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.

(ESPN)   Paterno family releases report that rips investigator Louis Freeh a new asshole, which Jerry Sandusky would like to see. NO THE REPORT   (espn.go.com) divider line 67
    More: Ironic, Joe Paterno, Jerry Sandusky, FBI Director Louis Freeh, Beaver Stadium, researchers, Graham Spanier, bad publicity, antitrust laws  
•       •       •

2690 clicks; posted to Sports » on 10 Feb 2013 at 4:10 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-02-10 02:07:30 PM
6 votes:
Dear everyone involved in this whole sordid affair;

The longer you keep bringing this up, the worse you look.  There is absolutely no chance that public opinion will change and people will suddenly start thinking "hey, covering up child rape isn't so bad."  It is not going to happen.  The sooner you stop calling attention to yourselves, the sooner people will move on to the next scandal and you can begin shifting attention back to football.
2013-02-10 03:45:06 PM
5 votes:
Joe ran cover for a pedo. No amount of reports attacking the people who investigated it will change that fact
2013-02-11 01:44:31 AM
3 votes:

justtray: If you read the ESPN article, you would know why your comment is so farking stupid.

Only one person involved had any connection to the Paterno family, and that one person's relationship was described as "not close." They were also directed to investigate and find the truth, regardless of positive or negative. Can the Freeh report say that? Based on this reports findings, and the obvious, glaring bias, non-factual conclusions the Freeh report makes, I would say "probably not."

I have no affiliation to Penn State or anyone who ever went there. I just hate public media witch burnings that are entirely devoid and ignorant of facts. Because as someone above said, they don't want or care about the facts. Everyone just wants to feel morally superior and blame anyone and everyone involved.

Frankly, I hope this reports help the Paterno family sue Penn State back to the stone age. They deserve it.


I stand corrected.  The connection is overstated.  But you still seem to be making a mistake about what a lot of people's complaint about Joe is.  Generally, I think people are taking some license to exaggerate when they say Joe covered-up the rapes.  What we DO know, and is undeniable, is that Joe knew Sandusky was doing something INCREDIBLY inappropriate.  Joe did not choose to do the DECENT thing I (or, I imagine, you) would have done, which is follow-up and find out, because if kids were getting raped on MY watch in MY locker rooms, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night not knowing if the problem had been dealt with.  Since Sandusky was still wandering around, that's pretty strong evidence something was amiss.

There's a long tradition in collegiate sports to ignore or willfully self-delude or even cover-up in order to protect student athletes.  Rape, especially, is a reprehensible problem at universities.

ESPN did a whole "Outside the Lines" on JoePa covering for assaults among his players.  Joe adamantly defended that it hadn't happened and he hadn't heard, and ESPN kept telling him it happened, but he was uninterested in investigating himself.

Ignorance was plausible deniability.   It wasn't until he was forced to see what happened that he kicked two players off the team.

So when we know for a fact that Joe reported up the chain the rape, and didn't follow-up, most of us aren't saying he did something illegal.  But he sure as hell did something reprehensible and morally indefensible.  Joe gets attacked for that reason, and because he is defended so adamantly by people who say he did nothing wrong.  He might not have done anything illegal, but you sure as shiat know that if it was HIS kid or grandkid in that locker room with Sandusky, Joe wouldn't have just gone with a "fire and forget" report and hope he wasn't confronted with it again.

THAT is why I find him detestable.  There were kids, hoping that somehow, somewhere, someone, God, anyone, would save them.  The pain, humiliation, and fear were dominating their lives, desperate for salvation.  Joe heard at least one cry for help, and did the absofarkinglutely minimum to satisfy the legal requirements to cover his own ass and that's it.

We need fewer of those guys in this world, and we sure as hell don't need to be worshipping their likenesses.
2013-02-10 06:58:36 PM
3 votes:

gimmegimme: Wait...so are we no longer mad at Joe Paterno for facilitating child rape for over a decade?


No, I still want to blow up the stadium. The anger I felt over this was so intense I had to let it go. It was getting to my health. This is starting to boil it back up again.

I wish Anonymous would have gotten involved. It seems like something they'd take up. Deface the PSU football website at a minimum. Cause disorder by threatening more serious consequences unless the season was cancelled. I can't believe those assholes got to make their football money after all of this. For the rest of my life I will discriminate against everything related to that school. I will not hire anyone who went there. I will not be friends with anyone who went there. It might not be fair to everyone, but something has to come in and level some consequences. The student body rioted in support of child molestation. This story came out and the only thing they cared about was "Will this damage our ability to recruit, resulting in us winning fewer football games?" I know a few students went against that, but all of the alumni will try to pretend they were in that small group, so I'm not going to buy it. Brand them.
2013-02-10 05:48:57 PM
3 votes:

FloydA: Dear everyone involved in this whole sordid affair;

The longer you keep bringing this up, the worse you look.  There is absolutely no chance that public opinion will change and people will suddenly start thinking "hey, covering up child rape isn't so bad."  It is not going to happen.  The sooner you stop calling attention to yourselves, the sooner people will move on to the next scandal and you can begin shifting attention back to football.


This. Paterno's dead, and his complicity is a matter of record. Attempting to smear the living to "protect the reputation" of a dead man is not just stupid, but also makes the dead man's reputation look that much worse as a result. Paterno humped a bunk (pun intended) dealing with Sandusky, as did the rest of the asshats busily trying to "protect the reputation" of themselves, the school, and all that friggin' football money.

Haven't you folks learned yet that "protecting the reputation" is what keeps getting you into deeper and deeper shiat? Shut up, deal with the situation, and move on.
2013-02-10 05:23:46 PM
3 votes:

js34603: I'll stick with the Freeh report that Penn State paid someone to write on their behalf. You can trust them, they'd never cover anything up.


Wouldn't it be in PSU's best interests to release a report that absolved Paterno (and others) from blame and tried to ignore the idea that high-level administrators knew what was going on?

If anything, I would think PSU would love to have a report similar to this one that said Paterno did nothing wrong and he's still a great guy.
2013-02-10 04:22:04 PM
3 votes:
More sour grapes. All the adults involved in this scandal want you to believe they're victims too.
2013-02-11 01:23:42 PM
2 votes:

Champion of the Sun: Seems like JoePa is the one getting all the heat.  And the governor who was AG while this was going down isn't getting too much attention.  The board of trustees are somehow forever blameless too. The police investigating the 1998 incident are given a pass.  The prosecutor is given a pass.  The coach who witnessed a child rape and didn't intervene is give a pass.  The janitor who witnessed a different rape is getting a pass.  No one has accountability here except JoePa and the kids playing football there a decade after the fact


We (fark) had that conversation and came to the uncontroversial unanimous conclusion that everyone else involved is a scumbag. What, you want MORE preaching to the choir about how they're all douches? There is only ONE person involved in ALL of this who consistently attracts defenders, and that's why he "seems" to get all the heat. He's not. They all get heat. He's the only one with people rushing forward to provide ceramic tiling.
2013-02-11 12:00:42 PM
2 votes:

justtray: As a last parting gift on this topic I leave the quote from someone else who judged in haste, and has now changed their mind;

"When I later took the time to do so, I was surprised to learn that the alarming allegations, which so disturbed the nation, were essentially theories and assertions rather than solid charges backed by solid evidence," Knight said in a 280-word statement provided to "Outside the Lines" by his wife, Penny. "On reflection, I may have unintentionally contributed to a rush to judgment." - Phil Knight

A lot of people on fark are in exactly the same postion he was, and should be incredibly ashamed of themselves. Not that anyone here has any remorse for their ignorance.


You must be joking.  A report paid for by the Paterno family has found that amazingly JP did no wrong.  Wow.  How.  Shocking.  I also love how the fake report points to a glaring error that Freeh didn't talk to Paterno, when the ONLY REASON Paterno wasn't interviewed by Freeh was because he refused to do so.

Look, Sandusky was investigated for showing with a young boy in 1998.  Sandusky full admits to showering with the boy and then resigns in 1999.  If ANYONE is going to tell me that JoPa didn't know why his Assistant Coach was being investigated for...and why the sicko had to resign...you are 100% completely FOS.  You are telling me the guy has the facility and the ability to hand pick the replacement AD, but he isn't told that Sandusky was farking around with kids?  Get a clue.

TWO YEARS LATER McQueary tells JoPa about the 2nd shower incident.  Not the first, the SECOND incident.  By the way, when the Sicko resigned in '99, JoPa supported allowing Sandusky full access to the athletic facilities, including keys.  So not only did he cover for him, he also gives the pedo access to the SAME farkING FACILITY WHERE ITS HAPPENED BEFORE!!!

Look in the mirror jackass...that's what the face of being ashamed looks like.
2013-02-11 10:36:42 AM
2 votes:

DaintySavage: McQueary is a large man who saw Sandusky sodomizing a boy. He didn't say a word or attempt to intervene. He went to his dads house and talked to him about it. Neither contacted the police.


I doubt anyone here who is attacking Joe is defending McQueary.  McQ did as much as Joe did, followed the same laws and procedures.  If one attacks McQ, it is on a moral basis.  While it is fully deserved, it also ruins the defense that Joe followed procedure and should therefore be left alone.

There is a qualitative difference, of course, between witnessing the rape and merely being informed of it.  But so, too, is there a qualitative difference between being an assistant coach and being one of the most powerful men in the state.  They were not equally vulnerable in their jobs and they were not equally credible when it comes to any accusation that the institution engaged in retaliation and cover-up.

And there's certainly a difference between who is getting all the defending.
2013-02-11 12:26:00 AM
2 votes:

schuylkill: gimmegimme: Champion of the Sun: jj325: I will not buy the idea that Joe Paterno was a "confused old man" in 2001.

He was 75 and there was a bunch of pressure on the university to fire him for being out of it.  They had a few bad seasons in a row there, most people attributed it to his old age.

Dude deserved to lose his legacy and all, but I don't see enough evidence to say the guy was part of a conspiracy to cover up the allegations.  His bosses, yeah without a doubt.  And McCreary was young and of a sound mind, why isn't he some huge pariah?  Cause he told his boss about it.  And his boss told his boss.  The main bosses covered it up, which the evidence clearly shows.

JoePa didn't call the police and tell them that Sandusky raped at least one boy in the shower.  He had several years to do so.  That's called a cover-up.

OH MY FARKING GOD!!!!! That's also called hearsay! He can't call the police as he didn't witness anything and what was supposedly told to him and what he understood is still not clear (besides what did McQueary actually see - that story has changed so many times). Mike McQueary should have been advised to go to the authorities by his father, Paterno, Curly and Schultz. The fact that it got up the to university president and then still nothing is a farking travesty. Even worse - they had a plan to go to the authorities and then someone went complete pussy and decided to handle the matter in house. Was Paterno complicit in a cover up? - Maybe, from reading  Posnanski's biography of Paterno, I get the feeling Paterno was a grumpy old man at that point in time whose only concern in life was holding on to the head coaching job. Does that excuse him, fark no. But the decisions made at that point in time also have to weigh on McQueary, Spanier, Curly, and Schultz. And let's not forget the BOT. Where the hell where they during all this? So spare me the "this is all Joe Paterno's fault". There is plenty of blame to go around...


Uh, people calling the cops don't have to worry about whether or not something was hearsay...that would be dumb.  If someone tells me "My friend killed his girlfriend", it would be perfectly fine for me to call the cops - in fact, it would be my moral obligation if no one else has.  The only people who have to worry about whether something was hearsay or not are the cops and the lawyers...but I'm pretty sure they would have gone to McQueary for his eye-witness statement to avoid that problem.
2013-02-11 12:22:11 AM
2 votes:

justtray: This is Fark, so facts have no meaning here (see George ZImmerman/Trayvon Martin), but let me just post the only thing that matters;

From the report: "No evidence exists that Paterno concealed critical information about Sandusky."

