Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

The Cruxifiction of Joe Paterno


Rovers
 Share

Recommended Posts

When you walk into a shower room and find a middle aged man with his dick up the chute of a young boy please follow these simple steps.

 

1. Club or punch the rapist where the back of his skull runs into his neck.

2. Pull the rapist off the boy and out of the boy while applying a sleeper hold to the rapist until he is out.

3. Stomp on the rapist's balls.

4. Tie up said rapist. Electrical cords or computer cords will do in a pinch. Don't worry if you are cutting off his circulation, Tie him good and tight.

5. Get the boy out of the shower and covered up. Make certain he is not placed where he has to see or hear the rapist.

6. Call 911. Demand the police and an ambulance, both.

7. Go back in to check that the rapist is still tied tightly

8. Stomp the rapist's balls again.

9. Stay around to make certain that real cops and real paramedics respond, not some campus rental variety who think the rapist and his friend, the coach, are gods.

 

Things you do not do.

 

1. Leave quietly so the rape can continue.

2. Fail to call the police and fire rescue to give medical assistance to the traumatized youth.

3. Wait until the next day to report the matter to the rapist's friend. (See that sort of allows evidence to be destroyed and the cover up to begin, as well as, you know, allowing the rape to go on to culmination.

4. Report the matter to a doddering old man who is not in law enforcement and who is a friend of the rapist..

5. Remain quiet for years while witnessing the rapist taking other boys into same shower room.

 

The list of people who should hang for this includes at least the rapist, the eyewitness, the eyewitnesses father, the coach, the A.D., anybody on the board of regents or trustees who had even a sniff of this, and any politician who did as well whether judge, D.A. or chief of Police.

 

Prosecutors should be looking at this matter quite creatively. Failure to report by persons in a position of trust, failure to report, aiding and abetting or complicity charges for sexual assault on a child, potential murder counts for the death of the prosecutor, felony murder counts including complicty and aiding and abetting theories, racketeering and corrupt organizations counts for use of university and charity funds to facilitate and then cover up crimes while paying off witnesses with jobs, promotions, or favors in access to the program. It should be scorched earth time on these burritoers. Ain't no statute of limitations on most murder counts Chili Con Quesos.

 

There can be no response too extreme. Imagine the horror of that little boy. His rectum being torn apart, searing pain in a cold shower room that echoes his cries and his rapist's grunts while a disgusting hairy old man rapes him. He sees help arrive, against all hope, and then the help cowardly slinks away abandoning him to his fate. Imagine the ultimate betrayal in his eyes as that happens. Imagine the darkness that decends on him after. Imagine the threats he was subjected to to force his silence through the aftermath. Imagine his helplessness. Then imagine that he knew this was going to happen again to others.

 

This makes me hope for a hell where the violations they have inflicted are visited upon them ten fold, and for eternity.

 

If I were the prosecutor in charge, whether D.A. or A.G,. all I would say is that I'm coming, and Hell's coming with me.

Edited by Ditkaless Wonders
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 199
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

For Christ's sake...even his thread title is bizarre. Cruxifiction? Are you effing kidding me?

 

 

This has been a quickly developing story. Rovers started this thread yesterday with a limited amount of info (as he's admitted). I'm thinking if he had to do it over again he wouldn't use the word "Cruxifiction".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't that complicated.

 

McQueary tells Paterno something the day after he witnessed it. I guess that there is some "ambiguity" about what McQueary said, but I cannot think of any scenario that would exculpate Paterno for his subsequent behavior.

 

The thing for a man to do, particularly one that is a leader of young men, is to tell McQuery to sit his ass down and to call the police. The next call is to the AD to inform him of that. Anything else is unacceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has been a quickly developing story. Rovers started this thread yesterday with a limited amount of info (as he's admitted). I'm thinking if he had to do it over again he wouldn't use the word "Cruxifiction".

 

BS

 

I have an idea- don't start a thread on such a serious case when you are limited in any capacity.

 

There was plenty of information out yesterday - the title is insulting to anyone with a half a brain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BS

 

I have an idea- don't start a thread on such a serious case when you are limited in any capacity.

 

There was plenty of information out yesterday - the title is insulting to anyone with a half a brain

Give Rovers a break cat. At least he had the gumption to say he was misinformed, and then change his opinion accordingly. From time to time, these threads actually serve as a means to inform oneself. IMHO, that is a good thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't that complicated.

 

McQueary tells Paterno something the day after he witnessed it. I guess that there is some "ambiguity" about what McQueary said, but I cannot think of any scenario that would exculpate Paterno for his subsequent behavior.

 

The thing for a man to do, particularly one that is a leader of young men, is to tell McQuery to sit his ass down and to call the police. The next call is to the AD to inform him of that. Anything else is unacceptable.

 

I think this is BS, and McQueary and Paterno are offering different versions of what was relayed to Paterno.

 

Did McQueary go to Paterno's office and say "Uh, coach, I think I saw something yesterday that was odd and maybe wrong. What should we do?"....and Paterno doesn't even ask for specifics as to what he saw, and just relays to his boss that something may have happened, but nothing specific?

 

Or....McQueary details the everything he saw. This seems the most logical. Paterno even admits McQueary was "visibly shaken". If a subordinate of mine walked in very upset, and reported that he witnessed a sexual assault at our company....you can bet I would be trying to find out exactly what happened. No freakin way Paterno didn't ask for details and dig in before taking it to the next level...he certainly wanted to have all his facts straight before reporting a good friend of his to the AD. Paterno's version doesn't pass the sniff test, and the Board of Trustees knew it. Paterno knew....and continued to let it happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you're off base on this one man. whether Sandusky was a coach or not was irrelevant. he was involved in a program (second mile) that used the penn state facilities and he had keys to the building.
Privileges I believe were revoked after this came out, true? I forget where I read that. Anyone know for sure?

 

He brought kids to practice
EDIT: I just found that part in the GJ paper. I change my stance. Dammit Joe wtph.

 

whether paterno was skeptical is irrelevant. i find it hard to believe he thought it was some kind of prank. even if he thought there was a 1% the chance the story was true, you gotta go to the cops. that's there job to figure out if a felony crime was committed, not his.
How is him being skeptical not relevant? You kidding? If someone walked up to you and said "dude I just saw your dad raping a little boy!" would you go right to the cops? Would any of us in a similar situation? I really really doubt it. Are your doubts "irrelevant?"

 

Again given he was at practices I change my stance and agree with Paterno getting the ax - but if you want to nail Paterno to a cross because he knew of the allegations and "didn't do enough" then how about the people at the charity? How about anyone and everyone else? Why isn't anyone calling for their heads?

Edited by BeeR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paterno even admits McQueary was "visibly shaken".

And yet it was the next day before Paterno was told and then a further day before he reported it to the AD. I mean, what the.......? How is this not an immediate call in both cases? Next to witnessing an actual murder, I can't imagine anything more in need of immediate action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again if you want to nail Paterno to a cross because he knew of the allegations and "didn't do enough" then how about the people at the charity? How about anyone and everyone else? Why isn't anyone calling for their heads?

 

I think many will....in time.

 

The problem with Paterno was two-fold:

 

1. He was the most visible of everyone, and was to represent the University and the football program on national TV Saturday. No possible way that would have been appropriate, given the questions surrounding his involvement...but Paterno was having none of that, leading to.....

 

2. Paterno made a terrible mistake in trying to fire a preemptive strike yesterday, say he would retire at the end of the year. Are you kidding me? Your program, and the entire University, is in the midst of the most horrifying scandal perhaps in the history of college athletics...and you're going to dictate to your superiors when you will step down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paterno had the power to stop this years ago, and he didn't. He was an enabler for his buddy. Paterno knew what was happening as did I am sure many people in the college community. If Paterno is being cricified he deserves it, because let's get real, the buck stops with Paterno. He had enough power to do whatever he wanted. He could have made Sandusky dissappear from the campus entirely, but he didn't. Case closed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

F*CK PSU, F*CK Sandusky, F*CK Paterno, F*CK EM ALL!!

 

My prayers are going out to all the victims and their families. Many of which may not have been victims, had anyone had a set of cajones big enough to do the morally correct responses. Instead they ALL turn a blind eye, due mostly to money. Out of sight out of mind? Bullsh*t.

 

F*CK EM ALL!!

Edited by Hugh B Tool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

F*CK PSU, F*CK Sandusky, F*CK Paterno, F*CK EM ALL!!

 

My prayers are going out to all the victims and their families. Many of which may not have been victims, had anyone had a set of cajones big enough to do the morally correct responses. Instead they ALL turn a blind eye, due to mostly to money. Out of sight out of mind? Bullsh*t.

 

F*CK EM ALL!!

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, it was not clear from McQueary's angle whether Sanduskie was anally penetrating the boy or merely rubbing his penis along the boy's crack.

hmmmm...never thought of it that way. Now that I think of it...let's leave Joe alone. He did so much for the university. He should be thanked for his service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One interesting point to add - if you can suspend your disbelief enough to think that Joe Paterno didn't fully understand or wasn't given the details on Sandusky's activities in 2002, you still have to address another issue with the timeframe. As of March 2011, the grand jury looking into the charges against Sandusky had been meeting for the prior 18 months. Paterno and Curley were both called as witnesses at some point during that period.

 

So, at best, Paterno had to know the severity of the charges against Sandusky circa March 2011, but most likely earlier than that. Yet, Sandusky was still appearing on campus and using the football facilities up through last week.

 

Seems difficult to reconcile that, if you're a Paterno supporter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they're going to cruxify Paterno, then they better do the same to EVERYONE who "knew." That includes people at that charity the guy worked for and who knows how many others. But that won't happen. Know why? Nobody cares about the nobodies. They care about big splashy revenge, and burning an icon like Paterno goes a long way to that. "Look we got PATERNO! How's that for a big counter-strike?"

 

are you effing kidding me? anyone concerned about the rape of a child being institutionally glossed over is just looking for a "big counter-strike"? you are even more completely out-to-lunch on this one than usual. get a freaking grip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really truly cant believe that a man saw another man doing the unspeakable to a boy and he didnt stop it. If I saw it I would have delivered justice right on the spot and I dont care what my relationship was to the man. All very sickening and sad. I hope justice is served cold to all and my prayers to the victims. It just goes to show that sometimes those we respect so much and dont truly know have awful secrets that would change our minds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is BS, and McQueary and Paterno are offering different versions of what was relayed to Paterno.

 

Did McQueary go to Paterno's office and say "Uh, coach, I think I saw something yesterday that was odd and maybe wrong. What should we do?"

 

and at that point, paterno does one of two things: either,

1) he says, ok, tell me exactly what you saw, and mcqueary tells him about the "slapping sex sounds" that alerted him and then the fact that he witnessed and old man and a young boy completely naked obviously engaged in anal intercourse, and then paterno follows through as any minimally moral person would do; or

2) paterno says oh ok. then he pro forma reports up the chain that "there might have been something inappropriate or something, just so y'all know", pooh-poohing it and then go on like nothing happened.

 

he was either concerned with 1) getting to the bottom of it and making sure appropriate actions were taken, or 2) brushing the whole thing under the rug. he had a crystal clear choice, a fork in the moral road whether he realized it or not, and chose the latter path.

 

plenty of "good people" have done the same thing with these kinds of allegations, not to pull a detlef here, but just look at the catholic church. I guess it's probably out of loyalty and friendship to the people involed, maybe some sort of psychological block that won't let them believe it could be true. there may be ways of "explaining" the enabling behavior, but there can never be any way of excusing it.

Edited by Azazello1313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really truly cant believe that a man saw another man doing the unspeakable to a boy and he didnt stop it. If I saw it I would have delivered justice right on the spot and I dont care what my relationship was to the man. All very sickening and sad. I hope justice is served cold to all and my prayers to the victims. It just goes to show that sometimes those we respect so much and dont truly know have awful secrets that would change our minds

Says a lot about how big institutions shape peoples' behavior within them, whether it be schools, churches, corporations, police departments...people act in ways you wouldn't expect, under the authority/umbrella/mob mentality of the institution. It explains why corruption and immoral behavior is rampant, though we assume most people are honest and moral.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and at that point, paterno does one of two things: either,

1) he says, ok, tell me exactly what you saw, and mcqueary tells him about the "slapping sex sounds" that alerted him and then the fact that he witnessed and old man and a young boy completely naked obviously engaged in anal intercourse, and then paterno follows through as any minimally moral person would do; or

2) paterno says oh ok. then he pro forma reports up the chain that "there might have been something inappropriate or something, just so y'all know", pooh-poohing it and then go on like nothing happened.

 

he was either concerned with 1) getting to the bottom of it and making sure appropriate actions were taken, or 2) brushing the whole thing under the rug. he had a crystal clear choice, a fork in the moral road whether he realized it or not, and chose the latter path.

 

plenty of "good people" have done the same thing with these kinds of allegations, not to pull a detlef here, but just look at the catholic church. I guess it's probably out of loyalty and friendship to the people involed, maybe some sort of psychological block that won't let them believe it could be true. there may be ways of "explaining" the enabling behavior, but there can never be any way of excusing it.

 

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think the first thing Paterno did was talk to his buddy Sandusky. How that conversation went will go along way in defining Paterno's role in a potential cover-up. There's no way we'll ever know what was said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information