I went to that site and then realized it belongs to John Zeigler, one of the most partisan Sandusky supporters out there. Yes, you read that right, JZ has spent the last few years meeting and interviewing the convicted child molester in order to make a case for his exoneration.
Other than Zeigler, his lawyer, and Nambla types, I do not know if anyone believes Sandursky today.
Even Joe Paterno’s son, Scott, has condemned Zeigler for his hyper-partisanship on Sandusky - enough said.
I guess I like what Ziegler has had to say because his views about the Penn State fiasco seem to have evolved in a manner similar to my own. I started out believing that Paterno's actions were reasonable and honorable assuming that the allegations against Sandusky were true. And I've since moved to believing that none of the allegations against Sandusky hold water.
So now you know of someone, i.e. me, who is not Ziegler, his lawyer or a Nambla type who believes that Sandusky is innocent.
Once, only Dorothy Rabinowitz believed that the Amiraults were railroaded.
Let me know what you believe Ziegler has posted on his website that is misleading or inaccurate.
ML/NJ
Having read everything available on the case since the beginning including this and other threads at Free Republic I do not to this day believe that Sandusky has any defenders who are not NAMBLA types.