Please proceed with your regularly scheduled indignant, ignorant outrage, witch hunt.


except that report isn't about facts

that is the entire point of this thread
2013-02-10 09:38:00 PM
2 votes:

Champion of the Sun: LesserEvil: Amazed some people still defend Paterno

The only defense I'm making of him is that there's no proof he affirmatively covered up child rape.  Read all the comments here, people just throw that out there like it's gospel.  There's tons of doubt as to that.

I don't see why he would think the college would be hurt by Sandusky getting arrested at the time.  There's nothing but risk in covering up the abuse.  He doesn't want to hurt the college, so he does something that can only hurt the college?  There's no personal threat to him in Sandusky getting arrested.  I don't see much threat to the university or football program either.  He cares so much about the football program, that he takes the only course of action that could cause it danger?


Dude, if Paterno had run directly from his meeting with McQueary to the first TV camera he could find, shouting SANDUSKY IS A CHILD RAPIST AND MUST BE STOPPED!  GO ARREST HIM NOW!, then we would all have been calling him a hero.

Instead, he's a child rape facilitator who helped to cover up serial child rape for at least a decade.
2013-02-10 08:58:48 PM
2 votes:

SkittlesAreYum: puffy999: Champion of the Sun: And McCreary was young and of a sound mind, why isn't he some huge pariah?

To me, he's the one person who had the greatest chance to put a stop to all of this, and he didn't do it.

I mean, AFTER that event, and other events that eventually became more publicized, the administrators and AD and Paterno really, really blew it to a much grander degree. But all of it could have ended in that shower/locker room.

No, the administration had the greatest chance to stop it all, for two reasons.

1. It was going on long before McCreary witnessed anything. If it had stopped there, Sandusky would still have had access to victims from 1977 to 2001.

2. It can very intimidating being told by your boss not to involve yourself anymore. It doesn't excuse him, but it's more understandable. To Godwin this, it's like blaming those who were "just following orders" more than the Nazi leadership because they could have refused. It's true, and they should have, but the greater blame always lies with those in authority.


That fear and intimidation makes sense for McCreary.  But Paterno was the single most powerful man at Penn State.  He's not going to be intimidated by administrators who have more to fear from him than he has from them.  You may as well say that Kobe Bryant was intimidated by Michael Brown.
2013-02-10 08:48:52 PM
2 votes:

Champion of the Sun: something weird happening in the shower


Seriously, nobody in their right mind would hear that and not have warning bells going off.

Let's take an unassailable person... Mr. Rogers... you have heard he was in the shower with a young boy, something weird was happening in the shower... and you still think, perfectly innocent, it's Mr. Rogers.

Hell no. You think, WTF? Then you confront a person you've known since they PLAYED for PSU, the guy who was meant to be your replacement, until something "weird happened" in the shower with another boy 14 years earlier... if you've been deaf to all the rumors hovering around your buddy Jerry for the previous 20 years, you probably get a light flickering on...

One thing you do not do is play it down when you pass it on to your superiors, and henceforth ignore it, if you do not condone that sort of thing.

On the other hand, if you were aware your buddy had some "bad habits" that might affect your beloved football program and your legacy, should they ever see the light, you might rely on the same administration guys who covered it up before and hope it all blows over once more. Hell, that assessment is being generous, because there are a lot of worse possibilities that come to mind.

/Amazed some people still defend Paterno
2013-02-10 07:51:08 PM
2 votes:

Champion of the Sun: gimmegimme: JoePa didn't call the police and tell them that Sandusky raped at least one boy in the shower. He had several years to do so. That's called a cover-up.

He also didn't tell the police how long Sandusky's cock was either, because he didn't know any of those facts.  He told his bosses, they covered it up.  There's a chance he was in on the cover up, but there's no evidence of that.  A tiny shred of proof should be offered to back up the claim that he was involved in actively covering it up.  What they've shown is that two people did cover it up, and they referenced talking to him about the incident, and not the cover up.  They had two emails regarding the incident as proof of a cover up.  Every other piece of correspondence was lost due to a computer system error.

It's a huge jump in culpability from hearing about suspicious horseplay in the shower to being involved in a conspiracy to cover up child rape.


You're absolutely right.  If someone I trust tells me they saw my buddy raping a child, I'm immediately going to tell my boss and then completely forget about it after that.

//Come now; McQueary made it clear he saw rape, not just horseplay.
2013-02-10 07:35:52 PM
2 votes:

Champion of the Sun: jj325: I will not buy the idea that Joe Paterno was a "confused old man" in 2001.

He was 75 and there was a bunch of pressure on the university to fire him for being out of it.  They had a few bad seasons in a row there, most people attributed it to his old age.

Dude deserved to lose his legacy and all, but I don't see enough evidence to say the guy was part of a conspiracy to cover up the allegations.  His bosses, yeah without a doubt.  And McCreary was young and of a sound mind, why isn't he some huge pariah?  Cause he told his boss about it.  And his boss told his boss.  The main bosses covered it up, which the evidence clearly shows.


it's pretty clear they joepa among others told sandusky to go rape boys somewhere else.  hence the whole, no more using the facilities.  they knew, they didn't care.  fark 'em.
2013-02-10 07:35:31 PM
2 votes:

Champion of the Sun: My reading of the emails the article linked to showed that the President of the university wasn't comfortable with ratting on Sandusky, and wanted to keep it a private matter. JoePa asserted that he thought the university handled it. Seems like there's an agreement between the president and the AD, and JoePa was nominally involved.

There's a world of difference between confused old man who didn't do enough to report allegations and a conspirator covering up and aiding child rape.


