These people think that only good people can get molested by a monster. People with faults/sins can't be violated in their minds.
The stalking of AF is pathetic.
My challenge to the Paterno haters and their BS logic
- Thread starter TenerHallTerror
- Start date
The stalking of AF is pathetic.
Only a select few are in denial about what Jerry is to be honest. Discrediting a witness is a common practice, but they think they are on to something with it. JZ's an obvious attention whore, but that is appealing because he says what they want to hear. You ever notice how these Jerry trolls take every slightly related topic and somehow bring it back to AF or the world lied to frame Jerry. Jerry must have one big arrogant POS to have so mamy people go after him like that, but that really wasn't who he was as he was Mr Nice Guy groomer...so they just hated the nice charity guy. You know the guy that filled in as a father figure, everyone turned on him for money. Everyone is a liar but Jerry....yep. Ok.
You are welcome to your own opinions and to call me anything that you want. The facts demonstrate that Sandusky's trial was patently unfair. I think there is a good chance that Judge Foradora will award a new trial; and even if he doesn't, that Superior and/or the Pa. Supreme Court will on appeal.
I agree with NCIS special agent John Snedden's premise that there was no sex scandal at Penn State, just a political hit job. In what I believe is the likely event that Sandusky wins a new trial, I think that Sandusky's lawyers will be able to demonstrate Snedden's premise.
But he was not in possession of any child porn. And he told JZ he is innocent.
Those two facts alone indicate that he is truly innocent.
Of course you agree with anyone that even gives you remote hope it isn't true. Saying it was a political hit job doesn't mean Jerry isn't a pedophile. You do realize it can easily be both and more than likely is. We know Jerry is a pedophile and there is some good evidence it was hit job, but that has never been proven in a court of law. Paterno's expert Clemente is an expert on child sex abuse cases, yet you only agree with a PSU alum in Snedden who really sounds like his background wasn't centered around sexual abuse like Clemente.
How come the Paterno's aren't carrying your flag of free Jerry? They would have way more interest in that being true than even you as the super fan boy who can't believe this happened? You know why, because they know Jerry fooled a lot of people and he still has you fooled...congrats on being there still.
Last edited:
What's proposed in his appeal isn't fact. They are claims that have yet to be challenged. Whether or not they are valid arguments is opinion.
You seem to have no understanding of the psychology of sexual abuse at all, or any interest in gaining the tiniest bit.
We're talking about a 15 year old kid admitting he willing took part in sex acts with Jerry Sandusky. Do you think that's a particularly easy thing to come to terms with let alone tell someone in graphic detail?
I've have enough of this BS painting victims as soulless grifters. Sandusky targeted the most vulnerable and now it's being used to attack them.
My reply to Pendergast, Ziegler, the FMSF, and Big Trial will be substantive. And unlike them I don't have to twist the facts and use innuendo.
Literally the only reason Ziegler hopped on the "free Jerry" train was because he was shunned and had no other options.
IMO the defense has put together a compelling case that the trial was unfair and that Sandusky deserves a new trial. They have identified 31 issues of counsel ineffectiveness/prosecutorial misconduct (none of which are specious) and they only need 1. The OAG has a week left before their response is due and I think they are going to have a hard time rebutting these issues. I look forward to reading their response as well as in learning Judge Foradora's ruling on the merits of the PCRA petition (which should take ~ 2 months if all goes according to schedule).
Please don't conflate my wanting to see a fair trial for someone accused of CSA with a disregard for the psychology of sexual abuse. I understand the psychological damage that victims of CSA suffer and sympathize with their plight. There is no question in my mind that TSM's protocols for protecting at risk children and the adults who looked after them were substandard and inadequate.
AF's accusations are vigorously disputed by the defense. If Sandusky wins a new trial, I believe the credibility of his accusations will be the basis for the jury verdicts. I am not sure how difficult it has been for AF to describe his accusations. I am suspicious of their accuracy in large part due to way they have evolved over time, the possible use of repressed memory therapy techniques, and the character testimony that people who close to him have provided. Due to an abundance of caution, I am willing to give him the benefit of doubt regarding his accusations and do not wish to attack him or shame him in any way at this time.
I do not speak for Ziegler, but I believe you are mistaken regarding his motivation. My motivation is to learn the truth of what happened in the entire fiasco. Toward that end, I think the best path forward is for Sandusky to get a new fair trial with an objective view of what happened. Sandusky's first trial was a sham and he deserves a new one. IMO, he has the law on his side. I hope that the Pennsylvania judical system agrees.
Well, lookie you-- pretending for once to care about those filthy, dumb, hillbilly, redneck, trailer trash kids when it suits your purpose.Typical defense lawyer line...prostitutes cannot be raped and girls wearing a short skirt were looking for it too. Even more so if they were known to sleep around. Typical defense lines...but hey the guy who lied about not showering with kids again is the one to believe here.
You're welcome to check my posts here and quote any where I defended Jerry or said he was my hero.
Please take this opportunity to use the Ignore feature.
I guess it's not fact until 12 random people too dumb to get out of jury duty determine if it's fact or not? Fact... OJ didn't kill anyone! Someday you will learn that so called facts determined by the legal system aren't necessarily consistent with reality.
You're wrong about Ziegler. He posted a 45 minute video on YouTube where he blames Scott Paterno for everything that's transpired.
It's not a coincidence he came up with the idea of interviewing Sandusky when the Paternos commissioned their report. He no longer had anything to offer when it came to the story.
Just look at his website. Stalking Facebook pages, trespassing to take photos of people's cars and homes, and getting in online arguments isn't journalism.
