RANT ON, RANT ON!!!!!!! Grrrrrr, you are showing me. YOU DOWN WITH OAG...YEAH, YOU KNOW ME, YOU DOWN WITH THE OAG...YEAH, YOU KNOW ME. LOUD WORDS!!!!!!!
No Sex Scandal at Penn State, Just A "Political Hit Job"
- Thread starter lubrano
- Start date
If there is no credibility here, why do you spend so much time here? Entertainment value (I do sometimes).
I've looked at some sites but would be interested in what other sites you would suggest going to for better information and better discussion?
Thanks
For football and recruiting...247 and the DEN here on this site. Ryan is awesome for this site and Fitz is incredible at 247. The sites are moderated for real and the nonsense here doesn't go on there...it's fooball/sports 90% of the time.This is for pure entertainment with BODE...I mean Get Real, aka BODE, aka BeatofDaEast, aka Bushwood, and FranklinsTowerRingsaBell is so much fun to play with. It's like having a laser pointer and a cat...good stuff.
The record very clearly shows that "Jerry was, a preferential child sex offender" who accessed all of his victims with the aide and assistance of the State of Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Judiciary (in having kids assigned to him via Adoption, Foster Parenting, etc... while the court/law-required evaluations on both sides of the equation were done by TSM/Raykovitz & Crew), Direct Pennsylvania Agencies whose mandate was the Welfare & Protection of these children, State-Licensed Charities and Group Homes, etc., etc., etc.... But it's all the fault of PSU Football....and sanctioning PSU & PSU Football while not lifting a finger to investigate the PRIMARY CARE Agencies and Entities UNDER WHOSE CARE & CUSTODY these children were under is going to "protect these kids for the future", don't you know??? You can't make up the absurd and ridiculous bull$hit and nonsense you trolls and scumbag "Defenders and Champions of the Corrupt" spout as "righteousness", "justice" and "sanity"!!!
Last edited:
First, I have laid out my thoughts on this story in detail in bullet lists for you (and others) several times. Do a search if you care enough.
Now just a couple of points, not meant to be all inclusive because most of what you posted is obvious....
If you stuck to those points in your posts, few would disagree with you much.
I believe there is something seriously wrong with Sandusky, and he is guilty of enough CSA to be where he belongs. His trial was highly questionable in many respects, but I believe if he ever did get another trial the outcome would again leave him behind bars for the rest of his life.
I couldn't care less about JZ. I do firmly believe some victims inside and outside of those who testified at the trial are opportunistic liars.
Where you really miss the point by miles is when you go off on the blame thing. It's not about sharing the blame with Raykovitz and every other party that's more culpable than the 3 PSU administrators who were hung by the OAG in misdemeanor effigy, it's about figuring out what really happened and solving the actual problem. Not a single kid now or in the future has been protected by what happened over the last 5 years to CSS. Figuring out what went wrong at the charity that was responsible for the perp and the victims for decades had a FAR greater likelihood of getting to the root of the problem.
Let me add since you left him off...I am among those who feel Mike McQueary is either a coward or a liar or some combination of the two. He either left a child being subjected to "some type of intercourse" in the custody of the adult perpetrator (I don't believe that is what was going on that particular night), or he embellished what he saw under oath a decade later to serve the OAG. There is no in between for me. Was it because of pressure from the OAG? More concern over his career than kids? Gambling? Pics of his Johnson? I have no idea and never said I did. You call him low hanging fruit. I call him the linchpin to turning the Sandusky scandal into the Joe Paterno and PSU shitstorm for the OAG.
Some people here like to discuss that stuff. Is anything ever going to get illuminated from those discussions? I seriously doubt it. Neither will anything be solved by your rants about Sandusky's overall guilt. That problem was solved 5 years ago.
You can't ignore the lack of verifiable facts supporting that conclusion, nor 'the end justifies the means' mentality of the prosecution. Logic suggests that if JS was the monster he was made out to be, the OAG wouldn't have had to cut the corners it did.
The most obvious example to me is the janitor case. No victim. No witness testimony. No report of a crime. No established date for the crime (Try coming up with an alibi?). No physical evidence of a crime. Yet JS was convicted on 5 counts based on hearsay testimony! And we have since learned that the actual witness told police that Sandusky was not the man he saw!
BTW, did Clemente know that? Did he know there was a statement from V2 that emphatically claimed no abuse occurred that night or ever?
The people who want this to all go away refuse to acknowledge the incongruities and outright contradictions that have been uncovered since Jerry's verdict was read. I've never said I thought he was innocent, but I'm no longer sure he was guilty of all that he was convicted. Five years ago, I was sure. Today, I'm not. And if he is guilty of some but not all, but a coordinated effort was made to deflect attention away from TSM and its connection to PSU by throwing Joe, C/S/S and the reputation of the football program under the bus, we should know about it and hold people accountable.
No one knew or believed JS was a pedophile. Corbett didn't even want to prosecute. Circumstances changed when Spanier pissed off Corbett and AF's mother threatened to go to the Feds. The Howard Stern "anonymous" email was timed to provide the PSU hook. Once Tommy Boy had Surma on board, JVP was Sweaty Surma's quid pro quo. I'd wager that once the JVP angle led to a media firestorm, even Corbett and his conspirators were stunned at the magnitude. Fina and Corbett eventually tried walking things back on Joe but they had already been exposed for the scum they really are. I've also always suspected that 98 was the real story. Whoever put an end to that investigation, needed to be sure that 01 was the focus.
ps remember when the teary eyed OGBOT tried to sell that they didn't actually fire Joe?
Last edited:
The only thing more curious than being convicted of a crime with no witness, no victim and no date or location is the number of people who would defend it. Not to mention that the crying janitor is on tape denying that the person he saw was Sandusky!
indynittany said:
There are plenty of verifiable facts supporting the conclusion. Travel records, receipts, phone calls, getting caught repeatedly in compromising situations with small children, sometimes naked, Jerry's own words.
indynittany said:
PCSOs aren't "monsters". They are parents, coaches, troop leaders, priests, people who walk amonst you everyday. In fact if you paid any attention to the case itself you would see that Jerry was portrayed as the opposite of a monster. He was big dumb, loving, cuddly, goofy Jer. That's how Jerry manipulated his victims
indynittany said:
That person almost certainly is NOT V2.
indynittany said:
The statistics of child sexual abuse overwhelmingly show that inconsistencies in details rarely mean that a victim is lying outright about the underlying abuse alleged. Even so allowing for some that may be, only 8 actual victims were presented at trial and we know that somewhere upwards of 30 victims who the university settled with. Even allowing that some of these victims are also possibly lying, the evidence in this case overwhelmingly supports his guilt. This also does not include victims who have never come forward. For instance, Ray and I have discovered other people who we feel were likely silenced with hush money PRIOR to the scandal breaking.
You can hold the people accountable for CPS, OAG, political mistakes and/or malfeasance accountable without thinking Jerry is anywhere but where he deserves to be.
I don't mind discussing the stuff, but your rants are no better IMO. That is the kicker...it's ok for you to rant about TSM or MM, but I somehow can't rant on Jerry or JZ. I'm not sure if you realize this, but we share this world. Thanks for the reply.
BTW if MM did such a piss poor job of telling anyone, why in the hell did they discuss DPW at all? Why, why, why would the discuss it or ramifications of not calling DPW if he didn't at least at hint at something wrong? Did it ever occur to you that the CYA could be on the other end too?
Last edited:
None of this has bupkis to do with PROSECUTING THOSE RESPONSIBLE for enabling and abetting Jerry's FRAUDULENT, Philanthropic-/Charitable-BASED via State Imprimatur & Licensing schemes OR Maliciously Prosecuting (i.e., "scapegoating") PSU, PSU Football & PSU Associated Parties via an INTENTIONALLY FALSE & FRAUDULENT Presentment and Indictments!!!
You continue to disgracefully attempt to TAR & FEATHER and impugn anybody who dare points out the REAL PARTIES who ENABLED & ABETTED Sandusky - the VERY SAME PEOPLE who Maliciously Prosecuted PSU and published INTENTIONALLY FRAUDULENT Presentments & Indictments for this purpose to PROTECT & SHIELD the ACTUAL RESPONSIBLE PARTIES who unknowingly via gross-negligence and criminally prosecutable failures AIDED and ABETTED Sandusky via not just a State Licensed Charity, but also State-Administered Adoption, State-Administered Foster Parenting, State-Administered Group Homes, etc...IOW, Direct State Agencies, State Actors, State Contractors AND State-Licensed & -Regulated Entities!!! But all of this CRIMINAL ACTIVITY and outright TYRANNY perpetrated against innocents, PSU and the PSU Community at-large -- including protecting the people actually responsible Sandusky's crimes via their own PROFESSIONAL, Government-Employee CRIMINAL FAILURES!!! -- should just be ignored despite the fact that it was WHOLLY UNNECESSARY, and had absolutely nothing to do with, finding Sandusky Guilty at trial (or evidence of same) if Sandusky is in fact guilty! The reprehensible tyranny and unrighteous Prosecutorial Misconduct, Malicious Prosecution and CRIMINAL ACTIVITY referenced has ZERO to do with Sandusky's "guilt or innocence" - NOTHING, NADA, ZERO, ZILCH you fargging blockhead!
Last edited:
This viewpoint and its propagators are the clear "voices of sanity" and maturity according to none other than LaJolla Ly'in....go figure!
BTW, who knew that LaJolla Ly'in was Bernie McCue's BWI screen-name???
When you can't make sense, you have to make things up. I get it BODE, but it's pretty damn weak even by your delusional standards. Then again there is a strong rumor as to why you are so against child predators being prosecuted. That is why you take timeouts and change handles every so often....it makes sense. I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt, but it appears you and Jerry are one in the same.
The difference is I dont rant about the stuff that interests me (what really happened along the chain of PSU's involvement in this case from McQueary through Raykovitz, etc) inside of threads about whether Sandusky is a pedophile or not. I just assumed this thread was about the "political hit job at Penn State".
And as to your other question...At the time of the emails they had received by all accounts, except McQueary's a decade later, a vague report and were formulating their plan. They hadn't even put step one into action. They had all options on the table so of course notifying an agency was one of them depending on what they learned. Ultimately they made the unfortunate decision to trust Raykovitz to be competent as the head of a children's charity. Sounds really crazy on their part doesn't it? In hindsight, that was a big and unfortunate mistake. McQueary didn't have to CYA if he really believed Sandusky was raping a child that night, he just needed to call the police (with a nudge from his Dad, Mother, Dranov, Bueller, or anybody else he told).
Incidentally, I have a somewhat serious idea for you. Start a thread about what a monster Jerry Sandusky is. Maybe even use a poll to kick the tread off. Is Jerry Sandusky a true pedophile or not? See who takes the other side and slug it out for days if need be. I suspect you won't get many takers, but I could obviously be wrong. You will have the side benefit of me not participating in the thread, because that topic isn't interesting to me in the slightest at this point. Just trying to be helpful.
The massive holes and inconsistencies in your arguments and supposed logic as an "expert" would be amusing if they weren't so sad in their clear purpose to DEFEND the criminally corrupt OAG and Pennsylvania Government (and the politicians who wield its powers and authority in a tyrannical, self-serving fashion rather than in pursuit of the "public good").
You state in your final paragraph: "The statistics of child sexual abuse overwhelmingly show that inconsistencies in details rarely mean that a victim is lying outright about the underlying abuse alleged.", but out of the other side of your insanely hypocritical mouth earlier in the post you say this to discredit THE ONLY PARTY ON RECORD who came forward to authorities and identified himself as "Victim 2" in the Presentment (and has been paid by "Victim's Fund" as Victim 2): "That person almost certainly is NOT V2." based solely on the prosecutors saying there were inconsistencies in his story, which were MINOR compared to inconsistencies of other supposed-victim's stories that the prosecution went with despite the inconsistencies?!?! You are a classic defender of a clearly corrupt OAG, who engage willy-nilly in criminal behavior no different than the alleged criminal, via your "I'll have my cake and eat it too" argumentation and logic. Pathetic.
Great theory, but if no laws were broken and nothing had occurred at all, why talk about the DPW or even TSM which isn't a reporting agency. They informed TSM as a courtesy. TSM is not where you report sexual abuse nor was that it's primary mission ever. You would hope the leader of TSM would say...hmmm...pretty odd that he was doing this and act on it, but he did not. Why would you even call TSM if MM didn't tell them anything. So they called Jack and thought about DPW, but MM didn't tell them anything at all. Nothing at all. Every good conspiracy theory needs that fall guy.
Did they tell Jack this is your problem and investigate it? I missed those emails, but maybe they exist. Did they say you're the mandatory reporter so we are off the hook? Did they try and present that as a defense...EVER? Hmmmm, something just isn't adding up there.
I don't need your help nor have I asked for it. You can do what Bob and a few other whiny babies do...put me on ignore as a different opinion scares you. Nothing I said about MM, TSM, or CSS is written in stone any more than your opinions....but you can't handle hearing it.
So funny. "Anything" is your word not mine. If he didn't tell them "anything" at all they wouldn't even have been discussing what to do. I wish I could make the world more black and white for you.
Nothing scary about you LaJolla. Consider the thread idea an olive branch.
If you honestly think them telling TSM or Jack was as good as reporting it...well then...I don't know what to tell you. That is about as PC as I'll be.
Yea, @sshole-boy is now calling me a pedophile and Jerry Sandusky above, because he took umbrage at me pointing out that his "voice of sanity" writings on this board are nearly identical to Bernie McCue's ramblings on those CDT papers, which they unquestionably are - go figure, that he would take umbrage when their views are analogous!?!? He's calling me a pedophile and Sandusky supporter (despite having stated infinite times that I think JS is guilty but it is irrelevant to what is actually being discussed, the "Political Hit Job of Penn State"), because he doesn't like me pointing out the Malicious Prosecution and FRAUDULENT MEANS by which the OAG intentionally damaged PSU and PSU Community with their criminal tyranny, but he's clearly not a troll or a flamer! Good stuff!
I find your post extremely ironic. I will post a complete swag about people's opinions on this board. I would say the following
. A maybe 5% posters think JS could be innocent of his major charges
. B another 25% think while JS is likely guilty of many charges and is where he should be his trial was a clusterf%$&k and because of that there are still many unanswered questions that should be explored.
. C 50% have moved beyond JS and think that C/S/S were railroaded by the OAG and BoT and think many of the factors that led to this crisis [CSA] are still generally in place because the focus has all been misplaced toward C/S/S.
. D then there is the group where I would put you and getmyjive etc. -
. JS is guilty, C/S/S are guilty [not via a plea or a strange verdict but truly guilty by their actions] and should have done more, JVP should have done more. Those are okay positions to have. My beef is that you then make the leap that anyone in group B or C who questions other agencies, explains reasons for accepting a plea [other than guilt] heaven forbid questions the veracity of any victim, or questions the motives of the OAG, somehow then fall into group A. Your fall back is "hail to Ziggy" etc. Then you claim others have a deaf ear. You clearly have blind spot on this issue. Not sure how or why but it is quite obvious.
Ohhhh, you like to toss the stones, call names, and now want to cry foul. LOL, I was on this site before you BODE and I didn't have my crystal ball telling me you would be here in 2017 crying about this crap. I was on long before pnny as well. How come you two are the only ones that have to change handles or go in timeout, yet everyone else is a troll or flamer? Kind of makes me wonder why you can't hold a rational discussions...maybe because you never really wanted one.
Birds of a feather....are flocking outside!!!!!!!
Fair opinion, but you don't seem to have issues with anyone calling out the other side of the fence there too? Jive is a troll...BS. He's been a PSU fan and on the online community forever. Him daring to say he thinks those 3 possibly knew more isn't some crazy opinion...well maybe here...but a lot of people do feel that way...right or wrong. I don't see you getting upset by those calling him out or shouting him down? How come? Tell me where the irony is there?
I'm far from innocent, outspoken, and will state my mind...but I won't make things up about people or attack them outside of this site like pnny apparently has. Like I just said BODE is just like JS...TIC, he that is the same man making things up about me all day long. I'm Bernie McCue...wrong. I'm a lawyer...wrong. Not to mention his constant profanity with anyone not seeing things his way. When you start calling those people out too...I'll be more open to the criticism. I have yet to see anyone say to BODE or PNNY...see the line and stop crossing it. Why is that?
Last edited:
247 has some really fantastic mods. Just incredible, IMO.
Telling the football coach the next day isn't the same as reporting "it" that night to police either is it? But the earwitness and his posse thought it was a fine way to report "some sort of intercourse" I guess.
Telling Raykovitz should have been the same as reporting "it". In hindsight it wasn't, because Raykovitz told Jerry to put his swimming trunks on and head down to the Hilton. Raykovitz actions, while I don't think sinister, were pure incompetence and negligence.
Do I wish CSS would have reported to a state agency in 2001? Of course I do. They didn't and that proved to be a big mistake in hindsight.
@ssboy chooses yet again to simply ignore THE FACT that Mike McQueary himself stated to the "30th SWIGJ" (the one he, as well as TC & GS, testified to - they didn't testify to the "Grand Jurors" of the "33rd SWIGJ") that he DID NOT "see" or "eyewitness" what corrupt OAG alleges in their "33rd SWIGJ Presentment" and Indictments -- it would therefore be IMPOSSIBLE for him to give "an eyewitness account" of such a crime to JVP, Curley, Schultz, his father, Dr. Dranov OR ANYONE ELSE! What do you know, the testimony of his father, Dr. Dranov, JVP, Curley and Schultz are consistent with McQueary's testimony to the "30th SWIGJ" that while McQueary said many things, and rambled on a good deal about obtuse speculations and conjectures which he found upsetting, the one thing he CONSISTENTLY NEVER DID was identify himself as having SEEN and EYEWITNESSED any CRIMINAL ASSAULT despite being asked directly and point blank if he DID SEE or EYEWITNESS such things -- he left everybody he spoke with under the belief that he DID NOT in fact see and eyewitness anything criminal, let alone "anal rape", to the point where Dr. Dranov even states that their entire discussion was specifically about this TOPIC and based on everything McQueary said - both Dr. Dranov and McQueary's father came away with the belief that Police did not need to be called regarding the incident (i.e., what Mike told them he "saw" and "eyewitnessed" DID NOT amount to a crime, let alone the "anal rape" of a child!) and that McQueary should go to sleep and initiate an HR Report with his employment supervisor the next day! IOW, McQueary went to JVP to make an ADMINISTRATIVE HR REPORT TO HIS EMPLOYER based on the FACTUAL RECORD - he did not go to JVP to file a "Criminal Police Report", nor did McQueary believe he was an "eyewitness" to a crime as not only his own testimony to the "30th SWIGJ" makes quite clear, but his father's and Dr. Dranov's testimony - the first people he spoke with while THE INCIDENT WAS STILL IN-PROGRESS - CONFIRM that McQueary never reported seeing a criminal sexual assault, let alone "anal rape", which is SPECIFICALLY why they recommended that the calling of Police and Law Enforcement Authorities was UNNECESSARY and Mike should simply report it to his EMPLOYER via his DIRECT HR SUPERVISOR at his earliest convenience, but probably the next day if possible!
Again, because what McQueary actually testified to the "30th SWIGJ" (i.e., he wasn't the "eyewitness" the State was claiming he was), confirmed by everyone else he spoke with in 2001, is INCONVENIENT to @ssboy's "preferred made-up facts", he simply chooses to IGNORE THEM and continue to claim that McQueary all these people that he was an "eyewitness" to a crime, which is an OUTRIGHT FABRICATION (i.e., a LIE) according to none other than McQueary himself who has stated that he NEVER told ANYONE he was an EYEWITNESS to these things!!!
MM didn't tell anyone anything, but yet they old felt the need to go upstream from them. You got it. MM didn't sink JS alone...his actual victims did that in a court of law. I'm fine with how that turned out. The collateral damage to Joe and PSU caused by the BoT was sheer stupidity, but that doesn't mean I need to fight for a new trial. Sorry...not going to happen on this end. Nobody outside of this site thinks Jerry's charity is a proper reporting agency...well because for one they are a charity and don't deal with sexual abuse. Maybe if they didn't sink themselves with their own emails...they could have played that card...but that isn't what really happened.
Your need to go to profanity 100% of the time merely shows you have zero will power and are prone to fly off the handle. Maybe you think it's a good look or maybe you just weren't taught how to engage people. I can see getting heated every now and then, but you and pnny are lunatics. If you only really were this outraged and wrote those rants to people in the system that could make a change...oh well.
Last edited:
Couple clarifications....
- McQueary testified he DID NOT eyewitness criminal assault to the Grand Jurors he testified before, the "30th SWIGJ" - not the Grand Jurors of the "33rd SWIGJ". McQueary then gave sworn testimony "at trial" consistent with this "30th SWIGJ" testimony and not only abjectly stating he was NOT an EYEWITNESS to the crime claimed by the OAG in the "33rd SWIGJ Presentment", but furthermore NEVER told ANYONE he was an "eyewitness" to the OAG's claimed crimes. Again, McQueary's own sworn testimony, including to the "30th SWIGJ", was the he was NOT an eyewitness to the alleged crime, not that he "was an eyewitness" as claimed by the OAG -- IOW, McQueary's own testimony is EXCULPATORY in regards to 100% of the Indictments brought against C/S/S, the DIAMETRIC OPPOSITE of the "Probable Cause Direct Evidence" that the OAG fraudulently claimed MM's testimony was!
- McQueary has consistently said that he THOUGHT "some sort of intercourse" was going on despite not ACTUALLY SEEING IT based upon the noises he originally heard when walking in the building and the body positioning of the parties that he saw extremely briefly via two quick glances in a mirror from a distance. But again, clearly stated that this was CONJECTURE on his part as he didn't actually see what The State alleged he "saw" and "eyewitnessed" in their Presentment and Indictments. IOW, he CONTRADICTED the State's claim and provided EXCULPATORY evidence, not "Direct Evidence Eyewitness Testimony" suppoting the State's claim. This is further confirmed by the State then lamely asking him to "qualify" his speculation as if this changes it from conjecture to "eyewitness" testimony - and even then, McQueary's very tepid response was only that he was "relatively sure" in regards to the quality of his conjecture; whatever that is supposed to mean...but clearly is not "eyewitness testimony".
- In other words, the State's claim is that McQueary told JVP, Curley and Schultz that he "saw" and "eyewitnessed" a crime and wanted to make a criminal report to them DESPITE the fact that this claim by the OAG in their "33rd SWIGJ Presentment" and Indictments DIRECTLY CONFLICTS with the ACTUAL TESTIMONY of not only McQueary to the "30th SWIGJ" (and subsequently at trial), but also conflicts with the testimony of all other parties that McQueary spoke with about the incident in 2001!!!
- Providing obtuse ramblings and indecipherable conjecture when your asked simply what you actually saw, IS NOT making an "eyewitness report of seeing anal rape sexual assault" and it is laughable for @ssboy to continually claim it is!!!
Last edited:
Now McQueary telling them "anything" is the standard for whether he did what the OAG claimed he did in their FRAUDULENT "33rd SWIGJ Presentment" and Indictments (i.e., that McQueary went to PSU to make a "Criminal Report" [a proven lie based on both McQueary's Father's and Dr. Dranov's sworn testimony] of "seeing" and "eyewitnessing" the anal-rape of a 10 year old child and IN FACT made a report that he "saw" and "eyewitnessed" the anal-rape sexual assault of a 10 year old child on the night of Friday 2/9/2001). This is what the "33rd SWIGJ Presentment" and it's Indcitments stated that the OAG would prove beyond any reasonable doubt you fargging @sshat - where specifically did I ever say that Mike McQueary never made a report of any kind.....never spoke with his father or Dr. Dranov about making an HR Report to his work supervisor rather than call police, etc....???? Never said that McQueary didn't make a Report - said he didn't make the REPORT YOU ARE CLAIMING according none other than HIMSELF, let alone both his Dad and Dr. Dranov, you fargging douche-bag who continually attempts to put bull$hit thoughts and words in other's mouths that they never uttered!
McQueary went to JVP to make an HR Report about the incident, NOT A POLICE REPORT OF EYEWITNESSING A CRIME, according to none other than McQueary himself and both of the people he spoke with while the incident was still IN-PROGRESS, his Father and Dr. Dranov both CONFIRM that calling police was DISCUSSED and eschewed in favor of making an HR Report via his work supervisor based on what Mike REPORTED TO THEM!!!
Last edited:
Interesting take for sure from Mr. Cray, Cray. I'm not putting any words in your mouth where as you do it constantly. I never said anything about ANAL rape, but carry on as if I said that even one time. In fact in 25 pages of this thread, the first time I mentioned it was in this post. So once again you feel the need to LIE to make a point. It kills your credibility when you LIE and make things up. You can kick and scream like the little bit*h that you are, it does't phase me at all. I think it's cute.
Things Zigs alleged V2 got wrong:
1. Date of incident - while Mike also got this wrong he equivocated a bit in testimony. Alleged V2 states he was certain of the date.
2. Locker Room layout - it isn't even close. he basically drew a rectangle
3. Date of when Jerry said he may be contacted - again he was off by 3-4 weeks which may be allowable if not for his absolute certainty of the date of the incident
4. When the last time was that he worked out with Jerry on campus - again he says clearly he worked out until 2002 while a member of the WB football team. Again not a problem except he now ties his FB career in HS to the date of the episode. So either he was lying about his FB career or about the date of the incident, or Jerry continued to bring kids on campus in violation of Tim's decree.
5. He says he quit TSM in 6th grade, but I have posted proof he stayed with the program until at least 9th grade.
6. Jerry had multiple contacts with this person in the months leading up to the GJP release.
I would also add that Jerry masterfully duped the wise sage Zig here. Jerry planted this person for Zig to find in the prison interview. He dropped enough clues that he knew Zig would chase down without ever naming him. Likely knowing the wonderboy Zig would out the kid for him.
Of course I also never said he isn't a victim, I said he isn't "victim 2". So no, there is no contradiction in any of my post. Try to follow, or grab a valium.
Because a man and a boy alone in a shower is a lawsuit waiting to happen. All it takes is an accusation.
The more obvious question is why are there zero references to the boy in any of the written notes and emails related to this incident?
If they were told of a sexual assault and relayed that report to JR, I would agree with you. Since they weren't, I would argue they did what they should have done. It was JR's professional, moral and legal responsibility to look into the matter more closely.
If you had a complaint about someone you had a working relationship with abusing their privileges, would you go to LE or to the entity you were partnered with?
For the 3rd time, Tim didn't go to Jack to report child sexual abuse. Mike didn't report that to his Dad or Dr. D or they would have taken action.
Because they wanted JR's cooperation in preventing a future he said/he said situation in the PSU facilities.
