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

To: FlJoePa

Why did Joe then cover it up? I agree that this goes a lot deeper than anybody knows but Joe Pa STILL actively covered it up to protect the programs prestige, and that is inexcusable to most sane folks of good moral fiber.


4 posted on 07/27/2012 7:34:47 PM PDT by aft_lizard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: aft_lizard

MOre likely he covered it up to protect his butt. Ol’Jer can’t hurt him now, but there may be others!


5 posted on 07/27/2012 7:44:27 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: aft_lizard

What proof is there that Joe covered up anything? Why do people keep reporting this as if it is fact? There is zero evidence to say this and he got a clean bill of health from the PA attorney general.

He reported a second hand account of the 2011 incident the next day to his superiors (as he was required to do by PA law). MM testified that no one ever told him not to discuss what he saw.

If Joe covered something up, he did a much worse job of it than he did turning kids into men and winning football games.


6 posted on 07/27/2012 7:45:33 PM PDT by FlJoePa ("Success without honor is an unseasoned dish; it will satisfy your hunger, but it won't taste good")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: aft_lizard
Re: “Joe Pa STILL actively covered it up...”

There is no evidence to back that up, just Freeh’s opinions and bizarre interpretations of the facts.

The 1998 assault claim was investigated by five government agencies.

Not one of them recommended a charge against Sandusky.

The claim that Sandusky was “allowed” to resign in 1999 is bizarre - there was NO charge against him.

The only reasonable criticism that might be directed against Paterno is that he waited 24 hours - on a weekend - to report McQueary’s shower claim against Sandusky.

Remember, Paterno’s total knowledge of the shower case was hearsay. Paterno did not witness anything. All Paterno could do was report what McQueary said to him. If Paterno had testified in court, 100% of his knowledge would be hearsay evidence.

Remember this, too - we have ONLY McQueary’s account of his conversation with Paterno. We have NO rebuttal from Paterno.

After waiting 24 hours, Paterno reported McQueary’s claim to his [Paterno’s] immediate boss and to the University vice-president in charge of the campus police force.

Suggestions that Paterno had a responsibility to “follow up” on the shower allegations are legally bizarre.

Both the prosecution and the defense would have claimed that Paterno was trying to influence the case or was trying to obtain confidential information.

No lawyer involved in this case would have told Paterno ANYTHING.

15 posted on 07/27/2012 9:51:57 PM PDT by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: aft_lizard

Joe Pa’s supporters want to make him a martyr.


20 posted on 07/27/2012 10:32:49 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Pr 14:34 Righteousness exalteth a nation:but sin is a reproach to any people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | 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