Jump to content

Bo Schembechler (probably) covered up hundreds of child molestations


Recommended Posts

On 6/11/2021 at 3:23 PM, WhatTheBuck said:

According to the players in the press conference, they were 17 and 18 year old kids. They didn’t know how to react. One of them mentioned that he eventually grabbed the doctor’s hand and pulled it...um...out. But they also talked about how much they loved going to school, playing for their team, the camaraderie with their teammates, and the chance to win a conference championship and go play in the Rose Bowl. They didn’t know how to react and there were no adults in their life to guide them. They had to figure it out on their own. You beat the shit out of the doctor who’s sticking his finger up your rectum and who are they going to believe? You or the doctor? That probably ends your career. 

Aren't there stories about the doctor requesting sex favors to help players/ex-players receive a medical deferment to avoid Vietnam? Some may have accepted that trade-off.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

1988: ....UM does finally manage to win the Rose Bowl over USC. ND defeats both participants in the Rose Bowl during the regular season.

the 1988 Notre Dame-USC game wasn't played in or at the Rose Bowl, it was played at the Coliseum 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Aren't there stories about the doctor requesting sex favors to help players/ex-players receive a medical deferment to avoid Vietnam? Some may have accepted that trade-off.

 

Yes, I read that in one of the stories last week. Then he wasn't able to give them -- or wouldn't -- the deferral.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SwanderedTalent said:

the 1988 Notre Dame-USC game wasn't played in or at the Rose Bowl, it was played at the Coliseum 

ND Joe is a moron but I think he's saying the '88 Irish beat both teams who participated in the Rose Bowl game during the regular season -- Michigan and USC.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Yes, I read that in one of the stories last week. Then he wasn't able to give them -- or wouldn't -- the deferral.

What do you mean you couldn't get me a deferral? That wasn't what you said last week!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

What do you mean the doctor’s note isn’t enough for a deferral?  That son of a bitch.   Wait a second … this is 1969.   Hmm.

Ok, I didn’t want to have to say this, Lieutenant, but I’m still ineligible for service regardless of my medical history.  You see, I’ve had homosexual contact with my doctor.  

Of all the sorry tricks to get out of service … you will try anything to dodge the draft!  

No, no.  This part is actually true.  Everyone knows.  Just ask around about the guy.

Yeah, yeah, you and the doctor.  I’m sure Bo Schembechler and Joe Paterno are perverts, too, right?  You’re on the first plane to Saigon, buddy!

Edited by longhornmatt
  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/14/2021 at 12:00 PM, longhornmatt said:

What do you mean the doctor’s note isn’t enough for a deferral?  That son of a bitch.   Wait a second … this is 1969.   Hmm.

Ok, I didn’t want to have to say this, Lieutenant, but I’m still ineligible for service regardless of my medical history.  You see, I’ve had homosexual contact with my doctor.  

Of all the sorry tricks to get out of service … you will try anything to dodge the draft!  

No, no.  This part is actually true.  Everyone knows.  Just ask around about the guy.

Yeah, yeah, you and the doctor.  I’m sure Bo Schembechler and Joe Paterno are perverts, too, right?  You’re on the first plane to Saigon, buddy!

Recruiter:
Now, are either of you homosexuals?

John Winger:
You mean like flaming?

Recruiter:
Well, it's a question we have to ask of all our new recruits.

Russell Ziskey:
No, we're not homosexual, but we are willing to learn.

Edited by C-Man
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, texifornia said:

Ah yes, the problem with going after child molesters is... a society and environment of wokeness?

 

Jim Brandstatter needs to be fired, and then be the conjugal visit for the entire, local, state prison yard.  WTFF  is wrong with that ass wipe ??!!

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, texifornia said:

Ah yes, the problem with going after child molesters is... a society and environment of wokeness?

 

That’s about the worst take possible.   Even putting aside the wokeness part, his argument is that people shouldn’t criticize Bo because donors might get mad and give less money.   Yeah, wouldn’t want to let something small potatoes like covering up 900 sexual assaults, pedophilia, and beating his wife and 10 year old son outweigh getting paid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone read the Mitch Albom column on this? Disclaimer - I loathe Mitch Albom's phony ass. I thought this was pretty much textbook victim shaming/blaming. I could not imagine these same words being inferred about say, Rachel Denhollander (Nassar victim who helped bring the story to light). Gross. In my opinion. Copying and pasting because fuck giving Albom clicks. 

