Could the 2001 Sandusky Lasch Building incident be something that never really happened? It's a classic case of presenting the truths that are there but leaving the whole truth out of the picture. A few truths along with some made up truths. As much of the truth as they want you to know, trying to get people to believe a lie. In this case a lie that would frame Jerry Sandusky and lead to false accusations against the officials at Penn State. The lie made up about the 2001 incident in the Lasch building, on the PSU campus.
The 2001 incident became famous when the prosecutors and investigators claimed that Ex PSU Coach, Jerry Sandusky, raped a child in a shower room at PSU in the Lasch building, in February of 2001 after hours. They claimed that an assistant coach under Paterno saw Sandusky in the shower room with a child. They further claimed that the coaches and officials were made aware of suspicious behavior and suppressed the information. Claiming that information about the incident and Sandusky was hidden and covered up. This began the trials against the officials. Sandusky stood trial for the charges stemming from the accusations by investigators and the prosecution centered around the 2001 incident.
The prosecution claimed that the dates of the incident were altered in an attempt to cover the incident. But the truth is that the incident that was covered up was an incident that happened, where information was taken from records and used to fabricate the Lasch building incident. The reports on that incident have never been seen since around the time of the original incident. Those reports included police reports. Security reports. Notes by administration. Notes on the incident by Paterno. And a brief description written by a student who was with Schultz, in Paterno's small office space in the Student Athlete Services Building. I know the description was written there.
None of that information has ever been found or released. Knowing it happened, and then trying to figure out where all the reports and information went to became puzzling to me. I could only conclude that if there was any reports available, the prosecutors did not want them to be found. They were covered up, internally in the police department, or altered and covered up in Schultz's office, maybe years after the incidents were forgotten.
One thing I knew that no one else seemed to know, not Curley, Schultz, Paterno, was that the paper in Schultz's office was a description of the incident. I knew it was there. No one remembered it, but I did.
Then how did the prosecutors know there was a paper in Schultz's office that described an incident so similar to that one? How did the incidents match so close? I mean the Morgan Building incident and the Lasch Building incident?
I reasoned that someone found the paper and used the information to fabricate the Lasch Building incident. They took information from reports on the Morgan Building incident and the brief. Then, made up the story about the Lasch Building incident.
Here are some particulars about the incident. *It happened at 9:30 AM. (It was in a shower room. *People heard and suspected a child was being harmed in the shower room. *It happened in the Morgan Building, not the Lasch Building. (People reported hearing sounds that they believed came from a child being harmed by a man.)
The assistant coach did not testify, originally, that he heard sounds like a child being raped coming from the shower room, in the Lasch Building. But the prosecution said that he did. Saying that, in court, matched the Morgan Building incident events. At that point I knew that they knew about the Morgan Building incident information.
I also realized that there was only ONE incident, not two. Only ONE. And the actual incident had to be the Morgan Building incident. I knew that information on the Morgan Building incident was being called the Lasch Building information. Shower room. 9:30. Screams.
Could the incidents have happened at 9:30 AM and 9:30 PM? A coincidence? Both incidents involved screams? Was there two incidents that closely matched? NO. There wasn't. Only one.
Information was erased on the actual incident and some information or reports were spared but altered to suggest that an incident happened that never happened.
The Lasch Building incident 2001 was a fabrication. The Morgan Building incident was erased. The people who claimed the Lasch Building incident happened knew it was a lie. They covered the information on the Morgan Building incident. Some information was most likely altered to appear as though it was altered to cover up the fabricated incident. And the people who had the information claimed that the altered information validated the Lasch Building fabrication. But no one has ever seen that information. But we know they knew the information about the original incident. Very smart, very complicated. But still just a lie.
Knowing the incident was a lie. Knowing they lied tells you that they had witnesses lie. And knowing that, the testimony of the witness was altered. Knowing that it is assumable that the imposter was placed in the shower room to trick the assistant coach into believing it was Sandusky. Was it possible? Was it possible, knowing that the imposter had tricked so many people up to that point, to trick the coach into believing he was Sandusky? The answer is YES.
Ultimately, the assistant coach was led to lie on their behalf against the accused or he was fooled into thinking that Sandusky was the person in the shower room, in 2002. Not 2001.
Altering his testimony did not change the fact that he saw a man who he thought was Sandusky in 2002 in the Lasch Building, at or around 9:30 PM. Not 9:30 AM in the Morgan Building in 2001. Not 9:30 PM in the Lasch Building in 2001. In 2002.
He did not see the man in the shower room in the Lasch Building in 2001. And the information on the Morgan Building incident had to be purposely overlooked by the investigators.
The 2001 incident was fabricated.
The 2001 Morgan Building incident was never reported in the trial or in the investigations.
Fabricating the 2001 incident, had to do with framing Sandusky. They did. He was framed. Man, was he ever framed.... When you realize that, when you understand that, it's hard to keep from crying. You have seen evil. Pure evil. But that evil hasn't won yet. The truth can still set Sandusky free.
Pray that the truth prevails. Sandusky was framed.
Comments