[JustaDumbBlonde]

Impression is different from listening to facts. Sandusky admitted some sort of wrongdoing years ago. He was seen by a graduate student performing anal sex on a little boy. He was seen by janitors performing oral sex on one or more little boys. There has been testimony, under oath, before a grand jury.

If you are not only presuming this guy innocent at this point, but publicly vouching for his character, you are a complete fool that should not be trusted with children yourself.

[palmer]

She didn’t see or read that testimony, she might caught some clips from reporters but that’s not the same thing. She is saying two things, that she believes he is innocent by her impression (probably naive) and that the trial is the proper place to decide (a reasonable suggestion).