tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post3550842561311812932..comments2024-03-07T02:17:34.434-08:00Comments on Tom In Paine: New facts continue to make a mockery of media attacks on Joe Paterno.Marc Rubinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10746456438052849715noreply@blogger.comBlogger21125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-23390336684443338932011-12-19T12:45:27.390-08:002011-12-19T12:45:27.390-08:00"The blatant hypocrisy by ESPN is twofold. Fi..."The blatant hypocrisy by ESPN is twofold. First, if it was journalistic standards and corroboration they needed before they would report accusations against Fine, they applied no such standards to Joe Paterno ( one makes the cash register ring, the other doesn't)."<br /><br />Just a heads-up on using this logic going forward - 9 of Penn State's 12 games in 2011 were on ABC or some form of ESPN. Their bowl game against Houston is on ESPNU. <br /><br />Syracuse (like many Big East/Big 12 teams) will play on ESPN's family of networks for the majority of their conference games but football definitely moves the meter on television. In terms of overall dollars I would say Penn State brings in more bacon, though I cannot prove that definitively. <br /><br />Either way, I would be shocked if ESPN's coverage was motivated by money since they probably want both PSU and Syracuse to do well in their respective sports. Short-term sensationalism generally is not favored over long-term success. A Paterno-less PSU that will likely struggle to land big time recruits in the next few years hurts ESPN's coverage, despite the bump in ratings during the scandal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-35314700142413132442011-12-18T04:17:57.836-08:002011-12-18T04:17:57.836-08:00Marc ~ You relied on the infamous CNN in this post...Marc ~ You relied on the infamous CNN in this post: "According to the CNN report, the mother and Penn State campus police arranged for the mother to have a confrontational conversation with Sandusky on which two Penn State campus police detectives would eavesdrop. Just to repeat, that's <b>two Penn State campus police detectives</b>, . Detectives from Penn State campus police. <br />There was reportedly a second conversation between Sandusky and the mother, also with <b>detectives from the Penn State Campus police</b> eavesdropping." [Emphasis mine]<br /><br />State College P.D. (city) Detective Ralph Ralston was with PSU Detective Shreffler when they eavesdropped on Sandusky's conversation with Victim 6 in mid-May of 1998.<br /><br />In addition to city police, a state Public Welfare Dept. investigator, Jerry Lauro, was with PSU Police Detective Shreffler when they interviewed Sandusky on June 1, 1998.<br /><br />Reference: Grand Jury Presentment, pg 19-20.<br /><br />You fell into the very media trap you are ranting about others doing, and skewed information others rely on, by making it sound as if ONLY PSU police investigated Victim 6's case.<br /><br />The first Grand Jury Presentment was made available - by the print media - on Nov. 6. No need to rely on any journalists or bloggers for information, is there?<br /><br />Reference: http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/uploadedFiles/Press/Sandusky-Grand-Jury-Presentment.pdfMoms Hugshttp://momshugs.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-385667818402038672011-12-16T05:27:15.753-08:002011-12-16T05:27:15.753-08:00Does anyone know that JoePa tried to fire sandusky...Does anyone know that JoePa tried to fire sandusky before 98' season and was over-ruled by the trustees! JoePa did what he was suppose to do. Everyone has their chain of command and he followed it. Whatever happen after that is out of his hands!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-80901061293152238532011-12-15T14:53:31.299-08:002011-12-15T14:53:31.299-08:00"when you say that the mother reported to the..."when you say that the mother reported to the PSU police, the same police that paterno reported what he had been told. I don't think this is accurate, according to the grand jury report. Paterno told the AD. He did not tell the police or the administrator in charge of the police"<br /><br />You are incorrect. As another reader has pointed out,check page 8of the grand jury report which reports on a face to face meeting between Paterno,Curley and Schultz, the administrative head of Penn State campus police.Marc Rubinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10746456438052849715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-87143527600720307102011-12-12T13:56:14.975-08:002011-12-12T13:56:14.975-08:00"May I suggest that you write an article abou..."May I suggest that you write an article about McQueary's credibility?"<br /><br />What's clear is that every new peice of information supports Joe Paterno's initial public statements before Penn State gagged him.<br /><br />Clearly whatever McQueary saw he was too uncomfortable with it to give details to Dranov about sexual contact which supports Paterno's statement that he was never told by McQueary of any sexual contact. Despite the fact that all the evidence supported that, it didnt stop the news media from claiming the opposite. <br /><br />Dranov's version of what McQueary told him completely supports what Paterno said McQueary told him and didnt tell him which more than justifies the actions Paterno took and completely discredits the news media for anyone who needed additional proof.Marc Rubinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10746456438052849715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-10518627389063770122011-12-12T07:04:21.094-08:002011-12-12T07:04:21.094-08:00VERSION 4. The Schultz version, told to Gary Schul...<b>VERSION 4.</b> The Schultz version, told to Gary Schultz, with Curley present, in the same McQueary/Curley/Schultz meeting as Version 3, above. According to the GJ presentment, Schultz testified that McQueary "reported the incident in the shower involving Sandusky and a boy. Schultz was very unsure about what he remembered [McQueary] telling him and Curley about the shower incident. He testified that he had the impression that Sandusky might have inappropriately grabbed the young boy's genitals while wrestling and agreed that such was inappropriate sexual conduct between a man and a boy. While equivocating on the definition of 'sexual' in the context of Sandusky wrestling with and grabbing the genitals of the boy, Schultz conceded that the report the graduate assistant made was of inappropriate sexual conduct by Sandusky. However, Schultz testified that the allegations were 'not that serious' and that he and Curley 'had no indication that a crime had occurred.' Schultz agreed that sodomy between Sandusky and a child would clearly be inappropriate sexual conduct. He denied having such conduct reported to him either by Paterno or [McQueary]."<br /><br /><b>VERSION 5.</b> The statement to police version, in the form of a handwritten statement to police "during the recent grand jury investigation", presumably shortly before his Grand Jury testimony. "In it, McQueary states that he witnessed a boy, about 10, being sodomized in a shower and hurried out of the locker room. He does not mention stopping the assult, and does not mention talking to any police officers in the following days, the statement says. The whole incident, the statement says, lasted about a minute, and McQueary wrote that he would not recognize the boy if he saw him today."<br /><br /><b>VERSION 6.</b> The Grand Jury testimony version, told to the Thirty-Third Statewide Investigating Grand Jury, in December, 2010. In this version, "as [McQueary] entered the locker room doors, he was surprised to find the lights and showers on. He then heard rhythmic, slapping sounds. He believed the sounds to be those of sexual activity. As [McQueary] put the sneakers in his locker, he looked into the shower. He saw a naked boy ... whose age he estimated to be ten years old, with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky. [McQueary] was shocked but noticed that both [the boy] and Sandusky saw him. [McQueary] left immediately, distraught. ... [McQueary] was never questioned by University Police ... ."<br /><br /><b>VERSION 7.</b> The e-mail to friends version, told to friends in an e-mail shortly after the firing of Joe Paterno, in November, 2011. In McQueary's e-mail, he said, "I did stop it, not physically ... but made sure it was stopped when I left that locker room ... I did have discussions with police and with the official at the university in charge of police ... no one can imagine my thoughts or wants to be in my shoes for those 30-45 seconds ... trust me." Also, in "the email, McQueary states that he also told Penn State University police about what he saw that night."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-42243925416617459142011-12-12T07:01:40.469-08:002011-12-12T07:01:40.469-08:00May I suggest that you write an article about McQu...May I suggest that you write an article about McQueary's credibility? Given how his story has changed, is it not conceivable that he told Curley, Schultz, and Paterno something different from what he told the grand jury? Is it not possible that Curley, Schultz, Paterno, and/or Spanier "did the right thing" based on the information they possessed at the time? Remember, the public outcry and charges against these four men are a direct result of McQueary's testimony, and solely of McQueary's testimony.<br /><br />At least seven versions of McQueary's story have surfaced so far. For listing purposes, I'm numbering them in chronological order of when he said them.<br /><br /><b>VERSION 1.</b> The Dranov version, told to Dr. Jonathan Dranov on March 1, 2002, immediately after the alleged incident. In this version, "McQueary heard 'sex sounds' and the shower running, and a young boy stuck his head around the corner of the shower stall, peering at McQueary as an adult arm reached around his waist and pulled him back out of view. Seconds later, Sandusky left the shower in a towel."<br /><br /><b>VERSION 2.</b> The Paterno version, told to Joe Paterno on March 2, 2002, one day after the alleged incident. According to the GJ presentment, McQueary "telephoned Paterno and went to Paterno's home, where he reported what he had seen. ... Paterno testified that [McQueary] was very upset. Paterno called Tim Curley ... to his home the very next day, a Sunday, and reported to him that [McQueary] had seen Jerry Sandusky in the Lasch Building showers fondling or doing something of a sexual nature to a young boy." Elsewhere in the GJ presentment, Gary Schultz testified that Paterno reported to him "'disturbing' and 'inappropriate' conduct in the shower by Sandusky upon a young boy, as reported to [Paterno] by a student or graduate student [namely, McQueary]." According to an ESPN article, a "source" said that "Paterno recalls McQueary 'vaguely' referencing 'fondling' or 'touching' or 'horsing around' by Sandusky and a youth. But Paterno never had the understanding that McQueary had witnessed a 'sodomy' or 'rape'."<br /><br /><b>VERSION 3.</b> The Curley version, told to Tim Curley, with Gary Schultz present, approximately a week and a half after McQueary's meeting with Paterno. According to the GJ presentment, McQueary "reported to Curley and Schultz that he had witnessed what he believed to be Sandusky having anal sex with a boy in the Lasch Building showers." Curley testified that [McQueary] reported to them that 'inappropriate conduct' or activity that made him 'uncomfortable' occurred in the Lasch Building shower in March 2002. Curley specifically denied that [McQueary] reported anal sex or anything of a sexual nature whatsoever and termed the conduct as merely 'horsing around'. When asked whether [McQueary] had reported 'sexual conduct' 'of any kind' by Sandusky, Curley answered, 'No' twice. When asked if [McQueary] had reported 'anal sex between Jerry Sandusky and this child,' Curley testified, 'Absolutely not.'"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-2584903528051608172011-12-11T13:21:21.055-08:002011-12-11T13:21:21.055-08:00I've been following your blog and its fantasti...I've been following your blog and its fantastic. You might find this of interest:<br /><br />http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/12/another_version_of_mike_mcquea.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-82698179194403305882011-12-11T10:08:32.719-08:002011-12-11T10:08:32.719-08:00Another fantastic post, Tom! I'm looking forw...Another fantastic post, Tom! I'm looking forward to any suggestions you could give on "what to do about the news media".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-21346291673327794082011-12-08T14:22:57.066-08:002011-12-08T14:22:57.066-08:00"Now you're defending the most powerful g..."Now you're defending the most powerful guy in an organization that protected a child rapist for over a decade."<br /><br />The problem is that there is not a single fact to substantiate what you wrote. Not one.<br /><br />If you've been reading my attacks on Obama and the news media, you know Ive been attacking him for his dishonesty and duplicity as well as the news media for turning a blind eye to all of it. Just as they turned a blind eye to egregious incompetence and dishonesty in the Bush administration. <br /><br />Lies, dishonesty and incompetence by the news media for their own self-serving reasons have become a way of life for journalism and its been a real a threat to democracy.And I can trace every serious problem this country has had in the last 15 years to the news media's misrenpresentations or avoding reporting the truth.<br /><br /> It doesnt matter if they lie and misrepresent about politicans and public policy or Joe Paterno. It's all part of the same problem.Marc Rubinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10746456438052849715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-80412470458440756552011-12-08T14:11:26.455-08:002011-12-08T14:11:26.455-08:00.." The fact is that Joe Paterno had an eyewi....." The fact is that Joe Paterno had an eyewitness to his longtime assistant, Jerry Sandusky, raping a child."<br /><br /><br />This is the problem isnt it. You say "the fact is..." when there is not a single fact anywhere on the planet earth that indicates Joe Paterno had any idea McQueary saw "a child being raped in the shower" because McQueary never told him that and there is a mountain of evidence to show that McQueary didnt tell him that. So Paterno never "had an eyewitness" tell him that a child was being raped in the shower. That is the fabrication and dishonesty and incompetence that was put out there by the news media.<br /><br />Let me remind you and everyonee else that needs reminding, that Paterno testified in front of a grand jury. He also said publicly that he was never told any of the things McQueary told the grand jury about what he saw (even though he hasnt as yet said what it was exactly that McQueary told him).And the grand jury obviously believed him. If Paterno's public statements were at odds with his grand jury testimony he would have had a big problem. And McQueary obviously didnt testify to anything regarding what he told Paterno that was at odds with anything Paterno said publicly or to the grand jury. Those are the facts. <br /><br />It's got nothing to do with any kind of hero worship. It has to do with out and out lies and misrepresentations by the media for their own self-serving interest and also because they are grossly incompetent and the damage that they do not only to Paterno but to the democracy, when people such as yourself, who have busy lives and dont have the time to fact check or think through what they report, believe what you read and hear.Marc Rubinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10746456438052849715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-59235604917639081072011-12-08T13:40:32.730-08:002011-12-08T13:40:32.730-08:00:"..so I'm not sure why Joe has been fire...:"..so I'm not sure why Joe has been fired..."<br /><br />The trustees said exactly why he was fired and didnt mince words. They said they couldnt stand the media pressure and attention anymore and that they believed it was in their self-interest to fire him and get out from under the pressure. Pretty good reason for firing a 60 year employee where no proof existed he did a thing wrong, just empty uninformed fabrications by the news media.Marc Rubinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10746456438052849715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-8747619241614500432011-12-08T13:25:56.622-08:002011-12-08T13:25:56.622-08:00Why are you going on about this? Are you insane? F...Why are you going on about this? Are you insane? For the three and a half years I've been reading you, you've been skewering Obama and often talking sense.<br /><br />Now you're defending the most powerful guy in an organization that protected a child rapist for over a decade.<br /><br />What the hell is wrong with you? The U.S. Senate just voted to let the military arrest and detain people indefinitely on American soil. You can't be bothered to care about that? You only care about Joe Paterno? <br /><br />Jeez man where did this ill-advised and wrongheaded obsession come from?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-74166700717506488702011-12-08T11:32:33.668-08:002011-12-08T11:32:33.668-08:00Marc - you've got some interesting points here...Marc - you've got some interesting points here but overall, I think you're bending over way too much into hero worship and putting on blinders as to what happened. The fact is that Joe Paterno had an eyewitness to his longtime assistant, Jerry Sandusky, raping a child. Paterno's life and career is built around going above and beyond, not merely doing what is necessary. And reporting that alleged rape to the authorities was all that was necessary.<br /><br />There's a reason that Joe Paterno was the story - he had made himself the face of the program and the university for the past 40 years. If anything happened on campus, there was one person the media wanted a comment from - Joe Paterno. And now we've got arguably the biggest coverup in the history of college athletics happening on JoePa's watch. Seems reasonable that the media would chase this one.<br /><br />Sports is all a game of what have you done for me lately and sad though it may be, this will now be the headline in his obituary. A couple national titles and Linebacker U are phenomenal things but they are tarred by his having knowledge of a child rape and not doing all he could to investigate it. The media were right to go take this one to the top and Penn State was right to get rid of him immediately.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-57286844436115242452011-12-08T10:58:37.419-08:002011-12-08T10:58:37.419-08:00"..look at page 8 of the grand jury report. S..."..look at page 8 of the grand jury report. Schultz testified that he was called to a meeting with Paterno and Curley, which certainly indicates he did report to Schultz, who oversaw police on campus."<br /><br />Thanks, I did not know that part. Lucky for me, I said I didn't think and not I know like the media does. <br /><br />I'm interested too see what happens when this all plays out, if we ever even find out the real truth.<br />I'm not a Paterno fan. Not because of this, but because of other reasons of his "true character" I have witnessed. However, everyone, even sandusky is innocent until proven guilty, so I'm not sure why Joe has been fired or given this so called shame the media has put on him. <br /><br />I'm afraid Sadusky will walk, even if guitly. And that I blame partly on the media and their so called facts. that is the real shame in this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-54874526750807683742011-12-07T17:06:15.859-08:002011-12-07T17:06:15.859-08:00Why are we still talking about JoePa? His connecti...Why are we still talking about JoePa? His connection to JerrySan has been talked to death. Today JerrySan was arrested wearing a "Penn State Wrestling" warm up suit. Is "Penn State Wrestling" a euphemism or is there actually a Penn State wrestling program? If there is such a program, what are its connections to JerrySan? Everyone was so quick to jump on JoePa and the football program. Can we please spend some time talking about the wrestling program, if any?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-81232182352361976732011-12-07T10:23:31.054-08:002011-12-07T10:23:31.054-08:00"..when you say that the mother reported to t..."..when you say that the mother reported to the PSU police, the same police that paterno reported what he had been told. I don't think this is accurate, according to the grand jury report. Paterno told the AD. He did not tell the police or the administrator in charge of the police.."<br /><br /><br />Here is an answer given by another reader as to the issue you raise, whch has been raised by others. <br /><br />"..look at page 8 of the grand jury report. Schultz testified that he was called to a meeting with Paterno and Curley, which certainly indicates he did report to Schultz, who oversaw police on campus."<br /><br />This reflects my understanding of the chain of events as well.Marc Rubinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10746456438052849715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-57177714642617452042011-12-07T08:48:49.340-08:002011-12-07T08:48:49.340-08:00Paterno and the other officials, including the D.A...Paterno and the other officials, including the D.A., didn't do anything wrong in the Sandusky matter. I am under the increasing suspicion there is a LOT less here than meets the eye on the whole thing.<br /><br />Sandusky at the very least has problems with appropriate boundaries with children. Whether these actually meet the threshold of "child molestation" is for the courts to decide, I guess. However, I don't exactly trust anything a parent says or so-called victims when there is money to be made in civil suits.<br /><br />I know from personal experience having been wrongly accused civilly of "failing to report" something that never happened in the first place. It's really hard to get a reputation back once trashed in this manner.OTE adminhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09259422705314063194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-45231361464560671022011-12-06T21:36:04.017-08:002011-12-06T21:36:04.017-08:00People who judge other people without evidence are...People who judge other people without evidence are guilty of a "moral crime"--or they are at least stupid and malicious.<br /><br />The sin of pre-judgement/stupidity might be forgivable for a citizen-blogger-with-a-lot-of-anger, but not for a journalist, who should understand simple legal principles: an accusation is not a conviction, and a prosecutorial report (the Grand Jury report) is not the whole story--nor is it intended to be the whole story. <br /><br />I watched, astonished, as ESPN journalist-pundits tried and convicted Paterno on air. They seemed driven almost by a blood-lust.Pat Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13129896023064236847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-70889404065719026362011-12-06T21:10:59.159-08:002011-12-06T21:10:59.159-08:00Now that Joe has been fired, do you think media fo...Now that Joe has been fired, do you think media folk will pull down his statue, then up and stomp on it like the Iraqis did to Saddam Hussein?tom sheepandgoatshttp://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2011/11/the-firing-of-joepa.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3820377390281203107.post-86690394294008434282011-12-06T16:29:23.950-08:002011-12-06T16:29:23.950-08:00I agree with almost all of this and all of what I ...I agree with almost all of this and all of what I think your point is. However, when you say that the mother reported to the PSU police, the same police that paterno reported what he had been told. I don't think this is accurate, according to the grand jury report. Paterno told the AD. He did not tell the police or the administrator in charge of the police, as he was brought into it later. <br />Of course, the grand jury is only a summary and only tells or cares about what is important to their case, and since no criminal charges, paterno probably isn't anyone they care about. <br />I'm not saying you miswrote because I think paterno is guilty. i again, I agree with your thoughts behind this. I'm just not sure that fact is correct.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com