With the Benefit of Hindsight - Ziegler's new documentary podcast on scandal to start in 2021

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
4,156
5,128
1
Was Jerry Sandusky a nudist? I’ve never heard that before. That would at least be the first somewhat reasonable possibility somebody has offered up as an innocent reason for the showering activity.
He is not, to my knowledge, a nudist. My point is that you keep saying (paraphrase) "Any time anyone is naked, a hug must be sexual". I provided a point to refute that. I think it is clear that Sandusky did not view nudity the same way you do. I suspect this was a function of growing up around locker rooms in a different era.
 
  • Like
Reactions: francofan

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
54,257
27,360
1
Do you agree that it was bad judgement to be showering with the boy in ‘98 and hugging him in the shower?
I give JS a pass for this but that should have been a wake up call. No excuse the second time even if there was no sexual assault.
 

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
54,257
27,360
1
Mike had such a great look he couldn't tell what color the kid's hair was or even if there was arousal. The insertion question was taking a big leap.
MM said the boy came running out of the shower and that he didn't look distressed. I'm pretty sure that a young boy would look distressed if he was forced into anal sex.
 

AvgUser

Well-Known Member
Jul 12, 2016
1,711
2,940
1
How do you prove intent then? It certainly can’t just be based on the honesty of the alleged perpetrator, can it? Common sense and reason has to play into it, I would think.
Common Sense and the Sandusky trial went the way of the dinosaur from day one. The twists, turns and unbelievable stories that were told on the stand and afterward defies all rationale thinking and logic.
 

Connorpozlee

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2013
7,554
9,184
1
He is not, to my knowledge, a nudist. My point is that you keep saying (paraphrase) "Any time anyone is naked, a hug must be sexual". I provided a point to refute that. I think it is clear that Sandusky did not view nudity the same way you do. I suspect this was a function of growing up around locker rooms in a different era.
I think I probably view nudity the same way the vast majority of people in the world view it. Group shower after practice, a game, at the gym is reasonable. Alone with an 11-year old and hugging them is not, father figure or not. And Jerry admitted he shouldn’t have done it after the first incident, then continued the behavior.
 

Connorpozlee

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2013
7,554
9,184
1
I give JS a pass for this but that should have been a wake up call. No excuse the second time even if there was no sexual assault.
Fair enough, though I’m guessing if it was your own son you wouldn’t give JS a pass for it.
 

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
54,257
27,360
1
Oh, I absolutely agree with your last paragraph. 100%.
The father figure thing makes no sense though, unless your father showered alone with you and hugged you when you were 11 years old. That’s simply is not something a father does. It’s not something a father figure does. It absolutely is not something a worker with troubled youth does. It absolutely defies all logic, don’t you think?
My father showered with me many times at campsites, at the beach, etc. He didn't help me get clean but I grew up in a functional family and learned that at an early age. My high school coach showered with a couple of us from time to time. He also participated in horsing around. You act like it's outlandish to think two males would go into a communal shower. That was a reasonably common thing at one time.

Again, I'm not saying JS is innocent.
 

Connorpozlee

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2013
7,554
9,184
1
My father showered with me many times at campsites, at the beach, etc. He didn't help me get clean but I grew up in a functional family and learned that at an early age. My high school coach showered with a couple of us from time to time. He also participated in horsing around. You act like it's outlandish to think two males would go into a communal shower. That was a reasonably common thing at one time.

Again, I'm not saying JS is innocent.
I’ve never said it was unreasonable for two males to share a group shower. Never. But very specifically to Jerry Sandusky, it is not reasonable in any way for a grown man to get into a group shower with one 11-year old boy and hug him. Why people choose the give all these other examples (getting into a group shower with their father who didn’t touch them, sharing a group shower with a coach and other teammates, etc... ) that have nothing to do with what we know Jerry admitted to is baffling to me.
And like you, I am not saying that I know Jerry is guilty. Nobody knows for sure, other than Jerry and the accusers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WHCANole

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
54,257
27,360
1
I’ve never said it was unreasonable for two males to share a group shower. Never. But very specifically to Jerry Sandusky, it is not reasonable in any way for a grown man to get into a group shower with one 11-year old boy and hug him. Why people choose the give all these other examples (getting into a group shower with their father who didn’t touch them, sharing a group shower with a coach and other teammates, etc... ) that have nothing to do with what we know Jerry admitted to is baffling to me.
And like you, I am not saying that I know Jerry is guilty. Nobody knows for sure, other than Jerry and the accusers.
I don't remember the hug but that could have been part of horsing around. I recall the 98 incident that he was holding the boy up closer to the shower head to rinse his hair. I have no idea what JS was doing. I'm just saying it might not have been so obvious to everybody that he was sexually assaulting a child.

P.S. I do recall MM saying he saw JS pressed up against a boy to the wall. Of course MM's report seems to have changed over time. I don't believe that JS was raping a boy that night. I think it would be difficult for a 6' tall man to do that to a 4' tall boy from a standing position. Also, MM said the boy wasn't stressed. I guess it's possible that JS was just getting off by rubbing up against the boy and the boy didn't understand anything sexual was occurring. Who knows.

Bottom line is that Dranov, Dad, Joe, Curley, & Shultz all said that MM didn't tell them about sexual assault. That seems pretty exculpatory to me. My guess is that MM heard something that didn't seem right so he reported it. I suspect that he watered it down because he wasn't sure about what was going on. Then later he was pressed for not doing more to stop things on his own that night so he started to embellish his story by saying C&S knew what he was trying to say.

I also think the jury was caught up in the outrage and media hype. I think JS would have had to prove his innocence in order to be found not guilty.

Finally, I think that at least half of the "victims" made up or embellished their stories in order to cash in. No, I don't think JS was raping kids in his home and that Dottie and family stood by and did nothing while they screamed. I think the whole repressed memory therapy thing used by attorneys was a farce.

I do think JS had some boundary issues, otherwise he wouldn't have allowed himself to get caught twice. I have no idea exactly what he did or to how many kids. I just know a lot of things about this case don't pass the smell test.
 

Connorpozlee

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2013
7,554
9,184
1
I don't remember the hug but that could have been part of horsing around. I recall the 98 incident that he was holding the boy up closer to the shower head to rinse his hair. I have no idea what JS was doing. I'm just saying it might not have been so obvious to everybody that he was sexually assaulting a child.

P.S. I do recall MM saying he saw JS pressed up against a boy to the wall. Of course MM's report seems to have changed over time. I don't believe that JS was raping a boy that night. I think it would be difficult for a 6' tall man to do that to a 4' tall boy from a standing position. Also, MM said the boy wasn't stressed. I guess it's possible that JS was just getting off by rubbing up against the boy and the boy didn't understand anything sexual was occurring. Who knows.

Bottom line is that Dranov, Dad, Joe, Curley, & Shultz all said that MM didn't tell them about sexual assault. That seems pretty exculpatory to me. My guess is that MM heard something that didn't seem right so he reported it. I suspect that he watered it down because he wasn't sure about what was going on. Then later he was pressed for not doing more to stop things on his own that night so he started to embellish his story by saying C&S knew what he was trying to say.

I also think the jury was caught up in the outrage and media hype. I think JS would have had to prove his innocence in order to be found not guilty.

Finally, I think that at least half of the "victims" made up or embellished their stories in order to cash in. No, I don't think JS was raping kids in his home and that Dottie and family stood by and did nothing while they screamed. I think the whole repressed memory therapy thing used by attorneys was a farce.

I do think JS had some boundary issues, otherwise he wouldn't have allowed himself to get caught twice. I have no idea exactly what he did or to how many kids. I just know a lot of things about this case don't pass the smell test.
Taken from a November 9, 2011 CBS News article:
“Jerry Lauro, an investigator with the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, testified to the grand jury Sandusky admitted to him and Schreffler in an interview that he hugged the boy while naked in the shower and that he knew it was wrong.

However, the case was closed after then-Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar decided there would be no criminal charges filed.”
 

Media Fan

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 3, 2001
2,725
1,627
1
Forget C/S/S. Why do you think Sandusky was in the shower with these boys alone? What logical reason would there be?
Makes sense to me that at the end of an activity I would want to take a shower just like the kids that participated in whatever the activity was.
What would you want me to do, wait till all the kids get out of the shower before I take a shower. That makes no sense to me.
I played basketball when I was 50 with a bunch of young men at the YMCA. After the game, I took my shower along with them. Doesn’t that make sense.
 

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
4,156
5,128
1
Taken from a November 9, 2011 CBS News article:
“Jerry Lauro, an investigator with the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, testified to the grand jury Sandusky admitted to him and Schreffler in an interview that he hugged the boy while naked in the shower and that he knew it was wrong.

However, the case was closed after then-Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar decided there would be no criminal charges filed.”
Based on how this meshes with your opinion, either:

1) Naked hugs in the shower are not necessarily a crime
or
2) Gricar didn't know the law.
or
3) Gricar was corrupt
or
4) Gricar was pressured by someone else to not file charges.

Are there other possibilities to explain no charges files after he admitted doing this that I am missing?
 

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
4,156
5,128
1
I also think the jury was caught up in the outrage and media hype. I think JS would have had to prove his innocence in order to be found not guilty.
This ^^^^^^^^

The media frenzy and journalistic malpractice over this case, in combination with the illegal actions of the OAG (which were tolerated by the court), meant there was basically zero way Sandusky would get acquitted, short of all the accusers recanting their testimony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marshall23

Connorpozlee

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2013
7,554
9,184
1
Makes sense to me that at the end of an activity I would want to take a shower just like the kids that participated in whatever the activity was.
What would you want me to do, wait till all the kids get out of the shower before I take a shower. That makes no sense to me.
I played basketball when I was 50 with a bunch of young men at the YMCA. After the game, I took my shower along with them. Doesn’t that make sense.
Well, yes. Any reasonable person in that role would wait and take a separate shower or just wait until they get home as it is absolutely inappropriate for a persona working with at-risk youth to shower alone with them. Jerry admitted this according to Lauro in the quote I attached up above.
And your last sentence said it again, and I continue to not get why people can’t grasp the difference between showering with a bunch of people you just played a game with and taking a shower alone with one kid whom you choose to hug during the shower. You showered with ”a bunch of young men” (and I am going to assume you didn’t hug any of them during the shower but you can correct me if I wrong on that assumption) while Jerry showered alone with an 11-year old boy, hugging him in the process.
 
Last edited:

Connorpozlee

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2013
7,554
9,184
1
Based on how this meshes with your opinion, either:

1) Naked hugs in the shower are not necessarily a crime
or
2) Gricar didn't know the law.
or
3) Gricar was corrupt
or
4) Gricar was pressured by someone else to not file charges.

Are there other possibilities to explain no charges files after he admitted doing this that I am missing?
Because it is very difficult to prove intent? I don’t know, I’m not in the legal or law enforcement field. But if that one singular incident can not result in charges, I would think it provides pretty reasonable intent when a second incident is found to have occurred.
 

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
54,257
27,360
1
Taken from a November 9, 2011 CBS News article:
“Jerry Lauro, an investigator with the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, testified to the grand jury Sandusky admitted to him and Schreffler in an interview that he hugged the boy while naked in the shower and that he knew it was wrong.

However, the case was closed after then-Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar decided there would be no criminal charges filed.”
That doesn't tell me much.
 

crm114psu

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
646
324
1
I can understand why the jury came to this conclusion in 2012. Today, I believe that most of the people who understand the case the best would come to a different conclusion.
Unfortunately for you and Jerry, a jury is not comprised of "people who understand the case the best". If by astronomical odds he gets a new trial I would be willing to bet the outcome would not significantly change.
 

marshall23

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2013
15,370
24,494
1
Unfortunately for you and Jerry, a jury is not comprised of "people who understand the case the best". If by astronomical odds he gets a new trial I would be willing to bet the outcome would not significantly change.
But I assume you are not Jerry.....and I'll bet he'd love to take that bet.
 

marshall23

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2013
15,370
24,494
1
Well, yes. Any reasonable person in that role would wait and take a separate shower or just wait until they get home as it is absolutely inappropriate for a persona working with at-risk youth to shower alone with them. Jerry admitted this according to Lauro in the quote I attached up above.
And your last sentence said it again, and I continue to not get why people can’t grasp the difference between showering with a bunch of people you just played a game with and taking a shower alone with one kid whom you choose to hug during the shower. You showered with ”a bunch of young men” (and I am going to assume you didn’t hug any of them during the shower but you can correct me if I wrong on that assumption) while Jerry showered alone with an 11-year old boy, hugging him in the process.
Not that it makes a huge difference, but I thought there were 2 boys involved in the case and only one mother raised a stink. I don't blame her, by the way. However, isn't it true that after the case ended in no charges....that not only did Jerry remain close to the young man in question, but the mother often felt comfortable reaching out to Sandusky asking him for favors? Especially tickets for PSU games etc.
 

Connorpozlee

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2013
7,554
9,184
1
Not that it makes a huge difference, but I thought there were 2 boys involved in the case and only one mother raised a stink. I don't blame her, by the way. However, isn't it true that after the case ended in no charges....that not only did Jerry remain close to the young man in question, but the mother often felt comfortable reaching out to Sandusky asking him for favors? Especially tickets for PSU games etc.
Hmmmmmm............. I don’t recall there being two boys but that’s certainly possible.
Jerry remaining close to the boy is a non-factor to me. It’s not uncommon.
 

marshall23

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2013
15,370
24,494
1

marshall23

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2013
15,370
24,494
1
In that article? I don’t see where it said there was another boy in the shower with them.
It refers to a second boy being interviewed. I can't be one hundred percent sure. I just seem to recall there were 2. Anyway, Lauro says he's seen boundary issues like this before......
How is it a crime 11 years later? LOL
 
  • Like
Reactions: francofan

Connorpozlee

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2013
7,554
9,184
1
It refers to a second boy being interviewed. I can't be one hundred percent sure. I just seem to recall there were 2. Anyway, Lauro says he's seen boundary issues like this before......
How is it a crime 11 years later? LOL
I don’t recall two boys, but who the hell remembers at this point? It would be interesting to see what Lauro would have labeled a second, similar incident 3 or so years later.
 

marshall23

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2013
15,370
24,494
1
I don’t recall two boys, but who the hell remembers at this point? It would be interesting to see what Lauro would have labeled a second, similar incident 3 or so years later.
Well if it was Alan Myers, he was 14 and living part time with Sandusky. That's why the prosecutors didn't want to name the "little boy in the shower." Like I said earlier.....this isn't about unwanted touching anymore. Sandusky has more than served prison time for that sort of offense. This is about whether people believe he was anally raping kids in his family room. About claimants who changed their stories once money was on the table, manipulated by lawyers who changed the type of sex acts, frequency, locations and dates in order to get the maximum financial settlement.
Its quite a leap from Lauro's boundary issues to life in prison. Too much doesn't add up.
Let's not forget we're talking about a perp who had some health issues in the man junk area as well.
 

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
4,156
5,128
1
Because it is very difficult to prove intent? I don’t know, I’m not in the legal or law enforcement field. But if that one singular incident can not result in charges, I would think it provides pretty reasonable intent when a second incident is found to have occurred.
Even if I agree with this statement (not sure I do; if there was no sexual intent the first time why would there be the second time?), doesn't this point to CSS responding correctly? (and I know you haven't been particularly critical of CSS, but others on this thread have).
 

