ADVERTISEMENT

Penn State Trustees call special meeting on Friday to discuss Freeh Report

I would not believe everything Zig says. Spanier's lawyers have instructed him NOT to speak about the issue, so chatting with Zig would certainly be on the No No List.

I agree 100% that Ziegler can be a complete ass. However, I have yet to catch him telling any deliberate lies about the case. Whenever he engages in speculation, he admits its just that and he does openly retract theories when it seems that are not supported by the evidence (such as the possibility that Aaron Fisher was actually molested by his stepfather).

I was the first person to suggest to Ziegler that the McQueary incident may have occurred prior to February 9, 2001. He was actually extremely skeptical at first. It was only after he was presented with a flood of facts that he decided to change his views.
 
I don't think even Zig believes Jerry is innocent of inappropriate touching.

So thinking some vics made up stories makes sense, so thinking JS trial was a sham makes sense, thinking Ira went out of his way to cover for TSM makes sense and to think the MM vic 2 story was embellished makes sense but the thought the JS is innocent is a bridge too far for me. Even a vindictive Corbett, Surma et al would not burn down the University, and send a guy away for life for a couple personal grudges makes no sense.
If by innocent you or they mean, showering, touching, etc but no anal or oral sex I could see that.

I agree that he may have engaged in some inappropriate touching, but I believe (as the 1998 indicated) that is only a crime if there is a sexual intent. I doubt there was a sexual intent because its seems inconceivable that an ephebophile whose m.o. is snuggling boys in their beds and watching/horsing around with them in the shower would not have a huge cache of pornography.

Whatever the case, Jerry Sandusky is not spending his entire life in solitary confinement and Joe Paterno does not get fired and shunned due to inappropriate touching.
 
  • Like
Reactions: roswelllion
FWIW: A Lubrano, R McCombie, and A Taliaferro voted FOR the Lubert secret committee - which created the blanket of immunity for The Second Mile (one of the few times Taliaferro was moved to cast a Yea or Nay vote on anything :) )
A Lubrano may have, since then, recognized the error in his decision. IDK what he would say in that regard.
I am quite certain that neither McCombie nor Taliaferro have ever felt - then or now - that creating more and more layers of protection for certain folks, and more and more layers of deception, was a failure in responsibilities (we do remember the Heim affair - correct?).
And now - back to our regularly scheduled program.
So, Barry, please elaborate on what would be materially different today had these 3 voted the other way? If my understanding is correct, they would have lost the vote 35-3 and the result would have been reported as unanimous. Unless my understanding is incorrect (which is quite possible), I don’t see how we would be in a different place. Please help me to better understand this issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TenerHallTerror
Yep, and it's going to be a unanimous vote to not release the A9 report, too.
 
Responsible Governance:

It happens - or doesn't happen - one step at a time.


Where would we be? What would be different? If we had experienced and performed Responsible Governance (rather than abject failure of governance, of which this was one of hundreds of examples) for the last six years?
I'd be happy to discuss that - - - - - but, how many days do ya' have - 'cause its not a short story :)
How about we keep it simple: What would have happened immediately after the 35-3 vote?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TenerHallTerror
So, Barry, please elaborate on what would be materially different today had these 3 voted the other way? If my understanding is correct, they would have lost the vote 35-3 and the result would have been reported as unanimous. Unless my understanding is incorrect (which is quite possible), I don’t see how we would be in a different place. Please help me to better understand this issue.

My View: The outcome would not have changed anything ... at that moment.

On principle alone at least one of the Alumni trustees should have voted no simply to take a stand. In fact, all of them should have colluded and voted against something...anything... that the OGBOT was in favor.

How would it have been viewed if it were reported that Lubert was elected by a 32-1 vote? A landslide, yes. But never before had their been a dissenting vote. Now there was. Instead, Anth9ny not only voted for Lubert, but he praised him. Give me a break!

If you want to effect change, then start changing things. Today it might be one vote. Next week it might be two votes. Two months from now, may one of the 'tweener BOTers joins and also takes a stand.

I'm voting Barry next time simply because he will raise a ruckus.

