jordo212000
Posts: 10,664
Nov 15, 2011 12:06pm
Mindbogglingdat dude;973615 wrote: However, ten minutes before they were supposed to tape, Amendola said, "What if I can get Jerry on the phone?" Bob said do it, and five minutes later he was on the phone. There were also no ground rules for Costas to abide by.
Crazy that Amendola suggested Sandusky do the interview. Wow.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Nov 15, 2011 12:29pm
10 min before they were supposed to tape? Didn't the news come out that Sandusky was going to interview w/ Costas at like 7 pm?
karen lotz
Posts: 22,284
Nov 15, 2011 12:36pm
SportsAndLady;973882 wrote:10 min before they were supposed to tape? Didn't the news come out that Sandusky was going to interview w/ Costas at like 7 pm?
The interview had already taken place when it was first made known.
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Nov 15, 2011 12:37pm
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhkaren lotz;973898 wrote:The interview had already taken place when it was first made known.
well that makes sense
Laley23
Posts: 29,506
Nov 15, 2011 12:39pm
yeah, that was not live. you could tell from the way it was edited? There were like no pauses between questions and Costas actually cut him off at times (had it been live. Obviously they edited and cut out dead air).SportsAndLady;973882 wrote:10 min before they were supposed to tape? Didn't the news come out that Sandusky was going to interview w/ Costas at like 7 pm?
EDIT: I should read the whole thread each time. Lotz beat me to it.
Iliketurtles
Posts: 8,191
Nov 15, 2011 12:55pm
I didn't say I thought it benefitted Sandusky I said his laywer must think that somehow it does or he is the worst, most idiotic laywer ever.dat dude;973625 wrote:I disagree. There was nothing in that interview that benefited Sandusky. It was a terrible choice. Amendola could have spoke on behalf of Sandusky and came across much better.
Personally I don't understand why he had Sandusky interviewed and don't think is helped at all and just made things worse but stupid stuff like this happens by lawyers because they feel it will benefit their case.
As for the McQueary thing just more of the coverup taking place.
I also thought Costas was awesome last as well.
V
vball10set
Posts: 24,795
Nov 15, 2011 1:05pm
[video=youtube;wQr4x7yzNxg][/video]
O
OhioStatePride2003
Posts: 686
Nov 15, 2011 1:47pm
This. I wouldn't be a damn bit surprised if McQueary is their only credible witness, and he changes his story, does a little time for a perjury charge, and is paid royaly for ruining his reputation to cover-up for Sandusky.Iliketurtles;973951 wrote:As for the McQueary thing just more of the coverup taking place.
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Nov 15, 2011 2:00pm
OhioStatePride2003;974047 wrote:This. I wouldn't be a damn bit surprised if McQueary is their only credible witness, and he changes his story, does a little time for a perjury charge, and is paid royaly for ruining his reputation to cover-up for Sandusky.
Dr Winston O'Boogie
Posts: 1,799
Nov 15, 2011 2:00pm
I think Sandusky's lawyer's strategy is to to exactly what he did on tv - come right out and acknowledge that there was questionable behavior. That's how he's going to deal with the questions of "why are all these accusations being leveled against your client if he didn't do anything". I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say whether this is what I'd do, but that seems to be what's going on.
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Nov 15, 2011 2:12pm
When the evidence is this stacked against you, other than claiming insanity, this is probably the best defense.Dr Winston O'Boogie;974063 wrote:I think Sandusky's lawyer's strategy is to to exactly what he did on tv - come right out and acknowledge that there was questionable behavior. That's how he's going to deal with the questions of "why are all these accusations being leveled against your client if he didn't do anything". I'm not a lawyer, so I can't say whether this is what I'd do, but that seems to be what's going on.
Dr Winston O'Boogie
Posts: 1,799
Nov 15, 2011 2:43pm
"Sure I stole some pens from the supply closet, so I guess I 'stole company property'. But as far as that $5MM illegal wire transfer, I had nothing to do the THOSE allegations."sleeper;974073 wrote:When the evidence is this stacked against you, other than claiming insanity, this is probably the best defense.
V
vball10set
Posts: 24,795
Nov 15, 2011 2:52pm
he also likes 'em young, but at least they're female :rolleyes:Manhattan Buckeye;973621 wrote:I don't think Amendola is doing his client any favors, particularly with his own reported history.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/college/jerry-sandusky-s-lawyer-joe-amendola-a-16-year-old-client-pregnant-married-article-1.977873
[LEFT]
[/LEFT]Joe Amendola, the State College, Pa., attorney representing accused child molester Jerry Sandusky, has an interesting back story himself: He got a teen-age client pregnant during the mid-1990s.
Amendola, 63, married the girl several years after the birth of their child, The Daily reported Monday night, citing documents filed at the Centre County, Pa., courthouse.
Amendola represented a 16-year-old girl then known as Mary Iavasile when she filed an emancipation petition in September 1996, The Daily reported. The emancipation petition said the girl had graduated from high school in two years and held a fulltime job.
The girl gave birth to Amendola's child when she was 17 years old, her mother, Janet Iavasile, said. Amendola would have been about 49 years old at the time. The age of consent in Pennsylvania is 16.
Janet Iavasile said she didn't know the extent of the relationship between her daughter and the attorney. She thought he was more of a mentor than a paramour.
Speedofsand
Posts: 5,529
Nov 15, 2011 2:52pm
But in emails obtained by NBC News, McQueary reportedly wrote: "I did the right thing…you guys know me…the truth is not out there fully…I didn't just turn and run…I made sure it stopped…I had to make quick tough decisions."
Read that full report here.
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/jerry_sandusky_says_showers_wi.html
"I am innocent of those charges," the 67-year-old Sandusky said. "... I could say that I have done some of those things. I have horsed around with kids. I have showered after workouts. I have hugged them, and I have touched their legs without intent of sexual contact."
Read that full report here.
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/jerry_sandusky_says_showers_wi.html
"I am innocent of those charges," the 67-year-old Sandusky said. "... I could say that I have done some of those things. I have horsed around with kids. I have showered after workouts. I have hugged them, and I have touched their legs without intent of sexual contact."
D
dtdtim
Posts: 358
Nov 15, 2011 2:54pm
If McQueary isn't credible then that charge is probably dropped. Too bad for Sandusky that there are 39 others he has to answer for that McQueary did not witness.password;973759 wrote:This could be a big break for Sandusky, because if McQueary lied to the grand jury and changes his story now, he becomes a non-credible witness. I sure as hell hope they are not building this case just off of McQueary's statements and it comes out that it was all a lie about the rape. Maybe McQueary is a pedophile and he exaggerated the story to satisfy his own perverted sexual attraction to young boys.
Insanity defense? I don't really know what other plausible explanation there would be.vball10set;973626 wrote:How he felt putting Sandusky on the air at this time benefits his client is beyond me. I'd really like to hear his reasoning behind it because as far as I'm concerned, in the court of public opinion, he was tried, convicted, and executed.
Laley23
Posts: 29,506
Nov 15, 2011 3:13pm
I just like to know what kind of contact a 50+ year old can make with a 10 year old boy on the leg that isnt sexual?
V
vball10set
Posts: 24,795
Nov 15, 2011 3:18pm
this...."horseing around in the shower" alone with 10 year old boy at 9:30 at night? riiiiiiightLaley23;974158 wrote:I just like to know what kind of contact a 50+ year old can make with a 10 year old boy on the leg that isnt sexual?
Mulva
Posts: 13,650
Nov 15, 2011 3:22pm
Kicking him in the shin?Laley23;974158 wrote:I just like to know what kind of contact a 50+ year old can make with a 10 year old boy on the leg that isnt sexual?
T
Tiernan
Posts: 13,021
Nov 15, 2011 3:51pm
The guy I want to see Costas grill is McQueary (even more than Paterno...which is kinda like watching Dick Clark). I doubt McQ ever steps out in the public light again.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Nov 15, 2011 5:46pm
I played in sports all the way through high school. Never once did a coach hit the showers with the kids. If one did everyone would have been creeped out and the coach would not have made it through the next day.vball10set;974165 wrote:this...."horseing around in the shower" alone with 10 year old boy at 9:30 at night? riiiiiiight
D
dat dude
Posts: 1,564
Nov 15, 2011 5:50pm
SIAP, but McQueary will give his take on CBS Evening News tonight.
Mulva
Posts: 13,650
Nov 15, 2011 6:27pm
The plot just keeps getting thicker.McQueary, a Penn State wide receivers coach who was placed on administrative leave Friday, also told a friend in an email that he stopped the alleged rape and discussed it with police.
In the email, first obtained and reported Tuesday by The Morning Call of Allentown, Pa., McQueary said he "did have discussions with police and with the official at the university in charge of police" after the alleged incident.
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Nov 15, 2011 6:35pm
I watched it, that was an interview, he gave his take?????? McQueary said nothing other than "I can't talk right now" and then walked back in house. smhdat dude;974290 wrote:SIAP, but McQueary will give his take on CBS Evening News tonight.
V
vball10set
Posts: 24,795
Nov 15, 2011 6:39pm
this ain't gonna' end wellMulva;974327 wrote:The plot just keeps getting thicker.
Skyhook79
Posts: 5,739
Nov 15, 2011 6:45pm
Could someone please post the full 15 second video of the CBS interview where McQueary tells his take?