How is that not horrific?  When you become aware someone in your employ is raping children, never is there a moment where you hand it off and consider it done, unless that hand-off is to the police and a DA.  There's never a moment where "my boss is handling it" is a valid exit from that situation.  We're not talking about a guy stealing money from the till or sleeping through his shift.

Informing your boss about a child rapist is a courtesy to allow them to mitigate damage to the university in the inevitable and awful aftermath.  It's not an appropriate action to wash your hands of the situation.  How illegal it is I leave to the legal system.  Ethically and morally, he's getting an appropriate shelling.
2013-02-10 06:52:23 PM
2 votes:

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: Paterno is just lucky that he's dead.  Imagine if he had lived and they tossed him in jail for five to ten.


That's why Paterno's family keeps trying to retcon his reputation. He's no longer alive, and they can't make bank on what remains of his legacy.
2013-02-10 04:59:03 PM
2 votes:
It's painfully obvious that Paterno was involved in a cover up. Anyone with half a brain can see that. Now, if they could prove that he had no knowledge of what exactly Sandusky was doing (meaning he didn't know that there was sexual assaults of children going on and basically saying he was an unwitting party to the cover up); I would be willing to give Paterno some benefit of the doubt (not a lot, but some). But the report comes off as a full denial of his involvement and knowledge of anything going on and I can not buy that for one second.
2013-02-10 04:52:02 PM
2 votes:
I'm shocked that a report commissioned by the family to clear the family's name was released and it turns out that it tries to clear the family's name.

Next up, George Lucas will be hiring someone to release a report on how episode one is actually awesome.
2013-02-10 04:36:45 PM
2 votes:

davidphogan: Peter von Nostrand: Joe ran cover for a pedo. No amount of reports attacking the people who investigated it will change that fact

I was thinking something similar.  If they're paid to clear Joe's name, I'm sure they can find questions to ask just like Alex Jones finds questions about 9/11 and Sandy Hook.  It doesn't mean they're the right questions to ask.


From the Paterno site's bio of their lead investigator Wick Sollers:


Wick Sollers is Managing Partner of the Washington, D.C., office and former Chair of King & Spalding's Special Matters & Governmental Investigations Practice Group. He has extensive experience defending accounting and government contract fraud cases, grand jury practice, criminal environmental, health care and FDA matters, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act cases, internal corporate investigations, representation before congressional committees, federal criminal trials and appeals, and general civil litigation.

Yeah, this guy looks legit. I trust him implicitly.
2013-02-10 04:35:36 PM
2 votes:
i.imgur.com

Yes, nothing like getting people who are heavily invested in a more favorable outcome for Penn State or Paterno to do a supposed 'independent investivation' which is nothing of the sort.

I'm completely surprised to hear the former governor open his statements by saying he "insists on an particular outcome" from his investigators... WTF? I bet he has absolutely no ties to Second Mile, too, right? ::crickets:: right?
2013-02-10 03:56:35 PM
2 votes:

Peter von Nostrand: Joe ran cover for a pedo. No amount of reports attacking the people who investigated it will change that fact


I was thinking something similar.  If they're paid to clear Joe's name, I'm sure they can find questions to ask just like Alex Jones finds questions about 9/11 and Sandy Hook.  It doesn't mean they're the right questions to ask.
2013-02-10 03:31:55 PM
2 votes:
If there's anyone that would be an authority on assholes, it would be the Paternos.
2013-02-11 03:50:52 PM
1 votes:

Champion of the Sun: ScreamingHangover: You actually believe the local police were investigating Penn State players and the head couch wasn't aware?

There's some pretty funny videos of reporters bringing up recent arrests and investigations, and he looks like he's totally lost and confused. One of the many reasons people were calling for his ouster in the early 2000s.  There's a lot of debate about how much coaching he actually did over his last decade.  He spent almost two seasons sitting in a press box without head phones on.  Not sure if you've ever talked to any people over 70, but I don't think he had total administrative control over that program in the last decade.  It's just too big an operation for someone that age to run.  Doesn't absolve him of anything, but if he couldn't keep track of his own players getting arrested, could he keep track of potential investigations that didn't result in arrests or charges?


So he was totally incompetent and useless, yet he couldn't be fired?
2013-02-11 03:49:33 PM
1 votes:

Champion of the Sun: ScreamingHangover: You actually believe the local police were investigating Penn State players and the head couch wasn't aware?

There's some pretty funny videos of reporters bringing up recent arrests and investigations, and he looks like he's totally lost and confused. One of the many reasons people were calling for his ouster in the early 2000s.  There's a lot of debate about how much coaching he actually did over his last decade.  He spent almost two seasons sitting in a press box without head phones on.  Not sure if you've ever talked to any people over 70, but I don't think he had total administrative control over that program in the last decade.  It's just too big an operation for someone that age to run.  Doesn't absolve him of anything, but if he couldn't keep track of his own players getting arrested, could he keep track of potential investigations that didn't result in arrests or charges?


So what you're saying is that Paterno and his players could pretty much do whatever they wanted, and if called on it, all he had to do was play dumb, and all was forgiven?
2013-02-11 02:56:50 PM
1 votes:

Champion of the Sun: He didn't know players of his were under investigation for assaults either. Didn't know that some had been arrested even. You're making an assertion with no basis in fact, just on the assumption that a guy involved in the football program is all knowing. You and I might have inquired into it. But there's no evidence he had. Kings often don't know what happens below them, and they don't give a shiat either.


You actually  believe the local police were investigating Penn State players and the head couch wasn't aware?

Just keep sticking your head further in the sand.

// although you're right about him not giving a shiat.
2013-02-11 01:14:11 PM
1 votes:

Champion of the Sun: Kings often don't know what happens below them, and they don't give a shiat either.


It's so telling that you are comparing a football coach to a King.  Honestly...you people are delusional idolizing nutjobs.

Free piece of advice...stay away from any Cult recruiting events...
2013-02-11 12:49:14 PM
1 votes:

Champion of the Sun: There's zero proof that JoePa knew in 1998, only circumstantial evidence that he may have known that there was a police investigation into something.  Not even what the investigation was.  If the police make no arrests and the prosecutor decides not to press any charges, how much thought is JoePa gonna give to the investigation after the fact?


Right.

It's completely plausible that a Head Football Coach with the connections and power that JoePa had (he farking hand-picked his boss FFS) wouldn't know that his Head Assistant Football coach was investigated by police and wouldn't ask "uh, hey, why's my Defensive Coordinator being taking to police HQ"....and they didn't tell him.  I'm sure that's exactly how it went down.

Stick your head back in the sand.
2013-02-11 12:12:11 PM
1 votes:

Coach_J: justtray: As a last parting gift on this topic I leave the quote from someone else who judged in haste, and has now changed their mind;

"When I later took the time to do so, I was surprised to learn that the alarming allegations, which so disturbed the nation, were essentially theories and assertions rather than solid charges backed by solid evidence," Knight said in a 280-word statement provided to "Outside the Lines" by his wife, Penny. "On reflection, I may have unintentionally contributed to a rush to judgment." - Phil Knight

A lot of people on fark are in exactly the same postion he was, and should be incredibly ashamed of themselves. Not that anyone here has any remorse for their ignorance.

You must be joking.  A report paid for by the Paterno family has found that amazingly JP did no wrong.  Wow.  How.  Shocking.  I also love how the fake report points to a glaring error that Freeh didn't talk to Paterno, when the ONLY REASON Paterno wasn't interviewed by Freeh was because he refused to do so.

Look, Sandusky was investigated for showing with a young boy in 1998.  Sandusky full admits to showering with the boy and then resigns in 1999.  If ANYONE is going to tell me that JoPa didn't know why his Assistant Coach was being investigated for...and why the sicko had to resign...you are 100% completely FOS.  You are telling me the guy has the facility and the ability to hand pick the replacement AD, but he isn't told that Sandusky was farking around with kids?  Get a clue.

TWO YEARS LATER McQueary tells JoPa about the 2nd shower incident.  Not the first, the SECOND incident.  By the way, when the Sicko resigned in '99, JoPa supported allowing Sandusky full access to the athletic facilities, including keys.  So not only did he cover for him, he also gives the pedo access to the SAME farkING FACILITY WHERE ITS HAPPENED BEFORE!!!

Look in the mirror jackass...that's what the face of being ashamed looks like.


cdn.head-fi.org
2013-02-11 12:09:58 PM
1 votes:
And there is on more nail in the coffin of that pedo-enabler.  If the Paterno family had ANY evidence worth a shiat that really cleared JoePa's name, they would be suing everything that isn't nailed down.

Read this article...make up your own mind.

"In the end, though, the "Critique" did little to nothing to suggest Paterno didn't know in 1998. The report brought to light no new facts. So, barring further evidence being uncovered during the criminal cases expected later this year, the Freeh conclusion remains the far most likely scenario. "

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--paterno-family-report-does-littl e- to-diminish-belief-coach-knew-of-first-sandusky-allegation-184221077.h tml
2013-02-11 11:46:46 AM
1 votes:

veedeevadeevoodee: [67.18.219.83 image 800x477]


Sorry, but this shot always makes me think the following:

Two football players, running hard: "Hey Coach Paterno, wait up -- Sandusky's in the shower right now raping a kid! Coach!"
Paterno: "Taxi!"
2013-02-11 11:17:29 AM
1 votes:

justtray: As a last parting gift on this topic I leave the quote from someone else who judged in haste, and has now changed their mind;

"When I later took the time to do so, I was surprised to learn that the alarming allegations, which so disturbed the nation, were essentially theories and assertions rather than solid charges backed by solid evidence," Knight said in a 280-word statement provided to "Outside the Lines" by his wife, Penny. "On reflection, I may have unintentionally contributed to a rush to judgment." - Phil Knight

A lot of people on fark are in exactly the same postion he was, and should be incredibly ashamed of themselves. Not that anyone here has any remorse for their ignorance.


Phil Knight made no rush to judgement, he was a speaker at Paterno's funeral a longtime friend and vocal defender from the get go.  Any attempt he's now making to suggest that he judged Paterno too harshly is a lie, and his opinion is as worthless and biased as Jay Paterno's.
2013-02-11 10:53:37 AM
1 votes:

Yanks_RSJ: The best thing the Paterno family can do is disappear into State College where they are still revered and stop trying to convince the world outside of that insular cult-like bubble of anything.  We're not having it.  Go away.


This.  They could have actual video evidence of JooooeeeeeeePaaaaaaaaa doing a piss-poor job of pleading ignorance of child rape ("A man with a boy...I for to did not understand this, for who forsooth has heard of such"), and these shiatstains would still worship the ground he walked on for eternity. Oh, wait, that video exists, and JoooeeeePaaaa is a shiatstain on the ass of humanity.
2013-02-11 10:38:30 AM
1 votes:
The best thing the Paterno family can do is disappear into State College where they are still revered and stop trying to convince the world outside of that insular cult-like bubble of anything.  We're not having it.  Go away.
2013-02-11 10:26:28 AM
1 votes:
If a coworker was sodomizing boys, do you tell your boss and then wash your hands of it? Or do you make sure that the SOB goes to jail?

DancingElkCondor: Anyone in the media who claims that Paterno will not win is a freaking idiot

www.pensacoladigest.com
2013-02-11 10:17:21 AM
1 votes:

iron_city_ap: They sound butthurt.


Of course they were butthurt, they were just kids and no lube was used.
2013-02-11 01:24:37 AM
1 votes:

justtray: "No evidence exists that Paterno concealed critical information about Sandusky."

