So the prosecution trots out a Sandusky "victim" in this Spanier trial to show how Spanier's inaction in dealing with Sandusky led to more victims. However, there are some troubling facts that go against this narrative:
1. This "victim" initially told investigators that he was abused in 1998.
2. The McQueary incident that was reported to Spanier occurred in Feb 2001, though initial reports erroneously site 2002.
3. Victim's story at trial changes to being abused in 2001, or 2002, depending on which answer you want to listen to, because he says both at different times. (Needs to be after the McQueary incident to really cash in)
4. Victim states he remembers the real date of abuse because it was the summer BEFORE 9/11.
5. During yesterday's testimony, victim states that he was abused in 2002, because he remembers that it was the summer AFTER 9/11.
6. Victim testified during Sandusky trial that he showered with Sandusky once. No sex act remotely alleged.
7. Victim gave tearful recollection of his molestation yesterday. No details given.
And the defense yesterday would not cross examine, because you just can't question a victim of child abuse! It looks bad! Which is how this whole situation got fucked to begin with.