Post by honeybadger on Jun 21, 2012 14:27:25 GMT -5
Has anyone been following or checking in on it?
For some reason, I feel like it went really fast. I was reading a few articles and saw something posted on the P&CE board and I am now genuinely worried that he will walk. I'm sick to my stomach for the victims.
This is the thread that made me say WTF/Holy shit, if he walks....
It sucks but the Judge is trying to prevent an appeal and subjecting the victims to this shit all over again. Now we just have to hope there isn't one closet pedophile in the Jury.
Post by honeybadger on Jun 21, 2012 16:24:12 GMT -5
I get what the judge was saying but in the articles that contained more excerpts of what the judge said, it just seemed like it was REALLY being hammered home as if to maybe make the jurors doubt. IDK. I get wanting to avoid any appeal issues. I just REALLY want him to pay for his crimes. There is no doubt, IMO.
I'm right there with you. I don't believe for one hot fucking second that she didn't know. Or, at BARE MINIMUM, suspect the fuckery. Ugh.
Just hearing the quotes from her testimony make me think she knew it was going on, possibly even walked in on it. I suspect he's an abuser in more ways than one and has got her all wrapped up.
I wonder if Sandusky's wife will still be so supportive with the knowledge of the molestation of her son. Part of me wants to believe that this information would change her stance but another part of me knows from experience with a friend that this isn't always the case. Her father raped her for years and her family purposely stayed in the dark and then her mom lectured her for airing the family's dirty laundry when CPS got involved. She revoked all of her statements because of her mom. Her dad is, and has always been, a free man.
Post by crimewatcher on Jun 21, 2012 20:58:27 GMT -5
I think the Wife has purposefully turned a blind eye and probably would leave him alone with the boys so she felt less guilty. Like if I don't actually see it happening it's not happening.
Post by amaristella on Jun 21, 2012 21:14:14 GMT -5
I didn't read the article, just their comments and concerns about the quoted jury instructions. My mom was on the jury for a criminal case once. The guy beat his girlfriend then killed her, dumped her body and set it on fire. The instructions she was given as a juror didn't sound all too different in tone and substance. In this particular case the guy was convicted and sentenced to life in prison even though most of the physical evidence was destroyed by fire.
Oh, and it matters what the charges being decided are. In the case above the jurors were mainly being asked to decide what degree of murder had happened, whether it was premeditated or not.
I wonder if Sandusky's wife will still be so supportive with the knowledge of the molestation of her son. Part of me wants to believe that this information would change her stance but another part of me knows from experience with a friend that this isn't always the case. Her father raped her for years and her family purposely stayed in the dark and then her mom lectured her for airing the family's dirty laundry when CPS got involved. She revoked all of her statements because of her mom. Her dad is, and has always been, a free man.
I wonder if Sandusky's wife will still be so supportive with the knowledge of the molestation of her son. Part of me wants to believe that this information would change her stance but another part of me knows from experience with a friend that this isn't always the case. Her father raped her for years and her family purposely stayed in the dark and then her mom lectured her for airing the family's dirty laundry when CPS got involved. She revoked all of her statements because of her mom. Her dad is, and has always been, a free man.