Report finds Paterno not only knew but willingly financed Sandusky

[3 Times]

yes, coach mcqueary testified that he confided in coach paterno in 2001.

my reply clearly stated "prior to 2001".

thank you for your suggestion. my personal advice to you is to leave your heart and emotion out of your decision making. it will be your un-doing.

Fuck a timeline bro. Paterno knew right?????

 

[Spectrum]

Cran. I am going to read the full damn report this weekend. I just can't fathom how Paterno did not know. The "reports" I have been reading have been pretty damning. However, I do know that "journalists" can sensationalize shit.

 

[THREAD_CRITIC]

that your hero was protecting a pedophile, and we both know whos really emotional dude.

My heros are the men and women of my family.....JoePa is dead, he should've done more we established that 6 months ago...I only get emotional when it affects my money....write that down

 

[3 Times]

Cranrab,

Let me give you an example. There's evidence that Sandusky was raping little boys for 15 years, correct? Now do you need more evidence to believe that perhaps he was fucking little boys for more than 15 years? I don't. I'm pretty sure he was raping boys longer than 15 years although there is no "evidence" to support this. Evidence is not always needed to know something about someone.

 

[cranrab]

The latest report displays that perhaps Paterno not only knew, but conspired to cover it up.

great. please show me where.

 

[3 Times]

Cran. I am going to read the full damn report this weekend. I just can't fathom how Paterno did not know. The "reports" I have been reading have been pretty damning. However, I do know that "journalists" can sensationalize shit.

We should be past that already. The grand jury report clearly stated Paterno knew. The latest revelations are that Paterno and others were consciously hiding it from leaking to the public.

 

[3 Times]

great. please show me where.

Nah I learned a long time ago not to try and prove anything to someone that's in denial. A person in denial can only come out of that themselves, evidence and proof be damned. A person in denial is very clever at coming up with reasons for why they shouldn't believe something.

 

[cranrab]

I'm pretty sure he was raping boys longer than 15 years although there is no "evidence" to support this. Evidence is not always needed to know something about someone.

you've already stated that you don't require evidence when formulating your opinions. we didn't need an example to understand that part of your worldview.

 

[3 Times]

Example of being in denial:

Twenty-five years later, when former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky was accused of a 15-year reign of pedophilia on young boys, I thought Paterno was too old and too addled to understand, too grandfatherly and Catholic to get that Sandusky was committing grisly crimes using Paterno's own football program as bait.

 

[cranrab]

A person in denial can only come out of that themselves, evidence and proof be damned.

and "evidence and proof be damned" is your creed, is it not?

 

[cranrab]

Cran. I am going to read the full damn report this weekend. I just can't fathom how Paterno did not know. The "reports" I have been reading have been pretty damning. However, I do know that "journalists" can sensationalize shit.

the email AW if fond of referring to was sent on may 5, 1998. tim curley states he "touched base" with coach paterno in that email. read below in bold what tim curley would've told coach paterno on may 5, 1998.

university police chief thomas harmon said no evidence of a crime,

(p. 48) "...Harmon reported to Schultz before noon on May 5 that "[w]e're going to hold off on making any crime log entry. At this point in time I can justify that decision because of the lack of clear evidence of a crime"

these came later as the investigation progressed:

detective ron schreffler could not determine if a sexual assault occurred,

(p. 46) "Schreffler and Lauro also told Sandusky that the police could not determine if a sexual assault occurred."

dpw case worker jerry lauro concluded that no sexual assault occurred,

(p.47) "Schreffler's file notes that Lauro agreed that no sexual assault occurred."

cys counselor john seasock concluded after a 2nd psychological evaluation that there was no incident which could be termed sexual abuse.

(p. 44) "...Seasock opined that "there seems to be no incident which could be termed as sexual abuse, nor did there appear to be any sequential pattern of logic and behavior which is usually consistent with adults who have difficulty with sexual abuse of children."

 

[3 Times]

and "evidence and proof be damned" is your creed, is it not?

No I appreciate evidence and proof. I'm just not a slave to it. I've learned to trust my own intuition and use evidence and proof as merely a confirmation of what I already felt in my heart.

 

[3 Times]

the email AW if fond of referring to was sent on may 5, 1998. tim curley states he "touched base" with coach paterno in that email. read below in bold what tim curley would've told coach paterno on may 5, 1998.

These are statements from the State College police? To my understanding they totally botched this case. Not sure if I can depend on their testimonies. Obviously if they were doing any sense of good police work Sandusky would've been behind bars 10 years ago.

 

[cranrab]

These are statements from the State College police? To my understanding they totally botched this case. Not sure if I can depend on their testimonies. Obviously if they were doing any sense of good police work Sandusky would've been behind bars 10 years ago.

the detectives who listened in on jerry sandusky's conversation with the victim's mother dropped the ball.

jerry lauro from dpw dropped the ball big time, by basically rubber stamping other's findings instead of seeking out facts and evidence of his own.

john seasock who was contracted through cys (not a psu employee until 2000) also did a poor job, by rubber stamping his conclusions instead of being fully aware of the case materials.

all of these numerous blunders combined to let jerry sandusky walk free, while simultaneously never alerting anyone (including coach paterno) to the assault.

 

[3 Times]

the detectives who listened in on jerry sandusky's conversation with the victim's mother dropped the ball.

jerry lauro from dpw dropped the ball big time, by basically rubber stamping other's findings instead of seeking out facts and evidence of his own.

john seasock who was contracted through cys (not a psu employee until 2000) also did a poor job, by rubber stamping his conclusions instead of being fully aware of the case materials.

all of these numerous blunders combined to let jerry sandusky walk free, while simultaneously never alerting anyone (including coach paterno) to the assault.

You believe Paterno didn't know his DC was under several investigations???? Oh right you need evidence. Good luck with that bro. Not surewhy your holding on to that thread though

 

[alexw]

First Cran stated they werent even talking about Paterno, so I had to show and label this little piece of information. Somehow he forgot what a subtitle was/is:



This is the email that completely alerts us that Paterno was informed about Sandusky in 1998. Cran would like us to believe that the term touched base means hello

" I have hello'd with the coach. Keep us posted. Thanks"

Cran would also like us to ignore the subject of the email which is Paterno and the response that Sandusky was going to have an interview with Child Welfare.

But according to pedo defender, Coach Pa didnt know. Then we must conclude that they are discussing some other coach (on the penn st. campus) regarding Sandusky's issue with children. Get real!

Here is more of the Freesh's report which details the email above. Notice how they mention Sandusky as Sandusky. But somehow Coach could be anyone according to Cran. This also details the cover up as the police interviews were somehow placed in the Administrative section. Cran would like you to believe Coach Pa wasnt informed since there wasnt any evidence and the case simply went away. No, it was appropriately hidden so it wouldnt go public. Coach Pa knew all along




This part of the report details the private email from Curley to Schultz. Once again the title of the email is Jerry. This tells us the subject is Sandusky. Notice the emails subject isnt Coach or Paterno as before. We learn that Paterno is dying to know whats going on. Cran doesnt want to use his inferencing skills here. But anyone with a brain knows that coach is paterno. Besides the emails subject is "Jerry."




Now im about to fuck my girl after having a beautiful dinner at Cheeburger Cheeburger. Man that shit is the best burger joint on Earth. I'll be back to son this pedo loving nigga after I nut and she falls asleep!​

 

[3 Times]

First Cran stated they werent even talking about Paterno, so I had to show and label this little piece of information. Somehow he forgot what a subtitle was/is:



This is the email that completely alerts us that Paterno was informed about Sandusky in 1998. Cran would like us to believe that the term touched base means hello

" I have hello'd with the coach. Keep us posted. Thanks"

Cran would also like us to ignore the subject of the email which is Paterno and the response that Sandusky was going to have an interview with Child Welfare.

But according to pedo defender, Coach Pa didnt know. Then we must conclude that they are discussing some other coach (on the penn st. campus) regarding Sandusky's issue with children. Get real!

Here is more of the Freesh's report which details the email above. Notice how they mention Sandusky as Sandusky. But somehow Coach could be anyone according to Cran. This also details the cover up as the police interviews were somehow placed in the Administrative section. Cran would like you to believe Coach Pa wasnt informed since there wasnt any evidence and the case simply went away. No, it was appropriately hidden so it wouldnt go public. Coach Pa knew all along




This part of the report details the private email from Curley to Schultz. Once again the title of the email is Jerry. This tells us the subject is Sandusky. Notice the emails subject isnt Coach or Paterno as before. We learn that Paterno is dying to know whats going on. Cran doesnt want to use his inferencing skills here. But anyone with a brain knows that coach is paterno. Besides the emails subject is "Jerry."




Now im about to fuck my girl after having a beautiful dinner at Cheeburger Cheeburger. Man that shit is the best burger joint on Earth. I'll be back to son this pedo loving nigga after I nut and she falls asleep!​

Nice work bro!!!

 

[Naha-Nago]

You get the picture...


*two cents*

 

[Spectrum]

Cran,

Based on what Alex posted above, the probability of "Coach" being Paterno has to be very high given the way they are referring to Jerry by his first name. Also, when it is Coach...with a capital C, you really have to deduce to Paterno. It "could" be someone else by that is like Obama being in a meeting with some "presidents" of some companies and someone said the President want to know what happened. You know the most senior person is being referenced.. the POTUS. I would imagine if anyone is calling somone Coach in this situation, they are referring to Head Coach Paterno. Yeah, they "could" be referring to someone else, but come on....

 

[cranrab]

First Cran stated they werent even talking about Paterno, so I had to show and label this little piece of information. Somehow he forgot what a subtitle was/is:

nice collection of lies, AW. it makes it easier to refute you.

i'll address them 1 by 1 so it's easy to follow.

i quoted the louis freeh report (in this thread):

"the reference to Coach is believed to be Paterno."

that's speculation.

falsely attributing statements to me is weak.

so if that's too difficult for you to follow, it means that the sic believed that tim curley was referring to coach paterno in the email, but that's just guesswork.

 

[cranrab]

This is the email that completely alerts us that Paterno was informed about Sandusky in 1998. Cran would like us to believe that the term touched base means hello

" I have hello'd with the coach. Keep us posted. Thanks"​

sigh. another lie from the apparently hard-of-reading. kinda disappointing too, because i never considered AW as one of those that fishes for co-signers.

again, already addressed in this thread:

"i have touched base with the coach." has ZERO probative value.

touched base could mean they said as little as hello in the hallway.

touched base could also have mean they hatched a nefarious cover up.

unfortunately for YOUR position, the point here is that this email contains proof of nothing concerning coach paterno.

you desperately want to infer meaning. i have no interest in pursuing futile tasks.

in sum, you have an email not sent by coach paterno.

you have an email not received by coach paterno.

you have a statement with indeterminate meaning.

 

[cranrab]

Here is more of the Freesh's report which details the email above. Notice how they mention Sandusky as Sandusky. But somehow Coach could be anyone according to Cran. This also details the cover up as the police interviews were somehow placed in the Administrative section. Cran would like you to believe Coach Pa wasnt informed since there wasnt any evidence and the case simply went away. No, it was appropriately hidden so it wouldnt go public. Coach Pa knew all along

this is 1 of my favorites, because it made it obvious that you still haven't read the report (even the parts you're quoting!).

5/5/98 before noon university police chief thomas harmon informs gary schultz of "the lack of clear evidence of a crime."

5/5/98 5:24 p.m. wrote in the email that he "touched base with the coach".

between noon and 5:24 p.m. the information coach paterno would've received during the base-touching was "the lack of clear evidence of a crime"

i can point out another of your bullshit lies (why AW?) where you claim we disagreed over the "coach" reference in tim curley's 5/5/98 email.

from this thread:

AW,

i stipulate that the individual is jerry sandusky.

i further stipulate that in exhibit 2a "coach" is coach paterno.

would you stipulate that extracting meaning from "I have touched base" is a speculative at best?

only tim curley knows what communication took place between he and coach paterno on may 5th, 1998. only tim curley knows what was discussed.

speculation is not evidence.

but nice try muddying the waters.

 

[cranrab]

This part of the report details the private email from Curley to Schultz. Once again the title of the email is Jerry. This tells us the subject is Sandusky. Notice the emails subject isnt Coach or Paterno as before. We learn that Paterno is dying to know whats going on. Cran doesnt want to use his inferencing skills here. But anyone with a brain knows that coach is paterno. Besides the emails subject is "Jerry."

another gem here.

in tim curley's 5/5/98 email titled "Joe Paterno" we both agreed that the coach referenced in the email is coach paterno.

in tim curley's 5/13/98 email titled "Jerry" you want to assert that the coach referenced in the email is coach paterno.





i'd add a LOL too, if your demonstrated reasoning here wasn't so poor.

 

[cranrab]

Cran

AW is just doing his best ESCO impersonation.

please see above replies for full refutation.

 

[HeathCliff]

interesting

 

[playahaitian]

​

 

[creepin]

​

I'm speechless!

 

[trstar]

Shit. This mofo was a psycho