Rational thought needs to prevail around Sandusky

halfcentman · December 8, 2011 5:17AM

LET'S LOOK AT THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION FOR STARTERS:

1) As stated by the Sixth Amendment, people are innocent until proven guilty in a COURT OF LAW, not the uninformed court of public opinion.

2) A grand jury indictment is not a conviction of guilt.

3) Mr. Sandusky, even though he opened his mouth, has additional 5th amendment rights against self-incrimination. Personally, his lawyer gave him bad advice.

4) Mr. Sandusky, even if he is acquitted, will always be guilty because they will play the card that an acquittal means that the defense provided enough reasonable doubt for a not guilty verdict.

---------

So, isn't it amusing and a bit pathetic that we had candlelight vigils for ALLEGED victims. Not victims, but alleged victims. So what if we find that these victims are a) lying through their teeth, b) don't remember everything, or c) misunderstood his intentions? What if the defense chews these ALLEGED victims up and spits them out under cross-examination? How's that candlelight vigil look then?

What if this happened to someone you knew, or thought you knew? Have you ever known a person indicted of a very serious crime, get acquitted, and have their lives ruined as their mugshot gets strewn all over the news since the news loves stories like this since it pads rating, which in turn increases advertising dollars and makes more money? I have, and they ended up putting a gun in their mouth and pulling the trigger.

If anyone in their right mind thinks that the firings and all of this stuff regarding Penn State was solely about the ALLEGED VICTIMS, they are utterly naive. What it was about was money and reputation. Millions of dollars lost in enrollment and donations - PERIOD! Reputations that are more tarnished than a piece of Sterling Silver exposed to the elements. Remember, if someone tells you that it is not about the money - it's about the money.

-----------------

NOW FOR SOME SALIENT QUESTIONS:

1) Would I let Sandusky be with my kids alone? Of course not, just as I would not let a politician convicted of taking a bribe continue to serve in that capacity.

2) Is my worthless opinion is that he did this stuff? Yes, but it could always change as things play out. Do I think that it is going to when all is said and done? No.

This man, like any other American has rights and is entitled to them regardless of anyone's opinion. Remember that the next time you comment on such matters. That's why Justice wears a blindfold.

perkdog · December 8, 2011 5:31AM

Bottom line Sandusky needs to get thrown in jail and the same thing he did to innocent little kids needs to be done to him but more violently.

mlbfan2 · December 8, 2011 5:43AM

<< So, isn't it amusing and a bit pathetic that we had candlelight vigils for ALLEGED victims. Not victims, but alleged victims. So what if we find that these victims are a) lying through their teeth, b) don't remember everything, or c) misunderstood his intentions? What if the defense chews these ALLEGED victims up and spits them out under cross-examination? How's that candlelight vigil look then? >>

If Sandusky is actually innocent, then that would mean that some candles were wasted. What's the big deal?

bking · December 8, 2011 5:55AM

<< 

<< So, isn't it amusing and a bit pathetic that we had candlelight vigils for ALLEGED victims. Not victims, but alleged victims. So what if we find that these victims are a) lying through their teeth, b) don't remember everything, or c) misunderstood his intentions? What if the defense chews these ALLEGED victims up and spits them out under cross-examination? How's that candlelight vigil look then? >>

If Sandusky is actually innocent, then that would mean that some candles were wasted. What's the big deal? >>

<un-pc opinion>

He has a bit of a point in that people rush both to judgement and to the support of victims far too fast. Tawana Brawley anyone?? Crystal Gail Mangum anyone?? Something in the psyche of many that COMPELS them to "do something" more to make themselves feel better than to accomplish much. Same as all the folks who have to rush to the site of a tragedy and leave teddy bears, flowers, etc. as if that helps.

</ un-pc opinion>

Brick · December 8, 2011 6:09AM

In the tawana Brawley and Duke Rape Case the charges were proven false. I agree Mr. Sandusky will have his life ruined if found not guilty by any means other than proving the accusations false. O.J. was found not guilty and his life was pretty much destroyed as people believed him guilty. He will get as fair a trial as possible. I imagine the defense will keep the trial in that area in hopes of getting at least one sympathetic juror. In saying it's about the money I think you are correct but isn't that the same rush to judgment as you feel Sandusky is getting?

bking · December 8, 2011 6:14AM

<< In the tawana Brawley and Duke Rape Case the charges were proven false. I agree Mr. Sandusky will have his life ruined if found not guilty by any means other than proving the accusations false. O.J. was found not guilty and his life was pretty much destroyed as people believed him guilty. He will get as fair a trial as possible. I imagine the defense will keep the trial in that area in hopes of getting at least one sympathetic juror. In saying it's about the money I think you are correct but isn't that the same rush to judgment as you feel Sandusky is getting? >>

To be clear, I'm not drawing a parallel between the merits of the various cases, only the speed at which many rush to certainty and to "do something". In the Sandusky case, the number of distinct accusors alone makes it a different situation than the others, but the parallels in how others respond to the various situations are quite similar.

grote15 · December 8, 2011 7:05AM

Bottom line Sandusky needs to get thrown in jail and the same thing he did to innocent little kids needs to be done to him but more violently.

+1

gumbyfan · December 8, 2011 12:00PM

<< what if we find that these victims c) misunderstood his intentions? >>

It was probably tough for the victims to misunderstand his intentions when they were being sodomized.

Saberman · December 8, 2011 12:39PM

<< 

<< what if we find that these victims c) misunderstood his intentions? >>

It was probably tough for the victims to misunderstand his intentions when they were being sodomized. >>

Exactly.

Also, Sandusky already admitted to naked bear hugs to naked 10 year old boys in the shower. Him thinking that it is ok to do that makes him a freak enough.

Hard to compare to other cases. How many other cases were there where 30 victims all say the same thing, where the criminal admitted to some sexual misconduct to the police, and where the criminal thinks it is ok to give naked bear hugs to naked 10 year old boys?

JoeBanzai · December 8, 2011 1:52PM

In this country people ARE innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. HOWEVER there are many cases where people's guilt are obvious long before conviction or acquittal.

My first question of my ex-neighbor (the child molester) was "are you being falsely accused?" he replied that he was not and that was one victim.

Here we have several victims and some admissions by Sandusky of some pretty bizarre behavior.

Bottom line is in this day and age, you are going to be guilty until proven innocent and then still guilty in the court of public opinion.

IF he is guilty he should be executed, if he is being falsely accused, he deserves one hell of an apology. Time will tell.

Joe

Edited to add, in the example of O.J. I was able to watch the entire murder trial as I was working nights and when the not guilty verdict came in I was so surprised, I almost got sick to my stomach. The difference here is the victims are alive to tell their stories.

halfcentman · December 8, 2011 10:30PM

Guys and gals,

First of all, I thought that this thread was going to blow up. I am very happy as the OP that it has not.

My initital reaction without knowing any of the facts once I heard this was "throw him in jail; he will all of the action that he wants!" However, things like this are like an onion: there are so many layers and people with agendas that take away the real focus of this case.

I look forward to hearing more of your viewpoints.

Thanks,

Greg

JoeBanzai · December 9, 2011 1:17AM

Halfcentman,

Thread has much merit. This is still the best country in the world and our justice system was set up to be the fairest to the accused.

From what I have read it LOOKS to me like this guy spent his life surrounding himself with children looking for weak ones to rape. This makes me sick.

No matter what, Sandusky deserves a fair trial.

Joe

KeepItWarm · December 9, 2011 4:14AM

I get what the OP is saying, and yea, the piece of trash deserves a fair trial, but I look at it this way:

I simply do not believe that children, parents, janitors, high school coaches, and Penn State assistant coaches were all coming forward with false accusations over the past 13+ years. Therefore, dude is guilty.

Barndog · December 9, 2011 5:08AM

OJ didn't kill anyone either.

halfcentman · December 9, 2011 6:21AM

<< OJ didn't kill anyone either. >>

Yes, but at least there was a trial which enabled the public to formulate a more complete opinion.

Besides, it proves my point that even if he didn't do it that his life was ruined regardless.

halfcentman · December 9, 2011 6:22AM

<< I get what the OP is saying, and yea, the piece of trash deserves a fair trial, but I look at it this way:

I simply do not believe that children, parents, janitors, high school coaches, and Penn State assistant coaches were all coming forward with false accusations over the past 13+ years. Therefore, dude is guilty. >>

I am sure that if Vegas were taking odds on his acquittal, they would be rather high per dollar wagered!

onlyanumber · December 9, 2011 9:17AM

<< I get what the OP is saying, and yea, the piece of trash deserves a fair trial, but I look at it this way:

I simply do not believe that children, parents, janitors, high school coaches, and Penn State assistant coaches were all coming forward with false accusations over the past 13+ years. Therefore, dude is guilty. >>

Gentlemen, we have a winner. Hit it right on the head. And to add to those points. The one assistant coach that came forward has become villified for stepping forward. Several high ranking officials in Penn State lost their jobs/were arrested for covering up the allegations. There are a lot of layers to the onion and honestly, this one is huge.

swartz1 · December 10, 2011 5:33AM

Now they are trying to find out how the much the wife knew...

hope she has a good lawyer...

DIMEMAN · December 12, 2011 10:31AM

It's just like on "Law and Order" when they are all in the room trying to do a plea bargin. Everybody in the room knows the guy is guilty. He even admits it, but it's not going to happen unless he gets his deal!

Makes ya wanna PUKE!

Estil · December 12, 2011 10:47PM

<< It's just like on "Law and Order" when they are all in the room trying to do a plea bargin. Everybody in the room knows the guy is guilty. He even admits it, but it's not going to happen unless he gets his deal!

Makes ya wanna PUKE! >>

Just remember that L&O is make believe, like Mickey Mouse. For example, in L&O's world, a suspect who refuses to talk to the police can get five years for "obstruction of justice" (even if he didn't do what he was accused of). In real life, you have a constitutional right to remain silent and not utter a peep to the cops until and unless you have an attorney present during questioning.

SanctionII · December 12, 2011 11:45PM

I watched the press conference given by the defense attorney for Sandusky after today's preliminary hearing [at which Sandusky waived his right to a preliminary hearing at the last moment].

The impressions I get of the defense attorney is that:

1. He has chosen to speak extensively on the case in an attempt to reach, influence and persuade the jury pool by commenting on multiple topics [both legal and non legal] designed to create reasonable doubt;

2. He is very much personally enjoying all of the attention [media and other wise] that he is receiving in connection with this case; and

3. He is a little creepy himself.

KeepItWarm · December 13, 2011 4:14AM

Sure he's creepy...he knocked up an underage girl.

SanctionII · December 13, 2011 9:01AM

His knocking up a teenager he represented in an emancipation petition [to whom he is now married] is creepy, no doubt.

However, separate and apart from the above, there is something else about Sandusky's lawyer [I can not put my finger on it] that just gives me chills.

halfcentman · December 14, 2011 3:47AM

<< His knocking up a teenager he represented in an emancipation petition [to whom he is now married] is creepy, no doubt.

However, separate and apart from the above, there is something else about Sandusky's lawyer [I can not put my finger on it] that just gives me chills. >>

What is giving you the chills is that they are very vocal and defiant, doing something socially unacceptable such as calling allegedly moested children a bunch of liars and misunderstand intent who are now in it to ruin a man's reputation (which they have succeeded in) and for a hefty payday in civil litigation.

Sandusky's lawyer is essentially being incredibly vocal and telling everyone who does not believe his client is innocent to go and (expletive) themselves. He also made the right choice in waving his public hearing since the risk outweighed the reward. There was no chance to get anything dismissed, the defense could not cross-examine the way they wanted to, and the alleged victims were not given a chance to talk. In essence, Sandusky's legal team took a certain amount of leverage away from the victims and their lawyers. Personally, I like the approach from a strategy standpoint. He is being tried in a court of public opinion anyway; might as well go for broke!

Since I am the OP, the previously mentioned paragraph in no way, shape, or form is based on his innocence or guilt. It is based on considering legal moves to be nothing more than a high-stakes game of poker.

JoeBanzai · December 14, 2011 5:31AM

Estil, I am a big Law and Order watcher and I think you are confusing a suspect with a witness. A witness can be charged with obstruction if they refuse to testify when called before the Grand jury. I am not a lawyer, but L and O usually SEEMS to get things right even if it is "make believe".

Sandusky and his lawyer probably both know he is guilty, or will be found guilty if enough victims come forward, and the statute of limitations has not expired. In the past victims of rape often didn't come forward in time, I am hoping this is not going to happen this time. I am not surprised that Sandusky picked another child molester to represent him, they have a lot in common. This whole disturbing tale makes me sick.

The claim that all these people are coming forward to get some cash at the end of this is rather absurd.

Joe

SanctionII · December 14, 2011 6:17AM

Maybe the brashness of the defense attorney is what is creepy about him (particularly given the subject matter of the charges; the creepiness of Sandusky himself; the attorney's representation of a minor who he impregnates and marries; etc.). His public comments which are defiant and challenging are viewed by me multiple ways:

1. good from a public relations standpoint and from the perspective of influencing the jury pool by presenting points which promote the "innocent until proven guilty" aspect of our criminal laws and which creates questions about the credibilty of and the motivations of the persons who will testify against Sandusky;

2. good from the standpoint of making things as uncomfortable as possible for the "powers that be" [Penn State and its athletic and administrative leadership, Boosters, Local Police, Local Prosecutors, the Governor] in order to maximize the chances that these powers that be exert pressure on the prosecutor to make this case go away through a plea deal that is favorable to Sandusky [so that dirty laundry will not be revealed publicly at a trial];

3. evidence that the defense attorney is a blowhard who is thumping his chest touting his client's innocence; yet will cave in at the last minute to avoid the public disclosure of dirty laundry;

4. evidence that the defense attorney is using this case as an opportunity to get his "15 minutes of fame" and thus build up his own ego; and/or

5. an attempt by Sandusky (who is quite likely to be a child abuser) and his attorney (who could also be viewed in the same way, or at least be viewed as a person who is sympathetic to Sandusky's or others like him) to place the issue of sex between adults and children into the public eye on a national stage and forcefully advocate that there is nothing wrong with same and that it should be accepted as normal.

Estil · December 14, 2011 8:20AM

<< Estil, I am a big Law and Order watcher and I think you are confusing a suspect with a witness. A witness can be charged with obstruction if they refuse to testify when called before the Grand jury. I am not a lawyer, but L and O usually SEEMS to get things right even if it is "make believe".

Sandusky and his lawyer probably both know he is guilty, or will be found guilty if enough victims come forward, and the statute of limitations has not expired. In the past victims of rape often didn't come forward in time, I am hoping this is not going to happen this time. I am not surprised that Sandusky picked another child molester to represent him, they have a lot in common. This whole disturbing tale makes me sick.

The claim that all these people are coming forward to get some cash at the end of this is rather absurd.

Joe >>

I tried L&O on Netflix but I got really bored with the "all murder two, all the time" format. If they had done a better variety of crimes (say, kidnapping, big drug dealers or pimps, counterfeiting rings, government corruption, and so on) it'd be way more interesting. Still they did last 20 seasons so they sure did something right...

mikesimo88 · December 16, 2011 3:11AM

<< Guys and gals,

First of all, I thought that this thread was going to blow up. I am very happy as the OP that it has not.

My initital reaction without knowing any of the facts once I heard this was "throw him in jail; he will all of the action that he wants!" However, things like this are like an onion: there are so many layers and people with agendas that take away the real focus of this case.

I look forward to hearing more of your viewpoints.

Thanks,

Greg >>

halfcent, are you Jerry SanDouchkeys relative?

you are the only person (besides his dirtbag no-moral lwayers and 100 year old wife) that are defending this sodomizing homosexual....
please spare us your "innocent until proven guilt"y speech

bking · December 16, 2011 3:53AM

<< 

<< Guys and gals,

First of all, I thought that this thread was going to blow up. I am very happy as the OP that it has not.

My initital reaction without knowing any of the facts once I heard this was "throw him in jail; he will all of the action that he wants!" However, things like this are like an onion: there are so many layers and people with agendas that take away the real focus of this case.

I look forward to hearing more of your viewpoints.

Thanks,

Greg >>

halfcent, are you Jerry SanDouchkeys relative?

you are the only person (besides his dirtbag no-moral lwayers and 100 year old wife) that are defending this sodomizing homosexual....
please spare us your "innocent until proven guilt"y speech[/q

Who is this "US" you're speaking for, Mr. 14 posts??? How about you spare "us" your name-calling??

perkdog · December 16, 2011 5:12AM

<< 

<< 

<< Guys and gals,

First of all, I thought that this thread was going to blow up. I am very happy as the OP that it has not.

My initital reaction without knowing any of the facts once I heard this was "throw him in jail; he will all of the action that he wants!" However, things like this are like an onion: there are so many layers and people with agendas that take away the real focus of this case.

I look forward to hearing more of your viewpoints.

Thanks,

Greg >>

halfcent, are you Jerry SanDouchkeys relative?

you are the only person (besides his dirtbag no-moral lwayers and 100 year old wife) that are defending this sodomizing homosexual....
please spare us your "innocent until proven guilt"y speech[/q

Who is this "US" you're speaking for, Mr. 14 posts??? How about you spare "us" your name-calling?? >>

This guy mikesimo88 is one of 2 things...

A- A Punk
B- An angry alt as evidenced by his moronic PM to me

Prolly best to ignore this tool

Tabe · December 16, 2011 5:33AM

<< I tried L&O on Netflix but I got really bored with the "all murder two, all the time" format. If they had done a better variety of crimes (say, kidnapping, big drug dealers or pimps, counterfeiting rings, government corruption, and so on) it'd be way more interesting. Still they did last 20 seasons so they sure did something right... >>

The first season or two, they did other stuff besides murder. After that, though, it was murders only, which also irritated me.

Tabe

halfcentman · December 16, 2011 7:13AM

halfcentman · December 16, 2011 7:17AM

<< halfcent, are you Jerry SanDouchkeys relative?

you are the only person (besides his dirtbag no-moral lwayers and 100 year old wife) that are defending this sodomizing homosexual....
please spare us your "innocent until proven guilt"y speech >>

Well, the first moronic post had to come from somewhere.

No, I am a human being who has the ability to think objectively unlike most of society and comment on the LEGAL TACTICS being used for a man who is due his day in court regardless of you think.

Were you there? Perhaps you have some wonderful, psychic ability that some of us do not have where your opinion on this man's guilt is worth more than anyone else's.

I just hope you get convicted of a serious crime, have your name all over TV, and have your life ruined someday, even if you are acquitted. You better be real careful what you wish for, because you just might get it.

I will no longer be replying to this thread.

Cubby · December 16, 2011 9:40AM

Based on your statements Greg, I have ascertained that: a) You are an attorney or b) You have the mind to be a lawyer.

Cubby · June 22, 2012 12:54PM

guilty on 45 counts

Dave99B · June 22, 2012 1:18PM

Rot in the slammer, Sandusky. You are one sick person.

I truly hope your victims recover someday. They deserved better.

Dave

stown · June 23, 2012 2:25AM

I hope a Bubba makes Sandusky his little beyatch and he develops the worst case of roids ever recorded in the history of man.

DIMEMAN · June 23, 2012 2:49AM

Sometimes people are wrongly accused of crimes and that is why we have trails and you are innocent until proven guilty.

Now it's official and I hope he makes somebody a very nice wife in the slammer!

Pay back is a bit_h!

pitboss · June 23, 2012 3:05AM

<< I hope a Bubba makes Sandusky his little beyatch and he develops the worst case of roids ever recorded in the history of man. >>

How about a jar of VICKS!

Dboneesq · June 23, 2012 4:18AM

MAY YOU ROT IN HELL YOU PIECE OF SH!T. HOPE YOU KILL YOURSELF AND SAVE THE TAXPAYERS MONEY.

TheTalkingWalnut · June 23, 2012 4:24AM

I don't think Sandusky has the same aversion to male on male interaction that we do. Prison will be a nice break for him.

I do know, however, that he is only the first of many scumbag trees to fall in the Penn State forest. That scumbag hypocrite Paterno standing up with both George Bushes, talking about family values while sacrificing dozens of young kids for "the program" cheated the hangman, but with Sandusky convicted the rest of them better get their affairs in order.

Look closely at your average Family Values/Jesus Loves Me More/I'm A Real American type and you'll also see a tickle monster, an airport bathroom toe tapper or a congressional page molester.

cash4gold · June 23, 2012 4:52AM

<< I don't think Sandusky has the same aversion to male on male interaction that we do. Prison will be a nice break for him.

I do know, however, that he is only the first of many scumbag trees to fall in the Penn State forest. That scumbag hypocrite Paterno standing up with both George Bushes, talking about family values while sacrificing dozens of young kids for "the program" cheated the hangman, but with Sandusky convicted the rest of them better get their affairs in order.

Look closely at your average Family Values/Jesus Loves Me More/I'm A Real American type and you'll also see a tickle monster, an airport bathroom toe tapper or a congressional page molester. >>

It's all Bush's fault!

stown · June 23, 2012 5:34AM

<< 

<< I hope a Bubba makes Sandusky his little beyatch and he develops the worst case of roids ever recorded in the history of man. >>

How about a jar of VICKS! >>

He doesn't deserve vicks or vasoline. Perhaps some spit but otherwise, au natural.

perkdog · June 23, 2012 11:59AM

Here is exactly what is going to happen to Sandusky.

He will arive at a DOC and immediately be placed in an protective custody unit, perhaps in a risk room until his mental health status is documented and evaluated. Once he is deemed mentalty stable to leave the paper johnny he will be sent to what I call an "Alien" unit where he will reside with all detestable creepy maniacs who crave the same type of thing he does and eventually he will find a young playmate and enjoy himself in exchange for very little if none at all canteen.

Our prison systems protect guys like Sandusky, gone are the days where justice is served in the big house. Correctional facilities have grown politicaly correct just the way the majority of our society has except of course for those people that are victims or have family members that were victims, those are the people that more than likely were politicaly correct until something bad happened to them ofcourse.

Classic example of the blowhard opening post, if it were HIS family then he would be first in line sharpening the ax, same goes for SteveK and the rest of you that went to the end of the earth defending Paterno and the rest of these scumbags that covered for this POS.

Connecticoin · June 25, 2012 12:46PM

Hey, teacher, leave them kids alone!!

mcadams · June 25, 2012 8:33PM

Paterno will be in civil court by this time next year facing his own suit. I guess he'll also be a defendant in the inevitable suit against the University.

NSibian · June 25, 2012 10:49PM

<< Paterno will be in civil court by this time next year facing his own suit. I guess he'll also be a defendant in the inevitable suit against the University. >>

This is a joke right?

Boopotts · June 25, 2012 11:35PM

<< Paterno will be in civil court by this time next year facing his own suit. I guess he'll also be a defendant in the inevitable suit against the University. >>

This could be the first civil suit in the U.S. where the defendant is only willing to communicate via a Ouija board. Should be interesting.

Rational thought needs to prevail around Sandusky

Comments