Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Lakeshark
If I am an old fool (and I certainly am not as young as once I was), I am an old fool in love with DUE PROCESS OF LAW. It is in every copy of our constitution, even yours.

See #52.

Paterno did what he was required to do and did not do what the university required him not to do. He honored the rule of law and the rules of his employment contract. He did not go on a personal crusade without adequate evidence as you apparently would have preferred. You were disappointed. Toooooo bad! Welcome to the wonderful world of academia and its carefully constructed Fantasyland.

The courts can neither indict nor convict nor criminally punish the dead. If you REALLY care so much about the child raping done by Sandusky, then, now that he is safely behind bars functionally forever (too bad he could not be executed), it is time to turn your attention to the living perps or those who may have been perps (kiddie rapers and cover up artists alike, university officials, Second Mile Foundation, etc., and particularly Spanier).

As to Paterno's innocence, he is and was innicent until PROVEN GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. Again, that is well-settled law in all 50 states. He is dead and it is too late. Further, you purport to know just what it was that Paterno "knew." Neither you nor I nor anyone else here "know" any such thing as what Paterno KNEW. Even if Paterno SAID he knew, and even if he were not dead, you would have to get that testimony by the hearer into evidence under a valid hearsay exception. Do you have some kind of machine that is a psychic detector of what Paterno "knew?" I have never heard of such a device being allowed into testimony or to testify.

The "life changing stuff" WAS disgusting and as vile as it gets. That was the stuff that Sandusky DID to the kids according to the jury that rendered the verdict AFTER he received due process of law and legal representation, etc. The trial court just yesterday rejected defense motions to set aside the verdict on a defense claim of inadequate time to prepare his defense before the trial. Your unsupported planted axioms after "as vile as it gets" don't make a shred of difference. They are not evidence of anything but of your passions and temper tantrum.

I note that you have a remarkable reluctance to go after Spanier and the other administrators at Penn State. You too would only be satisfied by the celebrity scalp offered to you by Spanier and the trustees and the administrators who have been indicted. And you think I drink the kool aid big time??? Don't go to law school. You have no future in the legal profession and little capacity for discernment.

54 posted on 01/30/2013 11:04:03 PM PST by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline, Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Society: Rack 'em, Danno)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies ]


To: BlackElk
The requirement you speak of, for the crime that was done was a bare minimum of what someone with his knowledge should do, it was hugely and embarrassingly a minimum of what anyone should do in that case.

Defending that minimum is flat out wrong, it's like saying Bambi or Hillary did no wrong at Benghazi. They were just so busy with more important things.......

I mean, "who cares?"

Right?

Wrong. Absolutely, positively wrong.

60 posted on 01/31/2013 8:16:50 AM PST by Lakeshark (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson