ADVERTISEMENT

Boomer and Carton weigh in on PSU

Beancounter88

All Conference
Dec 22, 2010
3,476
2,319
113
On the way to work this morning, they addressed the issue briefly. Said the NCAA should go to UCLA and tell them Bradley can't work there anymore and should go to tOSU and tell them Schiano can't work there anymore - TODAY. They shouldn't be working with young men anymore. The difference with these guys is apparently they SAW the abuse happen and did nothing - they didn't just HEAR about it. There should be reporters swarming to UCLA and tOSU.

Paraphrasing of course, but that was the theme of it. The pressure will start to build even further.
 
On the way to work this morning, they addressed the issue briefly. Said the NCAA should go to UCLA and tell them Bradley can't work there anymore and should go to tOSU and tell them Schiano can't work there anymore - TODAY. They shouldn't be working with young men anymore. The difference with these guys is apparently they SAW the abuse happen and did nothing - they didn't just HEAR about it. There should be reporters swarming to UCLA and tOSU.

Paraphrasing of course, but that was the theme of it. The pressure will start to build even further.
Embarrassing that two guys in the world's biggest media market would literally do no homework and jump on the "sensational" media element. There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that Bradley or Schiano saw or heard anything.
 
I think sworn testimony constitutes evidence.

As posted in another thread, here's McQueary's testimony:
McQueary: "He (Bradley) said another assistant coach had come to him in the early 90's about a very similar situation to mine, . . . "

McQueary: "Greg had come into his (Bradley's) office white as a ghost and said he just saw Jerry doing something to a boy in the shower. And that's it. That's all he ever told me."

What is "very similar?" And what was "doing something?"
Not saying this behavior is acceptable, but what if Gary saw Jerry washing the boy's back? For any normal person, this would be considered odd behavior, but it would comport with Gary's Twitter statement that "I never saw any abuse, nor had reason to suspect any abuse, during my time at Penn State."

We live in a world where people want to condemn and/or convict in a court of public opinion.
 
still if this was going on since 1976,its hard to think many coaches didnt suspect and/or see certain things..Jerry brought kid victims on PSU charter planes..after he was accussed two prior times..
 
As posted in another thread, here's McQueary's testimony:
McQueary: "He (Bradley) said another assistant coach had come to him in the early 90's about a very similar situation to mine, . . . "

McQueary: "Greg had come into his (Bradley's) office white as a ghost and said he just saw Jerry doing something to a boy in the shower. And that's it. That's all he ever told me."

What is "very similar?" And what was "doing something?"
Not saying this behavior is acceptable, but what if Gary saw Jerry washing the boy's back? For any normal person, this would be considered odd behavior, but it would comport with Gary's Twitter statement that "I never saw any abuse, nor had reason to suspect any abuse, during my time at Penn State."

We live in a world where people want to condemn and/or convict in a court of public opinion.
Um, a 50 year old in a shower washing a young boys back is EXACTLY a reason to suspect abuse.
 
then you should do some homework too, because a deposition by an insurance lawyer is not evidence
What?
Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion.[1] This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of the truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence.

In law, rules of evidence govern the types of evidence that are admissible in a legal proceeding. Types of legal evidence include testimony, documentary evidence, and physical evidence.

A deposition is TESTIMONY--it is EVIDENCE. Now maybe what you were getting at is his testimony is double hearsay. But it is still evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thegock
Why would Boomer, Carton or their staff do any homework? That would constitute wasted time and money for them. The media has become accustomed to riding on the piggyback of the original story breaker. Less effort and cost for them. As long as the audience is built in, it doesn't matter.
 
Um, a 50 year old in a shower washing a young boys back is EXACTLY a reason to suspect abuse.

Don't disagree, but it is not itself abuse. We are dancing around words here, the same way President (Bill) Clinton said something depended on the meaning of the word "is".

Don't know and don't really care what Greg saw. He's gone. There is no statue of him or buildings named after him at Rutgers, nor will there ever be. All my post above indicated is Gary's Twitter statement could be completely truthful if he saw nothing more than Sandusky and a boy in the shower together, and perhaps he saw Sandusky washing the boy's back. Again, it is not my position that this is acceptable behavior--it is strange, but not abuse.

And I am not a Gary fan or apologist. I really have no feelings about the guy now that he is gone. He did a nice job at Rutgers while he was our coach. But he is gone and not ours anymore. Anyone who tries to draw a line to connect dots to Rutgers is grasping at straws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU2055
Objection. Double hearsay.

That's a different question. I understand that it's heresay, but it's still evidence however inadmissible in court for this purpose. What will it take before you admit yourself that he probably saw something, his cell phone video?
 
still if this was going on since 1976,its hard to think many coaches didnt suspect and/or see certain things..Jerry brought kid victims on PSU charter planes..after he was accussed two prior times..
At some point the nonsense has to stop! Does anyone stop and think about how ridiculous this sounds? Assistant coaches knew about this, but players didn't? People in the community didn't know anything about this? The President of the United States recognized his work with children in 1990. Business leaders sat on the board of the Second Mile. He was allowed to adopt children. A major publishing company released a book in 2001. But there were obvious signs in 1976 that this assistant coach had to be protected and promoted to DC! Absurd!
 
  • Like
Reactions: rdono28337
What?
Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion.[1] This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of the truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence.

In law, rules of evidence govern the types of evidence that are admissible in a legal proceeding. Types of legal evidence include testimony, documentary evidence, and physical evidence.

A deposition is TESTIMONY--it is EVIDENCE. Now maybe what you were getting at is his testimony is double hearsay. But it is still evidence.
You are correct. It is evidence, but it is not proof!
 
At some point the nonsense has to stop! Does anyone stop and think about how ridiculous this sounds? Assistant coaches knew about this, but players didn't? People in the community didn't know anything about this? The President of the United States recognized his work with children in 1990. Business leaders sat on the board of the Second Mile. He was allowed to adopt children. A major publishing company released a book in 2001. But there were obvious signs in 1976 that this assistant coach had to be protected and promoted to DC! Absurd!
REALLY?

Sandusky has argued that the "1998 complaint was a minor allegation" that was determined not to be true. Amendola said Sandusky did not discuss that case with Paterno, Schultz or athletic director Tim Curley — the other official now charged in the 2002 allegation. Curley, now on leave, and Schultz both deny the criminal charges.

Still, Amendola said he believes university officials knew about the 1998 complaint, and that they agreed there was nothing to it. "The Penn State police department doesn't investigate something of that magnitude involving a Penn State, high-profile coach, who was still coaching, and not contact Penn State officials," he said.

The fact that university police ended their investigation without bringing charges, and that the state welfare agency found no indication of sexual abuse in the 1998 complaint, meant Sandusky could continue working with young boys at his charity, his summer football camps and at the nearby high school.
 
At this point, I would think the only thing PSU could be on the hook for is its share of the $90M+ in settlements that they will have to pay for. That is a financial matter - not a NCAA matter. No more sanctions?

GS and Bradley will have to answer their own questions about what they saw/did and it could impact their careers. The statue should disappear and the Paterno family should be told to go away quietly. Anything else I am missing?
 
At this point, I would think the only thing PSU could be on the hook for is its share of the $90M+ in settlements that they will have to pay for. That is a financial matter - not a NCAA matter. No more sanctions?

GS and Bradley will have to answer their own questions about what they saw/did and it could impact their careers. The statue should disappear and the Paterno family should be told to go away quietly. Anything else I am missing?
No further sanctions, just the $90M. Certainly not trivial, but not the end of the world for a school with the fundraising of PSU.

The statue stays in storage permanently... Can't see there ever being a point it comes back out without an enormous firestorm/backlash. The Paterno family continues their vocal support of Joe, much to the chagrin of the PSU administration and community at large.

There will never be proof of guilt or innocence, but the vast majority of folks have heard enough to make up their minds about Paterno. Those still defending him will be the equivalent of folks who argue that the South actually won the Civil War, moon-landing deniers, or 911 truthers.

James Franklin is fired in a season or two, PSU eventually makes a home-run hire and makes it's way back into the Top 10. Life goes on...
 
While the information released does suggest further investigation should be done here, McCready's conversation with Bradley does not in anyway constitute proof regarding what Greg Schiano saw or didn't see. it would seem that both Schiano and Bradley should have been deposed to get at the truth of the matter. If what McCready says proves to be true then both Schiano and Bradley should be held accountable, until that happens I don't see how these two could or should be held accountable and suffer the proper consequences. Idiots like Boomer and Carton are just trying to create a story from their media platform.
 
Why would Boomer, Carton or their staff do any homework? That would constitute wasted time and money for them. The media has become accustomed to riding on the piggyback of the original story breaker. Less effort and cost for them. As long as the audience is built in, it doesn't matter.
Very true, but still despicable. I have no idea where this case ends up, but so much has been blurred. Sandusky appears to be a very sophisticated, evil predator. Does anyone really think that dozens of assistant coaches, hundreds of people in the community, church members, Second Mile volunteers all suspected this guy but said nothing? The grand jury was convened for 3 years! And still people were not believing it. The media wasn't following. The first I heard about it was on BWI. It sounded ridiculous, maybe 1 kid looking for $, given all the positive publicity for Second Mile. When the case was revealed, it was horrifying, like church cases. But ther are so many absurd angles that make no sense to a reasonable person. One of Sandusky's children defended him until the end of the trial. When he was convicted, he posted on Facebook " I had no idea that this was happening. If I had sensed any indication, I would have done everything in my power to stop it!" His son had no idea or suspected anything, but every coach at Penn State should have known and done something.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Cheesesteak Vegas
No further sanctions, just the $90M. Certainly not trivial, but not the end of the world for a school with the fundraising of PSU.

The statue stays in storage permanently... Can't see there ever being a point it comes back out without an enormous firestorm/backlash. The Paterno family continues their vocal support of Joe, much to the chagrin of the PSU administration and community at large.

There will never be proof of guilt or innocence, but the vast majority of folks have heard enough to make up their minds about Paterno. Those still defending him will be the equivalent of folks who argue that the South actually won the Civil War, moon-landing deniers, or 911 truthers.

James Franklin is fired in a season or two, PSU eventually makes a home-run hire and makes it's way back into the Top 10. Life goes on...
I think you over estimate the community at large.
 
REALLY?

Sandusky has argued that the "1998 complaint was a minor allegation" that was determined not to be true. Amendola said Sandusky did not discuss that case with Paterno, Schultz or athletic director Tim Curley — the other official now charged in the 2002 allegation. Curley, now on leave, and Schultz both deny the criminal charges.

Still, Amendola said he believes university officials knew about the 1998 complaint, and that they agreed there was nothing to it. "The Penn State police department doesn't investigate something of that magnitude involving a Penn State, high-profile coach, who was still coaching, and not contact Penn State officials," he said.

The fact that university police ended their investigation without bringing charges, and that the state welfare agency found no indication of sexual abuse in the 1998 complaint, meant Sandusky could continue working with young boys at his charity, his summer football camps and at the nearby high school.
And Hillary was just cleared by the FBI. She did nothing wrong.

Paterno had power. He kept the state of Pennsylvania from forcing him to retire.
 
Curious...obviously hearsay is not proof but it does implicate them. In no way would they be in any legal danger by these statements but does it open them up to civil?
 
On the way to work this morning, they addressed the issue briefly. Said the NCAA should go to UCLA and tell them Bradley can't work there anymore and should go to tOSU and tell them Schiano can't work there anymore - TODAY. They shouldn't be working with young men anymore. The difference with these guys is apparently they SAW the abuse happen and did nothing - they didn't just HEAR about it. There should be reporters swarming to UCLA and tOSU.

Paraphrasing of course, but that was the theme of it. The pressure will start to build even further.

And what did they say about PSU?
 
That's a different question. I understand that it's heresay, but it's still evidence however inadmissible in court for this purpose. What will it take before you admit yourself that he probably saw something, his cell phone video?

You misunderstand me. I was referring to its admissibility in court, not its general status (habit, since I'm a lawyer). I don't deny that he probably saw something. As I said in another thread, you can't be a little bit pregnant here. If he saw something, heard something, or knew something, he deserves to be tossed on the Penn State shitpile of history with the rest of them. There is nothing worse than crimes against children. If true, Schiano is dead to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KingHigh
There probably will not be any more sanctions to PSU but the bad PR that they are getting is fantastic. Carton was quite vivid talking about maggots eating Joe Paternos body in hell and such.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Virginiarufan
On the way to work this morning, they addressed the issue briefly. Said the NCAA should go to UCLA and tell them Bradley can't work there anymore and should go to tOSU and tell them Schiano can't work there anymore - TODAY. They shouldn't be working with young men anymore. The difference with these guys is apparently they SAW the abuse happen and did nothing - they didn't just HEAR about it. There should be reporters swarming to UCLA and tOSU.

Paraphrasing of course, but that was the theme of it. The pressure will start to build even further.

I don't know the legality of being able to do that and not honor their contracts. That being said, they both refuted what McQueary said. It's hearsay at this point.
 
What?
Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion.[1] This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of the truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence.

In law, rules of evidence govern the types of evidence that are admissible in a legal proceeding. Types of legal evidence include testimony, documentary evidence, and physical evidence.

A deposition is TESTIMONY--it is EVIDENCE. Now maybe what you were getting at is his testimony is double hearsay. But it is still evidence.


Not all deposition testimony is admissible.
 
I don't know the legality of being able to do that and not honor their contracts. That being said, they both refuted what McQueary said. It's hearsay at this point.
When they refute that in a court room, I would agree with you. Before then, they can say whatever they want without consequence.
 
Embarrassing that two guys in the world's biggest media market would literally do no homework and jump on the "sensational" media element. There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that Bradley or Schiano saw or heard anything.
how do you say that in light of what was just disclosed
 
What baffles me the most about this demented sick individual named Sandusky is: Was he Bear Bryant/ Nick Saban/ Pop Warner/ Alonzo Amos Stagg/ Knute Rockne/Lombardi rolled into one as an assistant in the eyes of Paterno? For him not to just get rid of him from the get after the first allegations and witnessing of child abuse on the grounds of the football facility? I mean really? Or did this guy have the goods on JoePa that he couldn't get rid of him? I mean who on JoePa's coaching staffs hung out with this guy after work? Holy moses. The shit this guy pulled off was systemic.

GO RU
 
Or did this guy have the goods on JoePa that he couldn't get rid of him?

This. The same reason he keep McQuery on the staff. If the NCAA ever looked into his gambling on games the 409 wins would be under threat. Keep 'em close so they don't squeal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU-AGK
They obviously have a vested interest in denying McQ's claims. Just comes down to who and what you want to believe.
Seems like the courts have found McQ's claims truthful to date. The guy is spineless, is a douche but the courts have not found him to be a liar yet.

Since the rest of his subpoena was accurate, why would one not give him the benefit of the doubt now.
 
ADVERTISEMENT