Sandusky Investigation Findings

[alocispepraluger102]

Had you done this to start instead of attempting to insult me, things would be just fine.

Does this mean you're now one of the stunned former ardent supporters?

Sports figures should never be ardently supported in the first place.

That wasn't the question...

Ah, but it really is!

5:45 PM: The Washington Post's Sally Jenkins, who had interviewed Joe Paterno about the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal, writes Thursday that the former Penn State coach was a "liar", a "cover-up artist" and a "hubristic, indictable hypocrite".

[Larry Kart]

Hey, everybody. Just my two cents at this point, but now that we've got the Freeh report, and barring any further subsequent substantial developments in this sad and ugly matter, do we really want to again go down the same road we went down before -- i.e. one where most of us on the one hand express our indignation at how bad what went down at Penn State was and is and how heinous an act/crime child sexual abuse is, while on the other hand Goodspeak parses Joe Paterno's role in this situation in as narrow a manner as possible (though one that makes sense to him), whereupon a good many of us express anger or sarcasm at him in attempt to ... what? Nothing, it would seem, is going to move anything or anyone here ("here" being this thread), unless again there are further substantial developments to ponder and discuss. I'm remind of my favorite line from Audie Murphy's WWII memoir "To Hell and Back," grunted out numerous times by a weary veteran in Murphy's platoon as they slog there way through France and Germany: "Save yo' breat."

[JETman]

Well said, Larry. AFAIC, not one person here should be surprised at how any of this turned out. (Did anyone really need a report to reveal what the depths of Paterno's or PSU's involvement was?) So the expression of faux indignation then just becomes a huge waste of everybody's time.

[Aggie87]

This is a bulletin board - people chat. How is chatting about a topical event a waste of time on a chat board?

Yes, we all knew what Sandusky was convicted of, but this report firms up how much Paterno knew and when he knew it. It confirms he deserves the condemnation that most of us felt he was due.

I do agree generally that nobody is going to change anybody else's mind, but it's interesting to see how people justify their positions.

Edited July 12, 2012 by Aggie87

[Mike Schwartz]

Hey, everybody. Just my two cents at this point, but now that we've got the Freeh report, and barring any further subsequent substantial developments in this sad and ugly matter, do we really want to again go down the same road we went down before -- i.e. one where most of us on the one hand express our indignation at how bad what went down at Penn State was and is and how heinous an act/crime child sexual abuse is, while on the other hand Goodspeak parses Joe Paterno's role in this situation in as narrow a manner as possible (though one that makes sense to him), whereupon a good many of us express anger or sarcasm at him in attempt to ... what? Nothing, it would seem, is going to move anything or anyone here ("here" being our this thread), unless again there are further substantial developments to ponder and discuss. I'm remind of my favorite line from Audie Murphy's WWII memoir "To Hell and Back," grunted out numerous times by a weary veteran in Murphy's platoon as they slog there way through France and Germany: "Save yo' breat."

Larry,

The "substantial developments" came today in the form of the 8 month old commission report headed by the former head of the FBI being released, your two cents and voice of reason post , this is NOT going down the same road; rather new developments based upon information carefully collected with persons clearly pointed out who conspired individually and collectively that allowed 14 additional years of attacks on children to continue. This serves to substantially move information forward which may have been the source for argument among rabid former Paterno supporters, put to rest for all with reasonable minds.

[Tim McG]

Had you done this to start instead of attempting to insult me, things would be just fine.

Does this mean you're now one of the stunned former ardent supporters?

Niether.

I just needed to have some tangible evidence and the Freeh investigation was exactly that.

And, if you recall, my whole contigency centered around the protocol necessary for a conviction and that facts, not high-charged emotional language, will [and did] put that Sandusky bastard behind bars for life.

[Chuck Nessa]

So friggin' easy. Exit by butter slide.

[Tim McG]

This is a bulletin board - people chat. How is chatting about a topical event a waste of time on a chat board?

Yes, we all knew what Sandusky was convicted of, but this report firms up how much Paterno knew and when he knew it. It confirms he deserves the condemnation that most of us felt he was due.

I do agree generally that nobody is going to change anybody else's mind, but it's interesting to see how people justify their positions.

It changed my mind.

If Paterno was a part of the cover-up as stated in the Freeh report, then he is as guilty as sin of protecting and subsequently enabling Sandusky. I find that to be utterly disgusting.

Edited July 12, 2012 by GoodSpeak

[Chuck Nessa]

Thanks.

[Tim McG]

So friggin' easy. Exit by butter slide.

Exactly.

Get the facts, get at the truth.

Just what I have been saying all along, Chuck.

[JETman]

Hey, everybody. Just my two cents at this point, but now that we've got the Freeh report, and barring any further subsequent substantial developments in this sad and ugly matter, do we really want to again go down the same road we went down before -- i.e. one where most of us on the one hand express our indignation at how bad what went down at Penn State was and is and how heinous an act/crime child sexual abuse is, while on the other hand Goodspeak parses Joe Paterno's role in this situation in as narrow a manner as possible (though one that makes sense to him), whereupon a good many of us express anger or sarcasm at him in attempt to ... what? Nothing, it would seem, is going to move anything or anyone here ("here" being our this thread), unless again there are further substantial developments to ponder and discuss. I'm remind of my favorite line from Audie Murphy's WWII memoir "To Hell and Back," grunted out numerous times by a weary veteran in Murphy's platoon as they slog there way through France and Germany: "Save yo' breat."

Larry,

The "substantial developments" came today in the form of the 8 month old commission report headed by the former head of the FBI being released, your two cents and voice of reason post , this is NOT going down the same road; rather new developments based upon information carefully collected with persons clearly pointed out who conspired individually and collectively that allowed 14 additional years of attacks on children to continue. This serves to substantially move information forward which may have been the source for argument among rabid former Paterno supporters, put to rest for all with reasonable minds.

Set me straight: what exactly do you get when a former "ardent" supporter changes his/her mind? Do you get to feel good about yourself because you were "right"?

I've made my position clear from the beginning. The importance of college athletics to oddsmakers and the general populace alike is the indirect cause of all of this. Anyone with half a brain could see trouble (whether it be in the form of something like this or in any other form you might feel like choosing) coming a mile away. Knowing the mindset regarding Paterno and PSU for years, my only surprise is that it took this long for the whole charade to blow up to these proportions.

Now all we have to do is wait for testimonials from the likes of Franco Harris to begin pouring in!

[Larry Kart]

Hey, everybody. Just my two cents at this point, but now that we've got the Freeh report, and barring any further subsequent substantial developments in this sad and ugly matter, do we really want to again go down the same road we went down before -- i.e. one where most of us on the one hand express our indignation at how bad what went down at Penn State was and is and how heinous an act/crime child sexual abuse is, while on the other hand Goodspeak parses Joe Paterno's role in this situation in as narrow a manner as possible (though one that makes sense to him), whereupon a good many of us express anger or sarcasm at him in attempt to ... what? Nothing, it would seem, is going to move anything or anyone here ("here" being our this thread), unless again there are further substantial developments to ponder and discuss. I'm remind of my favorite line from Audie Murphy's WWII memoir "To Hell and Back," grunted out numerous times by a weary veteran in Murphy's platoon as they slog there way through France and Germany: "Save yo' breat."

Larry,

The "substantial developments" came today in the form of the 8 month old commission report headed by the former head of the FBI being released, your two cents and voice of reason post , this is NOT going down the same road; rather new developments based upon information carefully collected with persons clearly pointed out who conspired individually and collectively that allowed 14 additional years of attacks on children to continue. This serves to substantially move information forward which may have been the source for argument among rabid former Paterno supporters, put to rest for all with reasonable minds.

I said "subsequent substantial developments," i.e. developments subsequent to the release of th Freeh report and what it contains. For example, if Graham Spanier blew his brains out next week and left a detailed "I fess up" suicide note, that would be a subsequent development.

[Mike Schwartz]

Hey, everybody. Just my two cents at this point, but now that we've got the Freeh report, and barring any further subsequent substantial developments in this sad and ugly matter, do we really want to again go down the same road we went down before -- i.e. one where most of us on the one hand express our indignation at how bad what went down at Penn State was and is and how heinous an act/crime child sexual abuse is, while on the other hand Goodspeak parses Joe Paterno's role in this situation in as narrow a manner as possible (though one that makes sense to him), whereupon a good many of us express anger or sarcasm at him in attempt to ... what? Nothing, it would seem, is going to move anything or anyone here ("here" being our this thread), unless again there are further substantial developments to ponder and discuss. I'm remind of my favorite line from Audie Murphy's WWII memoir "To Hell and Back," grunted out numerous times by a weary veteran in Murphy's platoon as they slog there way through France and Germany: "Save yo' breat."

Larry,

The "substantial developments" came today in the form of the 8 month old commission report headed by the former head of the FBI being released, your two cents and voice of reason post , this is NOT going down the same road; rather new developments based upon information carefully collected with persons clearly pointed out who conspired individually and collectively that allowed 14 additional years of attacks on children to continue. This serves to substantially move information forward which may have been the source for argument among rabid former Paterno supporters, put to rest for all with reasonable minds.

I said "subsequent substantial developments," i.e. developments subsequent to the release of th Freeh report and what it contains. For example, if Graham Spanier blew his brains out next week and left a detailed "I fess up" suicide note, that would be a subsequent development.

I did miss that Larry....thanks for leaving the door open for the *doubters*

[Aggie87]

Set me straight: what exactly do you get when a former "ardent" supporter changes his/her mind? Do you get to feel good about yourself because you were "right"?

I've made my position clear from the beginning. The importance of college athletics to oddsmakers and the general populace alike is the indirect cause of all of this. Anyone with half a brain could see trouble (whether it be in the form of something like this or in any other form you might feel like choosing) coming a mile away. Knowing the mindset regarding Paterno and PSU for years, my only surprise is that it took this long for the whole charade to blow up to these proportions.

Now all we have to do is wait for testimonials from the likes of Franco Harris to begin pouring in!

You've been essentially talking about a separate issue, IMO. Not the specific issue at Penn State, but trying to divert the discussion to something else. Your position may be valid, but it's only tangentially germane to Sandusky's perversions. I think that's why nobody's really engaging you on it.

[JETman]

Tangentially germane?

In a world where a much lower level of importance is correctly placed on college sports and the revenue it generates, how in the world are we talking about Sandusky's disgusting acts 15 years after the fact, instead of when they were first discovered?

I have no agenda. I'm looking at the BIGGER picture. This is something most of the leaders in our nation have trouble doing. The atmosphere surrounding sports at the college level reeks at every level. It's time someone took a closer look.

[Aggie87]

Tangentially germane?

In a world where a much lower level of importance is correctly placed on college sports and the revenue it generates, how in the world are we talking about Sandusky's disgusting acts 15 years after the fact, instead of when they were first discovered?

We're talking about it today because Penn State released their findings today. Today is the first day we've had a chance to read about it, and hence talk about the report.

We talked about the case when it first came into the public eye, and we talked about it during the trial. That doesn't make any sense to you?

I have no agenda. I'm looking at the BIGGER picture. This is something most of the leaders in our nation have trouble doing. The atmosphere surrounding sports at the college level reeks at every level. It's time someone took a closer look.

Have at it. I just think it's a separate and perhaps bigger issue than the topic of this thread.

[GA Russell]

Just as we know that the Catholic priests were not the only clergymen to abuse children (although the Catholic Church seems to have received all of the attention), I strongly suspect that Penn State is not the only university with seriously wrong things they are covering up. Call me cynical, but that's how I see it.

[JETman]

Just as we know that the Catholic priests were not the only clergymen to abuse children (although the Catholic Church seems to have received all of the attention), I strongly suspect that Penn State is not the only university with seriously wrong things they are covering up. Call me cynical, but that's how I see it.

THANK YOU!

[JETman]

Tangentially germane?

In a world where a much lower level of importance is correctly placed on college sports and the revenue it generates, how in the world are we talking about Sandusky's disgusting acts 15 years after the fact, instead of when they were first discovered?

We're talking about it today because Penn State released their findings today. Today is the first day we've had a chance to read about it, and hence talk about the report.

We talked about the case when it first came into the public eye, and we talked about it during the trial. That doesn't make any sense to you?

I have no agenda. I'm looking at the BIGGER picture. This is something most of the leaders in our nation have trouble doing. The atmosphere surrounding sports at the college level reeks at every level. It's time someone took a closer look.

Have at it. I just think it's a separate and perhaps bigger issue than the topic of this thread.

You act as if I've touched a nerve!

Does it not make sense to YOU that the average forward thinking human being would be highly offended that money would be more important than the lives of innocent children? THAT in my eyes is quite germane to the topic at hand. Yes, Paterno fucked up, but on a much larger level the system fucked up, and continues to do so, in a more far reaching way.

Nobody's engaging me, btw, because of the importance of sports in people's lives. If what I'm suggesting were to actually happen (don't worry, it won't, Vegas is much too powerful), the void would be too much to bear for most.

[T.D.]

Interesting article re. LaVar Arrington.

Recall that Arrington was a big defender of Sandusky and Penn St. when the scandal initially (2011-12 vintage, that is ) broke.

Edited July 13, 2012 by T.D.

[Larry Kart]

JETman and others: Anyone who's been around an athletic team setting, academic or not, and at just about any age level, ought to be aware that there's some (for want of a better term) potential homoerotic component in the air. Worst case or cases -- we know that that is/they are. OTOH -- and I certainly don't know how to handle these shadings (if "shadings" is the right term) -- but I think that a good deal of this is unavoidably part of all that's in play in boys becoming men/shaping their identities (and in girls becoming women, for that matter). And of course, among the adult mentors/coaches/hangers-on, there have been and probably always will be a certain number of people whose "issues"/desires/what have you significantly reside in that somewhat homoeroticized atmosphere.

People like Sandusky who put their fantasies into action, and mobilize the resources of coercion and charm in order to do so, are, I would say, both a significantly different crew and not that different. For one, are not coercion and charm the twin poles of behavior that most significant leaders of teams effectively put to use? (In that, I'm reminded that in addition to everything else, Sandusky seems to have been a highly gifted football coach who taught several generations of celebrated Penn State linebackers their craft.) What I'm trying to say here, is that the world of organized sport, male and female, cannot be walled off from homoeroticized thinking and at times behavior -- it's on the table there because it's on the table in terms of general human development, especially when one is in the hands of (sorry about that) mentors, because that's the nature of situation and also because one sometimes needs/desires some mentoring. My point, I guess, is that to think in the face of the Sandusky-Penn State disaster that this is essentially a matter of "quarantine the alien vileness" and/or "hang the alien bastards high" or "purge the Augean stables" is to ignore the fact (at least I think it's a fact) that to some degree we live and/or lived in those stables, too, and for a reason, even of necessity.

[Dan Gould]

I'm not at all sure what you're getting at Larry, but I don't see how there can be any naturally occuring homoerotic component to interactions between adult authority/father figures and adolescent boys. Or not one that can be labelled as inevitable in any way.

[T.D.]

Well said, Larry. Too complex an issue for me to comment on at the moment.

[Larry Kart]

I'm not at all sure what you're getting at Larry, but I don't see how there can be any naturally occuring homoerotic component to interactions between adult authority/father figures and adolescent boys. Or not one that can be labelled as inevitable in any way.

Well, we can disagree about how much/in what ways/how often, etc., but not any? It's almost as though you've proved my implicit point, that we human beings have an understandably powerful need not to see what is/has been/can be there.

[Dan Gould]

Can be there, because sickos exist and prey on children? Of course. I was objecting to the idea that its natural or normal.