Stan's right, you should be embarrased...

[LAOrange]

Why is it that in this specific instance, people automatically think the worst? Why can't we embrace "innocent until proven guilty."
This is insane... our entire program is supposed to go down because of the alleged bad actions of one. Why didn't Pitino get fired, Calhoun's had a couple of assistants behave badly, Calipari, the list is endless.
Where was the word "alleged" in any of Schwartz's early reporting. I don't think I've ever been so outraged by advocacy reporting Why is it that we can jump to conclusions on a heinous crime before we can believe two obvious losers perpetrated this crap to get famous and/or money.
Doesn't anybody watch CSI or Criminal Minds? Pedophiles don't transition to older types and they don't stop with just one victim. Can anybody here honestly believe that a grown man is going to take it for years? Especially, when he described his typical reaction. Would any person tug on that kid 1000 times especially when he states he told him no, no, no, froze, acted disgusted, etc.?
People we know and trust corroborate Bernie's integrity and actions. Did that happen with the PSU guy? There are more holes in Davis's story that at Camp Green Lake (look it up).
Now, the necessary statement: If it turns out to be true. Bernie fries. But I seriously doubt that it's true and we really should wait for the trial before we sentence him and everybody around him.

 

[cusetown1]

Yeah, I have wondered how can he say he was molested 100's if not a 1000 times if he always said No, No? I would assume he would tell somebody after about 100 or so times. Correct?

 

[cusetown1]

Yeah, I have wondered how can he say he was molested 100's if not a 1000 times if he always said No, No? I would assume he would tell somebody after about 100 or so times. Correct?

Or after the first time, I would hope.

 

[Guinness]

Why is it that in this specific instance, people automatically think the worst?

Have you ever been to upstate NY? We are not known for being half glass full kind of people.

 

[senorpalmer]

I'm not sure what the truth is here but I believe Bernie's innocent until proven guilty. That being said, Davis appears to me as someone who might be borderline mentally challenged, and that is the type of person who would lack the ability to stop repeated molestation into his adult years.

 

[StealthTurkey]

I have a huge problem with the accusers' interview. A very good friend of mine who was molested as a boy had this to say during and after watching it multiple times (paraphrasing as best I can):

"What does he mean Bernie TRIED to touch his penis? Did he or didn't he touch you?

He felt disgusted? At 10? How would he know it should be disgusting at 10? I didn't know until later it was wrong. I was 10!!!

He tried to tell him no? Well, did he tell him no or not? It's one way or the other.

Why is he looking around? What is he looking for? What to say next?

He called him Bernie [while telling him to stop]? And then said he was a GOD to him? Bernie sounds a little informal for a GOD.


My problem with this is that he is so vague and so willing to talk. It took me years and years and years to even admit to myself that it happened. I couldn't fathom talking about it on national tv. My experience, I remember every damn thing that happened. What tree it was under, what the guy wore, the smell of his cologne. I can tell you in exact detail. You don't just forget."

Maybe for some people, recalling the events is different, but that interview was surreal to me. It literally seems like a joke. Probably the least believable stuff from a person I have ever seen.

 

[MaxwellCuse]

I'm not sure what the truth is here but I believe Bernie's innocent until proven guilty. That being said, Davis appears to me as someone who might be borderline mentally challenged, and that is the type of person who would lack the ability to stop repeated molestation into his adult years.

Mentally challenged is a PC term for mentally ed. Davis supposedly earned an accounting degree from Weber State. Is that correct or not? If it is I can't see how you could classify the guy as mentally challenged. Mentally ill on the other hand is a real possibility.

 

[bnoro]

I have a huge problem with the accusers' interview. A very good friend of mine who was molested as a boy had this to say during and after watching it multiple times (paraphrasing as best I can):

"What does he mean Bernie TRIED to touch his penis? Did he or didn't he touch you?

He felt disgusted? At 10? How would he know it should be disgusting at 10? I didn't know until later it was wrong. I was 10!!!

He tried to tell him no? Well, did he tell him no or not? It's one way or the other.

Why is he looking around? What is he looking for? What to say next?

He called him Bernie [while telling him to stop]? And then said he was a GOD to him? Bernie sounds a little informal for a GOD.

My problem with this is that he is so vague and so willing to talk. It took me years and years and years to even admit to myself that it happened. I couldn't fathom talking about it on national tv. My experience, I remember every damn thing that happened. What tree it was under, what the guy wore, the smell of his cologne. I can tell you in exact detail. You don't just forget."

Maybe for some people, recalling the events is different, but that interview was surreal to me. It literally seems like a joke. Probably the least believable stuff from a person I have ever seen.

It's posts like this that make me feel much better about the situation and make me think it's a money grab. Thanks for the input, and sorry for your friend, terrible that happened to him.

 

[senorpalmer]

Mentally challenged is a PC term for mentally ed. Davis supposedly earned an accounting degree from Weber State. Is that correct or not? If it is I can't see how you could classify the guy as mentally challenged. Mentally ill on the other hand is a real possibility.

If that's the case then I seriously misread him.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

I have a huge problem with the accusers' interview. A very good friend of mine who was molested as a boy had this to say during and after watching it multiple times (paraphrasing as best I can):

"What does he mean Bernie TRIED to touch his penis? Did he or didn't he touch you?

He felt disgusted? At 10? How would he know it should be disgusting at 10? I didn't know until later it was wrong. I was 10!!!

He tried to tell him no? Well, did he tell him no or not? It's one way or the other.

Why is he looking around? What is he looking for? What to say next?

He called him Bernie [while telling him to stop]? And then said he was a GOD to him? Bernie sounds a little informal for a GOD.

My problem with this is that he is so vague and so willing to talk. It took me years and years and years to even admit to myself that it happened. I couldn't fathom talking about it on national tv. My experience, I remember every damn thing that happened. What tree it was under, what the guy wore, the smell of his cologne. I can tell you in exact detail. You don't just forget."

Maybe for some people, recalling the events is different, but that interview was surreal to me. It literally seems like a joke. Probably the least believable stuff from a person I have ever seen.

• "tried to touch"
We're talking about a recollection of an event 17 years earlier. If he says Bernie "tried" touch it, he could simply be hesitant to tell the world another man had his hands on his junk. Could be as simple as that.

• "felt disgusted"
Why WOULD'T he know, at ten, that he was disgusted by the move? I would have known at ten. Saying whether or not it was "wrong" is altogether different. Wrong is a morality or ethics issue and has nothing to do with a person's visceral reaction to something.

• "Tried to tell hm no."
I don't know a lot of ten year olds who would refuse a move like that in the same way he would as a more mature adult. "No," as an adult seems likely. "Please don't" or "I don't wanna" seems more likely for a child. Not sure why we're dickering over syntax here. Especially when it's about a long ago event.

• Calling him "Bernie" / God / Informal.
Wow. This is just silly. Firstly, "god" is not literal. Secondly, i've known people as a child, to whom i was asked to call by a first name, and still had a great deal of reverence or respect for that person. Besides that, you don't know if he's mixing his recollection of the 'first' incident, with how he would have described subsequent incidences or the 'relationship' as a whole.

• "So willing to talk"
If (IF) this had happened to you, and no one believed you, and you had tried to get someone to listen years ago, unsuccessfully... wouldn't you be exceptionally glad to finally be able to have your story heard? If this had happened to you, wouldn't you be grateful for a way to finally be able to 'get back' at the perpetrator?

Everyone handles stress differently. Everyone handles trauma differently. If your friend can't imagine speaking about it publicly, that's one person's thought process, regarding an entirely different set of circumstances. Yeah, you can say both people were molested. But, that doesn't mean their experiences were the same.

• People remember things differently, better/worse... than other people. If your friend's incident was only a one-time thing, yeah, i would expect he/she would be able to recall in specific detail all about the encounter. If it happened a thousand times, even though YOU might think the first was the most important, i can imagine they might all fade together into memory of a collective set of experiences.

I'm not saying i believe it either, but we can't cherrypick details of the interview and apply bias to 'reason' why those items don't work for us. Everything you mentioned could just as easily be perceived as reasons why the story DOES make sense. Besides that - to make up a story like this, and say it happened 1,000 times... Not smart, if you're fabricating it. TEN times would be more believable, and require a smaller burden of finding opportunities for those ten events. The best lies are the simplest lies.

The other MAJOR issue with this whole thing, whether it's true or not: seemingly, you can get away with it if you only do it to one person. If you have to have corroboration by a string of other victims to prove sexual assault, it's no wonder a great many real victims don't come forward.

 

[Upstate]

Yeah, I have wondered how can he say he was molested 100's if not a 1000 times if he always said No, No? I would assume he would tell somebody after about 100 or so times. Correct?

Between the ages of 12 and 27, most boys don't molest their own selves that often.

 

[Knicks411]

Between the ages of 12 and 27, most boys don't molest their own selves that often.

Definitely gotta call BS on that one...

Or did I say too much?

 

[qdawgg]

I have a huge problem with the accusers' interview. A very good friend of mine who was molested as a boy had this to say during and after watching it multiple times (paraphrasing as best I can):

He felt disgusted? At 10? How would he know it should be disgusting at 10? I didn't know until later it was wrong. I was 10!!!

I'm not trying to take one side or another on this but I do have to comment on this particular part. The above statement may be true for your friend but is definitely not typical. Typically children who have been molested may not exactly know that the "incident" was wrong - per say. But around 8 years old or so, depending on who you listen to but generally before 10, children will feel disgusted by what has transpired.

 

[LAOrange]

Definitely gotta call BS on that one...

Or did I say too much?

I've been thinking. Why 27? If Davis is 37 now that would mean the last incident took place in 2001. Maybe this is a ploy to get SPD to re-open the case based on an original misjudgement on the Statute of Limitations. I'm not going to give them any credit for being clever and it is this precise point which will probably lead to their demise. Unless Bernie had him chained in the basement, it's beyond reason.

 

[StealthTurkey]

• "
Everyone handles stress differently. Everyone handles trauma differently. If your friend can't imagine speaking about it publicly, that's one person's thought process, regarding an entirely different set of circumstances. Yeah, you can say both people were molested. But, that doesn't mean their experiences were the same.

• People remember things differently, better/worse... than other people. If your friend's incident was only a one-time thing, yeah, i would expect he/she would be able to recall in specific detail all about the encounter. If it happened a thousand times, even though YOU might think the first was the most important, i can imagine they might all fade together into memory of a collective set of experiences.

I'm not saying i believe it either, but we can't cherrypick details of the interview and apply bias to 'reason' why those items don't work for us. Everything you mentioned could just as easily be perceived as reasons why the story DOES make sense. Besides that - to make up a story like this, and say it happened 1,000 times... Not smart, if you're fabricating it. TEN times would be more believable, and require a smaller burden of finding opportunities for those ten events. The best lies are the simplest lies.

The other MAJOR issue with this whole thing, whether it's true or not: seemingly, you can get away with it if you only do it to one person. If you have to have corroboration by a string of other victims to prove sexual assault, it's no wonder a great many real victims don't come forward.

You're right, but all the issues that I had with the interviews, my friend expressed in the same way and he has been through it. When I talked to him about it, all he knew was somebody accused Fine, and that Boeheim immediately stood behind him. He was really upset about Boeheim's stance, and had no idea about anything else. He heard a snippet on the radio. He's older, and not an internet guy. I didn't even know that had happened to my friend until I showed him the interviews and he broke it all down for me. It's all conjecture at this point, and I have tried to consider where the alleged victims are coming from, it's just really difficult at this point. If you think what he said was wrong, I won't dispute that. Just sharing.

 

[Cusey]

Have you ever been to upstate NY? We are not known for being half glass full kind of people.

Excellent observation, Guinny. It's one of the reasons I left.

 

[qdawgg]

Have you ever been to upstate NY? We are not known for being half glass full kind of people.

Glass half empty, styrofoam cup, and a hole in it.

 

[bnoro]

I've been thinking. Why 27? If Davis is 37 now that would mean the last incident took place in 2001. Maybe this is a ploy to get SPD to re-open the case based on an original misjudgement on the Statute of Limitations. I'm not going to give them any credit for being clever and it is this precise point which will probably lead to their demise. Unless Bernie had him chained in the basement, it's beyond reason.

I think he saw the PSU case, saw Statute of Limitations was 12 in Pennsylvania, figured that applied to NY, and used it. That's my guess based on how stupid this dude is.

 

[bevosu]

Have you ever been to upstate NY? We are not known for being half glass full kind of people.

Not only that, but as SU basketball and football fans we all know (too well) that when we begin to think that the glass IS half full...the glass breaks..

 

[Whitey23]

Have you ever been to upstate NY? We are not known for being half glass full kind of people.

I think your avatar and signature prove it.

 

[rrlbees]

Nobody should be embarrassed. There isn't 1 single poster here who isn't hoping this all goes away and all is well. Not one. There is also not a problem with people be worried and wondering "what if". I also have not seen 1 poster say they think any of this is true. But there is the possibility it is, so it is discussed. It is also peoples opinion whether or not JB said some things he may not should have. It should not be an embarrassment if you thought he went too far. What is embarrassing is people calling out others for being worried or having an opinion.

 

[Jeepers]

• "tried to touch"

We're talking about a recollection of an event 17 years earlier. If he says Bernie "tried" touch it, he could simply be hesitant to tell the world another man had his hands on his junk. Could be as simple as that.

When this story first broke, they said that Bernie masturbated him 100s-1000s of times, to ejaculation.

 

[pearl31]

Nobody should be embarrassed. There isn't 1 single poster here who isn't hoping this all goes away and all is well. Not one. There is also not a problem with people be worried and wondering "what if". I also have not seen 1 poster say they think any of this is true. But there is the possibility it is, so it is discussed. It is also peoples opinion whether or not JB said some things he may not should have. It should not be an embarrassment if you thought he went too far. What is embarrassing is people calling out others for being worried or having an opinion.

Well put.

 

[Cuse_1999]

I think he saw the PSU case, saw Statute of Limitations was 12 in Pennsylvania, figured that applied to NY, and used it. That's my guess based on how stupid this dude is.

This is an excellent point. I had no idea the SOL in Penn was 12 years. What he didn't realize is that it's not molestation when he's 27.

 

[Fireball Jr.]

Have you ever been to upstate NY? We are not known for being half glass full kind of people.

speak for yourself, my fine stouted friend