Sandusky prison interview article
- Thread starter NoBareFeet
- Start date
- Status
Oh look, you’re now up to 16 total posts since 2012 all of them in this thread. You must be pumped for some big paychecks coming your way!
Go shill somewhere else
You’re the delusional one. Most prosecutors and judges are corrupt assholes looking to climb political ladders not seek justice/truth. Our legal system is a joke.
Lemme guess, you are ok with the fact the judge in the summer 2012 trial of JS allowed John McQ to claim he was never at or testified in the 12/2011 prelim? What’s your explanation for such an absurdity? Poor John had a sudden case of dementia? See bottom of this post for the transcript:
https://pennstate.forums.rivals.com/threads/sandusky-prison-interview-article.351064/post-6720036
How ironic since the judge for Curley admonished him for have a faulty memory about stuff from 2001.
Did I say or suggest political aspirations don't drive rulings or decisions? I said, a plea doesn’t mean additional/most severe crimes didn't occur or couldn't be prove just like a settlement in a civil case doesn’t prove guilt.
Not sure why I'd have an issue with that ruling. I've seen countless worst decisions. That's not even in the discussion for something I'd complain about.
If you're arguing Sandusky should be freed/given a new trial on that ruling you're wrong. The fact people are defending/supporting Sandusky is terrifying and shows how emotional they still are about this more than a decade later. Sandusky is exactly where he should be. Just like Paterno's biggest supporters/defenders are why his reputation nationally is destroyed.
The public doesn't care or remember what the BOT said or anything in court. They remember a story breaking of a football coach (they don't even remember former coach) sexually assaulting minors in our locker room and the first thing Penn State fans did when the story broke was defend Paterno. Why you're disputing any of this is inconceivable. It's basic. We're not discussing what is fair or what should have happened. It doesn't matter that the BOT in your mind forced people to defend Paterno (especially since they didn't...like their mistakes that mistake was a choice) nor does it matter that you and I know Paterno followed procedure. All that matters is public perception which you're still contributing to destroying as you still don't comprehend your inability to accept what is supports the JoeBot argument. Just like people supporting Sandusky.
The sooner everyone stops with the nonsensical defense of Sandusky and defending Joe as though you're paid to do so the sooner people will forget and move on. But they can't move on because you can't as you still want/expect an apology to the Paterno family. I can't even begin to fathom how you dont understand that can never happen. But, of course, you still think the general public cares about what the BOT said
When anyone even remotely excuses TSM is being intellectually dishonest. There is no point in responding to them. Any out of program contact with a child should have been documented. PSU contacting JR was definitely CYA because TSM should have investigated the incident. The buck has always stopped with TSM.
MM reported it to PSU. The policy would identify the appropriate compliance officer.
The corrupt FBI?? Lulz! Freeh old buddies were never going to find anything. Kinda hard to when TSM was allowed to backup a shredding truck and go to town on destroying docs/evidence. Go away shill
Since TSM was told about 1998 and 2001 it makes no sense for the admins to be charged with failure to report but no one from TSM to be charged. TSM was legally obligated to look into any and all reports no matter how benign the reporter thought the incident was.
1. Lots of high ranking people were involved with TSM.
2. TSM didn't have deep pockets like PSU.
3. The media hype was all about bringing down Joe Paterno, a famous revered individual with an unblemished record.
? It was shut down and All the records were destroyed before any investigation- there are pictures of this happening…smh
Two things:
Ask yourself if you were FALSLY accused of raping children would you sit on the stand and defend yourself? Of course you would. He was being railroaded and not going to win the verdict no matter what. It didn’t matter if he testified or not and anyone knew that.
Have any former players or coaches hinted about whispers of him? Anyone?
Ask yourself if you were FALSLY accused of raping children would you sit on the stand and defend yourself? Of course you would. He was being railroaded and not going to win the verdict no matter what. It didn’t matter if he testified or not and anyone knew that.
Have any former players or coaches hinted about whispers of him? Anyone?
When JR was given a report from PSU of an out of program contact, he is required to internally investigate to at least find out who, what, when, and where regardless of the nature of the contact. Are you telling me that was done?
So you think there was a conspiracy in the Federal Government to protect TSM? Who on their board were they trying to protect and from what?
I don't think they knew about 1998.
Were they given anything actionable to report?
Do you have a cite for that? At Spanier's trial Tim Curley exonerated TSM.
Can you cite a law or regulation that said that in 2001? I don't think he had any such duty then. Particularly since Curley did not give him anything actionable.
Sandusky was a beloved figure in the State College area. I'm thinking he had that going for him in the trial and that is why they had to present multiple victims plus a third party witness. I also, think that is why Gricar did not charge him as an elected DA he knew one complaint would not get a conviction. I think Sandusky's reputation then gave him a lot of advantages that it took a lot of accusers to bring him down.
According to MM, yes.
I'm not taking the bait. You're not interested in having an honest convo, you are posting from an obvious SHILL account.
