That was also the hope that the inmates of the Gulags clung to.
Posted on 11/09/2011 7:30:27 PM PST by Colofornian
Penn State trustees fired football coach Joe Paterno and university president Graham Spanier (SPAN-yer) amid the growing furor over how the school handled sex abuse allegations against an assistant coach.
The massive shakeup Wednesday night came hours after Paterno announced that he planned to retire at the end of his 46th season.
But the outcry following the arrest of former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky on molestation charges proved too much for the board to ignore.
One key question has been why Paterno and other top school officials didn't go to police in 2002 after being told a graduate assistant saw Sandusky assaulting a boy in a school shower...
(Excerpt) Read more at newser.com ...
That was also the hope that the inmates of the Gulags clung to.
IMHO, should have happened a long time ago.
I am puzzled about one thing.
So many of the same people who cry out about the foul criminality implicit in this situation, overwhelmingly take an attitude of ‘get over it’, regarding the decriminalization of homosexuality.
It easier for me to understand how a culture so closely associated with giving Paterno godfather-like authority to take the issue to him first, and even for him to handle the situation more privately than is revealed here, than to immediately judge him. Yet I would still adamantly hold both homosexuality and these reports as criminal in nature.
I am puzzled by so many who publicly condone homosexuality, but then act affronted upon hearing these reports.
Folks on this thread should think about this too:
In the time that all this was going on, remember one focus of the PSU program was to make JoePa the winningest coach of all time. I cannot recall when that mark was reached exactly. Sick as it is, I am sure there was some shoving a scandal under a rug in order not to undermine this milestone.
Are you smoking crack?
Not only has he already been indicted, he is already out on bail (although forbidden to be near any children including his grandkids).
“Where did I once express sympathy for JoPa? I just want it to make sense. No indictment yet for the rapist, but everyone around him is getting excoriated. How can that be acceptable?! Why do you willfully ignore that? Just because of the intensity of the topic? Do you not understand that it will be used as a tool in the future by unscrupulous people, particularly in government? How am I evil for stating what seems so obvious?”
__________________________________________________________
Why don’t you take a look at my other posts related to this topic on other threads? I am not willfully ignoring anything nor do I not “understand”. Have you read the grand jury report yet? Do you understand that many people enabled this monster and that they have testifiied to that?
You’re welcome :)
I’m a married woman with four kids. My husband and I attended and met at Penn State back in the 1980’s. We are saddened about this entire thing. No blinders on here.
The media focus is on Paterno and he’s being scapegoated. I’ve read everything there is to read about this case/situation. I think it’s sad and dispicable what the media is doing to Paterno. The students at University Park know this is media driven and they are fighting against it. As I sit here listening to and watching the reporters about the “riot” and how “uncomfortable it is for police and reporters” I can’t help rolling my eyes and gagging. Pennn State is probably one of the best places to attend college and this “riot” is anything but. The talking heads commenting on how difficult is is for reporters crack me up. The students are rebelling against and are angry with the liberal media. I’m on their side.
think Micheal Jackson....having young boys sleep in his bed....and think of all the people that protected him....because of money....
To be accurate..This was pederasty..The love of boys between 12 and 17.
Involving minors in their sick sex is the horrifying part.
The failure to report the crime(s) may be what allowed Sandusky to continue raping little boys. That is why there is so much outrage at the silent men. If those men had had more courage, other little boys could have been spared a lifetime of anguish. These men are lucky that they are only being fired.
I am outraged that Sandusky is not sitting in jail at this moment. I am outraged that it has taken YEARS to release the grand jury report. Justice is long overdue.
Not true. Read p. 7 again of the Grand Jury Presentment: Grand Jury Presentment
This was victim #2...it doesn't matter that Sandusky was no longer an employee...'cause as you mentioned, he had full on-campus privileges. Retired employees cannot engage in open-ended carte-blanche anything goes behavior minus potential consequences.
He immediately reported the incident with the grad student but that was AFTER Sundusky retired. Paterno had no authority over him and no authority to deny him access to the campus.
Again...what does it matter that Sandusky was retired by 2002? What distinction does that make? If McQueary saw a reporter with lockerroom privileges raping a kid in the showers late post-game, would that matter that the reporter wasn't an employee of Penn State? How ludicrous can you get in pointing out "Facts" that are entirely irrelevant?
IN my parallel analogy of a reporter/journalist raping a kid, Paterno wouldn't have any authority over him, either...nor PERSONAL authority to deny him access to the locker room. But, again, so what?
You mean to tell me that if all Paterno did was to lateral an eyewitness account of a journalist raping a kid to his superiors, but never followed up on it, that would have been A-OK with you? Really?
Again, that investigation was also stifled.
What investigation? I'm sorry but this story seems to be quite lost on you...the FACTS are that no investigation was jumpstarted on THIS case till over half a dozen years after the fact...(Sandusky was being investigated in '07...but that was ANOTHER case)...
It wasn't that the investigation was started and then squelched. Penn State never even allowed a "take-off" because all of them -- including Paterno -- kept quiet!
So there is nothing here about Paterno covering anything up.
Sure there is. First, he delayed telling his supervisors for 24 hours. (What? What if YOUR kid was accessable to a re-rape the night Paterno said nothing)
But here's what's a LOT worse: He never followed up in the LONG RUN to ensure that the authorities (not just his superiors) found out McQueary's eyewitness report. In fact, he upgraded McQueary's lot in life (from grad asst to wide receivers coach & then head of recruiting). What? You don't think Paterno had the option of asking McQueary if the police had ever questioned him...and upon finding out 'no' -- to use his considerable influence to direct McQueary to do that?
Imagine, if you would, if McQueary had seen a shower murder and body disposal. Do you think if McQueary told Paterno about such a thing, that Paterno's "obligations" to "report" the "incident" would have been entirely met if he had merely told the account to his superiors -- and his superiors alone?
Are you crazy? IF he never then followed up to ask McQueary if the police had questioned him...then, yes...ya better believe a cover-up was operative.
All of this came out right after he became the winningest coach of all time.
Coinkidink? I think not.
To be accurate some of the boys were as young as seven, and the oldest that has come foreward so far was fourteen.
This is pedophelia.
Yep. Spanier has been taking Penn State in a hoorendous direction. I’m glad he’s fired.
That womens’ basketball coach was also vilified by the same media taking down Paterno.
Indeed it is!
Any PA criminal law folks know an answer ? (I was just curious and looked at PA statutes a little)...
Sandusky is toast, probably the rest of his life in prison, rape of a child, first degree felony up to 40 years (he should get multiple counts).
But for those who knew and concealed the crime, i.e., Paterno & Co, witnesses, etc., might these criminal charges apply ?:
§ 5105. Hindering apprehension or prosecution.
(a) Offense defined.—A person commits an offense if, with intent to hinder the apprehension, prosecution, conviction or punishment of another for crime or violation of the terms of probation, parole, intermediate punishment or Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition, he:
(1) harbors or conceals the other;
(2) provides or aids in providing a weapon,
transportation, disguise or other means of avoiding
apprehension or effecting escape;
(3) conceals or destroys evidence of the crime, or
tampers with a witness, informant, document or other source of information, regardless of its admissibility in evidence;
(4) warns the other of impending discovery or
apprehension, except that this paragraph does not apply to a warning given in connection with an effort to bring another into compliance with law; or
(5) provides false information to a law enforcement
officer.
(b) Grading.—The offense is a felony of the third degree
if the conduct which the actor knows has been charged or is
liable to be charged against the person aided would constitute a felony of the first or second degree. Otherwise it is a misdemeanor of the second degree.
(Dec. 18, 1996, P.L.1074, No.160, eff. 60 days)
§ 5107. Aiding consummation of crime.
(a) Offense defined.—A person commits an offense if he
intentionally aids another to accomplish an unlawful object of a crime, as by safeguarding the proceeds thereof or converting the proceeds into negotiable funds.
(b) Grading.—The offense is a felony of the third degree
if the principal offense was a felony of the first or second
degree. Otherwise it is a misdemeanor of the second degree.
§ 5108. Compounding.
(a) Offense defined.—A person commits a misdemeanor of the second degree if he accepts or agrees to accept any pecuniary benefit in consideration of refraining from reporting to law enforcement authorities the commission or suspected commission of any offense or information relating to an offense.
(b) Defense.—It is a defense to prosecution under this
section that the pecuniary benefit did not exceed an amount
which the actor believed to be due as restitution or
indemnification for harm caused by the offense.
No she isn’t. She’s (or he) is trying to stop the homosexual talking points.
He didn’t give Paterno a detailed account. At least, that’s not factual info yet.
____________________________________
Nice to see that you've got your priorities straight.
Precisely what I thought...
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.