ADVERTISEMENT

Sandusky crap

I don't know enough about all of the cases to say who Sandusky did or did not abuse but having worked with pedophiles for 10 years, I have no doubt he is a pedophile and that he abused innocent kids. Non-pedophiles don't think it's okay to shower with kids, let alone hug them (as he claims) while they're showering together.

He did it. Its disgusting. We will have to forever own it. It is what it is.
I have studied the case extensively and I am convinced that Sandusky didn’t harm any child.

I believe you are referring to the 1998 showering incident. It was thoroughly investigated with no charges filed and Sandusky not indicated.

Please check out the reviews of Mark Pendergast’s book “The Most Hated Man in America,” John Ziegler’s s epic podcast “With the Benefit of Hindsight,” Ralph Cipriano’s big trial blog or John Snedden’s report on his federal investigation that renewed Graham Spanier’s top-level security clearances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Achowalogan
I have studied the case extensively and I am convinced that Sandusky didn’t harm any child.

I believe you are referring to the 1998 showering incident. It was thoroughly investigated with no charges filed and Sandusky not indicated.

Please check out the reviews of Mark Pendergast’s book “The Most Hated Man in America,” John Ziegler’s s epic podcast “With the Benefit of Hindsight,” Ralph Cipriano’s big trial blog or John Snedden’s report on his federal investigation that renewed Graham Spanier’s top-level security clearances.
I swear I’m not going to go down the rabbit hole here. I’ll let you have at it. But, he was charged and convicted of crimes in that incident, just not at the time.
 
"I don't know enough about all of the cases to say who Sandusky did or did not abuse but having worked with pedophiles for 10 years, I have no doubt he is a pedophile and that he abused innocent kids. Non-pedophiles don't think it's okay to shower with kids, let alone hug them (as he claims) while they're showering together.
He did it. Its disgusting. We will have to forever own it. It is what it is"
- LionsandBear
^^^This x 1000. I know there are some on this board who fanatically cling to the "Sandusky being in a shower with an unrelated child is OK" line of thinking. IMO this sentiment seems to stem from the hope that Sandusky being innocent will therefore reverse the Paterno association narrative that grew uncontrollably in 2011. However, the majority (vast, probably?) of people will agree with the bolded statement above and their interest ends there. They don't want to check out Pendergast's book, Ziegler's podcast, Cipriano's blog or Snedden's report. They believe (as did the judicial system that charged and convicted him) that JS was a pedophile and deserves to be in jail.
 
I swear I’m not going to go down the rabbit hole here. I’ll let you have at it. But, he was charged and convicted of crimes in that incident, just not at the time.
Yes, he was wrongly convicted in his 2012 trial. The OAG poisoned the jury pool with their knowingly false grand jury presentment that Mike McQueary witnessed an anal rape.

I ask you the question I have always asked you - which single accuser are you most convinced that Sandusky harmed/abused?

if you are going to put someone away for life, you should have at least 1 iron-clad victim. In this case, there aren’t any.
 
"I don't know enough about all of the cases to say who Sandusky did or did not abuse but having worked with pedophiles for 10 years, I have no doubt he is a pedophile and that he abused innocent kids. Non-pedophiles don't think it's okay to shower with kids, let alone hug them (as he claims) while they're showering together.
He did it. Its disgusting. We will have to forever own it. It is what it is"
- LionsandBear
^^^This x 1000. I know there are some on this board who fanatically cling to the "Sandusky being in a shower with an unrelated child is OK" line of thinking. IMO this sentiment seems to stem from the hope that Sandusky being innocent will therefore reverse the Paterno association narrative that grew uncontrollably in 2011. However, the majority (vast, probably?) of people will agree with the bolded statement above and their interest ends there. They don't want to check out Pendergast's book, Ziegler's podcast, Cipriano's blog or Snedden's report. They believe (as did the judicial system that charged and convicted him) that JS was a pedophile and deserves to be in jail.
Believe what you want to believe. There isn’t any compelling evidence of Jerry’s guilt.

if it is such an open and shut case, why did the prosecution have to resort to a knowingly false grand jury presentment, leaking grand jury materials like a sieve, violating attorney-client privilege and other misconduct?
 
"I don't know enough about all of the cases to say who Sandusky did or did not abuse but having worked with pedophiles for 10 years, I have no doubt he is a pedophile and that he abused innocent kids. Non-pedophiles don't think it's okay to shower with kids, let alone hug them (as he claims) while they're showering together.
He did it. Its disgusting. We will have to forever own it. It is what it is"
- LionsandBear
^^^This x 1000. I know there are some on this board who fanatically cling to the "Sandusky being in a shower with an unrelated child is OK" line of thinking. IMO this sentiment seems to stem from the hope that Sandusky being innocent will therefore reverse the Paterno association narrative that grew uncontrollably in 2011. However, the majority (vast, probably?) of people will agree with the bolded statement above and their interest ends there. They don't want to check out Pendergast's book, Ziegler's podcast, Cipriano's blog or Snedden's report. They believe (as did the judicial system that charged and convicted him) that JS was a pedophile and deserves to be in jail.
Ziegler was in the room when Myers testified!

The media blew it in part because they showed no skepticism about witnesses like Myers, who, going by the transcript, clearly wasn't credible.

Myers, who was on the witness stand for less than an hour before Centre County Senior Judge John M. Cleland, said he couldn't recall or didn't remember 34 times.

Either he was dealing with early-onset Alzheimer's, or else he was lying about everything.

Before Myers was brought in as a witness, Sandusky was sworn in and the judge explained to him that since nobody knew what Myers was going to say, his testimony "could be harmful to your case."

So is this a chance you're willing to take, the judge asked. Sandusky told the judge his mind was made up.

"It is my decision to have Allan Myers testify," Sandusky told the judge.

Myers, a former Marine, testified that he originally got to know the former Penn State assistant football coach through his Second Mile charity.

"Did you think of Mr. Sandusky as a father figure," Alexander Lindsay, Sandusky's lawyer, asked.

"Yes, I did," Myers said.

Myers was shown a picture of himself posing with Sandusky at Myers's wedding. Lindsay asked if Myers remembered when that picture was taken.

"That I do not remember," Myers said.

Lindsay showed Myers a photo of a football camp when Myers served as a coach, and posed for a picture with some boys, along with Sandusky. Lindsay asked Myers how old he was in the photo.

"I don't remember," Myers said. "I don't even know what year that was."

"Well, were you an adult," Lindsay asked. "Do you know that?"

"I wasn't an adult," Myers said.

"Can you give us any estimate of your age," the lawyer asked.

"No," Myers said.

Myers recalled that he lived in Sandusky's home "right after I graduated high school to attend Penn State."

"And I left there because he [Sandusky] was controlling and I left," Myers said. "And that was the end that I ever lived with him."

Sandusky was controlling, Myers said, but he didn't say anything about Sandusky being abusive.

Lindsay asked Myers if he remembered being interviewed on Sept. 20, 2011, by state Trooper James Ellis and Corporal Joseph A. Letter.

"I recall being interviewed," Myers said.

Lindsay gave Myers a copy of the police report and asked if it reflected what he told the state troopers.

"Yes," Myers said, before snapping at the lawyer, "Please don't raise your voice at me."

Lindsay asked if Myers remembered telling the troopers that he and Sandusky had often worked out at the Lasch Building.

"I don't remember that interview," Myer said.

Lindsay asked Myers if he recalled telling the troopers "nothing inappropriate occurred" in the shower with Jerry, and that at "no time were you made to feel uncomfortable."

"I don't recall," Myers replied.

Lindsay asked Myers if he remembered telling the troopers that after workouts with Sandusky, he and Jerry would return to the coach's home and shower in separate facilities.

"I said it," Myers said, "But I don't remember it."

Lindsay asked Myers if he remembered an interview he gave to an investigator named Curtis Everhart who at the time was working for Joseph Amendola, Sandusky's inept trial lawyer.

