Penn State Sandusky Trial #12 (GUILTY-post verdict discussion)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gitana1 said:
"Don't you hate how Paterno describes it? "Sex between a man and a boy". Really? I have heard variations on the theme so many times in various cases. "We saw a man having sex with a child in a car." "The child was involved in a sexual relationship with the man."

Little kids can't have sexual relationship with adults. They are not having sex with adults. They are being molested, victimized, raped.

I know Paterno has passed away but were he alive I would tell him that there is no such thing as "sex" between a man and a boy. That's called child rape, buddy.

Funny how we never use those descriptors when it is a woman getting raped. I never hear anyone say, "I turned the corner and saw a man having sex with a woman." It's always, "I saw a man raping a woman."

So why are kids different? Why are kids deemed capable of having a "relationship" or "sexual intercourse" with their attacker/abuser?

Drives me crazy. Sorry for the rant.
__________________
It was such a great rant that I've bumped it up to this thread!


Kudos to gitana for an excellent rant. I have one of my own to post:

It really bothers me when I read statements like "Sandusky displayed inappropriate behavior" or "Sandusky inappropriately touched the boys". Imo, inappropriate actions are things like wearing black socks with brown shoes, slurping soup out of a bowl, or singing Christmas carols at a Fourth of July picnic.
"Malicious"
"Criminal"
"Depraved"
"Evil"
Those are just a few of the words I find that are better suited to describe Sandusky's behavior. I think that when people and the media use the term "inappropriate", they make Sandusky's crimes sound like nothing more than a mere faux pas. His victims deserve more respect than that, imo.
 
Another CBS Sports story, this one by Dennis Dodd, discussing the NCAA's role in days to come:

Emmert, NCAA in position to send important message: Make Penn State pay

the rest at the link above

Bah. (Not intended at you, WFGODOT, just jumping off from your post).

IMO the NCAA has about as much credibility as that man behind the curtain that Dorothy wasn't supposed to pay any attention to.

It only now butts in after the conviction?

Again I say bah.

(and O/T, I can't believe I just now figured out what WFGODOT refers to. And my degree is in English! :ashamed:
 
Sex abuse reporting requirements taking effect nationwide, in wake of Sandusky case

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/sex-ab...ng-effect-nationwide-in-wake-of-sandusky-case

...........In Florida, legislators this year approved what many child advocates consider the toughest mandatory reporting legislation in the country for sexual abuse in universities and other schools.

The “Protection of Vulnberable Persons” law, SB 1816, states that anyone who suspects a child is being abused must report it. ........ In addition, failure to report suspected child abuse is now a third-degree felony, not just a misdemeanor, and universities could face fines of $1 million if officials do not report the abuse. Universities could also lose state funding for two years, according to the law............

Penn State University, where Sandusky abused 10 boys over a 15-year period, instituted a policy requiring employees to report suspected child abuse to state authorities.

But legislators nationwide also acted in response to the Penn State scandal. About 105 bills have been introduced in 2012 legislative sessions in 30 states and the District of Columbia.

More at link....
 
What I thought was true about Paterno now seems to be proved as true. He did nothing to protect the child from 2001 that he knew about or future victims of Sandusky. The 'moral god' of Penn State was a false god, as humans usually are. His holy football program was more important than ANYTHING. NO, they must treat Sandusky, the rapist, HUMANELY, to heck with the children! I was almost sure about this but this just seals the deal to me. I'm beginning to think when he said he 'should have done more' he really meant 'more to cover this mess up for good'. Tearing his statue down should be just the beginning of correcting this false 'legacy' IMO.

Eloquently put and I couldn't agree more. What a hypocrite JP was. Success with honor, my aunt's fanny. :furious:
 
Kudos to gitana for an excellent rant. I have one of my own to post:

It really bothers me when I read statements like "Sandusky displayed inappropriate behavior" or "Sandusky inappropriately touched the boys". Imo, inappropriate actions are things like wearing black socks with brown shoes, slurping soup out of a bowl, or singing Christmas carols at a Fourth of July picnic.
"Malicious"
"Criminal"
"Depraved"
"Evil"
Those are just a few of the words I find that are better suited to describe Sandusky's behavior. I think that when people and the media use the term "inappropriate", they make Sandusky's crimes sound like nothing more than a mere faux pas. His victims deserve more respect than that, imo.

You are so correct. Picking your nose in church = inappropriate.

Raping children = evil.

Once again: :furious:
 
Paterno quote
"They ask me what I'd like written about me when I'm gone. I hope they write I made Penn State a better place, not just that I was a good football coach."
:sick:
 
I don't like to make judgments without evidence, but there is now evidence that Paterno did the follow up, and it was a recommendation not to go to C&YS or DPW.
 
I don't like to make judgments without evidence, but there is now evidence that Paterno did the follow up, and it was a recommendation not to go to C&YS or DPW.

Am I being stupid? :waitasec:

Because if I am interpreting today's news stories correctly, they strongly suggest that JP quashed his higher-ups' instincts to do the right thing by reporting JS's activities to the Second Mile and child welfare authorities.

How does that equate to JP doing the follow up?
 
I don't like to make judgments without evidence, but there is now evidence that Paterno did the follow up, and it was a recommendation not to go to C&YS or DPW.

Just flabbergasting, J. J.!

I criticized Paterno because he did not report directly to police or CPS after the report from MM, because the way I read Pa. reporting law, he had that responsibility. After that was shown incorrect, I still criticized him for not reporting as a moral duty to protect the children, and because of his high stature and influence. Even considered some of the excuses given for his not having done so...but being from Fl. and not used to 'gothic PA', I still considered it a failing that he did not 'follow up', as did a lot of others.

But, I have to admit, never did I conceive that he would be the force behind a conspiracy to not report the abuse and to cover up for JS, to not regard how this would affect the boy and other children at risk, or even the school if it was discovered.

How could a man who preached 'doing the right thing' let himself even consider this decision for any reason? (not really a question)
 
Am I being stupid? :waitasec:

Because if I am interpreting today's news stories correctly, they strongly suggest that JP quashed his higher-ups' instincts to do the right thing by reporting JS's activities to the Second Mile and child welfare authorities.

How does that equate to JP doing the follow up?

I think, if I read JJ correctly, he means that the follow-up JP did was that he quashed a follow up with C&YS and DPW. In other words, JJ is acknowledging that there is now evidence that Paterno did not do the right thing by the children.
 
Am I being stupid? :waitasec:

Because if I am interpreting today's news stories correctly, they strongly suggest that JP quashed his higher-ups' instincts to do the right thing by reporting JS's activities to the Second Mile and child welfare authorities.

How does that equate to JP doing the follow up?

My understanding of the emails was Curley had a 3 step plan in place (1. Talk to JS; 2. Report it to 2nd Mile; 3. Report it to authorities). However, after Schultz (and Curley?) spoke with Joe, they decided to do nothing. Hence, the thought would be Joe persuaded them to keep it "in house" and not go further with it.
 
Just flabbergasting, J. J.!

I criticized Paterno because he did not report directly to police or CPS after the report from MM, because the way I read Pa. reporting law, he had that responsibility. After that was shown incorrect, I still criticized him for not reporting as a moral duty to protect the children, and because of his high stature and influence. Even considered some of the excuses given for his not having done so...but being from Fl. and not used to 'gothic PA', I still considered it a failing that he did not 'follow up', as did a lot of others.

But, I have to admit, never did I conceive that he would be the force behind a conspiracy to not report the abuse and to cover up for JS, to not regard how this would affect the boy and other children at risk, or even the school if it was discovered.

How could a man who preached 'doing the right thing' let himself even consider this decision for any reason? (not really a question)

I have to say I'm really not surprised. To me it's always seemed that the "higher ups" were probably taking direction from Paterno, not the other way around.

And we sort of knew there had to be a conspiracy of some kind involving Paterno, since McQueary got a job and Jerry was still around campus involved with Second Mile and getting tickets to take boys to games with him. It always smelled like a cover-up, but with this new information it seems worse.

My only problem is that now J.J. and I don't have anything to argue about. ;) Just kidding!
 
Bah. (Not intended at you, WFGODOT, just jumping off from your post).

IMO the NCAA has about as much credibility as that man behind the curtain that Dorothy wasn't supposed to pay any attention to.

It only now butts in after the conviction?

Again I say bah.

Honestly, I don't think the NCAA will anything to Penn State, unless the Freeh report uncovers NCAA violations. I really don't think they will touch the Sandusky stuff.
 
The stupid thing is, imo, that if they had just called LE and reported Sandusky from the start, it would have been over and done with, no huge taint of shame to take Penn. State down at all. Pathetic decisions all the way around.


Yes. This gets to the heart of the matter. It seems that's exactly what the administrators were inclined to do when they were just talking to each other about the problem. They were going to do the right thing, for whatever reason, it doesnt matter. IMO because they realized the potential liability they might face if they did the wrong thing, but it doesn't matter why. Fact is they were going to come clean, report jer and get right with the law.

Then spannier talked to. Joe. You know, the old man who had never heard of a man havin sex with a boy---not to mention, raping a boy in the Penn state showers.

And that was the end of it. Joe squashed everything.

That's the problem wi
 
Here's a repeat of the link to the Vicky Triponey vs Paterno story.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...state-s-new-whistleblower-vicky-triponey.html
I have no surprise at all that Paterno was the core validator of an instinctive desire to make Sandusky mess go away. His "I don't know about man-boy sex" was such a blatant lie, that I've never believed he was honest.
Somewhere I read that Spanier describes himself as an abused child- how could he ignore others?
 
Victoria Balfour, an investigator for some of the attorneys and victims in the first Sandusky trial, will be on Websleuths Radio tonight. Listen, call in....this is your chance to let the men who bravely stood up know how much you support and admire them. This is also a chance to let other potential victims know that there is justice for them as well.

The trial we just experienced is merely round one. Be ready...there is so much that will be happening these next few months. Bobbing and weaving from Penn State, Freeh's report, more men coming forward...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
102
Guests online
1,346
Total visitors
1,448

Forum statistics

Threads
589,176
Messages
17,915,136
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top