Well, that's a bit squishier.
The Penn State police department reported to Schultz, so I think that when people criticize Paterno for "not going to the police" it's fair to point out that he did take it to Schultz.
OT: Well now I've read the dumbest tweet of my life inre Sandusky
- Thread starter simons96
- Start date
Well, that's a bit squishier.
The Penn State police department reported to Schultz, so I think that when people criticize Paterno for "not going to the police" it's fair to point out that he did take it to Schultz.
Look dude, it's a "a basic day 1 fact of the case that Sandusky was a coach in 1998 when he committed his crimes against Victim 6."
What about Spanier? Didn't Schultz report to him? By that moronic logic wouldn't Spanier be the "police" as well?
Spanier didn't have direct oversight of the police department, "Shultz" did. Just like how the chief of police might report the mayor, doesn't make the mayor the police. Why don't you focus all your troll energy on the fact that JS was reported to the a mandated reporter at the second mile?
Way to dodge all the tough questions with this bit of distraction.
Which crimes against Victim 6? The ones that were fully investigated in 1998 and found not to have happened? The Victim who said he "couldn't recall any overt sexual contact occurring during the shower encounter" during the trial? Your timeline did get it's info from the super duper accurate grand jury report, so I'm sure there aren't an errors. Let's all just stop having independent thoughts and believe what ESPN tells us to believe.
He was convicted at trial.
You make Penn Staters look like idiots when you try to deny that.
Aoshiro said:
So I guess OJ really was innocent? I never said JS wasn't convicted a trial, please stop trying to change the subject. You make whatever school you are actually a fan of look like idiots when you try continually make irrelevant points. Please keep your next reply on topic or simply don't reply at all.
If you want go back and actually try to defend your position, I've quoted my previous post for your convenience:
An updated source? The basis of the timeline is his convictions. It is a matter of fact that Sandusky was convicted of charges that took place when he was a coach at Penn State. There should be NO argument there. Now if you want to argue that he was falsely convicted, then that's something different entirely.
What world do you live in?
What you stated was this "it's a basic day 1 fact of the case that he was an EX-Coach when he committed all his crimes."
That is flat out WRONG. Several of the crimes that he was convicted of occurred while he was still a coach at Penn State. That is not arguable. It's a statement of fact.
He was convicted on three of the four charges pertaining to Victim 6.
He was acquitted of indecent assault. He was found guilty of:
Count 29: Unlawful contact with minors
Verdict: Guilty.
Count 30: Corruption of minors
Verdict: Guilty.
Count 31: Endangering welfare of children
Verdict: Guilty.
Link
I've had some success at getting people to listen to why the narrative is detrimental to protecting children everywhere from PCSOs. You can piss into the wind all you want, but I'm trying to schedule a meeting with Ms. Grigsby because she lives where I do. I can guarantee you even if I don't get to meet with her personally , she's not going to try that schtick again.
Thank you for the context in which Simons was laughing about the guy trolling on the OTL tweet.
For those who don't tweet, what people say when one of these stupid media "productions" are posted on Twitter is all very public. Even if there is one such as the nimnal who "gets his education from ESPN", the rest of us are publicly replying and posting facts on the same chain.
That means these facts are also read by people who get their "news" from ESPN and all these other sorry media outlets/columnists/ "investigative journalists" who can't tell this story right to save their lives. And they get it from Twitter postings.
IMHO it's worth it. Otherwise the stupid narrative stands unchallenged in that venue. And maybe, just maybe we can get some more people educated on child predators.
Last edited:
I'll tell you what's "stoopid". You don't seem to get that the ESPINs of the world have to be publicly challenged every single time they put out one of these stupid tweets. Millions of people read them. They must be challenged and the trollers given a dose of edumacation. You can thank us all later.
Last edited:
Gee, I thought we "moved on" and weren't talking about this any more? LMFAO, at you PennsyOrafice, not with you.
While we're on the subject of common sense do you mind explaining why Sandusky continued showering alone with kids after 98?
Common sense is stopping the practice when it's made clear you shouldn't be doing it. Especially when it's completely unnecessary.
Well LT....coaches shower with kids all over the country in locker room shower. I was in 11 years old when I first showered in a locker room with other players and coaches after baseball practice, Ya, I know I was a player and these kids were not. But the fact is to most of us that shower in locker rooms this would not stand out. When I was you group adult youth showering in open showers took place at church camp and scout jamborees as well. What also might shock you is that when someone of stature is exonerating from wrong doing, like JS was by the investigation in 1998 people in admin tend to take that information as a sign that the investigated and exonerated are clean. It was a Second Mile psychologist that exonerated JS after another indicated he was a profiler. What people tend to overlook is that C/S/S and everyone else, even if they were informed of the investigation in 1998, they were not privy to the details of that investigation....just a summary outcome.
JS was a classic pedofile and very good at it, unfortunately. He fooled a lot of people on the way to foolling the PSU administrative people. Remember the 1998 investigation was about JS activities at a high school whose experts in the filed also investigated the alleged incidents there (privately) and discredited the claims.
JS was talked about by college coaches from all over the country as a 'big kid' .... 'a goof' etc for a lot of years. I heard this banter all the time at sports banquets, from PSU coaches and coaches from many other universities. UVA, Pitt, ND, OSU....etc. They all talked well of JS because of his youth program..... calling out the details of a sealed investigation ex post facto ,,,when the details were not released to anyone, just the conclusion is pure BS.
My question is why has there not been a focus on the second unqualified psychologist being called into the 1998 investigation especially one that worked for the Second Mile. If he had not been called in, the outcome would have been quite different and JS would have been prosecuted then. Additionally, the knowledge so many people in the public pretend C/S/S and somehow Paterno had regarding 1998.... which they did not....they would have had and I am sure JS would have been given the boot after due process in the 1998 case.
The outrage is misplaced here. The real outrage should be focused on the very unusual events in the 1998 investigation, but for the journalistic world where is the sensationalism in going after a psychologist for a nationally obscure youth organization and potentially a deceased Centre County DA when you have JoePA and PSU football to attack in print and on the air? Hell, what would any carpet bagging journalist do these days.
The juvenile fans and lazy media members that thrive on taking the path of cheap sensationalism over newsworthy scripts, copy and print will keep this alive as long as they can. Perhaps we need to ignore them and keep pushing for due diligence in this matter, as always, not matter where it takes us. It is the honorable thing to do.
JS was a classic pedofile and very good at it, unfortunately. He fooled a lot of people on the way to foolling the PSU administrative people. Remember the 1998 investigation was about JS activities at a high school whose experts in the filed also investigated the alleged incidents there (privately) and discredited the claims.
JS was talked about by college coaches from all over the country as a 'big kid' .... 'a goof' etc for a lot of years. I heard this banter all the time at sports banquets, from PSU coaches and coaches from many other universities. UVA, Pitt, ND, OSU....etc. They all talked well of JS because of his youth program..... calling out the details of a sealed investigation ex post facto ,,,when the details were not released to anyone, just the conclusion is pure BS.
My question is why has there not been a focus on the second unqualified psychologist being called into the 1998 investigation especially one that worked for the Second Mile. If he had not been called in, the outcome would have been quite different and JS would have been prosecuted then. Additionally, the knowledge so many people in the public pretend C/S/S and somehow Paterno had regarding 1998.... which they did not....they would have had and I am sure JS would have been given the boot after due process in the 1998 case.
The outrage is misplaced here. The real outrage should be focused on the very unusual events in the 1998 investigation, but for the journalistic world where is the sensationalism in going after a psychologist for a nationally obscure youth organization and potentially a deceased Centre County DA when you have JoePA and PSU football to attack in print and on the air? Hell, what would any carpet bagging journalist do these days.
The juvenile fans and lazy media members that thrive on taking the path of cheap sensationalism over newsworthy scripts, copy and print will keep this alive as long as they can. Perhaps we need to ignore them and keep pushing for due diligence in this matter, as always, not matter where it takes us. It is the honorable thing to do.
Last edited:
I have the Penn Live goof on ignore, and he's too dumb to realize it.
UncleLar said:
The basis of the timelines is not his convictions. It specifically references what it's based on, like the grand jury report, etc. This has already been covered. Please stop wasting our time.
I've never said that he wasn't convicted. Why do you people keep bringing this up? What world do you live in?
