Jerry Sandusky, 80, is a victim of Pennsylvania’s justice system. People think Sandusky must be guilty, because there were ten alleged “victims” of underage sexual abuse. Of the 10, only eight appeared at trial. All were over the age of 18 by the time they testified. Six were over 21. None ever reported abuse when it allegedly occurred.
Due Process
Judge Cleland decided Sandusky did not have the right to confront two of the “victims.” The jury did not know their names. Even the judge did not know their names. They were mystery victims.
One of these absent victims never existed. The other hid during the trial so the defense would not call him, and simultaneously he would not lose his chance of making millions from Penn State. He hid because he had told police, newspapers, and through a sworn affidavit that Sandusky had never abused him. Then he met with a civil lawyer, Andrew Shubin, who persuaded him he was throwing away millions. So he hid. And he collected $6.9 million, which he split with his lawyer. “Victim” #2 is is Allan Myers.
Prosecutorial Misconduct
The prosecutor, Joe McGettigan, lied to the jury when he said the identity of “Victim #2” (Myers) was only known to God – unless, of course, McGettigan thought he was God. He played God over the lives of several people. From my perspective, McGettigan acted more like a devil.

Origins of the Accusation
McGettigan came late to the lynching of Jerry Sandusky.

The case began with a 15-year-old boy lying to his mother. The lad probably did not understand the enormity of his lie, or the consequences. He had lied many times to his mother and got away with it. He did not intend this lie to destroy so many lives, including his own.
He just wanted to spend the night with a friend, smoke marijuana, try to get a teenage girl for sex and, in the absence of a girl, watch porn – all things he could not do at Sandusky’s home. To get out of going to Sandusky’s, where his mentor and benefactor would pressure him to honor a commitment he made to help with Sandusky’s charity The Second Mile, and worse, go to church on Sunday, he told his mother that Sandusky made him feel uncomfortable.
He implied that the gregarious Sandusky, who hugged, patted and sometimes embraced neglected and forlorn children – as Fisher had been – had a “creepy” possibly sexual overtone.

This was the boy who was so affection starved just a few years earlier that he would run and jump in Jerry’s lap and cling to him – possibly because the only men his mother ever brought to the house abused him.
This was the boy who wore tatters, whose clothes were rags and ill-fitting. Sandusky, out of mercy, provided him with decent clothes to go to church. And gave him sneakers from the rich supply Nike provided Sandusky as promotional wares. He once gave him a gift of some used golf clubs – a donation from the Second Mile – because Fisher had helped with a golf tournament for the Second Mile.
These gifts were later used against Sandusky, as if it were a sinister ploy to groom Aaron Fisher.

Yes, Sandusky gave him gifts. The boy lamented once that he had no computer. Everyone else in school had a computer, but him. There was a used computer that someone had donated to The Second Mile, and Sandusky gave it to the boy in return for some little service he did helping Sandusky at the charity.
The Lie
In November 2008, Fisher was no longer interested in helping Sandusky help other boys, as he had once been helped. He thought a little lie would work to get his planned evening of fun with his friend. He did not understand that his lie would unleash terrible forces that would bring together unbelievably cruel and selfish people to lie together, not always knowing the others were lying, but always knowing they, themselves, were lying.
An Avalanche of Lies
All eight accusers who testified lied—everyone. Here are the pictures, so you can see the face of lies.

Eight men took the opportunity to make up stories about Jerry Sandusky, knowing their fortunes were assured. Everyone knew before they told their lies on the witness stand that Penn State would deliver millions unto them. All they had to do was lie about Sandusky. They knew they’d be believed. They were encouraged by police and prosecutors driven by ambition, natural cruelty, and an absence of justice in their hearts, and by civil lawyers whose scruples were as low as their clients.
Some accusers justified their lying by the convenient thought that the other accusers were possibly not lying. Since Sandusky is guilty of abusing the others, their reasoning went, they might just as well cash in with a million dollar lie. After all, Penn State could afford it.
Everyone profited off of one innocent man, Jerry Sandusky, who dedicated his time to helping troubled youth. Sandusky cared about helping teens get on the right path, and some of them did.
Among the boys he tried to help were 15-year-old Aaron Fisher. He started the snowball rolling. A lie can be like a snowball. Be careful where you throw it. One little lie told by one little, almost pathological liar who lied to his mother, and everyone was swept away – including he – in an avalanche.
Aaron Fisher, now 30, and in trouble again and again – (arrested, stabbed, caught drunk driving, involved in domestics, exposed for vandalizing cars, etc.) for the fates are catching up with him.
He was born under a bad star. Or had the devil’s curse, or was under some baneful witch’s spell, for he had the inordinately wicked luck to be the start of something colossally unjust.
And while he had his instant fix – his quick reward – yes, he got $7.5 million – split with his attorney – but that money is gone or almost gone – and he must now rue the barren harvest he has sown.
His attorney already faced his day of reckoning. The man who egged him on and showed the lad and his mother the green pathway, not caring much if it was truth or fiction, surrendered his life by committing suicide two years ago.

In our next post, we will show the boy who lied and how he told his lie that destroyed so many and helped none. All the accusers that followed merely riffed off his lie. And Joe McGettigan, that devil of a prosecutor, along with the deceitful prosecutors, Frank Fina and Jonelle Eschbach, were there to help coach them every inch of the way.
Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist, media strategist, publisher, and legal consultant.





Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
I just don’t get why you pick on these children. You call kids liars. Kids don’t lie. These children don’t have a thing to gain by being brave and testifying about a molester.
I’m shocked that you would name these children. Victim 1 is 15 years old. That may seem grown to you but he is still a child. You expose him to reduce at his school and mockery by his little friends
https://www.nbcnews.com/video/the-scandal-sandusky-took-a-liking-to-me-44479555740
https://framingpaterno.com/aaron-fishers-family-posts-facebook-photo-him-laying-cash-giving-middle-finger
I’m still not seeing any evidence that any of these men lied. Where is the evidence? Got any?
these are the words of Allan Myers, the boy who was at the center of the whole story. He called McQueary allegations bullshit. Prosecutors didn’t like his story and hid him
Where is the evidence Jerry Sandusky did anything at all to these accusers? There is NONE – only the words of 20-something-old MEN with no direction in life who saw easy money. Why did these accusers keep going back for YEARS to the Sandusky’s house if they were being raped and made to do other acts as they say? Why were some of them still friendly with Jerry into their 20s? Why did one accuser accompany Jerry to a Penn State game weeks before this case broke? Why did an accuser take his child and fiancé to meet the Sanduskys? These accusers were in their twenties at the time all of this happened and like I stated they saw EASY MONEY.
How’s this for evidence.Directly from one of the liars that stole 9 mil. So he was one of the top paid. Surma and Lubert should both burn in jail. The pussies they were https://www.nbcnews.com/video/the-scandal-sandusky-took-a-liking-to-me-44479555740
It’s only a matter of time.
The enormity of this cover up is vast and goes to powerful players entrenched in the corruption.
Franks steadfast dedication to the truth and persistence on behalf of the innocent will prevail.
Do what if fisher lied. Isn’t there something a little more important ? This is over. Sandusky is convicted. All this does is hurt the boys he abused. More important than that is it hurts Penn state for the sake of on wood man. It’s not worth it.
Drop Sandusky before you hurt Penn state. Some of the trustees are very upset about this. Are you going to keep going until Gov Shapiro gets mad or people stop donatinng?
Sandusky may be innocent so what who gives a crap? His life is not worth the life of a great university.
You act like you’re not going to die. What kind of a man are you ?
“Our University is a better institution today as a result of the work and dedication of our trustees, administrators, faculty, staff and students,” the president stated.
🤣
Is there any evidence that the Prosecutors knew the identity of “Victim #2” prior to arresting Sandusky? I haven’t seen any. However, the identity of “Victim #2” was well known by one participant in this theatrical production — Jerry Sandusky. So yes, when McGettigan told the jury that the identity of “Victim #2” was “known only to God” that was an obvious lie.
The prosecutors and investigators never interviewed Sandusky about anything during
the 3-year investigation prior to indictment. Does that seem odd to anyone? I believe Sandusky spoke with a child services representative at the very beginning regarding the Fisher allegation that Jerry made him feel “uncomfortable”, but nothing after that.
The prosecution could have determined the identity of the “boy in the shower” from
a 10-minute conversation with Sandusky once they learned of the 10-year-old
allegation from Mike McQeary. Instead of confronting Sandusky (or arresting him for assault?), investigators interviewed dozens (hundreds?) of Second Mile
kids about Sandusky. 99.9% of them said Sandusky never touched them, including Allen Myers (the boy in the shower/Victim #2). Myers was interviewed by police because he had been a Second Mile kid, but the police did not know he was “the boy in the shower”.
So, the prosecution indicts Sandusky and goes to trial knowing that Sandusky could call
their bluff at any time by naming Myers as “the boy in the shower” and forcing
Myers to exonerate him? No prosecutor would ever allow themselves to face such potential public humiliation . . . these obvious “loose ends” are dealt with during the investigation. Unless the whole thing is fake. And the fakery is shown by the fact that Sandusky did not testify at his trial or take advantage of any preliminary hearing to gain insight into the stories of the “accusers”.
I appreciate a good “true crime” story like everyone else, but this one is too ridiculous to
believe. I think those investigating this story need to start thinking outside the box.
Allan was hiding in the woods just so he could not be called to give testimony. If a continuance was granted, this would have gone very differently. But they got 4 innocent men and PA is very smug about it to this day. No regard to truth or justice.
No, the prosecutors didn’t know the identity of accuser #2 at the time of arrest, but they did by the time of the trial.
Myers himself, an adult who had maintained a great relationship with Sandusky over the years even inviting him to his wedding, came forward to Sandusky’s lawyers after Jerry was arrested (the “sworn affidavit” referred to in this article). Prior to arrest Myers also had written letters to the editor of PA newspapers in praise of Sandusky which had been published. But then in the ~7 months between arrest and trial, Myers flipped and got a lawyer saying that he had been abused after all.
So by the time of the trial he was dangerous to both sides. The prosecution didn’t want to call him because of years of behavior that indicates he was not abused. But the defense didn’t want to call him because by the time of the trial he was claiming abuse.
Does it make sense to you now?
Sandusky not testifying has its own explanation which I’ll leave for another day. It has nothing to do with Allan Myers.
Thank you for the reply. I’m still looking for an explanation for the Prosecution’s reckless decision to indict Sandusky without interviewing him to try to determine the identity of “victim # 2”. The Prosecution knew that Sandusky knew the identity of “the boy in the shower”. If the Prosecution was so sure that Sandusky was a monstrous abuser, weren’t they putting “victim # 2” in jeopardy by indicting Sandusky before they could possibly safeguard him? Beyond that, how was Jerry Sandusky allowed to be out on bail until trial without providing the identity of “victim # 2”? Forget about being a flight risk, Jerry was an existential risk to a potential rape victim of his who could testify against him.
Obviously, that situation sounds absurd as no Prosecutor would put themselves in that position. Concerns about victim # 2’s safety aside, it is simply not credible that Prosecutors would not interview Sandusky before indicting him for the rape/assault of “victim # 2”. As I stated earlier, they left themselves wide open for profound humiliation if “victim # 2” came forward and denied abuse or if Jerry Sandusky simply testified as to what happened and exposed the Prosecution’s sloppy investigation.
None of that happened . . . why? Why were the Prosecutors apparently unconcerned about “victim # 2” coming forward to blow up their case? Or Sandusky testifying about the incident? The Prosecution couldn’t have pulled this off without the assistance of Jerry Sandusky.
I’ve seen no evidence that the Prosecution knew the identity of “victim # 2” by the time of trial. There was some speculation that Myers, through his attorney, presented himself to Prosecutors as a victim before trial, though not as the “boy in the shower”, and the Prosecutors didn’t find the accusation credible enough to bring additional charges.
On Monday, The Second Mile’s president resigned, saying he hoped his departure would help restore faith in its mission.
Jack Raykovitz, a practicing psychologist, had testified before the grand jury that recommended indicting former Penn State assistant coach Jerry Sandusky on 40 counts of child abuse. The panel said Sandusky found his victims through the charity’s programs
Street Hustler says: Double header a wise man once had a good buddy. Not an average buddy, just a good buddy that gets two BJs and comes and gives his buddy the other one. Double header, LOL shame
“Make Your Voice Heard: Touch the Future, Vote Today!”
Remember, a good slogan should be memorable, concise, and inspire action.