<p>I am not an expert on Penn State but thought I heard Sandusky was given the title professor emeritus of physical education and this gave him some perqs. I don’t think he was any form of (academic) professor in reality.</p>
<p>lateparty- did the title come with certain benefits- such as an office on campus. Would Paterno been able to grant the title or deny the benefits?</p>
<p>Sandusky dodged bullet in Texas. He took one victim with him to Texas for a bowl game and local cops are now investigating charges. Texas had the death penalty for child rape. But the Supreme Court overturned it. Too bad.</p>
<p>[Jerry</a> Sandusky could face Texas charges related to bringing a boy to 1999 Alamo Bowl | PennLive.com](<a href=“http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/jery_sandusky_could_face_texas.html]Jerry”>Jerry Sandusky could face Texas charges related to bringing a boy to 1999 Alamo Bowl - pennlive.com)</p>
<p>[Austin</a> news, sports, weather, Longhorns, business | Statesman.com](<a href=“http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/06/26/0626jessicaslaw.html]Austin”>http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/06/26/0626jessicaslaw.html)</p>
<p>I haven’t a clue on that - I am way out on the west coast, where I have previously remarked Penn State is bigtime in our news - ALL the sports channels/anchors are focusing on this - so in addition to national coverage, my point is I recall hearing that tidbit.
It’s a sorry mess, that’s for sure…
Maybe someone close to Penn State can comment on perqs there for professors, emeriti professors, staffers, sports-related employees…</p>
<p>Sandusky was able to take the child out of class because he was a volunteer wrestling coach and had access to the school building. He did not take the child out of the building itself- just to conference rooms or the wrestling room. CBS reports that this is what Victim 1 reported.
In addition, phone records indicate that Sandusky called the child at home over 180 times over a six-month period. When the mother complained to school officials, she was told Sandusky had a heart of gold.
Good lord, this guy was so brilliant at this…it takes my breath away.</p>
<p>Apparently, paterno has been handing of mostnof the coaching responsibilty to staff, from recruiting, to plays, to almost everything, for several years he has been just a figure head when it comes to the actual coaching</p>
<p>I imagine paying someone a million dollars for an image would be irksome</p>
<p>I have read this entire thread and concur with JHSs and Hunts (among others) advice to exercise caution in reaching conclusions based solely on the Pennsylvania grand jurys report, media coverage, and speculation. As revolted as we all are by what we have read, as difficult as it may be to stay patient, my own experience as a juror on a child molestation case (story follows) leads me to recall how wide the gap may be between prosecutorial claims and jury response.
In 1999 I spent the better part of one spring afternoon throwing up because I had just learned that a jury, on which I had sat for several days as an alternate, had acquitted on all countsin 15 minutes, no lessa defendant charged with 7 counts of sexual assault on a minor under the age of 12, lewd and lascivious behavior with a minor, etc. It had been my firm belief, on exiting the courtroom as deliberations began, that the defendant would be found guilty of several (not all) of the charges against him. In my view, therefore, my fellow-jurors had effectively liberated a predator.
In trying to reason out how my peers could have reached such a verdict, I was forced into the conclusion that errors by the prosecution, as well as insinuations by the defense attorney (withdrawn upon objection but nevertheless absorbed by the jury) had overshadowed all evidence of the defendants guilt. First, although they had the childsage six at the time of the crimescontemporaneous videotaped description of certain acts by the defendant (her mothers former boyfriend), they chose to put herby then age eighton the stand. She appeared to be not simply intimidated by her surroundings, but heavily medicated. She knew her name, but not her address, where she went to school, or much else. She spoke like a zombie. Then, in what I can only describe as a boneheaded attempt to pull off a stunning Perry Mason moment, the chief prosecuting attorney asked her to identify the defendant as the man who had hurt her. We on the jury gasped collectively as she indicated that she had no idea who he was.
Medical evidence existed that the child had indeed been harmed at some point, although no DNA evidence was presented. A nanny testified to the childs sudden complaints that her genitals hurt, as well as to the fact that she was bleeding. On the videotape, when a social worker tried to play the devils advocate and suggest possible innocuous interpretations of what the child had described, the girl angrily rebuffed her with all the righteous indignation that a six-year-old can muster, asking the social worker, Are you crazy? It was on this basis that I personally judged the defendant guilty on some of the chargesthose strongly supported by the videotapeand would have so argued in the jury room.
Clearly, my colleagues were not convinced. Apart from the Perry Mason manqué blunder, perhaps they were swayed by the defense attorneys description (quickly withdrawn) of the childs mother as a piece of scum (read prostitute). Perhaps they took to heart his suggestions that the child had absorbed too much daytime TV, or had been swayed by the nanny.
As I was not in the jury room, I will never know. Nevertheless, as I read the Pennsylvania grand jurys report, with all of its bone-chilling descriptions, I am reminded how great the distance is between charges and convictions. Barring a series of plea bargains, the fates of the three men charged, as well as all those implicated in the supposed cover-up, will rest on what evidence is presented, on how it is presented, on how that evidence is countered, and, most importantly, on how the juries involved evaluate the testimony they hear.</p>
<p>Urbangardner, you do realize that there have been several incidences reported by witnesses, and several young boys and Sandusky himself admitted to a victims mothersnhe did a bad things, showering and hugging a naked boy. His own admission. Tis is whatnis fact</p>
<p>Also these men are morally guilty and should be so ashamed of themselves. Pathetic</p>
<p>
But Penn State Football is a for-profit entity.</p>
<p>Insofar as potential punishment for Sandusky goes, sports reporters (here in CALIFORNIA, admittedly) are saying they are hearing Sandusky is likely to have sharp lawyers who will bargain any sentence down by 10 or 15 years (!) in exchange for pleading to lesser charges.
A plus would be avoiding putting young men victims on the stand to testify and be cross-examined amid a messy and costly trial, however one worries Sandusky will end up with some sort of sweetheart deal…they are ALL lawyering up bigtime, no doubt…
My strong wish is for truth and justice.
And – I think McQueary (spelling?!) ought to be ashamed of himself and not be hired as a coach ANYWHERE.</p>
<p>Update</p>
<p>[Did</a> Paterno Also Cover Up PSU Basketball’s Homophobia? | News | The Advocate](<a href=“http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/11/11/Paterno_Also_Covered_Up_PSU_Basketballs_Homophobia/]Did”>http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/11/11/Paterno_Also_Covered_Up_PSU_Basketballs_Homophobia/)</p>
<p>Lateparty, Many of these victims are now in their 20s and testifying may bring some closure to their horrific experience and give them some sense of power.</p>
<p>^^^^ Sparkeye7. Yep alot of people forgot about this piece of work too. What the hell is it about PSU?</p>
<p>Sparkeye7, Wow, it’s coming out of the woodwork.</p>
<p>According to Joe’s son, Joe was chomping at the bit to tell his side of the story earlier this week at his press conference, but the University (his employer) would not let him.</p>
<p>Now that Joe is free to talk, surely he will do so soon, won’t he?</p>
<p>Unless he is advised not to by his attorneys.</p>
<p>The attorneys his son also insists he has not contacted? Yea…right.</p>
<p>"If you saw a crime in action (mugging) why didn’t you intervene directly instead of just honking the horn and calling 911? Were you worried about the possible consequences of getting directly involved at the time? Should you have done more to protect the victim? And back in 2002, is it possible a grad student in a locker room was in his gym clothes and didnt have his cellphone on him at the time? " - jym626</p>
<p>There was no phone at PSU?</p>
<p>One thing I haven’t seen discussed here or in the media – if the GA saw the assault, was he ever asked to provide a description of the child – something that could lead CPS or the police to leads on finding the victim? Did the investigation ever even get THAT far? Perhaps others (at Second Mile?) might have seen Sandusky hanging out or favoring a particular kid? Just have not seen anything indicating that there was a serious effort given to identifying the victim.</p>
<p>It’s horrifying how this child and others were invisible to so many who could have done something to stop what was happening.</p>
<p>Even Fox News is weighing in: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Paterno</a> Never Needed Hindsight | Fox News](<a href=“Paterno never needed hindsight | Fox News”>Paterno never needed hindsight | Fox News)</p>