What I personally find most irritating is the Sandusky defense that the "accusers" are going to sue in civil court thereby providing motive to lie.
It is not conscionable to suggest that these young men have lied for a "potential" gain. Winning in Civil Court is not the same as winning in Criminal Court. The burden of proof is less, the potential to settle quickly is much greater. But, it won't provide the one thing the victims want. While they might would take a cash settlement, the civil court cannot and will not offer them JUSTICE. Pick any survivor (and I do mean ANY) and offer them a check reward versus the chance of confronting their abuser in court and the opportunity for the Courts to successfully prosecute them and convict them and punish them and the checks will go uncashed brother. I might could use a few exta dollars to help pay for therapy, but to find out that 29 years later the bastard might get sent up for what he did to me....OH MY GOD...Talk about self esteem. Keeep Your money honey....just let me tell the truth.
I think Bill O'Rielly's saddest moment was when he started nit picking on the factor about the details of the "accusers" stories. C'mon Bill.....10 of them, 52 counts.....look bro..where there is smoke...there is fire...and it is raining anvils in Pennsylvania.