Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,700 posts, read 41,763,058 times
Reputation: 41381
Advertisements
Here is my two cents on the whole situation and then I'm outta here;
Joe Paterno did the standard right thing in reporting the act to his superior, so I think legally he fulfilled his obligation and should have no charges against him.
However I think in this situation Paterno should have gone further to make sure this was dealt with correctly, therefore I think there is probable cause to terminate him and I think Paterno erred by not going above and beyond in this case.
Paterno's legacy is going to be stained and I think deservedly so for not pursuing the situation further.
I think most rational PSU students are sad about the situation and want to support Joe but understand what had to happen.
Here is my two cents on the whole situation and then I'm outta here;
Joe Paterno did the standard right thing in reporting the act to his superior, so I think legally he fulfilled his obligation and should have no charges against him.
However I think in this situation Paterno should have gone further to make sure this was dealt with correctly, therefore I think there is probable cause to terminate him and I think Paterno erred by not going above and beyond in this case.
Paterno's legacy is going to be stained and I think deservedly so for not pursuing the situation further.
I think most rational PSU students are sad about the situation and want to support Joe but understand what had to happen.
The bold will probably be Paterno's defense. But the trial will have to be moved to perhaps Alaska or Hawaii (if there) for any jury to believe that. Joe Pa is considered next to God in some parts of PA, and most people with a pulse in the US are aware of that.
From what I've seen in the news, it's not clear if coaches are mandatory child abuse reporters in Pennsylvania. If so, the guy who witnessed the attack had a legal responsibility to call the police.
Here is my two cents on the whole situation and then I'm outta here;
Joe Paterno did the standard right thing in reporting the act to his superior, so I think legally he fulfilled his obligation and should have no charges against him.
However I think in this situation Paterno should have gone further to make sure this was dealt with correctly, therefore I think there is probable cause to terminate him and I think Paterno erred by not going above and beyond in this case.
Paterno's legacy is going to be stained and I think deservedly so for not pursuing the situation further.
I think most rational PSU students are sad about the situation and want to support Joe but understand what had to happen.
How did he know ? Are you guessing ? Are you repeating ? I can not find out how people think he knew ! Paterno had nothing to do with the children at all . Most of the crime was at Sanduskys home and the childrens school.
Why is Paterno now considered the Columbo crime stopper of pedifiles ?
He does not work with children .
He testified to the grandjury he knew. The grand jury report has been made public. As to the second half of your statement that is untrue as well. The crimes being alledged occured at Penn States campus. Including the infamous shower incident that Paterno was made aware off. Sandusky was also at closed practices with children after Paterno knew of the allegations. He was at these practices with children. So that means that Paterno had a good idea that it was a large possibility that the children that Sandusky had with him were being raped and molested by Sandusky, and Paterno took no action. That is rephrensible. It's the cops job to stop Sandusky and Paterno's to alert the police, which he did not do, which is why he does not have a job.
The bold will probably be Paterno's defense. But the trial will have to be moved to perhaps Alaska or Hawaii (if there) for any jury to believe that. Joe Pa is considered next to God in some parts of PA, and most people with a pulse in the US are aware of that.
From what I've seen in the news, it's not clear if coaches are mandatory child abuse reporters in Pennsylvania. If so, the guy who witnessed the attack had a legal responsibility to call the police.
Paterno was not idicted so he will not face any criminal charges.
Joe was fire for mishandling the situation, kind of a gross mismanagement thing. He looked past the abuse and hoped it would go away. What he did was a great disservice to the school and the victims. He should of called Sandusky down on the carpet when the incedent was reported and turned it over to the police, instead he chose not to push the matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdm2008
The university's standard of proof can be whatever it wants it to be. They not need a jury conviction to terminate someone. They have police reports an eyewitness and thats enough for them.
Thanks for the responses. I slept on it and have read more about the details - it is clear to me now why the coach was fired.
The horrible part of this is Sandusky wasn't stopped a decade ago.
The stupid part is, if he'd been turned into the police right away it would have been only a fraction of the taint on Penn State as it is now.
The sad part is how disappointing Joe Pa's judgement in this matter was. The difference in the way he'll be remembered, vs. the way he was thought of before is like day and night.
Oaky, I've just reread my post and I've decided to add that this post is more about a member of the media, and wrongheaded over -reactions, than about the Penn State incident, per se.
Anyway, I was driving home a little before lunch time today, and on the radio was Colin Cowherd of ESPN. He went on for a while about the whole sordid Penn State affair and then he kind of summarized his viewpoint by saying that "Young boys and old men don't mix. There's too much at stake to trust them with boys." I believe that's an exact quote by Cowherd. A caller, a 57 year-old man, suggested that Cowherd's view came dangerously close to discrimination, and he, the caller, offered guidance to boys, not to mention knowledge in athletics. Cowherd remained unswayed.
After giving it some thought, my views are in line with Cowherd's. After all, I don't like young white women to associate with black men, what with black men's criminal record statistics, there's too much at stake.
The moderators should have giving you a warning or timeout for your last sentence.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
