re: Sandusky interview: "I have horsed around, showered, touched, but no sexual inte

quote:

---

First, I think Sandusky's lawyer did the right thing by letting him do the interview. I also like that he went big (Costas on a network broadcast) and that he didn't limit the questions and let Sandusky answer without interruption (at least that is the way it was broadcast).

---

Ummm, why? He took 16.3 seconds to answer whether or not he was attracted to 8 year old boys. That should take less than a third of a second to answer is he is innocent. It pretty much proved his guilt.

Did you not read my whole post? Of course, after the fact we know Sandusky was a colossal failure based solely on the worst imaginable answer to one easy question.

What I was saying is that if he wanted any chance, he had to get a different version of the story and events out there and make a denial while also answering some hard questions. Up until the question about being sexually attracted to boys, Sandusky had handled the interview well and probably done himself some good. He had done a good job of answering or deflecting some much harder questions from Costas up until that point. How he could screw that question up so badly is beyond me.

A prison shower may be to him what a trip to Disney World is for most.

quote:

---

A prison shower may be to him what a trip to Disney World is for most.

---

I seriously doubt it. Most of these sick fricks are not into men in general. They think they are too hairy and muscly. Not to mention these mother frickers frick back, unlike a 10 year old that is overpowered and has to take it. I think this man getting raped and stabbed would be the only gay porn I would actually enjoy.

quote:

---

McQueary

said he did the right thing

---

He didn't do the right thing. This is a guy who broke up a knife fight between two young, strong players, yet he was too shocked to get a 67 yr old off a 10 year old and had to hurry to the parking lot to call his dad? Yeah, sure.

Question for the board and any lawyers on it:

I read (somewhere in one of the thousands of articles on this) that Sandusky's lawyer plans to get some of the charges dropped because the victims were never identified. That includes the victim in the instance above.

Is that possible? I know people have been convicted of murder when no body was found, but in those cases the name of the victim was known. Is there any precedent in rape/child molestation cases wherein the victim isn't identified? Maybe a conviction of a pedophile who posts a video of rape of an unknown child? I just don't want to see these charges dropped and, sadly, after the "non" bail set by the Second Mile volunteer I wonder if some of the judges in PA are looking for an excuse.

wow, just fricking wow.

How he could screw that question up so badly is beyond me.

--------------------------------




He had too much molester in him

All we are seeing is the depth of denial in this criminal and the Penn State program and university. It took far too many victims to finally tear down the veil of secrecy that exists in State College.

I wonder what it is like living in that small college town with all these people who are so close geographically. When the students head home for the holidays I wonder how the social environment will be changed. I do know this, I'm glad I don't live there.

Bob Costas reaction to JS answering that question was unreal. Did ya'll see how big his eyes got? BC was like are you fricking serious!

It's all about safe boundaries. I make sure no kid ever sees "my private part" when I pee in a urinal. That is where my bountry is set. Forget letting a kid see me naked, much less taking a shower with a kid.