Forum: The Rubber Room - Serious disease and death wishes =automatic ban. No blatant socially taboo racist insults, no obscenely gross pics and ABSOLUTELY NO HARDCORE PORNOGRAPHY.

Thread: Penn st got what was coming -school a disgrace

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
  1. #76  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    Quote Originally Posted by bukis 1 View Post
    What did Mcqery get 7 million? I guess he won his case based on all lies too. Right Brucefan? Everything at psu was all just a misunderstanding. That's how you sick people think over there

    EXCLUSIVE: Bombshell Audio Proves ESPN Censored Key Part of Mike McQueary Profile

    https://youtu.be/xXWodkR0LxM
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #77  
    RX Wizard bukis 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    columbus,oh
    Posts
    5,620
    John Ziegler and you live together right Brucefan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #78  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    Quote Originally Posted by bukis 1 View Post
    John Ziegler and you live together right Brucefan
    Stop , I cant take the intense scrutiny of the information provided . I have no comebacks . You have proved your case .

    it all makes perfect sense http://www.framingpaterno.com/sites/...ary%202015.pdf
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #79  
    RX Wizard bukis 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    columbus,oh
    Posts
    5,620
    Glad to see you've come to your senses! lol I forgot you and your cult over there never will. Trump may have to start throwing Happy Valley patrons out of our country to make it safer.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #80  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    Quote Originally Posted by bukis 1 View Post
    Glad to see you've come to your senses! lol I forgot you and your cult over there never will. Trump may have to start throwing Happy Valley patrons out of our country to make it safer.
    Not likely!

    Donald Trump Sends Letter Supportive of "Framing Paterno" /sites/default/files/3-27-2014%2012%3B45%3B51%20PM.GIF
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #81  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    Quote Originally Posted by bukis 1 View Post
    What did Mcqery get 7 million? I guess he won his case based on all lies too. Right Brucefan? Everything at psu was all just a misunderstanding. That's how you sick people think over there
    I honestly don't care if you think Jerry Sandusky's innocent. You're fooling yourself, however, if you think he (or Spanier, Curley, or Schultz) got a fair trial. Via John Ziegler:
    "Here is Mike McQueary's testimony from the Spanier trial where he accidentally revealed the Attorney General office's plan to leak the grand jury info before the arrests of Jerry, Tim, and Gary. In theory this could help get Jerry a new trial, but in this situation it will not..."







    Tuesday, April 4, 2017

    Showers And Leaks: Mike McQueary Blows The Whistle On AG's Office


    http://www.bigtrial.net/2017/04/show...ary-blows.html

    Read more at http://www.bigtrial.net/2017/04/show...8q0wKeO6Y3j.99

    "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."

    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."

    Read more at http://www.bigtrial.net/2017/04/show...8q0wKeO6Y3j.99
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #82  
    RX Wizard bukis 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    columbus,oh
    Posts
    5,620
    Brucefan do you get paid to try to protect psu? Can't imagine why anyone would work so diligently to defend them. You must have way too much time or just no life at all.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #83  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    Quote Originally Posted by bukis 1 View Post
    Brucefan do you get paid to try to protect psu? Can't imagine why anyone would work so diligently to defend them. You must have way too much time or just no life at all.
    This whole case is the greatest injustice I have ever seen in my life . It's an unbelievable perfect storm of media incompetence, political paybacks, personal vendettas, the total destruction of the winningest coach in college football history who lived his life impacting people in a positive way only to be destroyed overnight by a myth. I have spent way too much time, but not in sharing , but what I have seen and read about the case . Completely mind boggling , and anyone that looks ( I have no idea why you would, I get that) would come to the same conclusion I did .

    Ill just keep keep trying to educate people on the facts, and hopefully change some hearts and minds .

    Everyone should fight for something You believe in


    As they say, we are, because he was ..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #84  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    pa
    Posts
    40,887
    Quote Originally Posted by brucefan View Post
    This whole case is the greatest injustice I have ever seen in my life . It's an unbelievable perfect storm of media incompetence, political paybacks, personal vendettas, the total destruction of the winningest coach in college football history who lived his life impacting people in a positive way only to be destroyed overnight by a myth. I have spent way too much time, but not in sharing , but what I have seen and read about the case . Completely mind boggling , and anyone that looks ( I have no idea why you would, I get that) would come to the same conclusion I did .

    Ill just keep keep trying to educate people on the facts, and hopefully change some hearts and minds .

    Everyone should fight for something You believe in


    As they say, we are, because he was ..
    Joepa a huge fraud. He bullied faculty and administrators his entire career. The only thing that prevented him from jail was death. He died as he lived.....a fraud and a coward.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #85  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    My Response to Those Trying to Get Me Fired from Mediaite

    by John Ziegler | 6:41 pm, April 4th, 2017





    If you are a reader of small, far-left websites, there is a chance that, over the last couple of days, you have heard that I am awful person who should be fired from Mediaite due to my investigation of the entire “Penn State Scandal.” Based on one laughably inaccurate story from an unknown “journalist” — who never bothered to seek comment from me — some people now apparently believe that I have “stalked” the “victims” of Jerry Sandusky and revealed their identities and private contact information.
    This allegation is not only false, but a pure fantasy.
    Normally, I wouldn’t even bother to set the record straight, but the Mediaite editors wanted to give me the opportunity to respond, which I am more than happy to do. In fact, I strongly believe that even a cursory understanding of the real truth of this matter will give open-minded people a clear view of what really happened in the case itself.
    I have made a lot of mistakes in my crusade for justice and media responsibility in this case, but mistreating those who are accusers of Sandusky is NOT one of them. In fact, I now strongly believe that I have, in general, been too respectful of some of these grown men. When you understand the full story, I think that you will agree with me.
    Like almost everything about this crazy story, which exploded almost six years ago with the sudden firing of legendary football coach Joe Paterno (just four days after Sandusky’s arrest and the release of a grand jury presentment), these accusations against me are not only untrue, but the exact opposite of the truth.
    As for the specifics, one serious allegation is that I stalked certain victims. Let me be clear, I have NEVER remotely “stalked” anyone in this case. This is simply a loaded term used to create a false impression and provoke faux outrage. In fact, I have only ever sought to contact THREE of the thirty-three adult men (who were paid almost $100 million by Penn State in this case) and in all three of those situations my actions have been on extremely firm moral and legal ground.
    The three men who I have sought to speak with about their stories are Aaron Fisher (“Victim 1” who, in his own name, wrote the only accuser’s book in the case), Sandusky’s adopted son Matt Sandusky, and a man Penn State paid as “Victim 2,” the boy who Mike McQueary infamously saw with Sandusky in a Penn State shower in 2001. It is important to point out that ALL of the accusers in this case are adults who have proactively put their names very clearly in the open public record, but these three provide extremely special circumstances regarding the public nature of their role.
    Fisher, by far the most important accuser in the whole case who wrote the book and appeared on 20/20, is obviously a public figure in every way. But more than that, he ASKED me, through an article in the Philadelphia Inquirer, to meet him. Before he did that, I had never even attempted to contact him, despite the fact that his mother once accepted, via Facebook, my offer of $10,000 to charity if Aaron could pass a lie detector test (which she then backed away from the next day, apparently after speaking to Aaron).
    Aaron not only publicly said he wanted to meet (not to mention engaging me in a long, taunting Facebook exchange), his fiancé posted this photo of him giving the middle finger to the camera while partly naked in a bed draped with cash to Facebook:

