tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post6006781508560132857..comments2024-01-30T04:57:48.673-05:00Comments on Second Mile Sandusky Scandal: Only Victim Found Not Credible By Jury Is Awarded SettlementBarry Bozemanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03484041114078117845noreply@blogger.comBlogger36125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-39814690738246989772013-08-22T11:50:30.839-04:002013-08-22T11:50:30.839-04:00Sean Black, you obviously know very little of this...Sean Black, you obviously know very little of this case outside of what the media has told you. You are the type of person certain members of the PSU BOT are relying on to continue pushing the false narrative they created. <br /><br />Ray has done a very thorough job of looking at the case for each of the 10 victims from the trial, please review what he has said in detail before you make accusations.<br /><br />Penn State has basically opened up the bank vaults to anyone that had contact with Sandusky and were of a certain age during an indetermined period of time. Why would they do this? Because certain people on the PSU BoT and the governor used the Sandusky case as an opportunity to grab power from the school and remove individuals (Spanier and Paterno) that they did not like. So they corrupted the Sandusky investigation to fit their own needs. If you want detail on why and how, please read Ray and John's extensive writings on the matter.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03720169386357383860noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-74175625658777826742013-08-22T09:43:14.998-04:002013-08-22T09:43:14.998-04:00Ray it occurred to me that you've been telling...Ray it occurred to me that you've been telling me something here, but you haven't actually SAID it. Are you telling us that Sandusky is innocent? Are you saying he helped those kids and they all are falsely accusing him? Every one of them?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03701163393137265713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-52875748007109834702013-08-22T08:57:08.176-04:002013-08-22T08:57:08.176-04:00Why do they need to pay anyone to hush if nothing ...Why do they need to pay anyone to hush if nothing happened? Looks like you just fell off the apple cart, got back up, chased it down and ran into it again. <br /><br />Even if I take what you say as absolute gospel you don't have any explanation for 5 accusers out of 10. You just ignore them. Even you (with your weak argument that 3 convictions were because of a shower) admit only one victim was not to be believed. <br /><br />If its so easy to go get free money from Penn St why didn't you or I or millions of other poor people claim they were sexually abused? Nobody wants to admit it even happened to them, let alone make it up. Do I suspect maybe 1 or 2 are looking for a free ride? It could happen, but it's not going to happen with the frequency you need to claim Sandusky didnt do anything. <br /><br />You and Ziegler more than anyone else in the world right now are publicly laying the ground work, the foundation, for the next Sandusky. <br /><br />Stop grooming us. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03701163393137265713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-85987235624004686862013-08-21T21:01:14.787-04:002013-08-21T21:01:14.787-04:00Sean Black,
Did you just fall off the apple cart.
...Sean Black,<br />Did you just fall off the apple cart.<br /><br />Confidentiality agreements in this case should be considered as "legal hush money." <br /><br />PSU has turned down 3 gold diggers who weren't credible -- and if PSU paid Victim 5 for his non-abuse in the ONLY incident that was NOT BELIEVED BY A JURY, the bar had to be very low.<br /><br />Ever heard of the McMartin Pre-School case? Little Rascals Pre-School? Well, there's your precedences.Ray Bleharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14557326921056183979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-60186618593517092112013-08-21T16:13:26.156-04:002013-08-21T16:13:26.156-04:00If they wanted to go to trial they would??? Not on...If they wanted to go to trial they would??? Not on your life. They could not in any way shape or form handle a trial. The BoT has in every way possible tried to make this whole thing disappear. And the more unbelievable moves they make the farther they get from "moving forward". To pay out money for what JS did when he was not a member of PSU is uncomprehendable.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10694439858138029958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-73264275043497651392013-08-21T15:13:38.844-04:002013-08-21T15:13:38.844-04:00Ray 25 victim confidentiality reports have been pr...Ray 25 victim confidentiality reports have been proposed...with tentative agreements to sign. <br /><br />If Penn St's lawyers wanted to go to trial they would. <br /><br />If you ever do find the truth, part of those 90% that went unreported, just don't bury it for the sake of your image. <br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03701163393137265713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-85974669002505099392013-08-21T13:22:56.433-04:002013-08-21T13:22:56.433-04:00On cue, John Ziegler is speaking out about the mon...On cue, John Ziegler is speaking out about the monies being paid by PSU on behalf of Sandusky's crimes and unproved allegations. John's style is a bit loud for me, but his words are well-supported by the evidence to date. I particularly love his response to the question about PSU BoT doing the sensible thing by paying out and moving on: "That may make sense if it's not your money and the truth doesn't matter!". Exactly.