A thread for the Paterno haters .....and liars. Have at it Bitchs!

Essence, before you brand me a liar, you might want to read the following post:

http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=1825448&postcou nt=9

McQueary and Paterno did what was legally required, so they did not face criminal charges.

But neither of them ever followed up on the incident - either with their superiors or with law enforcement - even though they continued to observe Sandusky's presence on campus and his involvement with children. They were content to wash their hands of the problem. That's what I mean about passing the buck.

I was very careful not to call any particular individual a liar.

But there is misrepresentation by omission. Or being parsimonious in the veracity.

From what I read Paterno did exacty the correct thing shortly after he heard about it.

Whether he should have made follow up inquiries after he had passed it to the proper authoriities is something which he probably regretted, but hindsight is wonderful.

Aren't you judging us when you tell us not to judge?

Very cute!

BTW, the phrase i was thinking of above is more commonly known as being 'economical with the truth' i.e. telling a lie.

Aren't you judging us when you tell us not to judge? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Pointing out Matthew 7:1 is not telling you not to judge, it is pointing out the biblical significance of judging. Do with it what you will.

You do like to twist you some words and hear what you want.

Sorry, WTF, I judge you to be an idiot.

What don't you get?

Why you have a misguided perception on my posting history?

I am not trying to sell you anything gnadfly.

You think it is weird. Ok. That is your right. I think you are just either trying to be cute and failing or you are weird.

It is my general nature to dig into subjects and try and see all sides.

I think that is what a right leaning fellow like yourself finds weird. That is not your kinds nature. You are herd mentality creatures. I get that. When you start understanding yourself as well as other you will find fewer things weird.

Come away from the herd and enjoy the world, it is not perfect but all in all a beautiful place if you will just open up your mind to the possibility that there are more than one angle to stories. Originally Posted by WTF

Wow. WTF is the queen of denial. You aren't trying to see all sides. You've have the same opinion throughout this although admittedly I haven't wasted my time reading all your posts. And you keep doubling down on it. Weird. And my recollection of your posting history is pretty good. So good that I know that you won't go to the trouble of disproving it.

McQueary and Paterno did what was legally required, so they did not face criminal charges.

But neither of them ever followed up on the incident - either with their superiors or with law enforcement - even though they continued to observe Sandusky's presence on campus and his involvement with children. They were content to wash their hands of the problem. That's what I mean about passing the buck. Originally Posted by chicagoboy

That is the thing. The officers investigating the case said that while Paterno and McQueary did what was legally required they failed in their moral responsibility. This is what the police said, they failed in their moral responsibility to follow through and make sure something was done.

One thing everyone is forgetting is that 10 years Sandusky had been Paterno's loyal assistant coach and was suppose to take his place when he retired. When the first incident happened 10 years ago all of a sudden Sandusky was "retired" with virtually no mention or ceremony. Paterno barely said anything about it. Sandusky was NEVER mentioned for another coaching position with any other university after that moment. That tells me Paterno knew and yet he did nothing. It came down to protecting the football program at all cost.

Sorry, WTF, I judge you to be an idiot. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

a nuanced idiot

Essence, before you brand me a liar, you might want to read the following post:

http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=1825448&postcou nt=9

McQueary and Paterno did what was legally required, so they did not face criminal charges.

But neither of them ever followed up on the incident - either with their superiors or with law enforcement - even though they continued to observe Sandusky's presence on campus and his involvement with children. They were content to wash their hands of the problem. That's what I mean about passing the buck. Originally Posted by chicagoboy

First you say they did nothing. Then when that is exposed as a falsehood (is that better?) you come with this passing the buck. What if the police had been involved and done nothing? Should Paterno then done what? Take the law into his own hands, kill Sandusky? Even though Paterno had not seen anything. Is that what was needed? How many kids that played for Joe do you think had been falsely accused of something? How many rightly so? Don't you think that Paterno let the chain of command handle it? Rightly so, I say. That is what law abiding citizens do. To say he did nothing was a lie, to say he did not do enough is stating the obvious....with hindsight.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/...ry-report-says
That is when McQueary told Dr. Jonathan Dranov, a family friend and colleague of McQueary's father, that he had heard "sex sounds" and a running shower before a young boy peered around the corner of the shower's stall, the Harrisburg, Pa., newspaper reported Sunday morning, citing a source with knowledge of Dranov's testimony before the grand jury that brought the charges.
McQueary, a receivers coach who remains on administrative leave, said he then saw an adult arm reach around the boy's waist and pull him out of view, Dranov told the grand jury, according to the newspaper's source.
Sandusky left the shower in a towel seconds later, the report said.
Because McQueary said he hadn't personally witnessed an assault, Dranov said he advised McQueary to report the incident to his superiors at Penn State, but that he shouldn't worry about informing the police, the report said.
Ousted coach Joe Paterno has said he was never told of anything such as rape or molestation about what happened in the shower stall. Paterno and McQueary discussed the matter the next day.

In my humble opinion the "proper authorities" are the police, not the university administration.

Sorry, WTF, I judge you to be an idiot. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

And I think you are a cocksucker

a nuanced idiot

Originally Posted by gnadfly

You would be a cocksucker too if cutiepie had one, as is you just lick his vaginia.

I love it when you two start name calling means you have no facts to back up your beliefs.

In my humble opinion the "proper authorities" are the police, not the university administration. Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

Well ok, then McQueary should have told the police.

Maybe you should go change the law in Penn.

Had the chain of command been followed, the police would have been called.

What does eccie do if it hears of something fishy of a legal nature?

Would you call the police?

Is there a plan set in place if a fishy review appears where the police are contacted?

Do we bury our head in the sand?

Follow up?

Or kick that stone up to a higher power?

What is eccie's plan of action?

Afterall we are all so perfect here.

Wow. WTF is the queen of denial. You aren't trying to see all sides. You've have the same opinion throughout this although admittedly I haven't wasted my time reading all your posts. And you keep doubling down on it. Weird. And my recollection of your posting history is pretty good. So good that I know that you won't go to the trouble of disproving it. Originally Posted by gnadfly

disproving what.

aspd posting history too?

What would you do gnadfly if you found out cutiepie was doing as Sandusky?...you found out about it here on eccie.

Would you report it to the police? Would you turn over your posting history to the police? You hadn't seen anything but somebody had told you something about cutiepie.

What would you do?

I love it when you two start name calling means you have no facts to back up your beliefs. Originally Posted by WTF

No, it means we are tired of your bullshit and the fact you never listen, but you quote Scripture on a SHMB to try to prove your point.

You are a buffoon and a sideshow. Kind of like watching a sitcom on TV. It makes you laugh, but has no lasting merit.

You will require the last word. Go ahead. I've got better things to do.