I am free as can be Skippy.It'll help you grow
Soon, and the truth I tell you shall set you free.
But keep on keeping on…you make such a compelling case lol.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I am free as can be Skippy.It'll help you grow
Soon, and the truth I tell you shall set you free.
You are truth free but I shall remedy that.I am free as can be Skippy.
Well, of course I do! Now, repeat after me: Joe is not my god and he failed morally to protect those kids. Healing broBut keep on keeping on…you make such a compelling case lol.
Go back to your own board!Well somebody has to do it. You JoeBots are quite daft. Instead of just calling me names while looking like a child, debate me on the facts. I know them and you should learn them.
Quit defending pedos and their enablers.Go back to your own board!
Quit defending fraudsters who stole millions from Penn St and it's stupid leadershipQuit defending pedos and their enablers.
The truth is full of gray areas and nuance. Your narrative was proven demonstrably false over a decade ago. Still, you can't deviate one iota from your script. If you do, the whole thing unravels.How so? This should be fun.
If by fraudsters you mean the victims of Sandusky then I see my work is REALLY cut out for me. This is the ultimate sickness of JoeBots.Quit defending fraudsters who stole millions from Penn St and it's stupid leadership
Not reallyThe truth is full of gray areas and nuance.
Four juries said otherwise.Your narrative was proven demonstrably false over a decade ago.
No need to deviate as it is the truth but your narrative is pure fantasyStill, you can't deviate one iota from your script. If you do, the whole thing unravels.
Not at all. It is clear that the three are rationalizing not reporting Sandusky when they know his conduct was sexually inappropriate as testified to by Joe.For example, the email from Spanier (below), in response to Curley, proves that those men were not operating under the belief that a boy had been abused:
Agree and this is why he went to jail. The buck stopped with him. However.....This approach is acceptable to me. It requires you to go a step further and means your conversation will be all the more difficult, but I admire your willingness to do that and I am supportive. The only downside for us is if our message is not “heard” and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it. But that can be assessed down the road. The approach you outline is humane and a reasonable way to proceed.
- “This approach is acceptable to me.” Right out of the gate, Spanier exercises his role as the final authority. If Freeh wanted a smoking gun, he had it.
No it means that he (Freeh) took Joe's input to not report Sandusky VERY seriously and it weighed heavily in Spanier's desire NOT to report him.
- He could have easily downplayed any participation by Paterno based on this single statement. That he didn’t, especially in light of how little he had regarding Joe, suggests a far more nefarious agenda was in play.
There were three steps that CSS originally decided to do in February 2001. 1) Confront Sandusky 2) Inform TSM 3) Report Sandusky to DPW.
- Spanier acknowledged that Tim’s proposal to inform Sandusky required an additional step. If contacting DPW had been taken off the table, the number of steps would have been reduced by one.
I agree they handled it like a personnel issue when it was in fact a crime that Spanier acknowledged could come back to bite them later. Coverup. Keeping it internal instead of informing the proper authorities. Inappropriate sexual activity with a child by an adult is NEVER a "personnel matter".
- Spanier acknowledged that what Tim was proposing would entail a difficult conversation with Sandusky. It would be awkward and uncomfortable. This is consistent with a delicate personnel issue, not a criminal one. In fact, if it had been believed to have been criminal in nature, speaking to Jerry at all would have been ill advised.
No it is consistent with Spanier passing the buck to Curley to try and keep his fingerprints off it and his Thanking Tim for letting him do so and doing the dirty work. This is not in any way inconsistent with the narrative put forth by Freeh originally. Just top admins covering up.
- Spanier then said he is supportive and he admired Tim’s willingness to do that. This is wholly inconsistent with the narrative put forth, but again supports the theme of trying to help Sandusky deal with boundary issues.
I disagree, Spanier is doing a vulnerability assessment of the actions they are taking RIGHT NOW. In the present. Only just means in reference to the decision taken NOW of the CURRENT molestation.
- “The only downside for us…” This statement is absolutely critical to understanding the whole mess. Spanier is stating that their purpose is to help Sandusky, to send him a message that his behavior must change otherwise there would be consequences, both for him and PSU. However, his use of the word ‘only’ in the context of that message being received precludes any vulnerability from this incident in and of itself and was entirely dependent on some future indiscretion on Sandusky’s part.
No, they are gambling that Sandusky won't do it again at least in a way that could be tied back to PSU. This is consistent with the OAG theory proposed at Spanier's trial and proven by the Jury verdicts and Curley and Schultz's guilty pleas.
- Had they understood that a boy had been abused, their vulnerability for not reporting would have been unrelated to any subsequent event and open ended.
Since that hadn't happened yet it was doubtful that it would but it was a calculated risk that they chose to take. It cost them dearly later. Often exposures of cover ups come from places not anticipated by the bad guys. In this case MM's testimony in 2010 sunk them.
- At that point, several people, especially the boy and his family, could have reported the matter to child services at any time.
Crimes and wrongdoing are what one confesses to. You refute yourself with that idea.
- This statement, along with Schultz’s initial notes where he said “unless JS confesses…” proves that they did not believe they were dealing with a criminal situation.
Meaningless. He did not contact them and Sandusky continued to prey on boys. You can't justify "Well I stand by what I could have done." Spanier didn't and other boys paid after the incident.
- Spanier is keeping the option of contacting DPW on the table.
Cover up and looking out for Jerry as a former member of the "family". No concern for the child
- His use of the word ‘humane’ suggests again that they were trying to be considerate of how their actions might affect Sandusky while still doing the right thing with respect to the university’s involvement.
The best way they thought to minimize damage to PSU was to cover it up and not report it. They didn't give a damn about the kid as shown by their unwillingness to even try and find out who it was.
- Had a sex crime been the elephant in the room, it is highly unlikely that they would care one iota about Jerry, but would have been entirely focused on how best to minimize the damage to Penn State and the wellbeing of the victim.
Correct! Because ALL they gave a damn about was the reputation of PSU and Jerry. They could have cared less about the kid. That PSU reputation and THEIR jobs were paramount!
- Finally, what's conspicuously absent from this or any of the emails, is any mention of the boy.
Which by turning in Sandusky THEN (2001) would have completely eliminated the possibility of future CSA. However, CSS and Joe knew about 1998 and Chamber's report. Had Sandusky been exposed as a pedophile in 2001 and then the media and public learned of 1998 and the subsequent PSU inaction then CSS and Joe would have lost their jobs. No 409! They knew this and so covered it up.This plan had nothing to do with concealing a crime and everything to do with preventing one down the road.
It wasn't the showering that was the issue and you know it! It was the touching. You JoeBots always lie about that!By showering alone with TSM kids in the PSU facilities, Jerry was opening himself and PSU to a civil suit based solely on an accusation.
PSU could have and should have acted then (1998) to restrict Sandusky. But they covered up Chambers report.It could have happened in 1998.
Yes, if it was found out that they covered it up. They had ample reason to restrict and even ban Sandusky from bringing kids to campus in 1998 and alerting the staff as well. But they were silent in 1998. this informed what they did in 2001. Cover up.C/S/S were trying to prevent that with their actions. They weren't concerned with what had happened, but with what could happen.
But they went to jail. All of them so I think THEY were discredited and not the truth.Once all the felony charges against C/S/S were dropped, the narrative was discredited.
They aren't that stupid because they have stated he failed as a leader to protect those children. Trying to overlook his guilt in the abuse of children would just make PSU look worse.PSU should have gone all out to rebuild Joe's reputation at that time.
I think your narrative is the fragile one since no one outside your bubble believes it. Your narrative is a conspiracy theory. CSS are convicted criminals, Sandusky is in jail and Joe will FOREVER be associated with the scandal. It will tarnish his image forever. He does have the wins total though.Again, the narrative is so fragile that it can't withstand even that one, long overdue, concession.
If your theory is true. That being that McQueary absolutely knew he had witnessed a criminal act that needed to be reported to the police, but Mike was afraid he wouldn’t be believed so he needed Joe Paterno to “back him up”. Then it is inconceivable that Mike would not have disdain for Joe. But that is indeed the case, as Mike still strongly supports Joe Paterno even after his death.Doing anything other than what he did would have been professional suicide and Sandusky would have been free. Going to Joe was his best option as the police would never have believed him over Sandusky without Joe being a part of it.
Another important point is that this email, which the Freehbasers claim damns Paterno and PSU, was printed out and filed by Gary Schultz and then Gary voluntarily turned it over during the investigation. This is not the actions of men looking to cover up sexual assault.The truth is full of gray areas and nuance. Your narrative was proven demonstrably false over a decade ago. Still, you can't deviate one iota from your script. If you do, the whole thing unravels.
For example, the email from Spanier (below), in response to Curley, proves that those men were not operating under the belief that a boy had been abused:
This approach is acceptable to me. It requires you to go a step further and means your conversation will be all the more difficult, but I admire your willingness to do that and I am supportive. The only downside for us is if our message is not “heard” and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it. But that can be assessed down the road. The approach you outline is humane and a reasonable way to proceed.
This plan had nothing to do with concealing a crime and everything to do with preventing one down the road. By showering alone with TSM kids in the PSU facilities, Jerry was opening himself and PSU to a civil suit based solely on an accusation. It could have happened in 1998. C/S/S were trying to prevent that with their actions. They weren't concerned with what had happened, but with what could happen.
- “This approach is acceptable to me.” Right out of the gate, Spanier exercises his role as the final authority. If Freeh wanted a smoking gun, he had it. He could have easily downplayed any participation by Paterno based on this single statement. That he didn’t, especially in light of how little he had regarding Joe, suggests a far more nefarious agenda was in play.
- Spanier acknowledged that Tim’s proposal to inform Sandusky required an additional step. If contacting DPW had been taken off the table, the number of steps would have been reduced by one.
- Spanier acknowledged that what Tim was proposing would entail a difficult conversation with Sandusky. It would be awkward and uncomfortable. This is consistent with a delicate personnel issue, not a criminal one. In fact, if it had been believed to have been criminal in nature, speaking to Jerry at all would have been ill advised.
- Spanier then said he is supportive and he admired Tim’s willingness to do that. This is wholly inconsistent with the narrative put forth, but again supports the theme of trying to help Sandusky deal with boundary issues.
- “The only downside for us…” This statement is absolutely critical to understanding the whole mess. Spanier is stating that their purpose is to help Sandusky, to send him a message that his behavior must change otherwise there would be consequences, both for him and PSU. However, his use of the word ‘only’ in the context of that message being received precludes any vulnerability from this incident in and of itself and was entirely dependent on some future indiscretion on Sandusky’s part. Had they understood that a boy had been abused, their vulnerability for not reporting would have been unrelated to any subsequent event and open ended. At that point, several people, especially the boy and his family, could have reported the matter to child services at any time. This statement, along with Schultz’s initial notes where he said “unless JS confesses…” proves that they did not believe they were dealing with a criminal situation.
- Spanier is keeping the option of contacting DPW on the table.
- His use of the word ‘humane’ suggests again that they were trying to be considerate of how their actions might affect Sandusky while still doing the right thing with respect to the university’s involvement. Had a sex crime been the elephant in the room, it is highly unlikely that they would care one iota about Jerry, but would have been entirely focused on how best to minimize the damage to Penn State and the wellbeing of the victim.
- Finally, what's conspicuously absent from this or any of the emails, is any mention of the boy.
Once all the felony charges against C/S/S were dropped, the narrative was discredited. PSU should have gone all out to rebuild Joe's reputation at that time. Again, the narrative is so fragile that it can't withstand even that one, long overdue, concession.
How do we know you aren't one?Quit defending pedos and their enablers.
It's not a theory and MM discussed such at the prelim hearing when asked why he didn't go to police.If your theory is true.
I think MM thought he saw a crime and did go to Joe for top cover.That being that McQueary absolutely knew he had witnessed a criminal act that needed to be reported to the police, but Mike was afraid he wouldn’t be believed so he needed Joe Paterno to “back him up”.
Why?Then it is inconceivable that Mike would not have disdain for Joe.
Because Joe gave him top cover for 9 more years and gave him a job on the team. Joe would have continued to protect MM had he remained in his job and even told his family not to attack MM which they haven't.But that is indeed the case, as Mike still strongly supports Joe Paterno even after his death.
Pot meet kettleWTF dude - get a life. PSU isn’t even you team - you are a very weird individual.
The emails were turned over to Freeh by Schultz's assistant who copied them. Gary should have turned them over when Baldwin asked him about what he had on Sandusky when the first subpoenas came in from the OAG. He didn't because he was covering up. He kept them as a CYA to show his boss Spanky approved on the steps they took.Another important point is that this email, which the Freehbasers claim damns Paterno and PSU, was printed out and filed by Gary Schultz and then Gary voluntarily turned it over during the investigation. This is not the actions of men looking to cover up sexual assault.
I don't see it in that thread. Are the other notes from the Alumni BOT conspiracy reports? I see notes apparently from Spanier AFTER THE FACT justifying and lying about his involvement. Once again from Freeh:Adam Clark has an excellent Twitter thread showing how the emails and notes taken in order and in context show the truth is the opposite of the Freeh Report:
What the hell does that even mean? I bet you are one of those butt hurt criminol fans who thought Saint Bobby deserved the all time wins crown.Pot meet kettle
The the pot calling the kettle black doofus. I don't know but I bet Bobby would rather not have that "crown" knowing the the shame, disgrace and guilt of Joe.What the hell does that even mean? I bet you are one of those butt hurt criminol fans who thought Saint Bobby deserved the all time wins crown.
Your parents married because they fell in love and wanted to start a family. Imagine their disappointment when you arrived. Go back to your Nole hole and let us decide our own morality.The the pot calling the kettle black doofus. I don't know but I bet Bobby would rather not have that "crown" knowing the the shame and guilt of Joe.
My parents were and are VERY proud of me.Your parents married because they fell in love and wanted to start a family. Imagine their disappointment when you arrived.
No, you need a conscience as you are rationalizing evil. I am happy to help with that.Go back to your Nole hole and let us decide our own morality.
Lets see your degree in psychology first. Maybe you're the one who needs help.My parents were and are VERY proud of me.
No, you need a conscience as you are rationalizing evil. I am happy to help with that.
Lets see your degree in psychology first. Maybe you're the one who needs help.
I’m thinking your dismissal of evil requires more than psychology?Lets see your degree in psychology first. Maybe you're the one who needs help.
You are the one shouting the loudest and you're the one who started this whole thread years after!or you?
Talking to yourself Handleman? Never a good sign.You are truth free but I shall remedy that.
Well, of course I do! Now, repeat after me: Joe is not my god and he failed morally to protect those kids. Healing bro
Pnnylion started this thread. He starts one of these every few months. This entire thread is exactly what he was looking for.You are the one shouting the loudest and you're the one who started this whole thread years after!
I didn’t start this thread that nut @joeaubie21 did. You silly boiYou are the one shouting the loudest and you're the one who started this whole thread years after!
Talking to you young boi. Trying to set you straight!Talking to yourself Handleman? Never a good sign.
I will tell you what is true grasshopperI will be sticking what I know to be true.
You talk like a man with a paper a$$hole…tis true.Talking to you young boi. Trying to set you straight!
I will tell you what is true grasshopper
Silly boiYou talk like a man with a paper a$$hole…tis true.
I’m thinking your dismissal of evil requires more than psychology?
You talk like a man with a paper a$$hole…tis true.
I know what it SUPPOSED to mean but your context is all wrong moron.The the pot calling the kettle black doofus. I don't know but I bet Bobby would rather not have that "crown" knowing the the shame, disgrace and guilt of Joe.
Fits the situation perfectly cretin.I know what it SUPPOSED to mean but your context is all wrong moron.
Now quit looking in the mirror Junior.Silly boi