Sandusky going with the big guns to debunk repressed memory

[L.T. Young]

Yes, I believe that Sandusky is likely innocent. I can't be 100% certain because I was not directly involved. Based on the facts and the circumstances of the case, I believe that his trial was inherently unfair. In order to establish his guilt or innoccence, I believe it must first be established that his trial was unfair and that is my focus at this time.

Are you willing to acknowledge that his trial was unfair? Are you 100% certain that he is guilty?

I can say he's been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on about 40 counts. You're confusing beyond a reasonable doubt and absolute certainty. They're not the same thing.

I think wasting time splitting hairs is just a product of his fame and other motives.

I posted an article in another thread about Ted Bundy possibly being framed from 1980. I came across it looking for info on Loftus testifying for Bundy. It perfectly illustrates how blinded people can be. Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's reasonable.

How did Aaron Fisher know about 98 or 01 when he made his allegations?

He didn't, was it a lucky guess? Where was the payday coming from back then? Fisher was a nobody and Sandusky was a candidate for sainthood.

Why did Sandusky continue to shower alone with kids after he was told not to?

Knowing the kid wouldn't tell anyone isn't an acceptable explanation. He was told not do it. "I was raised in a different era" isn't an acceptable explanation. He was told not to do it.

Why did Sandusky start taking kids swimming when his showering activities were shutdown?

It doesn't seem the least bit odd that the Tickle Monster decided to frolic with half naked boys after he was stopped from frolicking with completely naked boys?

And then you've got the victims testimony. FYI, victims changing their story is actually quite normal in valid CSA cases.

But you keep believing the guy sitting in prison with every reason to lie to you, who can't explain why he did any of the things that supposedly landed him there, is an innocent victim.

 

[francofan]

I can say he's been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on about 40 counts. You're confusing beyond a reasonable doubt and absolute certainty. They're not the same thing.

I think wasting time splitting hairs is just a product of his fame and other motives.

I posted an article in another thread about Ted Bundy possibly being framed from 1980. I came across it looking for info on Loftus testifying for Bundy. It perfectly illustrates how blinded people can be. Just because it's possible doesn't mean it's reasonable.

How did Aaron Fisher know about 98 or 01 when he made his allegations?

He didn't, was it a lucky guess? Where was the payday coming from back then? Fisher was a nobody and Sandusky was a candidate for sainthood.

Why did Sandusky continue to shower alone with kids after he was told not to?

Knowing the kid wouldn't tell anyone isn't an acceptable explanation. He was told not do it. "I was raised in a different era" isn't an acceptable explanation. He was told not to do it.

Why did Sandusky start taking kids swimming when his showering activities were shutdown?

It doesn't seem the least bit odd that the Tickle Monster decided to frolic with half naked boys after he was stopped from frolicking with completely naked boys?

And then you've got the victims testimony. FYI, victims changing their story is actually quite normal in valid CSA cases.

But you keep believing the guy sitting in prison with every reason to lie to you, who can't explain why he did any of the things that supposedly landed him there, is an innocent victim.

Yes, he was found guilty on 45 out 48 counts in a patently unfair trial. Results from an unfair trial are inherently unreliable.

I am not confusing reasonable doubt with absolute certainty. I believe there are real doubts with a lot of what the OAG presented. if Sandusky is fortunate to win a new trial, IMO the results will most likely to be very different.

 

[Mixolydian]

No sane person would visit a pedophile in prison to ask him if he is innocent or for
any other reason. If you had an ounce of common sense, you could have asked me
or a myriad of others who would have told you what he was going to say. So if we are
going to compare opinions, mine carries much more weight than yours since I am sane,
very intelligent and have an enormous amount of common sense. We are polar opposites.

On the contrary you are one of the biggest dopes on this board who has never ever contributed a useful thought or demonstrated an ounce of ability to think beyond an inch deep. And that is true regardless of Sandusky's guilt.

 

[L.T. Young]

Yes, he was found guilty on 45 out 48 counts in a patently unfair trial. Results from an unfair trial are inherently unreliable.

I am not confusing reasonable doubt with absolute certainty. I believe there are real doubts with a lot of what the OAG presented. if Sandusky is fortunate to win a new trial, IMO the results will most likely to be very different.

I know how many counts he was found guilty of. About 40 were proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

A new trial on all charges is a waste of time.

 

[bjf1991]

I know how many counts he was found guilty of. About 40 were proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

A new trial on all charges is a waste of time.

Are people accused of a crime - even folks who YOU KNOW are guilty - entitled to a fair investigation and trial?


That is, of course, a hypothetical question when posed to you...... you have stated your answer (repeatedly)


There is not a single soul in the nation who is immune to finding themselves similarly charged, investigated, tried, and convicted of any number of crimes.
Not a one. None.
And every asshat in the nation would KNOW they were guilty.


I really do not want to see that happen to ANYONE...... but there is no doubt that it happens to SOMEONE, with regularity.

Given that fact:
I do hope that the "someones" are the belligerent, intellectually-retarded asshats like LaJolla, Osprey, and yourself.



The fact that the incomprehensibly F-ed up fiasco involving Sandusky also was responsible for obfuscating and covering up any number of legitimate investigations into malfeasance......

The fact that the entire Sandusky fiasco was used to devastate a community and a University that you stupid f***s CLAIM to value.......

Those facts? They just make you and your ilk even more pathetic, idiotic, and contemptible.

Have a nice day.

 

[Mixolydian]

Are people accused of a crime - even folks who YOU KNOW are guilty - entitled to a fair investigation and trial?


That is, of course, a hypothetical question when posed to you...... you have stated your answer (repeatedly)


There is not a single soul in the nation who is immune to finding themselves similarly charged, investigated, tried, and convicted of any number of crimes.
Not a one. None.
And every asshat in the nation would KNOW they were guilty.


I really do not want to see that happen to ANYONE...... but there is no doubt that it happens to SOMEONE, with regularity.

Given that fact:
I do hope that the "someones" are the belligerent, intellectually-retarded asshats like LaJolla, Osprey, and yourself.



The fact that the incomprehensibly F-ed up fiasco involving Sandusky also was responsible for obfuscating and covering up any number of legitimate investigations into malfeasance......

The fact that the entire Sandusky fiasco was used to devastate a community and a University that you stupid f***s CLAIM to value.......

Those facts? They just make you and your ilk even more pathetic, idiotic, and contemptible.

Have a nice day.

Maybe one of your greatest posts ever. But the nuance will be lost in the braying of "Joebots", and "ped enablers" and "tickle monster", etc. by the simple minded, black and white world morons you list (and there are more), as if somehow that has anything to do with the point you are making.

Yes, pathetic is a good word.

 

[no1lion99]

PCRA transcript is now up from March 24th:

http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SANDUSKY TRANSCRIPT FROM MARCH 24 2017.pdf

It seems Gillum got skewered and was very evasive. He denied using repressed memory therapy, but did admit to being in the grand jury room with V1 on two occasions. The defense deemed a victim's advocate being in there as "highly irregular."

From Amendola's testimony, after the charges against JS were "leaked" and Ganim ran her story, the PSP moved in to arrest Jerry. One big problem, they couldn't find him. The nation's worst serial pedophile ever and they lost him? They had to call Amendola to learn JS was in Cleveland visiting family.

The defense also got on the record the dramatic differences in JS's(what V# is he) and V6's GJ testimony to their trial testimony. In reading back the trial transcript, Amendola got both to admit to telling Joe McGettigan their "new" version of what happened before trial. At the PCRA hearing, Amendola testified he was never informed of the "new" allegations and Lindsay deemed this a Brady violation. Petrosky changing the scene of the crime in the janitor incident is another potential Brady violation the defense has raised.

Judge Foradora is considering calling Judge Cleland as a fact witness pertaining to the off the record meeting he attended to discuss waiving the preliminary hearing.

Leiter and Rossman both testified as well.

Yeah very good testimony for Jerry in the latest round of "defense" as usual.

Amendola counsels Jer for 2 years: Now Jerry please remember you HAVE to be adamant about your innocence. Leave absolutely no doubt.

Jerry talks to Costas: eh whatevs Joe....magic pause time.

 

[Pinkhippo PeanutButter]

Are people accused of a crime - even folks who YOU KNOW are guilty - entitled to a fair investigation and trial?


That is, of course, a hypothetical question when posed to you...... you have stated your answer (repeatedly)


There is not a single soul in the nation who is immune to finding themselves similarly charged, investigated, tried, and convicted of any number of crimes.
Not a one. None.
And every asshat in the nation would KNOW they were guilty.


I really do not want to see that happen to ANYONE...... but there is no doubt that it happens to SOMEONE, with regularity.

Given that fact:
I do hope that the "someones" are the belligerent, intellectually-retarded asshats like LaJolla, Osprey, and yourself.



The fact that the incomprehensibly F-ed up fiasco involving Sandusky also was responsible for obfuscating and covering up any number of legitimate investigations into malfeasance......

The fact that the entire Sandusky fiasco was used to devastate a community and a University that you stupid f***s CLAIM to value.......

