Hard to believe his lawyer(s) was/were aware of what he was doing in talking to the media, apparently without legal representation. There is No Way in HELL that he should be talking about anything to anyone. Making things worse for himself could hardly be imagined, but by talking, that is exactly what he's doing! I pity any lawyer who has him as a client.

What's that quote? Something along the lines of "It is better to remain quiet and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." In this case substitute another word for "fool" and you've got my take on it.

I am waiting for the video/photographic evidence to surface. That is a sickening thought, I know, but in reality, I have read enough not to believe that it exists, somewhere. Typical for these crimes, from what I've read.

Per NPR this morning, his lawyer was in on the the set with Costas when Costas talked with Sandusky. This seems to be part of his lawyer's (insane) strategy.

That's a strategy? Whoa. *shakes head, walks away in disbelief* Thanks for the clarification, sir. I will pay better attention before hitting the keys.

His lawyer says they found the boy that McQuerey allegedly saw being raped, and the now grown victim supposedly denies the whole thing. Ummm... Not sure I believe that the victim would feel comfortable when approached by the lawyer of his alleged rapist. Also, he may not wish to come forward and let people know he'd been anally raped. The shame of that can be overwhelming. What a quagmire.

I heard a few clips and my mind was blown.

If you want to proclaim your innocence, how do you stumble on "Are you sexually attracted to underage boys"?

It's the oft-forgotten home run strategy of "BE SO INCOMPETENT THAT HE RECEIVES NEW TRIAL FOR INEFFECTIVE COUNSEL, HOPE EVERYONE JUST FORGETS." It's audacious, but so was Waterloo. Wait.

Yeah, I actually thought of that. It still boggles my mind.

i thought about that when I wrote that.:p

Have you all seen the reports about Sandusky's attorney?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/1...n_1095005.html

Post-gazette.com Sandusky claims innocence

I'd just link it but I'm on the phone.

Something really rubbed me the wrong way about that article.

You can't make this stuff up. Unbelieveable.

So the pedophile has retained a pedophile lawyer?

You really can't make this stuff up...

Exaaaaactly.

From what I've read today, Bob Costas actually believed he was going to have an interview with Sandusky's lawyer, and at the last minute, his lawyer asked Costas, "Do you want to talk to Sandusky?" I also understand that the question quoted here was asked on the fly.

Sandusky's response was disturbing... Consistent with the rest of the interview.

What exactly?

Just curious...

ETA: This isn't the exact article I read earlier, but it essentially says the same thing:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...4cbcf054599a10

Interesting. Joe Paterno signed his house over to his wife for $1 in July

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/sp...ife-for-1.html


DaffyKD