Myers remembered the interview.

Lindsay asked if he remembered telling the investigator, "I am alleged Victim No. 2."

"I'm sure I did," Myers said, before adding, "I don't remember everything."

Lindsay asked Myers if he recalled telling the investigator that on the day McQueary heard "slapping sounds" and thought there was an anal rape going down in the showers, Myers said, "Jerry and I were slapping towels at each other trying to sting each other."

Myers was a month short of his 14th birthday in 2001 when the infamous shower incident occurred. The official grand jury report, however, says that Mike McQueary witnessed Sandusky raping a 10-year-old boy in the shower.

Oh well, nobody expects the prosecutors to get the details right when they're on a witch hunt to put an alleged pedophile in jail. Whether or not they have to make up the evidence themselves. And apparently, nobody expects the witnesses to remember whatever stories they told.

"I don't recall everything I told Mr. Everhart," Myers said.

Did Myers recall telling the investigator that he used to slap the walls and slide on the shower floor when he was taking a shower with Jerry?

"I can't recall everything I said in that interview back then," Myers said.

Lindsay read out loud a quote from a report that stated what Myers had supposedly told Everhart:

"The grand jury report says Coach McQueary said he observed Jerry and I engaged in sexual activity. That is not the truth and McQueary is not telling the truth. Nothing occurred that night in the shower."

"Do you recall telling him that," Lindsay asked the witness.

"Like I said, I can't recall everything I said back then," Myers said. "But if it's in there, I said it then, yes."

Lindsay asked Myers if he told the investigator that "I never saw McQueary look into the shower that night," another claim by McQueary. "I am sure" it didn't happen, Myers told the investigator.

On the witness stand, Myers wasn't sure.

"That's what I said back then," Myers said. "Once again, I can't recall what I said then."

Lindsay read Myers more quotes from the interview with the investigator. In the quotes, Myers:

-- denied having sex with Sandusky;

-- repeated that "McQueary did not tell the truth;"

-- repeated that "I am alleged Victim No. 2 on the grand jury report;"

-- again claimed that Sandusky "never sexually assaulted me."

"That's what I said then," Myers said. "And once again, I can't recall everything I said then."

Lindsay asked Myers if he told the truth when he spoke to the investigator.

"Yes," he said.

Allan Myers had once been Jerry Sandusky's biggest defender. He even wrote a letter to the editor of a local newspaper stating what a great guy Jerry was.

At the beginning, Myers kept saying that Mike McQueary was a liar, Jerry was a great guy, and that Jerry had never touched him inappropriately.

Then Myers hired attorney Andrew Shubin, who represented eight victims in the Penn State sex abuse scandal. Myers became Shubin's ninth victim. He flipped on Jerry, claimed he'd been abused, and collected nearly $7 million.

When asked how much he received from his settlement, Myers said," I'm not allowed to answer that question."

Lindsay asked Myers, who wasn't called as a witness during the Sandusky trial, where he was when the trial took place.

"I believe I was somewhere in central Pennsylvania," he said. "Now exactly where I was, I can't recall. I might have been working. I don't know exactly, but I was here in Pennsylvania . . . I was somewhere inside Clinton County or Clearfield County, somewhere in that little Trifecta."

Asked if he could recall being in a specific place, Myers replied, "I can't recall where I was when the trial was going on . . . I can't tell you exactly where I was, I don't remember that."

It was Lindsay's contention that Sandusky deserved a new trial because the prosecutor, Joseph McGettigan, lied to the jury when he stated that the existence of Victim No. 2, the boy in the showers, was "known only to God."

As far as Lindsay was concerned, McGettigan knew that Myers was Victim No. 2, but didn't want to call him as a witness during the Sandusky trial because he had formerly defended Jerry.

On cross examination, the prosecution had a simple script. To reiterate that when he finally got his story straight, Myers was indeed a victim of Jerry Sandusky's.

