• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Penn State Cult (Joe Knew)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Hstead said:
You guys need to listen to the podcast.

I heard this guy first on Zack Smiths podcast which is very good and has a ton of inside buckeye info.

Don’t buy into all the media bs. This guy actually did a great deal of research and he blows a lot of what was “common knowledge” totally out of the water with facts. Mcqueery actually never testified that he saw them having sex. His story changes a bunch. His original story has been blown apart by Ziegler.

Ziegler is not a paterno fan nor penn st fan. The paternity family, mostly Todd, hates Ziegler.

Please listen to the podcast then come back and give me your opinions. I’ve only listened to the first four so far but he raises a ton of doubt and questions with facts on his side not bs spun by the media.
Click to expand...
Ziegler may or may not be a Paterno fan, but he is certainly a “mainstream media is the devil” guy. In the interest of keeping politics out of this thread, I won’t discuss the specifics of his other project, but suffice it to say that he has one specific agenda, and he is willing to bend anything…and I mean anything…to get to the singular conclusion he wants. He very well may not care about Paterno, Penn State, the victims (or whatever you call them) or anything else…he cares about his media-driven conclusion.

And I have to say, if a persons defense of a pee doe is that they’re a “chaste pee doe” then they ain’t getting very far with most people.
 
Upvote 0
Bucklion said:
Ziegler may or may not be a Paterno fan, but he is certainly a “mainstream media is the devil” guy. In the interest of keeping politics out of this thread, I won’t discuss the specifics of his other project, but suffice it to say that he has one specific agenda, and he is willing to bend anything…and I mean anything…to get to the singular conclusion he wants. He very well may not care about Paterno, Penn State, the victims (or whatever you call them) or anything else…he cares about his media-driven conclusion.

And I have to say, if a persons defense of a pee doe is that they’re a “chaste pee doe” then they ain’t getting very far with most people.
Click to expand...
@Buckeyeskickbuttocks (or whoever with experience in lawyerings) correct me if I’m wrong, because I’ve mostly seen it referenced humorously in various forms of entertainment, but aren’t there very specific mechanisms in place to prevent media influence over the outcomes of trials?
 
Upvote 0
Buckeye86 said:
@Buckeyeskickbuttocks (or whoever with experience in lawyerings) correct me if I’m wrong, because I’ve mostly seen it referenced humorously in various forms of entertainment, but aren’t there very specific mechanisms in place to prevent media influence over the outcomes of trials?
Click to expand...
The jury selection process typically includes asking prospective jurors if they have any knowledge of the case. Likewise, they are instructed to render their verdict based on evidence elicited in Court. The jury can also be sequestered. Nothing is fail safe, but to answer you question, yes, care is taken to reduce or hopefully eliminate external influence
 
Upvote 0
Buckeye86 said:
@Buckeyeskickbuttocks (or whoever with experience in lawyerings) correct me if I’m wrong, because I’ve mostly seen it referenced humorously in various forms of entertainment, but aren’t there very specific mechanisms in place to prevent media influence over the outcomes of trials?
Click to expand...

Buckeyeskickbuttocks said:
The jury selection process typically includes asking prospective jurors if they have any knowledge of the case. Likewise, they are instructed to render their verdict based on evidence elicited in Court. The jury can also be sequestered. Nothing is fail safe, but to answer you question, yes, care is taken to reduce or hopefully eliminate external influence
Click to expand...

Juries are at perfect liberty to come up with whatever verdict they like, based on any criteria or no criteria. This is, to my understanding, called jury nullification. Lawyers are forbidden from arguing for it (or even from mentioning it if I recall correctly), but it's a very real thing. That is how some pretty high-profile cases have ended with shocking verdicts.

No... jury nullification did not happen at the Sandusky trial.

Did McQueary or whatever his name is come off as a bit squirrely? Yes
Were there other facts that seemed weird? Yes

Was there also a gigantic pile of other evidence that you have to ignore if you want to point to a couple of question marks to question the verdict? Absolutely yes

Pointing at the weakest parts of ANY prosecution's case and saying that these disprove the whole case is like scraping some paint off of a safe and claiming to have cracked it.
 
Upvote 0
Mariotwins said:
Leave it to the Pedsters at BWI to compare molestation cases instead of being angry/disappointed/disgusted that they happened
Click to expand...

Pedsters live in a alternate world of their own where a good "That child molesting was worse than our child molesting" argument is perfectly reasonable
 
Upvote 0
Mariotwins said:
Leave it to the Pedsters at BWI to compare molestation cases instead of being angry/disappointed/disgusted that they happened
Click to expand...

I just came from reading the thread over there and that's exactly how it reads to me also.

Side note: amazing how many cultists still think the whole PSU scandal was much ado about nothing.

Or maybe it isn't amazing.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
buckeyemania11 said:
Pedsters live in a alternate world of their own where a good "That child molesting was worse than our child molesting" argument is perfectly reasonable
Click to expand...

BuckyKatt said:
I just came from reading the thread over there and that's exactly how it reads to me also.

Side note: amazing how many cultists still think the whole PSU scandal was much ado about nothing.

Or maybe it isn't amazing.
Click to expand...

It's kind of like, "Our 63-14 beat-down on Ohio State was better than Ohio State's 63-14 beat-down on us."
 
Upvote 0
These guys are funny. Three of the top 8 threads on BWI right now are about sex abuse scandals in other places. There's Michigan, Chicago Blackhawks, and LSU.
I guess if there are more sex abuse scandals, it diminishes the one they had...?
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top