Penn State Sandusky Trial #12 (GUILTY-post verdict discussion)
- Thread starter ynotdivein
- Start date
- Status
costalpilot
Active Member
couched Bs by administrators trying to be "humane"
BennyProfane
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2011
- Messages
- 51
- Reaction score
- 0
Phew! From page 115 on the Clery Act:
In fact, according to the CPO, he told one of his supervisors in 2007 that there was a need for additional personnel to assist with the Clery Act and "we could get hurt really bad here." The supervisor responded by saying "we really don't have the money."
The CPO is listed as the University Police Department's Crime Prevention Officer, although he's not identified by name.
In fact, according to the CPO, he told one of his supervisors in 2007 that there was a need for additional personnel to assist with the Clery Act and "we could get hurt really bad here." The supervisor responded by saying "we really don't have the money."
The CPO is listed as the University Police Department's Crime Prevention Officer, although he's not identified by name.
costalpilot
Active Member
sunny hostens doesnt get it that some are STILL supporting penn state.
i can explain it sunny.
they are football fans.
fan = fanatical.
fan = my ego is irretrievably tied to football at my school of choice........ (penn state, for example)
these people see anything said that might be construed as negative about "their" program as a personal attack on them.
i can explain it sunny.
they are football fans.
fan = fanatical.
fan = my ego is irretrievably tied to football at my school of choice........ (penn state, for example)
these people see anything said that might be construed as negative about "their" program as a personal attack on them.
BennyProfane
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2011
- Messages
- 51
- Reaction score
- 0
With all the debate on this board about Paterno being a mandated reporter and Schultz being a proper legal channel of communication for that reporting, Freeh's report is very specific (pg. 118):
The Special Investigative Counsel found no indication that Paterno, Curley and McQueary met their responsibilities as CSAs by reporting, or ensuring that someone reported, this incident to the University Police Department. As a result, no timely warning could hvae been issued to the University community and the inceident was not included in the University's Clery Crime statistics for 2001.
McQueary, Paterno and Curley did report the incident to Schultz who, as SVP-FB, was ultimately in charge of the University Police Department. However, Schultz was not a low enforcement officer and was not the person designated to receive Cleary Crime reports or to collect Cleary Crime statistics for the University.
Arguably, as the most senior leader of the University, Schultz and Spanier should have ensured compliance with the Clery Act regarding this incident. There is no record that Spanier or Schultz reported, or designated someone to report, the incident to the University Police Department, which should have caused the incident to be included in the University's Clery Crime statistics and may have triggered the issuance of a timely warning to the University community.
The Special Investigative Counsel found no indication that Paterno, Curley and McQueary met their responsibilities as CSAs by reporting, or ensuring that someone reported, this incident to the University Police Department. As a result, no timely warning could hvae been issued to the University community and the inceident was not included in the University's Clery Crime statistics for 2001.
McQueary, Paterno and Curley did report the incident to Schultz who, as SVP-FB, was ultimately in charge of the University Police Department. However, Schultz was not a low enforcement officer and was not the person designated to receive Cleary Crime reports or to collect Cleary Crime statistics for the University.
Arguably, as the most senior leader of the University, Schultz and Spanier should have ensured compliance with the Clery Act regarding this incident. There is no record that Spanier or Schultz reported, or designated someone to report, the incident to the University Police Department, which should have caused the incident to be included in the University's Clery Crime statistics and may have triggered the issuance of a timely warning to the University community.
ynotdivein
Retired WS Staff
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2009
- Messages
- 11,425
- Reaction score
- 69
costalpilot
Active Member
the only people still being "fooled" by anything seems to be the paterno family.
I'm still lobbying for a forum...lease:
We still have the Curley/Schultz perjury trials to come. Possibly more criminal trials, Spanier especially. Unless the victims settle, there will be civil suits to follow. NCAA, the feds, etc, are still investigating. The fallout from this scandal will last for years.
believe09
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2007
- Messages
- 28,094
- Reaction score
- 518
Admin told me to go ahead and set up a separate thread for the report:
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8140091#post8140091"]Link[/ame]
Bring over posts and links as relevant, OK?? I have read the report twice now....
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8140091#post8140091"]Link[/ame]
Bring over posts and links as relevant, OK?? I have read the report twice now....
believe09
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2007
- Messages
- 28,094
- Reaction score
- 518
I'm still lobbying for a forum...
((hugs)) JBean left me a VM saying to set up a thread which I did...:blowkiss:
costalpilot
Active Member
i agree with tom klein that there seems a direct connection between sanduskys "retiremement" in 1998 and the mcQueary report in 1998...dont knbow of the bond will ever n=be established, but those are not unconnecetd events, imo.
unless the pervert just needed more free time to molest children than his job was affording him. and i dont berlieve that.
i think he was forced to retire by joe. but treated "humanely" otherwise.
i'll bet joe the great moralist completely covered all that up though.
unless the pervert just needed more free time to molest children than his job was affording him. and i dont berlieve that.
i think he was forced to retire by joe. but treated "humanely" otherwise.
i'll bet joe the great moralist completely covered all that up though.
ynotdivein
Retired WS Staff
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2009
- Messages
- 11,425
- Reaction score
- 69
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=178528"]Magic Portal to Freeh Report Thread[/ame]
costalpilot
Active Member
post freeh report response from PATERNO family...note that at the end they try to dilute Joes responsibility by saying :"everyone" shares in the responsibility...well i've heard the report summarzied and it doesnt point to"everyones" responsibility, but to the responsibility of four men---joe paterno is one of those men...the Paterno family remains in obscuration mode, no matter what.
The Paterno family released the following statement with regard to the release of Louis Freeh's report:
We are in the process of reviewing the Freeh report and will need some time before we can comment in depth on its findings and conclusions. From the moment this crisis broke, Joe Paterno supported a comprehensive, fair investigation. He always believed, as we do, that the full truth should be uncovered.
