Even "funnier" is that the police decided to memorialize hearsay but neglected to confirm it with the source. That leads me to a number of conclusions, none of which are good.
CNN Headline on Paterno
- Thread starter Lion8286
- Start date
Even "funnier" is that the police decided to memorialize hearsay but neglected to confirm it with the source. That leads me to a number of conclusions, none of which are good.
I don't put nearly as much weight on Joe's testimony or interviews as most people.
Last edited:
Its a great point, Art. I feel like the cops knew JS was dirty and were going to do whatever they needed to do to put him behind bars. In retrospect, an admirable thing to do. But the politicos got involved, then the press, and there was no turning back for anyone. It was a snowball down the hill, kept getting bigger and faster and nobody was willing to step in front of that mess to try and stop it (wouldn't have helped anyway, see Franco Harris).
In my best Hardy-Har-Har voice:
Oh me, oh my, but that would require woooooooork, Lippy.
Then why would he have any files pertaining to cases if he was only in charge of the business part?
The article was timed, and its publication was withheld, so as to coincide with Penn State's first "big" game of the year, thereby drawing as much attention as possible to it.
That fact by itself does not speak to the credibility of the piece, but it does point up that Sara was trying hard to dress it up as some kind of bombshell, which it is NOT.
In fact, the key supposed revelation -- that Joe had knowledge of one previous situation -- is old news. It's already been established pretty clearly that he was aware of the 1998 investigation of an encounter between Sandusky and a minor in a shower.
Anyway, after a few initial headlines, Sara's big scoop appears to have pretty much disappeared into the ether. Now hopefully she'll get her butt on a plane to Florida or maybe even Iraq and do some real reporting. If CNN still does any of that.
Word on the street* is they do not.
* Yes, this reference to Ms. Ganim's actual source is an intentional pun.
She would have done a hug public service had she demonstrated what happens when you take a 2x4 moving at 120 mph to the face.
Actually, it would have been the 2 x 4 that would have been performing a huge public service.
Are you saying Joe needed to be fed information like a child in order to understand that something sexual occurred?
You know I'm talking about the 1998 incident.
If you wish to pretend that you didn't know, fine. Now you know.
Hey now.....The Joe Paterno would be a great name for a warship!!
You see, here is the problem with this kind of thinking - this has nothing to do with football!! This is about truth and justice. You know, the kind of important stuff that generations of people gave their lives to protect?? The rights that we all hold so dear. The rights we expect will be granted to ourselves or our loved ones should we ever find ourselves in the wrong place at the wrong time?? We have a right to expect our media to tell the truth (you know, that whole 4th estate thingy?) We have a right to expect an unbiased judiciary. We have a right to expect due process. I could go on and on. But I can tell you this.........I would rather never win another ****ing football game if the price is moving on from defending someone who had their rights stripped away from them and is still being unfairly maligned almost 6 years later. And YOU would want people to fight for your rights too.
Ah, so you're saying that according to the OAG's "fauctual accounting" of the story -- Mike McQueary himself, his father and Dr. Dranov all should have CLEARLY been charged with Felony Obstruction of Justice for acting as an "Accessory After the Fact" in not calling in the Criminal Sexual Assault "Anal-Rape" of a 10 Year Old Child In-Progress despite the OAG stating in their Presentment that this is what Mike McQueary "saw" and eyewitnessed and then told both his father and Dr. Dranov that this is what he "saw" and eyewitnessed while the incident was still in-progress and Sandusky was at Lasch with the child?
So why weren't Mike McQueary, his Father and Dr. Dranov arrested and charged genius? It is beyond clear that they committed a super-serious Felony punishable by long jail terms if the OAG's lies are to be taken as factual evidence without question or Courtroom scruitiny?
BTW @sshat, being told an obtuse, non-descriptive hearsay report that included no description of a Sexual Assault, let alone an act, (this according to none other than Mike McQueary himself under oath in a PA Court of law multiple times) well AFTER THE FACT by a party who at the same time tells you that he, nor his father or family friend Dr. Dranov (who JVP also knew well) called police because they didn't think it was serious enough to do, but instead decided Mike should report it to his employer via his HR protocol which is why he was there.... IS NOT CRIMINAL! Your assertion that The State would not press charges on parties committing CRIMINAL FELONY "ACCESORY AFTER THE FACT" and "AIDING & ABETTING" a RAPIST of a 10 year old child by CRIMINALLY NOT CALLING authorities, but would press "misdemeanor" FTR charges under CPSL for failing to understand an obtuse report several weeks after the fact is BEYOND ABSURD you phucking twit!!!
