Prosecutors Object to Ex-Penn State Administrators Request for Pre-Trial Appeal
- Thread starter step.eng69
- Start date
So paraphrasing you're saying once we know who you are we'll wish you weren't around? That's pretty much decided for most on here no matter the outcome of any legal proceeding.
No, just someone who has some idea of what is coming, and has seen the reaction of some people to it.
You will even note the irony of it when it comes out.
I neither confirm nor deny anything about my identity, except that I am one of the alumni. I think it would come out by the time the case goes to court. (And I said that prior to starting to the trial being scheduled.)
I could never have posted here, and you would still not like it.
Last edited:
Regarding the trial, why would your identity matter one way or the other? If you know things we don't know then good for you, I guess. You're acting like the verdict is a foregone conclusion but that's not how a trial works. Unless, of course, the whole thing is rigged and you have knowledge of that.
Rigged is such a harsh word to use in describing our courts of justice in PA. Maybe judicial manipulation is more appropriate in that it gives a more respectful tenor or characterization of The Honorable (place name here).
I reserve the right to decide what is ironic, and what isn't.
And dude, we know what's coming, and so do you. You aren't here to perform pre-trauma counseling, after all.
Are you saying you are one of the A9? If so, I call BS (based on how you and Anthony have interacted). If you are saying you are merely an alumnus, congrats. Me too.
Also, why would the start of the trial have any impact on a message board (i.e. making your identify known) unless your posting here have been subject to a subpoena?
No, I am saying that am that large group of Penn State alumni. I attended and graduated from Penn State. I am not claiming to be on the Board.
Well, with me, they didn't need a subpoena.
You only need a subpoena if you decline to give information that you have.Respectfully, neither one of us knows it all, but I know parts that are not public as of yet.
Wensilver made a comment about not wanting to taint the jury pool. When that pool is filled, figuratively, I'll dive in.
To an extent, I am here, voluntarily, to try to keep fellow alumni from making Penn State look bad.
No, I'm saying that the information will change things.
I choose not to confirm or deny my identity until after the trial is underway (or if the case is dismissed).
Last edited:
No, I am saying that am that large group of Penn State alumni. I attended and graduated from Penn State. I am not claiming to be on the Board.
Well, with me, they didn't need a subpoena.
Respectfully, neither one of us knows it all, but I know parts that are not public as of yet.
Wensilver made a comment about not wanting to taint the jury pool. When that pool is filled, figuratively, I'll dive in.
To an extent, I am here, voluntarily, to try to keep fellow alumni from making Penn State look bad.
I imagine if you took a vote here, we'd turn down the offer of your help.
He's about a turd on the walk, nothing more. The guy is full of it, like Jockstrap.
No, I am saying that am that large group of Penn State alumni. I attended and graduated from Penn State. I am not claiming to be on the Board.
Well, with me, they didn't need a subpoena.
Respectfully, neither one of us knows it all, but I know parts that are not public as of yet.
Wensilver made a comment about not wanting to taint the jury pool. When that pool is filled, figuratively, I'll dive in.
To an extent, I am here, voluntarily, to try to keep fellow alumni from making Penn State look bad.
So just to be clear, you are bragging about being a PSU alumnus? Because there are so few of us here? I'm confused.
And you are further implying that you volunteered information about the CSS case that is bad for CSS? I'll take you at your word that your volunteered info to the OAG. I strongly suspect whatever you volunteered will have no bearing on the case. Maybe I'm wrong, but if you are really the key player you pretend to be, you wouldn't spend all day on this message board.
OUR MESSIAH!!!!!!!!No, I am saying that am that large group of Penn State alumni. I attended and graduated from Penn State. I am not claiming to be on the Board.
Well, with me, they didn't need a subpoena.
Respectfully, neither one of us knows it all, but I know parts that are not public as of yet.
Wensilver made a comment about not wanting to taint the jury pool. When that pool is filled, figuratively, I'll dive in.
To an extent, I am here, voluntarily, to try to keep fellow alumni from making Penn State look bad.
No, I'm saying that the information will change things.
I choose not to confirm or deny my identity until after the trial is underway (or if the case is dismissed).
Are you gonna' reveal yourself to all your followers on the "third day"?
LOL
Here's a better idea:
When you "jump in", don't "jump in" to a pool - - - jump in to a wood chipper
Perhaps you are Cynthia Baldwin, on the internet from Turks and Caicos? You're about as believable.
I'm not 'bragging," only explaining my interest.
We will have to see how my information plays out. Or perhaps we have.
I rarely believe message boards, especially this one. The evidence won't play out here.
Ah, I see Barry the balding boob has also responded with his usual lack of substance.
So shall we vote on whether we want this joker's "help" or not?
I vote no.
I vote no.
Nope. I'm worried that you'll sicken me so much that I'll vomit on my keyboard.
Feel free to vomit on your keyboard. It will still have chance to be more accurate that the rest of your posts.
It sounds like you could have worked for one of the Penn State 3 or served in an advisory role. You're making it sound like you came forward late with damaging information that can change the outcome of this case, otherwise they would have taken one of the plea bargains supposedly offered. You say you are here to prevent Penn State from looking bad. I don't see much that can make Penn State look worse than to bring up damaging information regarding former top leadership at this late time. The University has made great strides in salvaging its reputation. Even though the trial would bring some of it to mind again, what we know publicly would likely not cause an uproar against Penn State. You are suggesting otherwise. Why on earth would you wait unless you are a coward?
I see much more, and it is not necessarily illegal.
As for who, how and when, it will become apparent. For now, I will neither confirm or deny any claims of identity.
Well we know you're a tad more literate than #9 was, having seen some of his emails. If you only had substance to go with your incessant typos. Then we'd have something...
IANit:
That avatar is hysterical. I have STD on ignore but I can imagine what crap he is spewing. Come to think of it STD is a perfect acronym for him.
STD is a lonely idiot with no real purpose in life anymore. He thinks we are stupid enough to believe that he came here to provide a public service. As if we were born yesterday.
You want to provide us a public service? Take yourself and your buddies to one of the biggest trees on the mall, and hang yourselves from it. For that, we shall be grateful.
You want to provide us a public service? Take yourself and your buddies to one of the biggest trees on the mall, and hang yourselves from it. For that, we shall be grateful.
You wouldn't know accuracy if it hit you across the eyes with a 2 x 4. Which, if we are lucky, will happen.
Ohhh, another Christmas card I won't be getting.
And, as they said in Forrest Gump, "Stupid is as stupid does." I'll let you posts be the criteria on which you are judged.
When you ignore, you live in ignorance. I guess for you that is easier than reality.
You haven't gotten a Christmas card from a real person in decades. Nobody gives a crap about a loser like you.
I'm sure your parents went down to your basement and gave you one.
(I must admit, I'm starting to enjoy this.)
Anthony has already identified STD as Jonathan Jacobs aka JJ, the infamous Penn Live and CDT troll. I can confirm the posting styles are nearly identical, always trying to get the last word and making the same ridiculous claims that AM isn't v2 because he was positive it was 2002 and that he may have been abused, but he is not v2.
I neither confirm nor deny any questions about my identity at this point.
Oh, BTW, that is also the OAG's claim about Victim 2. Apparently, he also could accurately describe the locker room. That was in Sassano's testimony.
Now, if I were JJ, and I may be, he had been writing on the Gricar disappearance for several years prior to the grand jury being revealed. He would be a position to have found out things about 1998 that were not published. He also wrote a blog for the CDT, so he had some inside contacts.
Of course, he could have told me what was going on, or I could have other connections, or both.
Last edited:
I wasn't asking you for a confirmation or a denial. You are what you are JJ.
No, I am saying that am that large group of Penn State alumni. I attended and graduated from Penn State. I am not claiming to be on the Board.
Well, with me, they didn't need a subpoena.
Respectfully, neither one of us knows it all, but I know parts that are not public as of yet.
Wensilver made a comment about not wanting to taint the jury pool. When that pool is filled, figuratively, I'll dive in.
To an extent, I am here, voluntarily, to try to keep fellow alumni from making Penn State look bad.
No, I'm saying that the information will change things.
I choose not to confirm or deny my identity until after the trial is underway (or if the case is dismissed).
Do you understand that as an alum, you shouldn't be so excited to provide whatever eye-witness testimony you claim to have? You can't wait to "save Penn State embarrassment" by apparently completely showing just how horrible our university is?
Even if you were not an alum, you should be sad about the information you have that would finish bringing down a university.......the past 5 years hasn't been exciting to any of us. And if by some miraculous chance you are correct, very few people on this board will be upset with you (almost everyone wants the truth - there are just varying guesses as to what the truth is.....and a range of opinions as to the magnitude of corruption that has occurred). Why so happy?
While I am enjoying the exchanges, I am not happy about the situation. Hey, what happened, happened. I cannot rewrite what happened. But I can encourage you not to rush into a theory without knowing all the facts.
Your quote:
"Well, with me, they didn't need a subpoena.
You only need a subpoena if you decline to give information that you have."So you are thrilled to tell your story (assuming the smiley face is when you are happy), but you aren't happy about the situation. Hmmm
Your quote:
"Well, with me, they didn't need a subpoena.
So you are thrilled to tell your story (assuming the smiley face is when you are happy), but you aren't happy about the situation. Hmmm
I am happy not to be part of the coverup, and to be one of the few people with a Penn State affiliation to have actually contacted law enforcement.
Now, frankly, I wish that I didn't have the information in the first place and that law enforcement had been contacted in 2001 and had prosecuted in 1998. I wish that Sandusky wasn't a pedophile and not molested anyone.
Also, remember that I consider people like you as the embarrassment to Penn State.
Last edited:
So where was it that you witnessed this dastardly misdeed? On a message board or in a comment section?
Or perhaps on social media?
And if you're really grooving to Bad Girls right now, then just respond with something lame like, "That will be apparent."
Last edited:
