Can this Penn State mess get any more bizarre?

Age of consent in PA is 16. Also, "statute".

Depends. The current Model Rules of Professional Conduct prohibit sexual activity between attorney and client unless said sexual contact began prior to the attorney-client relationship. However, the current Model Rules weren't in place in 1996, and I also don't know if Pennsylvania has adopted them (although I imagine they have; most states have).  

But keep in mind that the DA likely had dozens, if not hundreds, of criminal cases. Could just have easily been a gang related disappearance, or whatever.

It's the Mafia! Everything is because of the Mafia. Joe Pa is a made man. They look out for him.

For the 10,000th time, he was investigating meth trafficking.  I know state police involved in this and that is the "unofficial" thinking.

Yeah, what an odd and surreal interview.  How about when he does the classic 'repeat the question  you were just asked' thing when Costas flat out asks, "are you sexually attracted to young boys?" and then he hesitates for an awkward amount of time, professing how much he likes to be around them and winds his way to ultimately saying "no, i'm not".  It felt like he was on the verge of just laying it out there, telling us that he is and then having a serious breakdown.  I think his, "...I wish I were dead" comment to the Mom of the '98 accuser is quite telling.  I feel like he wanted to just admit to everything and there is a side to him that hates the other side that not only did these things, but a side that seemingly was helpless against it's urges. 

Was Sandusky paid by NBC for last night's phone interview? If so, add NBC to the list of people and institutions which have shown bad judgment in this mess.

Sandusky is guilty, watching that interview put things to rest - YES, he is.  He sounded creepy and had no energy in his voice in his own defense.  And his admission that he took showers with young boys, "horsed around with them", and touched them on the leg is simply abnormal for anyone his age.  It wouldn't take anyone with 1/4 of a brain to believe now he is very, very capable of committing far worse acts - even if you never heard about any of the other incidents with eye-witnesses. 

All the lawyers I've heard who saw the interview believe it was a HUGE mistake for him to do the interview. If I was his lawyer (and thank goodness I'm not) I'd have told him to find another lawyer if he persisted in going ont he air with NBC. If he thought he had nothing to lose, he was wrong. 

she's not actually 16 or whatever age they're claiming now. 

Hmm. Missing DA, therefore aliens? I don't think it's out of the question.

I'm not sure of the rules in Penn.

..but it doesn't appear to have been the law at the time. The provision was added by amendment in 2000.

http://www.padisciplinaryboard.org/documents/Ethics2000-Approved-Rule.pdf

What, that's wild. I don't think we should take comfort in prison rape. I think what the guy did is despicable, but we shouldn't throw our own morality away by cheering rape and castration, even for scumbags. When we throw common decency and humanity away -- even in the face of child abuse or terrorism -- we lose our own moral authority.

While your heart is in the right place, can we never see the phrase "prison cum dumpster" on mgoblog again? Please?

There are about 10 million people who would disagree with you. Let's not go there.

The HOOKERS CRAIG JAMES DID not KILL are in Dallas, where he attended SMU.

They changed the rules in North Carolina (where I'm licensed as well as in MI). By rule, one can't have sex with a client while representing him/her unless the parties started having sex prior to the attorney representing the client. How it's enforced and interpreted, however, is that it's only improper if the attorney uses his/her authority as an attorney to obtain sex, e.g., by taking sexual favors in lieu of payment or threatening to not provide zealous representation. I think the obvious rule should be, "Don't sleep with your clients unless you were already in a sexual relationship." Bar Associations don't seem to want to enforce that, however. Sleeping with a client who is a minor is morally reprehensible. Whether it's illegal or a violation of professional standards, I leave to others to figure out.

but was not on the board

they can't pressure the kid into not testifying because, i assume, the PA police could get search warrants for phone records, etc., if they have any evidence of witness tampering--which, btw, they do according to the grand jury report. (no idea why charges haven't been filed--maybe unsuccessful, merely attempted witness tampering isn't a crime?) 

but more importantly if they get the kid to testify nothing happened, the state will find out who he is. if anything, i imagine they'll find a different kid and get him to claim he was the kid in question and that nothing beyond sliding across the shower floor happened. because i'll bet that even if mcqueary et al can nail down a date for the alleged rape, they won't be able to nail down dates for the kids in question. that'll be tricky, i think.

were not notified of either the 2000 incident (witnessed by a janitor), nor the 2002 incident (witnessed by McQueary), because they were not notified. The janitor did not report because he did not want to lose his job. McQueary's report went to the AD and to VP Schultz, to whom the University Police report, but Schultz did not involve the University Police department.

The University Police *did* investigate the 1998 incident, and sent their reports to the Centre County prosecutor's office, which chose not to prosecute.

I'm with pineapple man on this one.