Sandusky says he only 'horsed around' with boys.

Look I don't like this Sandusky guy
but that is his story.

He is acting like it is completely normal..

It was not a joke. I think Sandusky really
thinks it was OK.

So far I have read posts stating that we cannot be sure because these boys were "high risk youth" and "I can't remember what I ate last week, let alone what I was doing nine years ago".

Seriously?

McQueary WITNESSED Sandusky raping a boy in the lockerroom. The Janitor WITNESSED Sandusky have oral sex with a boy in the lockerroom. A Highschool coach WITNESSED Sandusky half naked, laying on top of a boy. It was the highschool coach that finally called police back in the 90's. To those saying "wait" or "these kids might be lying". How many individual adults have to WITNESS something, before it becomes a problem in your mind?


As for this all coming out 9 years later and how you " cannot even remember what you ate for lunch last week" Well..I don't remember what I ate for breakfast last week either.... but I can tell you exactly what I did and where I was a specific date in 2001. September 11th 2001, and I'd bet everyone else here can too. "RAPE" is one of those "things" that you tend to not forget....IN FACT, I'm pretty sure that loads of people pay therapists a lot of money to HELP THEM FORGET.


A grown man menaced these children. Just like all child predators, he knew that the kids could be manipulated into not talking. "I'll kill your mommy if you talk" " I'll tell everyone you're lying" "you enjoy it and everyone will know it" etc etc, with a young scared child, these sorts of cowardly threats work,and work well.

Why would Sandusky worry about the kids talking? McQueary was 28 years old, a graduate assistant, and he SAW Sandusky raping one of the children. Sandusky and the child SAW McQueary "SEE" them during the act....and Sandusky wasn't bothered enough to stop what he was doing. It goes to show how insidious this problem was, and it lends credence to the COVERUP theory..when a man knows he has been seen raping little boys, and he doesn't even skip a beat, and is still around a DECADE later, doing the same thing, while the SAME people who WITNESSED him doing it, are still around too.

Originally posted by chapterhouse
reply to post by butcherguy

 

This all smells to me took 9 years to come out I have a had time remebering what I ate last week. period

Some MSM idiot got a hook and ran with it, sound like bishops trying to distarct media. period

edit on 15-11-2011 by chapterhouse because: (no reason given)

Actually in cases of sex abuse in Pennsylvania, the victim has until their 50th birthday
www.pcar.org...

The new statute of limitations applies to any case in which the statute of limitations had not yet expired before the new law took effect. Pursuant to Com. v. Harvey, 542 A.2d 1027 (Pa. Super. 1988), time for prosecution may be extended by a legislative change if the prior period has not yet expired. To determine whether the statute has expired, the date of the victim’s 18th birthday is more important than the date of the commission of the offense. On August 27, 2002, the statute of limitations for child sexual abuse was extended to 12 years after the victim’s 18th birthday. (Before that amendment, the statute of limitations was 5 years after the victim’s 18th birthday). That change in the statute of limitations applied to cases in which a child victim turned 18 on or after August 27, 2002. Since the 12-year period has not yet expired before the new law took effect, the statute of limitations for cases under the 2002 amendment has now been extended to the victim’s 50th birthday. For cases involving child victims who turn18 on or after August 27, 2002, the Commonwealth now has until the victim’s 50th birthday to file criminal charges for abuse that occurred before the victim turned 18.

But in Texas, the statute of limitation is different. Sandusky may be charged in Texas.

Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Title 1. Code of Criminal Procedure Chapter 12. Limitation Art. 12.01. FELONIES. Except as provided in Article 12.03, felony indictments may be presented within these limits, and not afterward: (1) no limitation: (B) sexual assault, if during the investigation of the offense biological matter is collected and subjected to forensic DNA testing and the testing results show that the matter does not match the victim or any other person whose identity is readily ascertained; (2) ten years from the date of the commission of the offense: (E) sexual assault, except as provided by Subdivision (1) or (5); or (5) ten years from the 18th birthday of the victim of the offense: (A) indecency with a child under Section 21.11(a)(1) or (2), Penal Code; or (B) except as provided by Subdivision (1), sexual assault under Section 22.011(a)(2), Penal Code, or aggravated sexual assault under Section 22.021(a)(1)(B), Penal Code Read more: wiki.answers.com...

All victims in Pennsylvania have until their 50th birthday, and if they accuse him the day before their birthday, he would still be investigated.

News of more victims coming forward:

More Sandusky victims

reply to post by butcherguy


Has nothing to to with ATS we dont MSM her go poof

Playing frogger in the shower with a kid wearing a ball-gag is not 'horsing around'. Any attempts by Mr. Sandusky to convince us of the contrary makes him appear all the more guilty.

My guess is Mr. Sandusky will 'horse around' with a noose-ended rope or a twelve-gauge lon before this thing ever goes to trial.

And the world will be a better place for it.

Click here for more information.

I read a projection that 8 victims might cost Penn State 15% of their endowment - would 40 (by extrapolation) cost them 60% of their endowment.

Gotta love the lunatics calling for his death.

Here is an idea - let this case go to court, allow the man the right of being INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, and then allow the justice system to take care of them.

It frightens me what would happen if many of the "average" Americans were in charge of the justice system - especially those here on ATS.

reply to post by spyder550

Good question. This will cost the university big time, as it is.

The civil suits which are bound to be filed will end up in federal court, due to the sovereignty issue ( the Commonwealth of PA and Penn State University can be viewed as the same entity in state courts).

Individuals such as McQueary, Paterno, Curley and others will no doubt be named as defendants, so this will get really messy.

Originally posted by gwydionblack
Gotta love the lunatics calling for his death.

Here is an idea - let this case go to court, allow the man the right of being INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, and then allow the justice system to take care of them
It frightens me what would happen if many of the "average" Americans were in charge of the justice system - especially those here on ATS.

You have a point, but if Mr. Sandusky had half a brain in his empty keg of a skull, he'd stop flapping his lips and allow it to be dealt with in the courts.

If he's going to lip off about 'horsing around' naked with ten-year-old boys in a shower claiming it's some sort of innocent silliness, then one has to expect there will be people such as I who feel that cockroaches, banksters and putzwater dinks such as Mr. Sandusky should be subject to extermination.

Again, though, you're right in saying he has a right to a trial.

Can't wait to see Nancy Grace's wig doing twirls above her pointy little head during that trial!!!!

Originally posted by gwydionblack
Gotta love the lunatics calling for his death.

Here is an idea - let this case go to court, allow the man the right of being INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY, and then allow the justice system to take care of them.

It frightens me what would happen if many of the "average" Americans were in charge of the justice system - especially those here on ATS.

Sandusky is not an average American either. And with witnesses to his crimes, it will be hard to prove not guilty. I wonder how the victims feel with the attitude of innocent until proven guilty. Probably makes them feel more victimized. What a shame that in this country, when there are witnesses and victims we still have to say he is innocent. His guilt was provided by the witnesses. Now the witnesses are scrambling to protect the university, sounds like the university is more important in your eyes than the victims. That is the shame of this justice system.

reply to post by gwydionblack


It's sad how manipulated and political correct people can be.

Think out of the box my friend and re-think what is most efficient and humane.

Originally posted by novuslibertas
reply to post by gwydionblack

 

It's sad how manipulated and political correct people can be.

Think out of the box my friend and re-think what is most efficient and humane.

Yes, I agree.

It seems in this country it more honorable to protect the guilty by saying they deserve their day in court to protect their alleged innocence. He does not have alleged victims...he has victims. He is only allegedly innocent, according to him. What he has to do now is convince the victims and the witnesses that he is innocent. That is going to be hard to prove to the victims. He is the one saying his crimes are alleged, he is the one saying that everyone else has lied about this. But what he has not done is say there is a conspiracy against him, he can't even do that. He is guilty but only in his own magical thinking does he expect others to not say he is guilty.

This is hallmark thinking by those who are guilty of sex abuse and rape, they aren't guilty because you say they are guilty. They are only guilty if they say they are, and the victims are not victims. For him to say there are victims, that means he is guilty, ergo...no victim, no guilt. And people who pat them on the back and demand justice always forget the severity of the crime. Rape is an inhumane act, it does not matter the social standing or wealth of the perpetrator, it is still inhumane. If there were no witnesses, then we could say it is a matter of his words against theirs. But 8 children who never knew each other and made the same charge, there is no conspiracy and it is more than a shadow of a doubt, which trials in this country have to prove guilt by.

8 kids, 3 witnesses....sounds guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. He is going to court not to prove his innocence, but to get people convinced of his magical thinking. His magical thinking is this...he can have sex with all the little boys he wants and people have to accept his way of thinking.

Novuslibertas, you get a star from me because you aren't falling for his magical thinking.

reply to post by butcherguy


This man is morally and mentally sick. What is worse is the fact people around him knew and kept their mouths shut and let this continue. They in my opinion are worse than he is. They knew didn't care how horrible this was to the victims and their damaged lives. For what position and money. They are worse than Judas when he sold out Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. They should all be tried and put in prison with the good ole boys. They deserve every minute of it.

reply to post by WarminIndy

This is hallmark thinking by those who are guilty of sex abuse and rape, they aren't guilty because you say they are guilty. They are only guilty if they say they are, and the victims are not victims. For him to say there are victims, that means he is guilty, ergo...no victim, no guilt. And people who pat them on the back and demand justice always forget the severity of the crime. Rape is an inhumane act, it does not matter the social standing or wealth of the perpetrator, it is still inhumane. If there were no witnesses, then we could say it is a matter of his words against theirs. But 8 children who never knew each other and made the same charge, there is no conspiracy and it is more than a shadow of a doubt, which trials in this country have to prove guilt by.

Exactly right.

This is what makes NAMBLA possible. This twisted view the pedophiles have, that their victims want the perpetrators to do what they do to them.

I think they should waterboard the guy and find out who else has been involved over the years. Of course he is not gonna admit he raped kids, but I believe the kids, not him. If these kids said he raped them then I for one believe them.

Originally posted by redrose123
reply to post by butcherguy

 

This man is morally and mentally sick. What is worse is the fact people around him knew and kept their mouths shut and let this continue. They in my opinion are worse than he is. They knew didn't care how horrible this was to the victims and their damaged lives. For what position and money. They are worse than Judas when he sold out Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. They should all be tried and put in prison with the good ole boys. They deserve every minute of it.

Kinda like the good old Catholic Church . . .

Just sayin'.

Everyone this isn't one of those court cases where Justice will be Served.
The system has failed these children once, It is going to fail them again.


These abusers may walk scott-free. There is no evidence other than a testimony about a night that happened almost 10 years ago.


This will be a very very long and unsettling court case.


This man may walk. He is guilty, but will walk. Not enough evidence. Look at the case. Upsetting.

You don't "horse around" with 10 year old boys, period. Just for coming out and doing that interview and spewing what I can only call fecal matter out of his disgusting mouth, I think his punishment should be to spend 10 minutes alone in a room with those boys fathers. That would be my kind of justice.