From what we have been able to ****** at this time, it appears that after reviewing 3 million documents and conducting more than 400 interviews, the underlying facts as summarized in the report are almost entirely consistent with what we understood them to be. The 1998 incident was reported to law enforcement and investigated. Joe Paterno reported what he was told about the 2001 incident to Penn State authorities and he believed it would be fully investigated. The investigation also confirmed that Sandusky's retirement in 1999 was unrelated to these events.
One great risk in this situation is a replaying of events from the last 15 years or so in a way that makes it look obvious what everyone must have known and should have done. The idea that any sane, responsible adult would knowingly cover up for a child predator is impossible to accept. The far more realistic conclusion is that many people didn't fully understand what was happening and underestimated or misinterpreted events. Sandusky was a great deceiver. He fooled everyone - law enforcement, his family, coaches, players, neighbors, University officials, and everyone at Second Mile.
Joe Paterno wasn't perfect. He made mistakes and he regretted them. He is still the only leader to step forward and say that with the benefit of hindsight he wished he had done more. To think, however, that he would have protected Jerry Sandusky to avoid bad publicity is simply not realistic. If Joe Paterno had understood what Sandusky was, a fear of bad publicity would not have factored into his actions.
We appreciate the effort that was put into this investigation. The issue we have with some of the conclusions is that they represent a judgment on motives and intentions and we think this is impossible. We have said from the beginning that Joe Paterno did not know Jerry Sandusky was a child predator. Moreover, Joe Paterno never interfered with any investigation. He immediately and accurately reported the incident he was told about in 2001.
It can be argued that Joe Paterno should have gone further. He should have pushed his superiors to see that they were doing their jobs. We accept this criticism. At the same time, Joe Paterno and everyone else knew that Sandusky had been repeatedly investigated by authorities who approved his multiple adoptions and foster children. Joe Paterno mistakenly believed that investigators, law enforcement officials, University leaders and others would properly and fully investigate any issue and proceed as the facts dictated.
This didn't happen and everyone shares the responsibility.
The Paterno family released the following statement with regard to the release of Louis Freeh's report:
We are in the process of reviewing the Freeh report and will need some time before we can comment in depth on its findings and conclusions. From the moment this crisis broke, Joe Paterno supported a comprehensive, fair investigation. He always believed, as we do, that the full truth should be uncovered.
From what we have been able to ****** at this time, it appears that after reviewing 3 million documents and conducting more than 400 interviews, the underlying facts as summarized in the report are almost entirely consistent with what we understood them to be. The 1998 incident was reported to law enforcement and investigated. Joe Paterno reported what he was told about the 2001 incident to Penn State authorities and he believed it would be fully investigated. The investigation also confirmed that Sandusky's retirement in 1999 was unrelated to these events.
One great risk in this situation is a replaying of events from the last 15 years or so in a way that makes it look obvious what everyone must have known and should have done. The idea that any sane, responsible adult would knowingly cover up for a child predator is impossible to accept. The far more realistic conclusion is that many people didn't fully understand what was happening and underestimated or misinterpreted events. Sandusky was a great deceiver. He fooled everyone - law enforcement, his family, coaches, players, neighbors, University officials, and everyone at Second Mile.
Joe Paterno wasn't perfect. He made mistakes and he regretted them. He is still the only leader to step forward and say that with the benefit of hindsight he wished he had done more. To think, however, that he would have protected Jerry Sandusky to avoid bad publicity is simply not realistic. If Joe Paterno had understood what Sandusky was, a fear of bad publicity would not have factored into his actions.
We appreciate the effort that was put into this investigation. The issue we have with some of the conclusions is that they represent a judgment on motives and intentions and we think this is impossible. We have said from the beginning that Joe Paterno did not know Jerry Sandusky was a child predator. Moreover, Joe Paterno never interfered with any investigation. He immediately and accurately reported the incident he was told about in 2001.
It can be argued that Joe Paterno should have gone further. He should have pushed his superiors to see that they were doing their jobs. We accept this criticism. At the same time, Joe Paterno and everyone else knew that Sandusky had been repeatedly investigated by authorities who approved his multiple adoptions and foster children. Joe Paterno mistakenly believed that investigators, law enforcement officials, University leaders and others would properly and fully investigate any issue and proceed as the facts dictated.
This didn't happen and everyone shares the responsibility.
azwriter
Sister Mary Wanna
Yes Vinny is turning it on with his outrage. And I do think he is being sincere. But I do wish he and others on HLN would stop saying these "four" men did nothing. That's not true. They did do something concerning the circumstances and crimes of Jerry Sandusky. What these four stellar officals at a major University did was make a decision to cover up everything they knew, suspected and thought of Jerry's sexual abuse of young boys.
Yes, they did do something - Lied, conspired and swept it all under the rug.
It's all very disgusting and naturally makes me pause and ask: what else did they try to hide?
I need an Irish Coffee now.
azwriter
Sister Mary Wanna
This statement is very hard hitting and brings it all back where it belongs. What about the victims?
jmo
believe09
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2007
- Messages
- 28,094
- Reaction score
- 518
Bumping...
back2back19
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2011
- Messages
- 452
- Reaction score
- 0
The Paternos need to shut up. They sound so bad. I thought they weren't afraid of the truth? Yeah, guess they are.
And evidently the NCAA lawyer has read the Freeh Report and has concluded that there were no infractions commited that fit within the NCAA manual. I knew they'd be too cowardly to do anything.
And evidently the NCAA lawyer has read the Freeh Report and has concluded that there were no infractions commited that fit within the NCAA manual. I knew they'd be too cowardly to do anything.
- Status