In partnership with CBSSports.com
Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game
Buy, sell and swap tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Wow this is from Sandusky's Attorney. It sure looks like the media, NCAA, Jim Delaney and many others will be eating crow.....
Obviously it's tough to get past the fact this is Sandusky's attorney but if you can, it's a very interesting video.
Thank you for posting this. The media writes the story and will twist anything their way to fit their story.
He states some falsehoods in there though. I stopped listening after he said McQueary played in the Second Mile Golf Tournament after witnessing the shower event. That's just not true - and the golf tournament director has testified that McQueary didn't play. What did happen was that McQueary was invited and his name appeared in advertisements for the tournament as "among those expected to play" but McQueary never played.
lol thats not a falsehood....he did play
Show me some evidence.
Evidently, the tournament director's statement that he did not isn't enough for you.
It would have been very easy to prove that McQueary played in that tournament. All they had to do was find someone who played with him and have them testify. They couldn't because McQueary never played in it.
This post was edited by UncleLar 18 months ago
Here's the testimony of Henry Lesch of the Second Mile regarding whether McQueary played or not
Note: The document is copy protected so it can't be copied and pasted but I can get screen captures of the relevant parts.
Didn't they have pictures of him at the event?
They had a picture of him at A golf event but no one could testify that it was a Second Mile tournament picture taken after 2001 - that's the undated picture reference in the testimony. .
I guess first person accounts of him being there aren't relevant?
Show me somebody who's testified under oath that McQueary played. You won't find any.
Something has been bugging me. What is McQueary's motive to destroy his career, his colleague's careers, his beloved coach's career, and ruin the name of his university? Did he embellish the story he originally told Joe/Curley/Schultz? Then why? Could the prosecutors have possibly offered anything to him to compensate for his embellishment and consequent ruining of his livelihood? I don't get it. Maybe he did embellish (and was encouraged to by the prosecution) and simply wasn't bright enough to comprehend what would follow. Maybe he didn't embellish. Reports from the trial were he seemed genuinely upset at the characterization by Curley/Schultz ("just horseplay"). You would think he would have no motive to call it "extremely sexual" unless he actually believed it was. I wish there was a tape recording of his story back in 2001.
"You can take bowl games and you can take external things from people, but you can't take a warrior's heart."
Guilt for not doing anything in 2001? Maybe he just wanted to see Sandusky put away and didn't think about how it would effect Paterno et. al. I'm sure the prosecution helped guide him memory as well.
There was no motive to destroy anything on purpose. This is going back a decade plus and people are acting as if most humans remember word for word whtat they told someone a decade ago. It's just not likely. The truth is somewhere in between and those talking absolutes over testimony based on these decade old memories are fooling themselves IMO. It's partially true....like maybe someone heard MM at the golf tournament from around the corner.
If he was so damn positive it was something sexual in nature...there isn't a doubt in my mind he didn't know what to do. The reason there was doubt because he wasn't sure what he had heard/seen IMO which is fine. At 28 years old, you don't call your Dad when you see a child being molested and you are 100% positive about it. No way, no how. Sometimes your memory of an event a decade later may not be as clear to you as it should be. MM got screwed in all of this, but if he really did see the act and didn't act....I'm not feeling too sorry for him. That is just me. Either he did see something sexual in nature and didn't call the police or he thought he heard something unusual, but wasn't positive enough to call the police. I just don't think everyone will have the same memory of these conversations from a decade ago.
This post was edited by LaJollaLion 18 months ago
"One man didn't build this program and one man sure as hell cannot tear it down."
I've worked a lot of charity golf tournaments. The celebrity lists are always screwed up. They fact that the defense tried to us the list as evidence that McQueary played is actually strong evidence to me that he didn't. If they really had proof they would have contacted someone in his foursome and had them testify that they played with him. Not getting an eyewitness screams out to me that he really wasn't there.
IMO who cares if he played in the golf tournament. again, IMO, McQueary's testimony doesn't match the grand jury presentment. McQueary's actions in 2001 definitely don't match the grand jury presentment. IMO, if he really saw rape and didn't stop it right there and then - 28 yr old big male vs a 55 year not nearly as big male. I mean if I saw anyone raping a young boy I would grab any weapon I could and beat the hell out of the guy and get the kid out of there.
I know people are going to say "yeah tough guy" but I have stepped into fights to save people who were beaten to near death. When you actually see a horrific crime when there is real danger we put concerns for ourselves aside.
IMHO, if McQueary has a shred of dignity if he actually saw rape he would have stopped it. If not stopping it he would have called the cops - minimal.
Because he had to ask his father, Dr Dranov, and then Paterno what to do there is no way in HELL he actually saw a rape. If he saw really saw rape and didn't know what to do he's either incrdibly stupid or sick.
I don't question his motives at all. He's got no real choice but to try and testify to the best of his recollection. The simple passage of time and what it does to one's memory, coupled with a zealous prosecution with one goal in mind and an overzealous media looking to make this as big a scandal as possible accounts for the perceived and real inconsistencies in his story. I don't believe for a second that he wanted to bring down Joe, the program or the University.
The sad thing is, there needs to be a true and unbiased investigation into how everything was handled. People are trying to do that, but the media doesn't want to hear anything that contradicts the story they've already pushed. The bigger scandal seems to be withing the CYS and DPW, but it's not nearly as sexy to go after them. Creating the perception that Joe and the university covered up for a pedofile made for a much better story.
Are you going to post this same reply on every message board? Not to bust your balls, but I think that Amendola has more knowledge of the case than you.
As long as the topic is posted on multiple boards, I see no reason why I shouldn't respond on each. Not everyone is on every board.
As far as knowing more than Amendola, I am simply going by the testimony of Henry Lesch, the Second Mile's golf tournament director, who, by the way, happened to be a defense witness for Amendola. It was only under cross examination that he came forward with an admission that McQueary was NOT at the golf tournaments.
Amendola isn't testifying under oath on that video, but his witness was under oath when he stated that McQueary didn't play in the tournament. So I'm believing Lesch not Amendola.
You know, I think people overlook a huge human element to this. It's easy to say if you see a guy raping a kid you step in and break it up. Everyone would do that if you saw a total stranger, or even someone you kinda know but aren't really close to. But what if you walked in on your best friend? Or your uncle? Or your brother?
Let's not forget that Mike knew Sandusky since he was probably 9 or 10 years old. He went to his camps, played on his teams, and coached along side him. He looked up to the guy and respected him as a decent guy that was making a difference in society by helping kids through his charity organization. He probably had dinner at his house, knew his wife and kids, played in his charity golf events.
Then one day you walk in and see that. Your entire paradigm is rocked to the core. It's unfortunate if he didn't break it up, but I can forgive the guy if in that exact moment he froze and didn't know what to do.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports