Sandusky/Penn State scandal

[Old Pio]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

What needs to happen (and I have no idea how you do this without stomping all over the First Amendment) is some sort of confidentiality/anonymity agreement in these sort of cases. From accusation forward, the case and all names involved in the case, on both the prosecution and defense sides, are confidential and are not released unless and until the accused is found guilty. If they are found not guilty or innocent or the case is dropped for any reason, all records of the case are sealed and become property of the court. This removes the media incentive and protects the wrongfully/questionably accused while still allowing for genuine victims to come forward (actually, even making it easier for them since they won't have their names splashed across the media either.)

The media would probably FOIA the crap out of it, though, and the situation would reek of Orwell as well. The whole "secret court" thing makes people skeevy, for good reason.

Interesting. You're right, very difficult. And even more difficult when the accused (Sandusky) is a huge fish in a tiny pond.

Among other aspects of McMartin, a well known reporter for an LA TV station, who was assigned the case and covered it for years, established a relationship with and ultimately married the "therapist" at the center of the case. The one who employed the anatomically correct dolls and all the other little horrors. This fact was ignored and kept secret by prosecutors. The jury may have profitted from knowing of this conflict of interest when both the reporter and "therapist" testified. Oh, and the editor of the LA Times responsible for coverage of the case became engaged to the lead prosecutor. Move along, nothing to see here.

 

[pirate]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

sorry if this was referenced already but in Boston recently a child (7?) was charged with sexual assault for kicking another kid in the groin while defending himself from being beaten up...at this point it is the ultimate "Fire!!" in a crowded theater claim...don't yell fire, don't yell racism, don't yell terrorism, yell sexual assault...they all diminish the real acts that do occur but they have their moment when they catch the attention of everybody

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

sorry if this was referenced already but in Boston recently a child (7?) was charged with sexual assault for kicking another kid in the groin while defending himself from being beaten up...at this point it is the ultimate "Fire!!" in a crowded theater claim...don't yell fire, don't yell racism, don't yell terrorism, yell sexual assault...they all diminish the real acts that do occur but they have their moment when they catch the attention of everybody

If this matter isn't resolved, when he's 18 this kid will have to register as a "sex offender." He was defending himself from a bully who had him in a headlock. And a well placed shot to the marbles works wonders to make the bully turn you loose. What also plays a role here are "zero tolerance" policies which allow for no distinctions. A girl gives a Midol to a classmate and another kid's got 5 keys of heroin in his locker, it's all the same, a violation of our anti-drug policy. About the same time as the case you referenced, another little boy got himself into trouble by telling a classmate he thought his teacher was "cute." I guess he dodged a bullet. And the idiot principal of his school has resigned. But still, you begin to wonder what the eff is going on in our country.

 

[huskyfan]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

the McMartin / pre school abuse thing is not even remotely related to the Sandusky type thing. I don't know, Old Pio, but you seem to have a bit of a soft spot for old Jerry ....

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

the McMartin / pre school abuse thing is not even remotely related to the Sandusky type thing. I don't know, Old Pio, but you seem to have a bit of a soft spot for old Jerry ....

So smearing me is your way of refuting my argument? You're free to disagree with the dozens of typically windy paragraphs I've written here. But I would ask in all sincerity that you make an effort to be more accurate in summarizing the points I've made.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

Nobody (including me) wants a pedophile to get away with his crimes. However, none of us should be supportive of ignorant, fearful, superstitious, headline grabbing, voter impressing, moral panic prosecutions either. Interestingly, after dozens of these prosecutions in the 80's and 90's we don't see them anymore. I wonder why.

Too busy taking down the Catholic Church.

A friend and I have frequently laughed about (only half in jest) what's going to happen when 20 years from now people conclude maybe all those alter boys weren't abused by the priests. Now that will be entertaining.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

Too busy taking down the Catholic Church.

A friend and I have frequently laughed about (only half in jest) what's going to happen when 20 years from now people conclude maybe all those alter boys weren't abused by the priests. Now that will be entertaining.

Well, we already know of one: the guy who accused the late Cardinal Bernardin of Chicago. He eventually recanted and Bernardin forgave him. While I believe absolutely that little boys were abused by priests, it seems likely that among the dozens (hundreds?) of victims, a few may have been delusional or just making it up. However, Church records and administrators have shown conclusively that pedophile priests were known to "upper management" and were often reassigned to other parishes (with no warnings for the people in those parishes) where they could continue their hobby. And this was the heaviest burden of guilt the Church had to bear. Similar, in fact, to the alleged lack of followup by Paterno and McQueasy and others connected to this case: "they should have done something, and didn't, and other boys were abused as a result."

 

[pirate]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

the church moved priests around to avoid the rumors, attacked those who raised concerns and knew that more kids were being abused because of the moves...the folks at PSU removed sandusky from the football team but knew he was still involved with the charity and bringing boys on campus...that is smaller scale but a similar situation

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

the church moved priests around to avoid the rumors, attacked those who raised concerns and knew that more kids were being abused because of the moves...the folks at PSU removed sandusky from the football team but knew he was still involved with the charity and bringing boys on campus...that is smaller scale but a similar situation

Why so legalistic? Do you dispute the fact that far more rage has been directed at PSU because of the alleged collective "lack of action" by varous officials than at Sandusky? "Removed from the football team," in this case meant an office, a parking space, keys, a telephone, an e-mail account and apparant unfettered access to all athletic facilities. As far as Sandusky's presumed victims were concerned, that was a distinction without a difference. The Catholic Church has much more to answer for here, for all of the reasons you suggest, and more. But the claim that the "smaller scale" of what may have gone on at PSU mitigates, is weak.

Why do I have to keep repeating that at least in my case, I'm not saying these cases (all of 'em) are direcetly analogous? Two very highly positioned Penn State officials have been indicted for perjury. They may not be alone. The president and football coach have been fired. And it seems likely the civil suits will result in tens of millions of dollars in judgements against the university. The Catholic Church is a nationwide enterprise, with far more priests than a college has football coaches, and has been in business much longer. Assuming the allegations of wrong doing at Penn State are true (a huge assumption) it isn't much of a defense to say: "We may be bad, but they're worse." Apart from the differences in scale, what we know about the Church's behavior and what has been alleged about the collective behavior at Penn State is identical.

 

[pirate]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

Why so legalistic? Do you dispute the fact that far more rage has been directed at PSU because of the alleged collective "lack of action" by varous officials than at Sandusky? "Removed from the football team," in this case meant an office, a parking space, keys, a telephone, an e-mail account and apparant unfettered access to all athletic facilities. As far as Sandusky's presumed victims are concerned, that was a distinction without a difference. The Catholic Church has much to answer for here, for all of the reasons you suggest, and more. But the claim that the "smaller scale" of what apparantly went on at PSU mitigates, is weak.

Why do I have to keep repeating that at least in my case, I'm not saying these cases (all of 'em) are direcetly analogous? Two very highly positioned Penn State officials have been indicted for perjury. They may not be alone. The president and football coach have been fired. And it seems likely the civil suits will result in tens of millions of dollars in judgements against the university. The Catholic Church is a nationwide enterprise, with far more priests than a college has football coaches, and has been in business much longer. Assuming the wrong doing at Penn State is true (a huge assumption) it isn't much of a defense to say: "We may be bad, but they're worse."

dude, take a breath. I can't even tell what you are talking about. I was commenting that the PSU and catholic church issue are more similar than many people recognize...the scale was different but the reaction of the higher ups was similar and the resultant outcome was similar. I never said scale mitigated anything, that is all you.

The removed from the team comment was intended to parallel the moved to another parish tactic...it 'solves' one issue on the surface but doesn't address the crimes nor stop the next crime.

sheesh, lighten up

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

dude, take a breath. I can't even tell what you are talking about. I was commenting that the PSU and catholic church issue are more similar than many people recognize...the scale was different but the reaction of the higher ups was similar and the resultant outcome was similar. I never said scale mitigated anything, that is all you.

The removed from the team comment was intended to parallel the moved to another parish tactic...it 'solves' one issue on the surface but doesn't address the crimes nor stop the next crime.

sheesh, lighten up

Evidently I had a brain sh**t (it wouldn't be the first time) and misinterpreted your post. In the spirit of the season, I apologize. I was evidently agreeing with you at the top of my lungs.

 

[SanTropez]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-12-16/penn-state-mcqueary-testimony/52007662/1

Red testified today, I guess he was to bashful to use the proper terms when explaining what he saw to coach Paterno. What a dope.

At Paterno's house the next day, sitting at his kitchen table, McQueary said he described what he saw and that he told Paterno that Sandusky was in a "sexual" act with the child and described it as "extremely sexual."

McQueary said he did not give Paterno explicit details of what he believed he'd seen, saying he wouldn't have used terms like sodomy or anal intercourse out of respect for the longtime coach. He described it as "rough positioning" of Sandusky and the boy.

He said Paterno told him he had "done the right thing" by reporting what he saw. The head coach appeared shocked and saddened and slumped back in his chair, McQueary said.

Ten days after speaking with Paterno he said he met with Curley and Schultz.

"There is no question in my mind that I conveyed to them that I saw Jerry Sandusky in the showers with a boy and there was severe sexual acts going on and it was wrong and over the line," he said.

But he said he did not use the words "anal intercourse" or "sodomy."

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-12-16/penn-state-mcqueary-testimony/52007662/1

Red testified today, I guess he was to bashful to use the proper terms when explaining what he saw to coach Paterno. What a dope.

"Rough positioning?'' What in the heck is that supposed to mean? I suppose we're lucky McQueary didn't call it "encroachment."

 

[SteveF]

"Rough positioning?'' What in the heck is that supposed to mean? I suppose we're lucky McQueary didn't call it "encroachment."

Or Illegal d^*^ to the face

 

[MountieBoyOz]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

Or Illegal d^*^ to the face

An Illegal Touching joke would be way too easy and wrong.

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

"Rough positioning?'' What in the heck is that supposed to mean? I suppose we're lucky McQueary didn't call it "encroachment."

Ugh. We've got months, maybe years of this in our future.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

An Illegal Touching joke would be way too easy and wrong.

I dunno, it could be worse. He could have been called for fis... Errr, "holding"

 

[Old Pio]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

I dunno, it could be worse. He could have been called for fis... Errr, "holding"

If we can joke about the Challenger disaster: *dumb blond sounding voice meant to be Christa McAuliffe* "what happens if I push THIS button (followed by sound of explosion)" We can joke about anything. The "humor" courtesy of "The Greaseman,."

 

[rufus]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

We also heard that Paterno waited to inform his boss Curley because he "didn't want to interfere with their weekend". way to go, Joe.

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Joe-Paterno-told-a-grand-jury-he-8216-knew-ina?urn=ncaaf-wp11597

In the testimony, Paterno said he "knew inappropriate action was taken by Jerry Sandusky with a youngster" after a meeting with then-graduate assistant Mike McQueary, who allegedly saw Sandusky sexually abusing a boy in a locker room shower the previous night, but did not inform police and waited at least a day to inform his boss, athletic director Tim Curley, because he "didn't want to interfere with their weekends."

 

[joecct]

Re: Sandusky/Penn State scandal

Now we have a sportswriter:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...dren-in-1970s/2011/12/20/gIQAVgMi7O_blog.html