From Penn State Fan

[knapplc]

Like I said I have no problem with his firing. He did do something and not nothing, but it was the least amount possible.

 

We're quibbling over minutiae. Saying he did something is technically correct. It is like giving a village a task of moving a mountain, and having the man who owns the largest excavator move one grain of sand.

 

We can go over this all day. The bottom line is, Paterno didn't do what he should have done. End of story.

[HuskerGBR]

Like I said I have no problem with his firing. He did do something and not nothing, but it was the least amount possible.

 

We're quibbling over minutiae. Saying he did something is technically correct. It is like giving a village a task of moving a mountain, and having the man who owns the largest excavator move one grain of sand.

 

We can go over this all day. The bottom line is, Paterno didn't do what he should have done. End of story.

 

I agree and I have gone into this more then I would have liked to. I am passionate about the law and being innocent until proven guilty. As Mr. Paterno did fulfill his legal obligation...it doesn't mean we have to like the law and I am glad that PA got it changed in 2007. The authorities need evidence that Mr. Paterno knew more, but until then he is innocent. If Mr. Paterno wanted to he could get a good lawyer and sue the state for wrongful termination. Either way it makes me sick and I am done talking about it...I would be going after everyone involved if I was the attorney general.

[majech]

Like I said I have no problem with his firing. He did do something and not nothing, but it was the least amount possible.

 

We're quibbling over minutiae. Saying he did something is technically correct. It is like giving a village a task of moving a mountain, and having the man who owns the largest excavator move one grain of sand.

 

We can go over this all day. The bottom line is, Paterno didn't do what he should have done. End of story.

 

I agree and I have gone into this more then I would have liked to. I am passionate about the law and being innocent until proven guilty. As Mr. Paterno did fulfill his legal obligation...it doesn't mean we have to like the law and I am glad that PA got it changed in 2007. The authorities need evidence that Mr. Paterno knew more, but until then he is innocent. If Mr. Paterno wanted to he could get a good lawyer and sue the state for wrongful termination. Either way it makes me sick and I am done talking about it...I would be going after everyone involved if I was the attorney general.

 

How is it wrongful termination? He wasn't terminated for breaking a law. HIs firing was deemed the best interested of the university as was Bill Callahan, as was Frank Solich, as was Marvin Sanders. Those guys broke no law. Should they have sued. I really don't get what point you are trying to make.

[knapplc]

Like I said I have no problem with his firing. He did do something and not nothing, but it was the least amount possible.

 

We're quibbling over minutiae. Saying he did something is technically correct. It is like giving a village a task of moving a mountain, and having the man who owns the largest excavator move one grain of sand.

 

We can go over this all day. The bottom line is, Paterno didn't do what he should have done. End of story.

 

I agree and I have gone into this more then I would have liked to. I am passionate about the law and being innocent until proven guilty. As Mr. Paterno did fulfill his legal obligation...it doesn't mean we have to like the law and I am glad that PA got it changed in 2007. The authorities need evidence that Mr. Paterno knew more, but until then he is innocent. If Mr. Paterno wanted to he could get a good lawyer and sue the state for wrongful termination. Either way it makes me sick and I am done talking about it...I would be going after everyone involved if I was the attorney general.

 

Your continued defense of Paterno is baffling. He has ZERO claim for wrongful termination. None. And if he has any honor whatsoever he wouldn't even try to file such a claim.

 

You are also confusing reasons for termination and evidence necessary to convict in a court of law. These are not the same thing.

 

This continued mantra of "Paterno fulfilled his legal obligation" is disgusting. It is the defense of a coward, and if that's how JoePa thinks children should be defended, he was never EVER the kind of man who should be responsible for shaping young lives.

[HUSKERCR]

JoePa has just hired a DC Criminal Defense attorney.

He knows what's coming.

 

When the PSU moral cesspool is finally drained, might I suggest the following

name changes:

 

Happy Valley to "Creepy Valley"

Penn State to "State Pen"

Nittany Lion to "Nittany Lyin' "

JoePa to "JokePa"

[MNSker]

PSU has always been classy, except for that diss on Pittsburgh residents. Actually, who cares about the residents; only the Steelers matter!

 

[edit] I feel bad about JoePa - he's a classy guy--still culpable, but an honest mistake (IMO, I don't know exactly what happened.)

 

PSU overall is still classy, the whiteout at the stadium kicks ass, and I hope it looks like blood flowing with all the Husker fans in attendance! Heh

It is painfully apparent that you don't have the foggiest idea what happened or there is no way you could say he's a classy guy that made an honest mistake.

 

The graduate assistant saw Sandusky engaged in sodomy, met with his father and then for some reason decided to go to JoePa--I'd speculate because JoePa essentially was the father to PSU sports. JoePa (instead of reporting this to the police) met with the AD the next day--and here the language gets unclear in the grand jury report:

"the graduate assistant had seen Jerry Sandusky in the Lasch Building showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy."

 

How does sodomy turn into 'fondling or doing something'? Exactly what did Joe Paterno hear from the semi-ironically named McQueary?

 

On it went up the chain until it reached the university president, who is required by PA law to notify the state:

 

http://law.onecle.co...63.011.000.html

 

Staff members of institutions, etc.--Whenever a person

is required to report under subsection (b) in the capacity as a

member of the staff of a medical or other public or private

institution, school, facility or agency, that person shall

immediately notify the person in charge of the institution,

school, facility or agency or the designated agent of the person

in charge. Upon notification, the person in charge or the

designated agent, if any, shall assume the responsibility and

have the legal obligation to report or cause a report to be made

in accordance with section 6313. This chapter does not require

more than one report from any such institution, school, facility

or agency.

 

This is more or less what happened. His reputation and legacy and PSU are irrevocably stained, but yeah, I'll give hm the benefit of the doubt until I hear otherwise. I'm not trying to absolve him of blame, but at the same time I absolutely do not consider him a monster.

[HuskerGBR]

Like I said I have no problem with his firing. He did do something and not nothing, but it was the least amount possible.

 

We're quibbling over minutiae. Saying he did something is technically correct. It is like giving a village a task of moving a mountain, and having the man who owns the largest excavator move one grain of sand.

 

We can go over this all day. The bottom line is, Paterno didn't do what he should have done. End of story.

 

I agree and I have gone into this more then I would have liked to. I am passionate about the law and being innocent until proven guilty. As Mr. Paterno did fulfill his legal obligation...it doesn't mean we have to like the law and I am glad that PA got it changed in 2007. The authorities need evidence that Mr. Paterno knew more, but until then he is innocent. If Mr. Paterno wanted to he could get a good lawyer and sue the state for wrongful termination. Either way it makes me sick and I am done talking about it...I would be going after everyone involved if I was the attorney general.

 

Your continued defense of Paterno is baffling. He has ZERO claim for wrongful termination. None. And if he has any honor whatsoever he wouldn't even try to file such a claim.

 

You are also confusing reasons for termination and evidence necessary to convict in a court of law. These are not the same thing.

 

This continued mantra of "Paterno fulfilled his legal obligation" is disgusting. It is the defense of a coward, and if that's how JoePa thinks children should be defended, he was never EVER the kind of man who should be responsible for shaping young lives.

 

Really? Do you have a reading comprehension problem? The law at that time says he fulfilled his legal obligation and I also said that doesn't mean we have to like it. Where in any of my posts am I defending the man??? In fact, I said I would go after everyone involved, did I not? I really don't know wtf your problem is, because we are on the same side in the whole thing. The thing I can't stand is you guys all thing you are judge, jury, and F@#$$%% executioner.

 

I am not confusing anything so don't tell me I am. I might be wrong that he could sue, but if he is fired for this scandal (which don't give me a bullsh!t story that he wasn't) and he is found of no wrong doing...isn't that wrongful termination? I have seen crazier things and a good lawyer could find something there.

[Stumpy1]

Like I said I have no problem with his firing. He did do something and not nothing, but it was the least amount possible.

 

We're quibbling over minutiae. Saying he did something is technically correct. It is like giving a village a task of moving a mountain, and having the man who owns the largest excavator move one grain of sand.

 

We can go over this all day. The bottom line is, Paterno didn't do what he should have done. End of story.

 

I agree and I have gone into this more then I would have liked to. I am passionate about the law and being innocent until proven guilty. As Mr. Paterno did fulfill his legal obligation...it doesn't mean we have to like the law and I am glad that PA got it changed in 2007. The authorities need evidence that Mr. Paterno knew more, but until then he is innocent. If Mr. Paterno wanted to he could get a good lawyer and sue the state for wrongful termination. Either way it makes me sick and I am done talking about it...I would be going after everyone involved if I was the attorney general.

 

Your continued defense of Paterno is baffling. He has ZERO claim for wrongful termination. None. And if he has any honor whatsoever he wouldn't even try to file such a claim.

 

You are also confusing reasons for termination and evidence necessary to convict in a court of law. These are not the same thing.

 

This continued mantra of "Paterno fulfilled his legal obligation" is disgusting. It is the defense of a coward, and if that's how JoePa thinks children should be defended, he was never EVER the kind of man who should be responsible for shaping young lives.

 

Really? Do you have a reading comprehension problem? The law at that time says he fulfilled his legal obligation and I also said that doesn't mean we have to like it. Where in any of my posts am I defending the man??? In fact, I said I would go after everyone involved, did I not? I really don't know wtf your problem is, because we are on the same side in the whole thing. The thing I can't stand is you guys all thing you are judge, jury, and F@#$$%% executioner.

 

I am not confusing anything so don't tell me I am. I might be wrong that he could sue, but if he is fired for this scandal (which don't give me a bullsh!t story that he wasn't) and he is found of no wrong doing...isn't that wrongful termination? I have seen crazier things and a good lawyer could find something there.

Joe Pa got fired for STUPIDITY...He was STUPID not to put an end to it, he was STUPID to allow it to continue and he was was STUPID to allow Sandusky to remain apart of the university.

[JJ Husker]

PSU has always been classy, except for that diss on Pittsburgh residents. Actually, who cares about the residents; only the Steelers matter!

 

[edit] I feel bad about JoePa - he's a classy guy--still culpable, but an honest mistake (IMO, I don't know exactly what happened.)

 

PSU overall is still classy, the whiteout at the stadium kicks ass, and I hope it looks like blood flowing with all the Husker fans in attendance! Heh

It is painfully apparent that you don't have the foggiest idea what happened or there is no way you could say he's a classy guy that made an honest mistake.

 

The graduate assistant saw Sandusky engaged in sodomy, met with his father and then for some reason decided to go to JoePa--I'd speculate because JoePa essentially was the father to PSU sports. JoePa (instead of reporting this to the police) met with the AD the next day--and here the language gets unclear in the grand jury report:

"the graduate assistant had seen Jerry Sandusky in the Lasch Building showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy."

 

How does sodomy turn into 'fondling or doing something'? Exactly what did Joe Paterno hear from the semi-ironically named McQueary?

 

On it went up the chain until it reached the university president, who is required by PA law to notify the state:

 

http://law.onecle.co...63.011.000.html

 

Staff members of institutions, etc.--Whenever a person

is required to report under subsection (b) in the capacity as a

member of the staff of a medical or other public or private

institution, school, facility or agency, that person shall

immediately notify the person in charge of the institution,

school, facility or agency or the designated agent of the person

in charge. Upon notification, the person in charge or the

designated agent, if any, shall assume the responsibility and

have the legal obligation to report or cause a report to be made

in accordance with section 6313. This chapter does not require

more than one report from any such institution, school, facility

or agency.

 

This is more or less what happened. His reputation and legacy and PSU are irrevocably stained, but yeah, I'll give hm the benefit of the doubt until I hear otherwise. I'm not trying to absolve him of blame, but at the same time I absolutely do not consider him a monster.

Sorry but I think you're confusing the bare minimum legal requirement of his actions and what a decent respectable human being should have done. For me, benefit of the doubt has sailed but I probably do not consider him a monster either. That moniker rightfully belongs to Sandusky. All I know is a lot of innocent young boys were subjected to further molestation at the hands of Sandusky and I believe that Paterno knew well more than enough about the situation that he could've and should've been one of the handful of people that could have prevented it. His lack of inaction is inexcusable in my book and I find it quite scary that some people are still willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. He doesn't deserve it. Other people in that same boat would be McQuery (why is he still there?), the AD, the other charged finance guy, and whoever else ends up being an informed participant in the cover up which began after the 1998 incident. Absolutely no way a whole bunch of people didn't know what a perv this guy was. And no one stepped up for the kids. Makes me want to cry.

 

edit- If I'm JoePa it makes no difference if I hear "fondling", "inappropriate touching","something sexual in nature", or a very graphic description of sodomy. Any and all of those tell me I don't protect that guy, I don't want him around, and that he should in no way shape or form be around children. Joe failed a multiple choice test that had only one choice.

[knapplc]

 

This continued mantra of "Paterno fulfilled his legal obligation" is disgusting. It is the defense of a coward, and if that's how JoePa thinks children should be defended, he was never EVER the kind of man who should be responsible for shaping young lives.

 

Really? Do you have a reading comprehension problem? The law at that time says he fulfilled his legal obligation and I also said that doesn't mean we have to like it. Where in any of my posts am I defending the man??? In fact, I said I would go after everyone involved, did I not? I really don't know wtf your problem is, because we are on the same side in the whole thing. The thing I can't stand is you guys all thing you are judge, jury, and F@#$$%% executioner.

 

I am not confusing anything so don't tell me I am. I might be wrong that he could sue, but if he is fired for this scandal (which don't give me a bullsh!t story that he wasn't) and he is found of no wrong doing...isn't that wrongful termination? I have seen crazier things and a good lawyer could find something there.

 

Calm down.

 

People get fired for these kinds of things all the time. Failure to uphold your employer's moral codes, whatever they may be, are grounds for termination. Without looking specifically at Paterno's contract, I'm guessing there was a morality clause. Again, this is a very common thing. The BoT likely told Joe that while he had done "the legal minimum" he did not uphold his obligations to the children, and they fired him.

 

If I had a dollar for every time I've heard of someone getting fired for something like this, I could go out to a really nice dinner. With friends. And I'd buy. And I'd leave a good tip.

 

If you're not intending to defend Paterno, lines like this are poorly chosen: "The thing I can't stand is you guys all thing you are judge, jury, and F#$$%% executioner." It's simple common sense to see why Paterno was fired. It is not uncommon. Going on and on and on about "fulfilled his legal obligation" is irrelevant to why he got fired, but it does appear that you are defending the man.

[JJ Husker]

I really don't care if he has a legal case for wrongful termination or not. He needed to go and he's gone. And considering he had announced he was stepping down at the end of this season prior to the BoT canning him, there is very little in possible damages to be sought. Is he going to go after that last few weeks pay? I don't think so. Contractually he is probably being paid through the end of the season or longer anyway.

[knapplc]

I really don't care if he has a legal case for wrongful termination or not. He needed to go and he's gone.

 

Agreed. That's all there is to it.

[stlspartan]

Help me out here. I'm not sure how much JoPa knew - though it seems like enough. Regardless, why should it matter? He's responsible for the program. The program suffered a calamity the likes of which has never been seen before in college athletics. This horror was perpetrated by somebody that JoPa hired and supervised. How on earth can anybody have thought he could escape this? Everybody up through the president is going down for this. Certainly the guy with direct responsibility for the football program and corresponding salary is going to be taking the fall for it.

 

It's like saying that the Captain of the Exxon Valdez wasn't responsible when his ship hit the reef because he was drunk in his bunk at the time.

[Blaze1up]

Penn St. will have a hard time recovering from all this, it could take decades. Damn shame for our cross division rival.. GO ! BIG ! RED ! GOBIGRED !

[irafreak]

So I still wonder how involved the NCAA is going to become in all of this. Possible that Paterno loses his wins that kept him past Bobby Bowden, Eddie Robinson, etc...?