ADVERTISEMENT

Prosecutors Object to Ex-Penn State Administrators Request for Pre-Trial Appeal

I don't get it. Why try now to push this conspiracy charge?....

Could they be afraid that if Sandusky got a new trial he might walk? Keeping these guys bottled up, retains the presumption of guilt. I know you believe Sandusky is guilty, but the case against him was always weak, IMO. If Curley could have testified on his behalf in 2012, he might be free right now.
 
Could they be afraid that if Sandusky got a new trial he might walk? Keeping these guys bottled up, retains the presumption of guilt. I know you believe Sandusky is guilty, but the case against him was always weak, IMO. If Curley could have testified on his behalf in 2012, he might be free right now.

What could Curley have testified to that would help Sandusky?
 
could have testified on his behalf in 2012, he might be free right now.

No - Jack Raykovitz and the Second Mile leadership that had Tim's report could have just as easily passionately defended their charity figurehead & friend of 30 years - perhaps even hard charging, former Philadelphia DA Lynne Abraham could have gone on that stand and explained to the jury, given her investigation, how the Second Mile practiced complete oversight......oh wait.
 
No - Jack Raykovitz and the Second Mile leadership that had Tim's report could have just as easily passionately defended their charity figurehead & friend of 30 years - perhaps even hard charging, former Philadelphia DA Lynne Abraham could have gone on that stand and explained to the jury, given her investigation, how the Second Mile practiced complete oversight......oh wait.

Still waiting for you to start the gofundme.com for the investigation honey.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stufftodo
Hey look, the asshole is still up typing at 2:37 trying to be relevant.


And you are up about 3 hours later reading this board.

Of course, since an additional charge was added, I can why the posts of you and a few others lack substance.
 
You forgot about Courtney and Schultz. Their testimony indicates that:

Courtney: The additional report was not of horseplay.

Schultz: It involved genital contact.
raw


Thanks STD!
 
This is another excellent example of an "alternative fact." This was absolutely not Schultz's testimony.

This nonsense is how I know STD is JJ. JJ used to make the exact same misrepresentation of Schultz's testimony in the CDT and PennLive comments. I've already called him out on this twice now on this site (showing the actual testimony that refutes his claim) and yet he persists...He's obsessed.
 
Last edited:
Freeh could not make any criminal determination. He could not prosecute.

Further, I think Freeh missed something very fundamental. Part of that was because people wouldn't talk to him and he didn't explore the leads.

Shapiro seems to want to get a conviction. Good for him.
"Didn't explore the leads"? That's not the only thing Louie decided not to pursue.
 
This is another excellent example of an "alternative fact." This was absolutely not Schultz's testimony.


That was his impression. Something McQueary told him gave him that impression, or did Schultz go around thinking Sandusky just walked around grabbing boys genitals?

Don't worry, folks, it is coming.


The really funny part is when you all complain about a poster, and don't really want to face the facts.
 
Last edited:
That was his impression. Something McQueary told him gave him that impression, or did Schultz go around thinking Sandusky just walked around grabbing boys genitals?

Don't worry, folks, it is coming.


The really funny part is when you all complain about a poster, and don't really want to face the facts.
The only thing coming is your vanishing act which will occur swiftly as when you first appeared.

45ab9e961eed78eab305007872331b38.gif
 
I can only read everybody's retorts to that pathetic loser, but I would urge you all to take the path of using the Ignore button. It has the added appeal of hopefully causing him to lose wages if he's actually paid for his posting crap.

At any rate, it's good to see them nervous. His very presence defines that. Even as I Ignore it, it pleases me.
 
I can only read everybody's retorts to that pathetic loser, but I would urge you all to take the path of using the Ignore button. It has the added appeal of hopefully causing him to lose wages if he's actually paid for his posting crap.

At any rate, it's good to see them nervous. His very presence defines that. Even as I Ignore it, it pleases me.


He spams this shit all day long on PL about nut grabbing, but apparently doesn't understand "impression" "if" "what if" "would you say" "I don't know" "I don't know what you would call it". He's definitely full of shit and repetitious bullshit that is either meaningless, or irrelevant.

"Andrea DiMorphio"/shuttlesworth does the same thing. Now the 2 Pitt clowns are spamming their bullshit here, apparently enough under the radar not to get banned,
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeR0206
That was his impression. Something McQueary told him gave him that impression, or did Schultz go around thinking Sandusky just walked around grabbing boys genitals?

Don't worry, folks, it is coming.


The really funny part is when you all complain about a poster, and don't really want to face the facts.
I'll be happy to complain about your facts when you start citing some.
giphy-facebook_s.jpg
 
Last edited:
That was his impression. Something McQueary told him gave him that impression, or did Schultz go around thinking Sandusky just walked around grabbing boys genitals?

Don't worry, folks, it is coming.


The really funny part is when you all complain about a poster, and don't really want to face the facts.
If everyone's guilt is such a slam dunk, then all this BS and twisting of information wouldn't be needed. Especially just a month before the trial is supposed to start.
 
I'll be happy to complain about your facts when you start citing some.

A few have been. Diddier did whole thread on it. You and a few others, chose not to look.

I just said that Freeh missed something. It was noted, in the Freeh Report, that someone declined to be interviewed. It someone who was not acting on the advice of counsel and that the OAG had no objection to being interviewed. The Thornburgh Report even noted the individual.

I can only read everybody's retorts to that pathetic loser, but I would urge you all to take the path of using the Ignore button. It has the added appeal of hopefully causing him to lose wages if he's actually paid for his posting crap.

At any rate, it's good to see them nervous. His very presence defines that. Even as I Ignore it, it pleases me.

When you ignore, you live in ignorance. You have just illustrated that point.
 
A few have been. Diddier did whole thread on it. You and a few others, chose not to look.

I just said that Freeh missed something. It was noted, in the Freeh Report, that someone declined to be interviewed. It someone who was not acting on the advice of counsel and that the OAG had no objection to being interviewed. The Thornburgh Report even noted the individual.
Nice diversion. But back to the topic at hand, you incorrectly stated that a charge was added. It was not.
Of course, since an additional charge was added,

You also made an incorrect statement about Schultz' s testimony.
You forgot about Courtney and Schultz. Their testimony indicates that:

Courtney: The additional report was not of horseplay.

Schultz: It involved genital contact.

So again, I'll be happy to complain about your facts when you start citing some.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT