Penn State Sandusky Trial #11 (Verdict - GUILTY!)

[Pensfan]

Originally Posted by back2back19

Wait, CNN hasn't seen the e- mails? Guess we just wait for Freeh.

Who is leaking this information? I wouldn't want to pizz off Freeh. Reading his history, he is not a man that fears others and he doesn't back down.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Pensfan

I haven't read anything about this topic on the "secret" emails yet.

Unless McQueary knew the name of that child OR CEO DR. RAYKOVITZ WAS WILLING TO HELP IDENTIFY THE CHILD SINCE THE CHILD WAS LIKELY A TSM PARTICIPANT, I don't know how the PSU admins. would find his identity. Were there video security cameras in the PSU locker room or parking area in 2001? I seriously doubt Sandusky would have voluntarily given this victim's name to PSU admins. Would Raykovitz have helped if asked? Very doubtful. Too many people have a CYA life philosophy.

That's why PSU admins. should have turned the info over to the proper authorities.

[pinktoes]

Originally Posted by Pensfan

Who is leaking this information? I wouldn't want to pizz off Freeh. Reading his history, he is not a man that fears others and he doesn't back down.

Freeh was hired by the PSU Trustees to protect their interests. I'm sorry, to "get to the bottom of this."

So, either Freeh is seeing that it gets leaked, or he's releasing this info to some of the Trustees, who're leaking it. Wouldn't you think?

Because these leaks to CNN point the finger away from Trustees. And towards--well, it doesn't matter who, really.

[pinktoes]

Pensfan. As to what you said, "Sooooooo Amendola knocked up a 16-17-year-old and now he is the "go to guy" for pedophiles. Ugh! The accelerated rehab program is only for those who will admit that they are a child abusing pedophile."

My understanding is that an ARD requires no admission of guilt; it's more like a nolo plea. If i'm wrong, doesn't matter.

I think Sandusky chose Amendola because he'd been very successful, as Ganim pointed out, in getting plea deals in centre county for locals, and esp for PSU students and student-athletes.

What Sandusky didn't realize, in my belief so far, is that Amendola's power derived from his relationships within the judiciary at the county level. NOT at the state level. Sandusky was being tried by the state AG. Amendola knew where his power came from. Whatever other motives he might have had for representing JS, I don't know. Well, I mean he gets paid, like a stockbroker, whether his client wins or loses.

I'm not the only one asking: where did Amendola's power within the centre county judiciary come from?

A different question: why did Judge David E Grine award continued foster care placement of Matt (Heichel) Sandusky to JS and Dottie after a firesetting episode and after a suicide attempt--involving, Matt said on the police interview tape, 80 to 100 aspirin. That quantity puts you in the hospital and you're lucky to live, and not have organ damage. And in terms of liability, a firesetter who runs away and makes a serious suicide attempt--you better be all over that one. That's why Terry L Trude, juvenile probation officer wrote that letter.

And, BTW, did Trude ever work in an office with Patty Fornicola? I thought she worked in probation, centre county. I've seen Trude's name on adult probation cases as well--in 1994 and 1999.

Is that where Dr. Fox saw Matt and helped JS get Matt back? In the hospital, or on referral after that? And what about the girl who attempted suicide with him--the one who also lived in the Sandusky home?

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by pinktoes

Freeh was hired by the PSU Trustees to protect their interests. I'm sorry, to "get to the bottom of this."

So, either Freeh is seeing that it gets leaked, or he's releasing this info to some of the Trustees, who're leaking it. Wouldn't you think?

Because these leaks to CNN point the finger away from Trustees. And towards--well, it doesn't matter who, really.

Very astute observation, pinktoes.

I read, earlier this week on a Penn State football message board, that this information would be coming out. It was on a Penn State football board that rumors of MM having witnessed something improper between Sandusky and a boy circulated years ago. So those boards are a great source for information. (I even forked over some cash to have access to the insiders forum).

Any "inside info" on those boards is probably coming from people with connections to the university.

JMO

[BrownRice]

Originally Posted by back2back19

And if I remember correctly, the spin from the lawyers of Schultz/Curley was basically that they were good men who made bad decisions after being put into a bad situation with vague details or something like that.

I read that too. I find it offensive actually. GOOD MEN (or women) do not decide to do nothing when they have received information from an eyewitness who saw a boy being raped in a shower. They could have found out the boy's identity (threatened JS with going to the cops if he didn't fess up or something) and they could have checked he was ok (God forbid they contact police, geez).

If anything, I hope their careers are ruined and they regret their inactions for the rest of their pathetic, sorry lives.

[gitana1]

Originally Posted by IzzyBlanche

Excellent point:

In his last interview, Paterno claimed he never knew anything about “sex between a man and a boy.” This, coming from a man who studied Latin at Brooklyn Prep, was pre-law at Brown University and was as well-read as any football coach I had ever encountered.


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/co...#ixzz1zFbpPI00

Don't you hate how Paterno describes it? "Sex between a man and a boy". Really? I have heard variations on the theme so many times in various cases. "We saw a man having sex with a child in a car." "The child was involved in a sexual relationship with the man."

Little kids can't have sexual relationship with adults. They are not having sex with adults. They are being molested, victimized, raped.

I know Paterno has passed away but were he alive I would tell him that there is no such thing as "sex" between a man and a boy. That's called child rape, buddy.

Funny how we never use those descriptors when it is a woman getting raped. I never hear anyone say, "I turned the corner and saw a man having sex with a woman." It's always, "I saw a man raping a woman."

So why are kids different? Why are kids deemed capable of having a "relationship" or "sexual intercourse" with their attacker/abuser?

Drives me crazy. Sorry for the rant.

[ynotdivein]

Hi all. This thread is getting long, so I've prepared a new one for us.

Penn State Sandusky Trial #12 (GUILTY-post verdict discussion)

Penn State Sandusky Trial #12 (GUILTY-post verdict discussion)

I'll be locking up here shortly.

[ynotdivein]

Please continue at Thread #12 here

Please continue at Thread #12 here