The prosecution knew it.
The incident was a real incident. (I was a witness.)
It was used to try and convict Penn State.
Jerry Sandusky was just the fall guy.
There was no incident between Sandusky and McQueary in 2001.
McQueary couldn't have reported the incident about Sandusky in 2001 because it didn't have anything to do with Sandusky.
The truth about the 2001 incident has never been told, yet.
No one remembered it. But I did, because I was there.
EXCERPT: http://donrobbinsblog.com/2013/05/24/penn-state-info-related-royers/
The investigators claimed that the incident was about Sandusky, but it wasn't. They mentioned the incident and the date-2001- in trail, when the prosecution claimed that McQueary told them he heard the sounds of someone being raped before he went into the shower room and saw Sandusky. McQueary said that he never told them he heard anything like that. Charges were never proven against Sandusky concerning the incident in 2001. Sandusky was never convicted of those charges. The witness that claimed Sandusky raped him in the shower room in 2001 was not charged with giving false testimony. Even though he lied and the court knew it. Other claims against Sandusky were made by individuals and most of the claims were completely absurd. He was convicted on hearsay, even after the false testimony. And even after the matter from 2001 was dropped.
It was possible to find out that the incident from 2001 had nothing to do with Sandusky but the judge let the falsified evidence into the initial investigation.
EXCERPT: http://donrobbinsblog.com/
THE POINT.
THE MATTER WAS THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE TO KNOW WHERE THE INFORMATION CAME FROM AND UNDERSTAND THAT IT DID NOT APPLY TO SANDUSKY.
THE MATTER WAS THAT IT WAS POSSIBLE TO KNOW WHERE THE INFORMATION CAME FROM AND UNDERSTAND THAT IT DID NOT APPLY TO SANDUSKY.
No comments:
Post a Comment