    This photo appeared to be directed at me after I had reported on my website that many of his good friends, former girlfriends, supporters, and even close family members had gone on the record interviews with me saying that they are quite certain he was never abused by Sandusky. (A total of 12 people have spoken to me regarding this allegation.)
    At this point, I felt more than within my rights to try to speak with Aaron in person. So I went across the country to his house in Pennsylvania and attempted to do so. I did that on ONE occasion and he was not home. I also called his cell phone (twice, I believe) to let him know I was in town. This is NOT “stalking.” This is called “journalism.”
    As for Matt Sandusky, having starred in a documentary film and done a very revealing interview with Oprah Winfrey about the case (where he melted down when asked how we know he’s telling the truth), he is also very much an adult public figure. It is also very important to point out that the ONLY time he ever testified in this case was when he strongly DEFENDED Jerry Sandusky to the grand jury.
    So, in a rational world, Matt clearly has no magical media “force field” as a “Sandusky Victim,” as the court never determined that he was one. Penn State also paid him a large, un-vetted, settlement (despite the fact that he was too old under the state’s statute of limitations law).
    So, last year when Matt held his first speaking engagement in Pennsylvania, I flew across the country to attend with the hope of asking him a few questions (I had previously publicly offered to donate money to charity in exchange for an on-camera interview, but he never responded). I had a ticket to this very public event, on public property, in my own name, but it was VERY obvious that I was targeted by the authorities, at Matt’s direction, from the moment I arrived at the event (one which, very oddly, Matt had already banned any recording of).
    Outrageously and inexplicably, after Matt refused to start speaking while I was still sitting in the audience minding my own business, the police ordered me to leave the premises. When I asked why, they pulled me out of my seat, dragged me across the floor, slammed me to the ground and handcuffed me. I was arrested and hit with a series of completely absurd charges. Thankfully, because it was all caught on tape and it was very clear I had done nothing wrong, all the charges were eventually dropped and I paid a $100 fine so I could avoid the expense of yet another trip across the country.
    Had I been a celebrity, or the media not been so incredibly biased on this story, my plight would have been considered a serious violation of freedom of speech and of the press. It is the most egregious abuse of my rights that I have ever experienced. I know that I did not do anything wrong/illegal and the fact Matt was so incredibly worried about having me simply watch him speak should say volumes about what is really going on here.
    The only other accuser of Jerry Sandusky I have ever sought to speak with is the man who Penn State paid millions of dollars as “Victim 2,” the boy in the “Mike McQueary Episode” at the heart of the entire case.
    It is important to know that this man (who claimed he was a “victim” after he gave this bombshell statement exonerating Sandusky in the McQueary situation, causing both sides to fear his testimony) never testified at Sandusky’s trial. He also, as a married Marine, wrote letters to the editor in his own name strongly supporting Sandusky in local papers after the story broke, which to me eliminated any claim to anonymity that he might have.
    Amazingly, prosecutors told the jury that they could not produce a victim in the most widely reported allegation of child sex abuse in history because the boy’s identity was “known only to God.”

    Therefore, no court has ever officially deemed this man to be a “victim” in this case. Like Matt Sandusky, he was paid money by Penn State in an agreement where the school specifically states that it has not verified the nature of the claims. In an effort to find out what really happened, I e-mailed him on several occasions, even making a video plea just for him, which I later posted to YouTube. I have also left him a couple of voicemails, but was never sure I had the correct phone number.

    I always made it clear that if he simply responded that I had his real story wrong that I would, of course, leave him alone (and I would have been THRILLED to be able to get this entire monkey of a story off of my back forever). That never happened, and so I then made one visit to his home where I immediately left after being asked to by his wife. Again, that is not stalking: It’s trying to find out the truth.
    So I have never remotely “stalked” anyone, nor have I never “outed” anyone whose name was not already made very public by their choice. I have also never come close to revealing anyone’s contact information — that allegation is simply bizarre. Like almost everything else in this insane tale, there is what some in the media tells you about what happened, and then there is the truth.
    I just told you the truth. Just in case that still matters.
    John Ziegler hosts a weekly podcast focusing on news media issues and is a documentary filmmaker. You can follow him on Twitter at @ZigManFreud or email him at johnz@mediaite.com












    http://www.mediaite.com/online/my-re...from-mediaite/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #86  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    O.J style Trial travesty of justice The article speaks for itself



    Sunday, June 4, 2017

    Penn State Sentences: Shakespearian Tragedy Or Comedy Of Errors?


    image: https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cZ1sBFdtv.../s400/boca.jpg
    The Man Who Made Penn State's Showers Safe Again
    By Ralph Cipriano
    for BigTrial.net

    Judge John Boccabella proclaimed that he was witnessing a Shakespearian tragedy on Friday when he sentenced Graham Spanier, Tim Curley and Gary Schultz to jail for misdemeanors.

    But actually it was a farce that the judge was presiding over. "The Comedy of Errors" -- [Shakespeare wrote that one too] -- that Boccabella had a starring role in.

    To start things off, the prosecutors in the case wrote an insane sentencing memorandum where they proposed abandoning the law, as well as all logic and common decency, in favor of mob rule.

    What the prosecutors proposed was to hold Graham Spanier and one of their own cooperating witnesses -- former athletic director Curley -- personally responsible for the actions of bloggers, and the politically incorrect statements of some of Spanier's defenders.

    As crazy as that notion was, Judge Boccabella promptly ratified it by sending all three former Penn State administrators off to jail on Friday for a misdemeanor crime that they weren't guilty of, for supposedly breaking a child endangerment law that never even applied to them.

    All because of the blasphemies of others.

    According to the PennLive report on Friday's sentencing, the judge said that despite the fact that the three Penn State administrators had lost their jobs and their reputations because of this fiasco, a message of deterrence was still needed.

    Because some at Penn State, including members of the board of trustees, were still making excuses about what supposedly happened at Penn State, the judge said. And some of those people actually had the nerve to question the truthfulness and motives of Jerry Sandusky's alleged victims.

    Oh no, not the sainted victims of child abuse! Horrors!

    We're talking about the Happy Valley version of the Septa bus crash, where 33 alleged victims got in line to collect $93 million that the university was handing out, no questions asked. The actions of the Penn state trustees were so irresponsible that their own insurance carrier wound up suing them.

    In case you haven't done the math, the payouts amount to $2.8 million each. And, according to the rules of the game, as practiced in Happy Valley, none of the victims had to even reveal their real names. But according to the Honorable Judge Boccabella, it's beyond skepticism to suggest that a few fakers might have gotten in line for that kind of lottery.

    In case you're unfamiliar with the legend of the Septa bus crash, it's a Philadelphia specialty where a bus with 3 people on it crashes. And after all the lawyers in the case get through, 20 people file claims for damages in court.

    But in Happy Valley, it's even easier to collect.

    In the Penn State lottery, the university just put aside a pot of gold, and let the plaintiffs's lawyers decide who got what. And it didn't matter that the trustees only put $60 million in the pot. And the gold rush promptly overspent the budget by $33 million.

    No problem, we'll just pay all those bills, no questions asked. After all, it's only fair. Why prolong the suffering of the alleged "victims" by asking them any questions. Like is it true you actually claimed that Joe Paterno got in the shower with you and Jerry? And then you got paid?

    Anybody have any questions about such a process that's played out behind closed doors and under court seal, where the alleged victims grabbing those FAT CHECKS don't even have to state their real names?

    No possibility of fraud there, right? After all, people don't lie. Especially alleged victims of sex abuse. And certainly their lawyers can be trusted.

    All the way to the bank.

    Never mind that in Philadelphia, in a travesty that coincided with the Penn State scandal, a fraudster dubbed "Billy Doe" -- whose real name is Danny Gallagher -- just collected $5 million for his alleged pain and suffering in an out-of-court settlement with the Archdiocese of Philadelphia.

    Even though Billy Doe/Danny Gallagher has since been revealed as a complete fraud who just stole that money.

    And if you don't believe me, just ask the retired detective who was the district attorney's lead investigator.

    If there was any justice in Happy Valley, it would be Penn State's trustees who would be on trial for abandoning their fiduciary duties. But instead, Judge Boccabella was conducting an inquisition. Where Spanier, Curley and Schultz would have to pay for the blasphemies spoken by others.

    Because in Happy Valley, under the rules of the Penn State scandal, it's blasphemy to question the truthfulness and the motives of any of Jerry's alleged victims.

    As long as such an atmosphere of denial exists in Happy Valley, the judge declared, "a similar incident could occur at any time"

    That's right, Judge. At any moment, Mike McQueary could walk back into the showers at Penn State, and witness another former Penn State coach cavorting naked with another boy. And then, Mike could do nothing about it for another ten years.

    Just like he did the first time.

    Nice logic, Judge. But this is the same judge who introduced a 28-year-old witness to the jury as "John Doe." So everybody could pretend that instead of a grown man with a net worth of $8 million, Michal Kajak was a frightened 10 year-old boy who needed his Mommy and a box of Kleenex to get through a brutal inquisition where the defense lawyers in the case were too frightened to ask a question.

    Oh, please stop the torture! And get that sobbing witness another tissue.

    In case you missed it, after he got through ratifying the notion of mob rule, the Honorable Judge Boccabella promptly sentenced former Penn State President Graham Spanier to 4 to 12 months in jail, with two months of it under house arrest.

    Former Athletic Director Tim Curley got 7 to 23 months; former Penn State VP Gary Schultz got 6 to 23 months. But half of Schultz and Curley's sentences will also be under house arrest.

    Let's keep in mind that these three men had clean records and were being sentenced for a misdemeanor, where a fine and/or probation would have been appropriate.

    In any other case where the media wasn't all over it, and the prosecutors weren't screaming for blood.

    But actually, these guys should have never even gone on trial. But they did, thanks to one other legacy from Philadelphia -- bad case law made in the Billy Doe scandal.

    I've written about this before, but I don't think people get it.

    So, let's try again.

    Before the Billy Doe case came along, between 1972 and 2007, the only 300 people in Pennsylvania who were charged with endangering the welfare of a child were people who had direct contact with children, such as parents, teachers and guardians.

    In 2005, a grand jury investigating sex abuse in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia wanted to charge Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua and Msgr. William J. Lynn with endangering the welfare of a child.

    The same stunt the AG's office pulled with Curley, Scultz and Spanier. Only it was about real crimes.

    But a grand jury and Philadelphia District Attorney Lynne Abraham stated in the grand jury report that the state's child endangerment law, passed in 1972, only applied to people who had direct contact with children, such as parents, teachers and guardians.

    So that's why the grand jury and Abraham couldn't charge the cardinal or the monsignor with endangering the welfare of a child. Even though, according to the grand jury, they had been involved in a cover up that had shielded some 60 pedophile priests from prosecution for raping hundreds of child victims.

    Abraham promptly led a statewide drive to amend the law, and the state Legislature complied by passing an amendment tin 2007 that added supervisors to the law.

    So, under the rules of the game in Pennsylvania, Spanier, Curley and Schultz could have never even been charged with child endangerment, until some bad case law got made.

    Those blood-thirsty prosecutors in the state's Attorney-General's office would have never been able to write their insane sentencing memoranda. And the Honorable John Boccabella wouldn't have had to preside over a Shakespearian tragedy.

    So what happened?

    In 2009, along came an unscrupulous, ambitious District Attorney in Philadelphia, Seth Williams, who, like those blood-thirsty prosecutors in the AG's office, didn't have any interest in the rule of law.

    Instead, Williams went out in 2011 and indicted Msgr. Lynn under the state's original 1972 child endangerment law with no explanation for what he did.

    And what he did was pretend that there had been 2005 grand jury report from Abraham, and no 2007 amendment of the state law. Instead, Rufus Seth Williams decided to make his own law.

    Keep in mind this is the same unscrupulous district attorney, Rufus Seth Williams, who is facing a 29-count federal indictment charging bribery, extortion, honest services fraud and wire fraud.

    But maybe his worse crime was what he did to the law.

    Msgr. Lynn, of course was convicted at a 2013 trial, on one felony count of child endangerment, and he got sentenced to 3 to 6 years.

    Later that same year, the state Superior Court declared that the sky was blue. The court declared that the state's original child endangerment law didn't apply to supervisors. Only to people who had direct contact with children, such as parents teachers and guardians.

    D.A. Williams promptly appealed.

    That's when, in 2015, the state Supreme Court made some bad case law. The Supremes overturned the overturning of Msgr. Lynn's conviction. By saying the sky was purple.

    They did it by clairvoyantly reinterpreting the meaning of the original 1972 state child endangerment law to declare that they originally meant to include supervisors.

    In making bad case law, the Supremes ignored the actions of the 2005 grand jury in Philadelphia. And the actions of the state legislature in 2007 to amend the child endangerment law to include supervisors.

    But that's of little comfort to Spanier, Curley and Schultz as they head off to jail.

    But at least the citizens of Dauphin County, and the gullible media, can applaud the actions of the Honorable John Boccabella. That courageous judge, who with his tough jail sentences for the Penn State trio, assured that the showers at the Lasch Building will be safe again, and free of pedophiles.


    Posted by Ralph Cipriano at 9:40 AM image: http://www.blogger.com/img/icon18_edit_allbkg.gif

    Trial: Graham Spanier Trial



    Read more at http://www.bigtrial.net/2017/06/penn...54L7JeKk7cG.99
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #87  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    SEPTEMBER 5, 2017 Franco Harris: Graham Spanier Trial, Jail Sentence A Ridiculous Farce


    image: https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Y9Wmgi4q3...400/franco.jpg
    By Ralph Cipriano
    for BigTrial.net

    Franco Harris thinks that former Penn State University President Graham Spanier got screwed.

    Harris, 67, the former Penn State star and NFL Hall of Famer with the Pittsburgh Steelers, went on John Ziegler's "World According To Zig" podcast on Sunday to describe the trial and subsequent jail sentence of Spanier as a ridiculous farce.

    "They had this secret witness who was guarded by 1,000 police take the stand," Harris said, laughing. "It was a farce, it was staged."

    Harris was referring to the Dauphin County trial of Spanier last March, when Judge John A. Boccabella had a phalanx of extra sheriff's deputies patrolling the courtroom while the judge introduced 28-year-old Michal Kajak to the jury as "John Doe."

    Kajak, who testified as a sex abuse victim of Jerry Sandusky's, proceeded to sob on cue. Only the jury was never told about the sex abuse that Kajak allegedly suffered. It wasn't rape; Kajak was allegedly soaped up in the shower by Sandusky, for which Kajak collected in a civil settlement $8 million.

    And when Kajak got through his direct testimony, with the help of some Kleenex, the cowed defense lawyers in the case were too intimidated to ask Kajak a single question. Even though Kajak, a shaky witness at best, had given four different dates for the alleged shower incident, varying from 1998 to 2001, when he was between 10 and 14 years old.

    In the Kangaroo Court of Judge Boccabella, this was all the evidence that was needed to send a man up the river. Spanier was promptly convicted of endangering the welfare of a child, and the judge sentenced him to 4 to 12 months in jail.

    "That was so ridiculous," Harris said about the jail sentence. "So once again we see the political system at work here with the Attorney General's office. That was a farce."

    About the prosecution's case against Spanier, Harris said, "They showed nothing, they had nothing. It was all an emotional appeal to the jury."

    "This judge was just ridiculous," Harris said. And then there was the Attorney General's office.

    Short of an acquittal on all the charges, "This is the second best verdict we could have had," Harris said, because the jury found Spanier innocent of a second endangerment charge, as well as a charge of conspiracy.

    "And the Attorney General's office tried to make it . . . like they had this big victory," Harris said.

    "And of course the media lapped it up," Ziegler chimed in. "The media is so dumb. Anything that substantiates their fairy tale narrative they embrace."

    Ziegler asked Harris, a longtime defender of former Coach Joe Paterno, if he believed that Sandusky was innocent.

    "There will always be questions about that because a lot of them [the alleged victims] weren't even vetted," Harris said. "Penn State ended up playing all the money [$93 million to 32 alleged victims] and Penn State didn't even take the time to vet anyone."

    In Harris's view, his former coach got tarred and feathered.


    "When the news broke about Jerry and the allegations [came out] against Jerry," Harris said, "That should have never led to the firing of Joe Paterno. There should not have been any connection whatsoever."

    Harris said he would continue the fight to clear Paterno's name.

    "We have to get the story out, we want to educate Penn Staters," he said. He expects "this HBO movie" starring Al Pacino to stir things up again.

    "There are things that we're gonna have to do to really get our side of the story out," Harris said. "That's going to be very important, to get our side of the story out."

    "We will continuing fighting and never stop."

    On the podcast, Harris said he was reading an advance copy of Mark Pendergrast's book on the Penn State sex scandal, "The Most Hated Man In America; Jerry Sandusky and The Rush To Judgment," which has been excerpted several times on Big Trial.

    "It definitely makes you question some things," Harris said about Pendergrast's book. "It definitely isn't over."

    Elsewhere, on the podcast, Harris talked bout the upcoming football season. He pronounced Penn State's Saquon Barkley "the real deal." And revealed how he changed his diet 17 years ago to include blueberries and fish oil in hopes of healing his brain from all the concussions he's had on the gridiron.

    Harris also panned former NFL QB Colin Kaepernick for his social activism.

    "When he puts that suit on it is not just about him and his position," Harris said. "The team has to come first."

    The entire podcast can be heard here.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #88  
    RX Local
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    North of there
    Posts
    18,384
    Report: Police report corroborates testimony that Paterno knew of previous Sandusky allegations

    Dr. Saturday • Nick Bromberg • 48 minutes ago

    Former Penn State assistant Mike McQueary told police in 2011 that Paterno acknowledged having heard about a previous incident.
    A police report written in 2011 based on the account of former Penn State assistant Mike McQueary is consistent with testimony a former Penn State administrator gave that former coach Joe Paterno knew of a previous allegation of sexual abuse by Jerry Sandusky.
    According to a CNN report, the police report details McQueary’s 2001 report to Paterno that he saw Sandusky and a boy in the Penn State football facilities.
    “Paterno, upon hearing the news, sat back in his chair with a dejected look on his face,” the report states, adding that McQueary “said Paterno’s eyes appeared to well up with tears.”
    “Then he made the comment to McQueary this was the second complaint of this nature he had received about Sandusky,” the report states, citing McQueary’s recollection.
    Paterno and McQueary had “no discussion of the previous complaint at that time or any other time,” the report states.
    During former Penn State president Graham Spanier’s child endangerment trial this spring, former Penn State athletic director Tim Curley testified that he had discussed a 1998 allegation against Sandusky with Paterno.
    No charges ever came of the 1998 investigation. The Freeh Report, commissioned in 2012, also revealed that Paterno and other Penn State administrators were previously aware of allegations vs. Sandusky.
    A man has also testified that he told Paterno as far back as 1976 of an allegation of abuse by Sandusky.
    Sandusky was arrested in 2011 and later convicted of 45 counts of sexual abuse. He’s currently serving a 30-60 year prison sentence.
    Paterno lost his job as the scandal surrounding Sandusky erupted. He died in January 2012.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #89  
    RX Wizard PatsFanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    new england
    Posts
    7,243
    Disgusting human being right there
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #90  
    RX Local
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    North of there
    Posts
    18,384
    Quote Originally Posted by PatsFanatic View Post
    Disgusting human being right there
    Guilt of what he kept hidden put him in the grave
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #91  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    SHEEP


    Monday, September 11, 2017

    CNN Smears Joe Paterno With Old News From Tainted Source

    By Ralph Cipriano
    for BigTrial.net

    On Saturday, when the Nittany Lions were defeating the Pittsburgh Panthers 33-14 to go to 2-0 on a promising young football season, Sara Ganim of CNN posted a blast from Penn State's nightmarish past -- a big scoop that supposedly further tarred and feathered the ghost of the late Joe Paterno.

    What startling new evidence did Ganim have that she claimed would destroy what was left of Paterno's credibility? A one-page, 16-year-old police report from a tainted source and an investigation marred by blatant police and prosecutorial misconduct. And what did Ganim and CNN do with that new piece of evidence? She claimed it "bolsters evidence" that Paterno "knew years before Jerry Sandusky's arrest that his longtime assistant might be abusing children."

    You had to dig deep into Ganim's intellectually dishonest story to discover what her main new allegation was -- that Paterno supposedly knew about a 1998 incident where Sandusky was accused of hugging a naked 10-year-old boy in the shower. An incident investigated by the Centre County District Attorney's Office at the time and determined to be unfounded.

    An incident that allegedly happened three years before the infamous 2001 Mike McQueary shower incident, where McQueary, according to the state attorney general's indictment, supposedly saw Sandusky anally raping another 10-year-old boy in the showers. Even though McQueary later admitted what the attorney general wrote wasn't true. And the alleged victim of the most infamous act of child abuse in the history of America never came forward to testify. Despite tons of publicity and a potential multimillion dollar payout.

    With the so-called Penn State sex abuse scandal, it's getting harder and harder to separate reality from myth. All Ganim has done with her latest effort is to throw a fresh coat of mud on the situation and emphasize the need for independent scrutiny of the tainted investigation of Sandusky, as well as Ganim's central role in it.

    The problems with Ganim

    Problem No. 1 with Ganim's new story is that the news the reporter was peddling directly contradicted one of her previous scoops. Where she claimed that Paterno, who's no longer around to defend himself, knew about a previous allegation of abuse regarding Sandusky dating back to 1971.

    She also writes in her latest story about the 1998 incident as though it's some kind of mystery, even though Ganim, who did not immediately respond to a request for comment, is intimately familiar with all the details.

    So when did Joe know that Jerry might be a pedophile, Sara? Was it in 1998, or was it way back in 1971? Or was it in 1976, with another incident involving a "John Doe 150," as Ganim wrote about in her Saturday story.

    Problem No. 2 with Ganim's latest scoop -- the reporter has an ethical conflict that is undisputed.

    At Sandusky's trial, the prosecutors from the state attorney general's office admitted in a legal stipulation that Ganim, who won a Pulitzer Prize for her reporting on Sandusky while working for The Patriot News of Harrisburg, had meddled in a supposedly secret grand jury investigation of Sandusky.

    How did she meddle? By acting as an agent for the state attorney general's office when she contacted the mother of the naked 10-year old who was allegedly hugged in the shower.

    This ethical conflict was laid out in a legal brief filed by Sandusky's lawyers in their arguments for a new trial. In the brief, Sandusky's lawyers wrote that Ganim "approached the mother of accuser 6," Deb McCord, according to the testimony of State Police Corporal Joseph Leiter, and gave the mother the name and phone number for an investigator assigned to the attorney general's office.

    Ganim, according to the brief, left this message for McCord:

    "Debra, it's Sara from the Patriot. I just want to pass along this agent's name and number. The Attorney General has expressed interest in helping you."


    So when Sara Ganim writes another story about Joe Paterno, it's not exactly like Bob Woodward opining about Watergate. But that didn't prevent Ganim from making a splash with her bogus scoop in the gullible mainstream media, such as The Philadelphia Inquirer, with a fresh round of headlines asking What did Joe Know and When Did He Know It?

    Let's get to Ganim's new evidence and lay out why the source of it is tainted, as well as the product of an investigation marked by blatant police and prosecutorial misconduct.

    The one page Pennsylvania state police report from 2001, supposedly obtained from a source, Ganim wrote, is "described here for the first time." The report "lays out an account from whistleblower Mike McQueary," who was telling Paterno about the infamous shower incident starring a naked Jerry Sandusky and a 10-year-old boy.

    "Paterno allegedly told McQueary in 2001 that the claim against Sandusky ' was the second complaint of this nature he had received," according to the police report, which was written after Sandusky's arrest 10 years later," Ganim wrote.

    "Paterno, upon hearing the news, stat back in his chair with a dejected look on his face," the report states, adding that McQueary "said Paterno's eyes appeared to well up with tears."

    "Then he made the comment to McQueary this was the second complaint of this nature he had received about Sandusky," the report states, citing McQueary's recollection."

    The police report also noted that Paterno allegedly told McQueary that Dottie Sandusky, Jerry's wife, had told Sue Paterno, Joe's wife, that "Jerry doesn't like girls."

    A tainted witness

    Let's start with McQueary, who, according to Ganim, is now writing a book about his exploits as the alleged Penn State whistleblower.

    As former NCIS Special Agent John Snedden has said, McQueary is not a credible witness. As a special agent for the Federal Investigative Service, Snedden investigated former Penn State President Graham Spanier in 2012, to determine whether his top secret security clearance should be renewed by the federal government. Snedden wrote a recently declassified 110-page report that concluded there was no sex crime at Penn State and no coverup.

    Snedden didn't believe McQueary because he told five different versions of what he saw and heard in the Penn State showers, featuring fleeting glimpses of naked people in the shower and slapping sounds. The day he witnessed the shower event, McQueary was repeatedly questioned by his father, a doctor, and a friend of his father's, another doctor, about what happened. McQueary could not definitely say whether he had witnessed a sexual attack or horseplay. And that's why neither of the two doctors, both mandated reporters, ever told the police.

    McQueary was also questioned by two Penn State administrators, who came to the same conclusion as the two doctors, that McQueary wasn't sure what he saw or heard in the showers. So they didn't report it to the police either.

    "I've never had a rape victim or a witness to a rape tell multiple stories about how it happened," Snedden said in a previous interview with Big Trial, to describe why McQueary wasn't a credible witness. "If it's real it's always been the same thing," Snedden said.


    "In my view, the evolution of what we saw as a result of Mike McQueary's interview with the AG's office" was the transformation of a story about rough horseplay into something sexual, Snedden said.


    "I think it would be orchestrated by them," Snedden said about the AG's office, which has never responded to multiple requests for comment.

    A tainted investigation and grand jury report

    That didn't stop the attorney general's office from running with their version of McQueary's story.

    The 2011 grand jury report claimed that McQueary witnessed a 10-yar-old boy in the showers being subjected to “anal intercourse” by a “naked Jerry Sandusky.” McQueary supposedly told Joe Paterno about it, and two other university officials, but Penn State covered it up, the grand jury report says.

    But McQueary himself was shocked when he read the grand jury report. He emailed the prosecutors, saying they had “twisted” his words. ”I cannot say 1,000 percent sure that it was sodomy,” McQueary wrote. “I did not see insertion.”

    The investigation conducted by the state police in the Sandusky case also included stone-cold proof of police misconduct on tape. On April 21, 2011, the state police made the mistake of leaving a tape recorder on, and the machine caught the police deliberately lying to one alleged victim to get him to tell the story they wanted him to tell.

    State Troopers Joseph Leiter and Scott Rossman were interviewing Brett Houtz at the police barracks, with Houtz’s attorney Benjamin Andreozzi present. While Houtz took a cigarette break the two troopers continued talking with Houtz’s lawyer. They assumed the tape-recorder was turned off but it wasn't.



    In their conversation captured for eternity, the troopers talked about how it took them months to get details of sex attacks out of Aaron Fisher, Victim No. 1 in the Penn State case, and how they’re sure that Houtz was a rape victim too. The troopers then discussed how to get more details of sex abuse out of Houtz.


    Attorney Andreozzi had a helpful suggestion: “Can we at some point say to him, ‘Listen, we have interviewed other kids and other kids have told us that there was intercourse and that they have admitted this, you know. Is there anything else you want to tell us.’ ”


    “Yep, we do that with all the other kids,” Trooper Leiter said. Sure enough, when Houtz returned, Trooper Leiter told him, “I just want to let you know you are not the first victim we have spoken to.” The trooper told Houtz about nine adults that they had already talked to and said, “It is amazing. If this was a book, you would have been repeating word for word pretty much what a lot of people have already told us.”


    The troopers, however, have only interviewed three alleged victims at that point, and only one – Aaron Fisher – has alleged prolonged abuse. But Houtz didn't know that.


    “I don’t want you to feel ashamed because you are a victim in this whole thing,” Trooper Leiter told House. “He [Sandusky] took advantage of you . . . [but] We need you to tell us as graphically as you can what took place as we get through this procedure. I just want you to understand that you are not alone in this. By no means are you alone in this.”


    Reaction to Ganim's latest story



    The condemnation of Ganim's most recent story came from many quarters.

    "Well CNN published a lie from Sara Ganim," tweeted Scott Paterno, a lawyer who defended his father during the Sandusky scandal. "Sue never said that Dottie told her anything and this was categorically denied before publication."

    "To be clear Sara Ganim and @CNN is using triple hearsay to get clicks and it's false. And enough is enough,"

    "To my knowledge we were not contacted by Sara Ganim for a response," Dottie Sandusky wrote. "If we had been, I would have told her that this is old news which actually exonerates both Joe and Jerry.The incident in question is the 1998 episode which, according to Tim Curley's testimony, Joe knew was fully investigated by the D.A.and determined to be unfounded. I never said that Jerry doesn't like girls and the factual recording, including at trial, makes that extremely obvious to anyone not invested in this entire fairy tale.z"

    "On the brighter side, I'm glad to see that Sara and the rest of the news media has seemingly dropped the absurd notion that Joe Paterno was told in the 1970s about abuse that never happened by accusers who made up stories for Penn State money," Dottie Sandusky wrote.


    Former Special Agent Snedden called Ganim's scoop "revisionist history."

    "The whole thing is absurd," Snedden said about the supposedly new police report from 2011. "It was written ten years after the fact," Snedden said about the 2001 shower incident supposedly witnessed by McQueary.

    "Police reports are supposed to be contemporaneous," Snedden said. About the 2011 police report concerning the 2001 shower incident, Snedden asked, "How is that contemporaneous?"

    The CNN story, Snedden said, is the product of either "trying to either cover your ass or bolster your position."

    "It's totally absurd," Snedden said. "It appears to me that she [Ganim] doesn't even go through the motions of asking if it's accurate."

    John Ziegler, a reporter who has covered the Penn State story for years, was even harsher in his assessment of Ganim's work.

    "This one [Ganim's new story] is the biggest piece of crap yet," Ziegler said. "Ganim is pretending that we don't know" about the 1998 shower incident, Ziegler said. "If she was at the trial she would know that what she's reporting is ancient news. It's got cobwebs on it."

    "This is actually exculpatory," Ziegler said about Ganim's latests coop.

    When McQueary is telling Joe about the 198 shower incident, which is almost identical to the 2001 shower incident, "Joe is immediately thinking back to 1998," Ziegler said.

    "That then tells us that McQueary never said anything [to Paterno] about a sexual assault because Joe already knows that 1998 is a nothing burger," Ziegler said. "Had McQueary actually had something about a sexual assault Joe would have never connected it to 1998, because the D.A. had already cleared Sandusky."


    Ziegler said he has come to the conclusion that Ganim "was a very ambitious and also very native or stupid person who got used" by prosecutors in the Sandusky case to basically "put out a Craig's list ad" for more victims of sexual abuse.

    Ziegler said that Ganim's story goes beyond any claims of the prosecutors.

    Former Chief Deputy Attorney General Frank Fina, the lead prosecutor in the Sandusky case, went on 60 Minutes Sports in 2013 and said that there was no evidence that Joe Paterno had ever participated in a cover up.

    "I did not find that evidence," Fina said on 60 Minutes Sports.

    "It does reek of deception," Ziegler said about Ganim's latest effort to prop up the official Penn State story line.

    "They have to be worried about something," Ziegler said, who devoted a podcast to it. "This story makes me think that even she doubts it."

    Mark Pendergrast, an author who has written a book about Jerry Sandusky, The Most Hated Man In America; Jerry Sandusky and the Rush to Judgment, said that McQueary "revised his memory a decade after the Feb. 2001 shower incident, in which he heard slapping sounds but did not see Sandusky and a boy in the shower -- he only fleetingly saw a boy, in the mirror."

    McQueary's "memory of his meeting with Paterno in 2001was also subject to revisions and this appears to be more evidence of that," Pendergrast wrote in an email. "In other words, this is Sara Ganim once more raising a non-issue based on Mike McQueary's revised memory, and referring as well to highly questionable anonymous allegations dating back to the 1970s."

    The 1970s victims
    In May 2016, Ganim reported on CNN that a man who claimed to have been raped by Sandusky was personally ordered by Joe Paterno to keep quiet about the abuse.

    "Stop it right now" or "we'll call the authorities," the victim told Ganim that Paterno had told him.

    The victim told Ganim that he had no doubt it was Paterno on the other end of the phone ordering him to keep quiet.

    "There was no question in my mind who Joe was," the victim told Ganim. "I've heard that voice a million times. It was Joe Paterno."

    That victim got paid.
    Now we come to the most ridiculous part of our story, namely the man referred to in Ganim's most recent opus as "John Doe 150," the alleged sex abuse victim of Jerry Sandusky's dating back to June 1976.

    The one that Joe also allegedly knew about.

    John Doe 150 was represented in his civil claim by Slade McLaughlin and Paul Lauricella, the two Philadelphia lawyers who represented Danny Gallagher AKA "Billy Doe" in his bogus claim against the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, where Gallagher collected $5 million.

    Gallagher is the lying, scheming altar boy who claimed he was the victim of three separate rapes by a couple of priests and a Catholic school teacher. But then the lead investigator in the case, retired detective Joe Walsh, came forward to say that he caught Gallagher telling one lie after another, and that Gallagher even admitted he "made stuff up." Which led the detective to conclude that all of Gallagher's allegations were false.

    In the John Doe 150 case, the victim, who is 56 years old, claimed that back in the 1976, when he was 15, he attended a Penn State football camp for a week. According to alleged victim, he was taking a shower when 10 other kids when Jerry Sandusky, whom he had just introduced himself, stopped by. And then, after the other boys left the shower, Sandusky "came up to me and began soaping my back and shoulders."

    And then "he stuck his finger in my ass," the victim claimed. Sandusky allegedly apologized, saying he didn't realize he was getting that close.

    It gets even stranger. John Doe 150 claims, at 15 years old, he talked about the incident to a Penn State football player, who told him that Sandusky "does this with all of his, I guess, boys."

    According to John Doe 150, at 15, he them had the guts to hunt down Joe Paterno at his Penn State office, and corner him in the hallway. John Doe 150 supposedly told Paterno what just happened with Sandusky. And Paterno supposedly replied, "I don't want to hear about any of that stuff, I have a football season to worry about."

    Now have you ever heard a more absurd story? A 15-year-old kid molested on the first day he ever met Jerry Sandusky? No grooming? No box of candy or six-pack first?

    A 15-year-old kid who has just been victimized who has the nerve to track down and confront a legendary football coach?

    Who would believe this crap? Oh that's right, the same lawyers who bought Billy Doe's nonsense. And made $5 million off of it.

    Before he collected his settlement, John Doe 150 was never questioned by any lawyers or any psychiatrists representing Penn State. The Penn State Board of Trustees just paid John Doe 150 as one of 32 such claimants who collected a total of $93 million.

    In fact, one of John Doe 150's lawyers, Paul Boni, had even told reporter John Ziegler back in 2016 that he knew of no "direct irrefutable evidence" that Paterno knew about any prior abuse by Sandusky dating back to the 1970s.

    "I think you need more than anecdotal evidence or speculative evidence" to attack Paterno, Boni told Ziegler.

    This is the fairy tale that Sara Ganim asks us to keep buying. Only the stories just keep getting crazier.

    Ralph Cipriano at
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #92  
    RX Local
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    North of there
    Posts
    18,384
    Only one sheep and it can't handle the truth
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #93  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    Monday, September 18, 2017

    State Attorney General's Office Tries To Keep Sandusky Probe Secret

    image: https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lZAAAdtVo.../s400/josh.jpg
    By Ralph Cipriano
    for BigTrial.net

    What do you do when you screw up royally?

    If you're the state Attorney General's office, you try to keep a top secret lid on everything, even if its years after they put Jerry Sandusky in jail.

    That's what our A.G.'s office is up to. On June 28th, Jennifer C. Selber, executive deputy attorney general, wrote Assistant U.S. Attorney D. Brian Simpson in Harrisburg, about all of the files the A.G. turned over to the feds three years ago from the state's grand jury investigation of Sandusky.

    Selber's concern was that the U.S. Attorney's office not turn any of the A.G.'s records in response to a long-running FOI battle being waged by Ryan Bagwell, a former newspaper reporter and candidate for Penn State trustee. When Bagwell couldn't get any records out of the state, he filed FOI requests with the U.S. Attorney's office in 2014, and so far has recouped some 1,000 pages of documents.

    The A.G.'s office wants to make sure no further documents are released.

    "Initially, it must be understood that the investigation of Sandusky PSU and TSM [The Second Mile] was done through two Statewide Investigating Grand Juries," Selber wrote. "As such, all of the materials gathered by the OAG and provided to your Office were subject to grand jury secrecy."

    The state attorney general turned over their Sandusky records when they asked the U.S. Attorney's office to investigate Penn State and The Second Mile, Sandusky's defunct charity, for "financial irregularities and possible Clery Act violations" stemming from the state's grand jury probe of Sandusky. The Clery Act mandates transparency when it comes to reporting crime on campus.

    The feds closed the investigation in 2014, without any tangible results.

    Under Pennsylvania law, the state is allowed to turn over records from an investigation "only if the agency is investigating a crime within its jurisdiction and the person to whom disclosure is made are sworn to grand jury secrecy," Selber wrote. She asked that the records turned over to the feds under an FOI request remain secret and "confidentiality be maintained."

    Bagwell says he's determined to see this battle through to the end, "no matter how long it takes."

    "There's virtually no public access to records from police investigations in Pennsylvania," Bagel said. "They're not used to the idea of having their investigations scrutinized."

    Bagel says if the records are eventually released, they "might reveal some interesting things that suggest the original grand jury presentment should have never been written in the way it was."

    As previously reported on this blog, the grand jury report on Sandusky was built around an event that didn't happen, an anal rape of a naked 10-year-old boy by Sandusky, supposedly witnessed by Mike McQueary in the Penn State showers back in 2001.

    However, four men who interviewed McQueary said he didn't witness a sexual attack. Even McQueary agrees he never saw an anal rape, as he stated in writing in an email to the state attorney general's office.

    A federal official, former Special Agent John Snedden, also investigated the alleged shower rape as part of an investigation of former Penn State President Graham Spanier. Snedden concluded in a recently declassified 110-page report done in 2012 that McQueary was not a credible witness, no sex crime was committed at Penn State, and hence, no cover up, since there was nothing to cover up.

    During the state attorney general's investigation, a couple of state troopers were caught on a tape recorder lying to an alleged victim of sex abuse about hearing the same story from several other alleged victims, even though it wasn't true.

    "Obviously the AG is doing everything it can to make sure that people don't have the opportunity to review the facts versus the presentment," Snedden said.


    Posted by Ralph Cipriano at 10:42 AM image: http://www.blogger.com/img/icon18_edit_allbkg.gif

    Trial: Penn State Sex Abuse Scandal



    Read more at http://www.bigtrial.net/2017/09/stat...upBeVz1Y6xg.99
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #94  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    An innocent man is in jail and a coaching legend destroyed because of this piece of shit

    I present to you, the 'boy in the shower "


    Friday, September 29, 2017

    Boy In The Shower Says He Can't Remember 34 Times



    By Ralph Cipriano
    for BigTrial.net

    Allan Myers, the boy in the Penn State showers that Mike McQueary allegedly saw being raped by Jerry Sandusky, sure has a lousy memory.

    Myers couldn't remember when a picture of him posing with Sandusky had been taken, even though it was at Myers' own wedding.

    Myers couldn't remember what he told a couple of state troopers when they interviewed him in 2011, and Myers said that Sandusky had never abused him.

    Myers couldn't remember what he told a private investigator, namely that Mike McQueary was full of crap, and that nothing sexual had happened in that shower.

    A 48-page transcript from a Nov. 4, 2016 hearing where Myers was called as a witness as part of Sandusky's bid for a new trial was released for the first time earlier this week, in response to a request from a reporter for a major mainstream media news outlet. The transcript provides some insight into what is clearly a screwed-up case that the prosecutors and the news media have completely botched.

    And they blew it because they showed no skepticism about witnesses like Allan Myers, who, from what he had to say in this transcript, clearly isn't credible.

    In the transcript, 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 Myers was very forgetful, or he was clearly lying.

    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."

    But Sandusky had his mind made up.

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

    Myers, a former Marine, testified that he got to know Sandusky through the former assistant Penn State coach's Second Mile charity.

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

    "Yes, I did," Myers said.

    Myers was shown a picture of himself and 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 the boys he was coaching, 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."

    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 at 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, 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 Sandusky'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 worked at the time for Joseph Amendola, Sandusky's 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 thought he saw an anal rape 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. Even though the official grand jury report says that Mike McQueary heard "slapping sounds" and witnessed Sandusky raping a 10-year-old boy in the shower.

    "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. I am 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.

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

    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 a reported $3 million.

    When asked how much he received from his settlement, Myers said," Im 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 said that the existence of Victim No. 2 was "known only to God."

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

    "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 released.

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

    "And it's obvious to anyone who understand the case that he [Myers] wasn't telling the truth," Ziegler said. "He [Myers] remembers everything up until he flips on Jerry and then he can't remember anything."

    Myers' testimony, Ziegler said, was "a hundred percent consistent with a guy who had who had flipped for $3 million and felt bad about it, and didn't want to deal with it anymore."

    When Sandusky took the stand, Ziegler recalled, "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" in the Sandusky case," Snedden said. "His testimony is exculpatory and now serves only as an example of blatant prosecutorial manipulation."

    And where the hell did they hide Myers during the Sandusky trial?



    Ralph Cipriano at
    Share



    http://www.bigtrial.net/2017/09/boy-...er-34.html?m=1
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #95  
    RX Wizard Sal santorre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    bay village , oh (cleveland)
    Posts
    9,848
    Bruce,, do you believe we really landed on the moon?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #96  
    RX Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    house
    Posts
    694
    Jeffrey Sandusky pleads guilty to 14 counts of child sexual abuse.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/15/us...lty/index.html

    Like father like son, give it up brucefan.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #97  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    Quote Originally Posted by Sal santorre View Post
    Bruce,, do you believe we really landed on the moon?
    yes, next question
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #98  
    Que pasa? festeringZit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    33,698
    Quote Originally Posted by devocr View Post
    Jeffrey Sandusky pleads guilty to 14 counts of child sexual abuse.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/15/us...lty/index.html

    Like father like son, give it up brucefan.
    He learned it from his dad.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #99  
    RX Local
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    North of there
    Posts
    18,384
    How do u seperate Penn st men from Penn st boys?






    With a crowbar
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #100  
    RX Senior brucefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    wellington
    Posts
    1,989
    The fairy tale continues to unravel

    It's incredible, it's evidence of prosecutorial misconduct, trying to steer a witness's testimony," Snedden said. "It shows that the prosecution's manipulating the information, throwing out what they don't want and padding what they do want . . . It very strongly suggests a fictitious presentment."



    Tuesday, October 10, 2017

    Penn State Confidential: Prosecutor Told McQueary To Clam Up


    image: https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-oAPdcjH_O...00/jonelle.jpg
    By Ralph Cipriano
    for BigTrial.net

    On Nov. 10, 2011, six days after the state Attorney General's office released its official grand jury report on the Jerry Sandusky sex scandal, deputy Attorney General Jonelle Eshbach was trying to calm Mike McQueary, her distraught star whistle-blower.

    McQueary had written Eshbach earlier that day to tell her that the grand jury report that told the world that McQueary had witnessed a naked Sandusky in the Penn State showers having anal intercourse with a 10-year-old boy was wrong. In that same email, McQueary complained to the A.G.'s office that they had "twisted" his words about "whatever it was" that he had actually seen or heard in the showers.

    Now there's a star witness you can have confidence in.

    In a second email sent that same day, McQueary complained to Eshbach about "being misrepresented" in the media. And then McQueary tried to straighten out a couple of misconceptions, writing that he never went to Coach Joe Paterno's house with his father, and that he had never seen Sandusky with a child at a Penn State football practice.

    "I know that a lot of this stuff is incorrect and it is hard not to respond," Eshbach emailed McQueary. "But you can't."

    That email exchange, divulged in a couple of posts by Penn State blogger Ray Blehar, have people in Penn State Nation talking about prosecutorial misconduct. Naturally, the A.G.'s office has nothing to say about it, as an office spokesperson declined comment today.

    The 2011 grand jury report said that back when he visited the Penn State showers in 2001, Mike McQueary heard "rhythmic, slapping sounds." Then, he peered into the showers and "saw a naked boy, Victim No. 2, whose age he estimated to be ten years old, with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Jerry Sandusky."

    But McQueary wrote Eshbach, while copying Agent Anthony Sassano, "I feel my words are slightly twisted and not totally portrayed correctly in the presentment."

    "I cannot say 1000 percent sure that it was sodomy. I did not see insertion," McQueary wrote. "It was a sexual act and or way over the line in my opinion whatever it was."

    McQueary also complained about the media attention he was getting.

    "National media, and public opinion has totally, in every single way, ruined me," McQueary wrote. "For what?"


    Later that same day, McQueary wrote a second email to Eshbach and Sassano.

    "Also," McQueary wrote, "I never went to Coach Paterno's house with my father . . . It was me and only me . . . he was out of town the night before . . . never ever have I seen JS [Jerry Sandusky] with a child at one of our practices . . . "

    The reference about his father not accompanying him to a meeting with Joe Paterno was probably McQueary's attempt to correct a mistake in a Nov. 5, 2011Sara Ganim story about the grand jury presentment that ran in the Harrisburg Patriot News.

    In her story, Ganim wrote that according to the indictment, "On March 1, 2002, the night before Spring Break, a Penn State graduate assistant walked into the Penn State football locker room around 9:30 p.m. and witnessed Sandusky having sex with about 10 years old . . . The next morning, the witness and his father told head football coach Joe Paterno, who immediately told athletic director Tim Curley."

    Then, McQueary returned to the subject of the bad publicity he was getting over the grand jury report.

    "I am being misrepresented in the media," McQueary wrote. "It just is not right."

    That's what prompted Eshback to write, "I know that a lot of this stuff is incorrect and it is hard to to respond. But you can't."

    Former NCIS and FIS Special Agent John Snedden, a Penn State alum, was blown away by Eshbach's email response to McQueary.

    "It's incredible, it's evidence of prosecutorial misconduct, trying to steer a witness's testimony," Snedden said. "It shows that the prosecution's manipulating the information, throwing out what they don't want and padding what they do want . . . It very strongly suggests a fictitious presentment."

    During the defamation suit McQueary filed against Penn State, Eshbach was sworn in as a witness and asked to explain what she meant by telling McQueary not to talk.

    "My advice to Mr. McQueary not to make a statement was based on the strengthening of my -- and saving of my case," Eshbach testified. "I did not want him [McQueary] making statements to the press at that time that could at some time be used against him in cross-examination. He [McQueary] was perfectly free to make a statement, but I asked him not to."

    There's another angle to the prosecutorial misconduct story line -- this email exchange between McQueary and Eshbach that was reported on by Blehar was not turned over by the prosecution to defense lawyers during the Sandusky trial and the trial of former Penn State president Graham Spanier.

    While we're on the subject of prosecutorial misconduct, at the Spanier trial, it was McQueary who testified that during the bye week of the 2011 Penn State football season, he got a call on his cell phone from the attorney general's office, tipping him off that "We're going to arrest folks and we are going to leak it out."

    The fact that Mike McQueary didn't see a naked Jerry Sandusky having anal intercourse in the showers with a 10-year-old boy isn't the only erroneous assumption that came out of that shoddy 2011 grand jury report, Blehar wrote.

    "The Sandusky grand jury presentment of Nov. 4, 2011 provided a misleading account of what eyewitness Michael McQueary reported to Joe Paterno about the 2001 incident," Blehar wrote. "Rather than stating what McQueary reported, it stated he reported 'what he had seen' which led the media and the public to erroneously conclude the specific details were reported to Paterno."

    Keep in mind what the grand jury report said McQueary had seen -- a naked Sandusky having anal intercourse in the showers with a 10-year-old boy -- never actually happened, according to McQueary.

    The grand jury report said:

    "The graduate assistant went to his office and called his father, reporting to him what he had seen . . . The graduate assistant and his father decided that the graduate assistant had to promptly report what he had seen to Coach Joe Paterno . . . The next morning, a Saturday, the graduate assistant telephoned Paterno and went to Paterno's home, where he reported what he had seen."

    Blehar cited the words of Joe Paterno, who issued a statement on Nov. 6, 2011, saying that McQueary had "at no time related to me the very specific actions contained in the grand jury report."

    McQueary agreed.

    On Dec. 6, 2011, McQueary was asked under oath whether he had ever used the term "anal sodomy" in talking to Paterno.

    "I've never used that term," McQueary said. "I would have explained to him the positions they were in roughly, but it was definitely sexual, but I have never used the word anal or rape in this since day one."

    So what exactly did you tell Paterno, the prosecutor asked McQueary.

    "I gave a brief description of what I saw," McQueary testified. "You don't -- ma'am, you don't go to Coach Paterno or at least in my mind and I don't go to Coach Paterno and go into great detail of sexual acts. I would have never done that with him ever."

    Blehar also points out that not even the jury in the Sandusky case believed that Sandusky had anally raped Victim No. 2 in the Penn State showers, because they came to a not guilty verdict on the count of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse.

    Blehar then cites four other witnesses in the case who also testified that McQueary never used sexual terms in describing what he had allegedly seen in the shower.

    "Subsequent testimony in numerous proceedings from 2011 through 2017 by John McQueary, Dr. [John] Dranov, [former Penn State Athletic Director Tim] Curley and [former Penn State VP Gary] Schutz confirmed that no explicitly sexual terms were used by McQueary when he described what he actually saw," Blehar wrote.

    In his second email to Eshbach, McQueary stated, "I never went to Coach Paterno's house with my father . . . It was me and only me . . . he was out the night before . . ."

    In the email, McQueary doesn't say who the he was who was out the night before. In his blog post, Blehar takes the he as a reference to McQueary's father.

    "Wait, what?" Blehar writes. "Paterno was in State College on Friday night. If this statement is true, then Mike did NOT meet with his father (and Dr. Dranov) immediately after the incident(because John Sr. was 'out of town.')"

    "Another fabrication?" writes Blehar. "And the AG knew it."

    In handwritten notes written in 2010, McQueary doesn't mention any meeting with his father and Dr. Dranov. Instead, he writes that he "drove to my parents' house" and "spoke with my father about the incident and received advice."

    He also reiterates, "to be clear: from the time I walked into the locker room to the time I left was maybe one minute -- I was hastened & a bit flustered."

    A hazy one-minute memory that McQueary himself admitted he had no idea "whatever it was" he had actually witnessed.

    But it was a hazy, one-minute memory that the AG's office wrote an entire grand jury presentment around. How weak is that?

    It was flimsy evidence like this that led Special Agent Snedden to conclude that McQueary was not a credible witness back in 2012 when Snedden was investigating whether former Penn State President Spanier deserved to have his high-level security clearance with the federal government renewed. Snedden wrote a recently declassified 110-page report that concluded there was no cover up at Penn State because there was no sex crime to cover up.

    Because McQueary gave five different accounts over the years of what he supposedly witnessed during that one minute in the Penn State showers.

    "I'd love to see McQueary's cell phone records, absent whatever dick pics he was sending out that day," Snedden cracked, referring to the day McQueary witnessed the shower incident, and then called his father to figure out what to do.

    "Did he even call his dad?" Snedden wondered.

    Snedden renewed his call for an independent investigation of the entire Penn State scandal, and the attorney general's role in manipulating evidence in the case.

    "Anybody who cares about justice needs to be screaming for a special prosecutor in this case," Snedden said.

    John Ziegler, a journalist who has covered the Penn State scandal since day one, agreed.

    "This seems like blatant OAG misconduct and an indication that they were acutely aware their case had major problems," Ziegler wrote in an email. "Eshbach's response is stunning in that it admits errors in grand jury presentment and tells Mike to shut up about it."

    Ziegler said the possibility that Mike McQueary never met with his father and Dr. Dranov, his father's boss, in an emergency meeting, if true, was big news.

    "This is HUGE for several reasons," Ziegler wrote. The meeting, which supposedly occurred on the night McQueary witnessed the shower incident was the "ONLY piece of evidence that has EVER been consistent with Mike witnessing something horrible/dramatic" in the Penn State showers. And that's why "Dranov was brought in to meet with him [Mike McQueary] late on a Friday night in February," Ziegler said.

    The AG's office, Ziegler speculated, "is desperate for evidence that Mike did something dramatic in reaction to" witnessing the shower incident.

    And if the he McQueary was referring to in the email to Eshbach wasn't his father but was really Joe Paterno, Ziegler said, then that's another problem with the official Penn State story line. Because according to his family, Joe Paterno was in town that night and presumably available for an emergency meeting with a distraught assistant who had just witnessed a horrible sex crime in the shower.

    If he really did see an anal rape ongoing in the shower, however, does the McQueary story, in any of its versions, make any sense?

    McQueary didn't rush into the shower and try to save a helpless, 10-year-old boy.

    He didn't call the police.

    Like Elvis, he just left the building.

    "The meeting with Dranov is all they have," Ziegler wrote.


    Read more at http://www.bigtrial.net/2017/10/penn...OAMlPxBjSEf.99
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •