"Dream scenario" were your words. And you post like you have plenty of demons to slay. Just different ones.
No Sex Scandal at Penn State, Just A "Political Hit Job"
- Thread starter lubrano
- Start date
"Dream scenario" were your words. And you post like you have plenty of demons to slay. Just different ones.
Ha! Like the meltdown we're hearing about Michigan State...oh wait, never mind.
No. I can deal with Santa not being real. Keep holding out hope he comes down that chimney.
He could care a less if the politically-motivated and corruption-motivated OAG floated an intentionally fraudulent Presentment to enable the issuance of illegitimate Indictments because he is a POS, scumbag lawyer, who believes in the POS, scumbag lawyer's creed, just like the guy who issued the intentionally fraudulent Presentment/Indictments -- i.e., self-interest first and the ends justify the means regardless of means (including reprehensible, indecent, immoral, unethical, zero-integrity, unrighteous and unjust means....IOW, the OT creed of Belial, whose fingerprint is deceit, deception and untruth....whose very name is the genesis of the name we use for these things to this day, lie and liar!).
For me? You're an idiot.
Find one post where I ever said Jerry was framed. Just one. You can have from now until the end of time to find it.
Not a lawyer, never claimed to be. Carry on though, so accurate!!!!LOL
You don't know if Jerry molested anyone. Denial is a great thing, you can just ignore reality.
I can't imagine Dan Rather in the 1960's, leading up to an investigative story on JFK's assassination, with a picture of the cast of "Adam 12" leading the story. Sorry, just doesn't seem credible.
Ray Gricar will come down that chimney before this thing goes away, apparently. Spanier is done and some guy with a picture of Mark Harmon is now right up there with Wolf Blitzer, lmao.
What does the intentional violation of due process rights and the "Constitutionally Guaranteed Rights" of multiple individuals by a corrupt, immoral, scumbag, self-serving, lawyer-turned-politician have to do with whether Sandusky was actually guilty or not??? These are two WHOLLY SEPARATE and distinct topics that the defender of corrupt scumbags here wishes to conflate for self-serving reasons - go figure! (i.e., he keeps trying to put words and thoughts into other people's mouths that they never spoke -- often into people who have said the DIAMETRIC OPPOSITE such as myself. I've stated multiple times that I think Sandusky may be guilty based on his statements in 1998 and subsequent actions which conflict with promises he made in 1998, but that has bupkis to do with whether the OAG is corrupt and intentionally floated a Fraudulent Presentment, among many other acts of outright proven Prosecutorial Misconduct, does it???).
Last edited:
I have struck a nerve I see. Be blunt all you want. Just back it with facts. I've said from the beginning Jerry is where he belongs. I never have hedged on that. But you "know" things. You've got nothing pnnnnnny.
And once again... when will Joe and CSS have been trashed enough, before it's OK with you to trash the more deserved who haven't been blamed for anything. Let us "know".
I don't agree with you on much of the PSU aspect of this saga so you pull your one trick pony act out and throw me into the Free Jerry cult. So weak.
When in your mind will Joe and CSS have been trashed enough before it's ok to trash and blame the equally if not more deserved? Let us "know" when that's OK with you all "knowing" one. Maybe consult with jive first.
It is a pretty scary tyrannical world when the scumbag criminals are BOTH the criminals and the prosecutors....and individuals "guaranteed" rights under the law are trampled by said tyranny (Hitler's Germany a very good modern example) and people of good faith and character stand cowardly by and let it happen. Those cowards day will come according to the Christ's Creed - "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.". This instruction is preceeded by the following instruction: "Brothers and sisters, even if one of you is caught doing something wrong, those of you who are spiritual should set that person right in a spirit of gentleness; and watch yourselves that you are not put to the test in the same way.".
Allow me to continue the ridicule - MM is a lying POS who will walk away with millions. His life is ruined because he heard slapping sounds and wasn't man enough to either confront a senior citizen molesting a boy, or admit he didn't see anything and is lying through his teeth.
You agree with me more than you let on. I don't condemn Joe. I do think you can comprehend any blame anywhere near PSU. That is fine. I get you have a fence to walk with the cult guys here. You need to blast anyone not playing woe was the trial. Schultz admitted to naked bear hugs. They at least thought about making a proper report. Again, bad decisions were made and I disagree with the witch hunt, but I can't pretend they are idiots.
I don't know about framed, but certainly railroaded. He deserved a new trial even before the latest revelation from MM about the GJ presentment leak.