Jennifer Peterson, a lawyer representing the Commonwealth, asked Myers if he remembered speaking to to Special Agent Anthony Sassano of the state Attorney General's office.

"I remember seeing him and speaking with him," Myers replied. "I don't remember exact dates and times and how long everything was."

"And you told him the top were sexually abused by Mr. Sandusky, correct?"Peterson asked.

"I don't remember exactly what I said in the meetings," Myers said. "I know then I was more forthcoming but not all the way [forth] coming because [I was] still processing everything and dealing with it."

"Were you sexually abused?" Peterson asked.

"Yes," Myers said.

She didn't ask for any details, possibly because Myers probably forgot them.

After Myers left the witness stand, Lindsay put Sandusky up to testify as a rebuttal witness.

If Sandusky believed that Myers was going to finally tell the truth, and actually admit he was lying, Sandusky had just gotten torched

"Mr. Sandusky, did you ever sexually abuse Allan Myers in any way," Lindsay asked.

"Absolutely not," Sandusky said.

John Ziegler, a reporter who was in the courtroom when Myers testified, said he was glad that the transcript had finally been released.

"This is the only testimony of the person who is the epicenter of this whole thing," Ziegler said about Myers' central role in the Penn State scandal.

"And it's obvious to anyone who understands the case that he [Myers] wasn't telling the truth," Ziegler said. Myers' testimony was "a hundred percent consistent with a guy who had flipped for [millions] and felt bad about it, and didn't want to deal with it anymore," Ziegler said.

In contrast, when Sandusky took the stand, Ziegler said, "He was in tears, he was angry. It was righteous anger."

John Snedden, a former NCIS and FIS special agent who investigated the scandal at Penn State, said he was disturbed by Myers' evolving story.

"His initial statements are definitive and exculpatory," Snedden said. "His testimony then degrades into a wishy-washy, exceptionally foggy abyss."

"Being officially interviewed as the 'victim' of a traumatic event doesn't happen everyday," Snedden said. "And then you can't remember the specifics of that interview? Seriously?"

"It's clear why he [Myers] wasn't called by the prosecution" at the Sandusky trial, Snedden said. "His testimony is exculpatory and now serves only as an example of blatant prosecutorial manipulation."
 
Yes, he was wrongly convicted in his 2012 trial. The OAG poisoned the jury pool with their knowingly false grand jury presentment that Mike McQueary witnessed an anal rape.

I ask you the question I have always asked you - which single accuser are you most convinced that Sandusky harmed/abused?

if you are going to put someone away for life, you should have at least 1 iron-clad victim. In this case, there aren’t any.
This one. Sandusky showered alone with him, initiated a hug between he and the boy, was charged with a crime for it and was convicted for it. Iron-clad is not the standard in the court of law. Reasonable doubt is. Is it possible for it to have been just weird and not criminal? I guess maybe it is. Is it reasonable to believe that it was innocent? No, not really. A reasonable person would not create that situation.p to put himself in. Thus, people will think it’s unreasonable for it to have been innocent.
I consider you to be a straight shooter, Franco. But to continue to say he was investigated and cleared for that incident is not shooting straight unless you include the fact that he was investigated for it later, charged with a crime(s?) and convicted for it. Regardless of why, it’s a fact. You not liking that fact does not change it from being a fact.
That’s my last post on this in this thread. I wanted to make sure to answer that for you so you couldn’t say I don’t answer your question. Are you willing to answer a question for me then, in good faith? How many other men do you know who have showered alone with underage boys and initiated physical contact with them while alone and naked? My answer is zero.
 
