Sandusky continued to bring his prey to practice
The monster continued to bring his victims to practices even after the eye wintness report by McQuery. No one had any issues with it apparently?
"In other words, this is a case in which McQueary, in the years after he actually saw Sandusky raping a little boy, came face to face with Sandusky in the company of the little boys Sandusky was raping at the time – and he continued to nothing further about it."
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2011/11/the-mystery-of-cowardice
November 8th, 2011 at 7:28 PM ^
I believe he (Sandusky) has a prior from 1998.
November 8th, 2011 at 7:33 PM ^
So many things about this case just don't click.Like what?
November 8th, 2011 at 8:23 PM ^
The mom of one of the victims that talked to him but didn't pursue things further.(she did call the cops but didn't do anything after nothing happened and just asked if his penis touched her kid's body?)
The Graduate assistant seemed completely appalled about the situation but only contacted Joe Pa. After seeing that nothing happened, he(and apparently his whole family) stays quiet for a decade.
The janitor almost had a heart attack when he saw what he saw, but none of them contact the authorities and now the guy has dementia and can't testify.
Once you start plugging holes into the credibility(and the unlikelyhood) of some portions of the story... can't help but wonder how much of it is true. To top this all off, there's apparently no physical evidence and the only two witnesses either stayed quiet for a decade or now have dementia. Wonderful.
November 8th, 2011 at 8:44 PM ^
A Grand Jury indictment disagrees with you. But that's what court trials are for.
November 8th, 2011 at 9:07 PM ^
(had to create a new account to reply because the stupid server keeps thinking I'm a bot whenever I happen to miss a captcha and my account gets locked....)
Precisely, that's what court trials are for. Meanwhile, you guys are ready to lynch the guy before he gets a chance to defend himself from the allegations.
I'm not saying that I believe he's innocent. However, if there's a .0001% chance that he's not guilty... we should all shut up and wait and see what happens. I'm sure a big portion of this board was convinced Casey Anthony was guilty and was going to jail for what she did.. look at her now walking around with her Ohio State hat on.
There's also the Duke lacrosse scandal to serve as example. The truth is no one here knows how this whole thing is going to play out because you've only read the grand jury report and that's obviously just one side of the coin. You don't know what might happen later on, you don't know what the victims will testify once they go to the stand.
How many witnesses did the prosecution for the McMartin trial have?
November 8th, 2011 at 9:10 PM ^
Not guilty in court does not mean innocent. In fact, the system is designed so that it errs on the side of letting the guilty go free rather than convicting the innocent. A person found not guilty might very well be guilty.
And I'll decide when I shut up for myself, thanks.
November 8th, 2011 at 10:01 PM ^
The Duke lacrosse scandal was basically one crazy person making false accusations that got blown wayyyyy out of proportion due to race.
Putting aside the fact that Sandusky pretty much admitted it was true he molested a child in 1998, for this story to be fabricated means that 8 seperate victims over a 15 year span are all lying about the same man molesting them (and that's just in the report), many in a similar fashion. On top of this, it means that both McQueary and the janitor who claim to have seen Sandusky in the shower either saw something and completely misinterpreted what they witnessed - although you must ask, what reason does a 60 year old man have to be in the shower alone with a 10 year old boy - or they both fabricated a story out of nowhere for what possible gain? And finally, you have the final charges that started the whole process up, which would once again be another alleged victim lying about being molested by the same guy who has two seperate instances in the past of being accused of the same thing.
You compare this to Casey Anthony, but that isn't even close to this. You don't have the pattern, the repeated incidents of the same thing occuring again and again. You don't have the police hearing the conversation with the mom in 1998. You don't have something like the university banning him from bringing boys on campus in 2002.
To say that things dont add up or seem suspicious as you did earlier is probably one of the saddest attempts to garner attention I've ever seen.
November 8th, 2011 at 10:47 PM ^
November 8th, 2011 at 11:25 PM ^
makes mention of phone records and things in their presentment, I wouldn't be surprised if there are some texts or emails or chat logs that substantiate some of the relationship. From having been peripherally involved on a child sex abuse case during law school, I remember seeing a couple of chat room logs between a pedophile and what he thought was a 10 year old boy. I couldn't finish reading them, they were so disgusting.
November 9th, 2011 at 10:08 AM ^
and you're just that one guy who sees an opportunity to be different and is taking his chance, no matter how pathetic and insensitive it may seem.
Legally innocent till proven guilty. But anyone with functioning human brain can see where this is going.
side note: You're saying that McQueary waited ten years...yet Paterno confirmed that he brought the incident to him in 2002. It seems you are losing sight that one of the biggest secondary problems - you know, besides child rape - is that Penn State tried to keep something in-house rather than go to the police.
side note 2: I just read up on the McMartin preschool trial. In about 3 minutes you can tell that that bit of craziness is nothing at all like what is going on here. Terrible example. I'm sure no one in this coming trail will accuse their molester of being Chuck Norris.
But hey, keep it up, you're doing good work.
November 9th, 2011 at 3:18 PM ^
The grand jury's report for that case read worse than this one. Easy to say it's a terrible example when you read up on the trial. (which hasn't happened for this case)
November 9th, 2011 at 5:24 PM ^
beside the general craziness that you've posted, is that the kids in that trial were, well, kids. Most of those who testify in this trial will be adults or close to adults.
Keep standing out in the crowd man. You're a beautiful butterfly amongst all of us slugs.
November 8th, 2011 at 10:59 PM ^
Endorses this opinion.
November 8th, 2011 at 10:13 PM ^
She went to the cops. The DA investigated and declined to prosecute, even after they had Sandusky on tape admitting it and saying he wished he was dead. She, and the coaches at the high school in 2008, are the only ones who did the right thing.
On another matter, Penn State's students are coming off looking like complete and total idiots. To be chanting 'we are ... penn state" and seven nation army outside his house is unbelievable.
November 8th, 2011 at 10:23 PM ^
but really, they are kids. I'll forgive their ignorance. All the PSU alumni I work with have kids, and are so depressed that I don't even want to talk to them about it. They just want to clean house. "Fire everyone" is the quote I hear most often. These whippersnappers . . . well, they obviously don't have the perspective that age and pain and loss gives you.
now get the fuck off my lawn
November 8th, 2011 at 10:46 PM ^
I guess. There's just a weird and apparently unhealthy cult of personality that's surrounded that program for years.
I guess Paterno is their entire football history so the program without him is inconceivable to many fans, and he's spent so much time proclaiming a Grand Experiment and success with honor (and has done some very impressive things, especially regarding graduation rates among his players) that him being involved in such a moral failure must cause a lot of congitive dissonence. Next thing that's going to happen is that the gathered media's going to start being attacked.
November 8th, 2011 at 8:01 PM ^
We are talking about an incredible conspiracy if he isn't guilty.
Please, enlighten us.
November 8th, 2011 at 8:24 PM ^
I'm all for innocent until proven guilty, but the number of victims and eye witness accounts from credible sources are too much not to assume this took place.
November 8th, 2011 at 7:28 PM ^
I have mixed feelings about a potential trial. Imagine being one of the victims. You see this blowing up in the media and wait in a cold sweat for the prosecutors to come knocking on your door. Then you have to decide whether to go through what would be a hideous ordeal of testifying at a trial, or on the other hand, refusing despite the pressure and having to live with letting Sandusky go unpunished legally.
Who can say what anyone would do in that position? Talk about adding insult to injury… I would love to see Sandusky convicted by a jury, but not at the expense of putting his victim (s) through another kind of hell.
November 8th, 2011 at 7:46 PM ^
This just in...since the hotline was posted, the number of victims has doubled to 20
http://www.myfoxphilly.com/dpp/sports/local_sports/exclusive%3A-victims…
Penn State is Fked in this. They will be subject to millions of dollars in lawsuits and civil actions. Their President signed off on not taking Sandusky to the law in 2002.... he will be done too.
November 8th, 2011 at 7:59 PM ^
sure it's just a local affiliate but
"Sources tell Fox 29 since a press conference on Monday, the number of potential victims has more than doubled in the case."
That's a sentence worthy of the freep.
"On Monday, state officials publicized two phone numbers for past victims to call, and within a day, it seems investigators have new leads"
Put a phone number on the national media and lots of people are calling it... wow, surprise.
November 8th, 2011 at 8:07 PM ^
Mcgreary's full of shit? Implausible? Maybe. Possible? Yep.
November 8th, 2011 at 10:09 PM ^
Allowing Paterno and McQueary to coach another game is an affront to every nameless and faceless child who has ever been the victim of sexual abuse. Penn State must do the right thing this time.