 

Quote

Mitch Albom: Allegations against Bo Schembechler are devastating; so are the victims' stories

  • Mitch Albom Detroit Free Press (TNS)
  •  
    • Jun 11, 2021 Updated Jun 11, 2021
    •  
      •  
 
 
 

DETROIT — They say there are three truths in any accusation: the accuser’s, the accused’s, and the actual truth. Two of those were not accessible Thursday, and they never will be.

But one truth was heard.

And it was devastating.

 

Three men, now in their 50s and 60s, two of them former Michigan football players, the other the son of its most famous coach, sat behind a podium table in a hotel conference room, flanked by lawyers, and recounted, in painful detail, how their young bodies were sexually abused by a former team doctor named Robert Anderson.

“He digitally raped me” … ”He caressed my testicles while asking me questions about my sex life” … ”They called him Dr. Anal…”

The excruciating details went on. They spoke of being too scared to speak up. Too young to know how to react. Tears formed and words choked as they related multiple accounts of the most brutal betrayal between a doctor and patient.

“He fondled my genitals” … ”He molested and violated me” … ”I felt humiliated and confused.”

Anderson’s alleged behavior was cringing to hear. But to the accusers, it was only one breach of trust. The other, which may have hurt them more, was allegedly that of the coach, Bo Schembechler.

“Bo knew,” said Daniel Kwiatkowski, a former lineman in the 1970s.

“Bo knew everything,” said Gilvanni Johnson, a former wide receiver in the '80s.

“I understand the reverence people have for my father,” said Matt Schembechler, Bo’s son, “but I know the truth.”

That truth, as told by these three men, was a portrait of ruinous neglect. Bo was accused of dismissing reports of Anderson’s abuse with comments like “toughen up.” Matt Schembechler claimed he was first abused by Anderson in 1969 when Matt was just 10 years old, and when he told his father, “it didn’t go well.” He claimed Bo screamed at him and hit him.

“That was the beginning of the end of (our) relationship. … I hoped my father would protect me, but he didn’t.”

A parent's instinct

Protection is at the heart of parenthood, and at the heart of any college coach’s relationship with his players. Coaches go into homes and promise parents their sons will be looked after, that they will be like second fathers to those young men while on campus.

This is why Thursday’s news conference was, for those who revered Bo Schembechler, a huge gut punch. For those who loved him more personally, it was too shocking to believe.

These included Cathy Schembechler, Bo’s widowed wife, who, while saying she could not speak to Anderson’s conduct as she didn’t know anything about it, did tell me, “I can speak to the character of my late husband, Bo. From the time we were married in 1993 until his death in 2006, Bo never spoke of being aware of any inappropriate behavior or conduct by Anderson.

“In my opinion, Bo was not aware of this conduct and would not have allowed such behavior to occur, especially to any of his players, family, coaches, or program. If Bo had known of such conduct he would have stopped it immediately, reported it, and had Dr. Anderson removed from the university.”

Meanwhile, Bo's youngest son, Glenn “Shemy” Schembechler, also found the stories hard to believe. "None of us were in that room when those players were talking to Bo," he told ESPN. "The Bo I knew would have taken care of it and found another doctor. It would be that easy."

Others no doubt believe the same. Heck, many, many people want to believe the same. And of course, Bo is not here to respond to these charges, or explain why Anderson was never removed from the university. But the charges against him scream the obvious question: Why would a famous coach, who could have had any doctor he wanted on his staff, ignore such awful accusations in order to keep him?

“The only thing that I can come up with, knowing Bo and how he operated,” Matt Schembechler said, “is that (with that knowledge) he's got the goods on Dr. Anderson, Dr. Anderson's gonna do what he tells him. Kid can’t play? No, Doc, you’re gonna send that kid (out there).”

That theory seems extreme. It suggests that in addition to ignoring sexual abuse charges, Bo was extorting the doctor so that injured players could risk their health?

How could this have happened?

“I don’t know if I buy that,” said Johnson, who was actually on the team. But what then was the motivation? If you believe that these three and others went to Bo with reports of Anderson’s behavior — and listening to them, it’s difficult not to believe that — what possible explanation could satisfactorily cover Bo permitting Anderson to stay?

