The Penn State Child-Sex Abuse Scandal Thread...Hammer dropped on PSU...sanctions galore.

CashBanks said:
I suppose calling me ignorant didn't meet the criteria [emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji]

Those are emojis just in case they don't show up I don't wanna get any warnings for swearing [emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji][emoji]128514[/emoji]
Click to expand...


You had a deleted post, settle down :lol:

rillo561 said:
Definitely no love lost for the insurance companies they are scum no doubt, but I still don't see why these numerous sources would all have the same story when they went for depositions. From victims and assistant coaches.

It's kinda like the Cosby situation, only thing is Joe's not here to defend himself.
Click to expand...


Whoa, don't be lumping all ins companies together :smh:
 
Last edited:
rillo561 said:
But that line was eye-popping in itself.

The line in question states that one of Penn State's insurers has claimed "in 1976, a child allegedly reported to PSU's Head Coach Joseph Paterno that he (the child) was sexually molested by Sandusky."

The order also cites separate references in 1987 and 1988 in which unnamed assistant coaches witnessed inappropriate contact between Sandusky and unidentified children, and a 1988 case that was supposedly referred to Penn State's athletic director at the time.

http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/05/court_filing_says_joe_paterno.html

There's really no way to have "proof", other than video and that wasn't happening back then.
Click to expand...

I find it very shaky that a grand jury built a case off of years against Sandusky and this was never even a thought
 
dmxfury said:
You had a deleted post, settle down :lol:
Whoa, don't be lumping all ins companies together :smh:
Click to expand...

I'm not, but it's sort of the same. One side wants "proof" the other side sites "numerous sources" with the same encounters.

Another strange part to this story was that DA that didn't bother to charge Sandusky and ended up dead in some unfortunate accident.
 
StillIn729 said:
I find it very shaky that a grand jury built a case off of years against Sandusky and this was never even a thought
Click to expand...

One thing I've learned about grand juries is that they only allow what they want you to see and hear. Sandusky was the focus of the criminal trial, but in civil matters everything is up for grabs including these depositions.
 
dmxfury said:
I didn't delete it for swearing. So no, you don't know 'how I do'
Click to expand...

I wasn't referencing that post, it didn't include any "swears" I was referencing you being the only mod in my entire history on this site to take issue with me posting "swear" words despite them being censored.

So yes I do know how you do.

I don't wanna derail the thread any further tho and get in the way of boys caping for child molesters so i'll just see myself out.


:D
 
:rofl:

So I was supposed to see your post, decipher that it wasn't in reference to the current conversation that was being had but that it was actually referencing something from back in the day that wouldn't ever be on my radar (but apparently is still on yours)

Hm...ok
 
Always cracks me up when people pull the "You're the only mod" card.

Like what do you expect the response from that to be?

"Oh, well since since you said that I'm the only one, gee, I sure don't want to be the only one so let me just reverse everything. And I'm so sorry. For being the only one. Says you."

Rrrrriiiight.
laugh.gif
 
 
Jesus Christ. Thought this was behind us b.

I will always be disgusted about what happened man, all those lives ruined :smh:
 
psk2310 said:
Fact of the matter is, if allegations existed dating back as far as the insurance company is claiming, that would've come out during the monster's criminal trial with proof.

From what information is available on the "interwebz", the notion of allegations dating back to the 70s is speculative. Now if they bring absolute proof, that again is another matter.
Click to expand...

No they wouldn't have come out .

Past "Allegations" aren't brought into a criminal trial. A judge would not allow and it would be grounds for an immediate appeal
 
Guys I'm all about handling matters in house. I'm a huge believer in leaving the authorities out of something and resolving it like adults. For the coworkers and friends that have my back, I will always have theirs.

That being said, I can't turn my back on child molestation. That's about as evil as it gets. Anyone who knew about this and chose to cover for Sandusky is a coward
 
This crap infuriates me. It's one thing to turn a blind eye to it, it's another to cover it up for as long as Joe Pa did.
 
Bigmike23 said:
You read all that BS you was speaking early on tho?
Click to expand...

Yep, let me take this L. A lots changed in 4 years

Reading the comments from the blind Paterno supporters got me disgusted. Dudes saying it was a conspiracy and ****
 
Last edited:
Of course, it becomes very sensitive and subjective when it's your alma mater. Peeps do it with schools, sports teams, family members, workplaces, etc


By the way @SouthernILL314 is an entertaining, yet sad follow on Twitter.
 
Last edited:
erupt107th said:
Would like to see Still in and OKB's response to this. Did the insurance company put them up to this?
Click to expand...

Comes out at the same time, very plausible

Listen I have no respect left for Paterno but a lot of you guys just wanna crush and group everyone who ever attendee the school in the same category

I know this narrative, I see it every day
 
StillIn729 said:
Comes out at the same time, very plausible

Listen I have no respect left for Paterno but a lot of you guys just wanna crush and group everyone who ever attendee the school in the same category

I know this narrative, I see it every day
Click to expand...

Bingo. I don't know what's worst: the blind supporters of Paterno or those who group the actions and sentiments of a group of people with the entire university
 
CashBanks said:
"Penn State's legal settlements with Jerry Sandusky's accusers cover alleged abuse dating to 1971, which was 40 years before his arrest, the university said Sunday in providing the first confirmation of the time frame of abuse claims that have led to big payouts."

http://espn.go.com/college-football...usky-accusers-cover-alleged-abuse-dating-1971
Click to expand...

Whoa....so there was an allegation in '71, in which the university gave a pay out to the victim?

When there's smoke....

Can't tell me Paterno didn't know what was going on w/ Sandusky.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom