-Society-
Posts: 1,348
Nov 9, 2011 12:46pm
I believe that is why he posed it as a question?Skyhook79;964888 wrote:IDK, do you know that he did for sure?
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Nov 9, 2011 12:50pm
Thats how you took it... I took as something different.-Society-;964899 wrote:I believe that is why he posed it as a question?
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Nov 9, 2011 12:52pm
Not surprised, clearly went over you head.Skyhook79;964905 wrote:Thats how you took it... I took as something different.
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Nov 9, 2011 12:58pm
What does this prove? Nothing. It's just as feasible that during the time spent hanging out that Joe Pa asked him about the accusations, and he denied them. If your friend denies something, are you going to pry further? No, you're going to drop it.Fab1b;964876 wrote:Also want to tell me that after the alleged incidents and after Sandusky retired he and JoPa never hung out? Never sat in an office together, each others homes, lunch, coffee, etc...?
Everything that you're construing from your statement can be construed the other way as well. Why? Because we don't know the whole story. Until we hear from Joe Pa, everything is just inferences, and I'm sorry, but I refuse to crucify someone based on an inference. Once Joe Pa speaks or we hear his side of the story, then I'm willing to change my tune.
OneBuckeye
Posts: 5,888
Nov 9, 2011 12:59pm
V
vball10set
Posts: 24,795
Nov 9, 2011 1:02pm
one word...KarmaOneBuckeye;964915 wrote:
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Nov 9, 2011 1:05pm
No one is asking you to crucify him.lhslep134;964913 wrote:... If your friend denies something, are you going to pry further? No, you're going to drop it.
...
We are telling you that he screwed up...big-time. He's got to live with that now.
Even if my friend denied it, the SECOND time someone came to me with an accusation I would have to do something. Either someone is out to make the University look bad or there's some truth to what been told. Either way, I'm not just reporting it and letting it go at that...no matter what my "friend" says at that point.
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Nov 9, 2011 1:06pm
Did Penn State violate any NCAA rules? I'm not asking rhetorically, I don't know their 1000 page rulebook inside and out. Obviously they violated their legal duty, but did they violate any NCAA rules?vball10set;964921 wrote:one word...Karma
I'm asking because this case is distinguishable from OSU's in the sense that what was being "covered up" was an NCAA violation, not a crime.
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Nov 9, 2011 1:06pm
LMAO, sorry someone accuses someone I know of something that horrible and I ask them and take their denial as the truth (who the hell would admit to that?) I'm still alerting the police.lhslep134;964913 wrote:What does this prove? Nothing. It's just as feasible that during the time spent hanging out that Joe Pa asked him about the accusations, and he denied them. If your friend denies something, are you going to pry further? No, you're going to drop it.
Everything that you're construing from your statement can be construed the other way as well. Why? Because we don't know the whole story. Until we hear from Joe Pa, everything is just inferences, and I'm sorry, but I refuse to crucify someone based on an inference. Once Joe Pa speaks or we hear his side of the story, then I'm willing to change my tune.
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Nov 9, 2011 1:07pm
Ishlep is now an apologist for a pedophile. Unbelievable this troll will argue anyone on anything.
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Nov 9, 2011 1:10pm
You can't have it both ways. You're either letting it go or you report it. If you report it to your superiors, and it comes out that it's a lot more substantial than just an allegation, then it's on your superiors to do something about it. If you report it to your superiors, and they come back and tell you they didn't find anything, wtf are you supposed to do?Con_Alma;964927 wrote: Either way, I'm not just reporting it and letting it go at that.
If you recall, this is what happened with the Monus coverup at YSU under Tressel. Tressel reported what he heard to his superiors, and his superiors were the ones that failed him in the situation. It's why Tressel was never sanctioned but his superiors were.
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Nov 9, 2011 1:10pm
Maybe not but to present the football program as one with honor is now despicable.lhslep134;964928 wrote:Did Penn State violate any NCAA rules? I'm not asking rhetorically, I don't know their 1000 page rulebook inside and out. Obviously they violated their legal duty, but did they violate any NCAA rules?
I'm asking because this case is distinguishable from OSU's in the sense that what was being "covered up" was an NCAA violation, not a crime.
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Nov 9, 2011 1:11pm
Really? Joe Pa is the pedophile here? You really are an idiot.Commander of Awesome;964931 wrote:Ishlep is now an apologist for a pedophile
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Nov 9, 2011 1:11pm
Con_Alma;964938 wrote:Maybe not but to present the football program as one with honor is now despicable.
I agree with that.
2kool4skool
Posts: 1,804
Nov 9, 2011 1:12pm
Yes. Just stop.Tobias Fünke;964536 wrote:Has any of that actually been proven?
There's a handful of people who really are looking pathetic. Grasping at any straw, no matter how thin, to justify the awful actions(or in-actions) of someone they inexplicably still have hero worship for(because he seemed nice on TV lol.)Commander of Awesome;964931 wrote:Ishlep is now an apologist for a pedophile. Unbelievable this troll will argue anyone on anything.
Maybe Joe Pa didn't really know.....oh, well maybe he was forced to cover it up....ummmmm, well let's hear him speak first because that will clear it up!!!!
Pathetic.
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Nov 9, 2011 1:13pm
I don't want it both ways. I stated I am not simply reporting it and letting it go. I am following through to make sure the right thing is done.lhslep134;964937 wrote:You can't have it both ways...
What am I supposed to do?? I can't tell what I am supposed to do I can only tell you what I would do and that is call the police. It's that simple.
2 times someone comes to me and reports sexual allegations regarding a minor. The ONLY thing to do is call the police.
2kool4skool
Posts: 1,804
Nov 9, 2011 1:13pm
And on the new developments. The idea that Paterno will be given the privileged of finishing the season and retiring in the offseason is a slap in the face of every victim he could have saved by doing the most simple duties of anyone with basic human dignity. Not a surprise PSU STILL doesn't care about the victims.
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Nov 9, 2011 1:15pm
Agreed, the ones who are making inferences and assumptions that we don't know yet. You guys are completely missing the point of the people who are arguing against you. We're not arguing Joe Pa's innocence, we're arguing the possibility of innocence exists until we hear the other side.2kool4skool;964942 wrote:
There's a handful of people who really are looking pathetic.
Writerbuckeye
Posts: 4,745
Nov 9, 2011 1:24pm
What you don't get is that we've already heard from Paterno. His words are in the GJ report. He admits what he was told by MM was that the act taking place in the shower was sexual.lhslep134;964948 wrote:Agreed, the ones who are making inferences and assumptions that we don't know yet. You guys are completely missing the point of the people who are arguing against you. We're not arguing Joe Pa's innocence, we're arguing the possibility of innocence exists until we hear the other side.
That, combined with the 1998 report Paterno also knew about, and the action by Paterno to retire Sandusky are examples of things Paterno is telling us.
Him saying now, when he's under fire, that he was somehow fooled by a pedophile rings very hollow.
I'm sure people who admire him don't want to think he would lie about something like this -- but that's exactly what he'd doing. He's trying to save face any way possible.
Which is why anything he tells us now isn't going to change the facts.
Fab1b
Posts: 12,949
Nov 9, 2011 1:24pm
I just don't get some of you!
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Nov 9, 2011 1:26pm
Its known that he was aware of it happening and allowed it to continue. Never went to police, went to the AD. When the guy was still on the staff he should have gone to police, he didn't and knew about it. Therefore he's an accessory. Tier 3 law school hasn't covered that yet?lhslep134;964939 wrote:Really? Joe Pa is the pedophile here? You really are an idiot.
Commander of Awesome
Posts: 23,151
Nov 9, 2011 1:27pm
Spot on, I'm not sure how anyone that read the report can defend him or think he shouldn't be fired immediately.Writerbuckeye;964963 wrote:What you don't get is that we've already heard from Paterno. His words are in the GJ report. He admits what he was told by MM was that the act taking place in the shower was sexual.
That, combined with the 1998 report Paterno also knew about, and the action by Paterno to retire Sandusky are examples of things Paterno is telling us.
Him saying now, when he's under fire, that he was somehow fooled by a pedophile rings very hollow.
I'm sure people who admire him don't want to think he would lie about something like this -- but that's exactly what he'd doing. He's trying to save face any way possible.
Which is why anything he tells us now isn't going to change the facts.
M
MontyBrunswick
Nov 9, 2011 1:29pm
Paterno, and everyone involved should be let go.
/end of story
/end of story
lhslep134
Posts: 9,774
Nov 9, 2011 1:35pm
A. Joe Pa isn't legally liable for anything (FAIL on your part)Commander of Awesome;964970 wrote:Therefore he's an accessory. Tier 3 law school hasn't covered that yet?
B. Arizona is a Tier 1 school (another FAIL on your part).
Oh, and you still think Joe Pa is the pedophile? Because I'm defending the possibility of his innocence and you said I'm a pedophile apologist (3rd FAIL on your part).
Geez, you're 0-3. "PWND"
2kool4skool
Posts: 1,804
Nov 9, 2011 1:37pm
Trust me, I think we've got a pretty good handle on you people's side of the argument lollhslep134;964948 wrote:You guys are completely missing the point of the people who are arguing against you.
We've heard his side, read the GJ report. Whatever mumbling, senile speech he gives isn't going to tell us more.We're not arguing Joe Pa's innocence, we're arguing the possibility of innocence exists until we hear the other side.