Anthony, thanks again for all you're doing.
Question: When might you be able to share some of what you're finding in the Freeh documents? Thanks.
Latest in Paterno v NCAA
- Thread starter lubrano
- Start date
Question: When might you be able to share some of what you're finding in the Freeh documents? Thanks.
Anthony, you are calling a spade, a spade. I'm going to assume that you are doing this because you've now seen the documents. You can't say, precisely, what you've seen, but you're letting it be known in this fashion.
Lemon Lubrano? Avocado Anthony? These are the ice creams that will be named after you once Erickson's name is wiped off that F'ing building.
I'm not sure how that process would work given the judge's ruling. Clearly they can't compromise people's confidentiality but can they release info without identifying who said it or does any info release have to go before a judge first?
That's from McQueary's Grand Jury Testimony. Whatever you're quoting either isn't from that testimony or you've seen parts of it none of the public has. So which is it? This is McQueary's first testimony & it's clear he's full of uncertainty. Why wouldn't you think he approached Joe & the administrators with at least the same uncertainty? Sorry, but those aren't the words of a man certain he saw a boy raped. You wanna judge Joe on his Grand Jury testimony & none of his other versions then do so with Mike too.
The word "some" is not in either of these definitions, they can't be right.
Sometimes, it's not a conspiracy. MM lost everything when he testified. For whatever reason, you think he lied. There was literally no incentive for him to do so.MM didn't see a damn thing with the exception of seeing Sandusky leave the locker room with a boy late at night. He didn't think this was good and complained to others (his Dad, Dr Dranov, Joe) that he saw them leave and felt very uncomfortable. Over the 9+ years this festered into the "sexual nature". Absolutely NO WAY he saw anything inappropriate in a shower between Sandusky and a boy and left them alone. This DID NOT HAPPEN. NO WAY! If he had seen something inappropriate he would have stopped it right then and there and taken the boy with him. Human nature would have prevailed.
Only real question is why MM hasn't stood up like a man and explained what really happened. This part is still puzzling. His life sucks...he has nothing more to loose...yet he hasn't stood up. This is very curious.
The truth, and we will get the truth, will be so cleansing!I literally can't wait, but I will wait and in the end it will have been worthwhile...regardless of the outcome the truth will always prevail.
Oh lookie who has been working the "Google" thingy recently.
In hindsight I'll bet he wished he had not lied. And, I'm not going to explain to you what hindsight means.
I hope you don't smoke, because you surround yourself with so many "straw men" you'd go up in flames like a Buddhist Monk
It isn't "MM lied" that's even at issue ....... But if that's all your simple mind can grasp, knock yourself out
In this particular situation, for MM to "lie" ( in the most common sense of the word) would be a practical impossibility.
The c&cks&ckers who twisted and turned this entire event - starting 6, 7 years ago (and the list of those c&cks&ckers is a looooong one) - are the ones that folks should be focused on.
Getting tied up in the circle-jerk over "this word" or "that word", with respect to vague recollections of decades old conversations - recollections twisted and manipulated by those c&cks&ckers to fulfill their agenda - is simply allowing the true c&cks&ckers to succeed in the mission they set out on nearly a 6, 7 years ago.(it should therefore come as no surprise that the board c&cks&ckers - like GMJ - absolutely REVEL in that circle-jerk)
I don't know if life is hard for you ("life is hard when you're dumb"), or if you are the happiest man on the planet ("ignorance is bliss")...... But it must be one or the other
Last edited:
Just disappointed in your evasion. Just what do you think happened --- a coverup of some kind? And what exactly went down.
Come on, let's hear what you think.
"Disappointed"?
To be disappointed, wouldn't one first have to have some level of expectation - in order for that expectation to be unmet?
Unless you're new around here...... I can't imagine ANYONE having any expectations for anything but idiocy from Mr GMJ.
Last edited:
No incentive for him to do so? Are u even paying attention? He sent dick pics to a coed, not to mention he had gambling problems. You think that wasn't held over his head so that he would testify the "right" way?
Yeah, my expectations are not too high for an honest answer. At some point, it seems reasonable that he would present his version of how things went down."Disappointed"?
To be disappointed, wouldn't one first have to have some level of expectation - in order for that expectation to be I met?
Unless you're new around here...... I can't imagine ANYONE having any expectations for anything but idiocy from Mr GMJ.
I think that Curley and Schultz covered it up in order to protect Penn State. I think there is a chance that Spanier was left in the dark. Remember, MM and Paterno never directly talked to Spanier. Just look at how GS has been fighting everything through his lawyers and interviews while Curley and Schult have not said a word. Now, that's their right but it's still interesting to say the least.
So what if he did? How do you explain Dragnov's testimony? He said that MM was severely upset. That doesn't happen if he whitens see nothing egregious.
I long for the day that the only version we have is the truth and that no amount of rhetoric could change that truth.
Last edited:
Seriously, are you that much if a simpleton? What were the exact words MM used? Where did you first here the terms sexual nature? What do your qualifying comments mean? Did you have conversations with the DA before testifying? Why did you think 2002 instead of 2001? I mean, I could go on and on. Heck, I dare say even our resident attorney savant, GTA, could think of a few relevant questions. You? Lennie Small's got nothing on you.
Ok, I see that.
What responsibility, if any, does Paterno bear in your opinion? Why did he receive such blame, both in the national media and from the BOT?
You are a GD Olympic Champ already......you can stop anytime, your place in history is assured.
Idiot Olympics 2016 - GetMyJive:
Douchebaggery:
- Gold Medal
Inanity:
- Silver Medal (sorry, GTASCA beat you out there in a photo-finish)
Lunacy:
- Gold Medal
Straw Man 4X100 Relay (with CR/GTASCA/and PennsyOracle):
- Gold Medal
Idiot Biathlon (Non Sequitur and False Dichotomy):
- Gold Medal....and New Olympic Record
Circle-Jerk Marathon:
- Gold Medal (tied with former 3-time medalist GTASCA)
Pomposity:
- Silver Medal (sorry, CR was just too strong to overcome)
Protect PSU from what, exactly? That's part of the nonsense rhetoric I've never understood. Why would anyone react negatively if the school reported what they believed to be a serious crime? No other infractions by players were ever covered up. Why would this change that long-standing approach?
That's why I believe they did not get a report of a crime, just 'horseplay' or JS's boundary issues again. I believe they did not know what they were dealing with, and acted rationally based on what they were told and thought.
Also, I know Tim. Unless he would state himself that he did cover-up or commit perjury, I would never believe it. He's as good a person as there is.
They covered it up by telling Raykovitz at The Second Mile and by not telling McQueary to keep his mouth shut.
Sure. Whatever.
The "cover up" tale is about the dumbest thing that's ever come out of Harrisburg, and that's saying something.
I said before, in this thread, that I don't have a problem with how Paterno handled the situation. The way he did it should have resulted in Sandusky being arrested. The guys above him failed, it's that simple.
If they did not know what they were dealing with, the rational thing, as administrators of Penn State, would have been to report the incident to authorities and let them handle the situation. If it was another 1998 situation (which was still extremely inappropriate) then the police could make that determination.
They should have reported the incident to police.if you want to say that they were being grossly ignorant instead of actively covering it up, then they are the dumbest set of administrators in the nation.
You said, "I think that Curley and Schultz covered it up in order to protect Penn State." Are you backing down from that idiotic claim?
No, that is my opinion as to what happened. I am not saying that was the exact reason (only they would know). It's simply my opinion that fits I with the facts that we know and the testimony that we have seen. Frankly though, it doesn't matter what their motivation was. They failed. Finding out the reason for the failure is not going to change anything significant.
Sounds like your average OGBOT meeting...plenty of lies spewed and Dambly forgetting his time in jail.
I could start another grammar holy war and tell you that you misspelled your contracted naughty word...but you already knew that!
All he "saw" that night was RUDY.
Last edited:
If they did not know what they were dealing with, the rational thing, as CEO and Board members of Second Mile, would have been to report the incident to authorities and let them handle the situation. If it was another 1998 situation (which was still extremely inappropriate and SHOULD HAVE RESULTED IN A WRITTEN SAFETY PLAN AS PER STATE MANDATE) then the police, CYS, ChildLine and Second Mile themselves could make that determination.
Instead, after having Penn State on his charity doorstep complaining, CEO and licensed child welfare professional Dr. Jack Raykovitz solves the complaint with a quip about "just wear swim trunks" the next time Sandusky showers with a youth.
Doh!
If you knew Tim Curley at all, you would realize how stupid this sounds.
It sounds to me like the talking points have changed.
Last edited:
