Mike lied about watching Rudy that night
- Thread starter wensilver
- Start date
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
Mike lied about something? Say it ain't so, Joe.
Good grief the story is everything we thought it was and worse. A bunch of liars and bunko-steerers.
Mike's flaws are many. Lying is Just one of them, along with sexting, baiting deer,.......
Tpr. Rossman's report? For those needing a refresher on Rossman and Leiter's conduct:
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/06/jerry_sandusky_trial_state_pol_1.html
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/06/jerry_sandusky_trial_state_pol_1.html
Is there anything truthful or genuine with the McQueary family?
My experience says otherwise.
My experience says otherwise.
Last edited:
Look at the bright side...he's made 12 million times more than he ever would have made as a coach.
How is it that the police report was never used by Sandusky's attorneys? Oh wait, never mind.
If true, would this have been used if Curley and Schultz hadn't pled guilty?
Upon further thought, UncleLar, Towny and Dukie say that this can't be right because MM has been consistent and never changed his story, so Eileen must be wrong.
If true, would this have been used if Curley and Schultz hadn't pled guilty?
Upon further thought, UncleLar, Towny and Dukie say that this can't be right because MM has been consistent and never changed his story, so Eileen must be wrong.
Last edited:
Bump. Great read.
MM not really seeing anything also lines up with his email to Eschbach listing 2001 as "whatever it was"..."not 1000% sure"
And he also said he could not believe it when he heard PSU folks were getting charged and TC is a good guy. Huh? The guy so soft played your child abuse report to TSM is a good guy?? Please do explain Mike. Shouldn't he have been expecting PSU admins to he charged since he claims the admins downplayed his report?
Last edited:
Oh Jeebzus.........ANOTHER one???
Laugh, or cry?
I can remember when the only "I gotta' secret, but I ain't gona' tell" bullcrap on the Board was about "silent verbals"
I admire your "probativity", but this was a "non-professional" incident.
Impressed by your forensics - approaching pnnylion's level.I admire your "probativity", but this was a "non-professional" incident.
Eileen automatically assumes that a grand conspiracy occurred to beat the SOL. What's funny is how everyone around here talks about the difficulty of remembering details when talking about Paterno or CSS, but they do not give the same rope for MM. As shown in the article, MM was unsure if the year (2001 or 2002) immediately. So how is it unbelievable that MM didn't remember exactly why he was there late that night until he had some time to reflect upon it?
At the end of the day, it's meaningless. However, that report doesn't mean that MM lied or that the OAG concocted a plan to extend the SOL.
At the end of the day, it's meaningless. However, that report doesn't mean that MM lied or that the OAG concocted a plan to extend the SOL.
Eileen asks: Will McQueary ever be held accountable for changing his statements to police and on the witness stand? If he is investigated and found to have committed perjury I feel a lot of truths would begin to unravel.
Answer: LOL! Right about John/Jack Raykovtich is charged.
Eileen mentions PSU's appeal of whistle blower suit, but couldn't Sandusky's lawyers use it for PCRA? Wouldn't they have already seen it? And how come they didn't use it?
It really is interesting how MM's memory has only gotten better with the passage of time.
Answer: LOL! Right about John/Jack Raykovtich is charged.
Eileen mentions PSU's appeal of whistle blower suit, but couldn't Sandusky's lawyers use it for PCRA? Wouldn't they have already seen it? And how come they didn't use it?
It really is interesting how MM's memory has only gotten better with the passage of time.
Last edited:
If indeed McQueary was manipulated by the OAG into lying about certain key aspects of his testimony, it causes so many things about this bizarre case to make sense that otherwise make no sense at all.
Calm down Barry,Oh Jeebzus.........ANOTHER one???
Laugh, or cry?
I can remember when the only "I gotta' secret, but I ain't gona' tell" bullcrap on the Board was about "silent verbals"
The location and circumstances of this "incident" are so unique that my identity (which I purposely try to hide) could / might be exposed by a member of the "Clan".
