Posted on 11/15/2011 3:20:20 AM PST by scottfactor
Got through the first couple pages. Had to stop.
If this had been one of my sons, I’d be in prison and Sandusky would not be out on bail.
Yep, he'd be taking the ol' dirt nap.
That lawyer should be brought up on charges.....that is, if we still have an intact justice system left.
Sandusky says he regularly showered with young boys .....
This predator should be made to understand that most grown men would not do that............amd have no desire to do that.
A sociopath with a sexual degeneracy at his heart lacks the conscience to ‘turn states evidence’. Only some bargain could accomplish such a thing, like guaranteeing he is held for the rest of his life in a country club prison as opposed to general prison population of SingSing. And frankly, I don’t expect Sandusky to live much long if his lawyer detects signs of him ‘turning states evidence’. Evil is so inveigled in the issues and around this degenerate and the Second Mile ‘donors’ and some workers, it will likely go the same place the Franklin sex/rape/abuse case went, down the obscurity hole. The FBI made that one go away for some very powerful people to remain hidden.
In the 90s my fourth and last son started college at Miami of Ohio. I knew when I delivered him to campus it would be a challenge for him. Many Che Guevara, militant feminist and anti US tshirts.
It was mandatory for all new students to attend a student- led orientation. The orientation’s purpose was to make it clear Miami was a PC Marxist school. One kid objected to this impingement on his free speech. My son supported him. When he got back to his room someone had tacked a swastica to his door. He finished the first year and then transferred to Lehigh. This is what nonMarxist kids are subjected to. They’re free speech right is suppressed on the Marxist PC altar.
Yes, he APPEARS to be a slime ball, but with every news show opening with a rehash of this porn how can people not believe it?
He showered with young boys. A long time ago I worked at a YMCA. We had showers for males and females – not men, women, boys and girls. Only two showers. I guess times and locker rooms have changed.
But you’ve already convicted him.
Jack wagon?
I protest too much? I defend our law and Constitution. I dislike the continual coverage of this garbage. When the story first broke I too note and became aware of the accusation, I don’t need to be bombarded with it every time I turn on the news. I’m at the point where I change the channel every time this garbage is rehashed. I find the whole thing sick.
But he did seek out SOME for his “sexual needs”, by his own admission.
I don't need to “convict” someone who has already admitted guilt. I mean how stupid is that?
I cannot condemn a man whose own words condemn himself?
I suppose you would let Sandusky shower with you when you were 10 years old? Think nothing of it? Hope he doesn't chose you to satisfy his “sexual needs”?
How moronic.
OK, you and others have already convicted him. I assume you would approve of a constitutional amendment exempting accused (accused, not convicted) child molesters to be exempt from constitutional protections. Just let our “esteemed” news media determine guilt. When this happens take the accused to an arena and let the mob tear him apart, similar to the ancient Romans.
By the way, the star witness for the prosecution (McQueary) was seemingly caught in a major lie. He claims to have reported the shower incident to the police but they have no record of it.
Are you sexually attracted to young boys?
“I could say that I have done some of those things,” Sandusky said. “I have horsed around with kids. I have showered after workouts. I have hugged them and I have touched their legs without intent of sexual contact,” he said. “Am I sexually attracted to underage boys? Sexually attracted, no — I enjoy young people, I love to be around them ... but no, I am not sexually attracted to young boys,” Sandusky replied to Costas.
There is an elementary school behind Sandusky’s back yard.
I rarely get involved in any commentary of the latest legal “fascination” on FR or anywhere really. Everyone IS assumed innocent, until proven guilty.
In Sandusky’s case, there is no question however, not in the court of public opinion. Have you heard his interview? Not just read it, but heard it? Everyone can know, and should know, from hearing that alone...................he’s a predatory monster.
Absolute idiocy.
The guy's own words convict himself. He didn't seek sex from ALL the kids he “helped”, he explained.
McQueary is not the star witness - the eight kids who came forward were - McQueary was only called to testify AFTER those eight kids came forward.
Now there are ten more kids.
And the guy is saying he didn't seek sex from ALL the kids he “helped”.
I suppose you think OJ is innocent - no need to speak of his probable guilt before the sentence - and absolutely no need to after they found him innocent?
HE IS DESPICABLE
Our news media has convicted him. That’s good enough.
Our news media has convicted him. That’s good enough.
Are you sexually attracted to young boys?
What an ignorant question. I am not defending Sandusky but our Constitution. It seems some here – just like 0bama – want to scrap that document.
Why the impassioned defense towards an admitted pedophile who didn't seek sex from ALL the kids he “helped”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.