Eliminating threads

[Misder2]

My point is that the GJP was false, that it caused the Press and the Public to turn against Joe Paterno and Penn State, and that it resulted in the patently unfair trial of Jerry Sandusky.

BTW, I don't recall seeing a reply to my question to you of what you view are the right circumstances for vigilante justice.

A Grand Jury Presentment is neither true nor false. It is merely the prosecutions argument as to why the Grand Jury should indict. I am staunchly of the opinion that the presentment should NEVER be made public, it should remain within the confines of the Grand Jury secrecy rules. IF the Grand Jury indicts, THEN the prosecutions argument can be made, in court, where the defendants rights can be upheld. PA failed in that regard as it pertains to JS. Does that constitute a new trial? I'm not qualified to make that judgment. I don't feel that you are either but I do respect the fact that you are entitled to your opinion.

When the guilt of a defendant/perp is unquestionable and the wheels of justice turn too slowly or not at all, then vigilante justice may be justified, it all depends. I have much patience but little to no confidence in the legal community, it is not beyond my boundaries to act if I feel the need.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Just curious...is this free Jerry/fair trial movement about Penn State/JVP or about Jerry?

It's about Joe and his name to a few in addition to the school. They think JS will be cleared and the world will owe PSU an apology. It's actually pretty GD warped if you think about it. You notice the Paterno's aren't screaming for JS's new trial because they know exactly what he is now. They have more ears to the ground than just about anyone in the state, but these guys are just here for dear old Jerry. They can't separate JS from the BOT or the TSM. It's all one huge conspiracy to bring down PSU's football program and make an innocent man sit in jail.

 

[B_Levinson]

That transcript supports the fact, which has never changed in McQueary's testimony, that he was pretty sure, relatively sure, that he saw Sandusky sodomizing a young boy. The reason he did not contact the uniformed police was because it was "delicate in nature in his opinion." It had nothing to do with whether he had seen sodomy. In fact he testified he left after he was sure the act was over.

This transcript does nothing to support your premise.

If he actually saw Jerry sodomize a boy, he witnessed a felony. He said very clearly that he would have reported a burglary or car break in, but not whatever it was he thought Jerry was doing with the boy.

If you were sure you saw an adult male sexually abusing a child, would you call 911 on the spot?

 

[SteveMasters]

A Grand Jury Presentment is neither true nor false. It is merely the prosecutions argument as to why the Grand Jury should indict. I am staunchly of the opinion that the presentment should NEVER be made public, it should remain within the confines of the Grand Jury secrecy rules. IF the Grand Jury indicts, THEN the prosecutions argument can be made, in court, where the defendants rights can be upheld. PA failed in that regard as it pertains to JS. Does that constitute a new trial? I'm not qualified to make that judgment. I don't feel that you are either but I do respect the fact that you are entitled to your opinion.

When the guilt of a defendant/perp is unquestionable and the wheels of justice turn too slowly or not at all, then vigilante justice may be justified, it all depends. I have much patience but little to no confidence in the legal community, it is not beyond my boundaries to act if I feel the need.

Thank you for respecting my opinion. I am not a fan of the Grand Jury system in PA, especially after seeing the way it has been abused. I agree that the Grand Jury Process failed to protect JS's rights including his right to a fair trial. IMO, the obvious remedy is a new trial.

I question if vigilante justice is every justified. To me, taking justice into your owns hands is a very bad idea even when there is little question of a defendant's guilt. I believe that it inevitably makes things worse.

 

[B_Levinson]

It's about Joe and his name to a few in addition to the school. They think JS will be cleared and the world will owe PSU an apology. It's actually pretty GD warped if you think about it. You notice the Paterno's aren't screaming for JS's new trial because they know exactly what he is now. They have more ears to the ground than just about anyone in the state, but these guys are just here for dear old Jerry. They can't separate JS from the BOT or the TSM. It's all one huge conspiracy to bring down PSU's football program and make an innocent man sit in jail.

Joe's name has already been cleared at considerable expense to the reputations and credibility of the people who fired him. We do not need Jerry Sandusky to be innocent for that purpose.

Remember that Keith Masser and Kenneth Frazier admitted under oath that he was not fired for anything he had or had not done, which proves the Board scapegoated him. Not only that, the Board lied about it afterward by saying it fired him for failure of leadership. We don't need Jerry Sandusky to prove that because we already have Keith Masser's and Kenneth Frazier's sworn depositions in the Corman-NCAA lawsuit.

 

[WeR0206]

That transcript supports the fact, which has never changed in McQueary's testimony, that he was pretty sure, relatively sure, that he saw Sandusky sodomizing a young boy. The reason he did not contact the uniformed police was because it was "delicate in nature in his opinion." It had nothing to do with whether he had seen sodomy. In fact he testified he left after he was sure the act was over.

This transcript does nothing to support your premise.

B.S! He didn't call the police b/c he wasn't sure what JS and the kid were doing....that's why it was "delicate in nature". MM was weirded out/uncomfortable but wasn't sure if anything criminal was happening b/c he couldn't really see anything one way or the other. Hence the reason he went the HR route by reporting it up the chain (inappropriate behavior/use of showers) vs. the law enforcement route (clearly criminal activity). He didn't want to ruin JS's life/charity over something that was potentially nothing....aka "delicate in nature"

You gotta love that the OAG/Freeh/NCAA/PSU OG BOT/media crucified C/S/S for not calling the police even though the one and only witness never even felt compelled enough to do it or make a written statement to UPPD in 2001. Talk about a double standard!

 

[ralpieE]

The Commonwealth can't afford to take C, S & S to trial, for the truth will have to come out about the lies and misconduct.

 

[LundyPSU]

B.S! He didn't call the police b/c he wasn't sure what JS and the kid were doing....that's why it was "delicate in nature". MM was weirded out/uncomfortable but wasn't sure if anything criminal was happening b/c he couldn't really see anything one way or the other. Hence the reason he went the HR route by reporting it up the chain (inappropriate behavior/use of showers) vs. the law enforcement route (clearly criminal activity). He didn't want to ruin JS's life/charity over something that was potentially nothing....aka "delicate in nature"

You gotta love that the OAG/Freeh/NCAA/PSU OG BOT/media crucified C/S/S for not calling the police even though the one and only witness never even felt compelled enough to do it or make a written statement to UPPD in 2001. Talk about a double standard!

you think Mike hasn't been crucified over this?

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Joe's name has already been cleared at considerable expense to the reputations and credibility of the people who fired him. We do not need Jerry Sandusky to be innocent for that purpose.

Remember that Keith Masser and Kenneth Frazier admitted under oath that he was not fired for anything he had or had not done, which proves the Board scapegoated him. Not only that, the Board lied about it afterward by saying it fired him for failure of leadership. We don't need Jerry Sandusky to prove that because we already have Keith Masser's and Kenneth Frazier's sworn depositions in the Corman-NCAA lawsuit.

I'm fine with where Joe's name is with me is at and I'm fine with the pedophile in prison. The fairy tale isn't coming true and he will die where he belongs. Sorry some here can't believe that JS is a pedophile and that the entire state was in on this. I have no doubt PSU jacked up handling it, but that doesn't excuse JS from being a pedophile. Apparently that is too big a pill for some to swallow.

 

[B_Levinson]

you think Mike hasn't been crucified over this?

The reason he was crucified was because the prosecutor(s) responsible for the Grand Jury presentment lied about him actually seeing a sexual assault on a child, but not calling the police on the spot.

The next person in Mike McQueary's position will probably keep his mouth shut after he remembers what happened to McQueary when he tried to do the right thing. That's really good for the safety of children in this state, isn't it?

 

[L.T. Young]

L.T. Young.....That explanation/theory simply doesn't make sense. Are JM and Dr. D also cowards? Why didn't they do anything if MM was too scared/cowardly but was certain/thought a kid was getting raped?? It also doesn't explain why MM never even so much as made an anonymous call to UPPD or Childline if he really was a coward/feared for his job for some reason.

The 8 victims testifying at trial have nothing to do with MM/V2 (which is the discussion at hand) since V2 was supposedly never found and never testified to corroborate MM's 2010 version. Pointing out the deficiencies in MM's 2010 story and how it doesn't align with anyone's actions in 2001 has nothing to do with whether or not JS abused the other victims so I'm not even sure why you bring them up, nice strawman though!

Either MM, Dr. D, and JM are all cowards/involved in a cover up (there is ZERO evidence, testimony, or 2001 actions to support this theory)......

OR in 2001 MM wasn't really sure what JS and the kid were doing but was weirded out/uncomfortable and felt someone at PSU needed to be told (this is supported by the actions of EVERYONE involved in 2001 and it's also supported by the testimony of C/S/S/Joe/Dr. D/JM/and JR). Later in 2010 MM plays revisionist history in his statement to OAG by saying he was certain abuse/molestation was happening thus making no one's actions in 2001 make any sense.