I will be more respectful in my interaction with you from now on. You've always been respectful to everyone and deserve the same.
I'm too busy to discuss RMT in relation to this case right now, but I'll tag you later so we can have a discussion.
I will say I don't believe actual RMT is healthy at all.
Thank you for agreeing to be respectful. I like to treat people the way I would like to be treated.
I agree that I don't believe RMT is healthy at all and I think that Sandusky's issue 9 on trial counsel being ineffective in failing to present expert testimony that called into question the theory of repressed memory and demonstrated the likelihood of false memories in one of his strongest.
Referring to pages 88-89 in Sandusky's recent PCRA summary brief refers to testimony and statements by D.S., Matt Sandusky, Z.K., B.S.H., Aaron Fisher, Mike Gillum, and Attorney General Linda Kelly to explain why Sandusky is entitled to a new trial on the RMT claim.
In direct contradiction to statements made on the record and after-discovered statements made by D.S. and Matt Sandusky, the Commonwealth maintained that there was no evidence that a number of accusers underwent therapy that brought forth alleged repressed/false memories. Mr. Sandusky has presented evidence that various accusers did undergo therapy to improve their memories of abuse and that is why they testified at trial to why their stories changed over time.
The Commonwealth's prior claim that there was no reason for counsel to retain an expert because it was not an issue at trial and the Commonwealth never offered expert testimony on the subject reveals a misunderstanding of Mr. Sandusky's claim and the law. An example will demonstrate the incoherence of the argument. Simply because the Commonwealth does not call an expert on eyewitness identification would not preclude a defense attorney from presenting expert testimony where a person testified as an eyewitness and identified the defendant.
That the Commonwealth did not present expert testimony does not preclude a defendant from doing so. Here Z.K. testfied to blacking things out. B.S.H. testfied to remembering events that he had forgot. Aaron Fisher and Mike Gillum have made statements in their book that infers that Mr. Gillum helped Aaron Fisher remember being abused.
The Commonwealth cannot dispute that the accusers underwent therapy that aided their memory. Pointedly, it cannot do so because Attorney General Linda Kelly, immediately after Mr. Sandusky's convictions stated at her press conference that the victims had unearthed long buried memories. While the Commonwealth previously posited that Mr. Sandusky is manufacturing his claim, Mr. Sandusky has outlined those accusers that originally denied any allegations of oral sex or other types of sexual abuse. These stories changed over time after many of the accusers entered into therapy, sometimes at the behest of their civil attorneys.
As noted, Matt Sandusky, D.S, and Aaron Fisher have all made statements regarding therapy and memories of abuse. An attorney for Z.K. publicly stated that the alleged victims had buried the events deep in their subconscious. Phrased succinctly, Mr. Sandusky has set forth numerous instances regarding the accusers' ability to recall alleged abuse which undisputedly significantly changed over time. Had trial counsel presented expert testimony on memory, there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of Mr. Sandusky's trial would have been different. Mr. Sandusky is entitled to a new trial on this claim.
I am very interested to read how the Commonwealth will attempt to rebut issue 9.
still waiting for the haters to make a cogent argument for their narrative
You may be waiting a long time because they don't have any good arguments.
I am still waiting for anyone to rebut the 31 issues in the PCRA petition. I guess I will have to wait a week for the Commonwealth's response. I anticipate it will be lame as they don't have any good answers.
I thought he was talking about Paterno haters? You are still babbling about Jerry as you don't have the mental ability to separate the two. Jerry blew little boys. Joe committed no crimes.
I agree that Joe committed no crimes. The question before the court is whether Sandusky got a fair trial. I don't believe he did and I think his lawyers have made a compelling case that he didn't in the form of the 31 issues they identified in his PCRA petition. I don't believe the Commonwealth will be able to effectively rebut the issues. Time will tell, but I believe the law is with the defense.
Say it one more time. I think the law got it right and he'll die in jail. He's a POS!
Last edited:
They'll simply put it in context, use entire quotes, define what RMT is, and explain why it does not apply.
They'll also use professionals in the field of sexual abuse to explain how therapy works. It's common for victims stories to change for valid reasons.
It's Sandusky's right to present the best possible appeal he can. It's his lawyers duty to do all they can for his client. I personally think it's a weak argument that will be strongly countered.
My contempt for Pendergast, Loftus, the FMSF, Ziegler, and Big Trial (which I have misdirected at others) has nothing to do with Sandusky's appeal. Our justice system is set up this way for a reason and no matter how I feel about Sandusky he has rights.
As far as actual RMT, I don't understand the logic behind targeting the subconscious mind with extreme techniques as a way to reach therapeutic wellness. Hypnosis, guided meditation, forms of age regression therapy, etc is fraught with possible dangers.
Do I believe there's such a thing as "repressed memories"? Absolutely I do. We all bury embarrassing and painful moments from our childhood and adolescence. They hit us from time to time, sometimes decades later, and it feels like it wasn't a part of who you were 5 minutes ago.
That clearly doesn't require an extreme or specialized form of therapy to unearth. It doesn't even call for making a suggestion to a patient that fits a certain "criteria".
These people hold out hope that Sandusky is innocent only because they could then claim vindication for Paterno. It always comes back to Joe.
And your problem with that is exactly what? That he constantly beat Pitt's ass and made them look beyond stupid?
Using Pitt's own argument, Joe fattened his record on weak Eastern teams. Joe's record has a preponderance of wins against Pitt, Maryland, Rutgers and WVU. Therefore, by your own idiotic and failed logic, Pitt is a weak Eastern team.
Great IQ there, Pitter.
Sorry. Not a Pitt fan. I despise them. Pity is small time. Always has been, always will be.