Connorpozlee

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2013
7,554
9,184
1
Even if I agree with this statement (not sure I do; if there was no sexual intent the first time why would there be the second time?), doesn't this point to CSS responding correctly? (and I know you haven't been particularly critical of CSS, but others on this thread have).
Not being charged doesn’t necessarily mean they didn’t think there could be sexual intent. Could mean that they didn’t have enough to prove it. If you’ve called it a boundary issue, explained it as a boundary to the person, had him admit he shouldn’t have done it then he does it again, just being a boundary issue is less likely to be the case.
 

jerot

Well-Known Member
Jan 17, 2013
862
303
1
Well if it was Alan Myers, he was 14 and living part time with Sandusky. That's why the prosecutors didn't want to name the "little boy in the shower." Like I said earlier.....this isn't about unwanted touching anymore. Sandusky has more than served prison time for that sort of offense. This is about whether people believe he was anally raping kids in his family room. About claimants who changed their stories once money was on the table, manipulated by lawyers who changed the type of sex acts, frequency, locations and dates in order to get the maximum financial settlement.
Its quite a leap from Lauro's boundary issues to life in prison. Too much doesn't add up.
Let's not forget we're talking about a perp who had some health issues in the man junk area as well.
Good stuff.
Myers couldn't remember when a picture of him posing with Sandusky had been taken, even though it was at Myers' own wedding.

Myers couldn't remember telling a couple of state troopers who interviewed him in 2011 that Sandusky had never abused him.

Myers couldn't remember what he told a private investigator, that Mike McQueary was a liar, and that nothing sexual ever happened in the shower. And finally, Myers couldn't remember what he told the state attorney general's office after he flipped, and was claiming that Jerry had abused him.

Myers made all these fuzzy statements during a Nov. 4, 2016 hearing where he was called as a witness as part of Sandusky's bid for a new trial. A 48-page transcript of that hearing was released for the first time earlier this week, in response to a request from a curious reporter for a major mainstream media news outlet. Myers' pathetic performance on the witness stand proves what a screwed-up case this is, featuring overreaching prosecutors and a hysterical news media.

The media blew it in part because they showed no skepticism about witnesses like Myers, who, going by the transcript, clearly wasn't credible.

Myers, who was on the witness stand for less than an hour before Centre County Senior Judge John M. Cleland, said he couldn't recall or didn't remember 34 times.

Either he was dealing with early-onset Alzheimer's, or else he was lying about everything.

Before Myers was brought in as a witness, Sandusky was sworn in and the judge explained to him that since nobody knew what Myers was going to say, his testimony "could be harmful to your case."

So is this a chance you're willing to take, the judge asked. Sandusky told the judge his mind was made up.

"It is my decision to have Allan Myers testify," Sandusky told the judge.

Myers, a former Marine, testified that he originally got to know the former Penn State assistant football coach through his Second Mile charity.

"Did you think of Mr. Sandusky as a father figure," Alexander Lindsay, Sandusky's lawyer, asked.

"Yes, I did," Myers said.

Myers was shown a picture of himself posing with Sandusky at Myers's wedding. Lindsay asked if Myers remembered when that picture was taken.

"That I do not remember," Myers said.

Lindsay showed Myers a photo of a football camp when Myers served as a coach, and posed for a picture with some boys, along with Sandusky. Lindsay asked Myers how old he was in the photo.

"I don't remember," Myers said. "I don't even know what year that was."

"Well, were you an adult," Lindsay asked. "Do you know that?"

"I wasn't an adult," Myers said.

"Can you give us any estimate of your age," the lawyer asked.

"No," Myers said.

Myers recalled that he lived in Sandusky's home "right after I graduated high school to attend Penn State."

"And I left there because he [Sandusky] was controlling and I left," Myers said. "And that was the end that I ever lived with him."

Sandusky was controlling, Myers said, but he didn't say anything about Sandusky being abusive.

Lindsay asked Myers if he remembered being interviewed on Sept. 20, 2011, by state Trooper James Ellis and Corporal Joseph A. Letter.

"I recall being interviewed," Myers said.

Lindsay gave Myers a copy of the police report and asked if it reflected what he told the state troopers.