 

Could it be the way the players relayed it? Both Kwiatkowski and Johnson admitted they only told Bo once, and were intimidated in even bringing it up, in Johnson’s case “because I was afraid he would pull my scholarship.” Could it be, as some are suggesting, that Anderson lied and defended his behavior to Bo as medically required, and Bo was too myopic about football to question it? Could it be, as others have postulated, that the times were different, that people preferred to bury such secrets, naively wishing they would just go away?

Who knows? But none of those explanations are enough to counter the damage, not given the decades of terrible suffering that the alleged victims detailed Thursday. Johnson spoke of losing two marriages, and long stretches of sexual promiscuity, trying to prove “that I wasn’t a homosexual.” Kwiatkowski admitted to avoiding doctors ever since college “jeopardizing my own health. I’ve (also) found it very hard to have intimate relationships with women.”

There is no measuring what was broken by this apparently demented doctor, who is accused of abusing more than 800 men over his tenure from 1966 to 2003. Anderson died a few years later.

Plain and simple, he was a monster.

But Thursday wasn’t merely about the damage done.

It was about a response.

Time for 'total accountability'

Why now? Many people asked. What do Matt Schembechler and the former players want? All three spoke of wanting to show other victims of abuse that it is OK to come forward. All three also — along with their lawyers — agreed on one thing: The university has to take responsibility for what happened.

Not just admit that Dr. Anderson was horrific, as U-M has already done in a recent extensive report, but own up to allowing it to happen. This is why Bo is so critical to the case. If he knew and said nothing, the evil goes from one man’s abuse to a possible systemic cover-up that the university somehow condoned.

“Michigan State, Penn State, Ohio State, Southern California. ... And now Michigan,” said Steven Drew, one of the attorneys representing Matt Schembechler. “How many more do we need?

“We need to have start having total accountability. We need to stop the argument that we are immune from responsibility.

“(It’s) more important than the power, the privilege, the profits … more important even than the brand. The brand needs to be accountability.”

Cynics will say this is legalese for a massive lawsuit and huge financial damages. And one of the attorneys did confirm that they would be seeking damages. Michigan State, you recall, paid out $500 million to survivors in the Larry Nassar abuse suit.

But the questions that arose Thursday should not be centered on money, nor for that matter, on Jim Harbaugh, the current coach and a Bo disciple, who recently said the Bo he knew would never have looked away from an abuse scandal. Several reporters asked the panel about those comments.

“Please don’t focus on Jim Harbaugh,” Matt Schembechler beseeched the media. It’s clear he wants the focus to stay on his father.

“What do you think (Bo) would say if he were here right now?” a writer asked.

“Honestly,” Matt replied, “I could care less what his opinion was … I don’t hate Bo. I just don't like him.”

One truth is clear: The pain is real

Now, in the interest of background, it should be noted that Matt Schembechler, who was adopted along with his two brothers by Bo when Bo married their mother, Millie, has referred to Bo as “a horrible human being” whom he couldn’t wait to get away from when he turned 18. Matt once sued his father and U-M claiming they thwarted his plan to make souvenirs of old stadium bleachers. He also co-wrote a scathing magazine piece for GQ magazine about Bo — while Bo was alive — citing the bullying he claims he endured as a child.

None of that — repeat, none of that — counters one iota of ignoring sexual assault. The two are not in the same arena. What supporters of Bo are facing now is an internal crisis. Those who knew him well and admired him — and I count myself in that group — are left dumbfounded that a man of such apparent principle and integrity could knowingly permit such an awful string of events.

As Cat Schembechler said, “The allegations that I have read and heard … are not credible based on the Bo Schembechler that I knew and that many others knew as well.”

Were we all wrong? Were we all blind? Is there a piece of this whole story that is horribly missing?

Who knows? Even when the accused and the accuser are alive and facing one another, only two of three truths are made clear. We are all left to wonder about the third, the one most important and most elusive. But we can say this with clarity. Thursday afternoon was real tears, real choking up, and true heartbreak. And the damage done years ago is only just beginning to be measured.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Baboontyme said:

I thought this was pretty much textbook victim shaming/blaming.

how so? can you explain? I am likewise not an Albom fan-- that column was the first thing of his I'd read or listened to since probably the Sports Reporters circa 2003-- but that to me seemed like a fair piece expressing and exploring the confusion created by the clearly credible allegations.