As Bob said, you should probably just stick to sports.
Really? You claim common sense dictates Sandusky wouldn't have done anything sexual in the showers.
Common sense actually dictates he should have never been in those showers alone with a child after the 98 incident. Common sense clearly isn't something to lean on when talking about Sandusky. He's a sick twist that couldn't help himself.
L.T. Young said:
So he had contact with 100s of kids and was able to control himself 99.9% of the time, but in a public place he could get caught, he just couldn't help himself. Got it.
Let's not forget that victim 6 testified that he "couldn't recall any overt sexual contact occurring during the shower encounter". And Victim 2 at best has explicitly stated that nothing happened, and at worst never testified.
I don't want to go down this rabbit hole, I don't care what your opinion is. Please stop.
Why are you so insistent on denying the convictions? Sandusky was charged with crimes against 10 victims over an almost 15 year period from the mid 90s on. The evidence was solid enough that the jury convicted Sandusky of crimes against EVERY one of the victims. Sandusky was still a coach at PSU during the nineties when many of those incidents happened. To claim differently is either sticking your head in the sand in denial or claiming that Sandusky was falsely convicted. Which is it?
And most of this alleged stuff did not happen on Penn State Property. So why did the BoT pay where no culpability existed? What are they hiding? They were full of crap if they thought the insurance company was going to pay.
Why are you so insistent on saying that I am denying his convictions, when I am clearly not?
Oh FFS, you wrote, "it's a basic day 1 fact of the case that he was an EX-Coach when he committed all his crimes."
That just isn't true. He was convicted of crimes that were committed while he was a Penn State coach.
Yeah. I think he is confusing MM walking in when he was retired as compared to the rest of the timeline for the crimes. It is true he was retired in 2001, but that doesn't mean he was for the rest of the victims.
Aoshiro said:
I never said he wasn't convicted, I don't know why this is so hard to understand. I've already explained this all in previous posts. Please go back and read it slowly before wasting our time with further comments.
Why do you care so much? You seem so angry, let it go.
LaJolla Lion said:
I'm not confusing anything. Except for maybe a simple poster or two.
Because you have yet to refute this statement "it's a basic day 1 fact of the case that he was an EX-Coach when he committed all his crimes." All you have to do is acknowledge that you were wrong when you made that statement and I will go away.
So the reason why you continually keep making an irrelevant point, is because I won't refute my own statement. Got it, that makes complete sense. Thanks for adding so much value to this thread. I mean you could actually try to defend your position instead of posting nonsense, maybe start by responding to this:
I don't care if/when you go away. If I wanted you to go away, I can simply ignore you. But I'm having too much fun at your expense. So by all means, flail away!
Sandusky was a coach in 1998. Sandusky committed crimes in 1998. Therefore, your statement that "it's a basic day 1 fact of the case that he was an EX-Coach when he committed all his crimes" is incorrect.
No, if you're going to put together a half assed argument defending a pedophile I'm going to call you on it.
Once again you ignore the fact it was made clear in 98 that showering alone with kids was wrong. He continued to do it. That's a clear sign of pathological behavior.
This isn't a rabbit hole. You can't explain why he continued doing something that was unacceptable. You need to stop listening to Ziegler and accept reality.
Sure, and OJ is completely innocent in your world. I've pointed out why the alleged crimes before he retired are weak, you can't seem to address my points. You can choose to believe whatever you've been spoon-fed. I'm going to choose to approach this world with an open mind.
Gotta love the internet, when people simply can't admit they are wrong. It's people like you that feed this moron on twitter and their anti-PSU agendas, that keep kids in harms way.
I can't believe it took you this long to call me a pedophile defender. You might as well just say "I've got nothing, I'm wrong, you're right." That's essentially what everyone else reads when you type such nonsense.
When did I ever defend him or say he was innocent? You are apparently too weak minded to understand that when he retired to spend more time with the charity that was the source of his victims, that might have triggered him to start or ramp up his crimes.
Once again you ignore the fact that he had contact with 100s of kids and was able to control himself 99.9% of the time, but in a public place he could get caught, he just couldn't help himself. You can't explain why he only selectively lost control for crimes fit your false narrative.
