Deadpin checks up on judge who set Sandusky bail

Isn't the FBI called in when the allegations include Federal crimes and/or multi-state jurisdiction?
Don't get me wrong, sil, I agree with you completely, but I'm just not sure how/when a case qualifies for FBI inclusion.
At the very least, the PA state bureau of investigation and/or state police investigators should be running the case.
 
Isn't the FBI called in when the allegations include Federal crimes and/or multi-state jurisdiction?
Don't get me wrong, sil, I agree with you completely, but I'm just not sure how/when a case qualifies for FBI inclusion.
At the very least, the PA state bureau of investigation and/or state police investigators should be running the case.

They're not running it????
 
I think by the time this thing unfolds the FBI will be involved, and I actually hope that's not the case, because that would mean some of the other allegations flying around are true.
 
Isn't the FBI called in when the allegations include Federal crimes and/or multi-state jurisdiction?
Don't get me wrong, sil, I agree with you completely, but I'm just not sure how/when a case qualifies for FBI inclusion.
At the very least, the PA state bureau of investigation and/or state police investigators should be running the case.

I think there are allegations regarding activities that occurred at the Alamo Bowl, which, I think, would give the federal government jurisdiction (transporting a minor across state lines during the commission of or to commit a crime).
 
I think by the time this thing unfolds the FBI will be involved, and I actually hope that's not the case, because that would mean some of the other allegations flying around are true.

Scary thought. One can only hope the other allegations are tall tales. It's only gonna get worse I fear.
 
W.T.F. How can that not be a conflict of interest? Not recusing herself here seems to be incredibly unethical, and she should be dismissed immediately. Granted I am no lawyer, but this seems to be the definition of a conflict of interest. :confused:
 
Isn't the FBI called in when the allegations include Federal crimes and/or multi-state jurisdiction?
Don't get me wrong, sil, I agree with you completely, but I'm just not sure how/when a case qualifies for FBI inclusion.
At the very least, the PA state bureau of investigation and/or state police investigators should be running the case.

you are correct.

the FBI will not get involved in the Sandusky case, and they do not have any responsibility or obligation to involve themselves (unless unforseen new details come out that would make this a federal case).

and to those of you insinuating that the judge in the sandusky case set his bail low because she is a 2nd mile volunteer and is favoring him in some way, just stop. you dont know what you;re talking about. whether the bail was set at 100k or 500k, it really doesnt make a difference. he's a fairly wealthy man and he'd be home right now either way. He is not considered to be a flight risk, which is a major factor in determining bail amount. the bail was set accordingly. This is a right granted by the constitution. It's an example of how our justice system sucks, but it is what it is.

And it isnt like he's out living a normal life and having a great time. he's in a glass cage of misery right now. He might be at home but his mind is likely focused on whether he should off himself or not.
 
you are correct.

the FBI will not get involved in the Sandusky case, and they do not have any responsibility or obligation to involve themselves (unless unforseen new details come out that would make this a federal case).

and to those of you insinuating that the judge in the sandusky case set his bail low because she is a 2nd mile volunteer and is favoring him in some way, just stop. you dont know what you;re talking about. whether the bail was set at 100k or 500k, it really doesnt make a difference. he's a fairly wealthy man and he'd be home right now either way. He is not considered to be a flight risk, which is a major factor in determining bail amount. the bail was set accordingly. This is a right granted by the constitution. It's an example of how our justice system sucks, but it is what it is.

And it isnt like he's out living a normal life and having a great time. he's in a glass cage of misery right now. He might be at home but his mind is likely focused on whether he should off himself or not.

He was spotted in downtown state college shopping last friday.
 
you are correct.

the FBI will not get involved in the Sandusky case, and they do not have any responsibility or obligation to involve themselves (unless unforseen new details come out that would make this a federal case).

and to those of you insinuating that the judge in the sandusky case set his bail low because she is a 2nd mile volunteer and is favoring him in some way, just stop. you dont know what you;re talking about. whether the bail was set at 100k or 500k, it really doesnt make a difference. he's a fairly wealthy man and he'd be home right now either way. He is not considered to be a flight risk, which is a major factor in determining bail amount. the bail was set accordingly. This is a right granted by the constitution. It's an example of how our justice system sucks, but it is what it is.

And it isnt like he's out living a normal life and having a great time. he's in a glass cage of misery right now. He might be at home but his mind is likely focused on whether he should off himself or not.

He would be at home with the monitoring device on his ankle like the prosecuting attorney requested.
 
Re: Deadspin checks up on judge who set Sandusky bail

He would be at home with the monitoring device on his ankle like the prosecuting attorney requested.

but he isn't a flight risk. why would that be necessary?

lets remember that in the eyes of the law, sandusky is still innocent until proven guilty.

I'm just as mortified and disgusted by what the guy is accused of as everyone else, but the judge isn't being unethical by any means in setting the bail at what it was set at.

in nearly every case the prosecution asks for more than what they know they'll actually get.
 
Last edited:
Re: Deadspin checks up on judge who set Sandusky bail

but he isn't a flight risk. why would that be necessary?

I'm just as mortified and disgusted by what the guy is accused of as everyone else, but the judge isn't being unethical by any means in setting the bail at what it was set at.

in nearly every case the prosecution asks for more than what they know they'll actually get.

Why give him unfettered movement? It's unlikely he has been miraculously cured since his arrest.
 
Re: Deadspin checks up on judge who set Sandusky bail

Why give him unfettered movement? It's unlikely he has been miraculously cured since his arrest.

he hasnt been proven guilty of anything yet. he has only been indicted.

this is the way our legal system works. like it or not
 
you are correct.

the FBI will not get involved in the Sandusky case, and they do not have any responsibility or obligation to involve themselves (unless unforseen new details come out that would make this a federal case).

and to those of you insinuating that the judge in the sandusky case set his bail low because she is a 2nd mile volunteer and is favoring him in some way, just stop. you dont know what you;re talking about. whether the bail was set at 100k or 500k, it really doesnt make a difference. he's a fairly wealthy man and he'd be home right now either way. He is not considered to be a flight risk, which is a major factor in determining bail amount. the bail was set accordingly. This is a right granted by the constitution. It's an example of how our justice system sucks, but it is what it is.

And it isnt like he's out living a normal life and having a great time. he's in a glass cage of misery right now. He might be at home but his mind is likely focused on whether he should off himself or not.

So in your opinion there was no conflict of interest here?

Dominique Strauss-Kahn was required to pay $1 million cash only bond, wear a monitoring device, and waive his extradition rights on the accusation of a single very questionable accuser. Sandusky is basically guaranteed to die in prison, and faces numerous accusers who have been deemed incredibly reliable, yet he gets $100,000 unsecured bond and no monitoring. It is unreasonable then for me to think there may have been some favoritism on the part of this judge?
 

Latest posts

Top