Viper

Say it ain't so, Joe

Recommended Posts

Paterno died just to help get his friends off...

...that son of a bitch

Now THAT'S funny.

However, I wouldn't be surprised if there are people (including some that frequent these very boards) that seriously do think what you wrote.

So it's NOT funny then.

It's still funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Former AD Curley: I want my charges dropped

Gary Schultz: Me too

tl;dr version: PA law requires two witnesses to support a perjury charge. McQueary was the first.....Paterno the second. No Paterno, no case - they contend.

So it's conceivable two of the key figures in the cover-up could skate. Ridiculous.

Yeah, but Paterno's testimony from the Grand Jury transcipts (you know, the ones that most ALL of you have never read) could possibly be read into the court proceedings.

Yeah I wouldn't get too excited over this. I think in the absence of any other possible testimony from Paterno, the Grand Jury Testimony may end up being used in some manner. (I don't know the legal technicalities of doing this, but I can't see a moral problem with doing it, and I would imagine the prosecutors don't either, given their decision not to try and get testimony from Paterno in another way in the last couple of months of his life.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Former AD Curley: I want my charges dropped

Gary Schultz: Me too

tl;dr version: PA law requires two witnesses to support a perjury charge. McQueary was the first.....Paterno the second. No Paterno, no case - they contend.

So it's conceivable two of the key figures in the cover-up could skate. Ridiculous.

Yeah, but Paterno's testimony from the Grand Jury transcipts (you know, the ones that most ALL of you have never read) could possibly be read into the court proceedings.

Yeah I wouldn't get too excited over this. I think in the absence of any other possible testimony from Paterno, the Grand Jury Testimony may end up being used in some manner. (I don't know the legal technicalities of doing this, but I can't see a moral problem with doing it, and I would imagine the prosecutors don't either, given their decision not to try and get testimony from Paterno in another way in the last couple of months of his life.)

Not that I'm excited over it, but I thought there may be some possibility of Paterno's GJT being used as he was never under suspicion and he is reliable figure. I've tried looking up PA law about this situation but have yet to find anything.

I do believe Curley's and Schultz attorney's mention that they could not cross examine Paterno on his GJT and there for could not offer rebuttal in defense of Curley and Schultz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Former AD Curley: I want my charges dropped

Gary Schultz: Me too

tl;dr version: PA law requires two witnesses to support a perjury charge. McQueary was the first.....Paterno the second. No Paterno, no case - they contend.

So it's conceivable two of the key figures in the cover-up could skate. Ridiculous.

Yeah, but Paterno's testimony from the Grand Jury transcipts (you know, the ones that most ALL of you have never read) could possibly be read into the court proceedings.

Yeah I wouldn't get too excited over this. I think in the absence of any other possible testimony from Paterno, the Grand Jury Testimony may end up being used in some manner. (I don't know the legal technicalities of doing this, but I can't see a moral problem with doing it, and I would imagine the prosecutors don't either, given their decision not to try and get testimony from Paterno in another way in the last couple of months of his life.)

Not that I'm excited over it, but I thought there may be some possibility of Paterno's GJT being used as he was never under suspicion and he is reliable figure. I've tried looking up PA law about this situation but have yet to find anything.

I do believe Curley's and Schultz attorney's mention that they could not cross examine Paterno on his GJT and there for could not offer rebuttal in defense of Curley and Schultz.

The cross examination point is a good one, but remember these are defense attorneys, whose job is to try and get their men off. They are obligated to follow every path that could benefit their clients.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
these are defense attorneys, whose job is to try and get their men off.

Which is why Sandusky was so disappointed that nobody at the orphanage has passed the bar yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://deadspin.com/5889434

Sandusky's attorney wanted more delays, judge denied them.

Also, I don't know how admiral's joke didn't get more recognition. Well played, sir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CS85, thanks for bumping this and allowing me to admiral's joke. Hardest I've laughed today, sir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CS85, thanks for bumping this and allowing me to admiral's joke. Hardest I've laughed today, sir.

I can't believe we all missed it -- a damn fine joke, I say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another senior Athletic Department employee dismissed.

The firing of a Penn State athletics official was connected to the investigation into the child sexual abuse case at the university, said two persons familiar with the situation.

Mark Sherburne, an associate athletic director, was fired this week, said the people who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because no one was authorized to speak publicly about the matter.

One person said Sherburne was dismissed for failing to produce in a timely fashion documents under subpoena by the state Attorney General's office related to its investigation into Sherburne's boss, Athletic Director Tim Curley. Curley is on administrative leave after being charged with lying to a grand jury and failing to report an abuse allegation against retired assistant coach Jerry Sandusky.

University spokeswoman Lisa Powers declined comment Friday night since the matter was a personnel issue.

The person familiar with the firing said the documents were voluntarily produced and turned over to the attorney general's office.

It was unclear the types of documents in question, but the university has told staffers to preserve and produce documents related to the investigation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Way to be detailed, prosecution.