Getmyjive11 is an expert once the facts come out..... The greatest failure anyone can have is judging those involved based on what we know today, and not what was known at the time. In this situation, Getmyjive11 failed, and is a failure.
No. I would say he made a terrible mistake based on some thought process he underwent at the time. I guarantee that process wasn't he better hide the truth of Sandusky for the name of football at Penn State.
Honestly, I think jive is just hellbent on believing Joe is to blame for what happened. You can present all the points you want but he is just going to throw out parts of Joe quotes without context. I think he is entirely different from some of the trolls on here. I think he is a Penn State fan. I just think he is blind to any other opinions that could contradict his pre-determined beliefs.
His agenda is not yet fully exposed. He claims he wants to temper those that recognize the contributions Paterno made. Weird.
I guarantee that neither Dr. Dranov or Mike's Dad thought the child was being Sexually Assaulted, let alone "anally raped", based on what Mike was telling them which is ABSOLUTELY the point. It is only a CRIME and a CRIMINAL ACT if you intentionally do not call in an OBVIOUS crime of this nature to the direct and severe detriment of the victim (ditto any crime involving a firearm). What the OAG alleges in their Presentment as "FACT" (i.e., MM saw and eyewitnessed the child being "subjected to anal rape" and "told" both his father and Dr. D that "he saw the child being subjected to anal rape") is beyond absurd and if the OAG themselves actually believed this nonsense bull$hit, they would have arrested and charged Mike McQueary, John McQueary and Dr. Dranov.....and not arresting them is unconscionable if they really believe these men intentionally did not call police despite knowing without question a "child was being subjected to anal rape".
All Getmyjive11 can say is "Paterno failed". Nothing more, nothing less. It's like he's a trained parrot and someone is giving him a cracker for positive reinforcement.
Wonder who?
I have not read this whole thread, but what I don't hear anybody saying is that the police report in question tells us:
A) The police, themselves, knew a hell of a lot more about what was going on than Joe would have been told,
and, more importantly,
B) There's written, official proof that Joe considered Mike's report to be "similar" to the "earlier" incident, in which no accusation of sexual abuse had occurred.
A) The police, themselves, knew a hell of a lot more about what was going on than Joe would have been told,
and, more importantly,
B) There's written, official proof that Joe considered Mike's report to be "similar" to the "earlier" incident, in which no accusation of sexual abuse had occurred.
Nope. Just asking what exactly did mcqueary tell him? Do you know?
Of course not. But we know that he told him something of a sexual nature occurred. Unless you think Joe is a liar.
Your agenda is predicated on directly attacking the character of one man. One man who admittedly made a mistake. One man who contributed a great deal to "our" University.
You have a problem with that man. And it isn't because some of us appreciate his contribution. For you, it is personal. It's obvious.
Change your first sentence to be pro Paterno and you've described the Joe worshipers to a tee.
And for that you crucified him? Hope you're not my judge and executioner at the golden gates.
What's it say about you Mike McQueary worshipers that you worship him as a hero for intentionally ignoring and not calling in seeing and eyewitnessing a 10 year old child "being subjected to anal rape"? What's it say about you worshipers and defenders of the entire McQueary family when not only Mike McQueary did not call police, but neither did his father when told by his son, while the event was in progress and police/authorities could be sent to scene, that a 10 year old child was being "subjected to anal rape"?
No "warship". Appreciation, yes. Paterno did quite a bit for the University. Not to overlook the mistake, but undeniably, he did a lot for the University.
I said everyone involved failed and you say one man. Pathetic how you just make things up in your head.
Your energy is entirely directed at "Paterno failed". I've noted this before.
You do realize this is the sole reason that individuals other than myself are arguing with you? Or are we all pathetic to your absolute view on Sandusky?
