Posted on 03/10/2013 8:32:44 PM PDT by Colofornian
STATE COLLEGE — Penn State trustee Paul Suhey admits relieving Joe Paterno of his head coaching duties in November 2011 over a late-night phone call was not the right tact.
Stephanie Deviney, another trustee, is certain the whole board feels that way.
“We apologize, we screwed it up as far as how we delivered the message,” Suhey said Friday in an interview. “Our decision, we’re not going to go back on. But we messed that up big time.
“People are still so hurt by that, and you know, damn it, we screwed it up.”
The Paterno decision will go down in the annals as the trigger of when Penn State alumni and diehard fans turned against the board, and the anger has not relented. They email the trustees, write letters — even call them out in advertisements in this newspaper.
But, four trustees, in an interview with the Centre Daily Times’ editorial board, said they are committed to turning the corner, opening up and building on the progress the university has already seen in responding in the wake of the Jerry Sandusky abuse scandal. The trustees — Suhey, Deviney, board Chairman Keith Masser and Paul Silvis — said they hope the university community will meet them in the middle as part of moving forward.
SNIP
The trustees say they did not fire Paterno, thought they stood behind it as the right decision given the details of the presentment.
“We retired him three weeks early,” Suhey said...
(Excerpt) Read more at centredaily.com ...
It is exactly why we don't permit trials by lynch mobs.
Of course he is. That is what is posts are all about: Keeping the lynch mob worked up. [FredZarguna]
#1...Kinda hard to "lynch" a corpse...wouldn't you say? (Or did I point out a fact beyond both your IQs???)
#2...As for your other allegations here, allow me to quote columnist Scott Ostler, who was writing about all of this back in November of 2011-- Penn State's Joe Paterno gets what he deserves:
With responsibility comes responsibility."
And commenting upon Paterno's mea culpa: "With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more," Paterno said in a statement. That's pathetic. You need hindsight to tell you that you must do whatever you can to stop a dangerous criminal?
And finally: Several e-mailers demand, "Have you ever heard of due process?" The due process I've heard of involves a justice system and a legal trial. Paterno faces no legal action or charge. Legally, his rear end is covered. But there was no trial when Paterno was sainted, no jury declared him one of the noblest and finest college coaches of all time. The public decided. It's the same deal on the flip side...
So "trials?" "Guilty verdicts?"
More over-the-top hyperbole? What now, Chip? Are you saying that people are going to drag ole Joe's corpse from the grave and "try" him some court of law?
Are you lamely claiming that Joe is under indictment somewhere down here? Is he up for trial somewhere?
Oh...so you're lamely attempting to speak poetically...or word-picture, wise? Is that it?
If so, then Ostler's comment fits there: "...
People are fired ALL THE TIME on the basis of accusations alone!
Slackin' on the job...stealing something from the company...Facebooking too much (stealing time)...etc. etc. etc.
Corporations don't hold "trials" -- and even when they may discover an employee stealing something, they usually DONT report it to the authorities. They just sack the person. And yes on the basis of accusations.
What sort of a cosmetically sealed world do you live in???
Happy Valley?
Please post with larger font. I can't see how intelligent you are with these small characters.
I understand that in the worlds of fast food and mega-retail and shelf-stocking, you haven't been afforded these protections, but most governments, universities, and corporations large and small who hire professional, educated people don't do it -- at all -- let alone "all the time."
Grand jury testimony is done under oath.
And what Grand Jury testimony accuses Joe Paterno of being part of a cover-up?
Ask yourself that question. You're the one doing it. And you are obsessed to the point of a mental disorder over it.
(I don’t post ONLY for your benefit :) )
(Oh, and you psycho-analyze strangers from a distance...is there a fee, or is it free?)
-- Annie Fisher
http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2013/02/22/wrongful-termination-employment/
That's on THAT side of the coin...