Judge John Cleland has just granted a request to seal a document posted to the Centre County court website that contained names of the alleged victims and other witnesses involved in the child sex abuse case against Jerry Sandusky.

The attachment is about 30 pages. Prosecutors filed a request to have it sealed today after realizing it "inadvertently contains a number of names of individuals associated with the investigation of this matter." The information no longer appears on the Centre County court website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Between this, and McQueary suddenly being unable to remember which month or which year he saw and reported the child-rape, Jerry Sandusky is going to be watching neighborhood children play from his back porch for a long, long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sandusky trial is going on and the evidence is surfacing and it is just cringe worthy already

Jerry Sandusky allegedly wrote "creepy" love letters to one of his victims, and they will be read in testimony once the child sex abuse trial into the former Penn State assistant football coach begins Monday, ABC News reported, citing sources close to the case.

The love letters were allegedly written to "Victim 4," one of eight accusers set to testify against the 68-year-old.

Victim 4 is set to be the first witness to testify and is also expected to show gifts that Sandusky allegedly gave him, including a set of golf clubs.

The letters are allegedly handwritten by Sandusky and one of them entails a story written in the third person.

Victim 4, now 28, met the coach through Sandusky's charity, the Second Mile.

Ben Andreozzi, the attorney for Victim 4, would not talk about the letters, but did say, "They have evidence to support his allegations, and there's other evidence that has not been released to the public yet that I think will really resonate with the jury."

The report came as nine jurors were selected Tuesday during the first day of jury selection at Centre County Courthouse.

Sandusky faces 52 counts for allegedly molesting 10 boys over a 15-year period. The former defensive coordinator pleaded not guilty and has remained under house arrest since being charged in November.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/06/sandusky-allegedly-wrote-creepy-love-letters-to-victim/#ixzz1x19ZQ2vk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugh, this is all just as disturbing as I think we all figured. Sandusky's lawyer is playing the most hilarious defense ever: the molestation/rape victims are all in this for the money.

This link features more details from the testimonies of the victims, they are unpleasant to read, to say the least.

Also it's nice to see that McQueary has come clean with his testimony. The amount of waffling he was doing regarding his story was pretty unnerving, but on the stand he returned to telling the truthful details that he gave to the grand jury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you say Freudian slip

Accused Penn State pedophile Jerry Sandusky came off a lot creepier in that exclusive sitdown with NBC last November than anyone knew, but the Peacock Network oddly chose not to air what sounds a lot like an admission of guilt -- and now prosecutors want the whole transcript.

"I didn't go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that I've helped," Sandusky told Costas in footage that never made the November airing.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/18/prosecutors-request-transcripts-from-sandusky-interview-disturbing-unaired/?cmpid=prn_aol#ixzz1yCayGOan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you say Freudian slip

Accused Penn State pedophile Jerry Sandusky came off a lot creepier in that exclusive sitdown with NBC last November than anyone knew, but the Peacock Network oddly chose not to air what sounds a lot like an admission of guilt -- and now prosecutors want the whole transcript.

"I didn't go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that I've helped," Sandusky told Costas in footage that never made the November airing.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/18/prosecutors-request-transcripts-from-sandusky-interview-disturbing-unaired/?cmpid=prn_aol#ixzz1yCayGOan

I can't see that much point, the transcript would be in admissible surely? And as much as it might be something that Fox talking heads can get the,selves into a lather about,if something that was potentially an admission of guilt was aired I would have thought it would make a fair trial and any chance of a conviction virtually impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The admission - or his defense that hey, he didn't sexually acost every young boy who crossed his path - was not aired. Sandusky's full interview was 36 minutes, only 8 minutes of which was aired. The prosecution has a transcript of the full interview, and may introduce it into evidence at trial.

Lead defense lawyer Joe Amendola compares the Sandusky trial to a soap opera, namely, "General Hospital". He later amends his comparison to "All My Children". This isn't real anymore, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't believe you so I had to google '"joe amendola" "all my children"'

http://abclocal.go.c...ocal&id=8706843

Earlier Tuesday, Amendola told reporters to "stay tuned" to find out if Sandusky would take the stand himself, comparing the case to a soap opera. Asked which soap opera, defense attorney Joe Amendola initially said "General Hospital," then "All My Children."

Christ almighty you weren't kidding. The only way this can get more absurd and disgusting is if Amendola's closing argument is simply "WE ARE! PENN STATE!" and then Sandusky is acquitted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The admission - or his defense that hey, he didn't sexually acost every young boy who crossed his path - was not aired. Sandusky's full interview was 36 minutes, only 8 minutes of which was aired. The prosecution has a transcript of the full interview, and may introduce it into evidence at trial.

Lead defense lawyer Joe Amendola compares the Sandusky trial to a soap opera, namely, "General Hospital". He later amends his comparison to "All My Children". This isn't real anymore, right?

Jerry-Mouse-Facepalm%255B1%255D.jpg

This might just be the dumbest lawyer in the history of criminal law, how did he pass the bar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now