don't need to go make crap up.

You specifically said, about what Paterno knew at the time McQueary showed up at his door: "You hear multiple times that your friend is raping children, but the investigation did not result in a conviction."

This statement, to my knowledge, is unsupported by evidence. And when I called you on it, you gave a link that also doesn't support your statement.

Now are you going to admit that you made up that statement, or at the very least that it's a tremendous amount of hyperbole? ("multiple times" = "once", "raping" = "showering with", and "did not result in a conviction" = "wasn't even charged")


I will give you 10% agreement on your statement. We can admit that Paterno knew at least once that his buddy was showering with a little boy from that previous investigation. Once McQueary describes the slapping sound and the anal sex motions happening in the shower, I feel that "raping" is justified terminology.

Do we at least agree that Paterno knew about the 2002 child rape in the shower after he was told about it by McQueary? Perhaps I should focus on the fact that Paterno allowed the monster into his midst for a decade.
 
2012-06-25 01:25:43 AM

GoldSpider: The only people portraying Paterno as "all-powerful" are the ones deriving pleasure from his disgrace.


I would say that the "all-powerful" moniker is not that far from the truth. And believe me, I derive no pleasure from his end.
 
2012-06-25 01:26:09 AM

evaned: gimmegimme: Okay. Just do me this favor. If you ever see one of my future children showering alone with an adult (myself included)...call the cops. Please. Especially if the old guy is "horsing around" with my kid. Please.

I feel kind of bad laughing at anything connected to this whole event, but this actually did it.


I love how The Onion can actually make humor out of terrible situations and do it with respect. Here's one of my favorites: Neighbors Confront Alcoholic Child-Abuser About His Lawn
 
2012-06-25 01:27:10 AM

gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: evaned: gimmegimme: You hear multiple times that your friend is raping children, but the investigation did not result in a conviction

Now you're the one spinning facts. He didn't hear multiple times that Sandusky was raping anyone. At least if my memory of the grand jury indictment holds, we only know for certain that he knew of the previous investigation (1997) which was "just" for showering with a kid. Definitely inappropriate and should be ringing huge alarm bells, but it's also about as far from there to actual rape as Earth is from Alpha Centauri. And he also knew that gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: gimmegimme: Waldo Pepper: evaned: gimmegimme: You hear multiple times that your friend is raping children, but the investigation did not result in a conviction

Now you're the one spinning facts. He didn't hear multiple times that Sandusky was raping anyone. At least if my memory of the grand jury indictment holds, we only know for certain that he knew of the previous investigation (1997) which was "just" for showering with a kid. Definitely inappropriate and should be ringing huge alarm bells, but it's also about as far from there to actual rape as Earth is from Alpha Centauri. And he also knew that investigation didn't bring up anything.

As I've said in several earlier posts, he definitely should have reported this incident to the actual police. And his legacy in my mind has suffered dramatically for it. You don't need to go making up crap.

so gimmie which is it, had JoePa been told multiple times or was it just the showering thing from 97?

From my link:

1998 - Penn State police and the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare investigate an incident in which the mother of an 11-year-old boy reports Sandusky had showered with her son.

June 1, 1998 - Sandusky is interviewed and admits showering naked with the boy, saying it was wrong and promising not to do it again. The district attorney advises investigators that no charges will be filed, and the university police chief instructs that the case be closed.

Was the all-powerful Paterno too old to understand what was happening?

showering is not rape. if the DA and Police Chief tell me that the case is closed no charges are filed. why would I think any more about it.

do we have any clue as to how either the DA or Chief told what happen to JoePa. Was he involved in the investigations?

Okay. Just do me this favor. If you ever see one of my future children showering alone with an adult (myself included)...call the cops. Please. Especially if the old guy is "horsing around" with my kid. Pleas ...

investigation didn't bring up anything.

As I've said in several earlier posts, he definitely should have reported this incident to the actual police. And his legacy in my mind has suffered dramatically for it. You don't need to go making up crap.

so gimmie which is it, had JoePa been told multiple times or was it just the showering thing from 97?

From my link:

1998 - Penn State police and the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare investigate an incident in which the mother of an 11-year-old boy reports Sandusky had showered with her son.

June 1, 1998 - Sandusky is interviewed and admits showering naked with the boy, saying it was wrong and promising not to do it again. The district attorney advises investigators that no charges will be filed, and the university police chief instructs that the case be closed.

Was the all-powerful Paterno too old to understand what was happening?

showering is not rape. if the DA and Police Chief tell me that the case is closed no charges are filed. why would I think any more about it.

do we have any clue as to how either the DA or Chief told what happen to JoePa. Was he involved in the investigations?

Okay. Just do me this favor. If you ever see one of my future children showering alone with an adult (myself included)...call the cops. Please. Especially if the old guy is "horsing around" with my kid. Pleas ...


so you mean if your 3 yr old son gets in the shower with you (his dad) that is wrong?
 
2012-06-25 01:28:07 AM

nekom: I'm surprised they didn't take him directly to PC.


That's not a mistake. The world wants him to get shanked.
 
2012-06-25 01:29:49 AM

gimmegimme: I will give you 10% agreement on your statement. We can admit that Paterno knew at least once that his buddy was showering with a little boy from that previous investigation. Once McQueary describes the slapping sound and the anal sex motions happening in the shower, I feel that "raping" is justified terminology.

Do we at least agree that Paterno knew about the 2002 child rape in the shower after he was told about it by McQueary? Perhaps I should focus on the fact that Paterno allowed the monster into his midst for a decade.


Let's go back and look at the post where you originally said that:

gimmegimme: You hear multiple times that your friend is raping children, but the investigation did not result in a conviction. You would give your friend the benefit of the doubt when another person you respect claims he saw your friend raping a boy in the shower?


To my mind the part I'm asking you to retract pretty unambiguously refers to what Paterno knew before McQueary showed up.

But whatever. At this point I think I'm arguing somewhat just for the point of arguing and we don't actually disagree all that much. So I think I'll stop. :-)
 
Displayed 50 of 447 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report