<p>I don’t understand why they would not think it worthwhile.</p>
<p>What are they going to do - jail the former Professor Emeritus for a second lifetime? Drop JoePa to a lower ring of hell than he already inhabits? What would be the point? They could go after the folks who signed the checks (but that’s likely JoePa or his secretary), or who paid the bills (but they’re small-fry). Corruption against JoePa and Gricar? Both are dead. Corruption against the Governor? The tracks I’m sure are well-covered. (JoePa gives money to Second Mile, Second Mile gives money to the Governor…) So I just don’t see it. But maybe the legal brains on this board do.</p>
<p>Couldn’t this involve Spanier or Curley? (I would love to see the governor held accountable in some way.)</p>
<p>Maybe. But I don’t see anyone filing RICO charges for 2001. I doubt Spanier or Curley had any knowledge of the 1998 Mann Act violation. The connecting link in all of this is JoePa. The Gov’s quid pro quo (if it existed) would be extremely tough to prove.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, this whole sorry affair will probably not taint the Governor in any way. God forbid that we are stuck with him for a second four years.</p>
<p>What if Second Mile actually paid for the boys travel? Surely there is an accounting trail somewhere.</p>
<p>Regardless of who paid for what, it is not a crime unless they knew what they were funding. And since the people who knew may not have been the people authorizing funding, it is quite possible that there are zero Mann Act funding crimes.</p>
<p>
If anything, it might well have been Curley “signing the checks”, not Paterno, and if that is the case then it would seem to be the only possible Mann Act violation. As to the “small fry” they would be fully prosecutable, assuming that the top guys decided to invite as many people as possible into a cover-up.</p>
<p>
I am sure that they are not, since RICO is meant to combat organized crime and specifically requires that someone make and receive payments specifically and knowingly for the related illegal activity. In this case, that would require that Sandusky pay someone for the kids, or that someone blackmail Sandusky, or some other scenario. While there have been some unusual financial arrangements with Sandusky, no one has found anything related to PSU that really seems like a business arrangement to make a profit from child abuse. There have been some allegations that Sandusky may have been involved with such a racket on the side, but not in a way that interects with any of the other PSU figures.</p>
<p>
Now that is just funny - one guy under indictment, another one who definitely helped make a lot of things happen, both men vastly more active in the available evidence… but it must be all Paterno’s fault.</p>
<p>The reason it does not make sense that Curley or Spanier had any knowledge of a Mann Act violation is because they were both on board with the plan to report Sandusky, that is until Paterno convinced them otherwise.</p>
<p>
The Mann Act is not limited to just the “top dog” regardless of who you think that person is. If Curley and Spanier and Schultz were considering reporting him, they had knowledge. The only way that mini’s theory works is if Paterno not only orchestrated the whole thing but also cunningly found a way to manipulate vast sections of the university and town police forces, as well as CWS, all while somehow keeping them completely in the dark. That is a hell of a conspiracy to assume, and I would love to see some evidence, but all I have is a bunch of emails and testimony that show that the 1998 incident was investigated by off-campus police and the decision was made not to prosecute.</p>
<p>
It is supposition that Paterno convinced them of anything at all. The only evidence we have of what happened is a few emails passed between several people (none of them named Paterno) who have clearly demonstrated that their primary goal was covering their own assets.</p>
<p>[Sandusky</a> Probe Review Sought by Pennsylvania Democrats - Bloomberg](<a href=“http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-18/sandusky-probe-review-sought-by-pennsylvania-democrats.html]Sandusky”>Sandusky Probe Review Sought by Pennsylvania Democrats - Bloomberg)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“The Mann Act is not limited to just the “top dog” regardless of who you think that person is. If Curley and Spanier and Schultz were considering reporting him, they had knowledge.”</p>
<p>There was no Mann Act violation in 2001 (as far as we know). The Mann Act violations were when the former Prof. Emeritus carried a boy across state lines and used him for sexual purposes. We know that occurred in 1998 and 1999 to the two bowl games. It is pretty certain, and likely documented, that the university - and specifically, the football program - signed off and paid for the first one. No information has been revealed about the second.</p>
<p>In any case, the feds are not likely to prosecute a guy who is going to die in prison, and another criminal who is already dead.</p>
<p>There have been a ton of questions around Corbett’s involvement, and whether or not his political aspirations and goals influenced the investigation and resulting prosecution. It is possible that he allowed Sandusky to remain free and molesting to avoid having to address it during his campaign for Governor, and there are also questions as to how much his unusual level of involvement in this whole affair placed the state, the university, and the faculty and staff were also made secondary to his own political ambitions.</p>
<p>
Sandusky will probably never be prosecuted simply because, as you have noted, it is almost certainly not worthwhile when Sandusky is already going to die in prison.</p>
<p>
The only reference I can find is to Victim #4, assaulted during the trip for the 1999 Alamo Bowl. In order for someone other than Sandusky to be guilty of breaking the law under the terms spelled out by the Mann Act, they would have to (a) know that he was travelling with the child with the intent of sexual assault, and (b) be specifically and deliberately assisting him to do so. It is not enough to just pay for the trip, they would have had to pay for the trip knowing what he was going to do. </p>
<p>This would be extremely difficult to prove, as Spanier, Schultz, Curley, and Paterno had all been notified in late summer 1998 that Sandusky had just been investigated by the police with a finding (erroneous, but a finding) of “no criminal behavior”. Coupled with the fact that Sandusky’s trip was not something that would be otherwise suspicious makes it all but impossible to prove a Mann Act violation for anyone but Sandusky, unless you are in possession of proof beyond what was presented in court, in media, or in the Freeh report.</p>
<p>
And who would that be? And what proof do you have that they are a criminal?</p>
<p>[Sandusky</a> Victim 1 Steps Out of Shadows - Yahoo!](<a href=“http://gma.yahoo.com/sandusky-victim-1-justice-took-too-long-205548353--abc-news-topstories.html]Sandusky”>http://gma.yahoo.com/sandusky-victim-1-justice-took-too-long-205548353--abc-news-topstories.html)</p>
<p>OMG–Sandusky terrorized this kid. His HS allowed Sandusky to take him out of class without ever notifying his mother about the absences. </p>
<p>From the article:</p>
<p>Fisher said Sandusky began seeking him out at his own high school, Central Mountain High School in Lock Haven, Pa. Sandusky was a volunteer football coach there and would pull him out of class, with school officials’ blessing.
Daniels said the school never notified her about all of the classes her son missed because of Sandusky and Fisher said no teacher or administrator ever questioned Sandusky’s motives."</p>
<p>It grew to be too much and Fisher said he tried to do everything in his power to stay away from the ex-Penn State coach, sometimes hiding in school bathrooms rather to avoid meeting with Sandusky. But Sandusky only grew more aggressive, Fisher said.
“He once followed my bus home from school,” he said. “I took off running but he drove on the opposite side of the street, onto oncoming traffic to catch up with me. I ran up an alley and he went to my house and parked out front.”</p>
<p>^Unbelievable! The high school should be named in the civil case too.</p>
<p>At a bare minimum, the principal should have been fired a long, long time ago. Makes me ill.</p>
<p>But on a slightly brighter note:</p>
<p>[UNIVERSITY</a> PARK: Penn State trains 8,000 as mandated reporters after Freeh report | Penn State | CentreDaily.com](<a href=“http://www.centredaily.com/2012/10/19/3374986/penn-state-trains-8000-as-mandated.html]UNIVERSITY”>http://www.centredaily.com/2012/10/19/3374986/penn-state-trains-8000-as-mandated.html)</p>
<p>I just read a CNN article saying Sandusky’s lawyers are requesting a retrial because there wasn’t enough evidence against him. I wonder what color the sky is on Planet Sandusky.</p>
<p>interview with Victim #1 tonight on 20/20 tonight at 10:00pm ET.</p>
<p>OMG–If it wasn’t for Aaron and his Mom, Sandusky would still be out there today molesting kids. This 20/20 interview is something else.</p>
<p>He’s a hero, as Chris Cuomo said, he’s truly a hero. My heart went out to this young men hearing how he was terrorized by Sandusky, how he saw his school as a safe place, from the abuse, that was until Sandusky started removing him from classes. The HS coach who brought him to Sandusky, even though he suspected abuse. Can you even imagine what this poor kid felt?</p>
<p>And at the end of the interview, when he revealed how hurt and betrayed he felt that others treated him like a liar. He was still worried about what others felt about him. </p>
<p>I cannot believe that principal is still there. despicable, and a mandatory reporter.</p>