This one. Sandusky showered alone with him, initiated a hug between he and the boy, was charged with a crime for it and was convicted for it. Iron-clad is not the standard in the court of law. Reasonable doubt is. Is it possible for it to have been just weird and not criminal? I guess maybe it is. Is it reasonable to believe that it was innocent? No, not really. A reasonable person would not create that situation.p to put himself in. Thus, people will think it’s unreasonable for it to have been innocent.
I consider you to be a straight shooter, Franco. But to continue to say he was investigated and cleared for that incident is not shooting straight unless you include the fact that he was investigated for it later, charged with a crime(s?) and convicted for it. Regardless of why, it’s a fact. You not liking that fact does not change it from being a fact.
That’s my last post on this in this thread. I wanted to make sure to answer that for you so you couldn’t say I don’t answer your question. Are you willing to answer a question for me then, in good faith? How many other men do you know who have showered alone with underage boys and initiated physical contact with them while alone and naked? My answer is zero.
Is it reasonable to think that these kids lied for money?
 
Inhavlived in SEC country for 30+ years. I now live in Greenville, SC. Went to my local sports bar tonight and had a jerk start talkin about the scandal. When I said he doesn’t know anything like the rest of us, he shoved me and got kicked out…next thing I know, I’m asked to leave as well. Couldn’t be more proud for standing up for what’s right. I love Penn State . I love Joe Paterno and what he stood for. I will voluntarily leave annoy bar that thinks I’m in the wrong….EVER! Screw Clemson and screw the SEC!!!!
Why even respond to him?
 
This one. Sandusky showered alone with him, initiated a hug between he and the boy, was charged with a crime for it and was convicted for it. Iron-clad is not the standard in the court of law. Reasonable doubt is. Is it possible for it to have been just weird and not criminal? I guess maybe it is. Is it reasonable to believe that it was innocent? No, not really. A reasonable person would not create that situation.p to put himself in. Thus, people will think it’s unreasonable for it to have been innocent.
I consider you to be a straight shooter, Franco. But to continue to say he was investigated and cleared for that incident is not shooting straight unless you include the fact that he was investigated for it later, charged with a crime(s?) and convicted for it. Regardless of why, it’s a fact. You not liking that fact does not change it from being a fact.
That’s my last post on this in this thread. I wanted to make sure to answer that for you so you couldn’t say I don’t answer your question. Are you willing to answer a question for me then, in good faith? How many other men do you know who have showered alone with underage boys and initiated physical contact with them while alone and naked? My answer is zero.
V6 (zk) never claimed that Sandusky performed a sex act on him. He was only claiming possible grooming. I am not surprised this is the best you can do because there just isn’t any evidence substantiating bad acts on Sandusky’s part.
 
I have studied the case extensively and I am convinced that Sandusky didn’t harm any child.

I believe you are referring to the 1998 showering incident. It was thoroughly investigated with no charges filed and Sandusky not indicated.

Please check out the reviews of Mark Pendergast’s book “The Most Hated Man in America,” John Ziegler’s s epic podcast “With the Benefit of Hindsight,” Ralph Cipriano’s big trial blog or John Snedden’s report on his federal investigation that renewed Graham Spanier’s top-level security clearances.
You’re insane .
 
This one. Sandusky showered alone with him, initiated a hug between he and the boy, was charged with a crime for it and was convicted for it. Iron-clad is not the standard in the court of law. Reasonable doubt is. Is it possible for it to have been just weird and not criminal? I guess maybe it is. Is it reasonable to believe that it was innocent? No, not really. A reasonable person would not create that situation.p to put himself in. Thus, people will think it’s unreasonable for it to have been innocent.
I consider you to be a straight shooter, Franco. But to continue to say he was investigated and cleared for that incident is not shooting straight unless you include the fact that he was investigated for it later, charged with a crime(s?) and convicted for it. Regardless of why, it’s a fact. You not liking that fact does not change it from being a fact.
That’s my last post on this in this thread. I wanted to make sure to answer that for you so you couldn’t say I don’t answer your question. Are you willing to answer a question for me then, in good faith? How many other men do you know who have showered alone with underage boys and initiated physical contact with them while alone and naked? My answer is zero.
Listen carefully to McQ-

"I was on my way to Boston for recruiting and I was going from the F terminal over to the B terminals over in Philadelphia Airport," McQueary said. "And there was one of those little trams. The AGs called," he said, specifically naming Assistant Deputy Attorney General Jonelle Eshbach. And, according to McQueary, Eshbach "said we're going to arrest folks and we are going to leak it out."

