The End of an Era: Paterno is Finished

[Token]

They won't need a jury because they'll be begging for a plea, which they'll get.  I mean, the fuck is 66 years old.  A 10 year sentence would likely be a death sentence for him.

[GarMan]

Not an NCAA issue.  PSU fans and alum need to speak by not going to games, and/or donating until house is completely sanitized.  Folks need to go to jail.  But it's NOT an NCAA issue.

Why wouldn't this be an NCAA issue?  A school that paricipates in the NCAA had a sports program that was involved in the coverup of a multi-year, multi-victim child molestation scandel.  If this scandel wasn't associated with a sports program at Pedifile State, I would see why the NCAA should not be involved. 

By the way, the NCAA has announced that they will be conducting their own investigation, but I wouldn't expect much...

[JR4AU]

Why wouldn't this be an NCAA issue?  A school that paricipates in the NCAA had a sports program that was involved in the coverup of a multi-year, multi-victim child molestation scandel.  If this scandel wasn't associated with a sports program at Pedifile State, I would see why the NCAA should not be involved. 

By the way, the NCAA has announced that they will be conducting their own investigation, but I wouldn't expect much...

For the same reason they don't get involved when a player is selling cocaine in the athletic facilities, or when 4 players commit an armed home invasion robbery.  It has jack shit to do with the football program directly.  If every time a player or coach got arrested the NCAA sanctioned the program, there'd be precious few programs NOT on probation.   They don't involve themselves in non-athletics related issues.  They won't here unless it surfaces that a coach raped a player or recruit, or something similar.

[GarMan]

For the same reason they don't get involved when a player is selling cocaine in the athletic facilities, or when 4 players commit an armed home invasion robbery.  It has jack shit to do with the football program directly.  If every time a player or coach got arrested the NCAA sanctioned the program, there'd be precious few programs NOT on probation.   They don't involve themselves in non-athletics related issues.  They won't here unless it surfaces that a coach raped a player or recruit, or something similar.

I could almost agree with that, but we're talking about the leaders of Pedifile State's football program participating in a coverup that was very much a part of their football program.  If Sandusky did this at the local YMCA and only YMCA employees participated in the coverup, I could see this not being an NCAA issue.

[JR4AU]

I could almost agree with that, but we're talking about the leaders of Pedifile State's football program participating in a coverup that was very much a part of their football program.  If Sandusky did this at the local YMCA and only YMCA employees participated in the coverup, I could see this not being an NCAA issue.

Tell me why they didn't get involved with Jimmy Johns selling cocaine in/on athletic facilities?  Ok, I'll tell you.  It has NOTHING to do with football other than the accused happened to be a football player.  The NCAA has NO HISTORY of involvement in criminal activity by coaches or players that isn't directly related to football/athletics.  If you go read the NCAA manual and find the  the rule that would allow it, I'll gladly entertain it.  It's not there. 

[GarMan]

Tell me why they didn't get involved with Jimmy Johns selling cocaine in/on athletic facilities?  Ok, I'll tell you.  It has NOTHING to do with football other than the accused happened to be a football player.  The NCAA has NO HISTORY of involvement in criminal activity by coaches or players that isn't directly related to football/athletics.  If you go read the NCAA manual and find the  the rule that would allow it, I'll gladly entertain it.  It's not there.

Fair enough, but if Jimmy Johns' coaches and administrators knew of the incidents, failed to take appropriate action and continued to effectively condone them, shouldn't the NCAA get involved?  I believe that is the difference here. 

Meanwhile...

NCAA may look into sanctioning Penn State
By Mike Jensen

NCAA president Mark Emmert said Thursday that the national governing body would look into whether Penn State had broken NCAA bylaws in the child sexual abuse scandal that has toppled coach Joe Paterno as well as the school's president and athletic director...

Updated: November 11, 2011, 8:29 AM ET
NCAA defers to authorities
Associated Press

INDIANAPOLIS -- The NCAA is watching developments in the Penn State case but will defer to criminal investigators for now.

"The NCAA will defer in the immediate term to law enforcement officials since this situation involved alleged crimes," president Mark Emmert said Thursday. "As the facts are established through the justice system, we will determine whether association bylaws have been violated and act accordingly."
...