Most wrongful termination lawsuits have solid grounds- like
-Whistle blower retaliation
- Termination for jury duty
Refusal to break the law at the request of the employer
Invasion of Privacy
harassment
discrimination
Defamation of Character
Paterno wouldn't have sued for any of these...would have resulted in even more of what was under the surface coming out..
Paterno isn't suing for anything, he's dead. So he isn't on the staff anymore. See how that works? We weren't talking about Paterno. He was fired without cause because he was an at will employee. Curley, Schultz, and Spanier are NOT at will employees. Penn State has an employee manual/university policy and it requires its professionals in staff and faculty in non-tenure positions to be fired for cause. Firing for other than cause is grounds for a lawsuit. Send your idiot "authority" Annie I-couldn't-care-less an e-mail and she'll explain the difference to you between tenure, contract, staff protected, staff exempt and at will employees.
And please stop trying to cite idiots as authorities. CNN as a business resource? On FR? Seriously? I've already told you, your little Walmart or McDonalds benefits and "protections" don't apply to professionals.
Some local sports guy NO ONE outside of San Francisco has ever heard of hates Paterno, and felt safe enough behind the lynch mob to trash him in a blog five people read. Big Deal. Like you, he's a coward, talking lies and misinformation and hiding your lies and misinformation behind vocal morons in a herd that -- amazingly -- actually know even less than you.
It would be condign punishment, and exactly what the Law of Karma demands for you to lose your job someday on the basis of an accusation without any basis, but I don't wish that on you. Apparently, it's important to you to trash somebody who can't defend himself, who has never been found guilty of any crime as if he were an accessory to them. The record clearly shows he was not. So we have to ask: why is telling these lies to important to The Coliform?
Have you seen a psychiatrist for your problem?
what Grand Jury testimony accuses Joe Paterno of being part of a cover-up?
Where exactly did I post anything about Grand Jury testimony accusing Joe Paterno of a cover-up? He failed to notify police on his watch of a felony offense involving children, committed by a former assistant coach. That alone is shameful and disgraceful.
What you keep trying to do is lynch a reputation, you mouse.
I am guessing you were diddled (or worse) as a youngster, by an adult you trusted? Is that what this is about?
And it's all Joe Paterno's fault?
Wow. Three lies in one sentence.
Three strikes. You're out.
Have you seen a psychiatrist for your problem?
What are you, a child molester apologist?
What he was informed of didn't involve (plural) children
Would a single child have been any less distasteful you?
He personally put the witness with direct evidence "of something" in contact with the head of police within days of its happening.
He failed to notify police as soon as it was reported to him? Why wait, did he think the crime would just go away? If your child was reportedly being assaulted, how long would you wait to report the alleged perp? Or beat the SOB bloody?
The Jury did not regard McQueary's testimony of that incident credible enough to warrant conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/23/justice/sandusky-victim-number-six-reaction
Victim No. 6: Violation and vindication
" "guilty, guilty, guilty" -- of unlawful contact with minors, corruption of minors and endangering the welfare of children."
You're as pathetic and disgusting as the POS, Sandusky.
Hearsay is an out of court statement. The ginger seeing the rape is not hearsay. Hearsay would be a third party telling joe that ginger told them about the shower rape.
(Newsflash for somebody who seems lost in the glory years of JoePa...that reputation took the bus out of town long ago...and won't be effected upon the masses by me -- or anybody else! In case you haven't noticed, the statue came down quite some time ago...and nobody but JoePa himself invited others to yank it down)
As far as your projectionist theories, all the adults in my life have been abuse-free toward me (So much for your magic 8-ball psycho-analysis of complete strangers)
Perhaps you should instead simply stop sanctioning the Penn State diddlers & those who protected him?
Tell us...how it is that so many Penn Staters could see so much for so long & Sandusky remain on the loose to abuse again over & over & over again?
What are you, a child molester apologist?
(Yup, you got that right...anybody who tries to parse the difference between child rape and
Hmmmm. Interesting way of stating it. That leaves the question of just how abuse-free they were toward others.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.