I'm breaking my 7 word limit here. I gotta hear this one. Must be a classic. If you come to a game, I'll meet up with you.
Last edited:
The hypocrisy of your post boggles the mind.
Certainly explains why Noonan refused Moulton access to emails/staff of the PSP.
Okay, I'll risk the cross fire. Disclaimer: I cannot read the first note -- it's too blurry on my screen so I might be missing something key.
Say Mike actually had been watching Rudy. If he went to Lasch around 9:00 to pick up some tapes is it a big stretch to say he was working late on campus as he performed that task? The original account to police left out the Rudy part. Well, both accounts seem to have left out when he had and what he consumed for dinner, but nobody cares. So at what point in time should his account have begun to satisfy everyone?
Say Mike actually had been watching Rudy. If he went to Lasch around 9:00 to pick up some tapes is it a big stretch to say he was working late on campus as he performed that task? The original account to police left out the Rudy part. Well, both accounts seem to have left out when he had and what he consumed for dinner, but nobody cares. So at what point in time should his account have begun to satisfy everyone?
You don't think everyone here is being hypocritical? Hell, one could say that MM's original statement lined up pretty well with what he testified. He was, in fact, on campus to work late that night. Maybe he didn't feel that watching Rudy beforehand was relavent at the time? And it's not like the OAG made Mike say that the event may have been in 2002.
Tinfoil hat stuff here.
I am not saying I know what was said or meant by Mike in either version. Just saying your own hypocrisy knows no bounds. And the funny part is you're too dumb to realize it.
My stance is that Mike told them he was working late because that's what he was doing. He went there to work late. My point of bring up what O did was to show the hypocracy that was already going on in this thread before I got here. There is nothing hypocritical with my view of MM's statement.
The hypocrisy point goes beyond McQueary and Rudy. It's your "stance"? Do you know for sure that McQueary didn't give inconsistent statements? Maybe if he would have said "I don't know what you would call what I was doing before I went to the locker room. I was working(?). I don't know what it was" it wouldn't just be your "stance", you'd be sure what he was doing? LMFAO. Think dummy.
Stop being mad. MM said he was at Lasch working late, and that was exactly what he was doing. So my take (or stance, or whatever you want to call it) is that his stories line up, so this thread and that article are ridiculous. It's just more of the tinfoil hat BS that will get spun around here as being a "fact" when it isn't. There is nothing in that report that points to MM lying, but yet here he is being accused of not only lying but with working with the OAG in executing that lie in order to nail CSS. Laughable.
So why would Ira Lubert shell out $100 million like that without proper vetting to claimants that had stories of abuse done to them by the founder and chairman of a kids charity that had agreements with Children & Youth Services?
Ira's a successful, savvy, highly influential & politically connected businessman here in our state. He's got a state casino license to think about and a state licensed medical marijuana business to invest in.
Ira's a successful, savvy, highly influential & politically connected businessman here in our state. He's got a state casino license to think about and a state licensed medical marijuana business to invest in.
So being home early and in bed by 8:00 PM is the same thing as "at Lasch working late"? Got it.
Anyone know if Mike was drinking that night? I think the Bare Naked Ladies or some band had a Concert that evening, not that Mike attended. But it would have made it easier to call in additional Security from off the street.
Ive been saying this from the beginning. It kinda explains his dads and dranovs actions if he was all boozed up. They aren't going to call the police or make a bigger stink of it if mikes hammered and cant fully explain what he saw, heard, or whatever you would call it
"Improper behavior"!?!?!?! I thought he witnessed something very sexual and over the line?
I've never heard the theory that he was drinking that night, might explain why they told him to wait until morning to take action.
I've never heard the theory that he was drinking that night, might explain why they told him to wait until morning to take action.
Help me out, Mix. Someone I have on ignore is making some claims. Who is it and what is that person saying? Is it the same person who has some secret? I'd try to figure it out but I have a lot of posters on ignore. "Too dumb" covers most of them.
Similar threads
