Sandusky Claims His Innoncence in an Exclusive Interview with Bob Costas

He and his attorney need to be locked up. Man is sick and knows what he did was wrong. Horsing around my a** ! This kind of stuff ticks me off
 
Last edited:
He is trying to say that he was just horsing around. Being a jock. You have no excuse tobe in a shower with a young boy no excuse! That attorney knows hes guilty
 
He is trying to say that he was just horsing around. Being a jock. You have no excuse tobe in a shower with a young boy no excuse! That attorney knows hes guilty

Purely hypothetical situation:

A is in charge of watching over young B for a day. A and B have been playing football on a hot, sunny day; both are sweaty. B's parents sent a bag of clean clothes for him to change into if he ended up getting dirty, sweaty, etc. The only shower in the immediate proximity is in a now empty locker room in a facility that has janitors who have dementia. A lets B shower by himself. When B is out, dried off, and changed, A then gets in the shower. When A comes out of the shower, B is gone. B is never found again.

Is A at fault for any type of negligence?
 
All the reports didnt happen that way. Did you read all the victim reports i think they were like 7 telling what happend with each, it what on espn i believe. Its very distuurbing and made me angry reading it.
 
Apparently, the alleged victim of the 2002 incident could be one of Sandusky's character witnesses. If it is true that he denies being abused and/or molested, that puts a whole different spin on this case.


Alleged, could be, if...

You make fun of people that speculate, yet use words like the above.

Hypocritical post. I guess its only ok to speculate if you are doing the speculation.
 
Apparently, the alleged victim of the 2002 incident could be one of Sandusky's character witnesses. If it is true that he denies being abused and/or molested, that puts a whole different spin on this case.

Who is to say that is actually the boy. No way the defense could prove that.
 
Does anyone find that horsing around in the showers naked, with young boys disturbing? Or even odd?
 
Alleged, could be, if...

You make fun of people that speculate, yet use words like the above.

Hypocritical post. I guess its only ok to speculate if you are doing the speculation.

Making a speculative "if...then" statement is distinct from making an assertion based upon speculation.
 
Do you think the prosecution could prove that it is not? Who does the burden of proof fall on?

Burden of proof should be on the defense if they trot out a boy who they claim to be the person in the shower. I sincerely doubt the defense will do this - just throwing out stuff now to create doubt.
 
Burden of proof should be on the defense if they trot out a boy who they claim to be the person in the shower. I sincerely doubt the defense will do this - just throwing out stuff now to create doubt.

Do you think the prosecution has any duty to produce a victim for an alleged crime?
 
Purely hypothetical situation:

A is in charge of watching over young B for a day. A and B have been playing football on a hot, sunny day; both are sweaty. B's parents sent a bag of clean clothes for him to change into if he ended up getting dirty, sweaty, etc. The only shower in the immediate proximity is in a now empty locker room in a facility that has janitors who have dementia. A lets B shower by himself. When B is out, dried off, and changed, A then gets in the shower. When A comes out of the shower, B is gone. B is never found again.

Is A at fault for any type of negligence?

"Your honor, I had to take a shower with the young boy because if I waited until he was done to take my shower, he would have been kidnapped by those evil janitors. If anything, you should be thanking me for doing my duty as a responsible child care taker." Seems like a really good defense.
 
Do you think the prosecution has any duty to produce a victim for an alleged crime?

I think the prosecution should make an effort to find the victim and get his account. But given the age of the boy at that time and the eyewitness account, no, I don't think the lack of a victim casts doubt on the case.
 
"Your honor, I had to take a shower with the young boy because if I waited until he was done to take my shower, he would have been kidnapped by those evil janitors. If anything, you should be thanking me for doing my duty as a responsible child care taker." Seems like a really good defense.

You did not answer the question. In said hypothetical situation, could one charge A with negligence?
 
I think the prosecution should make an effort to find the victim and get his account. But given the age of the boy at that time and the eyewitness account, no, I don't think the lack of a victim casts doubt on the case.

How reliable is eyewitness testimony? How reliable is uncorroborated eyewitness testimony?
 
Just heard this on SC. That effer is toast. I'm physically sick to my stomach after hearing him.
 
How reliable is eyewitness testimony? How reliable is uncorroborated eyewitness testimony?

In this case, I find it very credible. The eyewitness had no ax to grind against Sandusky, was upset by the event and reported it to Paterno (which probably wasn't easy for him).
 
I think they're going to have to find the boys he actually did the deed too. Either that or this peice of trash won't get what he deserves. Our justice system works this way.

Touching them, horsing in the shower isn't going to get him put away for very long if at all.
 
I think they're going to have to find the boys he actually did the deed too. Either that or this peice of trash won't get what he deserves. Our justice system works this way.

Touching them, horsing in the shower isn't going to get him put away for very long if at all.

Gather 12 people that share that opinion. I'll be here when you get back.
 
In this case, I find it very credible. The eyewitness had no ax to grind against Sandusky, was upset by the event and reported it to Paterno (which probably wasn't easy for him).

Is it still credible if the following turn out to be true:
1. He told the Grand Jury that he saw the child rape and went home; that he did not step in to stop it.

2. That he told Paterno that he saw fondling and inappropriate behavior.

3. That he told Curley that he "believed" he saw child rape.

4. That he emailed his friend and said that he stepped in and stopped the act.

If it is true that at different times he gave contradictory testimony (whether to the Jury, to his superiors, or to his friends, do you still think he is a credible eyewitness?
 
Purely hypothetical situation:

A is in charge of watching over young B for a day. A and B have been playing football on a hot, sunny day; both are sweaty. B's parents sent a bag of clean clothes for him to change into if he ended up getting dirty, sweaty, etc. The only shower in the immediate proximity is in a now empty locker room in a facility that has janitors who have dementia. A lets B shower by himself. When B is out, dried off, and changed, A then gets in the shower. When A comes out of the shower, B is gone. B is never found again.

Is A at fault for any type of negligence?
Why make up this hypothetical situation when you think horseplay with grown men in the shower is a-ok?
 

VN Store



Back
Top