The Lions' Pride

Amendola claimed in a video interview with Ziegler that victim 2, his mother, and brother came into his office back in Nov '11 and said nothing happened. Soon after he changed his story in what could very well be a money grab.

Interesting. Thanks for posting!

If that boy somehow escaped Sandusky unscathed, then it would be wonderful. However, when it comes to our particular issues with Freeh and with the trials, Only what McQuery told Paterno and Curley/Schultz matters - not what he actually saw.

Correct. A point that very much seems to be overlooked by many.

Wouldn't it hurt MMs whistleblower case tho?

Its still huge for PSU if this person is indeed V2 and was never molested. So now we have a victim saying he was never hurt, combined with Curley/Schultz claiming what they were told, combined with what MM actually told Paterno/Big John/Dranov versus what MM is claiming he told PSU. Unless there is more evidence in favor of MM I don't know how you can convict.

you know, I don't think there's any question that Sandusky abused that child. Just because he didn't happen to do it the night McQuery saw them in the shower, isn't very important to me. Fact is, McQuery reported...something...up the chain. Perhaps you can argue that a football coach has zero place in dealing with the issue, beyond reporting what was told to him to the proper authorities, but those authorities d*mn well have the responsibility of dealing with this issue to the fullest of their abilities.

As for conviction, it was always going to be incredibly hard to convict, and it was never clear to me why the State was pursueing this case - they charged them with perjury regarding what McQuery told them in a meeting that was never documented or recorded. However, they probably have a much stronger case regarding the perjury charges that stemmed from the Freeh report. It's going to be very difficult for Curley and Schultz to argue that they weren't aware of that investigation, considering the email chains they had going on. This isn't like Joe, who was only tertiary mentioned - and it's even a question if he was the subject in some of these emails - these two were hip deep.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't see the significance of this - but again I always thought the State had a losing case in the original perjury charges, and V2 doesn't have anything to do with the charges added on.

Edit: the perspective below is of the general public and how difficult it is to move the public perception, not my beliefs. Must not have been clear, apparently.

V2's admission that nothing occurred in the shower won't change much. The general public has reduced the logic to a few powerpoint bullets.

1. Sandusky was in the shower with a boy. Abuse or not, it is a huge red flag.
2. This wasn't the first time Sandusky was ever reported with children.
3. Paterno waited to report anything and never followed up.
4. Curley, Shultz, and Spanier talked about it in an email yet still allowed Sandusky on campus.
5. Sandusky continued to prey on boys for 10 more years.

Ergo, therefore, ibid, etcetera, etcetera,etcetera (channels inner Yul Brynner), PSU knew and should have done more.

This awfully simplistic view is responsible for the persistence in perception. And when stated that simply, and technically even truthfully, all the rest of the discussion sounds to the public like PSU fans just trying to defend the indefensible. It is almost impossible with 20/20 hindsight and all of the dots connected for simpletons like Louis Freeh, Gene Wojo, Colin Cowherd, and Mike Golic people to put themselves in that place & time with the known information at the time to examine a reasonable course of action.

They're not thinking 4th dimensionally, Marty. They don't have the brain cells. And they spout the garbage and more people without brain cells can't put the puzzle together.

I liked the section of Blehar's analysis on "anchoring". Those are tough anchors to move.

It's not an entirely unfair viewpoint, minus the Paterno waited to report - all of those bullet points are true. Personally, I believe Penn State administration absolutely failed those children, and share blame with any number of institutions that allowed Sandusky to run free. My issues is with this idea that the Administrators refused to act to protect the football program, and that Paterno willfully covered Sandusky up to protect his program.

Both of those particular accusations are utterly without evidence and border on delusional. Our Athletic Dept, our athletic culture, our balance between student and athlete, are all still models for the rest of the NCAA institutions to look up to and emulate.