So now they truth comes out, you've drug me down this rabbit hole to exercise your hate against JZ. Keep on trashing PSU, keep fueling the fire that puts the spotlight on PSU instead of the professionals that failed those kids.
Last edited:
Defend my position? The only position I have is that your statement regarding Sandusky not committing crimes as a coach is a falsehood. I didn't know if you were intentionally lying or were just ignorant of that fact. At first, I thought it was a case of ignorance and it would be helpful if I alerted you to that. Clearly, that isn't the case. You have basically acknowledged that you are a troll. You don't care if you get your facts correct, you just want to stir things up. That, by definition, is a TROLL.
Are you kidding. You clearly and without a doubt made a false statement. When others pointed it out and it's clear as day it was false you then attacked those people. Jerry was not an ex coach for every crime he was convicted of. That is a TRUE statement and cannot be refuted unless you are saying the convictions were all bogus. If that is what you want to run with, so be it. So basically YOU are the guy who can't admit he was wrong.
I'm having trouble following precisely what is being argued in this thread. I know all the charges, dates, and locations are hard to keep straight, so I made some charts a while ago to help me:
----- Sandusky charges & Sentencing per charge
Sandusky is only serving time for IDSI charges committed against Victims 1, 4, 9, and 10. The remainder of the charges are being served concurrently.
Sandusky directly admitted to behavior resulting in charges committed against Victims 1, 2, and 6. Those charges toll to 8 years 3 months to 16 years 6 months. (Refer to testimony by Schreffler, Curley, and Dershem, respectively. Sexual intent established by warning not to shower in 1998; being caught in the shower in 2001; and admissions to Dershem in January 2006 with Amendola present.)
According to the Moulton report, Victims 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7 were identified prior to Sara Ganims's 3/31/2011 article. Investigators found Victim 3; he did not come forward; and he initially denied anything inappropriate.
----- Dates of abuse & Location if on PSU campus
Five of the ten victims at trial testified to abuses while Sandusky was employed by PSU. All five testified to abuses on campus.
Eight of the ten victims at trial testified to abuses on campus.
----- Sandusky charges & Sentencing per charge
Sandusky is only serving time for IDSI charges committed against Victims 1, 4, 9, and 10. The remainder of the charges are being served concurrently.
Sandusky directly admitted to behavior resulting in charges committed against Victims 1, 2, and 6. Those charges toll to 8 years 3 months to 16 years 6 months. (Refer to testimony by Schreffler, Curley, and Dershem, respectively. Sexual intent established by warning not to shower in 1998; being caught in the shower in 2001; and admissions to Dershem in January 2006 with Amendola present.)
According to the Moulton report, Victims 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7 were identified prior to Sara Ganims's 3/31/2011 article. Investigators found Victim 3; he did not come forward; and he initially denied anything inappropriate.
----- Dates of abuse & Location if on PSU campus
Five of the ten victims at trial testified to abuses while Sandusky was employed by PSU. All five testified to abuses on campus.
Eight of the ten victims at trial testified to abuses on campus.
UncleLar said:
I've posted why I believe I am correct, you on the other hand will not defend your position. You are here to simply post extraneous, or off-topic messages with the deliberate intent disrupting normal on-topic discussion. I appreciate you providing the link that defines you as the troll, ironic. Please don't project your troll behaviors on me.
LaJolla Lion said:
I never attacked anyone, I have been attacked though. Saying that I have attacked anyone is utterly ridiculous, and shows your bias. I've actually tried to not get drawn in to conversations with these trolls. I don't believe it to be false, and I have provided reasons that I think the allegations that occurred before he retired are weak. I've explained it very clearly and calmly, I don't understand why you guys have such a hard time understanding, and why you all get so excited about someone having a different opinion than you.
Thanks for providing your unsolicited 2 cents.
Uncle Lar is far from a troll and neither is Aoshiro. Stop the pnnylion defense as it's lame. Are you going to call them a Pitter next or tell them to go back to Pennlive? Lar knows his crap and calling him a troll is foolish not to mention a bit of an attack since he has been around PSU sites forever. He a pretty good resource along with Art in terms of rules, regulations, and history IMO. It's fine to have a different opinion, but it's odd to totally disregard facts when they are clearly pointed out to you. Carry on I guess as it's pretty clear what he said and what you said.