Again even the testimony of JM (at the 12/16/11 prelim) and Dr. D (at the JS GJ), the first two people MM spoke to that night, doesn't support MM's 2010 version so I'm not really sure how you reconcile with that....

The point is JS was untouchable in their minds. That's why they went to Joe you nitwit. That's why MM or anyone else didn't call the police.

Sandusky is still untouchable to you and your ilk. You do nothing but attack anyone that gets in the way of your agenda.

It doesn't matter how many times Sandusky's caught naked with child, it doesn't prove anything. Only Jerry knows if there was sexual intent.

It doesn't matter how many victims testify, they're all lying. It doesn't matter that Sandusky spent so much time with them alone and naked that he couldn't disprove a single claim. They got money so they have to be lying.

A witness saw Sandusky leave a shower with a child and 10 minutes later is told by another witness "the man that just left" was performing oral on the child. Doesn't matter, the witness that saw oral didn't identify JS. It could have been the other guy that liked to shower alone with kids.

MM believes he saw Sandusky sodomizing a child? He didn't see actual penetration so the prosecution was clearly engaged in a conspiracy to bring down PSU football and Joe with their GJP.

"Success with Honor" has become "He didn't see penetration" on this board. Congrats.

 

[GTACSA]

If he actually saw Jerry sodomize a boy, he witnessed a felony. He said very clearly that he would have reported a burglary or car break in, but not whatever it was he thought Jerry was doing with the boy.

If you were sure you saw an adult male sexually abusing a child, would you call 911 on the spot?

Your post was unresponsive to mine. But I will respond anyway.

Let's both think about your question. If you were in your 20's, working as a "gopher" at Goldman Sachs and hoping to soon land a real investment job with the company, and you saw a highly thought of former Executive doing what McQueary saw, would you call 911 on the spot? I'm not so sure I would have in those circumstances knowing that it could turn out that I would lose any employment prospects with GS and could possibly be blackballed from future employment with any similar firms; especially if the executive ended up beating the charges. How about you?

 

[Misder2]

The point is JS was untouchable in their minds. That's why they went to Joe you nitwit. That's why MM or anyone else didn't call the police.

Sandusky is still untouchable to you and your ilk. You do nothing but attack anyone that gets in the way of your agenda.

It doesn't matter how many times Sandusky's caught naked with child, it doesn't prove anything. Only Jerry knows if there was sexual intent.

It doesn't matter how many victims testify, they're all lying. It doesn't matter that Sandusky spent so much time with them alone and naked that he couldn't disprove a single claim. They got money so they have to be lying.

A witness saw Sandusky leave a shower with a child and 10 minutes later is told by another witness "the man that just left" was performing oral on the child. Doesn't matter, the witness that saw oral didn't identify JS. It could have been the other guy that liked to shower alone with kids.

MM believes he saw Sandusky sodomizing a child? He didn't see actual penetration so the prosecution was clearly engaged in a conspiracy to bring down PSU football and Joe with their GJP.

"Success with Honor" has become "He didn't see penetration" on this board. Congrats.

"Sandusky is still untouchable to you and your ilk. You do nothing but attack anyone that gets in the way of your agenda."

This may very well be one of those cases where vigilante justice is much safer (and possibly justified) than expecting the courts to follow through.The attitude of many here is the precise reason why nothing happened in the past. The reason people didn't report things in the past. The reason people turned a blind eye. I'm NOT talking about C/S/S/P here, just people in general.

"We want proof, we want DNA, these kids can't be believed/trusted (look at their backgrounds)." "He said it wasn't sexual he was just pushing boundaries" "He's just a chaste pedophile"

Guess what, Ziegler's dead wrong.

 

[B_Levinson]

The point is JS was untouchable in their minds. That's why they went to Joe you nitwit. That's why MM or anyone else didn't call the police.

Sandusky is still untouchable to you and your ilk. You do nothing but attack anyone that gets in the way of your agenda.

It doesn't matter how many times Sandusky's caught naked with child, it doesn't prove anything. Only Jerry knows if there was sexual intent.

It doesn't matter how many victims testify, they're all lying. It doesn't matter that Sandusky spent so much time with them alone and naked that he couldn't disprove a single claim. They got money so they have to be lying.

A witness saw Sandusky leave a shower with a child and 10 minutes later is told by another witness "the man that just left" was performing oral on the child. Doesn't matter, the witness that saw oral didn't identify JS. It could have been the other guy that liked to shower alone with kids.

MM believes he saw Sandusky sodomizing a child? He didn't see actual penetration so the prosecution was clearly engaged in a conspiracy to bring down PSU football and Joe with their GJP.

"Success with Honor" has become "He didn't see penetration" on this board. Congrats.

You are changing the subject from what McQueary told the Grand Jury to what other witnesses saw. None of what you says changes the proven fact that whoever wrote the presentment embellished McQueary's testimony, or "lied" for short.

 

[Ten Thousan Marbles]

It's about Joe and his name to a few in addition to the school. They think JS will be cleared and the world will owe PSU an apology. It's actually pretty GD warped if you think about it. You notice the Paterno's aren't screaming for JS's new trial because they know exactly what he is now. They have more ears to the ground than just about anyone in the state, but these guys are just here for dear old Jerry. They can't separate JS from the BOT or the TSM. It's all one huge conspiracy to bring down PSU's football program and make an innocent man sit in jail.

Well, that comment is just way over the line.

I am considering, finally, that you may be a straight-acting pedo.

 

[LundyPSU]

The reason he was crucified was because the prosecutor(s) responsible for the Grand Jury presentment lied about him actually seeing a sexual assault on a child, but not calling the police on the spot.

The next person in Mike McQueary's position will probably keep his mouth shut after he remembers what happened to McQueary when he tried to do the right thing. That's really good for the safety of children in this state, isn't it?

Wrong, he hasn't been crucified b/c of the words in the GJP. It is the words in his own testimony in 2010-2013 and his actions in 2001 and beyond. The next person in McQueary's position should take different actions, not keep his mouth shut. Keeping his mouth shut is part of the problem here.

 

[ralpieE]

The only one who hid something for ten years was Mike. He had to be flushed out, and then he lied, or was compelled to do it with things that were held over him.

 

[WPB_lion]

If both Sandusky (more than 6 feet) and the boy (5 feet) were standing as McQueary reported, penetration could not have occurred. The necessary parts would have been at different heights (http://schoolworkhelper.net/male-female-sexual-anatomy-function-and-purpose/) unless Sandusky got the boy to stand on a box or something. As for "wiggle room," if penetration could not have occurred, and McQueary could not testify that he somehow saw Sandusky manage to achieve it in some manner, the bottom line is that the GJ presentment lied.

By the way, it's getting even worse. I looked at part of the transcript from Sandusky's trial, and one of the victims testified that an attorney approached him before he testified, and that he signed a paper to have that attorney represent him. Another had his civil attorney ($$$$$$$) present when he was questioned, and possibly led on, by two investigators who later told conflicting stories in court.



I am sure that Mike Nifong and Scott Harshbarger (the attorney who probably railroaded the Amiraults) also would have preferred censorship of discussions of this nature. Things that live under rocks don't enjoy the light of day. The fact that you do not want the objective evidence discussed either says something about your character, as does the fact that you hide behind an anonymous screen name when you post this material.

If you want to live your life discussing the specifics of a child rape and debate whether or not McQueary saw what he saw, I have no problem with your choice.

However, I do not think it is inappropriate censorship when the moderator of what is primarily a football board deems such discussion inappropriate for a football board. In fact, I agree with the moderator.

 

[mn78psu83]

If you want to live your life discussing the specifics of a child rape and debate whether or not McQueary saw what he saw, I have no problem with your choice.

However, I do not think it is inappropriate censorship when the moderator of what is primarily a football board deems such discussion inappropriate for a football board. In fact, I agree with the moderator.

Yeah. Now I don't feel so bad about asking people what their favorite movies are.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Well, that comment is just way over the line.

I am considering, finally, that you may be a straight-acting pedo.

Which comment was over the line? Calling a convicted pedophile a pedophile? Either way, your comments are actually over the line, but I'm not really surprised by it.

 

[jjsocrates]

The point is JS was untouchable in their minds. That's why they went to Joe you nitwit. That's why MM or anyone else didn't call the police.

Stop and think about how stupid this comment is.

Joe was supposed to go "over the police's heads"? So now, its Joe didn't call the police, because he would do what the police were unable to do?

I seriously do question the effort of people who go through THIS MUCH EFFORT to keep this false narrative a Penn State story and to completely ignore what else went on. So, who really benefits the most from the spotlight staying on Penn State and OFF everything else...

 

[WeR0206]

you think Mike hasn't been crucified over this?

Not by the OAG/Freeh. I should have taken "media" out of my list as MM certainly got bashed in the media.

IMO MM should sue the crap out of the PA OAG for disparaging his reputation by their wording in the GJP and it's illegal "leak" to the world. This caused everyone in the world to think that MM eye witnessed the raping of a child then ran home to daddy and never called the cops which is completely false.

 

[simons96]

Not by the OAG/Freeh. I should have taken "media" out of my list as MM certainly got bashed in the media.

IMO MM should sue the crap out of the PA OAG for disparaging his reputation by their wording in the GJP and it's illegal "leak" to the world. That caused everyone in the world to think that MM eye witnessed the raping of a child then ran home to daddy and never called the cops which is completely false.

correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Mike even say the GJP did not accurately represent what he told the GJ??

 

[jjsocrates]

Which comment was over the line? Calling a convicted pedophile a pedophile? Either way, your comments are actually over the line, but I'm not really surprised by it.

Take your pick: http://mason.gmu.edu/~cmcgloth/portfolio/fallacies/fallacies.html

But specifcally - these:
http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/muddy+the+waters
http://mason.gmu.edu/~cmcgloth/portfolio/fallacies/bifurcation.html
http://mason.gmu.edu/~cmcgloth/portfolio/fallacies/dicto.html

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Stop and think about how stupid this comment is.

Joe was supposed to go "over the police's heads"? So now, its Joe didn't call the police, because he would do what the police were unable to do?

I seriously do question the effort of people who go through THIS MUCH EFFORT to keep this false narrative a Penn State story and to completely ignore what else went on. So, who really benefits the most from the spotlight staying on Penn State and OFF everything else...

As Lundy said, I thought this was about Jerry, not PSU? LMAO,,,so GD transparent.

 

[WeR0206]

The point is JS was untouchable in their minds. That's why they went to Joe you nitwit. That's why MM or anyone else didn't call the police.

Sandusky is still untouchable to you and your ilk. You do nothing but attack anyone that gets in the way of your agenda.

It doesn't matter how many times Sandusky's caught naked with child, it doesn't prove anything. Only Jerry knows if there was sexual intent.

It doesn't matter how many victims testify, they're all lying. It doesn't matter that Sandusky spent so much time with them alone and naked that he couldn't disprove a single claim. They got money so they have to be lying.

A witness saw Sandusky leave a shower with a child and 10 minutes later is told by another witness "the man that just left" was performing oral on the child. Doesn't matter, the witness that saw oral didn't identify JS. It could have been the other guy that liked to shower alone with kids.

MM believes he saw Sandusky sodomizing a child? He didn't see actual penetration so the prosecution was clearly engaged in a conspiracy to bring down PSU football and Joe with their GJP.

"Success with Honor" has become "He didn't see penetration" on this board. Congrats.

So are JM and Dr. D also cowards? You never really answered my question. You're saying that MM/JM/Dr. D were all on the same page that MM thought JS raped a kid and ALL of these people are somehow afraid of the big bad JS and that's why the never called UPPD?? What a load of B.S!! What the heck was JS going to do to them especially when you consider JM/Dr. D didn't even work at PSU/TSM and JS didn't even work for PSU anymore??? Come on man...you've gotta do better than that to support you're ridiculous non logical arguments.

What exactly did they expect Joe to do that UPPD/CYS couldn't?? Joe was a damned football coach, it makes absolutely no sense for them to take MM's report of certain child abuse to him and NOT UPPD. The only way that makes sense is if MM didn't really know what JS and the kid were doing but knew it was over the line and made him uncomfortable >> HR route vs. Law Enforcement route.

The rest of your post has NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand and I never mentioned any of the things you talk about in any of my posts.

I never said JS is innocent. I have said repeatedly that I think he is guilty because he continued showering with kids even after coming extremely close to getting in big trouble for it in 1998 and after LE/CYS told him to stop. He also dropped his appeal to the indicated ruling in 2009 which I don't understand. If you're innocent and your life's work is working with kids you'd think he'd fight that indicated ruling to the death, but he didn't.

However that doesn't mean that JS received a fair trail and didn't have his constitutional rights violated by the OAG. You and your buddies can't seem to grasp this distinction.

As I've said many times before, if you're outraged that JS gets a new trial you can thank OAG/Corbett/Fina/McGettigan/Cleland for that. Don't take you indignation out on us for simply pointing out that he didn't get a fair trial.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

So are JM and Dr. D also cowards? You never really answered my question. You're saying that MM/JM/Dr. D were all on the same page that MM thought JS raped a kid and ALL of these people are somehow afraid of the big bad JS and that's why the never called UPPD?? What a load of B.S!! What the heck was JS going to do to them especially when you consider JM/Dr. D didn't even work at PSU/TSM and JS didn't even work for PSU anymore??? Come on man...you've gotta do better than that to support you're ridiculous non logical arguments.

What exactly did they expect Joe to do that UPPD/CYS couldn't?? Joe was a damned football coach, it makes absolutely no sense for them to take MM's report of certain child abuse to him and NOT UPPD. The only way that makes sense is if MM didn't really know what JS and the kid were doing but knew it was over the line and made him uncomfortable >> HR route vs. Law Enforcement route.

The rest of your post has NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand and I never mentioned any of the things you talk about in any of my posts.

I never said JS is innocent. I have said repeatedly that I think he is guilty because he continued showering with kids even after coming extremely close to getting in big trouble for it in 1998 and after LE/CYS told him to stop. He also dropped his appeal to the indicated ruling in 2009 which I don't understand. If you're innocent and your life's work is working with kids you'd think he'd fight that indicated ruling to the death, but he didn't.

However that doesn't mean that JS received a fair trail and didn't have his constitutional rights violated by the OAG. You and your buddies can't seem to grasp this distinction.

As I've said many times before, if you're outraged that JS gets a new trial you can thank OAG/Corbett/Fina/McGettigan/Cleland for that. Don't take you indignation out on us for simply pointing out that he didn't get a fair trial.

How pissed you must have been when they shot UBL in the head.

 

[WeR0206]

correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Mike even say the GJP did not accurately represent what he told the GJ??

Correct, I believe it was a DVN ESPN article that mentioned an email MM sent to the OAG shortly after the GJP was "leaked" expressing his anger at how he/his testimony was portrayed in the GJP. Needless to say MM had a lot of explaining to do after the GJP leak and I'm sure he didn't appreciate how the OAG left him out to dry.

 

[simons96]

Correct, I believe it was a DVN ESPN article that mentioned an email MM sent to the OAG shortly after the GJP was "leaked" expressing his anger at how he/his testimony was portrayed in the GJP. Needless to say MM had a lot of explaining to do after the GJP leak and I'm sure he didn't appreciate how the OAG left him out to dry.

pardon my French then, so who are the frikkin idiots arguing about it???

 

[WeR0206]

How pissed you must have been when they shot UBL in the head.

WTF are you talking about? How is what happened to UBL even remotely similar (in case you didn't know UBL wasn't a U.S. citizen)? Did JS resist arrest with a cadre of minions armed with guns shooting at LE when they came to get him thus justifying deadly force? I don't think so.

Is associating JS (U.S. citizen) to UBL (non U.S. citizen who resisted arrest with lethal force) what you have to resort to in order to support your stance on this?? That says a lot if you ask me.

 

[jjsocrates]

WTF are you talking about? How is what happened to UBL even remotely similar (in case you didn't know UBL wasn't a U.S. citizen)? Did JS resist arrest with a cadre of minions armed with guns shooting at LE when they came to get him thus justifying deadly force? I don't think so.

Is associating JS (U.S. citizen) to UBL (non U.S. citizen who resisted arrest with lethal force) what you have to resort to in order to support your stance on this?? That says a lot if you ask me.

I put him on ignore following that comment. Non sensical, non-sequitir, devoid of logic. Guy is either a professional troll, former employee of the TSM or one of Jerry's special friends.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

WTF are you talking about? How is what happened to UBL even remotely similar (in case you didn't know UBL wasn't a U.S. citizen)? Did JS resist arrest with a cadre of minions armed with guns shooting at LE when they came to get him thus justifying deadly force? I don't think so.

Is associating JS (U.S. citizen) to UBL (non U.S. citizen who resisted arrest with lethal force) what you have to resort to in order to support your stance on this?? That says a lot if you ask me.

Well he didn't his day in any court. Maybe it was the US media framing him along with the US government. Kidding of course, but you guys have your fun with poor old JS.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

I put him on ignore following that comment. Non sensical, non-sequitir, devoid of logic. Guy is either a professional troll, former employee of the TSM or one of Jerry's special friends.

Professional troll? Notice most of the free Jerry clan came to this site well after the scandal. Odd how that worked, but check my date? Sorry you guys want this free run at turning this site into a free jerry board, but some here don't like hearing about poor old Jerry. The BoT screwed up. TSM may have some dirty hands, but JS is a GD pedophile. Funny thing is watching how upset you guys get over the guy. It's cute at this point.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

WTF are you talking about? How is what happened to UBL even remotely similar (in case you didn't know UBL wasn't a U.S. citizen)? Did JS resist arrest with a cadre of minions armed with guns shooting at LE when they came to get him thus justifying deadly force? I don't think so.

Is associating JS (U.S. citizen) to UBL (non U.S. citizen who resisted arrest with lethal force) what you have to resort to in order to support your stance on this?? That says a lot if you ask me.

Where was his trial? You sure the government didn't paint a bad picture of him using the media? Hell Jesse Ventura said the WTC buildings went down due to an internal explosion. Just goes to show some people will believe what they want to I guess.

 

[WeR0206]

I put him on ignore following that comment. Non sensical, non-sequitir, devoid of logic. Guy is either a professional troll, former employee of the TSM or one of Jerry's special friends.

Yeah....He is grasping at straws at this point with these non logical analogies. There is no "free Jerry" brigade....there's a "not let constitutional rights get violated because of the dangerous precedent is sets" brigade and he and his buddies can't seem to grasp that.

 

[WeR0206]

Where was his trial? You sure the government didn't paint a bad picture of him using the media? Hell Jesse Ventura said the WTC buildings went down due to an internal explosion. Just goes to show some people will believe what they want to I guess.

He didn't get a trial b/c the guy was resisting/evading arrest with a small army armed with machine guns you dolt! My god...you can't possibly be this dense. When you start shooting at the people coming to take you into custody your odds of surviving/going to trial are pretty small.

I actually would have preferred it for UBL to get arrested, tried, and have to live his life out in a miserable prison and think about his crimes vs. getting the easy way out via being shot.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Yeah....He is grasping at straws at this point with these non logical analogies. There is no "free Jerry" brigade....there's a "not let constitutional rights get violated because of the dangerous precedent is sets" brigade and he and his buddies can't seem to grasp that.

Please. You think he is guilty, but this is the case in the American Judicial system to be horrified over. Like I said, it's about the rep of the school or Joe as I doubt most you the brigade is fighting half as hard on any other pedophile cases. Even more so with the "I think he is guilty" crowd BUT!. He was given a trial, he was given a defense attorney, but he had no shot in hell to beat the 8 victims testifying against him. Tough pill to swallow, I know.

 

[B_Levinson]

Not by the OAG/Freeh. I should have taken "media" out of my list as MM certainly got bashed in the media.

IMO MM should sue the crap out of the PA OAG for disparaging his reputation by their wording in the GJP and it's illegal "leak" to the world. This caused everyone in the world to think that MM eye witnessed the raping of a child then ran home to daddy and never called the cops which is completely false.

If I had been MM, I would have held a press conference the instant the GJ presentment was released and told the public that that was not what I had told the GJ, regardless of the possible harm to the prosecutor's case. The prosecutor does not have the right to ruin my reputation by putting lies into my mouth.

 

[B_Levinson]

Please. You think he is guilty, but this is the case in the American Judicial system to be horrified over. Like I said, it's about the rep of the school or Joe as I doubt most you the brigade is fighting half as hard on any other pedophile cases. Even more so with the "I think he is guilty" crowd BUT!. He was given a trial, he was given a defense attorney, but he had no shot in hell to beat the 8 victims testifying against him. Tough pill to swallow, I know.

The witnesses in the Amirault trial also testified, after enough "coaching" from the prosecution team. If you want to go back even further, look at the Salem witch trials.

This is emphatically not proof, even more likely than not, that the Sandusky witnesses lied, but we know the prosecution team lied in the GJP and also that at least one witness changed his story. That tells me we have a problem here.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

If I had been MM, I would have held a press conference the instant the GJ presentment was released and told the public that that was not what I had told the GJ, regardless of the possible harm to the prosecutor's case. The prosecutor does not have the right to ruin my reputation by putting lies into my mouth.

I thought he did, he came out and said he slammed the locker door. It may have been via social media though.