"Yes," Myers said, before snapping at the lawyer, "Please don't raise your voice at me."

Lindsay asked if Myers remembered telling the troopers that he and Sandusky had often worked out at the Lasch Building.

"I don't remember that interview," Myer said.

Lindsay asked Myers if he recalled telling the troopers "nothing inappropriate occurred" in the shower with Jerry, and that at "no time were you made to feel uncomfortable."

"I don't recall," Myers replied.

Lindsay asked Myers if he remembered telling the troopers that after workouts with Sandusky, he and Jerry would return to the coach's home and shower in separate facilities.

"I said it," Myers said, "But I don't remember it."

Lindsay asked Myers if he remembered an interview he gave to an investigator named Curtis Everhart who at the time was working for Joseph Amendola, Sandusky's inept trial lawyer.

Myers remembered the interview.

Lindsay asked if he remembered telling the investigator, "I am alleged Victim No. 2."

"I'm sure I did," Myers said, before adding, "I don't remember everything."

Lindsay asked Myers if he recalled telling the investigator that on the day McQueary heard "slapping sounds" and thought there was an anal rape going down in the showers, Myers said, "Jerry and I were slapping towels at each other trying to sting each other."

Myers was a month short of his 14th birthday in 2001 when the infamous shower incident occurred. The official grand jury report, however, says that Mike McQueary witnessed Sandusky raping a 10-year-old boy in the shower.

Oh well, nobody expects the prosecutors to get the details right when they're on a witch hunt to put an alleged pedophile in jail. Whether or not they have to make up the evidence themselves. And apparently, nobody expects the witnesses to remember whatever stories they told.

"I don't recall everything I told Mr. Everhart," Myers said.

Did Myers recall telling the investigator that he used to slap the walls and slide on the shower floor when he was taking a shower with Jerry?

"I can't recall everything I said in that interview back then," Myers said.

Lindsay read out loud a quote from a report that stated what Myers had supposedly told Everhart:

"The grand jury report says Coach McQueary said he observed Jerry and I engaged in sexual activity. That is not the truth and McQueary is not telling the truth. Nothing occurred that night in the shower."

"Do you recall telling him that," Lindsay asked the witness.

"Like I said, I can't recall everything I said back then," Myers said. "But if it's in there, I said it then, yes."

Lindsay asked Myers if he told the investigator that "I never saw McQueary look into the shower that night," another claim by McQueary. "I am sure" it didn't happen, Myers told the investigator.

On the witness stand, Myers wasn't sure.

"That's what I said back then," Myers said. "Once again, I can't recall what I said then."

Lindsay read Myers more quotes from the interview with the investigator. In the quotes, Myers:

-- denied having sex with Sandusky;

-- repeated that "McQueary did not tell the truth;"

-- repeated that "I am alleged Victim No. 2 on the grand jury report;"

-- again claimed that Sandusky "never sexually assaulted me."

"That's what I said then," Myers said. "And once again, I can't recall everything I said then."

Lindsay asked Myers if he told the truth when he spoke to the investigator.

"Yes," he said.

Allan Myers had once been Jerry Sandusky's biggest defender. He even wrote a letter to the editor of a local newspaper stating what a great guy Jerry was.

At the beginning, Myers kept saying that Mike McQueary was a liar, Jerry was a great guy, and that Jerry had never touched him inappropriately.
 

marshall23

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2013
15,370
24,494
1
Good stuff.
Myers couldn't remember when a picture of him posing with Sandusky had been taken, even though it was at Myers' own wedding.

Myers couldn't remember telling a couple of state troopers who interviewed him in 2011 that Sandusky had never abused him.

Myers couldn't remember what he told a private investigator, that Mike McQueary was a liar, and that nothing sexual ever happened in the shower. And finally, Myers couldn't remember what he told the state attorney general's office after he flipped, and was claiming that Jerry had abused him.

Myers made all these fuzzy statements during a Nov. 4, 2016 hearing where he was called as a witness as part of Sandusky's bid for a new trial. A 48-page transcript of that hearing was released for the first time earlier this week, in response to a request from a curious reporter for a major mainstream media news outlet. Myers' pathetic performance on the witness stand proves what a screwed-up case this is, featuring overreaching prosecutors and a hysterical news media.

The media blew it in part because they showed no skepticism about witnesses like Myers, who, going by the transcript, clearly wasn't credible.

Myers, who was on the witness stand for less than an hour before Centre County Senior Judge John M. Cleland, said he couldn't recall or didn't remember 34 times.

Either he was dealing with early-onset Alzheimer's, or else he was lying about everything.

Before Myers was brought in as a witness, Sandusky was sworn in and the judge explained to him that since nobody knew what Myers was going to say, his testimony "could be harmful to your case."

So is this a chance you're willing to take, the judge asked. Sandusky told the judge his mind was made up.

"It is my decision to have Allan Myers testify," Sandusky told the judge.

Myers, a former Marine, testified that he originally got to know the former Penn State assistant football coach through his Second Mile charity.

"Did you think of Mr. Sandusky as a father figure," Alexander Lindsay, Sandusky's lawyer, asked.

"Yes, I did," Myers said.

Myers was shown a picture of himself posing with Sandusky at Myers's wedding. Lindsay asked if Myers remembered when that picture was taken.

"That I do not remember," Myers said.

Lindsay showed Myers a photo of a football camp when Myers served as a coach, and posed for a picture with some boys, along with Sandusky. Lindsay asked Myers how old he was in the photo.

"I don't remember," Myers said. "I don't even know what year that was."

"Well, were you an adult," Lindsay asked. "Do you know that?"

"I wasn't an adult," Myers said.

"Can you give us any estimate of your age," the lawyer asked.

"No," Myers said.

Myers recalled that he lived in Sandusky's home "right after I graduated high school to attend Penn State."

"And I left there because he [Sandusky] was controlling and I left," Myers said. "And that was the end that I ever lived with him."

Sandusky was controlling, Myers said, but he didn't say anything about Sandusky being abusive.

Lindsay asked Myers if he remembered being interviewed on Sept. 20, 2011, by state Trooper James Ellis and Corporal Joseph A. Letter.

"I recall being interviewed," Myers said.

Lindsay gave Myers a copy of the police report and asked if it reflected what he told the state troopers.

"Yes," Myers said, before snapping at the lawyer, "Please don't raise your voice at me."

Lindsay asked if Myers remembered telling the troopers that he and Sandusky had often worked out at the Lasch Building.

"I don't remember that interview," Myer said.

Lindsay asked Myers if he recalled telling the troopers "nothing inappropriate occurred" in the shower with Jerry, and that at "no time were you made to feel uncomfortable."

"I don't recall," Myers replied.

Lindsay asked Myers if he remembered telling the troopers that after workouts with Sandusky, he and Jerry would return to the coach's home and shower in separate facilities.

"I said it," Myers said, "But I don't remember it."

Lindsay asked Myers if he remembered an interview he gave to an investigator named Curtis Everhart who at the time was working for Joseph Amendola, Sandusky's inept trial lawyer.

Myers remembered the interview.

Lindsay asked if he remembered telling the investigator, "I am alleged Victim No. 2."

"I'm sure I did," Myers said, before adding, "I don't remember everything."

Lindsay asked Myers if he recalled telling the investigator that on the day McQueary heard "slapping sounds" and thought there was an anal rape going down in the showers, Myers said, "Jerry and I were slapping towels at each other trying to sting each other."

Myers was a month short of his 14th birthday in 2001 when the infamous shower incident occurred. The official grand jury report, however, says that Mike McQueary witnessed Sandusky raping a 10-year-old boy in the shower.

Oh well, nobody expects the prosecutors to get the details right when they're on a witch hunt to put an alleged pedophile in jail. Whether or not they have to make up the evidence themselves. And apparently, nobody expects the witnesses to remember whatever stories they told.

"I don't recall everything I told Mr. Everhart," Myers said.

Did Myers recall telling the investigator that he used to slap the walls and slide on the shower floor when he was taking a shower with Jerry?

"I can't recall everything I said in that interview back then," Myers said.

Lindsay read out loud a quote from a report that stated what Myers had supposedly told Everhart:

"The grand jury report says Coach McQueary said he observed Jerry and I engaged in sexual activity. That is not the truth and McQueary is not telling the truth. Nothing occurred that night in the shower."

"Do you recall telling him that," Lindsay asked the witness.

"Like I said, I can't recall everything I said back then," Myers said. "But if it's in there, I said it then, yes."

Lindsay asked Myers if he told the investigator that "I never saw McQueary look into the shower that night," another claim by McQueary. "I am sure" it didn't happen, Myers told the investigator.

On the witness stand, Myers wasn't sure.

"That's what I said back then," Myers said. "Once again, I can't recall what I said then."

Lindsay read Myers more quotes from the interview with the investigator. In the quotes, Myers:

-- denied having sex with Sandusky;

-- repeated that "McQueary did not tell the truth;"

-- repeated that "I am alleged Victim No. 2 on the grand jury report;"

-- again claimed that Sandusky "never sexually assaulted me."

"That's what I said then," Myers said. "And once again, I can't recall everything I said then."

Lindsay asked Myers if he told the truth when he spoke to the investigator.

"Yes," he said.

Allan Myers had once been Jerry Sandusky's biggest defender. He even wrote a letter to the editor of a local newspaper stating what a great guy Jerry was.

At the beginning, Myers kept saying that Mike McQueary was a liar, Jerry was a great guy, and that Jerry had never touched him inappropriately.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$
 
  • Like
Reactions: indynittany

Bob78

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 5, 2001
8,150
8,995
1


Ziegler's documentary podast is slated to be inaugurated next week with around 19 very long episodes in the works.

Thank you for the update on this.
While I am interested in what Ziegler has to say, the prospect of "19 very long episodes" if told in Ziegler's usual style (loud rants) would be a tough listen.
I'll give it a try, but executive summaries will be welcome.
 

francofan

Well-Known Member
Oct 26, 2015
2,807
4,539
1
Thank you for the update on this.
While I am interested in what Ziegler has to say, the prospect of "19 very long episodes" if told in Ziegler's usual style (loud rants) would be a tough listen.
I'll give it a try, but executive summaries will be welcome.

I hear you. I make no promises, but I will try to post summaries with pointers to what seems to me to be the most interesting topics.
 

PSU2UNC

Well-Known Member
Feb 9, 2016
4,156
5,128
1
Thank you for the update on this.
While I am interested in what Ziegler has to say, the prospect of "19 very long episodes" if told in Ziegler's usual style (loud rants) would be a tough listen.
I'll give it a try, but executive summaries will be welcome.
I feel like the rants are worst either on live radio or when he is self producing podcasts. In that he actually has a production team and other journalist working with him on this, I suspect the rants will be less.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: francofan

Pinkhippo PeanutButter

Well-Known Member
May 7, 2017
1,237
566
1
With 19 episodes I am sure a good number will be devoted to a fair airing from the side that believes Jerry is guilty.

Bottom line if at least 9 episodes don't cover that point of view this series has zero credibility
 

francofan

Well-Known Member
Oct 26, 2015
2,807
4,539
1
I feel like the rants are worst either on live radio when he is self producing podcasts. In that he actually has a production team and other journalist working with him on this, I suspect the rants will be less.

I am interested in seeing the final product and hope the podcast turns out to be a quality production.

I suspect his rants may also be less due to having a woman co-host who is a Los Angeles television sports personality. Does anybody know who his co-host will be?

I am guessing that it might be Pitt alumnus Liz Habib due to the following tweet she made last August in reference to the charging of Glenn Neff for writing a fraudulent check. Neff is a PSU claimant and one of the Lock Haven 5 who were recipients of multi-million dollar settlements.