Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
  1. #1
    Billso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    8,953
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 127/18
    Given: 105/8

    Alternate take on Freeh report

    This may generate some knee-jerk hatred, but perhaps some thoughtful responses too:

    The case against Joe Paterno: Weak to non-existent on the current record | Power Line

    I'd posted a similar concern about President Spanier and was criticized for it: the actual facts in the report simply don't back up the scathing "findings" in the summary, regarding Paterno and Spanier (by contrast, they very much confirm Schulz and Curley should burn in hell).

    Consensus journalism is never a healthy thing, any more than "consensus science". Both fields require skepticism and critical thinking at their very core.
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    *** Official Most Erudite Poster - 2011 HN POTY AWARDS ***
    "They were only 46 plays from going undefeated this year. With the talent that CPR has stocked up plus the standout WR from Urbandale coming in, 10-2 is probably a little pessimistic." - OK4P - 12/9/2013

  2. #2
    theboat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    #1 Smug Fatboy
    Posts
    18,153
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 461/47
    Given: 29/0

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    There may not be evidence to convict him in a court of law, but his actions after incidents leave little doubt in my mind. If the incident in 1998 was "cleared" then why was the heir apparent, Sandusky, forced to retire. IF the extent of the incident in the shower wasn't known, then why was Sandusky told not to bring children to the facilities again.
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  3. #3
    74Hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Exuding total awesomeness
    Posts
    2,062
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 18/41
    Given: 45/47

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    Quote Originally Posted by theboat View Post
    There may not be evidence to convict him in a court of law, but his actions after incidents leave little doubt in my mind. If the incident in 1998 was "cleared" then why was the heir apparent, Sandusky, forced to retire. IF the extent of the incident in the shower wasn't known, then why was Sandusky told not to bring children to the facilities again.
    Agreed. It doesn't take a genius to connect the dots. The "hard evidence" may not be there, which, imo, only shows that these guys did a decent job of talking in code and keeping somewhat quiet.
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    560
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 3/0
    Given: 1/0

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    But billso, how dare you ask for evidence and actual legal processes to play out in this case. Didn't you know everything associated with Paterno and thus PSU football must burn?

    More information has always been needed to actually place any sort of judgement on Paterno's actions/inactions...however many are unwilling to wait for that.

    See above.
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,597
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 35/19
    Given: 2/0

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    The Freeh report says that the decision to have Sandusky retire was made before the 1998 incident.
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,601
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 142/52
    Given: 0/0

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    The fact that outside law enforcement and the district attorney's office investigated the 1998 incident and decided to drop it,but somehow JoePa was supposed to go beyond them and somehow prosecute Sandusky himself has always bothered me.

    Then Emmert and the NCAA decided that JoePa was responsible from 1998 forward,as evidenced by overturning game outcomes from that point forward,just cements in the publics eye that somehow JoePa covered up the 1998 incident.....when in fact it was investigated by law enforcement.

    I think Freeh's gravitas as the former FBI director allowed him immense slack in drawing these conclusions from a public and NCAA eager for a public hanging.
    Of course,with Erickson willing to accept the conclusions without any scrutiny, it made it very easy for the public and NCAA to drop the hammer.

    As difficult as it would have been, PSU should have had Freeh wait until the trials were concluded and Schultz and the AD had testified....more info will come out,and it could leave PSU,NCAA and Freeh looking dumb.
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  7. #7
    1hawkeye1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Clear Lake: the Hamptons of Mason City
    Posts
    11,583
    Blog Entries
    4
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 358/80
    Given: 350/67

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    Oh boy! Another PSU thread..............
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    "Best to think of the Iowa offense as your divorced dad - some Saturdays he's showing up, some he ain't." SBNation



  8. #8

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,789
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 173/21
    Given: 0/0

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    Quote Originally Posted by Billso View Post
    This may generate some knee-jerk hatred, but perhaps some thoughtful responses too:

    The case against Joe Paterno: Weak to non-existent on the current record | Power Line

    I'd posted a similar concern about President Spanier and was criticized for it: the actual facts in the report simply don't back up the scathing "findings" in the summary, regarding Paterno and Spanier (by contrast, they very much confirm Schulz and Curley should burn in hell).

    Consensus journalism is never a healthy thing, any more than "consensus science". Both fields require skepticism and critical thinking at their very core.
    I think this board is about plum out of thoughtful responses. It's over and done with and the actual games can't get here soon enough. This thing has been debated and hashed over about as much as it's going to and the camps are set and no one is going to move from one side to the other....either you think the administration knew what was going on and did their best to sweep it under the rug in order to protect the program and institution or you think they didn't. No amount of additional discussion or reports or anything is going to change that at this point.
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,268
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 109/44
    Given: 133/13

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    Reality check here: Penn State AGREED to the penalties. AGREED. They didn't challenge the finding of the report and the NCAA.

    This matter is closed. Paterno is dead. He's dead. The only thing left to be concerned about are the victims. Write about them for a change
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  10. #10
    HawkeyesWin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    768
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 1/0
    Given: 3/1

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    Jopa ran the program the was used as a tool to rape little boys.

    McQuerry told him what happened in 2001. That along with the 1998 allegations that Jopa knew about pretty much seals Jopas status as one of the villians in the PSU rape factory.

    Please drop this Jopa is innocent nonsense.
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  11. #11
    atomicblue224's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Burlington,Iowa
    Posts
    5,102
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 52/10
    Given: 0/0

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    I have migraines from this!
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  12. #12
    JonDMiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    15,886
    Blog Entries
    11
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 510/119
    Given: 17/4

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    I am looking forward to the Feds investigation into Joe's financial dealings with 2nd Mile board members

    Report: Paterno Worked With The Second Mile On $125M Business Deal CBS Chicago

    Could be nothing other than coincidence. But when one tries to find what possible motive someone could have for not wanting to turn Sandusky in, after the 2001 incident at a minimum, very little makes sense other than trying to protect the image of the program and/or business tie ins that could have been damaged.
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  13. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    God's Country
    Posts
    1,361
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 30/1
    Given: 2/0

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    Quote Originally Posted by JHHawk View Post
    The fact that outside law enforcement and the district attorney's office investigated the 1998 incident and decided to drop it,but somehow JoePa was supposed to go beyond them and somehow prosecute Sandusky himself has always bothered me.

    Then Emmert and the NCAA decided that JoePa was responsible from 1998 forward,as evidenced by overturning game outcomes from that point forward,just cements in the publics eye that somehow JoePa covered up the 1998 incident.....when in fact it was investigated by law enforcement.

    I think Freeh's gravitas as the former FBI director allowed him immense slack in drawing these conclusions from a public and NCAA eager for a public hanging.
    Of course,with Erickson willing to accept the conclusions without any scrutiny, it made it very easy for the public and NCAA to drop the hammer.

    As difficult as it would have been, PSU should have had Freeh wait until the trials were concluded and Schultz and the AD had testified....more info will come out,and it could leave PSU,NCAA and Freeh looking dumb.
    You're going to cry over whether they took wins away from 1998 vs 2001? You're talking 24 wins. It doesn't really matter, he was involved at some point so who cares. It's not like it'll make a significant impact on anyone's life that those 24 extra wins were taken away. Why don't you talk to the victims and ask them how they feel about it?
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,601
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 142/52
    Given: 0/0

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    Quote Originally Posted by IowaFan81 View Post
    You're going to cry over whether they took wins away from 1998 vs 2001? You're talking 24 wins. It doesn't really matter, he was involved at some point so who cares. It's not like it'll make a significant impact on anyone's life that those 24 extra wins were taken away. Why don't you talk to the victims and ask them how they feel about it?
    I was addressing the Freeh report,and commenting on this former prosecutors analysis of that report.
    It was not the wins that mattered,but the implied guilt assigned to JoePa for not doing something after the 1998 incident,after law enforcement and the district attorney had done an investigation and did not pursue it.
    I am just asking what exactly JoePa should have done in 1998 after law enforcement dropped the case? Should he have taken the law into his own hands? I want to know why he is held more responsible for that incident than the law enforcement and district attorneys office whose actual responsiblity it is to pursue criminal justice?
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,011
    Thumbs Up/Down
    Received: 104/15
    Given: 11/0

    Re: Alternate take on Freeh report

    Quote Originally Posted by JHHawk View Post
    I want to know why he is held more responsible for that incident than the law enforcement and district attorneys office whose actual responsiblity it is to pursue criminal justice?
    I've had the same questions about what Paterno knew/should have done back in 1998; but only in the most technical sense because it doesn't really matter; by 2001 it was all surfacing again, and he didn't do enough - even by his own concession.
    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in