People are innocent until proven guilty

[boeing power]

dear ttwarrior,
shoot yourself and get it over with
you have said you are going to do it
do it tonight, you have no life

sincerely,
sbr forum

[ttwarrior1]

don't you have some pts to lose at sbr poker and call yourself a pro in sbr poker chat

[SlickRick1382]

Yes....however in public situations like a kid getting bullied at a game there are tons of other people around to stop it or call the cops.

The truth of the matter is that we probably don't do anything if it were less of a public event, regardless. The majority of us are conditioned to mind our own business and not mettle in other people's affairs except in the most extreme conditions. I do believe this was an extreme condition and more action was warranted because of it.

A lot of people have fault in this including Joe Pa although I personally feel that the amount of flak he is catching because of this may be a little unwarranted in the sense that it is excessive. Although I haven't read the report in it's entirety so I could be wrong. In hindsight everything is easier to deal with or resolve. Under the circumstances though there is always room for variance in how each and every one of us would of reacted or in what we would of personally done.

[opie1988]

don't you have some pts to lose at sbr poker and call yourself a pro in sbr poker chat

If ttwarrior has the balls to actually show up at next years bash.....I vow to hire a local gang member to repeatedly sodomize his dumbass.

If anyone is to witness the brutal rape of current chit-chat room village idiot....be sure to simply report it to your supervisor. (....and then obviously gouge your eyes out from having seen this pig naked!)

[neverstoppers23]

I am tired of hearing this bull shit. Yes he is innocent in our court system We just don't throw him in prison without a trail. It does not mean we as a public can not call him out and say he is guilty for the clear disgusting, perverted facts of thecase

[William Walters]

If ttwarrior has the balls to actually show up at next years bash.....I vow to hire a local gang member to repeatedly sodomize his dumbass.

If anyone is to witness the brutal rape of current chit-chat room village idiot....be sure to simply report it to your supervisor. (....and then obviously gouge your eyes out from having seen this pig naked!)

88.........have you SEEN warrior? You better find a gang member with an 18" rooster.

[Bluehorseshoe]

The truth of the matter is that we probably don't do anything if it were less of a public event, regardless. The majority of us are conditioned to mind our own business and not mettle in other people's affairs except in the most extreme conditions. I do believe this was an extreme condition and more action was warranted because of it.

A lot of people have fault in this including Joe Pa although I personally feel that the amount of flak he is catching because of this may be a little unwarranted in the sense that it is excessive. Although I haven't read the report in it's entirety so I could be wrong. In hindsight everything is easier to deal with or resolve. Under the circumstances though there is always room for variance in how each and every one of us would of reacted or in what we would of personally done.

Really? Here's the two things you need to know in a nut shell....

Paterno has been besieged by criticism since Sandusky, his former defensive coordinator, was charged over the weekend with 40 criminal counts of molesting eight young boys between 1994 and 2009 through his charitable foundation for at-risk youths, The Second Mile. Sandusky is free on bail and has a Dec. 7 court hearing.

Joe Paterno has been questioned over his apparent failure to follow up on a report of the 2002 incident, in which Sandusky allegedly sodomized a 10-year-old boy in the showers at the team's football complex. A witness, Mike McQueary, is currently receivers coach for the team but was a graduate assistant at the time.

So it went on for 7 more years after Paterno was made aware of what was going on.

[hawley]

I am tired of hearing this bull shit. Yes he is innocent in our court system We just don't throw him in prison without a trail. It does not mean we as a public can not call him out and say he is guilty for the clear disgusting, perverted facts of thecase

Moral duties in society far outweigh legal duties in circumstances like this.

[ttwarrior1]

opie you simply didn't read the posts

Do you want to go to prison opie. That's what will happen to you if that happens.

I do not support the rape of anyone or pedophiles and you have been reported

[antifoil]

If ttwarrior has the balls to actually show up at next years bash.....I vow to hire a local gang member to repeatedly sodomize his dumbass.

If anyone is to witness the brutal rape of current chit-chat room village idiot....be sure to simply report it to your supervisor. (....and then obviously gouge your eyes out from having seen this pig naked!)

this poster should be banned for these kind of remarks joking around about raping a person. you are a disgusting human being that should burn in hell.

[BiffTFinancial]

innocent until proven guilty only applies to criminal prosecutions by courts. there will be no criminal charges made against Paterno. as such, we're free to judge him now (and since we're not courts, we can go ahead and judge Sandusky too). your argument for not judging Paterno is as laughably naive and stupid as Sean Hannity's for not judging Herman Cain. everyone is free to judge Cain as a serial sexual harasser if they like, a criminal trial isn't coming (while they're at it, they can also judge him to be a fkn retard for not knowing that China has had nuclear weapons since the 1960s).

you're like one of those people who complains that Kobe Bryant is fined for calling the ref a f*ggot, whining "what happened to the First Amendment?" that is to say, you're fkn stupid.

[William Walters]

opie you simply didn't read the posts

Do you want to go to prison opie. That's what will happen to you if that happens.

I do not support the rape of anyone or pedophiles and you have been reported

Reporting Opie to SBR brass is the same as reporting Mark Cuban to Mavericks brass.

[hawley]

Reporting Opie to SBR brass is the same as reporting Mark Cuban to Mavericks brass.

[antifoil]

no worry God will pass judgment on Opie when his time comes for those immoral and disgusting remarks about rape.

[crazyfied]

that used to be true but with todays media it is guilty til proven innocent

[boeing power]

no worry God will pass judgment on Opie when his time comes for those immoral and disgusting remarks about rape.

dont try to change the topic assclown

this about ttwarrior being a pedophile and fuking retard

[antifoil]

Opie is apparently a rapist too.

i hope he prays to God for forgiveness for his immoral sickness. i wish eternal damnation on no one.

[SlickRick1382]

So it went on for 7 more years after Paterno was made aware of what was going on.

I never absolved anyone of their responsibilities in my original post, including Paterno. Like I said I'm yet to read through the entire court docs because I like to read through the facts before passing judgement (this applies more to passing judgement on Paterno than on the others involved in this case. Their involvement is quite clear.)

With regards to the above comment. I understand that it went on for 7 or more years after Paterno was made aware of the incident. But does that mean that Paterno knew it was still going on? You make it seem as if from 2002 onward Paterno had direct knowledge that these incidents were still occurring. I haven't read anything that suggests that.

I haven't read the docs in its entirety, so I could be wrong but that's not the understanding I've gotten thus far. Also I agree that Joe could of done more but things aren't always black and white. (In no way am I condoning any of the actions that transpired in this scandal before anyone decides to cause a witch hunt over my comments).

If anyone has read through the docs or has more direct knowledge other than to say they would of beaten the guy to a pulp, please do post as I'm interested in find out more info, specifically with regards to Joe Pa.

[Bluehorseshoe]

I never absolved anyone of their responsibilities in my original post, including Paterno. Like I said I'm yet to read through the entire court docs because I like to read through the facts before passing judgement (this applies more to passing judgement on Paterno than on the others involved in this case. Their involvement is quite clear.)

With regards to the above comment. I understand that it went on for 7 or more years after Paterno was made aware of the incident. But does that mean that Paterno knew it was still going on? You make it seem as if from 2002 onward Paterno had direct knowledge that these incidents were still occurring. I haven't read anything that suggests that.

I haven't read the docs in its entirety, so I could be wrong but that's not the understanding I've gotten thus far. Also I agree that Joe could of done more but things aren't always black and white. (In no way am I condoning any of the actions that transpired in this scandal before anyone decides to cause a witch hunt over my comments).

If anyone has read through the docs or has more direct knowledge other than to say they would of beaten the guy to a pulp, please do post as I'm interested in find out more info, specifically with regards to Joe Pa.

Well the point you made in your post was that "the flak" Joe Pa" was receiving was excessive. It's not. He only needed to know about it once where he might have been able to stop the next 7 years from happening.

[BiffTFinancial]

I never absolved anyone of their responsibilities in my original post, including Paterno. Like I said I'm yet to read through the entire court docs because I like to read through the facts before passing judgement (this applies more to passing judgement on Paterno than on the others involved in this case. Their involvement is quite clear.) With regards to the above comment. I understand that it went on for 7 or more years after Paterno was made aware of the incident. But does that mean that Paterno knew it was still going on? You make it seem as if from 2002 onward Paterno had direct knowledge that these incidents were still occurring. I haven't read anything that suggests that. I haven't read the docs in its entirety, so I could be wrong but that's not the understanding I've gotten thus far. Also I agree that Joe could of done more but things aren't always black and white. (In no way am I condoning any of the actions that transpired in this scandal before anyone decides to cause a witch hunt over my comments). If anyone has read through the docs or has more direct knowledge other than to say they would of beaten the guy to a pulp, please do post as I'm interested in find out more info, specifically with regards to Joe Pa.

willful blindness isn't much of a defense, which is the best-case scenario for Paterno here. he knew Sandusky molested a kid in 2002 in the locker room and regularly worked with a charity for disadvantaged kids, yet still allowed him to keep an office at the football facilities and bring kids there to watch practice and such. he was the most powerful man in Happy Valley and chose to nothing about a pederast using his access to the football complex and the university and the charity to molest children. i heard a PA columnist on the radio yesterday describing how Sandusky was bringing kids to practice in 2008. Paterno chose not to find out more, or he chose to let it go on, or he's so far past his prime that he has no control over what goes on there such that a predator can use the facility as his own perverted playground. i don't much care exactly what he knew since there's no possible excuse that's sufficient in any event.

[SlickRick1382]

Well the point you made in your post was that "the flak" Joe Pa" was receiving was excessive. It's not. He only needed to know about it once where he might have been able to stop the next 7 years from happening.

The only way he could of really stopped the "next 7 years" from happening was if he went to the police and there was enough evidence to prosecute Sandusky. Else there is no guarantee that Sandusky couldn't of found other ways to continue his deviant ways. So in essence we are judging Paterno on the basis that he himself didn't contact the authorities outside of those at Penn State, which still doesn't guarantee anything would of been resolved.

We all agree he "could" of done more but that doesn't make him responsible for everything that happened. He's being used as a scapegoat more than the actual administration who did nothing with the information and covered it up. If anyone should of gone to the police it should of been McQueary who actually witnessed the events that transpired.

I'm going to try and finish reading the court docs before I make any more posts in case there is any information that I'm obviously missing.

[Bluehorseshoe]

The only way he could of really stopped the "next 7 years" from happening was if he went to the police and there was enough evidence to prosecute Sandusky. Else there is no guarantee that Sandusky couldn't of found other ways to continue his deviant ways. So in essence we are judging Paterno on the basis that he himself didn't contact the authorities outside of those at Penn State, which still doesn't guarantee anything would of been resolved.

We all agree he "could" of done more but that doesn't make him responsible for everything that happened. He's being used as a scapegoat more than the actual administration who did nothing with the information and covered it up. If anyone should of gone to the police it should of been McQueary who actually witnessed the events that transpired.

I'm going to try and finish reading the court docs before I make any more posts in case there is any information that I'm obviously missing.

So what you're saying is, if someone doesn't think the police have a good case of prosecuting, they shouldn't contact them? Go back to bed knowing you did all you could. Going to the police would have at least alerted them to them that something wrong "might" be going on. There were other incidents that were investigated by campus security that were swept under the rug.

By the way, the feds might be getting involved in this case, which could mean prosecution of people who are not currently being charged.

[jetsjets1028]

we're in different world now where people are guilty until proven innocent

[SlickRick1382]

willful blindness isn't much of a defense, which is the best-case scenario for Paterno here. he knew Sandusky molested a kid in 2002 in the locker room and regularly worked with a charity for disadvantaged kids, yet still allowed him to keep an office at the football facilities and bring kids there to watch practice and such. he was the most powerful man in Happy Valley and chose to nothing about a pederast using his access to the football complex and the university and the charity to molest children. i heard a PA columnist on the radio yesterday describing how Sandusky was bringing kids to practice in 2008. Paterno chose not to find out more, or he chose to let it go on, or he's so far past his prime that he has no control over what goes on there such that a predator can use the facility as his own perverted playground. i don't much care exactly what he knew since there's no possible excuse that's sufficient in any event.

The whole he's the "most powerful man in Happy Valley" has no bearing on the events. If it does then we're saying that he's only responsible because of the position of power he was in and had it been a regular civilian we wouldn't hold them in the same regard.

Secondly we say we do, but we still don't know all the facts. We have to let due process run its course and have everything presented to us. If it's shown that Paterno knew everything he could of known or should of known about the situation then yes, there is no defense for him. Paterno, under oath, said that he didn't' know all the details of the allegations of what transpired that day in 2002. The grand jury found his testimony to be credible. Is it out of the realm of possibility that McQueary did not tell Paterno everything he saw that day to shield the coach? Are you saying the administration probably didn't keep him in the dark purposely of what was going on?

Just seems like Paterno is being held to a higher standard than everyone else in this situation. I still don't condone anything I'm just saying that everyone isn't being held to the same standards.

Can anyone in here say that Paterno KNEW (not assumed, should of known, suspected, etc.) but actually knew that his old friend was a crazed sex offender? I don't even think he even suspected it. He could of hoped or thought McQueary was mistaken. Even still he took the next step and fulfilled the honor code by reporting the incident.

[SlickRick1382]

So what you're saying is, if someone doesn't think the police have a good case of prosecuting, they shouldn't contact them? Go back to bed knowing you did all you could. Going to the police would have at least alerted them to them that something wrong "might" be going on. There were other incidents that were investigated by campus security that were swept under the rug. By the way, the feds might be getting involved in this case, which could mean prosecution of people who are not currently being charged.

First off that's not what I said and you're putting words in my mouth. I never said you shouldn't contact the police unless you're certain it can be prosecuted.

Again placing blame solely on Paterno. Last I check he did contact the police. Campus police was notified of the situation and why isn't blame being placed on those individuals as much as it is on Joe Paterno? Also Wasn't there an incident reported against Sandusky back in 1998 to the authorities? Nothing was done. With all your comments you're implying that Joe Paterno outright knew and believed that Sandusky was a deviant and did nothing. Therefore he should be held responsible. That's simply not the case.

[Kindred]

ttwarrior how about I skull phuck you? It's not rape because you're a fat rooster gobbling fa\*\*ot..

[Kindred]

First off that's not what I said and you're putting words in my mouth. I never said you shouldn't contact the police unless you're certain it can be prosecuted.

Again placing blame solely on Paterno. Last I check he did contact the police. Campus police was notified of the situation and why isn't blame being placed on those individuals as much as it is on Joe Paterno? Also Wasn't there an incident reported against Sandusky back in 1998 to the authorities? Nothing was done. With all your comments you're implying that Joe Paterno outright knew and believed that Sandusky was a deviant and did nothing. Therefore he should be held responsible. That's simply not the case.

You should kill yourself too.

They told the pedo scumbag not to have little kids on campus anymore...so it's okay to rape little kids just don't do it on campus

This douche bag was on Joe pa's staff for how many years??

You fags sticking up for joe pa probably think the pedophile isn't to blame, he's sick and suffering from an illness and he's not a bad guy..he gave the kid a reach around

Filthy scumbags go jump off a bridge.

[Kindred]

we're in different world now where people are guilty until proven innocent

How about I anally rape you with a baseball bat and then leave the country never to stand trial...am I innocent? Using your lame cocksucking logic I would be innocent and you'd have a bloody asshole and wear adult diapers for the rest of your life because an innocent man shoved a baseball bat where the sun doesn't shine

**** gang green, and **** joe pa..eat shit and die pal

[BiffTFinancial]

The whole he's the "most powerful man in Happy Valley" has no bearing on the events. If it does then we're saying that he's only responsible because of the position of power he was in and had it been a regular civilian we wouldn't hold them in the same regard. Secondly we say we do, but we still don't know all the facts. We have to let due process run its course and have everything presented to us. If it's shown that Paterno knew everything he could of known or should of known about the situation then yes, there is no defense for him. Paterno, under oath, said that he didn't' know all the details of the allegations of what transpired that day in 2002. The grand jury found his testimony to be credible. Is it out of the realm of possibility that McQueary did not tell Paterno everything he saw that day to shield the coach? Are you saying the administration probably didn't keep him in the dark purposely of what was going on? Just seems like Paterno is being held to a higher standard than everyone else in this situation. I still don't condone anything I'm just saying that everyone isn't being held to the same standards. Can anyone in here say that Paterno KNEW (not assumed, should of known, suspected, etc.) but actually knew that his old friend was a crazed sex offender? I don't even think he even suspected it. He could of hoped or thought McQueary was mistaken. Even still he took the next step and fulfilled the honor code by reporting the incident.

1st para: of course it doesn't mean that at all. a lot of people failed here, and different positions have different standards of care. the point i'm making is that if anyone could've call the chief of police personally and said "i want this investigated thoroughly but with an abundance of discretion in case it's a mistake so that Sandusky's life isn't ruined over a false accusation or a mistake." he could've made that happen easier than anyone.

2nd: don't need to know all the facts, and Paterno didn't need to know all the details. he was told that a 60 year-old was molesting a 10-year old in the shower (4 years after, by the way, Sandusky was investigated by the cops and agreed to "stop showering with children"). whether he knew all of the details or chose not to know them isn't that important. if your hypothetical is correct, the most powerful man in Happy Valley was kept in the dark by an entire administration regarding a serial pedophile. hey, that would be great news for Paterno, far worse news for everyone else.

3rd: Paterno should be held to a higher standard. duh. he is Penn State football, and now Penn State football is being tragically destroyed by the inexcusable actions of a few. how many more kids were harmed because of Paterno's inaction, inattention, apathy to the situation? he still allowed Sandusky in the building how many months after his grand jury testimony? he saw a guy he knew had been accused of child molestation bringing kids to practice, working at a charity for disadvantaged kids. i always thought that Paterno was a great man, and thus, i would've expected much more.

4th: sure, i agree, he could've been willfully blind, which brings me back to my original point that willful blindness is an okay defense to your teenage kid drinking beer in the backyard with his buddies, not so okay for a far more heinous crime. i don't care if you agree with me, i'm not evangelizing. you reserve judgment as long as you want. i find the notion that Paterno is some innocent victim to be incredibly naive. he and the president will both be gone before kickoff of the UNL/PSU game. sorry for Paterno that it ends like this, so so so much more sorry for the victims, particularly those who could've been saved if Paterno had acted.

[BiffTFinancial]

i only want two facts from Paterno:

1. you've know Sandusky a long time. he came to your home many times. after 2002, how many times did you invite Sandusky to your home?

2. of those times, how many of your 17 grand children were at your house?

[SlickRick1382]

You should kill yourself too. They told the pedo scumbag not to have little kids on campus anymore...so it's okay to rape little kids just don't do it on campus This douche bag was on Joe pa's staff for how many years?? You fags sticking up for joe pa probably think the pedophile isn't to blame, he's sick and suffering from an illness and he's not a bad guy..he gave the kid a reach around Filthy scumbags go jump off a bridge.

Obviously the ability to read, comprehend and use deductive reasoning eludes even the most simple of minds. Please leave the conversations that require actual thought to those who can properly express their opinions without needing to ask someone to kill themselves. It's obvious you contribute nothing of value to society and most likely are as much a drain on our society a the people you condemn.

Also, last I checked it was the AD and school that decided Sandusky wasn't permitted to be on campus with children, not Joe Paterno. So now ask yourself why would the school decide that Sandusky wasn't fit to be around children on campus but deemed it okay so long as it happened away from Penn State. Perhaps they should of alerted the authorities, don't you think?

[SlickRick1382]

4th: sure, i agree, he could've been willfully blind, which brings me back to my original point that willful blindness is an okay defense to your teenage kid drinking beer in the backyard with his buddies, not so okay for a far more heinous crime. i don't care if you agree with me, i'm not evangelizing. you reserve judgment as long as you want. i find the notion that Paterno is some innocent victim to be incredibly naive. he and the president will both be gone before kickoff of the UNL/PSU game. sorry for Paterno that it ends like this, so so so much more sorry for the victims, particularly those who could've been saved if Paterno had acted.

Leaving all the other points behind since we both have our own views / opinions on the matter I do agree with you here. I didn't say that Paterno couldn't of done more. I also didn't absolve him of his moral obligations. I'm merely pointing out that he seems to have garnered much more attention than the actual perp along with the administration who obviously committed a huge blunder in covering up this horrid act.

At the same time I'm leaving open the possibility that indeed he didn't know all of the facts. That he was shielded by the administration and kept away from the incident due to how damning the allegations were. It's also possible that he didn't believe his friend could of been responsible for what he was told and hoped McQueary was mistaken. This obviously applies to your "willfully blind" in a sense but is not out of the realm of possibility.

In the end all the bickering about Joe Pa and his alleged or possible involvement or lack thereof just diverts the attention from all the other culprits in this situation.

[ttwarrior1]

Funny people here want this guy to rot but supported michael jackson??????

[ttwarrior1]

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

The sanctimonious railroading of Joe Paterno

If there is one thing we have come to expect from the press its that when it comes to almost any big story they will miss what's important and what matters in place of those who will seize the opportunity for their own self-serving, sanctimonious, self-righteous reasons to try and make a name for themselves.

That is exactly what is going on now with the phony moralistic and imbecilic calls by factually challenged sportswriters and other journalists, not exactly known for their ability to think in the first place, for Joe Paterno the coach of Penn State football, to resign or be fired over a child abuse scandal involving a former defensive coach at Penn State.

The fact that, based on all the facts presently known, Paterno did nothing wrong, not in any imaginable way, doesn't stop the sanctimonious, self-righteous pseudo-moralistic members of the press from piling on over an issue for which they feel safe in piling on.

Here is what we and self-serving sports writers like Andy Staples for Sports Illustrated, Bob Ford, and others know. We and they know we don't have all the facts but that the prosecutors and grand jury do. We and they know that the grand jury, the body who does have all the facts, handed down indictments, one involving the abuser and two involving two Penn State officials who were charged with perjury for covering up one of the incidents and were indicted for failure to report sexual abuse. After hearing all the evidence including testimony by Joe Paterno, the grand jury did not indict Joe Paterno for anything.

Based on all the facts at the grand jury's disposal Paterno did nothing wrong. And the Pennsylvania State Attorney General said as much as well.

But if you want to pretend youre a moral hero, if you are self-serving and sanctimonious and looking to beat your chest about something, that isnt good enough. That also wont sell newspapers, get TV ratings, or get website hits the way going after a figure like Joe Paterno would. And the justification by these factually challenged journalists who are trying to do something journalists have proved they are incapable of doing in the first place -- think -- is that while Paterno did nothing criminally wrong he was morally wrong in not reporting what he heard to the police.

The problem with that is the need to answer the question, "heard what"?

Perhaps these journalists are not aware that it is in fact a crime -- a felony -- to know about child abuse and not report it. We have seen that repeatedly with the serial and institutional child sexual abuse in the Catholic church. We know that those in the hierarchy of the church who knew about the abuse by priests and did nothing are being held accountable.

The grand jury, the only body in possession of all the facts ( and the indictment is NOT all the facts - only evidence and testimony given to the grand jury contains all the facts and that is secret) decided that Paterno is blameless and committed no crime. At the same time the grand jury indicted two Penn State officials for not doing what the sanctimonious is saying Joe Paterno also didnt do but should have -- report abuse. So with no facts to support it a group of self appointed self-rightous journalists posing as moralists are calling for Paterno to be fired.

According to them Paterno should be fired for not doing what the grand jury held Paterno blameless for not doing -- going to the police with nothing.

The incident in question was witnessed by an assistant coach who actually saw the abuse take place. This coach - an eyewitness -- did NOT go to the police with what he saw but the press is giving him a pass anyway. Why? Because he is not a big fish. Because he is not going to embellish anyone's reputation. Because pointing the finger at him is not going allow sanctimonious journalists to stick out their chests the way the morally sanctimonious always do. Going after the person who actually the saw the abuse and did nothing but who is a lowly assistant coach wouldn't put a feather in the cap of those like Andy Staples, Bob Ford, or the editorial writers of the Philadelphia Daily News. Going after the witness who did nothing doesnt allow them to strut their "moral superiority" but going after Paterno gives them the opportunity to say, "look ma, I'm a hero".

So they go after Paterno, who according to his testimony and public statement had no details or specifics of what this coach saw because the coach never told him. This is an excerpt from Paterno's statement:
" He ( McCreary, the eyewitness) at no time related to me the very specific actions contained in the grand jury report:".

The grand jury investigation which included calling McCreary as a witness as well as Paterno and the two Penn State officials eventually indicted, concluded Paterno's statement was the truth and that Paterno fullfilled all his obligations in reporting what he knew to the Penn State Athletic Director and not the police.

But that still isn't enough for the railroading press. According to them Paterno should have gone to the police anyway. But they never say with what. An incident he didn't see and for which he had no details or specifics? What exactly was he supposed to say to the police? The sanctimonious in the press calling for Paterno's dismissal never say.

The mother of the boy who was sexually abused by Sandusky issued a public statement yesterday. In it she said that Sandusky in 1998 "admitted to my face - he admitted it", that he had sexually abused her son. She said in the same statement that Sandusky admitted the abuse to her again in 2002. What did the mother do? Nothing. Did she go to the police with this specific admission? No. But Paterno was supposed to with none of the facts the mother had.

So we have an assistant coach who actually witnessed the incident but didn't report it to the police and the mother of the victim who was told twice over a 4 year span by the abuser himself that he had abused her son and neither went to the police. But Paterno, who didn't have a fraction of the information those two had, was supposed to do more than the boy's own mother. And should be fired for not doing so.

McCreary and the boy's mother are clearly the ones who should have gone to the police but they are given a pass by the press because there is no money or moral superiority to be had by going after them. But going after Paterno who didn't know a thing about any specific act of abuse, well, that's a gold mine.

The justification being used for attacking Paterno is that while he may have done nothing wrong criminally he was morally wrong in not reporting it to the police. Again, these factually challenged journalists are oblivious to the fact that what they say is morally wrong -- not reporting it to the police -- is also criminally wrong. To restate the facts, not reporting child abuse is a felony. The fact that the grand jury didnt indict Paterno for not reporting abuse to police while indicting two Penn State officials for that very thing, is proof that those in possession of all the facts decided that there was nothing Paterno should have done that he didnt do.

With the press when it comes to controversy its always about cowardice and what they think they can get away with to sell newspapers, get ratings or website hits as long as they feel safe against retribution. They had nothing to say about irrefutable evidence that Bush lied the country into war but they got real tough with Anthony Weiner over a picture of his underwear. They put Joe Paterno's picture on the front page of the Philadephia Daily News with the word "Shame" in huge type but never a picture of the present Pope with the same word after we learned that the present Pope had known about the Wisconsin priest who sexually abused over 400 deaf children and did nothing.

Sandusky no doubt will get what's coming to him if he is guilty. Its too bad the same cant be said about journalists like Andy Staples, Bob Ford and the rest of the press who throw due process, common sense, facts and journalistic integrity out the window for their own self-serving reasons. But one can always hope.

NOTE: This morning on ESPN, Karl Ravich an ESPN anchor made an inadvertent but stunning admisson that bears out the premise of this peice. Ravich pointed out that all of the media attention is being focused on Joe Paterno, almost forgotten is Jerry Sandusky, the person actually indicted for engaging in the sexual abuse. Ravich made the point that while Sandusky will eventually have his day in court, for now they can't advance the story using Sandusky so all the attention is being focused on Joe Paterno. Obviously to, as Ravich said, advance the story.And milk it. At Joe Paterno's expense.

[Gee]

edit: fukn saloon thread.