It's hard to say he was railroaded when he had all those victims come forward.
Too funny, yea it's hard to determine if his "Constitutionally Protected Rights" were violated and wantonly trampled (along with C/S/S's) when the OAG issues intentionally Fraudulent Presentments for the purpose of generating illegitimate Indictments among a passel of other proven acts of Prosecutorial Misconduct.... Yea, that's it that's the ticket - you crack me up.
MM said that he heard rhythmic slapping sounds and that he saw Sandusky standing behind the boy in a shower with skin to skin contact. Let's not pretend that the charge came from nothing. In the end, the system worked... the prosecution failed to prove that anal sex occurred and so JS was found not guilty. Are you going to argue that Jerry needs a new trial because of a count he was found not guilty of?
Hey now... you have no idea if that jury would have known what JS was arrested for if that never got leaked!!!
Ummm, not for nothing, but here is what Mike McQueary actually said, in writing, about the OAG's Presentment immediately after it was released:
Here is what a Grand Juror on the 30th SWIGJ that Mike McQueary testified before had to say:
In another previously undisclosed matter, The Mag found that one grand juror who heard McQueary testify said he doubted his credibility. The grand juror, Stan Bolton, a 53-year-old employee of The Home Depot in York, Pa., now says he was skeptical of McQueary's claim that Sandusky engaged in a sex act with the boy because McQueary told grand jurors that he didn't see penetration.
"This planted a seed with me. Either you saw it or you didn't," said Bolton, who was one of 23 grand jurors. The prosecutors "kind of glossed over it and moved on to who [McQueary] told, which started the whole Joe Paterno thing."
When the presentment charging Sandusky, Curley and Schultz was released, it was written by the 33rd grand jury. In that document, prosecutors said McQueary, identified only as a graduate assistant, was found by the grand jury to be "extremely credible." However, the 33rd grand jury never heard McQueary testify. An earlier grand jury, the 30th, heard McQueary testify on Dec. 16, 2010. Bolton was a member of that grand jury.
"This planted a seed with me. Either you saw it or you didn't," said Bolton, who was one of 23 grand jurors. The prosecutors "kind of glossed over it and moved on to who [McQueary] told, which started the whole Joe Paterno thing."
When the presentment charging Sandusky, Curley and Schultz was released, it was written by the 33rd grand jury. In that document, prosecutors said McQueary, identified only as a graduate assistant, was found by the grand jury to be "extremely credible." However, the 33rd grand jury never heard McQueary testify. An earlier grand jury, the 30th, heard McQueary testify on Dec. 16, 2010. Bolton was a member of that grand jury.
Highly comical that you see nothing odd about the State's supposed "star eyewitness" (and a Grand Juror on the 30th SWIGJ that MM testified before) clearly labeling the OAG the lying, fraudulent Presentment producing scumbags that they are, but according to you that is evidence the system "worked" as it is supposed to....
I'm not sure what your point is. As I said, the prosecution took the liberty to adding the anal sex charge (whatever it is called) because there was at least a small amount of evidence that it may have occurred. That is how it works.. prosecuiters will charge what they can and let the trial work out the details. This is not unique to this case.
According to you, this statement by Mike McQueary, "It was sexual and/or way over the line in my opinion, whatever it was." is eyewitness testimony to something despite his use of the words "in my opinion" (i.e., words that DEFACTO mean he is conjecturing and only capable of conjecturing on the topic!) and also says, "...sexual....or way over the line....whatever it was." - all definitive words demonstrating he is not exactly sure what was going on in the shower contrary to your claim that he stated to anyone, let alone JVP, that he definitively knew what was going on in the shower based on what he saw!
You really are a sad sack piece of $hit pal.
He testified to the jury as to what he saw, and the jurors decided that he witnessed CSA. Maybe you should go complain to them about it?
More laughable bull$hit from the "maker up of facts" - there is nothing in MM's statements that is actual evidence (i.e., EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY) to what you claim you fargging moron douche-bag! Beyond that, the Grand Juror from the 30th SWIGJ that MM testified in front of CONFIRMS that MM testified to the DIAMETRIC OPPOSITE of what the OAG claimed he testified to in their FRAUDULENT Presentment @sshole!
You are grasping at straws to try and save the pedo. Whatever floats your boat.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
FB Recruiting NitBits: Where does Penn State stand for several key targets and more- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley
-
-
-