Yeah. They probably weren’t all face down.
Don’t get him mad! :eek:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=19258802
Nevertheless, rumors that the unofficial team nickname is now the “Nittany Molesters” appear to be unfounded.
Do they still have that unofficial scholarship ban against guys named Chester and Lester?
That’s correct.
Well, that leaves you making an assumption on top of an assumption - speculating on the insurance company’s motives and using that to speculate on the complainant’s motives.
No, my speculation about the claimant was independent of anything to do with the insurance company. See my original post on the subject (#6598).
Basically both the claimant and the insurance company have very strong motives to put forth this claim. Doesn’t mean that they’ve necessarily wrong about it, but you need to be very skeptical about claims that are so strongly aligned with self-interest and not subject to contradiction.
[FWIW, JP claimed under oath that he had never been told about any incidents other than the McQueary one. While he was also self-interested, he at least would have had reason to fear contradiction if lying.]
More confirmation of that 1976 accusation as court documents were unsealed.
Just came in to post this. More confirmation of the total moral bankruptcy of Joe Paterno. What a scumbag.
That just about says it all.
Yeah, I was going to post that.
Fuck him. What if that had been my son?
At this point theres nothing more to say. I’ve been battling Penn State creeps over this for a few years now, shocked and disgusted that all they care about is getting Paterno’s statue back up and team into Bowl games. At this point anyone that defends Paterno’s legacy is just sick in the fucking head, and cannot be reasoned with.
Well IMO anyone who thinks these latest allegations are remotely conclusive of anything is so closed-minded on this issue that they cannot be reasoned with. So there.
Clearly any fact that goes against the Paternoster family script is suspect. :rolleyes:
To the contrary, very few people would believe this type of claim under other circumstances. It’s only because it fits in with what people are strongly predisposed to believe that it’s being given so much credence.
I’ll let the Coz know you’re cool with him babysitting your teenage daughter.
With this and all the other evidence, it seems very likely that the best explanation for all this is that Paterno was told repeatedly about Sandusky and did almost nothing to stop it.
Do you think there’s a more likely explanation?
I’m not sure what “other evidence” you’re referring to, and I’ve discussed some of the other allegations at length earlier in this thread.
Right now, I’m discussing this particular allegation. As noted, it’s a claim that the maker had enormous incentive to make, as it bolstered a claim that would make him millions of dollars, it was not at all subject to any sort of refutation, so it’s a no-risk high-reward claim. As above, I don’t believe reasonable people would take this type of claim seriously under ordinary circumstances, and it’s only here because it fits into their preconceived narrative that they do.
Having seen the actual details of the claim, I’m even more skeptical. For one thing, it’s unlikely that a 14 year old victim would turn to his molester’s boss with whom he had no connection - he would more likely turn to an adult that he knew better. And for another, even if JP had that type of callous attitude, there’s no reason for him to have told that to the kid. (Especially being that, for all he knew, the kid had told or would tell a whole bunch of other people about it.)
So I think this is a highly dubious story at best. And the fact that people just take it at face value and treat it as conclusive says a lot about them and very little about JP.
But we are not under other circumstances. We are talking about Sandusky and Paterno, and their many victims.
Really? Are you in total denial of what happened? I found your early post about the teacher who rubbed your legs when you were young. I don’t think you are as objective as you’d like to think you’re being.
What does that have to do with anything? 