Reply With Quote
Is your inner child in peril?
Is your inner child in peril?
Just checkin' assholes, wanted to start with Dr. Havoc. C'mon, Doc, tell me true:::are you still advocating laughing about child molestation?
Knew you'd show up, but wheres the bandwagon s like blessings at?
Last edited by jjktkk; 12-27-2011 at 01:33 AM.
Bob Costas: Mr. Sandusky, there is a 40-count indictment, the grand jury report contains specific details. There are multiple accusers, multiple eyewitnesses to various aspects of the abuse. A reasonable person says, "Where there is this much smoke, there must be plenty of fire." What do you say?
Jerry Sandusky: I say that I am innocent of those charges.
Costas: Innocent? Completely innocent and falsely accused in every aspect?
Sandusky: Well, I could say that, you know, 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. But, um... uh ... So, if you look at it that way ... uh ... there are things that ... that ... uh ... wouldn't ... uh, you know, would be accurate.
Costas: Are you denying that you had any inappropriate sexual contact with any of these underage boys?
Sandusky: Yes, I am.
Costas: Never touched their genitals? Never engaged in oral sex?
Sandusky: Right.
Costas: What about Mike McQueary? The grad assistant, who in 2002 walked into the shower where he says in specific detail that you were forcibly raping a boy who appeared to be 10 or 11 years old, that his hands were up against the shower wall, and he heard rhythmic slap, slap, slapping sounds, and he described that as a rape?
Sandusky: I would say that that's false.
Costas: What would be his motive to lie?
Sandusky: You'd have to ask him that.
Costas: What did happen in the shower the night that Mike McQueary happened upon you and the young boy?
Sandusky: OK, we were showering and ... and horsing around. And he actually turned all the showers on and was actually sliding across the floor and um and we were, as I recall, possibly, like, snapping a towel and horseplay.
Costas: In 1998, a mother confronts you about taking a shower with her son and inappropriately touching him. Two detectives eavesdrop on her conversations with you and you admit that, maybe, your private parts touched her son. What happened there?
Sandusky: I can't exactly recall what was said there. In terms of, uh, what I did say was that if he felt that way then I was wrong.
Costas: During one of those conversations, you said, "I understand. I was wrong. I wish I could get forgiveness," speaking now with the mother, "I know I won't get it from you. I wish I were dead." A guy falsely accused, or a guy whose actions have been misinterpreted, doesn't respond that way. Does he?
Sandusky: I don't know. I didn't say, to my recollection, that "I wish I were dead." I was hopeful that we could reconcile things.
Costas: Shortly after that, in 2000, a janitor said that he saw you performing oral sex on a young boy in the showers in the Penn State locker facility. Did that happen?
Sandusky: No.
Costas: How could somebody think they saw something as extreme and shocking as that when it hadn't occurred? And what would possibly be their motivation to fabricate it?
Sandusky: You'd have to ask them.
Costas: It seems that, if all of these accusations are false, you are the unluckiest and most persecuted man that any of us has ever heard about.
Sandusky: [Laughs] I don't know what you want me to say. I don't think that these have been the best days of my life.
Costas: To your knowledge, did Joe Paterno have any information regarding objectionable activities on your part prior to that report in 2002?
Sandusky: My... I can't totally answer that question. My answer would be, "no."
Costas: Did Joe Paterno, at any time, ever speak to you directly about your behavior?
Sandusky: No.
Costas: Never?
Sandusky: No.
Costas: He never asked you about what you might have done?
Sandusky: No.
Costas: He never asked you if needed help, if you needed counseling?
Sandusky: No, no.
Costas: Never expressed disapproval of any kind?
Sandusky: No.
Costas: How do you feel about what has happened to Penn State and to Joe Paterno? And to the Penn State football program? And your part in it?
Sandusky: How would you think I would feel about a university that I attended? About people that I worked with? About people that I care so much about? How do you think I would feel about it? I feel horrible.
Costas: You feel horrible. Do you feel culpable?
Sandusky: I'm not sure what I know what you mean?
Costas: Do you feel guilty?
Sandusky: Guilty?
Costas: Do you feel as if it's your fault
Sandusky: No. I don't think it's my fault. I've obviously played a part in this.
Costas: How would you define the part you played? What are you willing to concede that you've done that was wrong and that you wish you had not done?
Sandusky: Well, in retrospect, I ... you know ... I shouldn't have showered with those kids. And, some...
Costas: That's it?
Sandusky: Yeah, that's what hits me the most.
Costas: Are you a pedophile?
Sandusky: No.
Costas: Are you sexually attracted to young boys? To underage boys?
Sandusky: Am I sexually attracted to underage boys?
Costas: Yes.
Sandusky: Sexually attracted? You know, I enjoy young people. I love to be around them. I ... but, no, I am not sexually attracted to young boys.
Costas: Obviously, you're en led to a presumption of innocence and you will receive a vigorous defense. On the other hand, there is a tremendous amount of information out there and fair-minded, common sense people have concluded that you are guilty of monstrous acts. And they are particularly unforgiving with the type of crimes that have been alleged here. And, so, millions of Americans who didn't know Jerry Sandusky's name until a week ago now regard you not only as a criminal but -- I say this I think in a considered way -- but as some sort of a monster. How do you respond to them?
Sandusky: I don't know what I can say or what I could say that would make anybody feel any different now. I would just say that if somehow people could hang on until my attorney has a chance to fight you know for my innocence. But that's about all I could ask right now and you know obviously it's a huge challenge.
After the game, talking about the Kings win...
“It’s not a rivalry,” Kobe Bryant said. “We beat them every year. Oh my God. I don’t care if they beat us tonight. I like (Kings owners Joe and Gavin Maloof). I hope they enjoy this.”
CROFL.... all I heard from Laker fans was how stupid the Chris Paul trade was and how they wanted no part of it, and now 2 weeks later it's constant ing about the trade not going down. It's like Fabbs had hundreds of bas children and taught them how to create threads.
You guys are only catching on NOW?
The rigging has been obvious since 2002.
Currently, 22 out of 30 teams lose money.
These are the expensive toys of very rich boys from the corporate world who got very rich by cheating when necessary in order to get ahead.
Investment bankers expect the government to bail them out if they lose all their money, and it has.
These owners expect Stern to do the same for them. They make bad deals and then demand protection.
The sad fact of the matter is that when you are the #1 most hated team, there is a profit to be made on screwing you over publicly. Fans of other teams go crazy for it.
Kobe was the most hated player for years and wasn't permitted to win again until he rehabilitated his image at the Beijing Olympics.
As Bill Russell said, it's a game of entertainment now.
Other franchises do not have the history of the Lakers, with Chick Hearn giving props to the other teams and not being a sycophant homer. WE don't want to win through a rig job.
Other teams' fans are only too happy to win through a rig job. Watching the Lakers lose is what they crave, it doesn't matter if it's not a sporting contest.
Unless the NBA is administered by an impartial third party, it will continue to have these conflicts of interest.
response to above post:
Exactly... You get it. I'll take it even a step further and say this has been going on since before Jordan got suspended for gambling for a year and a half under the guise of "retirement". Jordan's ring total was inflated as well. Ask a player from the '93 Knicks and '97 Jazz off record if the Bulls won legitimately, You'll probably get some interesting answers. Shaq and Kobe even benefitted from it as well (see: 4th qtr Game 7 2000 WCF and the Entire 2002 WCF). Stern was so livid at Kobe about Colorado that he ordered the most blatant rig job of the Stern-era in the form of the 2004 Finals (Which will forever have an asterisk by it in my mind). When Stern says he knows where the bodies are buried, He really means it.
Never said such.
Expect Lakers to lose to a second devision Greek team when Kobe shoots 28 times. He should be a clear 2nd option when Bynum returns. Bynum&Gasol should take 40 shots a game between them and Kobe no more than 16 imho. But it will never happen, Kobe being a chucker that he is, and the Lakers will suffer from that until he retires.
Kobe: 5
tired old bag Duncan: 4
is the way to suffer.
Kobe watch:
FGs - 10/24
3PT - 0/4
TO - 2
BA - 1
Boiled down:::
Kobe: 5
tired old bag Duncan: 4
Let's live in the present my friend.
My ass.
Present? past is much brighter for the spurs as well ...
Come take a walk with me... you and I, we'll leave the dynasties behind and venture into the harsh and lonely future of rebuilding.
This I know, my friend.
Nice win last night regardless.
Speak for yourself.
Yeah manu looked good. If the Spurs had a legit big-man to put next to this version of Duncan then I'd feel confident with them at least putting in a decent playoff run. It's sad that they're a small ball team now.
Yeah you probably want nothing to do with rebuilding. A few more losses and your pussy ass will probably disappear. Not only from Spurstalk, but also from the Lakers bandwagon.
Manu is nails ...
Everyone lamenting Paul and that did hurt us, but I would take Manu right now. If you put them in the same backcourt though aging both can handle and shoot well enough to make it work.
But yall won't let him go and we have nothing to offer ...
My T-Pups are gonna take a on the Lakers and Spurs
NB= f
Manu is like Jesus in SA. He's not going anywhere. I hope Tony finishes his career in SA, but I can see him being dealt within the next couple seasons. It's too bad the bea*ners in SA don't like him for some strange reason. Lakers should have made a play for Tony.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