I'm just asking and answering questions. Your call as to whether you wish to respond.I'm not taking the bait. You're not interested in having an honest convo, you are posting from an obvious SHILL account.
No you're not, you're shilling and trying to infest the thread with bs and steer the convo.
Here's a question you've refused to answer. Why do you have an account that was created in summer 2012 (hmm right when the JS trial was going on, what a coincidence!) with no activity for 10+ years until yesterday and all of your posts are in this one thread?
I bet Lannie Davis knows the answer to your first question.
TSM also contributed around $200,000 to Tom Corbett's various campaigns over the years.
Numerous players stated that Jer did nothing to or around them.
TSM is a non-profit and prohibited by law from contributing to political campaigns. I think you might be conflating Board Members contributing.
To be fair. You're not looking for an honest discussion. You just want everyone to say this was all the fault of the BOT which isn't true despite their obvious mistakes.I'm not taking the bait. You're not interested in having an honest convo, you are posting from an obvious SHILL account.
The organization has guidelines. I never mentioned against the law in 2001. No one at TSM cared enough about the child in question to follow their own guidelines. The entire incident at PSU is the fault of TSM. JR admitted on the stand that telling him should have been enough. Done with you. You are intellectually dishonest.
I don't believe there were any such guidelines in place at TSM in 2001. Can you cite otherwise?
Where in JR's testimony did he take responsibility for the PSU scandal? Can you cite?
How am I dishonest? I am challenging assertions here that aren't true but that is not dishonesty.
Lulz! Ok pal whatever you say. I've made it abundantly clear TSM/CPS/DPW are the entities most to blame. I'd put the PSU BOT at #2.
That being said, the current FALSE narrative that's out there (a broken PSU culture enabled JS) is entirely on the BOT b/c their messaging when the scandal broke was horrendously bad (immediately assume guilt of all PSU employees, pay Freeh (who was colluding with the corrupt/conflicted PAOAG) to solidify that position, etc.).
The BOT was never told about 2001 or 1998 until 2011. TSM was not told about 1998 and were given a non-actionable report in 2001 by Curley. CPS and DPW were never told about 2001 either. How then are they the most to blame?
What proof is there that Freeh "colluded" with the OAG?
He DID say when he started the investigation that he would coordinate with the OAG and the NCAA.
What "messaging" could the BOT have used? Digging in their heels probably would have produced worse results than what they got.
He had a duty to the at risk children in his care according to their own guidelines which are standard for all such organizations. You are outside your depth. I am not. Didn’t even care enough to get the kids name. All civil LAWSUITS should have went to TSM.
But not at that time. Those guidelines/laws were not there otherwise he would have been charged as well. He was not (according to Curley's testimony) given any actionable information and "out of program contact" inquiries may be a good practice but were not in place as law or rules then absent an actionable report.
Not sure that is true
Sandusky was an employee of Penn State and abused boys at least three separate times on campus, probably more on that campus and the administration knew it. TSM is no more and received their punishment thus. TSM was investigated as I cited above and no wrongdoing was found. I cannot see how you can throw all of this on them when one phone call in 2001 would have stopped it. However, it might have cost Paterno and CSS their jobs.
How much money did TSM spend on lawsuits? They told TSM. According to JR that was enough. Goodbye.
Somewhere - probably an old computer - I have pic of the shredders going to tsm - you can probably google them
They went bankrupt. The gave TSM nothing actionable. Where did JR say that? Do you have a cite?
This from a Penn State supporter and investigator:
"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."
Adios
Last edited:
Ros, Joe himself told the grand jury that a very agitated McQueary reported the day after the incident that he had seen Sandusky doing "something of a sexual nature" to the boy. This was from Joe's own mouth. Please...read the link.
Keep in mind also that neither Joe himself nor any member of his family ever attempted to defend Sandusky. Their defense always rested not on Jerry-was-wrongly-accused but rather Joe-didn't-know.
Mike McQueary no doubt wishes he'd never gone into Lasch that night. What he saw there ruined his life. But he did see it and he did report it...including in a written statement to police. And what he saw was consistent with the independent and separate testimony of numerous other victims, witnesses, and complainants as compiled in the grand jury report.
Why didn't he barge into the shower right then and there? He should have for sure. But his brain probably couldn't process the horror and all the implications of it. I'd like to think I would have reacted differently on the scene, but you don't know until confronted by it.
No, Sandusky was not "cleared" of anything by previous grand juries...if they were in fact convened as vaguely reported. Declining to bring an indictment requested by prosecutors does not equate to "clearing." To me, this is on the order of claiming that attorneys of numerous victims conspired separately to influence their clients to lie to the grand jury on the theory there'd be a big-time payday at some future time if they did so. It's a desperate fairy tale with no grounding in facts or evidence.
Yes, my friend, we'll agree to disagree. But it's ironic as hell that you and others here find yourselves defending the guy who destroyed Joe and Joe's historic legacy to Penn State...and also to the game of college football. As I said earlier, if you want a hill to die on, Joe's is a lot worthier than Jerry's.
- Status