Remember, "You can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant"
 
Last edited:
A home where Jeff & Matt lived had no pornography? Doesn't ring true.

It sounds more likely Jerry was tipped to the search & the whole house was purged.

Perhaps. Corbett waited two years before examining the home PC. However, the fact that Jerry did not smoke, drink or swear and was highly religious counts for something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TenerHallTerror
I love when people like Pink Hippo Butt Butter act like they understand forensic computer investigations
erase-hard-drive.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: TenerHallTerror
I love when people like Pink Hippo Butt Butter act like they understand forensic computer investigations

At least as much as the
Keystone kops in state college. Of course if all your conspiracy theories are true and they are as devious & computer savvy as you seem to think they would have easily been able to plant porn.

Live video of their "search" ...

NecessarySoreAmericanblackvulture-max-1mb.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: indynittany
A home where Jeff & Matt lived had no pornography? Doesn't ring true.

It sounds more likely Jerry was tipped to the search & the whole house was purged.

I'm a bit confused about this issue as to whether there was or wasn't something found at his house:



Listen at 11:59. Seems that McGettigan is suggesting they did find images.
 
A home where Jeff & Matt lived had no pornography? Doesn't ring true.

It sounds more likely Jerry was tipped to the search & the whole house was purged.
You need to rethink this statement. Do you think that the reference to porn refers to run of the mill internet porn? You can't be that stupid. If Jerry is indeed a pedophile, he isn't watching Debbie Does State College you fool.
 
I'm a bit confused about this issue as to whether there was or wasn't something found at his house:



Listen at 11:59. Seems that McGettigan is suggesting they did find images.

LMAO at Joe McGettigan.

Joe never bothered to drive over to the Upper Main Line Y and ask a few questions about Bruce Heim's Second Mile "Friends Fitness" program and what the hell that was all about.

UMLY is in McGettigan's back yard. "At risk" kids in Berwyn and along the Main Line? They drive a used Volvo to their Blue Ribbon award winning public high school and are forced to summer in Avalon.

What did McGettigan know about this pedophile training camp in his back yard and why didn't he do anything?
 
I'm a bit confused about this issue as to whether there was or wasn't something found at his house:



Listen at 11:59. Seems that McGettigan is suggesting they did find images.

Then why didn’t they present them at trial? The prosecution was so desperate for physical evidence. They made a huge deal about Sandusky’s “love letters” to V4 (which were not even remotely sexual or romantic) and encouraged the accusers to exaggerate the gifts of church clothes and old computers/sports equipment that PSU was going to otherwise throw away.

Perhaps they did stumble upon Matt’s stash, but adult porn would not have helped thier case. I believe Jeff had been out of the house many years by that time.

Another possibility is that the images were simply ones Jerry stumbled upon accidentally, or mild images like ESPN had when they release thier “body issue”. They never said they were child images. If that is the case, it proves Jerry did not try to clean his computer before the police searched it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: francofan
I agree that he may have engaged in some inappropriate touching, but I believe (as the 1998 indicated) that is only a crime if there is a sexual intent. I doubt there was a sexual intent because its seems inconceivable that an ephebophile whose m.o. is snuggling boys in their beds and watching/horsing around with them in the shower would not have a huge cache of pornography.

Whatever the case, Jerry Sandusky is not spending his entire life in solitary confinement and Joe Paterno does not get fired and shunned due to inappropriate touching.

I’m not sure that intent of the person doing the touching matters as much as the person being touched. Or in the case of a minor, the perception of the touching by other adults such as parents.
 
It is one thing to say they have reason to question his guilt. But its another thing to say they believe he is innocent.
Lundy, if you take the word "believe" out of your last sentence and replace it with "know", I'm in agreement with you.
 
I'm a bit confused about this issue as to whether there was or wasn't something found at his house:



Listen at 11:59. Seems that McGettigan is suggesting they did find images.
If they found any child porn images, they would have arrested him then and could have easily wrapped up their case/investigation in June 2011. What they found were images of AF and two other former CMHS students that were identified by a school security officer(Moulton timeline). At trial, the prosecution entered into evidence the pics of AF at various HS sporting events.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT