she's a sh*t ton more qualified than anyone currently on the BoT. or anyone here
Lubrano spoke at tonight's PSU Lake Erie Honor Joe Event
- Thread starter PSUEngineerx2
- Start date
she's a sh*t ton more qualified than anyone currently on the BoT. or anyone here
Not unless she gets sufficient confidence to speak forcefully in front of a Den of Thieves. I've seen enough.
Yep, just can't resist signing himself. His latest trick is another account called @newlyr where he threatens to stalk mine and Simons' homes. Sad pathetic person.
and yet McAndrew refuses to ban Zipay for clear threats. fun times.
I muted CR66 long ago. You should too. As far as A9 I believe they have good intentions I'm simply asserting based on history that they made a miscalculation that they'll later regret. Ira was getting in either way but to vote against Ira is to make the statement that Ira sold us down the river on the settlements which is what he did even if he had good intentions too.
It'll be nice when you and Anthony finally put the last nail in Freeh's coffin but we got another battle & we might have to get a little dirty to win it. At some point we need to discredit the 70s accusers as thorough as I'm sure you'll discredit Freeh. That will likely take IDing them. It's the only chance I see. Also I recently saw in PSU's lawsuit files that 2nd Mile waived all liability against PSU in their contracts for TSM events on campus. I'm sure that includes the Friends Fitness program. I hope Curley Schultz & Spanier have this info & documents proving this but it might be a good idea to ask Anthony to check with them on it.
I wish you the best of luck.
How is he using Ziegler's playbook? I am not a fan of Ziegler. I don't like his in your face tactics calling everyone names like pussy moron and his holier than thou type attitude. However, I haven't heard any accusations that he has ever impersonated anyone or tried to hide his identity.
I absolutely agree that we need to discredit the 70s accusers as soon as possible. While we are at it, we need to vet the more recent accusers particularly those who were represented by Andrew Shubin and Michael Boni like Matt Sandusky, Allan Myers, and Aaron Fisher.
True. Ziegler doesn't threaten to stalk people at their houses. Ziegler actually DOES stalk people at their houses.
There is a fine line between stalking and investigative journalism.
Aaron Fisher invited Ziegler to meet with him: "“If he has questions about me, he should just ask them directly — reach out and shake my hand like a man,” he said."
http://ht.ly/MqHvs
I believe that Allan Myers is the key to unraveling the entire fiasco and the false narratives that have been accepted by the public at large. I don't have any problem with Ziegler reaching out to Myers. Then again, I don't have any problem with Myers asserting his right to privacy. That being said, I hope that Judge Cleland can be objective and rules that Myers must testify in Sandusky's PCRA evidentiary hearings. I believe his testimony is very relevant to the PCRA appeal.
Some of you fellows are batshit crazy . You're not changing public opinion by attacking victims , even those who might be sketchy. You look like zealots , no better than those crazy jihadists .
You do no help with this Jerry stuff either . He's never getting out and he's where he belongs .
You do no help with this Jerry stuff either . He's never getting out and he's where he belongs .
You are welcome to your own opinions. It is not clear to me v1 and/or v2 are actual victims. I don't believe they have been thoroughly vetted. Please do not equate questioning what clearly look like false narratives (e.g. MM witnessing an anal rape in the show) in any way with condoning CSA.
Zig would love to meet with him. I think you have identified the wrong party as a coward.
This. Attacking the victims isn't going to help your cause at all. And it's not just the 70s victims that would need to be discredited, it's all of them. The public believes that Paterno know exactly what was going on, so discrediting a few victims out of 30+ isn't going to move the needle at all.
As I said before, even if every single person is a liar and his was the most massive screw job in the history of the world, it would be near impossible to prove. How exactly are you going to prove that something didn't happen? The effort to do so is futile and will end up just being a massive waste of time and energy.
Are you absolutely certain that v1 is telling the truth is his accusations? I am not. 12 people from Lock Haven who know him well and do not have an axe to grind are willing to speak on the record and say they believe he is lying. These people include 2 aunts, best childhood friends, ex-girlfriend and mother of his child, next door neighbor, and father of best friend.
There's a big difference between "attacking victims" and discrediting people who lied about abuse to receive a monetary settlement. I would think so called "victims' advocates" would also want to make sure that false accusers are ferreted out of the system, since they do more harm to real victims than those who doubt them.
The 70's victims are the ones that specifically claimed to have told Paterno they were abused by Sandusky. I don't care what the public thinks or why, because most of what they believe about this case is BS fed to them by a clickbait happy media. I want to see these two have to take the stand and be cross-examined. They are not little boys- they are grown men now in their 50s or 60s. I don't want to hear stories about poor health or other circumstances that prevent them from testifying. There were no health issues that kept them from peddling their stories to get a few hundred G's.
I think we deserve to hear the full story, not just the narrative certain lawyers, publications, or BOT members past and present want us to hear. I want those liars discredited, and I want whoever approved those settlements to look foolish, and I want whoever fell for and created those false narratives to look even more foolish.
They weren't there though. Only he and Sandusky would know if he were lying. Again though, if you find a way to prove that he was lying, you still have 30+ other victims that need to be disproven. Realistically, that's not going to happen.
So how would a lawyer discredit him? What question could he ask that makes his story irrefutably false?
I'm not saying that the 70s victims are telling the truth (the timing certainly is suspect), but how can you prove that a 40 year old conversation between the victim and a deceased coach did not happen? It's impossible.
Find discrepancies in their stories. For example, a number of people have pointed out that football camp attendees used individual showers in dorms, not group showers in athletic facilities, where the 1976 victim claimed to be abused. I'd like to know how a 14-year old navigated the campus without knowing the names of any buildings, but found Joe Paterno's office. I'd like to know why he told nobody about what allegedly happened to him for 38 years. Are there lists of attendees for sports camps? Is his name even on the list? I'm sure a savvy attorney could think of dozens more questions.
If the v1 and v2 accusations are discredited, then the foundation of the case is discredited. I don't know that it won't happen. If Sandusky wins a new trial, IMO it very likely will happen. These 3 days of evidentiary hearings in August could be very interesting. Judge Cleland could very easily shut things down if he so desires. I hope he can show at least some objectivity. If he does, I believe it will be clear that Sandusky did not remotely receive a fair trial. The trial was rife with acts of prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective counsel.
I would argue that without 1 and 2, the case against Jerry pretty much falls apart.
How would you compel any of the victims to testify ? This is done . Some guy says something forty years ago, how do you interrogate him under oath ?
If I were that guy I'd basically say GFY and go on with my life.
And here we go, loons that think jerry is innocent and he isn't where he belongs . This isn't about true justice for jerry it's about the desperate need to absolve PSU from any blame .
And you will never move public opinion from that.
If I were that guy I'd basically say GFY and go on with my life.
And here we go, loons that think jerry is innocent and he isn't where he belongs . This isn't about true justice for jerry it's about the desperate need to absolve PSU from any blame .
And you will never move public opinion from that.
I just think it would be extremely difficult. If he was brazen enough to lie to get money, he would lie on the stand. And, I'm sure he would get coached from his lawyer so at he would be prepared for the tough questions.
There will be no new trial and your idea of objectivity is the judge seeing it your way.
The foundation for why they went after Jerry would be gone, but you would still need to discredit another 30 victims now that the allegations are out there. I just cannot stress enough how impossible that task would be. And, of course, the only way you would even have a chance to be successful is if the are all liars. The possibility of that is extremely small.
They are all liars with 'enhanced' testimony provided by the investigators. Look at how they got MM to pervert his story
I'm curious, when you say pervert his story, are you talking about the escalation to anal rape or just simply the fact that he felt JS was abusing the kid in the shower? Can you please clarify?
Pervert as in horseplay that was reported in 2001 somehow comes out as anal rape in the grand jury testimony. How does that happen? Ask Fina and the other porn gaters
Per-vert - alter (something) from its original course, meaning, or state to a distortion or corruption of what was first intended.
elvis63 said:
So, ridiculous story of abuse happening in the 70s, and even more ridiculous story of telling Joe aside. After allegedly telling Joe, we are to believe that someone then kept quiet for 40 years, only deciding to speak for a short time just after Joe was dead and the wallet was open, and now doesn't want to speak anymore. Interesting timing throughout the entire alleged saga. Probably just a coincidence... we should just blindly believe him, what motivation would he have to tell lie$?
I don't think it would be impossible at all. All of the other "victims" were based on the foundation of v1 and v2. If that foundation collapses, the other allegations fold. I would love to see a new trial and see if any of the other allegations can stand on the own.