November 9th, 2011 at 7:42 AM ^
I don't think you can "publicly" force them to not coach on saturday. Innocent until proven guilty no matter how guilty someone appears. Penn State is in a tough spot here if the allegations end up being wrong and you forced a guy out you open yourself up to a large settlement. Unless the coaches themselves choose not to coach I dont think you can suspend/fire them. yet.
November 9th, 2011 at 7:48 AM ^
November 9th, 2011 at 8:12 AM ^
Innocent until proven guilty no matter how guilty someone appears
That's a criminal thing. You can (and IMHO should) suspend a guy on reasonable suspicion that he's done something like this, pending the outcome of the investigation. The can also ask for his resignation right now with no consequences.
November 8th, 2011 at 10:53 PM ^
An older woman chasing a younger guy is called a cougar. Does this mean an older guy chasing a young boy is called a Nittany Lion?
November 8th, 2011 at 11:02 PM ^
Not funny. Not remotely close to funny.
Bolivian'd.
November 8th, 2011 at 11:12 PM ^
You've been around a long time so no ban yet, but you're on thin ice.
November 9th, 2011 at 12:38 AM ^
I just figured people would have a slight sense of humor about the whole situation. People here tend to get a bit too self righteous at times.
November 9th, 2011 at 9:40 AM ^
geez what a fucking idiot. You've post several jokes, some not too terrible, but what's your point? I don't think most people active on these threads are in the joking mood. You can tell that. Why be an ass? What are you trying to prove about yourself or this situation? Go to another thread to post your clever comments, please.
November 9th, 2011 at 3:06 PM ^
I actually laughed out loud when I read that joke on someone's Twitter feed. I'm trying to prove that most people are a little too worked up about this. I'm not a huge fan of people forming a lynch mob.
November 9th, 2011 at 3:22 PM ^
Or know anyone who was.
Or can sympathize with those victims.
That you would laugh out loud about such a joke in these circumstances is appalling to me. Pathetic.
But I guess that's the beauty of this world. You can have your opinion, and I can have mine.
November 9th, 2011 at 4:24 PM ^
There are no lynch mobs.
And I'll decide for myself how worked up to get, as I'm sure you will for yourself.
Meanwhile, find a shred of decency.
November 11th, 2011 at 10:25 AM ^
FWIW, I have a 12 year old son. I have been absolutely appalled at this whole story and have cried tears over aspects of it.
But I also saw that joke on my twitter feed and found it funny. Terrible, but funny.
Granted, I wouldn't repost it here for love or money. But I reject the notion (being asserted by others) that anyone who cracks a smile over it is a heartless/soulless jackass, or doesn't care about children. Jokes strike people in different ways.
Hope Bolivia is nice this time of year.
November 9th, 2011 at 8:50 AM ^
The question is now ... How much did he know? He clearly forced out Sandusky - a successful DC who probably would have been in line for a HC position somewhere - after part of this scandal became known in the PSU AD. He basically said you can't touch boys and be a part of this program so we'll broom you but you can stay around here to do your camps and what-not as kind of a program consultant. Wow! How's that for doing the right thing?! At that point JoePa should have done something - like notify the police. Instead he tried to shield his friend, the program, and his name. To plead ignorance is a sham considering he fired the guy on the heels of finding out about like victim 4 or 5.
November 9th, 2011 at 9:47 AM ^
that's the thing - he didn't clearly force out Sandusky, although it *appears* that way. You would imagine that a move that surprising against a coach in such good standing wouldn't happen without some people knowing the real reasons. Will those reasons now come out? How truthful will JoePa be (I'm not optimistic).
On Sunday, Scott Paterno (Joe's lawyer son and family spokesperson) stated that at the time JoePa said that he told Sandusky that he wouldn't be coach b/c he spent too much time with his charity. JoePa supposedly said, "as the coach of Penn State, you can only have one master." and apparently Sandusky loved his charity too much to fully commit.
This sounds suspicious. You don't just suddently fire someone for this who has shown very clear success. Maybe he wouldn't be head coach, but why force retirement? He was a very successful defensive coach at the time he was fired/resigned.
This also sounds suspicious b/c if JoePa couldn't "say" Sandusky was fired b/c he was a pedophile, blaming his firing/resignation on 2nd Mile sounds about as close as he could get, right?