Then, McQueary, perhaps catching himself, said, "Let me back up a little bit. We heard rumors that I had heard that -- the week before that arrests were imminent and that it was going to be more than Jerry Sandusky."

The state Attorney General's office has a known problem with leaks. Former state Attorney General Kathleen Kane lost her job after she was convicted last August of nine criminal charges, including leaking "confidential investigative information" in 2014 from a past grand jury probe to Chris Brennan, then a Philadelphia Daily News reporter.

Kane had to resign from her job and was sentenced to 10 to 23 months in jail after she was convicted of perjury, conspiracy, leaking grand jury information and then lying about it, to cover it up.

In the Jerry Sandusky case, prosecutors testified at a post-trial hearing last August that they had no knowledge of how the media found out that Sandusky and others in the Penn State scandal were about to be arrested. And how the media knew that there was a grand jury investigation of Sandusky in progress.

"If we can establish there were leaks by government agents, it could result in dismissal of case," Al Lindsay, Sandusky's lawyer, told reporters after the appeals hearing last August.

When reached for comment late today, Lindsay was on the case.

"We received a portion of that transcript from Mike McQueary," Lindsay said. "And it's certainly something we're studying to see whether or not it might be a fertile field for us to develop with regard to Mr. Sandusky's motion for a new trial," Lindsay said on behalf of client, now serving 30 to 60 years in prison.

A spokesperson for the state Attorney General's press office, where they're known for hiding under their desks, did not respond to a request for comment.

On the witness stand at the Spanier trial last month, McQueary testified that immediately after the AG's office told him they were going to leak news of the impending arrests, he ran over to the office of Assistant Athletic Director Fran Ganter.

"I remember it clearly," McQueary testified. "And I said, you gotta call Timmy's. Those guys are in trouble."

"Tim Curley," Ditka asked, referring to the former athletic director at Penn State.

"Yeah," McQueary testified. "And, you know, he kind of passed it off or shrugged me off," McQueary said about Ganter. "I'm not sure they believed me. And that's all that happened with that."

"So, a week later, I'm in that airport and I get a call," McQueary testified. "And then the media starts gettin' ahold of everything, and it's all kind of downhill after that."

Amen, brother.

When McQueary testified about the AG planning to "leak it out," I was in the courtroom but did not grasp the significance of what McQueary said. I had to have others explain it to me. And then it took a while to get the court transcript via a money order sent out snail mail to the Dauphin County Courthouse, to verify what McQueary had to say.

But Penn State veterans got it right away. Like Maribeth Roman Schmidt, the head of Penn Staters for Responsible Stewardship.

"Mike's assertion under oath that the AGs leaked information about the PSU admins' arrests confirms suspicions we've had all along about prosecutorial misconduct on a number of levels," she said.

"It's now exceedingly obvious that the Attorney General was trying to manipulate public perception of the Penn State case from the very beginning, and they were willing to commit a crime to do it."

"This bombshell places the integrity of the entire Penn State case squarely at the feet of [newly elected AG] Josh Shapiro," Schmidt said about the new Attorney General who's yet to come out of hiding.

"If he's serious about restoring confidence in the AG's office," Schmidt said, "There is no other place for him to start than reviewing the conduct of prosecutors in this case from top to bottom."

Ray Blehar, who writes a blog, notpsu.blogspot.com, first reported the McQueary admission on March 25th, after he was tipped by Schmidt, who called it the "shocker of the day."

"McQueary Becomes Real Whistleblower," was Blehar's headline. In his blog post, Blehar quoted a transcript from McQueary's whistleblower and libel suit against Penn State, where McQueary scored a total of $12 million.

In the transcript from the McQueary trial, McQueary recounts how he was traveling to Boston, from Philadelphia Airport terminal B. It was Friday Nov. 4th after the Illinois game. McQueary testified how he got a phone call from then Deputy Attorney General Jonelle Eshbach.

"And she said a screw up had occurred or some kind of leak or a computer system malfunction, and she said all of the charges are going to be released," McQueary testified.

"However, it appears that McQueary's testimony at the Spanier trial goes a step further to state that Eshbach intentionally leaked the information," Blehar wrote.

"For years, Penn Staters have complained about the lack of an investigation into the leaks related to Jerry Sandusky," Blehar wrote. "Now, AG Josh Shapiro has the name of at least one of the Sandusky leakers. And it came from the Commonwealth's star witness in the Sandusky and Spanier cases."

Blehar called for Eshbach to be prosecuted "just as vigorously as former AG Kathleen Kane."

Eschbach, now running for York County District Attorney, did not respond to a request for comment.

For reporter John Ziegler, another regular chronicler of the Penn State scandal, the McQueary admission at the Spanier trial shines some light on a bigger picture.

"Anyone who uses his brain can only interpret this statement as an accidental admission that, just as I have long assumed, the AG's office prematurely leaked the grand jury presentment so that their favorite reporter, Sara Ganim, could 'find' it and start to set their false narrative," Ziegler said.

"Once you realize this is true, you must then also conclude that the entire basis of Ganim's article from March of that year revealing the existence of the grand jury was illegal AG leaks intended to jumpstart a case that was extremely weak because they had no credible accusers."
 
Sandusky kept a list on contacts from the second mile and checked or starred certain people. When they interviewed them they realized they were his victims. There were people who wanted nothing to do with any investigation or lawsuit .
So yeah Sandusky hurt kids and believe it or not everyone at PSU knew .
 
100 years from now if college football still exists some lowlife classless Pitt, Iowa, Rutgers, or SEC fan will still bring up Sanduskys name. It is just like the 1919 Black Sox Baseball scandal, it will never be forgotten. Meanwhile Michigan State, Ohio State, and Michigan had similar scandals and skate because of the B10 bias and hatred for PSU.

I agree. Gus Johnson kept mentioning 'Bo Schembechler' ball..blah blah during UM game yesterday. It is absurd that with amount of articles about what Bo knew as well as his son stating that he was molested and father knew...how the f* are they still mentioning his name with pride?
 
Sandusky kept a list on contacts from the second mile and checked or starred certain people. When they interviewed them they realized they were his victims. There were people who wanted nothing to do with any investigation or lawsuit .
So yeah Sandusky hurt kids and believe it or not everyone at PSU knew .
I believe you are mistaken. Can you name 1 person at PSU that claimed Sandusky was a child molester before 2009?
 
Sandusky kept a list on contacts from the second mile and checked or starred certain people. When they interviewed them they realized they were his victims. There were people who wanted nothing to do with any investigation or lawsuit .
So yeah Sandusky hurt kids and believe it or not everyone at PSU knew .
Second mile stuff is debateable, based on note info.
Most of the notes in the released files appear to be FBI interviews conducted in 2012 with Second Mile board members in both the State College office and other regional offices. The interviews described how Second Mile board members reacted to the Sandusky revelations dating back to as early as 2010 and 2011.

"Not a single person admitted to knowing about Sandusky's crimes prior to the presentment," Snedden said. Two people claim to know about "missing donor money," but nothing else is said about that subject in the rest of the released files.

The documents released by the feds are heavily redacted, but there are many references to Second Mile board members circling the wagons. References were made in the documents to false allegations being made by a "disgruntled mother" and a "disgruntled kid."

The documents are more noticeable for what they don't say. Such as in the issue of jurisdiction involving the Sandusky investigation. If, for example, in their investigation of The Second Mile, if the feds any found any evidence of a federal crime, such as Sandusky crossing state lines with sex abuse victims, "They would have taken it [the investigation] away from the state for prosecution," Snedden said.

"But they [the feds] didn't do any of that," Snedden said after reviewing the documents. "There's no indication they did that."

Instead, the attorney general pursued the Sandusky investigation, and the feds pursued The Second File.

"Sadly, neither focused on political vindictiveness and corruption, which is exactly what happened here," Snedden said.

Snedden has his own experience with a previous secret federal investigation into the Penn State scandal. In 2012, working as a special agent for the Federal Investigative Services, Snedden did a background investigation of former Penn State President Graham Spanier, to see if Spanier's high level security clearance should be renewed by the government.

As part of that investigation, Snedden investigated whether Spanier had orchestrated a coverup of Sandusky's crimes. Snedden's investigation concluded that there was no cover up at Penn State, because there was no sex crime to cover up. As far as Snedden was concerned, Mike McQueary, the guy who witnessed a naked Sandusky allegedly abusing a boy in the Penn State showers, was not a credible witness.

Spanier's clearance was renewed as the result of an 110-page report that Snedden wrote back in 2012, a report that was declassified earlier this year.

In the investigation of The Second Mile, the released files include copies of FBI interviews with eight witnesses whose identities are redacted. The interviews are recorded on FBI "302s," the number of the form that interview summaries were typed on by FBI agents.

"I see a lot of interviews with a lot of different people, a wide range of positions in the Second Mile hierarchy," Snedden said. "And I don't see any people admitting to knowing anything concrete about Sandusky."

In the interviews, there are quotes from woman who "had always heard positive things about the organization. She had never heard anything bad about TSM founder Jerry Sandusky."

Another woman interviewed by the FBI described Sandusky's "nondescript entrance and presence" at a March 25, 2011 "Celebration of Excellence" event in Hershey.

"Sandusky was not acknowledged during the event formally by TSM," the woman told the FBI.

"On March 31, 2011, the Patriot News published an article about the grand jury investigation" of Sandusky," the woman told the FBI. "The article was everywhere and everyone was talking about it."

"She didn't recall seeing any evidence of financial improprieties or anything otherwise questionable," the FBI 302 stated. "She did not personally observe any misuse of donations."

"The general mood of the room was that of denial," the woman told the FBI. "Everyone appeared to be in support of Sandusky and TSM."

In another 302, an unidentified witness said, "He did not observe any inappropriate behavior." On the same form, someone, possibly Sandusky himself stated the complainant "was a disgruntled kid, not associated with TSM. He was not aware at the time that the allegation was sexual in nature"

Another 302 notes that one board member was "shocked after reading the indictment." In addition, "four or five board members in particular were upset that they were never notified. The exchange was heated."

In the 302s, there was discussion of an earlier 1998 allegation that Sandusky had abused another youth in the shower, but "the allegations were considered 'unfounded.'"

There is also discussion in the 302s about an alleged allegation involving the Clinton County Children and Youth Services[CYS].

"CYS did have a safety plan in the event a child was a victim of sexual abuse," the 302 stated. "They did not need to enact their safety plan for SANDUSKY's case because the allegation was not founded and all actions taken by CYS were 'by the book.' "

Bagwell said he has filed multiple FOI requests as part of his Penn State Sunshine Fund. Bagwell, a former newspaper reporter who is now a web developer, said he filed his requests because he was seeking primary source documents from the Sandusky investigation.

"What frustrated me about everything since the very beginning was a complete and utter lack of transparency," Bagwell said.

In his court battle with the U.S. Attorney's office, Bagwell said, the feds indicated that there were some 300,000 pages of documents related to The Second Mile investigation. The feds only released 1,000 pages and "withheld tends of thousands more for reasons not apparent at this time," Bagwell said.

Bagwell, himself a former journalist, said the press coverage of the scandal has been "abysmal, reactionary and sensationalistic," as well as "factually incorrect." Bagwell said he hopes the newly released documents will have a calming effect on Penn State Nation.

"Penn Staters are still screaming for an investigation for years of The Second Mile," Bagwell said. "Well, it turns out there was an investigation."

"My overall view is that everything here [in the documents] seems to support the idea that The Second Mile didn't knowingly do anything wrong," Bagwell said. "The Penn Staters who are clamoring for heads at The Second Mile to roll, I don't think that's an outcome that's appropriate at this point in time."
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT