Shrmdougluvr
Give it all to me fool!
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 6,561
- Like
- 11,829
No, I'm just not an irrational person who allows my emotions to overrule my reasoning capability and commitment to using verifiable facts to draw definitive conclusions. That appears to be an issue for you.
The bolded part is the part that matters most. In fact, it pretty much negates the need for any further commentary - although the fact you choose to provide it does serve as evidence to my claim above.
EDIT - Any interest in admitting I obliterated your claim Joe Paterno committed a crime in the Sandusky case by citing the relevant facts and statutes? Or would you prefer to stick with your irrational, factually untenable position that Paterno committed a crime….you just can’t figure out what?
In fairness, unless you believe Paterno was completely naive, his legal duty to warn would have existed before he had no choice but to report (during the mccleary allegation). I happen to think Paterno and others knew Sandusky was a sicko well before mcclearys claims were brought to their attention. That’s why they gave Sandusky and his foundation that mou that had weird terms and restrictions.