Penn State Sandusky scandal

Parent Cafe
4341

<p>

</p>

<p>In order to report suspicions of child abuse, the reporter does NOT have the burden of having enough proof to “take it to court.” Any concerned citizen can report suspected child abuse of any kind to CPS. It is then up to CPS to investigate. There are mandated reporters (required to report “suspicion” of abuse, NOT PROOF), yet any citizen is also ABLE to report.</p>

<p>There were plenty of people around Sandusky who were “able” if not “required” to report suspicions to CPS that he was abusing children (which as mentioned before includes a whole range of behaviors including but NOT limited to rape). It’s beyond sad that apparently none of them did so.</p>

4342

<p>

</p>

<p>If the jurors believe any of the accusers and find the defense arguments to be not credible, that will be the “proof” they require to convict. One can be convicted of a crime with witness testimony that conflicts with the defendant’s version of events, circumstantial evidence, and in spite of the lack of forensic data.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>All legitimate questions, but irrelevant to Sandusky’s criminal case.</p>

4343

<p>CPt are you saying itmwould have to be forceble rape to be wrong? That it somehow okay for an adult male to fondle a young boy? Because that how your posts read</p>

4344

<p>No, Seahorse, no. I’m trying to figure out how this all was happening with so many people that had to be aware that Sandusky was over the line, yet no one put a stop to this. That is truly scary to me. </p>

<p>Conviction for actual rape may not be doable. The abuse and molestation seems clear. I have no idea what the legal standards are for these things. I am trying to get my head around how to operate so that things like this do not happen without also getting into a police state in terms of behavior. What in the present and in the future gets reported, how an people in organization and on their own should handle these things. In this case, the line was well stepped over, IMO, but in many cases there is that doubt as to what should be reported. How sure should one be. It isn’t that simple when you can cause a problem for nothing. It’s easy to sit back at this show and say so many should have kicked S’s ssa, and turned him in, but they did not.</p>

4345

<p>I agree with Greenbutton’s post above that it is important to find out the root causes for why Sandusky was allowed to continually commit crimes against children. The idea that we should “let poor Paterno rest in peace” and “let’s not tarnish his legacy” does a grave diservice to the University. When the cheating scandals occurred at the Service Academies, it became necessary to look far beyond the actual students and what rules they broke. It was determined that the incestuous ways in which professors and administrators were hired–they almost all were graduates themselves–had much to do with the overwhelming urge to protect the institution at any cost–and it became a requirement that at least half of the hiree’s be from outside the academy. Everyone around the program–directors, coaches, staff, etc–had all played under Joe, as well as their children–way, way too many insiders. The idea that, because he is dead, Joe’s part in this tragedy should be forgiven would be the absolutely the wrong thing to do.</p>

4346

<p>Cptofthehouse, you keep talking about Sandusky’s chances of being convicted for “actual rape.” You don’t seem to be aware that Sandusky wasn’t charged with rape. Technically, under Pennsylvania law, as ridiculous as it may sound, a man can’t rape another man or a boy. “Rape” requires P.I.V. sexual intercourse. (The same is true under New York law.) Instead, under Pennsylvania law, in addition to being charged with various crimes including indecent assault, etc., he was charged with multiple counts of “involuntary deviate sexual intercourse,” which, as I understand it, is a species of sexual assault. (Which is what rape of a man or boy is called in New York.) There is no need to prove anal intercourse of the kind McQueary saw him doing in the shower. The crime also includes oral intercourse. </p>

<p>Also, this is not CSI or any other kind of television program: “physical evidence” isn’t necessary for a conviction. If a jury believes what the victims and other prosecution witnesses state under oath, they will convict him. That’s proof enough.</p>

4347

<p>

I’m not reading that in Cpt’s posts at all.<br>

Things like this are not as black and white from the inside as they often appear from the outside or when we are looking back in time at them. Think about a lot of the things we’ve been taught: Don’t be a tattletale (or a snitch). Don’t make waves. Don’t make trouble. Loyalty is important. Mind your own business. </p>

<p>Then we see what happens to others when they come forward with controversial charges - they may lose their jobs, face public condemnation (especially if they can’t “prove” what they are saying), get death threats. Sometimes getting involved takes courage. Meanwhile, the school is only concerned about money and reputation. Period. They don’t have a collective conscience.</p>

<p>Add to this the fact that these types of behaviors and accusations are very uncomfortable for a lot of people. When I was at cc, I worked in the school library helping people use the computers. Another student, who was actually in some of my classes, would sometimes come by to see me. He was rather strange, and would sit at one of the rather concealing type desks and on several occasions exposed himself to me. I never reported it to anyone, in fact I never discussed it with anyone before this post. I don’t know why, but it just seemed to shocking to me to imagine myself going to the head librarian and saying that so-and-so was exposing himself in the library.</p>

4348

<p>As others have said, it’s so true that from a child’s viewpoint, the thought of telling one’s parents or anyone else about sexual abuse can be so embarrassing that it makes it almost impossible to say anything. I was repeatedly sexually abused by an authority figure (an endocrinologist I was seeing) for several years beginning at the age of 11, and never said a word to my mother even though she was out in the waiting room every time it happened. Why? I was embarrassed. I was at the age when I could never speak to a parent about something like that. Besides, he always told me that it was all part of the examination process, and I kept telling myself that if he said so it had to be true. Who was I to question him?</p>

4349

<p>Don’t know the legal terms and technicalities, so used the generic, one syllable term. I am also not knowledgeable on what is needed for a conviction in the case. </p>

<p>Very painful even reading about the testimony. </p>

<p>It’s easier reading and “tut, tutting” these happenings. What to do to stop and prevent this from happening now?</p>

