He was found guilty of sexually assaulting victim #2. Only 1 count of the indictment for what happened to victim #2 was not returned with a guilty verdict. You are still hanging your hat on the fact that without the victim identified they did not prove that there was penetration. But they proved there was a heinous sexual assault. Which was reported to Paterno. Which was not acted on. And you are still a fucking idiot.
BTW proving sexual assault without a victim is a pretty amazing bit of prosecution. The jury must have found the testimony very compelling. And of course the grand jury found that it was probable that everything to include penetration happened.
Ok, then I congratulate you on reaching the obvious conclusion that it’s possible that Sandusky was raping that boy in that position. It took a lot of posts, but you finally got there. Way to go!
Well you agreed that (obviously) it’s possible that a tall person could have sex with a short person in that position. Therefore, it’s possible that Sandusky (tall person) could have been raping that boy (short person) in that position.
It’s a small step, but a step you should be proud of nonetheless.
I’ve been aware of this roughly since the day of the verdict.
No I’m not, which is why I’ve never said that.
It was acted upon by Paterno and in accordance with longstanding campus practice as established in cooperation with and at the request of the local police.
I guess so. For a while there I beginning to think you could be reasoned with.
Hmm…the grand jury found that did they? Why, hell, I guess full-blown trials are just a waste of time then, huh? But wait a minute, why is it we have courtroom trials after grand jury investigations again?
No, I don’t believe it’s possible for that particular tall person to have been having sex with a short person of the presumed height in that position. Does that do it for ya, sweetie?
Thanks for the, err, comprehensive reply. I do appreciate you directly answering me. As for what you say, frankly, my first impression is – no offense intended – TLDR. That’s a rather imposing wall of text for a couple of simple questions.
Still, I do thank you, and I promise I’ll give it a fair reading. As soon as I, as you say, “have more time”.
Ahh. So you believe that it’s normally possible for a tall person and a short person to have sex in that position, but in this particular case (and for no reason that I can figure out) it’s not possible. Enlighten me- why is it not possible in this particular case?
I am confident, nay very confident, Starving Artist can enlighten us, after he spends ten or twelve posts telling what factors do not apply, and which he never said applied, and how could we dishonestly say he said they applied?
Are you genetically impaired to even begin to comprehend the amount of real life damage that was done at Penn State right under your senile fuck’s iron-fisted watch? Don’t bother responding. You already have thousands of times, you sick SOB.
I must give you credit iiandyiiii, I’ve had SA cornered before but I don’t think ever quite as cornered as this.
Well played.
If he does respond, usually this is where the posts are the most entertaining, although sometimes he just stops responding to that line of reasoning and hopes it will go away.
You know, I was just sitting here thinking, if someone told me that SA has a mental problem, I don’t think I would enjoy this thread as much.
I think a good part of my enjoyment is watching a person that appears to be coherent dodging, dipping, diving, ducking and dodging to avoid being wrong.
Anyone trying to diminish of distinction between anal rape and a bear hug on the grounds that they’re both acts of child sex abuse and therefore equally deplorable isn’t being honest with themselves, IMO. That’s like saying al qaeda flying airplanes into the twin towers is no more significant than the one that crashed in rural PA because they’re both terroristic attacks and therefore equally deplorable.
FWIW, McQ testified that he never reported anal rape or other graphic details to JVP. Joe still reported it through the proper procedural channels and of course never suggested that he keep the story to himself. Of course, I think we’d all like further clarification about his understanding of “a sexual nature,” but the Pennsylvania Attorney General went out of her way to praise Paterno for following proper reporting procedures exactly as described in the book of policies. She commended him for offering to participate as a key witness for the prosecution. And then she publically expressed concern about the rush to judgment that led to his immediate firing, especially given how resourceful he’d been in assisting the prosecution in building their case against Sandusky.
Finally, someone said something about JVP lying about his awareness of the 1998 investigation (which, incidentally, resulted in no findings of wrongdoing by 3-5 independent agencies). These allegations of JVP lying abt his awareness of 1998 originated from unsupported claims outlined in the 2-page exucutive summary of the Freeh report. A deeper look into that 267-page report reveals a complete lack of verified evidence connecting JVP to 1998 other than irresponsible leaps in logic and random stabs at unsubstantiated assumptions and wild specilation. The Freeh report is garbage and the 2-page executive summary is a disgrace of unfounded allegations.
FWIW, here’s the explanation that makes the most sense to me, almost word-for-word, courtesy of kcglassonion:
One thing I got from this is how credible Dr. Dranov’s testimony seems. Think about it…MM had 1-2 seconds to view an older man chest to the boy’s back. That measn all MM would have seen is a white haired man’s back via an agled mirror. How in the world would he know that it was Jerry Sandusky?
Dr. Dranov’s story offers a more credible story because it suggests that Jerry S stepped out of the shower, which would allow MM to know who the individual was with the boy.
Again…1-2 seconds via a mirror only visibility is an older man’s back. Jerry S was no longer an employee, so it’s not as if MM encounters him all the time. White haired man (only 20,000 of those individuals roaming around PSU at any time of the day). How does he know it’s Jerry? It’s because Dr. Dranov’s story explains how MM knew it was Sandusky…
So MM heard clapping sounds 3 times and a boy who does not appear to be hurt. An arm reaches out and grabs the boy back in. Jerry S proceeds to come out of the shower. Whether they encounter each other at the same time ackwardly is anybody’s guess. However, it would make sense that MM first reaction to Mikes father and Dranov about what he saw be the most accurate…
That is why Mike was okay for 10 years after the incident in not making a peep to the police or talking about it any futher. Even though I am sure MM at one point probably assumed some sexual was taking place in the shower, he probably considered that a more extreme possibility considering Sandusky’s reputation and rumors of him taking showers with boys. Then MM gets the news he probably never wanted to hear which was a possibilit of potential victims that were abused by Sandusky. Now the picture is painted a little more clearer. If Sandusky had sex with all those other boys, then it’s very possible that he had sex with the boy in the shower. AG and investigators know that MM’s story if could be considered credible can press charges on Sandusky. Whether the AG coerced MM into making a different account of what he saw or if MM created this new story without telling the AG what really happened is up for debate. The AG knew that without a damning 1st person encounter of Sandusky abusing a child, they would have no case… 3 or victims story vs Sandusky’s reputation… Icing on the cake…now charge Schultz and Curley for perjury charges. This will show even more credibility to MM’s story. How could the AG not charge Schultz and Curley for perjury if there stories completely contradict MM"s story to the AG. There you have it…Why Spanier and Dr. Dranov were never charged with perjury is beyond me. How Mike’s father could forget his testimony to the Grand Jury is even more baffling.
Dodging, dipping, diving, ducking and dodging [again] is what I’ve been having to contend with.
And it never changes anything. No matter how anyone dodges, dips, dives, ducks or redodges, the fact remains that I’ve been right all along and you dillweeds…haven’t.