The above is a factual statement.


You're making one carefully worded claim (note the weasel word "critical") and presenting that as "proof" exonerating Paterno of all wrongdoing.

Paterno admitted knowing about Sandusky's boy-raping,

Afterwards, Paterno kept Sandusky on the coaching staff.

After Sandusky retired, he was given a Penn State office and use of university facilities. Paterno supported this.

Your "factual statement" may be technically true. Another true statement is "Paterno knowingly protected and supported a child molester".
2013-02-11 12:56:26 AM
1 votes:

justtray: This is Fark, so facts have no meaning here (see George ZImmerman/Trayvon Martin), but let me just post the only thing that matters;

From the report: "No evidence exists that Paterno concealed critical information about Sandusky."

Please proceed with your regularly scheduled indignant, ignorant outrage, witch hunt.


Huh. I didn't know you could just go around declaring stuff and make it true.
2013-02-11 12:36:55 AM
1 votes:

justtray: This is Fark, so facts have no meaning here (see George ZImmerman/Trayvon Martin), but let me just post the only thing that matters;

From the report: "No evidence exists that Paterno concealed critical information about Sandusky."

Please proceed with your regularly scheduled indignant, ignorant outrage, witch hunt.


Now, hold on there a minute.  You're accepting as prima facie accurate a document put out by the family of the person whose name they're trying to clear?  You seem to normally have better judgment than that.  Would you take at face value an NRA document that stated, "No evidence exists that Assault Rifles exacerbate mass shootings"?  Of course not.  So why take this as being definitive?
2013-02-11 12:02:42 AM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Champion of the Sun: jj325: I will not buy the idea that Joe Paterno was a "confused old man" in 2001.

He was 75 and there was a bunch of pressure on the university to fire him for being out of it.  They had a few bad seasons in a row there, most people attributed it to his old age.

Dude deserved to lose his legacy and all, but I don't see enough evidence to say the guy was part of a conspiracy to cover up the allegations.  His bosses, yeah without a doubt.  And McCreary was young and of a sound mind, why isn't he some huge pariah?  Cause he told his boss about it.  And his boss told his boss.  The main bosses covered it up, which the evidence clearly shows.

JoePa didn't call the police and tell them that Sandusky raped at least one boy in the shower.  He had several years to do so.  That's called a cover-up.


OH MY FARKING GOD!!!!! That's also called hearsay! He can't call the police as he didn't witness anything and what was supposedly told to him and what he understood is still not clear (besides what did McQueary actually see - that story has changed so many times). Mike McQueary should have been advised to go to the authorities by his father, Paterno, Curly and Schultz. The fact that it got up the to university president and then still nothing is a farking travesty. Even worse - they had a plan to go to the authorities and then someone went complete pussy and decided to handle the matter in house. Was Paterno complicit in a cover up? - Maybe, from reading  Posnanski's biography of Paterno, I get the feeling Paterno was a grumpy old man at that point in time whose only concern in life was holding on to the head coaching job. Does that excuse him, fark no. But the decisions made at that point in time also have to weigh on McQueary, Spanier, Curly, and Schultz. And let's not forget the BOT. Where the hell where they during all this? So spare me the "this is all Joe Paterno's fault". There is plenty of blame to go around...
2013-02-10 10:11:21 PM
1 votes:

Somacandra: Peter von Nostrand: Joe ran cover for a pedo. No amount of reports attacking the people who investigated it will change that fact

That's the long and short of it. No amount of dressing up is going to polish that turd.


but but but Paterno was an incompetent moron who spoke to no one and sat in a darkened office when he wasn't on the sidelines for a game.  He had no influence at Penn State whatsoever and spent the last fifteen years of his coaching career doddling along like a geriatric Alzheimer's patient, just trying not to drool on himself.

Stop trying to rewrite history!
2013-02-10 10:06:23 PM
1 votes:

Peter von Nostrand: Joe ran cover for a pedo. No amount of reports attacking the people who investigated it will change that fact


That's the long and short of it. No amount of dressing up is going to polish that turd.
2013-02-10 09:47:08 PM
1 votes:
67.18.219.83
2013-02-10 09:17:11 PM
1 votes:

Champion of the Sun: I don't see why he would think the college would be hurt by Sandusky getting arrested at the time.


Well, the obvious is that mud spatters. Reporters are vultures, and sports pundits are worse... but we could think the worse... that Sandusky had leverage on Paterno that might have been exposed if he'd been put in front of a jury because Joe reported him; or we could simply assume that Paterno feared his light-handed tactics in dealing with his buddy might come to light, and it was too late to really do much more than try and remove access to school property (which they didn't do very well, at any rate).

I think it's silly to think Paterno had no motivation NOT to turn in a guy he knew for 35+ years, particularly when you are a high profile, "legendary" football coach that is idolized everywhere you go.

I find it incredibly hard to believe that Paterno had no clues about Sandusky's true nature, at any rate. Penn State students involved in athletics seemed to be somewhat aware that Jerry Sandusky was a weirdo to be avoided. It's very possible his crimes go back to his playing days, though he might have had an easier time hiding it back then (indeed, it probably emboldened him to expand his "play time" to PSU facilities and found Second Mile). It certainly IS possible that, as an assistant coach, Paterno might have been involved in some informal discipline of player Jerry Sandusky for some strange behavior with a young boy in 1964. Too many coaches in every sport, at every level, often are willing to overlook troubling behavior (including drug and alcohol abuse, PEDs, domestic abuse, fake girlfriends, etc...) because of their value to a program. We've already been made aware by former Penn State officials that Paterno insisted on handling all disciplinary actions 'internally' - which pretty much insures that we will never know the extent Paterno covered up crimes by other coaches and players in the program, and why his program looked so "clean" for decades.
2013-02-10 08:32:59 PM
1 votes:

RDixon: When did Penn State become a Catholic school?