NCAA President Mark Emmert will launch own investigation into alleged Jerry Sandusky sex-abuse case at Penn State
Emmert says he will defer to criminal investigators
BY Kevin Armstrong
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Thursday, November 10 2011

NCAA President Mark Emmert on Thursday said that while he will defer to criminal investigators, the NCAA plans on launching its own investigation into the alleged sex abuse scandal at Penn State.

"The NCAA will defer in the immediate term to law enforcement officials since this situation involved alleged crimes," Emmert said in statement released Thursday afternoon. "As the facts are established through the justice system, we will determine whether Association bylaws have been violated and act accordingly. To be clear, civil and criminal law will always take precedence over Association rules."
...

It's not as black and white as you seem to be painting this.  If Pedifile State's football program leadership, athletic director and president knew of the incidents and failed to take the appropriate action, effectively condoning and permitting additional incidents, I don't see how this isn't an NCAA issue, but I agree that it really depends on the policies and bylaws of the organization. 

[JR4AU]

Fair enough, but if Jimmy Johns' coaches and administrators knew of the incidents, failed to take appropriate action and continued to effectively condone them, shouldn't the NCAA get involved?  I believe that is the difference here. 

Meanwhile...

It's not as black and white as you seem to be painting this.  If Pedifile State's football program leadership, athletic director and president knew of the incidents and failed to take the appropriate action, effectively condoning and permitting additional incidents, I don't see how this isn't an NCAA issue, but I agree that it really depends on the policies and bylaws of the organization.

Hey IF they can find a hook to get involved, more power to them! 

[War Eagle!!!]

Hey IF they can find a hook to get involved, more power to them!

I would think the NCAA would only get involved if a program is gaining a competitive advantage by having a pedophile on staff...

I think that is what you are saying...

[The Prowler]

I would think the NCAA would only get involved if a program is gaining a competitive advantage by having a pedophile on staff...

I think that is what you are saying...

The NCAA's thinking is that if they'll coverup something like that...they'll coverup everything and anything else.

[JR4AU]

The NCAA's thinking is that if they'll coverup something like that...they'll coverup everything and anything else.

Bingo

[JR4AU]

I would think the NCAA would only get involved if a program is gaining a competitive advantage by having a pedophile on staff...

I think that is what you are saying...

Since they don't have arule against ass taping kids, yeah.

[Kaos]

And this is why it's despicable:  Anyone who values the integrity of a team that plays a fucking game over the innocence of children is fucked up in the head.

Additionally, the logic here is retardedly stupid.  "We want to save the integrity of our school, so instead of pointing out the one guy who did this and showing that, as a school, we stand against these actions, we're going to sweep it under the rug and turn our heads."

That type of logic doesn't make sense.  At all.  Even if that is what these dumb fucks believed, I don't give a flying monkey shit.  It's stupid.  It's superficial.  It's wrong.

Are you really a lawyer? 

You're seriously going to tell me that nobody in the history of the world has ever thought about burying something and hoping it goes away until Penn State came along?   Wow. 

It makes sense that you'd never have heard of the Catholic Church, I guess.  What was their rationale and logic in that widespread scandal? 

I never actually said I was defending him, only that I was pointing out ways it could have gone that made some modicum of sense.  Because it makes none to me. 

I'm still trying to figure out how a guy who sets such high standards -- and I don't think there's any argument that's been the perception regarding Paterno for longer than any of us have even been alive -- could have drifted off this badly.   

All I've done is ask "Isn't it possible" questions in my twisted Matlock brain.  Maybe you consider that a defense.  I'm just asking for facts, not supposition and to deal in what we know as an absolute rather than what we think might have or must have been.  Of all people I expected a lawyer to understand that. 

The only person here who's been able to effectively (and without hysterical ranting) explain why none of the rationales I've tried to come with up hold water is Wes.   I might be leaving somebody out, but he's about the only one who stuck to facts and didn't resort to "I just know" or "he must have known" arguments.  He stayed away from "shoot him in the face" mob mentality. 

And I think he's won.   

What Wes said leaves me in a quandry.  I can't find a way out of that box for Joe.  I've considered it all day.  There's no escape.   And I really hoped there was one. 

It stinks. 

[RWS]

Not only that but I could understand if the kid was say 16 or perhaps related, but no way in hell does a 55+ year old man belong in a shower with a boy that age.  There is no reason you could give me as a parent where I would be ok with that.

This is what I'm screaming. You don't even have to go past "55+ year old in shower in locker room with 16 year old" for red flags to go up. There is no reasonable explanation for that.

[Kaos]

This is what I'm screaming. You don't even have to go past "55+ year old in shower in locker room with 16 year old" for red flags to go up. There is no reasonable explanation for that.

How old are your goats?  I doubt they're 16.

[Vandy Vol]

Are you really a lawyer?

You're seriously going to tell me that nobody in the history of the world has ever thought about burying something and hoping it goes away until Penn State came along?   Wow.

Are you really illiterate?

I think you're missing our (or at least my) point.

No one is prancing around pretending the world is full of magical lollipops and unicorn queefs, and that no one tries to sweep anything under the rug or ignore something in order to preserve themselves.

[Kaos]

Are you really illiterate?

No, but I read that you were.

You said that about queefs and unicorns and then went on a lengthy rant about how it was stupid logic, blah, blah, blappity blah. 

Your first queef comment was invalidated by the remainder of your attempt at an argument.  You're  a circle talker.

[RWS]

How old are your goats?  I doubt they're 16.

Shouldn't you be acting like a 5 year old at a McDonalds somewhere?

[Kaos]

Shouldn't you be acting like a 5 year old at a McDonalds somewhere?

Next time I tell you to leave off the goddam tomato and you don't I will, Ronald. 

[Vandy Vol]

No, but I read that you were.

You said that about queefs and unicorns and then went on a lengthy rant about how it was stupid logic, blah, blah, blappity blah. 

Your first queef comment was invalidated by the remainder of your attempt at an argument.  You're  a circle talker.

You can sit on your philosophical throne and ponder all day about why someone would do something; I don't give two shits about why they did something.  The fact of the matter is that they did it.  You sound like Johnnie Cochran trying to explain that your client is a psychopathic murderer because his father diddled him when he was a child.

We've been repeating over and over that there were simply too many incidents, one of which was reported to Paterno, in addition to criminal charges that had been brought; there simply is no way that Paterno was in the dark on this.  At the very least, he should have had a strong suspicion, and should not have continued to allow the creep to hang around the program with children.  Paterno was in the wrong, and no number of theories about why he was in the wrong will change that.

All of these incidents and the time line for them were in the indictment.  If you've read it, then I don't know why it took Wes laying everything out in elementary terms for you to finally see what it is that we've been trying to say all along.

If any of the above is too "circular" for you, then you may need an adult to assist you in day to day activities.

[Kaos]

You can sit on your philosophical throne and ponder all day about why someone would do something; I don't give two shits about why they did something.  The fact of the matter is that they did it.  You sound like Johnnie Cochran trying to explain that your client is a psychopathic murderer because his father diddled him when he was a child.

We've been repeating over and over that there were simply too many incidents, one of which was reported to Paterno, in addition to criminal charges that had been brought; there simply is no way that Paterno was in the dark on this.  At the very least, he should have had a strong suspicion, and should not have continued to allow the creep to hang around the program with children.  Paterno was in the wrong, and no number of theories about why he was in the wrong will change that.

All of these incidents and the time line for them were in the indictment.  If you've read it, then I don't know why it took Wes laying everything out in elementary terms for you to finally see what it is that we've been trying to say all along.

If any of the above is too "circular" for you, then you may need an adult to assist you in day to day activities.

^^ Hysterical rant ^^

What I didn't see in the indictment (and still don't, frankly) is the connection between 1998 and 2002 in terms of who was told, what they were told, who knew and what they knew.  Based on Wes' simple, plain view, non-hysterical, pitchfork-less take on what was in the indictment, I'm willing to concede that at the very least Paterno should have known something in 1998, otherwise why would he have allowed Sandusky to step down. 

You're a lawyer and you don't think the who, what, when, where and why matters? 

I guess you guys are required to print this for a reason:

No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

This has been fun, but you're in on the tail end of the event and your blustering seems overwrought.  It's Friday night.  Go out and hit something. 

Oh, BTW?  Sandusky was barred from bringing kids to PSU in 2002.  He wasn't there with children after that. 
The board at Second Mile -- his foundation -- was also notified of the incident. 

It did nothing. 

Everything in the indictment is from 2002 and before I think.  Nine years ago.  That's a long time to pass for nothing to happen.   

Not defending, just saying.