The Lions' Pride

You may have less suspicion that you knew compared to Joe Paterno, but none of this is "proof" that you didn't know about Sandusky.

That's my point, there is no way you can "prove" that someone doesn't know something. All you have is their word, and you have Paterno, under oath saying that he didn't know. That's all we have. Your initial post said that there isn't "proof" that Paterno didn't know. There also isn't "proof" that you didn't know.

Now you obviously didn't know, I'm trying to make my point about your statement about proving what someone doesn't know.

According to the law, someone should have been arressted if they had told Joe anything with regards to the 98 investigation. That is the law in the state of PA. You don't get to know because you're a football coach when it comes to child molestation investigations because of the sensitive nature. If someone told Joe and comes forward with that information, so be it. That simply has yet to occur and probably because someone would have to admit to breaking the law or it didn't really happen.

Everyone has a right to make an informed opinion based on the information presented and my opinion is that JoePa had some amount of knowledge about the 1998 investigation. Do I think that makes him a criminal or do I think he was part of some coverup? Not at all.

Do I think the Freeh report was terrible? Yes. From what I have read in the Paterno report do I think they did a good job with it? No.

I think there is a middle ground between the Freeh report and the paterno report where PSU administrators and one coach were way to loyal to a former coach and significantly underestimated the sickness of Sandusky. Was it criminal? In my opinion not at all but they certainly dropped the ball.

My question is what information are you using to make your opinion?

Here is the evidence as it stands currently (and probably) ever will:

Freeh conducted over 430 interviews, but never found a single person that said Joe knew of 1998...

Freeh went through 3.5 million documents, but only found two emails to connect Joe to 1998
--- one of which relates to a scribbled note about no 2nd mile kids and liability
--- one of which states that "coach" is being kept informed. However, Freeh has no other emails/documents/audio recording show that Curley called Joe coach and that the situation was in question the 1998 incident
--- finally the first email cited happened before the date of the 1998 incident

According to Jay, 5 individuals under oath have sworn that Joe knew nothing about 1998 (not sure who those five are)

In Joe's grand jury, he said that he might have heard a rumor, but can not say with certainity

it was against the state law to inform Joe of JS transgressions until he was charged with the crime.

It also should be noted that there is significant documentation from multiple state agencies on the 1998 and none show evidence of Joe Paterno being informed/or questioned.

This is not to single you out, but I would love to see a clear piece of evidence that disputed Joe's testimony.

Who? Can you summarize for us not on twitter?

Interesting choice of words from him. Funny, he calls it his opinion yet yells about it like it's an undeniable fact. An opinion based on obstinence is one not worth sharing.

You should reply back to him that Manti Te'o conspired to fabricate his GF as a way to garner Heisman votes. No facts proving that? Doesn't change my opinion.

Golic isnt saying there is information that definitively points to Joe knew. If you listend to the interview, at all, you would know that Golic said Joe would never be found guilty (freeh report would never hold up) in a court of law. Golic said that he cant fathom how the head football coach in a small town didnt have any idea that his top assistant had the cops called on him and was under investigation. Its an opinion.

Look, im not on the media side of this. I think they are all giving their opinion, which is in line with 90% of America.

As I read these threads, everyone uses the word 'fact'. Its like you have been listening to Kevin Slaten too much. There is no fact that Joe was involved, but there is also no fact that Joe wasnt. Just like the media is all speculating, we as Penn State fans are also all speculating. Penn State fans all point to A+B must equal C (joe innocent). The media is speculating A+B must equal C (Joe guilty) and the FACT is, there is no proof either way.

But what does that prove, its still all hearsay... Nobody will ever know what Joe knew or didn't know. As much as I respect Jay for defending Joe, I kinda wish it didn't prolong this whole thing. This story is like Herpes; it just keeps resurfacing, and there will never be a resolution. Im ready for the BW game so that everyone can just move on. On to the 2013 season!

The problem with this attitude is that a lot of people dropped the ball outside of Penn State. PA DPW, Center County CYS, 2nd mile, BOT, AG Gricar, Corbett, etc... Just moving on doesn't get to the bottom of what happened and how JS was allowed to continue. Just blaming it on Paterno makes it go away while other children are being abused because of incompetent people in very important positions of protecting children.