• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Penn State Cult (Joe Knew)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
A sig over at BWI. I don't think anything I can say can explain everything wrong with the cultists over there more than this image.


391055_190000984417068_183522358398264_405045_1964378559_n.jpg
 
Upvote 0
Woody1968;2222416; said:
Embarrassing and admirable are the academic perception/NCAA violations, aren't they?
Click to expand...

I don't think the embarrassing factor has anything to do with overall academic perception. Look at schools like Nevada or the MAC schools in the upper half and schools like Cal, Washington, USC, Ohio State and ped aggy in the bottom half.

My understanding is that it is a combination of on the field ineptitude (Cal, Washington) with off the field scandal (USC, Ohio State, ped aggy). Nevada and FredOU are playing well right now and have no off-field scandals. The chart doesn't say a thing as to what kind of actual universities they are.
 
Upvote 0
Zurp;2222354; said:
Beautiful. Do they realize that Sanduskey was found not guilty for the parts with McQueary? I'm no lawyer or detective or anything else that lets me claim to be an expert. But I did watch Law and Order last night, and I'm pretty sure that that means the entire incident involving McQueary has no bearing on the fate of Sanduskey. In the eyes of the law, the McQueary stuff never happened. You can argue all you want over what did or didn't happen, what McQueary did or didn't see, what McQueary should or shouldn't have done - it has nothing to do with how long Sanduskey will be in prison. If McQueary is making the whole thing up, Sanduskey would have been found guilty on all counts he was charged for. The only difference that I can see is that maybe Joe Paterno would have been allowed to coach those last few games - including a bowl game. But those wins that he may have gotten would also would have been vacated in July.

Penn Staters: I think you're crazy for barking up any of these trees. But carry on if you must. But even I can see that this tree is not the right tree.

(Note: assuming McQueary story is correct, this issue is very important to the tragedy that befell the victim. I am not trying to trivialize the impact on his life.)
Click to expand...

I called it about a month ago. they are going to say anything that might eventually lead to Pedterno being exonerated and having that stupid damn number restored. That's ALL they care about.
 
Upvote 0
Zurp;2222354; said:
Beautiful. Do they realize that Sanduskey was found not guilty for the parts with McQueary? I'm no lawyer or detective or anything else that lets me claim to be an expert. But I did watch Law and Order last night, and I'm pretty sure that that means the entire incident involving McQueary has no bearing on the fate of Sanduskey. In the eyes of the law, the McQueary stuff never happened. You can argue all you want over what did or didn't happen, what McQueary did or didn't see, what McQueary should or shouldn't have done - it has nothing to do with how long Sanduskey will be in prison. If McQueary is making the whole thing up, Sanduskey would have been found guilty on all counts he was charged for. The only difference that I can see is that maybe Joe Paterno would have been allowed to coach those last few games - including a bowl game. But those wins that he may have gotten would also would have been vacated in July.

Penn Staters: I think you're crazy for barking up any of these trees. But carry on if you must. But even I can see that this tree is not the right tree.

(Note: assuming McQueary story is correct, this issue is very important to the tragedy that befell the victim. I am not trying to trivialize the impact on his life.)
Click to expand...


He was found guilty on 4 of the 5 counts relating to the McQueary testimony (victim #2). He was found not guilty only on the top count. One juror basically said that McQueary's testimony was instrumental in convicting Sandusky. I don't know how this falsehood that Sandusky was found not guilty, with regards to victim #2 (witnessed by McQueary), has come about, but it is wrong. He was convicted on the McQueary testimony also.
 
Upvote 0
Zurp;2222354; said:
Beautiful. Do they realize that Sanduskey was found not guilty for the parts with McQueary? I'm no lawyer or detective or anything else that lets me claim to be an expert. But I did watch Law and Order last night, and I'm pretty sure that that means the entire incident involving McQueary has no bearing on the fate of Sanduskey. In the eyes of the law, the McQueary stuff never happened.
Click to expand...
in regards to the charges against sandusky concerning victim 2, sandusky was found not guilty for involuntary deviant sexual intercourse because mcqueary never saw actual penetration. however, sandusky was still found guilty for indecent assault (on victim 2), unlawful contact with a minor, corruption of a minor, and endangering the welfare of a child. mcqueary's testimony was integral to these charges sticking.

edit: damn you, saw. zurp's message was posted nearly 6 hours ago and you decide to post your response 2 minutes before mine? :hatepc:
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top