Jump to content
IGNORED

Joe Paterno and Penn State


dhanson
 Share

Note: This thread is 3346 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Originally Posted by Kapanda

No, I've read several opeds on it.

FWIW, googled "did paterno lie" and got one blog entry on how he may or may have not forgotten about a telephone conversation.

Seriously?!?!

Perhaps that's the reason that you think everyone is piling on Paterno.  Read the Freeh report and see why there aren't many dissenting opinions.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by Kapanda

You have a blatant inherent bias on this issue. I read as far as "if Paterno is so innocent".

No one here is yet to make a claim that Pa is innocent

That's obviously your issue right there. You have a blatant lack of interest in facts.

Originally Posted by Kapanda

I might look at the key findings later (should be working). But there was nothing there I wasn't aware of. Except the name of the building. I'll stress again, no denying that what Paterno did was inherently and deeply immoral. I am in no way even insinuating otherwise. And the corruption of the programme is also evident. I agree with that too.

What I don't agree with is any insinuation that Paterno is as guilty as Sandusky.

As guilty as Sandusky - no . Sharing responsibility in what happened by actively covering it up, which is not only a crime but completely immoral? Absolutely, 100% yes. Period.

I have no bias in any case. I read facts, I have morals and zero tolerance for child abuse or abuse towards women, and that's all. If you're guilty of doing it, or covering it up, you're a piece of garbage and that's all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I get your position, it's not uncommon but consider this.  Our society is filled with sick people like Sandusky (and worse) that won't stop committing crimes against others in society unless someone stops them.  The sick and demented aren't likely to turn themselves in, so it's left to the rest of us to protect each other and our children from these animals.  If we all turn our back or even worse, do what Paterno did and help cover up and protect Sandusky from being brought to justice for his own selfish reasons, how civilized a society will we be?

Do you really want to raise a child in a society where the sick and demented run loose because no one wants to take action?   I've seen some horrible videos taken in other countries where a child is run over and left in the middle of the street crying while people walk past and other motorists drive over her, is that the type of place you want to live in?  If not, people like Paterno, who participated in a coverup of Sandusky's heinous acts, have to answer for their part in allowing him to remain free to hurt others.

Originally Posted by Kapanda

Not even close. Immoral, but not nearly as culpable as the person who did set me on fire. But I agree with your last paragraph.

And the whole internet is up in arms about Joe Pa. I have not read one Pa-favourable oped yet. It's pretty safe to assume that the authors I read on would dig the worst on Paterno they could find.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by Mr3Wiggle

I've never said that.  I really don't know of many people that are saying that.  It's clear that Paterno was a key enabler for Sandusky.  It's clear that PSU was more worried about it's football program than preventing/stopping child rape in it's facilities.  It's clear that a good amount of the student body at PSU still doesn't get it, and continues to blindly worship Paterno while they make themselves the victims.

Yeah, that comment wasn't aimed at you. It was a general remark given the heat I'm taking on this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by newtogolf

I get your position, it's not uncommon but consider this.  Our society is filled with sick people like Sandusky (and worse) that won't stop committing crimes against others in society unless someone stops them.  The sick and demented aren't likely to turn themselves in, so it's left to the rest of us to protect each other and our children from these animals.  If we all turn our back or even worse, do what Paterno did and help cover up and protect Sandusky from being brought to justice for his own selfish reasons, how civilized a society will we be?

Do you really want to raise a child in a society where the sick and demented run loose because no one wants to take action?   I've seen some horrible videos taken in other countries where a child is run over and left in the middle of the street crying while people walk past and other motorists drive over her, is that the type of place you want to live in?  If not, people like Paterno, who participated in a coverup of Sandusky's heinous acts, have to answer for their part in allowing him to remain free to hurt others.

Yeah, we are in full agreement here! Paterno was a coward. I've acted cowardly before and I hate it. I will teach my kids to do what is right all the time, regardless of personal consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by Kapanda

I might look at the key findings later (should be working). But there was nothing there I wasn't aware of. Except the name of the building. I'll stress again, no denying that what Paterno did was inherently and deeply immoral. I am in no way even insinuating otherwise. And the corruption of the programme is also evident. I agree with that too.

What I don't agree with is any insinuation that Paterno is as guilty as Sandusky.

Paterno IS as guilty as Sandusky, but he is guilty of different things than Sandusky. But without Paterno's connivance at least some of those boys would not have been raped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Bob Ryan had in interesting take in The Boston Globe this morning. There's a paywall so I can't link to it, but I've got a subscription so here are some excerpts: [QUOTE]Why do I think the football program should cease functioning for a minimum of two years? It’s very simple. Penn State University needs to demonstrate to the rest of us it knows why it exists. And by not addressing the topic, these people are saying that the reason Penn State exists is to enjoy seven or eight festive Saturdays each autumn, plus whatever relevant or irrelevant bowl games might follow. Is that so hard to comprehend? Let’s back up a bit. I come to you as someone who has been following college sports for 60 years...[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]I’ve had the benefit of exposure to a world essentially unknown to people in New England. I understand the passions and the great rivalries of college sports. Most people in New England do not, and Harvard me no Yales. It’s not the same. The last New England rivalry that even remotely approached the irrational fervor of the big national affairs was probably BC-Holy Cross... ...I love college sports. But I like to think I know where to draw the line.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]To make a long story short, Pennsylvania State University had been transformed into Joe Paterno U. Presidents cowered in his presence. The Board of Trustees was told where to go when it requested he retire. He should have retired at 70. He didn’t. He should have retired at 75. He didn’t. He should have retired at 80. He didn’t. To the absolute bitter end he thought he could control his own destiny. He was removed, kicking and screaming, upset that he could not finish the 2011 season. He was the living embodiment of Lord Acton’s famous pronouncement that “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” I repeat, Penn State needs to shut it down for two years. The school needs to rethink why it exists. But Penn State has provided a service for the other athletically corrupted behemoths of college sports. Penn State has given the world a How-Not-To. Let’s see if anyone has been taking notes.[/QUOTE] Not sure how much of it I agree with, but it's well written and thought out. I like the idea of reinforcing that universities are universities and not football player machines, but I don't know if shutting down the program is the right way to go.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by turtleback

Paterno IS as guilty as Sandusky, but he is guilty of different things than Sandusky. But without Paterno's connivance at least some of those boys would not have been raped.

semantics

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by jamo

Bob Ryan had in interesting take in The Boston Globe this morning. There's a paywall so I can't link to it, but I've got a subscription so here are some excerpts:

Not sure how much of it I agree with, but it's well written and thought out. I like the idea of reinforcing that universities are universities and not football player machines, but I don't know if shutting down the program is the right way to go.

Easily agreeable to in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Too bad it's not true, take a look at the Top 20 NCAA football programs and the money they earn for their universities.  Sorry but academics and ladies field hockey aren't keeping the doors open at these schools, football is.   Is it any wonder why some people argue these kids should be paid when you look at the profits they generate for their schools?

Rank School Revenue Expenses Profit
1 University of Texas (Football) $93,942,815 $25,112,331 $68,830,484
2 Univ. of Georgia (Football) $70,838,539 $18,308,654 $52,529,885
3 Penn State Univ. (Football) $70,208,584 $19,780,939 $50,427,645
4 Univ. of Michigan (Football) $63,189,417 $18,328,233 $44,861,184
5 Univ. of Florida (Football) $68,715,750 $24,457,557 $44,258,193
6 Louisiana State Univ. (Football) $68,819,806 $25,566,520 $43,253,286
7 Univ. of Alabama (Football) $71,884,525 $31,118,134 $40,766,391
8 Univ. of Tennessee (Football) $56,593,946 $17,357,345 $39,236,601
9 Auburn Univ. (Football) $66,162,720 $27,911,713 $38,251,007
10 University of Oklahoma (Football) $58,295,888 $20,150,769 $38,145,119
11 Univ. of South Carolina (Football) $58,266,159 $22,794,211 $35,471,948
12 Notre Dame (Football) $64,163,063 $29,490,788 $34,672,275
13 University of Nebraska (Football) $49,928,228 $17,843,849 $32,084,379
14 Ohio State Univ. (Football) $63,750,000 $31,763,036 $31,986,964
15 Univ. of Iowa (Football) $45,854,764 $18,468,732 $27,386,032
16 Michigan State Univ. (Football) $44,462,659 $17,468,458 $26,994,201
17 Univ. of Arkansas (Football) $48,524,244 $22,005,104 $26,519,140
18 Texas A&M; (Football) $41,915,428 $16,599,798 $25,315,630
19 Univ. of Kentucky (Football) $31,890,572 $13,905,724 $17,984,848
20 Oklahoma State (Football) $32,787,498 $15,479,410 $17,308,088

Originally Posted by jamo

I like the idea of reinforcing that universities are universities and not football player machines, but I don't know if shutting down the program is the right way to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by turtleback

Paterno IS as guilty as Sandusky, but he is guilty of different things than Sandusky. But without Paterno's connivance at least some of those boys would not have been raped.

Originally Posted by Kapanda

semantics

It's not semantics.  It's law.  If he were alive, he'd probably be charged with obstruction of justice, perjury and conspiracy.

He lied to a grand jury.

He conspired with others to conceal crimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by bwdial

It's not semantics.  It's law.  If he were alive, he'd probably be charged with obstruction of justice, perjury and conspiracy.

He lied to a grand jury.

He conspired with others to conceal crimes.

That's not what I've been talking about here. I'm not really versed on American law - or any law for that matter.

However, those may have been the charges, but it is by no means a foregone conclusion that he certainly lied and cospired for concealment of crimes - so no saying right now whether he would've been found guilty or not. All we can tell is that he failed to act on moral grounds.

The evidence that is out there on him possibly lying is that he may or may not have forgotten about a phone conversation, and on conspiration for concealment... Freeh only goes as far as saying that he had plenty of opportunities to blow the whistle and didn't. Even Freeh doesn't go as far as saying that he conspired to conceal crimes.