Those facts? They just make you and your ilk even more pathetic, idiotic, and contemptible.

Have a nice day.

 

[L.T. Young]

Are people accused of a crime - even folks who YOU KNOW are guilty - entitled to a fair investigation and trial?


That is, of course, a hypothetical question when posed to you...... you have stated your answer (repeatedly)


There is not a single soul in the nation who is immune to finding themselves similarly charged, investigated, tried, and convicted of any number of crimes.
Not a one. None.
And every asshat in the nation would KNOW they were guilty.


I really do not want to see that happen to ANYONE...... but there is no doubt that it happens to SOMEONE, with regularity.

Given that fact:
I do hope that the "someones" are the belligerent, intellectually-retarded asshats like LaJolla, Osprey, and yourself.



The fact that the incomprehensibly F-ed up fiasco involving Sandusky also was responsible for obfuscating and covering up any number of legitimate investigations into malfeasance......

The fact that the entire Sandusky fiasco was used to devastate a community and a University that you stupid f***s CLAIM to value.......

Those facts? They just make you and your ilk even more pathetic, idiotic, and contemptible.

Have a nice day.

Another post dripping with self righteousness and insults, shocker.

I think you've been living in a bubble smelling your own farts so long the lack of oxygen has led to brain damage.

The only reason you give a shit is you want to go back to the way things used to be. You're still looking for a way to make it all a big mistake. What a noble cause.

If Sandusky was to get a new trial some counts would be thrown out and the defense would still have to concede about 70% of what's alleged is true. You know that, right? They'll claim it wasn't sexual, but not that it didn't happen. Good luck with that.

Sorry I don't see it as important. A defense that consists of calling people names isn't all that impressive. To me anyway, you seem to love it.

 

[humpydudas19]

Another post dripping with self righteousness and insults, shocker.

I think you've been living in a bubble smelling your own farts so long the lack of oxygen has led to brain damage.

The only reason you give a shit is you want to go back to the way things used to be. You're still looking for a way to make it all a big mistake. What a noble cause.

If Sandusky was to get a new trial some counts would be thrown out and the defense would still have to concede about 70% of what's alleged is true. You know that, right? They'll claim it wasn't sexual, but not that it didn't happen. Good luck with that.

Sorry I don't see it as important. A defense that consists of calling people names isn't all that impressive. To me anyway, you seem to love it.

What is your problem?

 

[bjf1991]

Another post dripping with self righteousness and insults, shocker.

I think you've been living in a bubble smelling your own farts so long the lack of oxygen has led to brain damage.

The only reason you give a shit is you want to go back to the way things used to be. You're still looking for a way to make it all a big mistake. What a noble cause.

If Sandusky was to get a new trial some counts would be thrown out and the defense would still have to concede about 70% of what's alleged is true. You know that, right? They'll claim it wasn't sexual, but not that it didn't happen. Good luck with that.

Sorry I don't see it as important. A defense that consists of calling people names isn't all that impressive. To me anyway, you seem to love it.

Make up a "Top Ten List" of folks who you think are "disrespectful" towards your commentaries.


Now - realize that every one of them gives your "opinions" far more respect than they deserve.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Make up a "Top Ten List" of folks who you think are "disrespectful" towards your commentaries.


Now - realize that every one of them gives your "opinions" far more respect than they deserve.

Were you born a douche or did it just develop naturally?

 

[Mixolydian]

Another post dripping with self righteousness and insults, shocker.

I think you've been living in a bubble smelling your own farts so long the lack of oxygen has led to brain damage.

The only reason you give a shit is you want to go back to the way things used to be. You're still looking for a way to make it all a big mistake. What a noble cause.

If Sandusky was to get a new trial some counts would be thrown out and the defense would still have to concede about 70% of what's alleged is true. You know that, right? They'll claim it wasn't sexual, but not that it didn't happen. Good luck with that.

Sorry I don't see it as important. A defense that consists of calling people names isn't all that impressive. To me anyway, you seem to love it.

You rip a post for being insulting and self righteous and yet by the second sentence you are hurling insults and proceed to leave a totally self righteous post, with absolutely zero substance, just your opinions as if they come from some higher place. And all the while missing the point of the post you are responding to.

I won't speak for others, but when I call you a dolt, I don't mean it so much as an insult as I do a description. Although I could see how you might take offense to it

 

[francofan]

Another interesting excerpt from Mark Pendergrast's new book has been posted on bigtrial.net

This excerpt ‘Lurching Towards Trial,’ just gives you the flavor of how incredibly rushed the trial was, and how unprepared the defense lawyers were," Pendergrast wrote Big Trial. "The jury selection process was appalling, with several jurors indicating that they had already concluded that Sandusky was guilty. They were selected as jurors anyway. Defense attorney Joe Amendola gave the worst opening statement I’ve ever encountered, saying that the Commonwealth had ‘overwhelming evidence’ against Sandusky, when in fact there was no physical evidence at all, the victims’ stories were problematical in many ways, and the defense attorneys were utterly ineffective.It’s a complex story, but the bottom line is that, at the least, it is abundantly clear that Sandusky deserves a new trial.”

http://www.bigtrial.net/2017/05/lurching-toward-trial-in-sandusky-case.html#more

 

[bjf1991]

Another interesting excerpt from Mark Pendergrast's new book has been posted on bigtrial.net

This excerpt ‘Lurching Towards Trial,’ just gives you the flavor of how incredibly rushed the trial was, and how unprepared the defense lawyers were," Pendergrast wrote Big Trial. "The jury selection process was appalling, with several jurors indicating that they had already concluded that Sandusky was guilty. They were selected as jurors anyway. Defense attorney Joe Amendola gave the worst opening statement I’ve ever encountered, saying that the Commonwealth had ‘overwhelming evidence’ against Sandusky, when in fact there was no physical evidence at all, the victims’ stories were problematical in many ways, and the defense attorneys were utterly ineffective.It’s a complex story, but the bottom line is that, at the least, it is abundantly clear that Sandusky deserves a new trial.”

http://www.bigtrial.net/2017/05/lurching-toward-trial-in-sandusky-case.html#more

How ANYONE can not - at the least - conclude that this case deserves a re-trial is beyond me.

Aside from CONFLICTION, IGNORANCE, or INTELLECTUAL RETARDATION (all of which have been present in abundance over the last decade ) ....... I cannot think of a single alibi for those who would take the stance of "its over, move on"

 

[L.T. Young]

Make up a "Top Ten List" of folks who you think are "disrespectful" towards your commentaries.


Now - realize that every one of them gives your "opinions" far more respect than they deserve.

Once again all you can do is deflect in your typical sanctimonious tone.

You know that everything in the post was dead on, sans the fart smelling.

Address the fact that absent explicit sex acts Sandusky will have to admit he engaged in those activities.

 

[L.T. Young]

You rip a post for being insulting and self righteous and yet by the second sentence you are hurling insults and proceed to leave a totally self righteous post, with absolutely zero substance, just your opinions as if they come from some higher place. And all the while missing the point of the post you are responding to.

I won't speak for others, but when I call you a dolt, I don't mean it so much as an insult as I do a description. Although I could see how you might take offense to it

So I state facts and you call them opinions?

From the petition thread:

@francofan (Jerry's cheerleader)

"Don't fool yourself into thinking the public doesn't have a role in addressing a very important issue in the Penn State fiasco, namely the shenaningans that have taken place and the attempts by the powers to be (e.g. the OAG, the PSU BOT, etc.) to conceal what exactly has taken place. I believe that a new trial for Sandusky would be an excellent opportunity to take a new look at what took place and who deserves credit/blame for their role."


@bjf1991

"The potential benefits achievable if Sandusky's case is adjudicated properly - via a "new trial" or any other means - are so great, that any and every effort to tip the scales in that direction - - - even if the odds are stacked ginormously "against" - - - - is a worthwhile effort."


Are we really going to pretend this is just about one man getting a fair trial? Even Sandusky's most ardent supporter is focused on the broader picture. Don't blame me for people's motivations being transparent.

And the substance I offered is the fact that Sandusky's defense can't even deny 70% of what's alleged. Showering alone with them and engaging in "horseplay", laying in bed with them half naked, touching their legs and thighs, etc.

As far as Sandusky's defense, look at the petition and note RMT was never used despite the claim. That leaves you with they all lied for money. Personal attacks is all they have.

I'd say my post was pretty accurate if you're capable of being objective. Now run along and see if JZ has another bombshell penis picture that will crack the Sandusky code.

 

[bjf1991]

So I state facts and you call them opinions?

From the petition thread:

@francofan (Jerry's cheerleader)

"Don't fool yourself into thinking the public doesn't have a role in addressing a very important issue in the Penn State fiasco, namely the shenaningans that have taken place and the attempts by the powers to be (e.g. the OAG, the PSU BOT, etc.) to conceal what exactly has taken place. I believe that a new trial for Sandusky would be an excellent opportunity to take a new look at what took place and who deserves credit/blame for their role."