We don't have to only have one emotional response. Anger and disgust may be primary but there's room for disbelief and confusion too. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SwanderedTalent said:

how so? can you explain? I am likewise not an Albom fan-- that column was the first thing of his I'd read or listened to since probably the Sports Reporters circa 2003-- but that to me seemed like a fair piece expressing and exploring the confusion created by the clearly credible allegations.

We don't have to only have one emotional response. Anger and disgust may be primary but there's room for disbelief and confusion too. 

I have gone back and forth on it a few times. I understand his expressions of confusion. But he spends roughly half of the article casting doubt on some of the accusers and their motivations. I would unfortunately consider myself a veteran of reading articles on topics such as these, and you simply just can't go there. 'Oh hey I should point out that there's a lawsuit worth billions. Could THAT be a motivation? I should point out that this 'Matt Schembecler' is only Bo's ADOPTED son and he doesn't like him. Could THAT be a motivation?' 

I don't know, I think that's pretty gross. Like I said, I could not imagine someone penning these sorts of thoughts about Denhollander or some of the Nassar victims. When jackasses like John Engler and Joel Ferguson put their foots in their mouths repeatedly, and made allusion to questionable motives, they were absolutely skewered, and rightfully so. Here you have an acclaimed columnist doing the same in print. Perhaps my Albom dislike is running overdrive but that's how it reads to me. 

I should also state that I take zero pleasure in anything to do with this story and I could not care less about glass houses and internet redemption from online trolls who were thrilled to call MSU rape U or whatever. Child rape is not rivalry fodder in my book.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Baboontyme said:

I have gone back and forth on it a few times. I understand his expressions of confusion. But he spends roughly half of the article casting doubt on some of the accusers and their motivations.

That's his job as a journalist, even a sports writer.  They absolutely should face the strongest skepticism. 

  • Fuck You 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2021 at 2:11 PM, Bogeywon said:

Life long michigan fan here. I grew up being taken to games and tailgating. My uncle raised me on old ten year war videos. Bo was a god to him and I. With that being said I collect memorabilia and as far as my michigan stuff is concerned I had a michigan mini helmet signed by bo before he died. It’s like the holy grail michigan auto. After news of this broke a few weeks ago (have been waiting to see if it would get more national coverage) I immediately sold the helmet. I got $300 for it which was $100 less then what others were asking. I feel sick about the fact I was going to use that money for something like a guitar or what ever so I’m going to donate it to a fund for sexually abused people. This story has completely shaken me and is on the verge of breaking me from being a michigan fan. I didn’t go there but love the campus and all the surrounding areas. How could a man that claims to have stood for so much integrity do this? Burn it down burn it all fucking down! Statues buildings all of it. Not rename BURN IT DOWN! Also all that failed to report this and knew need to be locked up forever. If they are not I’m done. I’m not sure that there is a right way this can be handled to make me return to the fandom I once had for this university it’s administration or anyone involved. Sorry if this didn’t make sense but I’m just fucking sick right now and this university has been such a big part of my life I don’t even know what to say

I've been where you are going, and as far as I can tell there is no way back. Gave up my State tickets after almost 25 years - and to be very clear it isn't just as much because of the coverup by those in power as it was because of what Nassar did. And I know several of his victims, hell went to a HS graduation party for one just last weekend. And I can tell you that I was a huge college sports fan, not just MSU, and I barely watch it at all anymore. 

And I certainly to not relish in watching Michigan burn, because nobody should go through this; and yet it continues. Sure the BigTen has a problem, but there are others and if you look the list is much longer than you would think, not of which makes it easier to accept that MSU fucked up, PSU fucked up, etc.
 

On 6/12/2021 at 5:19 PM, notre dame joe said:

The problem is when a football coach hears "The doctor touched me" he thinks No shit, that's his job.   I said basically the same thing in the Nassar scandal.  You would have to have another Doctor spying on the perp to distinguish between molestation and examination.  And to set that up you have to already know it's happening. 

Don't ever think it was hard to distinguish, he was doing ungloved pelvic exams. It was wrong, he was wrong, and people knew, people who said nothing.

On 6/14/2021 at 8:53 PM, Nolacycling said:

I'm not gay but my boyfriend is.

fixed it for you

Edited by Wally Fairway
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

That's his job as a journalist, even a sports writer.  They absolutely should face the strongest skepticism. 

It is absolutely not his job. He is a feature columnist, not an investigative reporter. If the Free Press wants to send David Jesse down the path of FOIAing public records of the accusers, go for it. But that would also be very, very weird. 

