To me, the McQuearys are the quintessential piece of s#it cultists. Maybe Joe being older and traditional/Catholic and not in-tune with sexual behavior in general (according to Jay Paterno) let alone pedophilia, would be reason for him not to know what was going on...I can buy that. But Mike McQueary and his dad don't get that pass, sorry. But they were friends with the Sandusky family and of course didn't want to upset the apple cart (Penn State football) so to me they are guilty as sin.
Awesome Thread on the Penn St Board
- Thread starter Abro1975
- Start date
- Status
No they weren't guesses. They were direct comments and testimony by Joe Paterno himself.
Then you have this gem. I'm sure you will find a way to discredit it though.
According to the transcript, Paterno told investigator Anthony Sassano that the incident involved “some inappropriate sexual activity going on.”
Inappropriate sexual activity seems pretty self explanatory but I'm sure you will disagree.
Oh bull. His transcript is quite clear that the activity was sexual, inappropriate and with a young boy. You can't say those three things and believe that everything going on in that shower was above board and no problem. Cultists like to use Joe being old and acting dumb as part of his defense. He played dumb his entire career.
Well, I already provide the first two quotes earlier ITT and the last one just a few up. Not sure how anyone could see those quotes and not think of something horribly terrible. Wonder if good ole' Joe ever left his own grandkids alone with Jerry. I'm sure he did since he didn't know anything was going on.
The fact that people spend this much of their time and energy going out of their way to defend the reputation of a dead ball coach whom they probably never even met...save for possibly a polite handshake once or twice...is very telling of what kind of people we are dealing with.
For my own benefit please show me the quote in the actual email where Joe supposedly stopped Curly, Shultz, and Spanier from reporting Sandusky to the police. I am no fan of Paterno but to believe that Joe would or could stop higher-ups from going to the police just sounds ridiculous. We already know that people think the person referenced as "Coach" in the emails is Joe Paterno but that isnt necessarily true. Please provide the quoted email of Paterno stopping his bosses from reporting the incident? I would like to be enlightened.
Proof , like one of the players in this saga saying that what they are doing is something that will get them in trouble if it's ever leaked?
Proof like Paterno's statement under oath.... that McQueary told him something had occurred between Sandusky and a young boy, and that it was something of a sexual nature....and that McQueary had looked very shaken when telling Paterno this (so you say it was vague, but it was clear enough for Paterno to know it was of a deviant sexual nature involving an underage boy.)
Pattern no doubt had at least some questions about Sandusky based on the '98 investigation that, even though nothing came of it....would have definitely raised red flags about his tendencies with little boys.
There's plenty of proof. Enough proof to indict 3 men on multiple federal charges.
You just refused to see it.
Paterno had you clowns all conned, thinking he was this great man that cared about people.
He didn't even care enough to learn the kid's name who was raped in the shower.
First off, no one is buying that you are "no fan of Paterno." You are, we know it....so let's just get that out there in case you think you are fooling us in any way by masquerading as a non-Paterno cult member so that it may come off as a more sincere and unbiased rebuttal of all Paterno putdowns.
Secondly, the quote, which is Curley writing to Schultz and Spanier, says,
"After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday, I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps".
Considering they had previously decided to report Cookie Monster, then Curley has a conversation with Paterno and all of a sudden they decide NOT to report him and instead keep it under wraps from the public....the only people who wouldn't make the assumption that Paterno was the only factor, and only reason cited by Curley for altering their plan to report him are Paterno worshippers who refuse to believe how atrocious Paterno really was.
Here you go:
According to CNN, a chain of emails that followed the 2002 shower incident shows Curley and Schultz intended to report the allegation to authorities but then reconsidered after conferring with Paterno.
"After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday, I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps," Curley wrote in an email to Schultz and former president Graham Spanier.
I don't know of a single person who claims to not be a fan of Paterno's, yet refers to him as "Joe." It'd like the Jobot calling card.
It's perfectly clear that Schultz and Curley and Spanier mean Paterno....to everyone that isn't a Paterno worshipper like you. First off, they are very obvious in how they addressed people and organizations without naming them. They are not good at trying to fool anyone. If they were trying to using his name, then one way would be by calling him "Coach" instead of Joe or Paterno.
Or, they may have just forgotten to shield his identity and accidentally called him "Coach" instead of "the other subject" or something like that. Both are completely believable.
I would like to know when that conversation between Joe and the higher-ups occurred? Context is what is missing? Sounds like everyone based on what McCreary actually saw was unsure? Was this conversation right after the incident, was it 6 months later, or was it 1 year later, is this known at all? Sounds like alot of uncertainy to me. Are you going all the way back to 1998 to blame Paterno? The State Police I believe found no credible evidence and that's why the police dropped it. By the way, go ask some of the premier members on BWI if I'm a fan of Paterno, I've taken alot of heat over the years from pro Paterno people. Cant stand the guy, very selfish man who would not retire, and put his own interest ahead of the school's, this after saying "no one person is bigger than the program".
That said, this is America and everyone deserves "due process" in the legal system, unfortunately Joe passed and we are left with this mess.
1998 is irrelevant as it was investigated by DPW. The email about Paterno was just a few weeks after the shower incident.
- ) " like to know when that conversation between Joe and the higher-ups occurred?"
- ) The purported exchanges began 16 days after graduate assistant Mike McQueary first told Head Coach Joe Paterno on February 9, 2001,
- ) February 27, Curley e-mails Spanier & Schultz,
Curley indicates he no longer wants to contact child welfare authorities just yet. He refers to a conversation the day before with Paterno. It's not known what Paterno may have said to Curley.
Curley writes: "After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday, I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps."
Well obviously you dont know Penn State culture? Joe is how everyone refers to Joe Paterno. When you are talking within the Penn State Community about Joe Paterno everyone refers to him that way. I didnt know the man personally or ever met him.
This is all speculation, the conversation between Joe, Curly, and the higher-ups. We wont know more about this until there is actual testimony in court.
No one knows what was actually said between Paterno, Curly, Schultz, and Spanier? The problem with critics is that you guys want to fill in the blanks with anything that suits your argument. How about letting the legal system work itself thru and then we will know for sure what actually transpired.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. JoeBots twist every piece of evidence discovered to support their narrative. Legal obligation met or not, Paterno spent years with that sicko roaming the campus and the football facilities looking for his next victim. No biggie though. He met his legal obligation and that's all that matters.
Penn State culture? So you are admitting it's a cult? In what other type of brainwashed, sick culture do you use the friendly first name greeting when referring to someone you despise?
Listen, you can tell yourself anything you want to convince yourself that the man you considered a demigod was not involved in the cover-up....but the people outside your atrocious "Penn State culture" aint buying it.
The proof is right there in the email exchanges. They were set to report him. Then one of them spoke to Paterno (the man who had more authority on the campus then the actual president of the school) and the result of that conversation is that they decided not to report Sandusky.
End of story.
That you are fine with a coach who called ALL THE SHOTS at Penn State and was told my an assistant coach that Sandusky was involved with an underage boy doing something of a sexual nature (and Pateno even said he could tell how rattled McQuary was talking to him, so he knew it was serious) is as much an indictment on you as it is on Paterno.
This wasn't the first time Sandusky had such red flags raised with regards to inappropriateness with young boys ('98 investigation). Paterno didn't tell McQueary to go right to the police, he sat on it for a weekend until he finally told his AD...then later was at the very least involved in the conversation that led to the three boogeymen not following through on their plans to report cookie monster themselves.....and the fact he never did any additional follow-up whatsoever, didn't even seek to learn the kid's name who was raped.....well that speaks volumes about your disgusting Penn State culture.
Plenty of proof there. The man you worshipped was a con artist. He had you fooled. He had you convinced he was a great man, when he never even attempted to learn the name of the kid who was raped in the shower.
Poor cultist. You were taken.
He did call it something. He called it "something of a sexual nature." He knew it involved some type of sexual act with a minor. And you still choose to support this enabler?
I think its pretty obvious that pnnylion is either one of the 3 indicted, a family member of those 3, a family member of the Paternos or McQuerys or a legal rep of one of the above. I can't believe any other type of human being could be so obstinate and tunnel visioned as he is.
Just ****ing lay in a ditch and have someone cover you in dirt. How many screen names do you have now since you keep getting banned over on BWI? You think that Sandsuky is innocent. You believe that he never molested anyone. You are a victim blamer and a piece of shit. Seriously, go **** yourself.
All of the nonsense you post, with no proof, no evidence. Except what lurks in your hatred.
Don't waste your time with him. As I said, he thinks that all of the victims are liars and that Sandusky is innocent. Literally, that is what he believes.
He has also called the trial for the PSU admin "nonsense" and is such a sick bastard that he has been kicked off the PSU board for both rivals and scout multiple times. You are never going to get a quality response from him.
Cult, demigod, proof in the "emails" (none), 1998 (the State left him off, PSU had nothing to do with it). Everything you post is false, fictional and a product of hate/jealousy. Or borrowed from the Litany According to the Troll.
Look whose talking, laughed off BWI daily, banned about a dozen times. A clown, truly lacking in quality, sense and fact.
- Status
Similar threads
