TheRoyalIveyFund
Starter
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2011
- Messages
- 1,382
- Like
- 704
Either guilty or not, Schwarz (and ESPN for allowing it) is derelict of their obligations as professionals.
Schwarz has taken sides on this, it's clear.
-He did not ask legit questions that a decent human would ask that is trying to present the entire story. So, BF molested you for 6 years and then for years 7-12, you not only introduced your brother to BF but did not think it would happen again?
During years 7-12, when your brother was being victimized, you would have been 18-25. You are saying as a 23 year old adult, you didn't think to take action?
-The Davis guy said he met BF selling candy, the older brother said he introduced him.
-During the time I watched late last night, it was already out that the mother denied he went on a plane for any trips, claimed he didn't like to fly, etc. Big piece of information.
-Tim Welsh said he roomed with Bernie for his 3 years while on the road. I believe it's the same period.
-The language Schwarz used - "No adults did anything, they never asked questions". Schwarz' words, not the accusers. At a minimum, he needs to say "the accuser said no adults did..."
-Schwarz intimates the detective (fox?) did nothing. He literally said "he was not giving a lot of time to explain what happened". The accuser did not say that, that was Schwarz' take on it. If I'm the detective, I'm filing a defamation claim against Schwarz.
-Be more transparent. If you have proof he was in Ha, or NOLA in 87, then let the people know. For now, we don't even know whether to believe he was in NOLA. You assume Schwarz looked into it but tells that and that you confirmed it. If so, then yes, it is fishy a 13 or 14 is in NOLA with just Bernie and nobody else.
It has a terrible bias (probably his personal reputation at stake), yellow journalism (capitalizing on PSU) and either an inaccurate story, or one that is poorly put together. It likes a rough draft of a paper, or something like that. Thoughts are down, kind of getting organized, but key elements missing, sources not cited, etc, but you still turned in the paper.
Schwarz has taken sides on this, it's clear.
-He did not ask legit questions that a decent human would ask that is trying to present the entire story. So, BF molested you for 6 years and then for years 7-12, you not only introduced your brother to BF but did not think it would happen again?
During years 7-12, when your brother was being victimized, you would have been 18-25. You are saying as a 23 year old adult, you didn't think to take action?
-The Davis guy said he met BF selling candy, the older brother said he introduced him.
-During the time I watched late last night, it was already out that the mother denied he went on a plane for any trips, claimed he didn't like to fly, etc. Big piece of information.
-Tim Welsh said he roomed with Bernie for his 3 years while on the road. I believe it's the same period.
-The language Schwarz used - "No adults did anything, they never asked questions". Schwarz' words, not the accusers. At a minimum, he needs to say "the accuser said no adults did..."
-Schwarz intimates the detective (fox?) did nothing. He literally said "he was not giving a lot of time to explain what happened". The accuser did not say that, that was Schwarz' take on it. If I'm the detective, I'm filing a defamation claim against Schwarz.
-Be more transparent. If you have proof he was in Ha, or NOLA in 87, then let the people know. For now, we don't even know whether to believe he was in NOLA. You assume Schwarz looked into it but tells that and that you confirmed it. If so, then yes, it is fishy a 13 or 14 is in NOLA with just Bernie and nobody else.
It has a terrible bias (probably his personal reputation at stake), yellow journalism (capitalizing on PSU) and either an inaccurate story, or one that is poorly put together. It likes a rough draft of a paper, or something like that. Thoughts are down, kind of getting organized, but key elements missing, sources not cited, etc, but you still turned in the paper.