@bjf1991

"The potential benefits achievable if Sandusky's case is adjudicated properly - via a "new trial" or any other means - are so great, that any and every effort to tip the scales in that direction - - - even if the odds are stacked ginormously "against" - - - - is a worthwhile effort."


Are we really going to pretend this is just about one man getting a fair trial? Even Sandusky's most ardent supporter is focused on the broader picture. Don't blame me for people's motivations being transparent.

And the substance I offered is the fact that Sandusky's defense can't even deny 70% of what's alleged. Showering alone with them and engaging in "horseplay", laying in bed with them half naked, touching their legs and thighs, etc.

As far as Sandusky's defense, look at the petition and note RMT was never used despite the claim. That leaves you with they all lied for money. Personal attacks is all they have.

I'd say my post was pretty accurate if you're capable of being objective. Now run along and see if JZ has another bombshell penis picture that will crack the Sandusky code.

Objectively?

Objectively, you are a raging douchetard

Of course it is about a citizen getting a non-completely FUBAR trial (aka: a "fair" trial, if you wish)

It is also an issue and an event with incredibly far reaching repercussions

Which - probably - helps to explain your incredible level of "douchetardness" on the subject.

 

[francofan]

So I state facts and you call them opinions?

From the petition thread:

@francofan (Jerry's cheerleader)

"Don't fool yourself into thinking the public doesn't have a role in addressing a very important issue in the Penn State fiasco, namely the shenaningans that have taken place and the attempts by the powers to be (e.g. the OAG, the PSU BOT, etc.) to conceal what exactly has taken place. I believe that a new trial for Sandusky would be an excellent opportunity to take a new look at what took place and who deserves credit/blame for their role."


@bjf1991

"The potential benefits achievable if Sandusky's case is adjudicated properly - via a "new trial" or any other means - are so great, that any and every effort to tip the scales in that direction - - - even if the odds are stacked ginormously "against" - - - - is a worthwhile effort."


Are we really going to pretend this is just about one man getting a fair trial? Even Sandusky's most ardent supporter is focused on the broader picture. Don't blame me for people's motivations being transparent.

And the substance I offered is the fact that Sandusky's defense can't even deny 70% of what's alleged. Showering alone with them and engaging in "horseplay", laying in bed with them half naked, touching their legs and thighs, etc.

As far as Sandusky's defense, look at the petition and note RMT was never used despite the claim. That leaves you with they all lied for money. Personal attacks is all they have.

I'd say my post was pretty accurate if you're capable of being objective. Now run along and see if JZ has another bombshell penis picture that will crack the Sandusky code.

Your facts are very suspects such as Sandusky's defense can't even deny 70% of what is alleged. In fact, Sandusky's defense denies 100% of the charges that he is alleged of committing.

 

[Mixolydian]

So I state facts and you call them opinions?

From the petition thread:

@francofan (Jerry's cheerleader)

"Don't fool yourself into thinking the public doesn't have a role in addressing a very important issue in the Penn State fiasco, namely the shenaningans that have taken place and the attempts by the powers to be (e.g. the OAG, the PSU BOT, etc.) to conceal what exactly has taken place. I believe that a new trial for Sandusky would be an excellent opportunity to take a new look at what took place and who deserves credit/blame for their role."


@bjf1991

"The potential benefits achievable if Sandusky's case is adjudicated properly - via a "new trial" or any other means - are so great, that any and every effort to tip the scales in that direction - - - even if the odds are stacked ginormously "against" - - - - is a worthwhile effort."


Are we really going to pretend this is just about one man getting a fair trial? Even Sandusky's most ardent supporter is focused on the broader picture. Don't blame me for people's motivations being transparent.

And the substance I offered is the fact that Sandusky's defense can't even deny 70% of what's alleged. Showering alone with them and engaging in "horseplay", laying in bed with them half naked, touching their legs and thighs, etc.

As far as Sandusky's defense, look at the petition and note RMT was never used despite the claim. That leaves you with they all lied for money. Personal attacks is all they have.

I'd say my post was pretty accurate if you're capable of being objective. Now run along and see if JZ has another bombshell penis picture that will crack the Sandusky code.

Every single point in your post was your opinion. Not even one single fact. Not. Even. One.

The hillarious part is that you are too stupid to disguinish the difference. You've learned from a couple of the best around here.

Welcome to ignore. You are a complete waste of my time.

 

[thetruth82]

Do you guys know what is a fact. Jerry Sandusky is guilty and was convicted on the following charges: eight counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, seven counts of indecent assault, one count of criminal intent to commit indecent assault, nine counts of unlawful contact with minors, 10 counts of corruption of minors and 10 counts of endangering the welfare of children.

 

[bjf1991]

Do you guys know what is a fact. Jerry Sandusky is guilty and was convicted on the following charges: eight counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, seven counts of indecent assault, one count of criminal intent to commit indecent assault, nine counts of unlawful contact with minors, 10 counts of corruption of minors and 10 counts of endangering the welfare of children.

Jeebzus!!!!!

Really??????


Where would we be without f**king Oracles like you?


You deserve a rare visit from a classic.......

Go suck on a tailpipe

 

[L.T. Young]

Every single point in your post was your opinion. Not even one single fact. Not. Even. One.

The hillarious part is that you are too stupid to disguinish the difference. You've learned from a couple of the best around here.

Welcome to ignore. You are a complete waste of my time.

I apologize. I forgot I was dealing with completely delusional people that simply refuse to accept reality.

No matter what you say Jerry Sandusky can't deny anything except the actual sex acts. That's why he will never take the stand. That's why his defense is nothing but attacking victims.

You know he showered alone with kids and had physical contact with them when they were nude.

You know he hopped in bed with no shirt on and "cuddled" with them.

You know he put his hand on kids' legs and thighs when they were in the front seat of his car.

You know he was told not to shower alone with kids anymore and did it anyway. Or are we going to ignore what was written in 98 and believe the convicted sexual predator?

You know he changed up and started using a swimming pool courtesy of a TSM board member when his shower activity was shutdown.

But that's just opinion, right? There's nothing wrong with any of it even though it's textbook pedo behavior?

The petition is listed as "The Penn State Travesty" ffs and you want to pretend that this is solely, or even mostly, about Sandusky getting a fair shake? No, this is about desperate attempt to further another agenda.

Go ahead and pretend I'm just floating biased opinion. You're only lying to yourself.

 

[francofan]

I apologize. I forgot I was dealing with completely delusional people that simply refuse to accept reality.

No matter what you say Jerry Sandusky can't deny anything except the actual sex acts. That's why he will never take the stand. That's why his defense is nothing but attacking victims.

You know he showered alone with kids and had physical contact with them when they were nude.

You know he hopped in bed with no shirt on and "cuddled" with them.

You know he put his hand on kids' legs and thighs when they were in the front seat of his car.

You know he was told not to shower alone with kids anymore and did it anyway. Or are we going to ignore what was written in 98 and believe the convicted sexual predator?

You know he changed up and started using a swimming pool courtesy of a TSM board member when his shower activity was shutdown.

But that's just opinion, right? There's nothing wrong with any of it even though it's textbook pedo behavior?

The petition is listed as "The Penn State Travesty" ffs and you want to pretend that this is solely, or even mostly, about Sandusky getting a fair shake? No, this is about desperate attempt to further another agenda.

Go ahead and pretend I'm just floating biased opinion. You're only lying to yourself.

Except Jerry has already taken the stand on at least 2 ocassions in the PCRA evidentiary hearings.

Please tell me again who is unable to accept reality.

ICYMI, his defense is alot more than attacking the alleged victims. Please read his PCRA filings to understand what his defense actually is.

 

[L.T. Young]

Except Jerry has already taken the stand on at least 2 ocassions in the PCRA evidentiary hearings.

Please tell me again who is unable to accept reality.

ICYMI, his defense is alot more than attacking the alleged victims. Please read his PCRA filings to understand what his defense actually is.

Someone who just included RMT in a petition for Jerry Sandusky, when it's been proven a false claim, should probably STFU.

Taking the stand during a hearing isn't remotely close to opening yourself up to cross at a jury trial. You know this, but keep pretending like Jerry is going to wow everyone if he gets a new trial.

Save the cases of V2 and V8 all Jerry can do is attack the victims. Insisting RMT was used is attacking the victims because they've stated it wasn't. It's a stock defense in cases like this. That's why you continue to push it.

And you still can't address the behavior Jerry will have to concede to. Face it, the notoriety you claim sunk him is the only reason people like you are supporting him. He's a pedophile.

 

[bjf1991]

I apologize. I forgot I was dealing with completely delusional people that simply refuse to accept reality.

No matter what you say Jerry Sandusky can't deny anything except the actual sex acts. That's why he will never take the stand. That's why his defense is nothing but attacking victims.

You know he showered alone with kids and had physical contact with them when they were nude.

You know he hopped in bed with no shirt on and "cuddled" with them.

You know he put his hand on kids' legs and thighs when they were in the front seat of his car.

You know he was told not to shower alone with kids anymore and did it anyway. Or are we going to ignore what was written in 98 and believe the convicted sexual predator?

You know he changed up and started using a swimming pool courtesy of a TSM board member when his shower activity was shutdown.

But that's just opinion, right? There's nothing wrong with any of it even though it's textbook pedo behavior?

The petition is listed as "The Penn State Travesty" ffs and you want to pretend that this is solely, or even mostly, about Sandusky getting a fair shake? No, this is about desperate attempt to further another agenda.

Go ahead and pretend I'm just floating biased opinion. You're only lying to yourself.

Thanks LT.

You're kinda entertaining.........



Sorta' fun to watch you open your yapper and see how much stupid can come flowing out.

 

[bjf1991]

Someone who just included RMT in a petition for Jerry Sandusky, when it's been proven a false claim, should probably STFU.

^^^^. This....... despite the fact that it has been admitted as such by multiple claimants in multiple statements


You are a special brand of stupid LT

That is kinda' entertaining.....


But what I find much MORE interesting is,
"why"?

Why you feel such a need to put your stupid on display with a thousand repetitions of the same old tired, idiotic, flat-out inane bullshit?


One might think you're an overcompensating dick-toucher or something.
(Not that there's anything wrong with that)



But, alas, all good things must end.
Time to hit your "mute" button.


As they say in China - "Arree-bo-derchee"

 

[humpydudas19]

Every single point in your post was your opinion. Not even one single fact. Not. Even. One.

The hillarious part is that you are too stupid to disguinish the difference. You've learned from a couple of the best around here.

Welcome to ignore. You are a complete waste of my time.

What do you expect from a PoofterLive and Jockstrap acolyte?

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Someone who just included RMT in a petition for Jerry Sandusky, when it's been proven a false claim, should probably STFU.

Taking the stand during a hearing isn't remotely close to opening yourself up to cross at a jury trial. You know this, but keep pretending like Jerry is going to wow everyone if he gets a new trial.

Save the cases of V2 and V8 all Jerry can do is attack the victims. Insisting RMT was used is attacking the victims because they've stated it wasn't. It's a stock defense in cases like this. That's why you continue to push it.

And you still can't address the behavior Jerry will have to concede to. Face it, the notoriety you claim sunk him is the only reason people like you are supporting him. He's a pedophile.

Well here is the game plan if you want to live in total denial. You call everyone stupid that has accepted the reality of the situation that Jerry is in prison because Jerry is a serial pedophile. You blame everyone on the planet, but Jerry himself. Now mind you some of those other people screwed up, but you still gloss over the fact that Jerry is a sick f--k because your root cause or concern still got tarnished. If anyone calls you out on that, you continue to yell stupid as the fact that he is a pedophile really cannot be disputed any longer...then you say I'll put you on ignore because you are in the way of my delusional fantasy that this was all a bad dream.

So remember...yell names and then hit ignore. If you keep your fingers in your ears long enough and only hear those accepting your reality..it in fact becomes a reality. Don't forget to sign that petition even though the decision is already before a judge. Hurry up now...a few hundred may have already signed up and that tidal wave is coming.

 

[pandaczar12]

Do you guys know what is a fact. Jerry Sandusky is guilty and was convicted on the following charges: eight counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, seven counts of indecent assault, one count of criminal intent to commit indecent assault, nine counts of unlawful contact with minors, 10 counts of corruption of minors and 10 counts of endangering the welfare of children.

That pales in comparison to Bo's buddy Nassar... Fact!

Taking the stand during a hearing isn't remotely close to opening yourself up to cross at a jury trial. You know this, but keep pretending like Jerry is going to wow everyone if he gets a new trial.

So for years, your troll crew has simply ignored the fact that JVP's grand jury testimony wasn't cross examined. Now you slip up and use that defense... oops!

Time to admit that JVP's testimony was worthless because it 1) wasn't cross examined, 2) hasn't been heard to verify it's accuracy, 3) was qualified multiple times (I don't know what you'd call it).

 

[thetruth82]

So for years, your troll crew has simply ignored the fact that JVP's grand jury testimony wasn't cross examined. Now you slip up and use that defense... oops!

Time to admit that JVP's testimony was worthless because it 1) wasn't cross examined, 2) hasn't been heard to verify it's accuracy, 3) was qualified multiple times (I don't know what you'd call it).

This is all noise, the Facts are Jerry Sandusky was found guilty in 45 of 48 counts and that has stood up to multiple attempts at appeals. The Fact is he is a criminal and deserves what he is facing (dying in prison/ then off to hell). Time to admit his appeal has nothing to do with JVP or his grand jury testimony it's strictly Sandusky trying to save his own ass.

 

[pandaczar12]

This is all noise, the Facts are Jerry Sandusky was found guilty in 45 of 48 counts and that has stood up to multiple attempts at appeals. The Fact is he is a criminal and deserves what he is facing (dying in prison/ then off to hell). Time to admit his appeal has nothing to do with JVP or his grand jury testimony it's strictly Sandusky trying to save his own ass.

Please try again with an on-topic response that actually addresses the content of my post. You keep going on and on about Sandusky, I don't mention him once in my post.

 

[indynittany]

Someone who just included RMT in a petition for Jerry Sandusky, when it's been proven a false claim, should probably STFU.

Taking the stand during a hearing isn't remotely close to opening yourself up to cross at a jury trial. You know this, but keep pretending like Jerry is going to wow everyone if he gets a new trial.

Save the cases of V2 and V8 all Jerry can do is attack the victims. Insisting RMT was used is attacking the victims because they've stated it wasn't. It's a stock defense in cases like this. That's why you continue to push it.

And you still can't address the behavior Jerry will have to concede to. Face it, the notoriety you claim sunk him is the only reason people like you are supporting him. He's a pedophile.

Blowing raspberries on your adopted son's stomach is now punishable by life in prison. Is that really the kind of country in which you want to live?

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Blowing raspberries on your adopted son's stomach is now punishable by life in prison. Is that really the kind of country in which you want to live?

Ummmm yeahhhhhh, that isn't all he did or was sent to prison for so you kind of FOS.

 

[thetruth82]

Please try again with an on-topic response that actually addresses the content of my post. You keep going on and on about Sandusky, I don mention him once in my post.

Well this thread is about Sandusky not Paterno so you're off topic. Grand jury testimony is not cross examined so not sure what your argument is, is all testimony given to a Grand jury invalid then?

 

[pandaczar12]

Well this thread is about Sandusky not Paterno so you're off topic. Grand jury testimony is not cross examined so not sure what your argument is, is all testimony given to a Grand jury invalid then?

I replied to the content of the post I was replying to. You did not. See where the breakdown occurred? Please try harder in the future to stay on topic. If you want to talk about Sandusky, reply to the OP.

Apparently you missed #2 and #3 in my post (271) above? I suggest you read it again slowly, and if you still don't understand... ask someone to explain it to you. This will not only save you future embarrassment, it will also stop wasting our time.

 

[thetruth82]

I replied to the content of the post I was replying to. You did not. See where the breakdown occurred? Please try harder in the future to stay on topic. If you want to talk about Sandusky, reply to the OP.

Apparently you missed #2 and #3 in my post (271) above? I suggest you read it again slowly, and if you still don't understand... ask someone to explain it to you. This will not only save you future embarrassment, it will also stop wasting our time.

Your an idiot, you brought joes testimony out of no where the post your replying to makes no mention of it. And #2 and #3 are pointless as well both happen with testimony given to a Grand jury so you're saying all Grand Jury testimony needs to be thrown out. Really what's most embarrassing is this continued call for a new Sandusky trial because it was "unfair" when really you're just hoping for something to come out to exonerate PSU, justice for Jerry's victims be damned. Time to face the fact Jerry is guilty as hell and deserves rot in prison and then rot in hell

 

[coveydidnt]

Loftus testimony in Turner v. Honker, July 10, 1996 (p. 109)

Q: Is it your testimony that prior to your resignation you had no idea from any source that complaints had been filed?

A: I had absolutely no idea

Testimony in Seignious v. Fair, January 22, 1998 (p. 151)

Q: At the time that you resigned, Dr. Loftus, were there two ethics complaints pending against you?

A. There was no ethics investigation going on, but there were rumors two people had filed complaints.

Q. How did you learn about these rumors?

A. I read about it in a newspaper column in February or March of whenever it was, 1996.

Q. And was that the very first time that you learned that there were rumors that people had filed ethics complaints against you?

A. Yes.

Testimony in Liano v. Diocese of Phoenix, December 21, 2006 (p. 68)

Q: And I’m trying to understand. With regard to the [complaints], did you resign from that organization, the American Psychological Association, while those complaints were pending?

A. I don’t know. I resigned in January of ’96, but I didn’t know anything about any complaints.

 

[MtNittany]

justice for Jerry's victims be damned...

...and the Jeep, Ford, and Mercedes dealers as well.

Let's remember what happens when you DO actually question the "victims":

 

[LaJolla Lion]

...and the Jeep, Ford, and Mercedes dealers as well.

Let's remember what happens when you DO actually question the "victims":

Why would you question the victims? Are you a lawyer or law enforcement individual? Oh wait...you're mad because Jerry molested them and got Joe's name crapped on...nevermind..carry on.