Ex-Penn St. President Charged in Sandusky Case

Generally an unmoderated forum for discussion of pretty much any topic. The focus however, is usually politics.
Post Reply
User avatar
Colonel Taylor
Marshal
Posts: 994
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:51 pm

Ex-Penn St. President Charged in Sandusky Case

Unread post by Colonel Taylor »

Ex-Penn St. President Charged in Sandusky Case
About time, hope they get a cell next to the pervert!

Brother
Red Shirt
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:50 pm

Re: Ex-Penn St. President Charged in Sandusky Case

Unread post by Brother »

Exactly. About time. I hope they get every single one that was involved in the cover-up.

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 23170
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Ex-Penn St. President Charged in Sandusky Case

Unread post by O Really »

Just curious, would you guys like him actually tried, or do you want to convict him on charges alone? Not that I have any problem with private citizens speculating on guilt, but it seems at least one of you was being very critical of those who believe Zimmerman is guilty.

User avatar
The Piper
Red Shirt
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:44 am

Re: Ex-Penn St. President Charged in Sandusky Case

Unread post by The Piper »

O Really wrote:Just curious, would you guys like him actually tried, or do you want to convict him on charges alone? Not that I have any problem with private citizens speculating on guilt, but it seems at least one of you was being very critical of those who believe Zimmerman is guilty.
Nowadays, it's guilty until proven innocent; then comes the "Opps!" if they're wrong.

I have no doubt in my mind that Sandusky is guilty despite his ravings of innocence, It's too bad he got a solitary cell.

AntiAlias
Pilot Officer
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 10:14 am

Re: Ex-Penn St. President Charged in Sandusky Case

Unread post by AntiAlias »

The Piper wrote:
O Really wrote:Just curious, would you guys like him actually tried, or do you want to convict him on charges alone? Not that I have any problem with private citizens speculating on guilt, but it seems at least one of you was being very critical of those who believe Zimmerman is guilty.
Nowadays, it's guilty until proven innocent; then comes the "Opps!" if they're wrong.

I have no doubt in my mind that Sandusky is guilty despite his ravings of innocence, It's too bad he got a solitary cell.
Yeah, but he was tried, and found guilty. Not yet so for this dude. Who knows how far this will go.

User avatar
O Really
Admiral
Posts: 23170
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 3:37 pm

Re: Ex-Penn St. President Charged in Sandusky Case

Unread post by O Really »

I'd agree this guy is a sleaze, and there is certainly enough sleaze to go around in this whole sordid matter. But not all sleaze is illegal. Personally, I think McQuaid is pretty sleazy for not raising more hell when he saw nothing happening after his initial report. I think Paterno was pretty sleazy for passing the buck up the line - even though that's what he was supposed to do. I think Mrs. Sandusky is pretty sleazy because she couldn't possibly have thought Sandusky's attachment to young males was totally "ordinary." But not all those sleazy people will be found to be guilty of crimes.

User avatar
The Piper
Red Shirt
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:44 am

Re: Ex-Penn St. President Charged in Sandusky Case

Unread post by The Piper »

AntiAlias wrote:
The Piper wrote:
O Really wrote:Just curious, would you guys like him actually tried, or do you want to convict him on charges alone? Not that I have any problem with private citizens speculating on guilt, but it seems at least one of you was being very critical of those who believe Zimmerman is guilty.
Nowadays, it's guilty until proven innocent; then comes the "Opps!" if they're wrong.
My bad! I didn't express that correctly. This line was referencing Graham Spanier.

I have no doubt in my mind that Sandusky is guilty despite his ravings of innocence, It's too bad he got a solitary cell.
Yeah, but he was tried, and found guilty. Not yet so for this dude. Who knows how far this will go.

(Bannination, I wish you'd shoot them damn squiqqling emoticons over to the right >>>>>>, they're highly distracting!)

User avatar
Tertius
Squadron Leader
Posts: 379
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 11:07 pm

Re: Ex-Penn St. President Charged in Sandusky Case

Unread post by Tertius »

We all know presumed innocent until proven guilty. But we are not the jury. Out opinions are not subject to legal test.

The discussion point seems to be: Penn State knew and did not stop Sandusky. Was it enough to be a crime or not is beside the point. The problem is that organizations are made up of people. Be it a religious, business, civic, legal, or professional they are all subject to have a bad member. It is just illogical to think that the bad acts of a member should be hidden to protect the name of the organization.

If Sandusky had been outed when his perversion was first discovered the university's name would have been in the news but today it would be untarnished because of what I stated above. I do not believe Penn State will ever recover now.

If I were giving them advice I would ask the NCAA to permit all football players at other schools next year. Then I would discontinue football. I would announce Penn State is going to focus on academics bad nothing else. The future of other sports is under review.

User avatar
The Piper
Red Shirt
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:44 am

Re: Ex-Penn St. President Charged in Sandusky Case

Unread post by The Piper »

Vrede wrote:
The Piper wrote:(Bannination, I wish you'd shoot them damn squiqqling emoticons over to the right >>>>>>, they're highly distracting!)
Awww c'mon; give me a break! y'as don see Angus unlesses you's a readin' mah post!

Seeing them squigglies in the corner of your eye is a different matter!
(did I originally type 'squiqqling'? I sure did!)

User avatar
mike
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 652
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2012 7:47 pm

Re: Ex-Penn St. President Charged in Sandusky Case

Unread post by mike »

Vrede wrote:I keep expecting a breeze to take your skirt and . . .
Well, I'm sure it would reveal pretty much nothing except maybe a pair of Depends® ...Image
Image

Post Reply