I'm just realizing that you're being sarcastic. I think. I hope. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Baboontyme said:

It is absolutely not his job. He is a feature columnist, not an investigative reporter. If the Free Press wants to send David Jesse down the path of FOIAing public records of the accusers, go for it. But that would also be very, very weird. 

I'm just realizing that you're being sarcastic. I think. I hope. 

You aren't the least bit skeptical of the man who waited until the other parties were all dead before coming forward to sue for millions?  Even if not it's pretty bad to blame others for thinking.

  • Fuck You 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

You aren't the least bit skeptical of the man who waited until the other parties were all dead before coming forward to sue for millions?  Even if not it's pretty bad to blame others for thinking.

No, I'm not. It's not just one person. And alleged victims of sexual assault should not be greeted with skepticism. 

I see Mitch has a new article today "Talk of Bo's legacy overlooks the real villain: Robert Anderson". Fuck you so hard Mitch. He is seriously trying to make this about himself and his 50 year love affair with that University. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Baboontyme said:

No, I'm not. It's not just one person. And alleged victims of sexual assault should not be greeted with skepticism. 

I see Mitch has a new article today "Talk of Bo's legacy overlooks the real villain: Robert Anderson". Fuck you so hard Mitch. He is seriously trying to make this about himself and his 50 year love affair with that University. 

Right? Everyone knows the molester is a bad person, there's no story there. The story is about all the "good" people around him who allowed him to operate with impunity. Even if you liked covering their teams and cheering for their players.

Anything else is just deflection.

Edited by texifornia
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In all fairness, I did not read the article. And I won't unless someone copies and pastes it. And I am aware that most headlines are written by editors and not the actual columnists. But yes, the title alone makes me seethe. As you say texifornia, we KNOW Anderson was a villain. No one is overlooking that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Baboontyme said:

In all fairness, I did not read the article. And I won't unless someone copies and pastes it. And I am aware that most headlines are written by editors and not the actual columnists. But yes, the title alone makes me seethe. As you say texifornia, we KNOW Anderson was a villain. No one is overlooking that. 

Again, I'm not going to defend Mitch Albom's insipid ass. But. His point might be, who cares about Bo Schembechler's legacy...? Like Juicy says and like I'm sure the vast majority of Michigan fans feel, take Schembechler's name off everything and bury it in a slag pit near Detroit but (to your point) the story here is the deviant criminal and the people who enabled institutional cover-up. 

So it's kind of both-- Anderson's the villain, we all get that; anyone who had the slightest inkling there was a predator near the sports programs should be disassociated with the program including Saint Bo. Where we start saying "who the fucks cares about that?" is hand-wringing about "all the good Bo did"-- that legacy isn't relevant when the crimes are this serious. As in, I don't care if the football team's trains ran on time, the team doctor was still experimenting on unwilling patients. 

I too am guilty of not reading Albom but that's a twenty year trend I don't feel like breaking. 

Michigan gave the Fab Five, what, twenty-five years of disassociation because they took a bunch of money? Reggie Bush had to give back a Heisman because he had his rent paid. What does this get Bo, then?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SwanderedTalent said:

Again, I'm not going to defend Mitch Albom's insipid ass. But. His point might be, who cares about Bo Schembechler's legacy...? Like Juicy says and like I'm sure the vast majority of Michigan fans feel, take Schembechler's name off everything and bury it in a slag pit near Detroit but (to your point) the story here is the deviant criminal and the people who enabled institutional cover-up. 

So it's kind of both-- Anderson's the villain, we all get that; anyone who had the slightest inkling there was a predator near the sports programs should be disassociated with the program including Saint Bo. Where we start saying "who the fucks cares about that?" is hand-wringing about "all the good Bo did"-- that legacy isn't relevant when the crimes are this serious. As in, I don't care if the football team's trains ran on time, the team doctor was still experimenting on unwilling patients. 

I too am guilty of not reading Albom but that's a twenty year trend I don't feel like breaking. 

Michigan gave the Fab Five, what, twenty-five years of disassociation because they took a bunch of money? Reggie Bush had to give back a Heisman because he had his rent paid. What does this get Bo, then?

I appreciate what you're saying, but that's not Mitch's mo, in my opinion. Mitch literally made his nut, before Tuesdays with Morrie, before his plays, before Sports Reporters, etc...off of the University of Michigan. if you look at some of the tweets above, Mitch literally co-authored a book called "BO" with "Bo". Mitch wrote about about the Fab Five and how it wasn't fair that Chris Webber couldn't even afford a pizza, while Webber and his teammates taking cash from Uncle Ed Martin was the worst kept secret on campus. Mitch is basically a part of the institution at this point. And that's FINE when it comes to sports, but it calls into question some journalistic integrity in some cases. Specifically where it comes to the legacy of those he made his bones writing about and with, and whether he has the ability to be impartial, balanced and fair. This is SEXUAL ASSAULT and RAPE, not hoops and gridiron. He is trying to protect the legacy of the man who built the house that he worships at the alter of, and he's essentially calling the victims liars in the process. That's shitty. 

Look man, I'll bow out of this. Not trying to interject my opinions about what the proper way to handle this broader story is as a fanbase. Mitch just makes me seethe and I think he should be getting way more flak for this transparent shittiness. That's the thing. You kind of discover that it doesn't matter what you or the rest of your alumni base think. All of this happens around you, about something that you once took a good deal of pride in, and it feels awful. And the only thing that really matters is how to help make things right to the people who were harmed. I know that the UM alums that I know, and the fans that have posted here on surly feel the same because they are likely decent people. 

I will also say this, to my Longhorn brothers and sisters, to any Aggies or Sooners or Cowboys or whatever post here. Don't think that this can't happen at your school, or in your community. It absolutely can. Stay vigilant. And fuck Mitch Albom. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Baboontyme said:

Look man, I'll bow out of this.

Hey, you're not in any way wrong. You are (most unfortunately for you) better-versed in all things Albom than I am. I very well may be extending him too much benefit of the doubt, he might be trying to sway public opinion in favor of Bo or against Matt Schembechler etc etc-- I don't know, and I'm not that interested in him that I'm actually willing to read his dreck.

He's not a deep thinker, he's someone who emotes about deep thoughts, so maybe you're right.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

Every accusation should be viewed with some degree of skepticism. Less so if it’s one of hundreds, but no accusation should go unchallenged. 

Yep, a sense of fairness demands it.  It's about the worst accusation you can bring against someone, and can ruin their life even if proven false.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yep, a sense of fairness demands it.  It's about the worst accusation you can bring against someone, and can ruin their life even if proven false.

You bet. But I’m terms of assessing the act of the ACCUSED….when multiple people independently come forward with early identical stories….we all know what the fuck happened.

Anderson was a rapist. Of many. And Bo knew. Arguing about exactly WHICH individuals he raped is one of the common tools of deflection.

When it comes time to award damages, then you scrutinize individual claims. But when it comes time to assess the culpability of Anderson, Bo (and maybe others - hey Mitch, did YOU hear of any such rumors back in the day but purposefully not look into them because Go Big Blue?), we already know the essential facts.
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Brisketexan said:


You bet. But I’m terms of assessing the act of the ACCUSED….when multiple people independently come forward with early identical stories….we all know what the fuck happened.

Anderson was a rapist. Of many. And Bo knew. Arguing about exactly WHICH individuals he raped is one of the common tools of deflection.

When it comes time to award damages, then you scrutinize individual claims. But when it comes time to assess the culpability of Anderson, Bo (and maybe others - hey Mitch, did YOU hear of any such rumors back in the day but purposefully not look into them because Go Big Blue?), we already know the essential facts.

At this point nobody's is disputing Dr Anderson's guilt, and his life can't be ruined much since it's already over.  What is in dispute is "B0 Knew" and therefore 'The Michigan Taxpayer Owes Me Big Money.'

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Brisketexan said:


You bet. But I’m terms of assessing the act of the ACCUSED….when multiple people independently come forward with early identical stories….we all know what the fuck happened.

Anderson was a rapist. Of many. And Bo knew. Arguing about exactly WHICH individuals he raped is one of the common tools of deflection.

When it comes time to award damages, then you scrutinize individual claims. But when it comes time to assess the culpability of Anderson, Bo (and maybe others - hey Mitch, did YOU hear of any such rumors back in the day but purposefully not look into them because Go Big Blue?), we already know the essential facts.

Well....... yeah.  I was speaking more in terms of the concept of innocent before guilty, not rushing to judgement, and destroying peoples lives (Richard Jewell, The Duke lacrosse coach, and team).  

This shit seems to be pretty well verified so far.

Edited by Onboard 2.0
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...