Sandusky Appeal Hearing Article
- Thread starter Open Mind 1
- Start date
Was Jonelle Eshbach ever accused of falsifying the GJ Presentment that MM says he disputed?
Well there is a damning email in the public domain.
I believe there is an email from Esbach to MvQ where she writes “I know some of this is not true”. That may not be an exact quote, but she admitted it was not a truthfule representation of events.
Last edited:
Not only admitted it was sketchy, but suggested he remain silent.
Right, but isn't that unethical, and if so, was she sanctioned in any way?
True, too
I don’t think so.
However, so many legal shenanigans were overlooked and ignored it only adds to the travesty of the trial.
What’s your point/question? Everything was candy and roses because she wasn’t cited?
Some people don't like it when innocent people are imprisoned.
Ummm...no, quite the opposite. I don't think that any of these people should gotten away with any shenanigans at all and should face the appropriate consequences for their actions as officers of the court should be.
I think throughout this thread certain key points aren’t being discussed. You asked the question how many of the 53 other victims are recanting. According to the article Vic 10 said he was coached by the police. He also says he never underwent repressed memory therapy which should be easy to verify.My question back to you is of the 53 ( if that is areal number) how many were paid based on accusations only with no police involvement? How many others received coaching and explanation with huge payout at the end from police, to No Bare feet’s post how many victims had completely contradictory testimony until coached by police or greedy lawyers. I live out of state and IMO it is quite possible that JS could have abused a much much smaller group and for that SHOULD STILL BE IN JAIL. However the way the police lawyers judges second mile and the University handled this painted PennState as some child abusing sleazebag place where everyone looked the other way. Much bigger than just Joe’s legacy. I think both tOSU Michigan and MSU scandals and their relative perception reinforce that. If the truth helps spread sunshine I am 100% for it regardless of JS innocence or guilt.
Sounds like the *best* outcome the defendant could reasonably hope for is a vacation of counts related to V10.
Interesting to see the story being picked up by ABC, CBS, NY Post, etc.
I recall a column by Dan Wetzel when attorney Andreozzi and detective Leiter were caught talking on tape about leading a witness after previously testifying that they had never done such a thing. They were literally caught in a lie.
Still, that doesn't undo the investigation in 1998 when Sandusky said he wished he were dead, nor McQueary's report in 2001, nor the report to Jack Raykovitz/The Second Mile, nor Joe's testimony, nor some of the testimony from the accusers before they were coached (one said Jerry touched his privates in the shower but moved away and Jerry stopped).
Not to mention Jerry's promise that he was going to take the stand and testify, which turned out to be a bluff.
I decided it was not worth defending Jerry's innocence when he himself refused to do so. Maybe if Jerry took the stand and addressed each accuser by name, like, "Johnny, I pulled you off the streets and gave you a second chance. I coached you, I mentored you, I took you into my home and family. You and I both know that I never touched you inappropriately in any way. After all I did for you, how could you say I did these horrible things to you?"
Instead, Jerry sat it out.
JMHO.
Interesting to see the story being picked up by ABC, CBS, NY Post, etc.
I recall a column by Dan Wetzel when attorney Andreozzi and detective Leiter were caught talking on tape about leading a witness after previously testifying that they had never done such a thing. They were literally caught in a lie.
Still, that doesn't undo the investigation in 1998 when Sandusky said he wished he were dead, nor McQueary's report in 2001, nor the report to Jack Raykovitz/The Second Mile, nor Joe's testimony, nor some of the testimony from the accusers before they were coached (one said Jerry touched his privates in the shower but moved away and Jerry stopped).
Not to mention Jerry's promise that he was going to take the stand and testify, which turned out to be a bluff.
I decided it was not worth defending Jerry's innocence when he himself refused to do so. Maybe if Jerry took the stand and addressed each accuser by name, like, "Johnny, I pulled you off the streets and gave you a second chance. I coached you, I mentored you, I took you into my home and family. You and I both know that I never touched you inappropriately in any way. After all I did for you, how could you say I did these horrible things to you?"
Instead, Jerry sat it out.
JMHO.
Last edited:
The victims in this case were coached by investigators, the prosecution, LE, and psychologists to state that Jerry molested them. The repressed memory crap was disproven.
We've seen the interviews--we know why he didn't take the stand
You really are FOS....and everyone here knows it.
I only care about the truth....sad that you don't....and no, you don't already know the truth, being FOS that you are.
You don’t care about the truth
You care about Paterno'd legacy and Penn State football not the truth or the victims nor Sandusky.
And yes we know the truth...he's a pedophile. It's not debatable.
The "recanting" will grab the headlines. And capture the attention of the low engagement/low information folks - which is 99.99% of the population, of course.
Heck, in this very thread we see someone who is probably more informed than 99% of the population, who is citing "53 other victims" and wondering how many of them are "recanting". I am sure the poster is well-meaning, and no disrespect intended, but there were what - 8? - something like that, folks who gave testimony? Maybe less than that?
But the issue of importance is not the headline-grabbing "recantation" per se (assuming that comes to pass at the hearing next month). The issue is WHY he would have told a story that he is now saying is hogwash (again, assuming that is what comes to pass at the hearing).
THAT question is what then brings the entire prosecutorial/judicial effort into question. THAT is what becomes meaningful.
I fully expect this court, and this judge, to completely ignore/whitewash those issues. Why would anyone expect the judicial actions to date to suddenly morph into actions that illustrated any degree of curiosity or search for "truth"? In a broad and consistent pattern of both prosecutorial and judicial misconduct in every aspect of this affair - and every situation even tangential to the core issue (eg: The Curley/Spanier/Schultz situations, and the PSU BOT/Paterno situations).
Time will tell.
Heck, in this very thread we see someone who is probably more informed than 99% of the population, who is citing "53 other victims" and wondering how many of them are "recanting". I am sure the poster is well-meaning, and no disrespect intended, but there were what - 8? - something like that, folks who gave testimony? Maybe less than that?
But the issue of importance is not the headline-grabbing "recantation" per se (assuming that comes to pass at the hearing next month). The issue is WHY he would have told a story that he is now saying is hogwash (again, assuming that is what comes to pass at the hearing).
THAT question is what then brings the entire prosecutorial/judicial effort into question. THAT is what becomes meaningful.
I fully expect this court, and this judge, to completely ignore/whitewash those issues. Why would anyone expect the judicial actions to date to suddenly morph into actions that illustrated any degree of curiosity or search for "truth"? In a broad and consistent pattern of both prosecutorial and judicial misconduct in every aspect of this affair - and every situation even tangential to the core issue (eg: The Curley/Spanier/Schultz situations, and the PSU BOT/Paterno situations).
Time will tell.
Yes, I saw somewhere that the judge is limiting the scope to exclude things like prosecutorial conduct, though it is interesting that Frank Fina has been called to testify.
There are two reasons for this:
1) The writing was on the wall. Being a Sandusky victim was going to be a lucrative business.
2) Investigators, therapists, etc. all operated under the assumption that Jerry was a pedophile. So convincing each kid to testify was supposedly a virtuous cause that was going to put a monster in prison. Unless, of course, we wasn't a pedophile...
Aaron Fisher's lie got the ball rolling. His lie put everyone in the mindset that Jerry was a monster. Then a tip about McQueary witnessing something put everything into overdrive. But McQueary's account was tainted once he ""knew" Jerry was abusing kids. Then it was an avalanche of BS with lawyers and therapists hunting for victims that didn't exist.
Wait, ABC News doesn't care what Lando has to say?
Not sure what this means...
It's not a big deal but it gets hits and will create the "Pedo State" stuff all over again because they'll read nonsense from our fan base like in this thread
At least some of the "fake Sandusky supporters" here comprehend that he's not getting a new trial and this is only regarding one person's testimony. It changes nothing but alas "redemption for Joe" starts again
This is the equivalent of not comprehending misleading headlines and clicking on an article.
You trying to tell me what I do or do not care about is why you are FOS....and everyone here knows it....and that's not debatable.
Original...try all you want but you're transparent.
I'm FOS for not supporting a CONVICTED PEDOPHILE. Yeah seems good. Glad that's the hill you want to die on.
New York Times...
“I was misled repeatedly during the process, particularly by prosecutor Joe McGettigan,” Victim 10 said in the affidavit. “I now regret my role in facilitating what I have come to view as a deeply flawed prosecution.”
“I was led to believe that failing to testify in the manner prosecutors expected would allow a dangerous man to escape justice,” Victim 10 wrote, later saying he was unaware that his statements “would be used to secure a de facto life sentence for Mr. Sandusky.”
Victim 10 said he was coached during pretrial meetings, one of which lasted approximately six hours, where he was asked repeatedly to reframe his account until his responses aligned with what appeared to be desired by the prosecution team.
“I ask the courts, and any fair-minded reader, to consider that my testimony may have reflected not willful falsehood, but a tragic convergence of memory uncertainty, professional suggestion, prosecutorial coercion and my own vulnerability,” he wrote.
“I was misled repeatedly during the process, particularly by prosecutor Joe McGettigan,” Victim 10 said in the affidavit. “I now regret my role in facilitating what I have come to view as a deeply flawed prosecution.”
“I was led to believe that failing to testify in the manner prosecutors expected would allow a dangerous man to escape justice,” Victim 10 wrote, later saying he was unaware that his statements “would be used to secure a de facto life sentence for Mr. Sandusky.”
Victim 10 said he was coached during pretrial meetings, one of which lasted approximately six hours, where he was asked repeatedly to reframe his account until his responses aligned with what appeared to be desired by the prosecution team.
“I ask the courts, and any fair-minded reader, to consider that my testimony may have reflected not willful falsehood, but a tragic convergence of memory uncertainty, professional suggestion, prosecutorial coercion and my own vulnerability,” he wrote.
Chi Town nice to hear from the old timers. To be a little fairer your first paragraph could have added. "Still doesn't undo the 1998 investigation WHICH WAS INVESTIGATED AND DROPPED BY THE POLICE to which JS wished he were dead. In also could have said "it did not include the report to Raykovitz/The Second mile BY CURLEY TO WHICH RAYKOVITZ, JERRY'S BOSS AND HEAD OF SECOND MILE SAID TO CURLEY IF YOUR ARE SUGGESTING JERRY IS A PEDOPHILE YOU ARE CRAZY". Just a thought.
I wish Jerry would have done what you suggest. My guess is the vic's lawyers would have whispered in their ear. You have couple million $ reasons not to answer that question.
Great point on the 53 vics. I presumed he was suggesting 53 were the number of people PSU paid just for making an accusation regardless of how legit and zero vetting. That helped set narrative for Ped State U. and university of Ped State.
you don't seem to understand "the Pedo State" is much bigger the Joe and that narrative is fed by not vetting the claims doing it honestly and shining on the truth. As i said earlier JS could have abused 1 child and he is where he belongs but Penn State university doesn't and didn't deserve the treatment it got and continues to get. Getting back to today and football, if you think this episode hasn't affected our NIL with mega donors you are sorry mistaken. These 8 figure net worth folks don't need there friends asking why they are donating to Ped State.
Got stuck in the mud [from an old reference from one of your adversaries about your driveway.]. Where do the posters from the old politics board end up. Anywhere?
People talk about "culture" all the time - and, particularly wrt the football program, folks eat that sh&t up (even if much of the time it is jibberish)
Well, I will tell you that the one HUGE cultural shift at PSU - the real one, that dominates to this day, is the culture that changed when the Board and many of the powers-that-be jumped headlong like a flock of lemmings into the "Sandusky Ocean".
That cultural change - and, spoiler alert, it is WORSE today than it was 14 years ago, 10 years ago, or 6 years ago - has laid serious damage onto Penn State and everything it would hope to be.
It is not all due to "Sandusky", but that was without a doubt the catalyst for it all.
Well, I will tell you that the one HUGE cultural shift at PSU - the real one, that dominates to this day, is the culture that changed when the Board and many of the powers-that-be jumped headlong like a flock of lemmings into the "Sandusky Ocean".
That cultural change - and, spoiler alert, it is WORSE today than it was 14 years ago, 10 years ago, or 6 years ago - has laid serious damage onto Penn State and everything it would hope to be.
It is not all due to "Sandusky", but that was without a doubt the catalyst for it all.
You can go to the Clemson On3 site. They still have a free politics board, and it's kind funny as you transplants from FSU and Iowa along with some PSU guys and of course the Clemson guys. LB is there with the same schtick.
Latest
-
01
BWI
Projecting Penn State's injury report heading into the Nittany Lions' season opener
-
02
BWI
Penn State wants to play its backup quarterback; a note on two new starters, more takeaways from Tuesday before Marshall
-
03
BWI
Penn State - Marshall visitor list features several recruits who could earn an offer
-
04
BWI
Matt Campbell on Cooper, Tatsch and Burkle: Where injured Penn State players stand for week one; will anyone have a snap count?
-
05
BWI
Penn State position battles updates: Taylor Mouser on the RB2 job, receiver rotation, and more before Marshall