Manhattan Buckeye;967385 wrote:I don't think he's going to face criminal charges, he's too old and too senile. What good would it do? He's out, that's enough.

or he didn't break any laws but lets not let that get in the way of anything...

Skyhook79;967405 wrote:or he didn't break any laws but lets not let that get in the way of anything...

Perhaps not, but that doesn't mean he deserves to keep his job. Employers aren't bound to criminal laws.

Skyhook79;967298 wrote:He was told it was "something of a sexual nature" not contact WAS sexual. Big difference. I thought Lawyers loved to play with "open to interpretation" comments of statements in testimony and eye witness accounts?

GO READ THE GRAND JURY REPORT. This is what JOE PATERNO told the the Grand Jury under oath, "Sandusky was in the shower fondling AND doing something of a sexual nature TO a young boy."

BTW, McCleary under oath told the Grand Jury a much more graphic story. He said he, "Saw a naked boy whose age he estimated to be ten years old, with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky."

Both statements should make the most powerful man on the Penn State campus LIVID and make sure someone did something to stop Sandusky.

Big Gain;967454 wrote:GO READ THE GRAND JURY REPORT. This is what JOE PATERNO told the the Grand Jury under oath, "Sandusky was in the shower fondling AND doing something of a sexual nature TO a young boy."

BTW, McCleary under oath told the Grand Jury a much more graphic story. He said he, "Saw a naked boy whose age he estimated to be ten years old, with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky."

Both statements should make the most powerful man on the Penn State campus LIVID and make sure someone did something to stop Sandusky.

BUT somehow shouldn't make the person viewing with his eyes not take immediate action. You can say "READ THE REPORT" all you want. We've all read it. I'll agree that he was probably the biggest man in the Athletic Department, but no way was he above the president, Univ. Police, trustees....

I read something on CNN that stated that the AD informed that they had done "an internal investigation, and found no evidence of wrongdoing." At the end of the day, that's HIS boss and by being that, his word is trusted no matter who you are.

"I read something on CNN that stated that the AD informed that they had done "an internal investigation, and found no evidence of wrongdoing." At the end of the day, that's HIS boss and by being that, his word is trusted no matter who you are. "



The AD is fired.

bigkahuna;967466 wrote:BUT somehow shouldn't make the person viewing with his eyes not take immediate action. You can say "READ THE REPORT" all you want. We've all read it. I'll agree that he was probably the biggest man in the Athletic Department, but no way was he above the president, Univ. Police, trustees....

I read something on CNN that stated that the AD informed that they had done "an internal investigation, and found no evidence of wrongdoing." At the end of the day, that's HIS boss and by being that, his word is trusted no matter who you are.

I don't think anybody's disagreeing that McQueary clearly tucked his tail between his legs and ran off to daddy. He was chicken shit. But, he did tell his superior (JoePa), so as with JoePa, he's off the hook about it. He did the 'bare minimum' the law required of him. Not enough to actually help.

As for the internal investigation... why the hell was Sandusky banned from bringing children onto campus with him if they didn't find evidence of any wrongdoing? That seems questionable at best, and a 'cover-up and let's pray to God this never gets out' at worst by PSU big wigs.

Skyhook79;967298 wrote:He was told it was "something of a sexual nature" not contact WAS sexual. Big difference. I thought Lawyers loved to play with "open to interpretation" comments of statements in testimony and eye witness accounts?

Seriously? Please re-read what you posted. This is the most idiotic post I have ever read on this site.......and that is saying something. Congrats!

Terry_Tate;967300 wrote:Why people are still arguing with those vehemently defending Joe Pa is beyond me.

I quit responding to them on Tuesday. I realized that no matter what happens in their minds Joe Pa was right and everything that has happened to him was wrong.

I think when everything is revealed that a lot more than just PSU people are going to admit they were privy to the info that Sandusky was a pedophile. Guy is assistant coach of the year in 1998 (I believe) and likely on most ...colleges 'A list" for head coaching candidates. Suddenly he resigns/retires and nobody wants to touch him with a 10 foot pole as far as at least inquiring about him becoming their head coach? Something stinks in Denmark...

Fly4Fun;967319 wrote:Name one justifiable "something" that is of a sexual nature that is appropriate for a 60 year old man to be doing with a 10 year old child naked in a shower.

Anyone else still waiting to hear the golden response to this?

Paterno won't live long enough to need his attorney. Unfortunately this thing will drag out over the next 12 - 18 mos.

Manhattan Buckeye;967470 wrote:"I read something on CNN that stated that the AD informed that they had done "an internal investigation, and found no evidence of wrongdoing." At the end of the day, that's HIS boss and by being that, his word is trusted no matter who you are. "



The AD is fired.

http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/colleges/133340948.html?cmpid=15585797

As of Nov 7 he is on paid leave until after he has a chance to defend himself.
Do you have other info that says he was fired?