4350

<p>From the December 11th, 2011 testimony:</p>

<p>"During two hours on the stand, McQueary made his first public comments on Friday about the incident he witnessed first hand.</p>

<p>He said he heard slapping sounds in a shower and saw Sandusky standing behind a boy facing a wall with his hands around the boy’s waist.</p>

<p>“It was very clear that it looked like there was intercourse going on,” McQueary said, although he admitted he could not be 100 percent certain.</p>

<p>When he told Paterno of what he saw, the iconic US college football coach slumped deep into his chair, McQueary said.</p>

<p>“He said, 'I’m sorry you had to see that,”’ McQueary said.</p>

<p>According to Paterno’s grand jury testimony McQueary reported to him that Sandusky was doing something with a “sexual nature” to the boy.</p>

<p>Paterno told McQueary he had “done the right thing” by telling him. McQueary said the coach appeared shocked and saddened and said he would talk to others about what McQueary had told him."</p>

<p>So for years after this day, Paterno continued to support Sandusky, enable his use of the facilities, support Second Mile. As far as I’m concerned, Sandusky was, and is, a very, very sick man, who likely started his sick career long before 1998. Paterno spent 30 years in almost daily contact with him. And except for his dementia, as a criminal enabler, he doesn’t have the sickness excuse. </p>

<p>It wasn’t what he did on that one day when McQueary came to see him. It is every day from years before to years afterward. None of the administrators had such day-to-day “intimate” (hmm) contact with Sandusky.</p>

4351

<p>They got pictures out of his house and locker - if ever someone deserved the electric chair, Sandusky is at the top of the list. Paterno’s lack of action was almost as pathetic, he will never, ever be considered a great coach or person in 90% of America.</p>

4352

<p>

</p>

<p>You simply need the consensus of the jury for a conviction. It comes down to one question: do they or don’t they believe the testimony of the alleged victims?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>In my opinion, you must err on the side of the children. Believe them if they tell you and report. If they don’t tell you and your eyes and gut tells you that something is possibly going on, you also report. A CPS investigation would surely be unpleasant for an accused person, but as I said above, you have to err on the side of the kids. Suspicion = CPS report. It’s not a conviction, it’s a report of suspected abuse.</p>

4353

<p>[Final</a> alleged victim tells of rape by Sandusky | Reuters](<a href=“http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/14/us-usa-crime-sandusky-idUSBRE85B03Q20120614]Final”>http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/14/us-usa-crime-sandusky-idUSBRE85B03Q20120614)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Sandusky stared at the man throughout the testimony. The ‘man’ is now 18 years old.</p>

4354

<p>I really can’t read this stuff. Let me know when it’s over.</p>

4355

<br>

<br>

<p>Bingo! We have a winner!</p>

<p>Quite a number of worshipers at the alter of PSU football and Paterno idolators were apparently willing to turn a blind eye to the plight of young boys being hideously injured by an evil criminal. </p>

<p>“Don’t ask too many questions. It might rock the boat. It might damage PSU football or make St. Joseph look bad. It might disrupt the money flow. Shhh…it’s not my problem. I’m not directly involved so leave the matter to others. Maybe the whole thing will just somehow go away…”</p>

4356

<p>Second mile is transferring it’s money to a christian based foster charity, and you have to sign a pledge of faith to work there. Uh huh. So no Jews need apply I gather. Why does this not surprise me. The group is fine I guess, but if I had given to second mile and found they were giving to a group that makes its business to make saving kids that those kids need to start believing, well…</p>

<p>CPt seems to think a child needs to be raped in order for itmto be child molestation. It does not. </p>

<p>And that short story, omgoodness, very telling. Jer indeed.</p>

4357

<p>Seahorse, I absolutely do not think that. I don’t think that remark was necessary or pertinant? Do you think I support Sandusky on this? I’ve made my position clear. </p>

<p>I am not knowledgeable about this sort of case, and it frightens me that a situation like this could be going on in the present. It’s easy to point at a fait accompli, but a lot more difficult to clean one’s own stables. Better to make sure that something like this does not happen. I work with boys and young men. My kids have navigated the Catholic schools and they are all football fans and players.</p>

4358

<p>

</p>

<p>coureur, I agree …. Which explains why Schultz and Curley waited 10 days after being summoned to Paterno’s house on a Sunday to actually contact McQ regarding what he had seen. Both Schultz and Curley knew about the 1998 Sandusky incident and the lack of evidence to bring formal charges - now there is a potential eyewitness, but they wait 10 days to question him! Why???</p>

4359

<p>The answer may be precisely because the 1998 incident was fully investigated and dismissed by the DA. And because Joe Paterno’s call to them did not convey things in the way that McQueary’s ten-years-after-the-fact recollections might suggest.</p>

<p>Its interesting that no one is bothering to consider the news reports on the Dr. Dranov testimony. I haven’t seen an official transcript of it yet, but it was reported that his recollection starkly contradicted both McQuearys’ recollections.</p>

<p>Unless his reported testimony changes, this is a serious problem for the perjury trial. Add to that the fact the McQueary’s father seemed to not remember where he testified last December, and the defense is already close to a reasonable doubt on the perjury testimony.</p>

4360

<p>I guess it’s possible that no one at PSU knew Sandusky was a pedophile. And that McQueary didn’t see what he thinks he saw, and didn’t tell Paterno or anyone. And Sandusky was abusing boys for years in school showers and no one knew anything about it.</p>

<p>Yes, that is quite possible, and certainly not turning yet another blind eye to this whole mess.</p>