<br /><br />His interview link:<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCrMGzgqwig&feature=youtu.be<br /><br />Also, later today (Wednesday), John Z will be doing a similar interview with Kevin Slaten at 5pm eastern time which can be heard at www.TalkStl.com rdkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11007253694089460950noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-2449787064158502002013-08-21T08:11:43.965-04:002013-08-21T08:11:43.965-04:00The ongoing investigations by Blehar and others ar...The ongoing investigations by Blehar and others are attempting to determine how Penn State Univ became the culprit for Jerry Sandusky's crimes. JS has been found guilty under the laws and judicial procedures of PA. And he is paying for these convictions according to the law.<br /><br />The question many have, and not only PSU alumni, is WHY has Penn State Univ been assigned nearly equivalent blame as Sandusky. And how could this occur completely outside the judicial process? Accusations were officially made against PSU administrators, yet with no trial and no jury verdict, PSU is paying mightily for these ALLEGATIONS. Why and how has this happened? All citizens of PA, and the US in general, should be concerned that with no due process, trial, or judicial verdict an enormous penalty of reputation, history, and educational dollars can be charged.<br /><br />It's scary. rdkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11007253694089460950noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-38684822615498795892013-08-21T01:17:59.336-04:002013-08-21T01:17:59.336-04:00We have 32 people dating back to AT LEAST the '...We have 32 people dating back to AT LEAST the '70's all saying they were molested by Sandusky in some way shape or form. Some might have been raped some maybe not. THIS is a weak case for you? They tell us only 10% report child sex abuse. You think the number of accusers will get smaller?<br /><br />I think you're taking good people's hope and faith and taking advantage of it. You're a modern day elixer swindler. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03701163393137265713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-63523706799459813982013-08-20T22:25:12.683-04:002013-08-20T22:25:12.683-04:00When you get right down to it, it was an incredibl...When you get right down to it, it was an incredibly weak case against Sandusky. Read this: http://notpsu.blogspot.com/2013/08/were-politics-deciding-factor-in.html<br /><br />The Commonwealth was fortunate to get the testimony in on Victims 4 and 8. They didn't have a victim for one set of charges. Victim 1's testimony was unreliable. <br /><br />The Victim 8 verdicts will be overturned on appeal. <br />http://notpsu.blogspot.com/2013/07/more-than-just-wrong-date-in-janitor.htmlRay Bleharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14557326921056183979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-91782245154809853922013-08-20T22:17:42.847-04:002013-08-20T22:17:42.847-04:00There has been no evidence presented to date that ...There has been no evidence presented to date that would classify Sandusky as a "serial child rapist." The label is absolutely false based on the trial verdicts.<br /><br />There were not instances of rapes on the PSU campus and the majority of Sandusky's crimes occurred off PSU's campus.<br /><br />Ray Bleharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14557326921056183979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-565624780782686702013-08-20T22:14:44.869-04:002013-08-20T22:14:44.869-04:00No, Sandusky did not MOLEST victim 5.
If you to...No, Sandusky did not MOLEST victim 5. <br /><br />If you took a shower in a group setting at the YMCA after swimming and there was an adult male in the shower who didn't touch you, the situation would be similar.<br /><br />Again, the victim testified Sandusky cornered him, forcibly touched him, and the put the Victim's hand on his penis. The jury believed NONE of those things.Ray Bleharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14557326921056183979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-39592106092361509272013-08-20T22:11:21.694-04:002013-08-20T22:11:21.694-04:00Sean,
Sandusky was convicted of Anal Rape in one i...Sean,<br />Sandusky was convicted of Anal Rape in one instance occurring at his home between 2005-2009. He was not even accused of anal rape by any other victim aside from Victim 9.<br /><br />You obviously don't know the first thing about the case or the crimes involved.<br /><br />Indecent assault is ANY touching of genitals. He testified that he was forced to touch genitals and the jury didn't believe him. PERIOD. End of Story. He's not credible.<br /><br />All the jury believed was he showered with Sandusky. That's what those charge mean.Ray Bleharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14557326921056183979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-48533122498016222642013-08-20T22:02:01.749-04:002013-08-20T22:02:01.749-04:00Ray I read your link. It says Victim 5 had four co...Ray I read your link. It says Victim 5 had four counts related to him. Guilty on count 29, 30, and 31: endangering the welfare of a minor, corruption of a minor, and unlawful contact with a minor. <br /><br />Not guilty on indecent assault. <br /><br />This tells me the jury found the Victim VERY credible, convicting on 75% o the charges. This tells me this kid was molested but escaped anal rape. Are you here to say different? Are you telling me Sandusky DID NOT molest this minor child? Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03701163393137265713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-78340008060484828112013-08-20T20:54:44.699-04:002013-08-20T20:54:44.699-04:00Rums,
Exactly. I will blog on it soon, but Victim ...Rums,<br />Exactly. I will blog on it soon, but Victim 6 as a stand alone investigation in 1998 resulted in no charges. As a pattern is established and sexual intent is shown, then the showering is considered grooming. <br /><br />Ken Lanning's work on child molester behavior and Chambers pyschologic report from 1998 both would serve as evidence to disprove V5's story. As grooming involves gradual introduction to sexual experiences, forced touching would be highly unlikely in the first shower incident. No other victim reported that behavior.Ray Bleharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14557326921056183979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-88124751179760730832013-08-20T20:50:38.145-04:002013-08-20T20:50:38.145-04:00Sean,
Not credible = ACQUITTAL on the charge. How...Sean,<br />Not credible = ACQUITTAL on the charge. How much more basic does it get?<br /><br />Count 28: Indecent Assault: NOT GUILTY<br /><br />http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SANDUSKY%20VERDICT%20SLIP%20FOR%202422%20OF%202011.pdf<br /><br />Got it?<br /><br />Ray Bleharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14557326921056183979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-45492492310092303342013-08-20T14:57:39.722-04:002013-08-20T14:57:39.722-04:00Further, you're not charged and convicted on 3...Further, you're not charged and convicted on 3 child endangerment charges for "taking a shower" with a kid. If that's all that happened you might see an indecent exposure charge or something but he was convicted on 3 charges relating to the endangerment of the child. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03701163393137265713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-68659096852268309022013-08-20T14:54:15.461-04:002013-08-20T14:54:15.461-04:00Can I see some credible documentation where the ju...Can I see some credible documentation where the jury or judge deemed him "not credible". It's not that I don't trust you, it's that I don't trust anybody on the Internet. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03701163393137265713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-8684404182721865992013-08-20T12:03:04.329-04:002013-08-20T12:03:04.329-04:00Ray, is the showering considered part of the "...Ray, is the showering considered part of the "grooming" by Sandusky and the reason he was charged with unlawful contact with minors; corruption of minors; and endangering the welfare of a child in each shower incident, even if abuse did not occur during the shower?<br />Because it seems if each showering incident was viewed in a vacuum on a stand alone basis, there would be no charges. But being able to tie them all together, and including additional abuse charges, it seems then they got additional charges by establishing a pattern.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03720169386357383860noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-42220796923221283692013-08-20T09:48:13.720-04:002013-08-20T09:48:13.720-04:00I think we have a situation here (built on continu...I think we have a situation here (built on continual mishandling by the BOT) that they now feel that any prolonged lawsuits (arguing that victim #5 is not credible, or Sandusky was found not guilty of pedophilia after MM saw victim #2 in shower) brings the wrath of media and special interest 501c's. The last thing BOT wants and (even the alumni) is more false narratives and headlines like "PSU denies Victim #5 settlement based on testimony". The BOT finds itself behind the "rock and hard place". Now, they did it to themselves, but a hard place just the same. I read the news on Khoury this morning (forced to withdraw from NCAA lawsuit) with sadness. We need to keep voting the BOT (11/9) off the board, but there is too long a time between elections.Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09883895895662513750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-75422512400146756712013-08-20T08:54:01.903-04:002013-08-20T08:54:01.903-04:00Those charges simply mean that the jury believed t...Those charges simply mean that the jury believed that Victim 5 showered with Sandusky. Sandusky was charged with those crimes for every Victim he showered with.<br /><br />Victim 5 is the ONLY victim to levy an allegation of sexual abuse and not have it believed by the jury. His story about the incident not credible. <br /><br />If all the victims could only produce stories about showering with Sandusky, he'd be a free man right now.<br /><br />Ray Bleharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14557326921056183979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-13967517946790831442013-08-20T02:12:18.462-04:002013-08-20T02:12:18.462-04:00If the Jury found Victim 5 "not credible"...If the Jury found Victim 5 "not credible" why was Sandusky convicted on 3 charges related to Vic 5Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03701163393137265713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-42562863244677017342013-08-19T22:28:24.535-04:002013-08-19T22:28:24.535-04:00John Z, this is your cue!!John Z, this is your cue!!rdkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11007253694089460950noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-45033576922206443912013-08-19T20:39:58.766-04:002013-08-19T20:39:58.766-04:00They are invested in the blatantly crooked story t...They are invested in the blatantly crooked story that they all wrote about.Ray Bleharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14557326921056183979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260510730184507282.post-39123475051802220642013-08-19T20:39:22.734-04:002013-08-19T20:39:22.734-04:00Just going by my life experience here.....perhaps ...Just going by my life experience here.....perhaps the lawyers hired by PSU didn't know what an erection was when they were 13. Certainly, the jury could have decided the changes to the location and the year of the crime (uncovered on cross examination) were a little far-fetched. But I know what the clincher was for me.Ray Bleharhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14557326921056183979noreply@blogger.com