Ha, ha, ha - LMAO - you're so cutting edge. You mean kids get abused by public school teachers, neighbors, and non-Catholic university officials and you didn't know? Wow, your comedy is so fresh and progressive,
Regardless of what Joe did Sandusky was bringing kids on campus, and to games, up until 2010. Even if he just heard rumors he had the power to keep Sandusky away. And he didn't.
2013-02-10 08:26:11 PM
1 votes:

Champion of the Sun: gimmegimme: It doesn't bother you that Sandusky was still hanging out in the luxury boxes until the day the scandal came out? You don't see that Paterno was part of the reason that Sandusky was still allowed to use the rape showers until the day the scandal came out? Sure, they had already asked Sandusky to go rape children somewhere else, but still.

Paterno knew that Sandusky had, as you admitted, engaged in at least some kind of sexual act with a child on campus and Paterno knew about the previous allegations. But Paterno did nothing other than tell his boss.

Someone alleged to Paterno that Sandusky did that.  If he was told the actual details of it, then yes.  But he was told something weird happened.  He told his bosses.  He always maintained that he didn't know what really happened.  It would be a safe assumption on his part to assume it was a misunderstanding after trusting the word of his bosses that they'd investigate it.  The fact that Sandusky was still around probably made Paterno think there was a simple misunderstanding.  If his bosses investigated it, with the university police, and let the guy hang around, safe to assume there was nothing to it.  Mcqueary is the one who actually saw the rape, and he didn't do anything about Sandusky hanging around the program for another decade.  Perhaps his silence reassured Paterno every time he looked crooked at Sandusky?


I just don't understand how you can look at the timeline and make a zillion excuse that allow you to believe that Joe Paterno, the mastermind of Penn State, had absolutely no idea about the serial child rapist on campus until the scandal came out.

The timeline.

Was Paterno willfully blind or stupid?  These are really the only options if you reject "a facilitator of child rape who covered it up for over a decade."
2013-02-10 08:15:19 PM
1 votes:
I was going to sub this earlier today, but I decided against it. Glad to see someone someone picked up where my lack of troll work left off.

This family and their "grandfather of morals" is about 25% as disturbing as the child-rape that took place. I certainly hope that the family of this coke-bottled lens wearing POS kid-farking enabler would get raped, dry, balls deep in the ass by the big black cack of justice.

These PSU and Paterno defenders are the sickest brand of human-being.
2013-02-10 08:11:53 PM
1 votes:

Champion of the Sun: ha-ha-guy: Lets see, the motive behind ordering the Freeh report was so the PSU Board of Trustees could get an idea on how bad of a situation they were in and react accordingly.

The trustees accepted it as gospel immediately upon being given it.  They wanted someone to blame besides the institution.  Once they had it in hand and it made the President, AD, and JoePa look bad they had what they wanted.  That's why the PA governor is suing over it.  The trustees wanted the issue over with as quick as possible instead of finding out the faults of the school and the administration.  Once they were given even a semblance of justification, they canned the people named and acted like perfectly innocent parties.  So they had much more reason to lie.

There's no benefit to the Paterno family outside of the restoration of his name.  They didn't stand to lose any money no matter how this turned out.  They're not liable for any civil suits and his pension and contract were ironclad.  I don't think there's any lasting sponsorship money the family would've been interested.  They spent their money to clear his name for no pecuniary gain.


It doesn't bother you that Sandusky was still hanging out in the luxury boxes until the day the scandal came out?  You don't see that Paterno was part of the reason that Sandusky was still allowed to use the rape showers until the day the scandal came out?  Sure, they had already asked Sandusky to go rape children somewhere else, but still.

Paterno knew that Sandusky had, as you admitted, engaged in at least some kind of sexual act with a child on campus and Paterno knew about the previous allegations.  But Paterno did nothing other than tell his boss.

And aren't you sickened that Paterno was able to make all of those millions even though he was facilitating child rape all those years?  It's not "blood money," but it's something close.
2013-02-10 08:01:14 PM
1 votes:

Champion of the Sun: gimmegimme: Come now; McQueary made it clear he saw rape, not just horseplay.

He made it clear to the grand jury, but not Paterno.  He didn't want to upset Paterno so he told him something of a sexual nature was happening.

He said he did not give Paterno explicit details of what he believed he'd seen, saying he wouldn't have used terms like sodomy or anal intercourse out of respect for the longtime coach.

I don't want to defend JoePa, but labeling him as a conspirator in the cover up of child rape is a big allegation to make when there's no proof he did that.


I guess you're right.  If someone told me that my buddy was doing "something of a sexual nature" to a young boy, I would tell my boss and then completely forget about it without asking another question ever.
2013-02-10 07:52:40 PM
1 votes:
Lets see, the motive behind ordering the Freeh report was so the PSU Board of Trustees could get an idea on how bad of a situation they were in and react accordingly.

This report was tailor made at the request of the Paterno clan to clear Joe's name.

I'm sure that this one is much more accurate and trustworthy.
2013-02-10 07:40:04 PM
1 votes:

Champion of the Sun: jj325: I will not buy the idea that Joe Paterno was a "confused old man" in 2001.

He was 75 and there was a bunch of pressure on the university to fire him for being out of it.  They had a few bad seasons in a row there, most people attributed it to his old age.

Dude deserved to lose his legacy and all, but I don't see enough evidence to say the guy was part of a conspiracy to cover up the allegations.  His bosses, yeah without a doubt.  And McCreary was young and of a sound mind, why isn't he some huge pariah?  Cause he told his boss about it.  And his boss told his boss.  The main bosses covered it up, which the evidence clearly shows.


JoePa didn't call the police and tell them that Sandusky raped at least one boy in the shower.  He had several years to do so.  That's called a cover-up.
2013-02-10 07:37:14 PM
1 votes:

Champion of the Sun: And McCreary was young and of a sound mind, why isn't he some huge pariah?


To me, he's the one person who had the greatest chance to put a stop to all of this, and he didn't do it.

I mean, AFTER that event, and other events that eventually became more publicized, the administrators and AD and Paterno really, really blew it to a much grander degree. But all of it could have ended in that shower/locker room.
2013-02-10 07:29:15 PM
1 votes:

jj325: I will not buy the idea that Joe Paterno was a "confused old man" in 2001.


He was 75 and there was a bunch of pressure on the university to fire him for being out of it.  They had a few bad seasons in a row there, most people attributed it to his old age.

Dude deserved to lose his legacy and all, but I don't see enough evidence to say the guy was part of a conspiracy to cover up the allegations.  His bosses, yeah without a doubt.  And McCreary was young and of a sound mind, why isn't he some huge pariah?  Cause he told his boss about it.  And his boss told his boss.  The main bosses covered it up, which the evidence clearly shows.
2013-02-10 07:22:46 PM
1 votes:
Champion of the Sun:
There's a world of difference between confused old man who didn't do enough to report allegations and a conspirator covering up and aiding child rape.

I will not buy the idea that Joe Paterno was a "confused old man" in 2001.
2013-02-10 07:12:01 PM
1 votes:

gimmegimme: Wait...so are we no longer mad at Joe Paterno for facilitating child rape for over a decade?


nope, still mad.  fark that guy.  fark penn state for playing football this year.
2013-02-10 07:04:03 PM
1 votes:

Tommy Moo: gimmegimme: Wait...so are we no longer mad at Joe Paterno for facilitating child rape for over a decade?

No, I still want to blow up the stadium. The anger I felt over this was so intense I had to let it go. It was getting to my health. This is starting to boil it back up again.

I wish Anonymous would have gotten involved. It seems like something they'd take up. Deface the PSU football website at a minimum. Cause disorder by threatening more serious consequences unless the season was cancelled. I can't believe those assholes got to make their football money after all of this. For the rest of my life I will discriminate against everything related to that school. I will not hire anyone who went there. I will not be friends with anyone who went there. It might not be fair to everyone, but something has to come in and level some consequences. The student body rioted in support of child molestation. This story came out and the only thing they cared about was "Will this damage our ability to recruit, resulting in us winning fewer football games?" I know a few students went against that, but all of the alumni will try to pretend they were in that small group, so I'm not going to buy it. Brand them.


Calm down, friend.  I don't want to put words in the mouths of other farkers, but some seem to be saying that the overwhelming evidence proves that Paterno facilitated child rape for over a decade.  Therefore, Joe Paterno didn't facilitate child rape.
2013-02-10 06:49:29 PM
1 votes:
Wait...so are we no longer mad at Joe Paterno for facilitating child rape for over a decade?
2013-02-10 06:39:08 PM
1 votes:
JoePa went from doing nothing about it after hearing the allegation to actively covering it up.  I'm not sure where the proof was that JoePa did that.

Doing nothing is pretty damnable, but I'd want the record clear that he didn't actively cover it up if I were the Paternos.

My reading of the emails the article linked to showed that the President of the university wasn't comfortable with ratting on Sandusky, and wanted to keep it a private matter.  JoePa asserted that he thought the university handled it.  Seems like there's an agreement between the president and the AD, and JoePa was nominally involved.

There's a world of difference between confused old man who didn't do enough to report allegations and a conspirator covering up and aiding child rape.

And there's nothing worse than your friend who is an attorney trying to clear your name as a child rape enabler.  What a monster.
2013-02-10 06:38:25 PM
1 votes:
I still think the school should be on the hook for a much larger bill and a TV ban*, BUT should be eligible for non-BCS bowls and lose no scholarships.

*for the regular season, so if they make it to a bowl game, let them be on TV

/this would have punished people who had something to MAKE off of this school's football team, and punished the school/team financially without hammering the players
2013-02-10 06:29:31 PM
1 votes:
Paterno is just lucky that he's dead.  Imagine if he had lived and they tossed him in jail for five to ten.
2013-02-10 05:09:49 PM
1 votes:
Well, I personally refuse to believe anything in this report. After all it was prepared on behalf of Paterno's family by someone they paid! How can you trust that?

I'll stick with the Freeh report that Penn State paid someone to write on their behalf. You can trust them, they'd never cover anything up.
2013-02-10 04:44:37 PM
1 votes:

ScreamingHangover: davidphogan: Peter von Nostrand: Joe ran cover for a pedo. No amount of reports attacking the people who investigated it will change that fact

I was thinking something similar.  If they're paid to clear Joe's name, I'm sure they can find questions to ask just like Alex Jones finds questions about 9/11 and Sandy Hook.  It doesn't mean they're the right questions to ask.

From the Paterno site's bio of their lead investigator Wick Sollers:


Wick Sollers is Managing Partner of the Washington, D.C., office and former Chair of King & Spalding's Special Matters & Governmental Investigations Practice Group. He has extensive experience defending accounting and government contract fraud cases, grand jury practice, criminal environmental, health care and FDA matters, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act cases, internal corporate investigations, representation before congressional committees, federal criminal trials and appeals, and general civil litigation.
Yeah, this guy looks legit. I trust him implicitly.


Sounds like just the guy to defend the LAPD for shooting up those pickups.

This guy Wick is a close family friend and represented Paterno form the start of this mess...

http://deadspin.com/wick-sollers/

cache.deadspin.com

Nope, no conflict of interest there... completely independent!!
2013-02-10 04:39:55 PM
1 votes:
In other news, chickens in central PA have been placed on high alert.
2013-02-10 03:29:06 PM
1 votes:
img.photobucket.com
2013-02-10 01:16:52 PM
1 votes:
In other news, the oil industry releases report that rips investigator Michael Mann a new asshole.
 
Displayed 67 of 67 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report