Freeh does use the word "cover up" but in terms of not disclosing information, and not in terms of hiding information.

I did learn that - thanks to Mr3Wiggle's link - he failed to adhere to the Clery Act. But I did not see any conclusive evidence that he lied or conspired to conceal crimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by Kapanda

That's not what I've been talking about here. I'm not really versed on American law - or any law for that matter.

However, those may have been the charges, but it is by no means a foregone conclusion that he certainly lied and cospired for concealment of crimes - so no saying right now whether he would've been found guilty or not. All we can tell is that he failed to act on moral grounds.

The evidence that is out there on him possibly lying is that he may or may not have forgotten about a phone conversation, and on conspiration for concealment... Freeh only goes as far as saying that he had plenty of opportunities to blow the whistle and didn't. Even Freeh doesn't go as far as saying that he conspired to conceal crimes.

Freeh does use the word "cover up" but in terms of not disclosing information, and not in terms of hiding information.

I did learn that - thanks to Mr3Wiggle's link - he failed to adhere to the Clery Act. But I did not see any conclusive evidence that he lied or conspired to conceal crimes.

Wow.  Just, wow...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Originally Posted by Kapanda

That's not what I've been talking about here. I'm not really versed on American law - or any law for that matter.

However, those may have been the charges, but it is by no means a foregone conclusion that he certainly lied and cospired for concealment of crimes - so no saying right now whether he would've been found guilty or not. All we can tell is that he failed to act on moral grounds.

The evidence that is out there on him possibly lying is that he may or may not have forgotten about a phone conversation, and on conspiration for concealment... Freeh only goes as far as saying that he had plenty of opportunities to blow the whistle and didn't. Even Freeh doesn't go as far as saying that he conspired to conceal crimes.

Freeh does use the word "cover up" but in terms of not disclosing information, and not in terms of hiding information.

I did learn that - thanks to Mr3Wiggle's link - he failed to adhere to the Clery Act. But I did not see any conclusive evidence that he lied or conspired to conceal crimes.

So... what was the "cover-up" referring to?  Sue Paterno's meatloaf recipe?

You've already admitted not knowing much about American law, so I'll break this down for you... Paterno - and the others - were required by law to report what they knew about the crimes committed by Sandusky.  Period.  The Clery Act was violated, but so too was Pennsylvania state law.

The fact that they discussed the crimes and then failed to report them, makes it conspiracy.

The Freeh report also states that Joe Paterno did lie to a grand jury when he claimed that he didn't know anything about Sandusky molesting the boy in 1998.  Written correspondence proves otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by Kapanda

Freeh does use the word "cover up" but in terms of not disclosing information, and not in terms of hiding information.

I did learn that - thanks to Mr3Wiggle's link - he failed to adhere to the Clery Act. But I did not see any conclusive evidence that he lied or conspired to conceal crimes.

When you have an affirmative legal obligation to reveal information and you don't, then you are hiding information.

The only one playing with semantics here is you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by turtleback

When you have an affirmative legal obligation to reveal information and you don't, then you are hiding information.

The only one playing with semantics here is you.

Semantics in that I was not really talking about the letter of the law. I don't know it. I've been talking intent and culpability - and for the most part, so was everyone else.

There's been insinuation here that Joe Pa is as guilty as Sandusky on molesting the kids! So is he "as guilty, but guilty of another crime".. maybe, I'm not a lawyer. Is he nearly as culpable as Sandusky for the fact that this whole affair took place? Not even close. No Sandusky, no rape. No Joe Pa, still rape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Note: This thread is 3346 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Support TST Affiliates

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    Whoop
    SuperSpeed
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo and the code "iacasjun21" for 10% off SuperSpeed.
  • Posts

    • I would rather take #1.  On the slower greens I would mess up by leaving a lot of putts from the lower tier to the upper tier short. I like faster greens.
    • Well that’s really all we have to go by at this point. Anything can happen and is certainly seen in golf. Sergio could go 0-5, Scheffler kills it, hell who knows. Aside from Poulter and Garcia, I like the Euro guys. I really want to see Spieth do well. Stricker a bore but I’m sure he’s a good guy from the general Tour and media talk. 
    • Certainly looks like some inexpensive cast knock-off heads from Asia. Same mold used for a number of manufacturers. Don't think you'll learn much about these,
    • Does it tell you a specific manufacturer’s ball?  I know Ping doesn’t sell a ball but I wouldn’t want to be steering people to the competitors website where clubs might catch their eye.
    • I also think way too much is being made of the American on-paper strength. In a span of of 3 days every single one if the 12 players is capable of getting hot. Time and again team sports has proven to teach individual prima-donnas thumping lessons. I am glad Stricker is at a helm. He seems to have a level head. Hope he keeps the US group grounded.  EDIT: IMHO the hotter putting team has the advantage.
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. goofi22
      goofi22
      (43 years old)
    2. HackardLaw
      HackardLaw
      (38 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...