Posting Guidelines for BWI/McAndrew Board
- Thread starter SteveMasters
- Start date
Don't do as I have done....and that includes posting under a moniker that closely resembles this board's namesake. Who knew a simple underscore could cause so much trouble? 
Nice photo of McAndrew.Yes, there are guidelines. You may wish to refer to page 437 in the Unofficial, Official McAndrew Guideline Book. Look specifically at Paragraph 57, Subparagraph 10B, as modified by Subparagraph 2A (subsection 4D).
Are you giving any odds? PCRAs are notoriously difficult to win. It will be very easy for Judge Cleland to dismiss the PCRA out of hand. If there ever was a case that deserves a second look, this is the one. IMO, if Judge Cleland has any objectivity, he will order hearings into to merits of the PCRA and whether a new trial is warranted. The Commonwealth's response to the PCRA will be a very good indicator if the PCRA has any traction.
I honestly don't know. I believe he engaged in some questionable behavior, but I have not seen convincing evidence that it was criminal.
I am 100% sure that his trial was not fair. IMO, because the trial was not fair, the results of the trial are not reliable enough to make any conclusions about guilt or innocence. I would like to see a new, fair trial where any and all accusers tell their stories and an unbiased jury makes a call of whether or not the prosecution has shown beyond a reasonable doubt that crimes were committed. At that time, I would be in a much better position of knowing if JS is innocent or guilty.
If you want to stop talking about this, then please stop responding to any of the threads.
I am not so sure that JS is where he belongs. I believe he was unfairly convicted. If he gets a new trial, and I realize that is a big if, I believe there is a non-trivial chance that he will be exonerated.
Methink you doth protest too much. If you don't want to discuss whether or not JS got a fair trial, then don't. How am I harming you by stating my opinion. I think you are upset because you don't have any counter arguments to the case the trial was unfair and that you are concerned with what might come out of a new trial.
You are welcome to your opinion, but I respectfully disagree with it. I have a different view on the credibility of the accusers and am not convinced that any of the accuser testimony stands on it own. None of the victims made contemporaneous reports of sexual assaults and their stories have all changed over time to better fit the circumstances. Many hired lawyers before they spoke with police and a lot used repressed memory therapy to recover memories of the sexual assaults. They all had financial incentives riding on the outcome of the trial and all have been rewarded handsomely.
Are you defending the OAG's shenanigans?
Do you think it was all right for the Grand Jury Presentment to falsely state that Mike McQueary witnessed a sexual assault in the shower?
Do you think it was ok for the OAG to leak Grand Jury details in March 2011 to Sara Ganim in order to find more victims?
Are you fine with the suggestive interviewing techniques that Corporal Leiter used with v4 before v4 gave his Grand Jury testimony?
Do you think that it was no problem for the prosecution to make a knowingly false statement that v2 was "unknown to us...known to God but not to us"?
Are you thick? The answer is Yes. Why don't you really try and save Jerry where it matters? You really think some fairy princess is going to come in and save Jerry and the world will owe PSU some huge apology. You're delusional and blaming the OAG and the judicial system for the conviction of a serial pedophile illustrates my point. Yes they screwed some things up, but the bottom line is this wasn't just made up just to get Jerry. How many times in your life have you been investigated for being a pedophile? If the answer is greater than zero, it explains a lot. Another good site for Jerry's defense and yourself could be NAMBLA. They'll probably get your back.
Last edited:
Wow. The BoT certainly committed mistakes ranging from negligence to malfeasance (arguably) beginning March 2011 that made a very bad situation even worse, but I don't recall any BoT members molesting any kids in 2001 nor failing to investigate Sandusky after McQueary made his report.
And this was Penn State's fault why? Again, good job stearing blame from second mile, child services to Penn State. You have BOT written all over you.
JS didn't ruin Joe Paterno, Penn State's name. The BOT did with their actions starting in NOV 2011.
Please explain how his trial was not fair? He was FOUND GUILTY ON 48 COUNTS. If it was 1 or 2 counts I can see this argument, but not fair on 48 counts is pretty hard to argue.
I think you are thick for not seeing the original trial as being a patently unfair trial masquerading as a tool of justice. Jerry doesn't need a fairy princess, he needs a good lawyer. Al Lindsay seems to be head and shoulders better than Joe Amendola, but I don't know if he is good enough to win a new trial.
In the PCRA, Al Lindsay has made a compelling case that Sandusky’s constitutional rights were violated, that he had ineffective counsel and that he did not receive anything close to a fair trial. The Grand Jury Presentment that Mike McQueary witnessed a sex act in the shower was false and when combined with the unjustified firing of Joe Paterno created a jury pool that essentially had already convicted Sandusky. Joe Amendola and Karl Rominger were very ineffective in their defense as they were totally unprepared for trial. They should have walked away from the case when their requests for continuances were denied and they realized that they were unable to offer a defense that their client deserved.
Defense counsel provided Sandusky with terrible advice and made several key mistakes:
1) Advised against challenging the v1 charges when first indicated and against having a preliminary hearing that could have exposed more of the accuser's stories
2) Promised the jury that Sandusky would testify and then walked it back
3) Were totally unprepared for cross examining the accusers and other witnesses as exemplified by not interviewing accusers before trial and Amendola asking Rominger to cross examine McQueary with only thirty minutes notice
4) Advised giving Bob Costas interview without any preparation before interview
5) Mismanaged v2 and v8 charges by not introducing exculpatory statements
6) Ineffectively challenging the deplorable behavior of the OAG for their acts of prosecutorial misconduct and other misdeeds
7) Inexplicably answered none at appeal hearing to question on what items had been discovered after trial that would have altered their conduct at trial
Lindsay has documented these six instances of likely prosecutorial misconduct that should be investigated:
1) The false Grand Jury Presentment that Mike McQueary witnessed a sex act in the shower
2) The illegal OAG grand jury leak in March 2011 to Sara Ganim in their quest to identify more accusers
3) The OAG investigators suggesting testimony to v4 after he already made a statement and before he went before the grand jury (this was taped unbeknownst to investigators)
4) The OAG making a knowingly false statement when they said v2 was "unknown to us...known to God but not to us."
5) Using Sandusky's constitutional right to remain silent against him in closing arguments
6) Charging Spanier, Curley, and Schultz with criminal offenses when they apparently have no intentions of prosecuting them so they wouldn't be defense witnesses
If the State had such an air tight case, why did they have to resort to these very questionable sleazy tactics? Jerry Sandusky did not get a fair trial. The question of his guilt is unresolved. If Judge Cleland has a shred of objectively, he will order hearings into whether the issues identified in the PCRA have merit and whether or not Jerry Sandusky deserves a new trial.
So you think a retrial would mean he would get off of 48 counts of child sex abuse?
I can't believe you want tax payers to pay for a retrial of some sexual predator.
I can't believe you want tax payers to pay for a retrial of some sexual predator.
this reminds me of the rules of the house from Melvin in the Middle:
Mi Casa Su Casa..here are the rules for the house; first, there are no rules...second, get your damn feet of the couch.
Mi Casa Su Casa..here are the rules for the house; first, there are no rules...second, get your damn feet of the couch.
Nate, if you can explain how the BoT could have prevented Sandusky from being indicted and prevented Curley and Schultz from being indicted within 24 hours of the GJP leak, then you can lay all the blame for the damage to Penn State's reputation at the feet of the BoT. The indictments of Curley and Schultz is what screamed "Cover up!!" to the public at large. Penn State's reputation was sealed with most of the public the moment Curley and Schultz were indicted.
I didn't watch ESPN that week. I watched ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, etc. We were the lead story beginning Saturday night and for each of the next 5-7 days. The anchors and "reporters" were blasting PSU at every opportunity. It seemed like a competition for which network could express the most moral indignation and outrage That the BoT went radio silent for five days and then botched the press conference Wednesday night certainly made things worse, and the Freeh Report eight months later sealed the deal for anyone in the public who held a sliver of doubt, but the die was cast November 4 and 5. Frank Noonan saying at the Linda Kelly press conference that Paterno should have done more poured more fuel on the fire and I suppose that the BoT should have gagged Noonan somehow.
This is not a defense of the BoT, it's a confident assertion that the PR fallout was going to be very damaging no matter what the BoT did. Incredibly, Surma and crew made it even worse. The public doesn't care about the BoT, TSM, C&YS, DPW, etc., or any BoT decisions in 2011 and 2012. The public cares about decisions made by Penn State leadership in 2001.
I won't post anymore in this thread because I feel I'm hijacking the subject of BWI Board rules.
I didn't watch ESPN that week. I watched ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, etc. We were the lead story beginning Saturday night and for each of the next 5-7 days. The anchors and "reporters" were blasting PSU at every opportunity. It seemed like a competition for which network could express the most moral indignation and outrage That the BoT went radio silent for five days and then botched the press conference Wednesday night certainly made things worse, and the Freeh Report eight months later sealed the deal for anyone in the public who held a sliver of doubt, but the die was cast November 4 and 5. Frank Noonan saying at the Linda Kelly press conference that Paterno should have done more poured more fuel on the fire and I suppose that the BoT should have gagged Noonan somehow.
This is not a defense of the BoT, it's a confident assertion that the PR fallout was going to be very damaging no matter what the BoT did. Incredibly, Surma and crew made it even worse. The public doesn't care about the BoT, TSM, C&YS, DPW, etc., or any BoT decisions in 2011 and 2012. The public cares about decisions made by Penn State leadership in 2001.
I won't post anymore in this thread because I feel I'm hijacking the subject of BWI Board rules.
Last edited:
If he gets a new trial, I absolutely believe that he would be exonerated on some or all of the original counts. Off the top, the v8 counts are ludicrous. There was no victim, no eye witness, and no date presented at trial for these counts. In the PRCA, Lindsay presents a statement from the alleged eyewitness, Jim Calhoun, where Calhoun states that he didn't believe it was Sandusky sexually assaulting the young boy (paragraph 365 on page 85).
You're insane.
There is no judge, jury, lawyer that is going to clear a sexual predator on 48 counts of Sexual Child Abuse. NONE.
He may get cleared on a few counts, but 48 come on.
I worry about you, you are way to close to this and I am starting to wonder why.
The BOT did more damage to Penn State, its reputation, and its name then anyone.
You are welcome to your own opinion. It is not clear to me that Sandusky is a sexual predator. Since the first trial was not fair IMO, he deserves a new trial. I believe there should be a retrial and let the chips fall where they may.
You can think anything you want. I really don't care
What is wrong with my stating my opinions in a forum that discusses issues related to Penn State football on a topic that is inextricably linked to Penn State football. The issue of whether or not Jerry Sandusky got a fair trial is not going away any time soon. If you are not interested in this topic, then please don't comment. If the BWI moderators don't believe this is an appropriate topic for this forum, then so be it.
I hate these threads on this board because it paints the entire board as being obsessed and 100% focused on trying to find that one in a trillon chance that this whole nightmare will go away. The judicial system will work this out without you trying to find a picture of somebody tying Jerry's shoelaces together as he entered the courtroom.
I believe this is more than a one in trillion shot in the dark. Something in this whole story stinks. The best way to get to the bottom of it is to find out exactly what happened. At this time we don't know what exactly happened. IMO, a new trial will go a long way in determining what exactly happened.
This crap needs to be addressed by the folks running this board. It has been ignored by them for far too long.
I left the free board for a while and came back to this mess. Lately they delete it, but Dottie aka Steve starts up a new thread again.
Thing is, who cares what someone posts. It's not required reading for anyone.
Because its embarrassing to the rest of this board
If the testimony of numerous victims and a third party eye witness who saw what he believed to be Sandusky molesting a child cannot convince you, then nothing will. If your standards of guilt were the bar for putting child molesters in jail, nobody would ever get convicted for child molestation. You want a result so bad that you are unwilling to see the truth that is smacking you in the face.
Last edited:
If people are complaining so much, it must have hit a nerve. I don't understand why people are so upset at me for expressing my opinions. It seems their response to a differing opinion is to advocate censorship.
There is a lot of false outrage on the interwebs. A lot of "discussions" on the anonymous interwebs amount to shouting the loudest, often missing or ignoring the other person's point completely.
You are welcome to your opinion. IMO, the credibility of the victims/accusers vary. I would very much like to hear testimony from the survivors/accusers in a new fair trial to see if their accusations hold water beyond a reasonable doubt. If they do, then Sandusky should face the music. I have zero tolerance for perpetrators of CSA.
Last edited:
You have bought into a false narrative. MM did not witness a sexual assault in the shower. The Freeh Report is a farce. Curley, Schultz, and Spanier will be exonerated. Jerry Sandusky did not receive a fair trial. If Judge Cleland is at all objective, he will order hearings into the merits of the PCRA.
If your fringe views and posts go unchallenged on this board because everyone is tired of talking about it, it paints a picture of a Penn State Community that believes Jerry Sandusky is innocent and deserves a new trial. This image is exactly what the PSU haters want others to think. Thus, I encourage the board monitors to delete your fringe posts immediately so we can get back to discussing what this primary purpose of this board is about, football.
Having to read these threads and respond to them sickens me and makes my experience on this board much less enjoyable. Moderators should be deleting these types of threads immediately.
Please tell me what is so embarrassing about an honest difference of opinion. I may be in the minority, but I am not alone and I am not necessarily wrong.
I don't believe my views are fringe. They may be minority, but they are not extreme. I have gotten a fair amount of support for my opinions on this board from people who have been following this story very closely for a considerable length of time.
Similar threads
