The old fallback. Repressed memory. Seems to have worked so far for others.
Amended witness certification for AM
- Thread starter francofan
- Start date
The old fallback. Repressed memory. Seems to have worked so far for others.
That would be good right? Not really interested in JS, more concerned with the athletic department discrediting.
Here's betting that Myers says on the witness stand that he's never been in the Lasch Building and that Sandusky's abuse of him started sometime after February 2001.
I will take you up on your bet if you are willing. I do not think he will says that he has never been in the Lasch Building.
EC was being facetious..........wasn't he?
IDK.....on second thought - I guess its possible that I was incorrect in assuming he was "going for laughs".
If he credibly testifies that he was abused....I hope someone calls out the prosecutors for not believing him and for claiming not to know who victim 2 was.
My prediction: if he actually testifies (and Shubin doesn't squirrel him away somewhere). AM will be as consistent as possbile with his prior testimony. He was victim 2 but wasn't abused in the shower that night. Sandusky did touch him inappropriately at other times and it made him uncomfortable. He stood behind Sandusky just like Matt did b/c Sandusky was a father figure to him and he enjoyed the benefits of his association with Sandusky. It will be interesting if the judge shuts down attempts to challenge him and bring up repressed memory therapy, which he will deny anyway.
Result: charges dropped against CSS soon after unless OAG makes up BS claim that it should have been reported based on MM latest version. Sandusky PCRA denied. Not sure impact this will have on MM or his lawsuit because PSU did treat him differently and PSU's actions impacted future employment (I don't agree with latter, but jury seemed to think that was the case). May become basis for PSU appeal?
How in the world AM testimony - as you laid it out - effects CSS? I'll never know
Well thought out and this is the best we can hope for. Unfortunately, the way things have gone with everything thus far in all of this, I'm afraid it may be a little optimistic. I have little faith in people like AM and even less in the Commonwealth's system of justice. Hope to heck I'm wrong, but this thing has all the signs of a predetermined outcome.
Well, if no one was claiming sexual abuse occurred in the 2001 shower incident except MM (not his father, Dranov, AM, JS, CSS), what would CSS report? There would only be MM saying something sexual occurred. Does PA law state that a report of a man in a shower with a teen must be reported? What am I missing? If the OAG is looking for a way out of this mess, wouldn't AM provide the cover?
Last edited:
The hearing will now start Friday at 1:00 pm as opposed to 10:30 am. No reason was given for the chnage.
http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/Sandusky Order Dated November 1, 2016.pdf
http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/Sandusky Order Dated November 1, 2016.pdf
If Judge Cleland denies the PCRA, the defense will appeal to Superior and/or the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The evidentiary hearings to date have already gotten enough information on the record to make a very compelling case for a new trial IMO.
The ONLY persons of interest that CS spoke to was MM
What AM has to say now has NOTHING to do with what MM said to CS in 2001
Right?
So there is NADA impact on CS (and, by extension, S2).....based on what AM may or may not say today
Ugh - just after I adjusted my day to do Bellefonte in the AM, and BOT in the PM
They got wind of your plan probably. Seriously, this is deliberate to stifle some folks.
Really, none of This would shock me at this point.
As most people, AM will do what is in his best interest. He can't say anything that would endanger He needs to weave his story to connect as many of his statements that he can and explain away the others because of shame at the time or repressed memory.
I would guess he will say no rape occurred and that they were just horsing around and that at the time he thought that any genital contact was accidental but in hindsight may have been on purpose. After recovering his repressed memory he now thinks at other times he was lightly abused but not raped.
Just my best guess as they way his attorney will help him frame it so that he walks the line, keeps his money and lessens the impact of his conflicting stories regarding Sandusky.
His statements will be important because he will be both under oath and in public for the first time.
Truthful? That's another question.
I would guess he will say no rape occurred and that they were just horsing around and that at the time he thought that any genital contact was accidental but in hindsight may have been on purpose. After recovering his repressed memory he now thinks at other times he was lightly abused but not raped.
Just my best guess as they way his attorney will help him frame it so that he walks the line, keeps his money and lessens the impact of his conflicting stories regarding Sandusky.
His statements will be important because he will be both under oath and in public for the first time.
Truthful? That's another question.
