The Glade 4.0

You stated that none of have addressed the legal ramifications of contractual obligations Paterno had with the University. That is a fabrication of the contents of posts by multiple contributors to this thread, as I personally addressed that several times, as did DE and RD.

You stated that none of realize that Paterno was not a direct witness of a the crime. Another complete fabrication of content, as that was discussed and clearly outlined in my posts from the start, and further acknowledged by multiple posters in this thread subsequent to that.

Stating that we are doing or not doing something that is in direct conflict with the reality of the thread is a fabrication.


No, we have you ascribing positions to poster that don't exist. At no point have I offered a defense of Rynar's position, nor stated I agree with his position. I have been consistently stating I disagree with statements you are making.

Disagreeing with you does not mean I am defending Rynar, nor necessarily agreeing with him, and it certainly doesn't mean that because I disagreed with statements you made that I support or agree with one specific point of Rynar's.

I've yet to see the reason Paterno was fired, other than poor leadership/ a new direction/ and public outrage.

I read Paterno's press conference was squashed earlier, and that he was apparently told not to speak publicly about it. Then he hired a PR firm and made a public comment.

So far, the reasons appear to me to be the public comment and the public outrage as being the two reasons he was fired.

Do you have a source stating otherwise?

Its humorous to see Khross to adamantly using the fallacies which he so vehemently ascribes to himself as a victim.

That's where he broken his contract, Sam.

After all...

http://law.onecle.com/pennsylvania/dome ... 1.000.html



Mandatory/First Reporter laws are all state issued. And, by the by, Paterno did everything correct per PA's statute. You can see it at all the link above. Any failing of people higher up the food chain doesn't connect to Paterno.

_________________

It's humorous to see all of you trying to get out of the fact you have nothing but some vague sense that Paterno did something morally wrong.

_________________

Some please tell me exactly what Paterno knew (in specific detail - word for word), when he knew it, when he reported it, and to whom?

Didn't read the entire thread.

Anyway, Paterno should be fired. He had heard rumors/allegations and did not properly follow up. He is responsible for his staff, the locker room, the reputation of the school, and the children visiting his facilities.

I'm not saying he should be criminally charged, I'd need some evidence of a cover up.

What I am saying is there is enough information (uncontested by Paterno) to demonstrate that he was negligent in his professional responsibilities. Whether any children were actually molested or not is irrelevant.

He should have been fired.

Per Pennsylvania Statue he followed the law and caused a report to be made by his superiors. If they failed in their due diligence, that is not Paterno's fault.

_________________

Khross:

In the interests of not rehashing an argument that was defined 3 pages ago, I'm going to offer a quote from Ladas which succinctly states my thoughts on Paterno's culpability:



Now, I may subjectively view this role to be more or less disgusting than other posters, but I believe this is the point of agreement. We aren't talking about degrees, and the subjectivity of our individual outrage, we are talking about the actual acts (or lack there of) which inspire that outrage.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

I don't understand why so much outrage against Paterno.

Isn't Sandusky the one who committed the disgusting (and criminal) acts?

Too bad he's hamstrung here by all the privacy and confidentially laws surrounding mandatory reporting and criminal investigations. Likewise, he becomes liable damages suffered by the University and Sandusky if he makes statements about the allegations in that forum.

To which I refer to Corolinth's post ...

You guys are just posturing.

_________________

Paterno is getting attention because of his status, the fact he had great power, and apparently not much was done to stop Sandusky from *** raping kids on campus after the fact. Paterno also sat on the board of said *** raper, use to be underling, after allegations were brought to light.

Sandusky isn't receiving much attention because 1)He was not head of football for a bazillion years 2)He was not a nationally recognized football god 3)It's universally agreed he is a scumbag that deserves to rot.

More or less......

So you are saying that Paterno is somehow culpable for Sandusky's crime because of his status?

As hard as it is to believe, I find this position almost has hard to fathom as Xequecals willingness to ignore it altogether.

People are aiming outrage at Paterno because he did not live up to their own moral code. In my opinion, it's very hypocritical. But whatever.

When did you start taking your cues on morality from (to this point unsubstantiated) federal statutes? I don't give a rats *** about this. Exposing himself to some possible degree of double-jeopardy doesn't somehow absolve him.



Corolinth says lots of stupid things. I'll just put this on the pile.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

What about Paterno's own admission of his lack of action? Taken from his statement announcing his retirement at the end of the year, prior to the University's decision to fire him effective immediately:



Doesn't this show that he "knows" there is more that he should have done? What do we know as a fact regarding his employment? Sorry, I know it has been mentioned in this thread somewhere, but I am not looking back through 7 pages to find it.

Khross, are you saying that, as part of his contract of employment, he was not allowed to take action further than he did? I think I need a better grasp of what it is that JoePa was and was not able to do in light of finding out about such allegations regarding a member of the coaching staff. I find it hard to believe that such contracts could be allowed where someone would have to consider their job status before deciding to call the authorities (not school authorities, the police) to report a crime.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

Legally. Legality and getting fired for managing your staff, premises, and visitors properly is somethign completely different.

Initially, the problem is that Victim #2 was reported to Paterno and if he had done the right thing there would not be Victims #3-20. Instead he copped out, softened the message he delivered to his superiors and then sat on his hands while nothing happened to prevent Sandusky from using Paterno's football reputation, facilities and affiliation to continue raping little boys.

Now it is coming to light that Sandusky used his 2nd Mile Charity to "pimp" young boys out to wealthy donors and Paterno sits on the Board of Directors of that charity.

_________________

Did Paterno know about what was happening at the Charity?

When you say 'reported to Paterno', *exactly* what did he know? And could you clarify 'copped out' for me? You say he 'softened' the message... what *exactly* did he say?

What is it you think we have to have? Do I need some form or permission to hold an opinion on how things went wrong for so long and what should have been done? Is there a permit for which I need to apply?

What I don't need is someone that seems to think they have complete understanding making statements about things I have posted or not posted that don't actually reflect what was stated. I certainly don't need it from someone that consistently insists other posters refrain from doing the same to him, and demanding apologies when he thinks it has occurred.


I don't know if you are being serious in this request or not, but if so, it is my understanding the Grand Jury indictment linked earlier in this thread holds a timeline that discusses the most recent events.

It is also reasonable to assume, based upon Paterno's actions, that he was aware of the event in 1998 that resulted in an admission by Sandusky of fondling a boy, his "retirement" and the complaint filed by the mother.

I have not yet seen anything to suggest Paterno was aware of the incident witness by the janitor between the 1998 event and the 2002 event.



Do you mean on this board, or in the public arena in general? If on this board, aside from a couple comments by other posters, I haven't seen outrage at Paterno, just at the situation in general where a 10 yr old could be raped, witnessed without stopping, and then taking 9 years to come to justice.

Personally, I'm disappointed in Paterno, not outraged.


And again, he is caught in a legally prickly situation no matter what he does, and as I have stated before, if you are damned if you do and damned if don't, you do what is morally correct. From my position, morally correct would be bringing the situation, accusations and charges levied before the rest of the Board of Directors for 2nd Mile regardless of any potential "slander" accusations. By serving on the BoD for that organization, I made an obligation to make sound decisions regarding the direction and services of that organization and in protecting those being served.

Now perhaps Paterno did what he did out of a different set of moral beliefs. I can accept that, but I can still hold my opinion that is wrong and that my actions would have been different.


Stating my opinion is not posturing.

Ignoring the "outrage" qualifier, I'm not sure how people being disappointed/upset by this situation is in some way hypocritical, unless you are suggesting we have all been in Paterno's situation and acted as he did?

As a member of the Board you better know.


According to Paterno's grand jury testimony he knew the day after it happened. He altered the message as such:



Excellent outline here on what JoePa can be charged with, why, and how it went down:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/w ... index.html

_________________

This is being investigated by the journalist that broke this story a couple weeks ago from what I have read, and the journalist has been quite clear to say he only heard this rumor as part of his earlier investigation and attempting to follow the leads to see if its accurate or not.

First of all, Corolinth just needs to shut the **** up and quit telling other posters we're posturing or what the **** ever it is this week. Coro's posts are about Coro feeling superior to everyone else.

Second, all you're doing is making vague allusions to what he "becomes liable for." Liability for disclsures, statements, slander, and the like are very slippery issues, especially when the allegations in question are of serious criminal conduct. Statements he may make to the public are a totally different matter than reporting a crime.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Diamondeye:

I just linked the Pennsylvania statutes on it for you; you can go read them. At the point Paterno's Athletic Director and VP said the matter would be reported by the University and Paterno gave his statements and testimony, he'd done his due diligence as the law required. The failures of Penn State and its administration to provide proper training on reporting procedures which have changed 3 times in the last 15 years and 5 times since the original laws were passed in 1985 ...

Those aren't Joe Paterno's problem. I get that there are victims in this situation (assumes the allegations against Sandusky are true), but Paterno was in a legally untenable situation. He can't act, with regard to the 2 Mile Foundation, because Sandusky hasn't been convicted (as far as the evidence indicates) of anything. He can't actually go beyond the procedures established by his employer (the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania) because it does open him up to liability for the damages his actions cause.

And, yesterday, he ultimately got fired for making a public statement about the situation against the orders of the Board of Trustees and acting administration.

_________________