Penn St. will be bankrupt by the time this is over. Why would any of their big alumni give to that university knowing that their hard earned money will be just pissed away in law suit awards (the victims deserve every dollar they get)from now till eternity. Can you say hundreds of millions. Ask the Catholic church how fun that is.

rightfield;967620 wrote:Penn St. will be bankrupt by the time this is over. Why would any of their big alumni give to that university knowing that their hard earned money will be just pissed away in law suit awards (the victims deserve every dollar they get)from now till eternity. Can you say hundreds of millions. Ask the Catholic church how fun that is.

I bet the lawsuits are minimal. People are blowing this up to be something more than its not, maybe because their lives are boring and they need something to talk about. #Americansociety

Sykotyk;967481 wrote: He did the 'bare minimum' the law required of him.

He did 100% of the law that is required in Pennsylvania. No where in the Pennsylvania law does it say this is the "bare minimum" you have to do to be compliant. Did he go above and beyond the law? Maybe not but JoePa has already said "In hindsight, I should have done more" No one can ,for sure with 100% confidence, say what they would have done in the same circumstances.

Skyhook79;967647 wrote:He did 100% of the law that is required in Pennsylvania. No where in the Pennsylvania law does it say this is the "bare minimum" you have to do to be compliant. Did he go above and beyond the law? Maybe not but JoePa has already said "In hindsight, I should have done more" No one can ,for sure with 100% confidence, say what they would have done in the same circumstances.

Exactly. Now the Joe Pa knows the allegations were true, its easy to regret not doing more to stop it. At the time, he did what he was required to do by law, but it seems people don't want to create a law that you must call the police if you see any law being broken. If you don't, you are just as guilty as the person who committed the crime and deserve the same punishment.

Breaking the law is not the only way to get fired from a job. I don't think many disagree that he did what the law requires. That doesn't mean what he did was right.

So why did he get fired from his job? For following protocol outlined in his employment contract?

LOL

WebFire;967668 wrote: That doesn't mean what he did was right.

Um yes it does, otherwise he would be criminally charged. He was right to report to his superiors.

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: Dufoos, Paterno knew in 2002. READ THE GRAND JURY REPORT. NO ONE of any intellect is saying he broke a law. What's in question is his human decency, a moral compass, a concern for young boys. He admits he should have done more.

Big Gain;967680 wrote::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: Dufoos, Paterno knew in 2002. READ THE GRAND JURY REPORT. NO ONE of any intellect is saying he broke a law. What's in question is his human decency, a moral compass, a concern for young boys. He admits he should have done more.

His 61 years of service,charitable work etc... tells me he was concerned for young men. Who are you to question someone's moral compass? Thats why they don't prosecute "Morals" in a court of Law.

Manhattan Buckeye;967470 wrote:"I read something on CNN that stated that the AD informed that they had done "an internal investigation, and found no evidence of wrongdoing." At the end of the day, that's HIS boss and by being that, his word is trusted no matter who you are. "



The AD is fired.

Sykotyk;967481 wrote:I don't think anybody's disagreeing that McQueary clearly tucked his tail between his legs and ran off to daddy. He was chicken ****. But, he did tell his superior (JoePa), so as with JoePa, he's off the hook about it. He did the 'bare minimum' the law required of him. Not enough to actually help.

As for the internal investigation... why the hell was Sandusky banned from bringing children onto campus with him if they didn't find evidence of any wrongdoing? That seems questionable at best, and a 'cover-up and let's pray to God this never gets out' at worst by PSU big wigs.

The point I'm trying to make/speculate is maybe that report from the AD saying basically "we checked it out, nothing to see here..." was the same information that Joe Pa was told, and they went with "Don't bring any more kids around," to cover their own ass. I don't know, but this is why I'm defending Joe Pa and his actions until I/we know more. Right now, there isn't anything out there that shows me that Joe Pa deliberately tried to cover this up and make it go away. I see a man who at the time thought he was doing the right thing and now reflecting on whether or not it was. He's had almost 10 years to think about it. It depends on what information he knew/ignored from the beginning on.

Like skyhook said, the AD isn't fired, he's on leave still collecting a pay check. The VP resigned/went back into retirement. Joe Paterno and the President were the only ones who have actually been fired as of yet.

I know we've all beaten this to death, but I still point everything on McQueary for not stepping in immediately, for not reporting his own eye witness account to authorities, and what he did/didn't do after it came out that no wrong doing was found.

There are some many questions involving him that need to be answered. The biggest ones are who told you/what was told that made you decide not to call the police with what you witnessed? Why are you still allowed to coach?..... It just all starts with him.

sleeper;967638 wrote:I bet the lawsuits are minimal.

I've read a lot of dumb things on this thread, but this one takes it. Book it.

dat dude;967729 wrote:I've read a lot of dumb things on this thread, but this one takes it. Book it.

20 victims, a million or two to each. Call it a day.

sleeper;967677 wrote:So why did he get fired from his job? For following protocol outlined in his employment contract?

LOL

I believe he got fired for not doing "more" just like he later stated he should have. Therefore, he was no longer representing the University the way the Trustees wanted...so they fired him.