ADVERTISEMENT

Uh Oh - 1976???

There are a lot of hypocrites on this forum with very selective methods of evaluating claims of victims.
 
  • Like
Reactions: state_98
Let me just rant for a second. Abuse victims don't usually tell anyone. Period. And I think statistics might show that this is even more true for boys. When they do, it is usually close, trusted adults and often only because the adult is keyed into something wrong and asks questions (see 1998 victim with the mother, perfect example). The odds against these reports are pretty strong. You would have to believe that the parents were who were informed by the child and they decided to bring it to a bunch of football coaches, rather than an agency designed to help with at-risk children with staffing who they were probably familiar with, like a child psychologist.
 
Why didn't the OAG find out about the supposed '76, '87, and '88 claims and bring charges to those people? Surely with the OAG's vast resources they would have found out about them.

In all those millions of documents and hundreds of interviews, Freeh did not uncover a sniff of this? It is either BS or Freeh got a ridiculous amount of money to produce a report not worth the paper it is written on -- or both.
 
You Penn state people are real sickos, who seriously cares more about football than child abuse. What a bunch of fags
I've worked in an agency similar to The Second Mile, providing parenting education to families who had court-ordered services due to abuse and neglect. Maybe you need to inform yourself about the topic you care so much about. I am greatly concerned about all the people the media doesn't care about:

Jack Raykovitz, child psychologist and 2nd in charge at TSM
the CYS of Centre County and surrounds
Any trained staff that were a part of the TSM who usually are strong child advocates
All the people involved in getting JS's adoptions through

You know, the people that would be best suited to recognize a child predator.
 
Let me just rant for a second. Abuse victims don't usually tell anyone. Period. And I think statistics might show that this is even more true for boys. When they do, it is usually close, trusted adults and often only because the adult is keyed into something wrong and asks questions (see 1998 victim with the mother, perfect example). The odds against these reports are pretty strong. You would have to believe that the parents were who were informed by the child and they decided to bring it to a bunch of football coaches, rather than an agency designed to help with at-risk children with staffing who they were probably familiar with, like a child psychologist.


Agree with your evaluation. Would add another scenario: the child in question was close to Paterno and trusted him.
 
Something you need?
No, just that memory fades over time and often we need reminders, like you just did, and maybe Joe. But then we are depending on who is reminding us and the value of their memory, or is it just what they have been told was the memory. The language of the reminder is critical. And here we are. No offense intended to you. It is a common experience.
 
Michael Jackson himself is envious of the full on support of Sandusky by the victims and their families: These families simply refuse to report the heinous crimes done to their children to the police: Only a football coach is allowed to know.

Also, imagine the disrespect the Centre county Sheriff and the SCPD must feel? These children continue to be victims of pedophilia, and not a single one of their families, teachers, relatives or any other soul on the face of the earth will report the crimes to the cops: Just a football coach, and nobody else...ever.
 
No, just that memory fades over time and often we need reminders, like you just did, and maybe Joe. But then we are depending on who is reminding us and the value of their memory, or is it just what they have been told was the memory. The language of the reminder is critical. And here we are. No offense intended to you. It is a common experience.
Are you under the impression that I think that Joe knew about 1976 or even 2001 ?
 
Very likely.

If so, they might not know what the child reported or didn't. If he wasn't close, lifelong, it might also be unlikely that they'd remember him. My parents don't remember most of my elementary school age friends, even those that came over for an afternoon or two. Heck, I don't remember some of their names and others I don't remember what they looked like.
 
WTF is going on? Is this some last minute push back from the OG BOT to keep the current narrative alive? Main stream press picking this up as well:

From USA Today:
Report: Joe Paterno told about Jerry Sandusky sex abuse as early as 1976

"Former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky engaged in child sex abuse as many as 40 years ago,
according to a report published Thursday on PennLive.

Sandusky was convicted of 45 counts of child sex abuse in June 2012, five months after Paterno’s death, and is serving 30 to 60 years in prison. Lawyers for Sandusky, 72, have been in court this week attempting to overturn his conviction.

According to PennLive, the order also cites incidents of other assistant football coaches witnessing “inappropriate contact between Sandusky and unidentified children.” The website says that a court order related to an insurance coverage case involving Penn State includes a line that one of the school’s insurers has claimed “in 1976, a child allegedly reported to PSU’s Head Coach Joseph Paterno that he (the child) was sexually molested by Sandusky.”
------------------------------------
So, USA Today/PennLive are running this story all based on the claim by an insurance company (that's trying to get out of paying millions to PSU) where there is zero evidence to back it up...."1976 child allegedly reported to Joe that he was sexually molested..." Um...how do they know this isn't just another whacko/liar looking for a payday? Was this person vetted at all and do they have any PROOF??

The media is going to go bonkers over this.

You can be pretty sure the insurance company hired a number of investigators to vet the issue before they are going to fork over $ 60M to Penn State for its' liability payouts.
 
So we're to believe that the boy 1) Didn't go to the police AND 2) didn't tell his parents or they chose not to go to the police BUT instead went to Joe Paterno. Right. And I guess this is what Barron was referring to when asked about paying tribute to Joe and answered vaguely about some other things that could come out.
 
So we're to believe that the boy 1) Didn't go to the police AND 2) didn't tell his parents or they chose not to go to the police BUT instead went to Joe Paterno. Right. And I guess this is what Barron was referring to when asked about paying tribute to Joe and answered vaguely about some other things that could come out.


Barron is a pile of shit who needs to go.
 
You can be pretty sure the insurance company hired a number of investigators to vet the issue before they are going to fork over $ 60M to Penn State for its' liability payouts.


And those investigators are going to discover what about an alleged incident that took place 40 years ago? Witnesses to the alleged incident? Witnesses to the child allegedly telling Paterno?
 
This is bull crap. JoePa did everything that was legally required. He was under no obligation to do anything else. Why is it so hard for people to understand that?


What was legally required?


Joe screwed up. He never should have been involved. Once he was he should have told anyone who claimed to know about a crime to take it to the police and he would have been in the clear.
 
What was legally required?


Joe screwed up. He never should have been involved. Once he was he should have told anyone who claimed to know about a crime to take it to the police and he would have been in the clear.

GTF outta here with your bull crap. Joe did exactly as PSU policy and state law dictated, report to your superior and then stay out of it.

MM testified that NO ONE AT PSU EVER TOLD HIM TO KEEP QUIET. He was free to file a report with UPPD whenever he wanted but he apparently didn't feel strongly enough about what he THOUGHT was happening that night to take that step. He was 28 years old and he certainly didn't need Joe to tell him that he needed to go to the police if he wanted a criminal investigation (instead of an HR issue) to get started.

MM also testified that he expressed no dissatisfaction and never said MORE needed to be done when TC called him a few weeks later to follow up.
 
I'm confused - this 11 year old met with Joe in person or was able to call him over the phone?

Back in the 70's we had rotary dial - maybe a push button - how the hell can anyone substantiate a record of a phone call?

So let's say this 11 year old is able to get thru to Joe's office. The admin asst answers the phone and most likely writes down the kid's info on those little pink message pads that were so popular.

Are we to believe she'd put through such a call to Joe?

How does the 11 year phrase it? "Hi - I was abused by your coach".

An 11 year old is savvy enough to do this?

What am I not gettting?[/QUOTE

You are leaving out a few important parts...1).that 40 yrs later this would all of a sudden come to light in regards to an insurance companies claims....2) That the "investigative journalists" of the country would run with it and have it printed...3) People would actually believe it! No wonder why countries around the world laugh at us...
 
So let me get this straight.

In 1976, alleged victim claims he told Paterno about abuse.

In 1977, Paterno promoted Sandusky to defensive coordinator.

In 1977, Sandusky founded The Second Mile.

How did this person, in 1976, meet Sandusky, how was he abused and where, and why did HIS PARENTS determine that the proper course of action was to tell Paterno?

And Paterno's reaction this would have been to PROMOTE Sandusky?

And the PARENTS would sit silently by and say nothing about this to the police, child welfare, or anyone else at PSU.

I'd love to see this person's deposition. I'm sure it's a doozy.
 
You are leaving out a few important parts...1).that 40 yrs later this would all of a sudden come to light in regards to an insurance companies claims....2) That the "investigative journalists" of the country would run with it and have it printed...3) People would actually believe it! No wonder why countries around the world laugh at us...[/QUOTE]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ten Thousan Marbles
What was legally required?


Joe screwed up. He never should have been involved. Once he was he should have told anyone who claimed to know about a crime to take it to the police and he would have been in the clear.

With the benefit of hindsight, that's easy to say.

There is no evidence that anyone considered the 2001 incident to be a crime, however, there is evidence indicating the POLICE were contacted about the 2001 incident on 2-12-2001.
 
GTF outta here with your bull crap. Joe did exactly as PSU policy and state law dictated, report to your superior and then stay out of it.

MM testified that NO ONE AT PSU EVER TOLD HIM TO KEEP QUIET. He was free to file a report with UPPD whenever he wanted but he apparently didn't feel strongly enough about what he THOUGHT was happening that night to take that step. He was 28 years old and he certainly didn't need Joe to tell him that he needed to go to the police if he wanted a criminal investigation (instead of an HR issue) to get started.

MM also testified that he expressed no dissatisfaction and never said MORE needed to be done when TC called him a few weeks later to follow up.
THIS^^^^
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeR0206 and rmb297
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT