Jerry Sandusky accused of child molestation (2 Viewers)

[belljr]

I'll just post it instead of searchingPolice deny McQueary reported incident. AND WE'RE OFF

Meh. I think everyone knew that McQueary never filed a formal police report. He only said that he had "discussions with police", which could mean a lot of different things. Maybe he just had an informal conversation with a friend or acquaintance who was a cop?

I would be surprised that the GJ would leave that out, and if they did leave that out, then I would want the feds to get involved.

We don't know if McQueary even told the grand jury. If all he did was talk to an off-duty cop at a bar, then he might not have felt it was necessary to tell the grand jury about it.

I would guess he is talking about Schultz, since he is technically Head of University Police. So of course the police station wouldn't have anything from him on the incident. And I'm not saying that should count as "talking to police". Just that it may be what he means. I doubt that would be considered perjury.

was on espn ticker that GJ was never told by mcqueary he contacted police etc

 

[Thorn]

FWIW, it's not uncommon in estate planning to shift assets bxt husband and wife.

even if it was already owned by both? what is the possible benefit for transferring it from joint ownership to sole ownership by his wife?

Suppose that substantially all of the assets are in husband's name (not uncommon for that generation). Suppose husband is worth $8 million. The federal estate tax doesn't kick in until the estate is worth at least $5 million, and the rate is steep. If husband dies, $3 million of his estate gets hit with the tax. If they arrange their assets so that they both own about $4 million, no tax. WALA!

And they waited until he was 84 to figure this out?

Well the amount of the exemption changes from year to year, both at the federal and state level. Also, the amount of assets folks have can change dramatically, especially if they inherit or get some lump sum. As a result, it's not uncommon to make these sorts of changes from time to time even if an estate plan has been set up a long time ago.

 

[BobbyLayne]

FWIW, it's not uncommon in estate planning to shift assets bxt husband and wife.

even if it was already owned by both? what is the possible benefit for transferring it from joint ownership to sole ownership by his wife?

Suppose that substantially all of the assets are in husband's name (not uncommon for that generation). Suppose husband is worth $8 million. The federal estate tax doesn't kick in until the estate is worth at least $5 million, and the rate is steep. If husband dies, $3 million of his estate gets hit with the tax. If they arrange their assets so that they both own about $4 million, no tax. WALA!

I take it you're a lawyer who doesn't do much estate planning.Transfers between spouses are not subject to estate tax. The very common solution most folks employ, for large or small estates, is an AB Trust. There is no need to shift assets from one spouse to the other. ETA: When the first spouse dies Half goes into Trust A (irrevocable) and half goes into Trust B (For Benefit Of surviving spouse).

The surviving spouse cannot sell any of the property in Trust A, but they can use it and pocket all of the income and interest that it generates. They can also use, sell, or convey any of her own assets in Trust B. When the surviving spouse dies and passes the assets onto to the children, each Trust receives the full $5M exemption.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

I'll just post it instead of searchingPolice deny McQueary reported incident. AND WE'RE OFF

Meh. I think everyone knew that McQueary never filed a formal police report. He only said that he had "discussions with police", which could mean a lot of different things. Maybe he just had an informal conversation with a friend or acquaintance who was a cop?

I would be surprised that the GJ would leave that out, and if they did leave that out, then I would want the feds to get involved.

We don't know if McQueary even told the grand jury. If all he did was talk to an off-duty cop at a bar, then he might not have felt it was necessary to tell the grand jury about it.

I would guess he is talking about Schultz, since he is technically Head of University Police. So of course the police station wouldn't have anything from him on the incident. And I'm not saying that should count as "talking to police". Just that it may be what he means. I doubt that would be considered perjury.

was om espn ticker that GJ was never told by mcqueary he contacte police etc

A) If we are taking the ESPN ticker for legal clarification, then the world must be ending soonB) McQueary might now be saying he contacted the police to make himself look better when in reality he meant he talked to Schultz. The GJ meant did he call the local police station or 911. So in my opinion, he's not committing perjury. He's just making himself look better. And in truth, if he saw Schultz, the head of University Police, at his meeting with Curley, he probably figured he had it covered. I don't think that's so crazy to think from him point of view, although I think we all agree that he and/or Paterno should have called the actual police as soon as it happened.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

FWIW, it's not uncommon in estate planning to shift assets bxt husband and wife.

even if it was already owned by both? what is the possible benefit for transferring it from joint ownership to sole ownership by his wife?

Suppose that substantially all of the assets are in husband's name (not uncommon for that generation). Suppose husband is worth $8 million. The federal estate tax doesn't kick in until the estate is worth at least $5 million, and the rate is steep. If husband dies, $3 million of his estate gets hit with the tax. If they arrange their assets so that they both own about $4 million, no tax. WALA!

I take it you're a lawyer who doesn't do much estate planning.Transfers between spouses are not subject to estate tax. The very common solution most folks employ, for large or small estates, is an AB Trust. There is no need to shift assets from one spouse to the other. ETA: When the first spouse dies Half goes into Trust A (irrevocable) and half goes into Trust B (For Benefit Of surviving spouse).

The surviving spouse cannot sell any of the property in Trust A, but they can use it and pocket all of the income and interest that it generates. They can also use, sell, or convey any of her own assets in Trust B. When the surviving spouse dies and passes the assets onto to the children, each Trust receives the full $5M exemption.

Didn't we already establish that joint assets aren't subject to a judgment against one of the owners in PA?

 

[BobbyLayne]

Just correcting misinformation about estate planning.

 

[Thorn]

FWIW, it's not uncommon in estate planning to shift assets bxt husband and wife.

even if it was already owned by both? what is the possible benefit for transferring it from joint ownership to sole ownership by his wife?

Suppose that substantially all of the assets are in husband's name (not uncommon for that generation). Suppose husband is worth $8 million. The federal estate tax doesn't kick in until the estate is worth at least $5 million, and the rate is steep. If husband dies, $3 million of his estate gets hit with the tax. If they arrange their assets so that they both own about $4 million, no tax. WALA!

I take it you're a lawyer who doesn't do much estate planning.Transfers between spouses are not subject to estate tax. The very common solution most folks employ, for large or small estates, is an AB Trust. There is no need to shift assets from one spouse to the other. ETA: When the first spouse dies Half goes into Trust A (irrevocable) and half goes into Trust B (For Benefit Of surviving spouse).

The surviving spouse cannot sell any of the property in Trust A, but they can use it and pocket all of the income and interest that it generates. They can also use, sell, or convey any of her own assets in Trust B. When the surviving spouse dies and passes the assets onto to the children, each Trust receives the full $5M exemption.

I completely understand that there may not be a need for it, but it isn't uncommon for estate planners (who maybe aren't as good at it as you are), or for lay people who have some understanding of the exemption, to transfer assets bxt spouses.

 

[BobbyLayne]

FWIW, it's not uncommon in estate planning to shift assets bxt husband and wife.

even if it was already owned by both? what is the possible benefit for transferring it from joint ownership to sole ownership by his wife?

Suppose that substantially all of the assets are in husband's name (not uncommon for that generation). Suppose husband is worth $8 million. The federal estate tax doesn't kick in until the estate is worth at least $5 million, and the rate is steep. If husband dies, $3 million of his estate gets hit with the tax. If they arrange their assets so that they both own about $4 million, no tax. WALA!

I take it you're a lawyer who doesn't do much estate planning.Transfers between spouses are not subject to estate tax. The very common solution most folks employ, for large or small estates, is an AB Trust. There is no need to shift assets from one spouse to the other. ETA: When the first spouse dies Half goes into Trust A (irrevocable) and half goes into Trust B (For Benefit Of surviving spouse).

The surviving spouse cannot sell any of the property in Trust A, but they can use it and pocket all of the income and interest that it generates. They can also use, sell, or convey any of her own assets in Trust B. When the surviving spouse dies and passes the assets onto to the children, each Trust receives the full $5M exemption.

I completely understand that there may not be a need for it, but it isn't uncommon for estate planners (who maybe aren't as good at it as you are), or for lay people who have some understanding of the exemption, to transfer assets bxt spouses.

Well, yeah, I forgot to factor in the incompetence factor. It may be JoePa got stupid advice - and I've seen plenty of bad CFAs and CPAs and lawyers dole it out to wealthy clients.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Just correcting misinformation about estate planning.

OK, no big deal. Just seems like a smear story or something if the house is already protected as a joint asset. Seems weird that the NY Times would run it.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

I liked this thread better when it was titled "Jerry Sandusky is a big-time child molester."

 

[prefontaine]

I completely understand that there may not be a need for it, but it isn't uncommon for estate planners (who maybe aren't as good at it as you are), or for lay people who have some understanding of the exemption, to transfer assets bxt spouses.

I would say it's incredibly uncommon as there is no estate planning benefit to doing such. In addition, a sale below FMV like this would have tax implications (to keep people from merely selling their assets to their kids for $1). This was clearly done for some reason that had nothing to do with estate planning unless Paterno has the dumbest advisers on the planet.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

I completely understand that there may not be a need for it, but it isn't uncommon for estate planners (who maybe aren't as good at it as you are), or for lay people who have some understanding of the exemption, to transfer assets bxt spouses.

I asked what the benefit was to doing this. So, the answer is none?

 

[Thorn]

I completely understand that there may not be a need for it, but it isn't uncommon for estate planners (who maybe aren't as good at it as you are), or for lay people who have some understanding of the exemption, to transfer assets bxt spouses.

I would say it's incredibly uncommon as there is no estate planning benefit to doing such. In addition, a sale below FMV like this would have tax implications (to keep people from merely selling their assets to their kids for $1). This was clearly done for some reason that had nothing to do with estate planning unless Paterno has the dumbest advisers on the planet.

Bobby Layne's point was that there was no need to make the spousal transfer during life and that a better plan would involve setting up trusts within the couple's wills. That doesn't mean that people can't (and don't) do what Paterno did here (not that I'm expressing any opinion as to why he did anything). Also, saying that a conveyance is "for one dollar and other consideration," is part of ancient traditional language that doesn't necessarily mean that the property was literally sold for one dollar.

I completely understand that there may not be a need for it, but it isn't uncommon for estate planners (who maybe aren't as good at it as you are), or for lay people who have some understanding of the exemption, to transfer assets bxt spouses.

I asked what the benefit was to doing this. So, the answer is none?

The answer that it could be a (less than ideal) way to take advantage of the $10 million estate tax exemption available to couples, as opposed to the $5 million one available for individuals.

 

[BobbyLayne]

100!

So proud of all of you.

 

[CrossEyed]

100!

So proud of all of you.

You guys are all just riding my coattails.

 

[BobbyLayne]

I completely understand that there may not be a need for it, but it isn't uncommon for estate planners (who maybe aren't as good at it as you are), or for lay people who have some understanding of the exemption, to transfer assets bxt spouses.

I asked what the benefit was to doing this. So, the answer is none?

Actually there may be - but it has nothing to do with the estate tax exemption, and likely nothing to do with protecting the asset from litigation (which, we have previously established, is exempt from creditors because it is their Primary Homestead).The NYT article states that "Documents filed in Centre County, Pa., show that on July 21, Paterno's house near campus was turned over to "Suzanne P. Paterno, trustee" for a dollar plus "love and affection." The key word is "trustee."

The fact that it says trustee clearly shows that it was not just transferred to his wife, but to a trust in which she is the trustee. We have no idea what this trust says, because the NYT only (in broad general terms) described the documents, they never scanned and uploaded them.

It was probably just a revocable living trust. A revocable living trust can be used to avoid probate, because when you die, the trust owns the property and not you (actually the revocable living trust owns everything while you are alive, but I don't want to bog this down in details). Whether it is his revocable living trust, or his wife's is unclear. She can be the trustee of either, both, or neither. It's also possible that the transfer was to a special kind of tax planning trust called a QPRT, or qualified personal residence trust, which is used to transfer the house to younger generations for tax planning.

The NYT didn't publish the documents, so we don't know for sure. However, I do think it's far more likely that this was a routine estate or tax planning transaction, and has nothing to do with the ongoing scandal.

 

[prefontaine]

The answer that it could be a (less than ideal) way to take advantage of the $10 million estate tax exemption available to couples, as opposed to the $5 million one available for individuals.

Maybe this wasn't clear, I dunno, but it isn't a "less than ideal way." It doesn't work like that at all.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

I completely understand that there may not be a need for it, but it isn't uncommon for estate planners (who maybe aren't as good at it as you are), or for lay people who have some understanding of the exemption, to transfer assets bxt spouses.

I would say it's incredibly uncommon as there is no estate planning benefit to doing such. In addition, a sale below FMV like this would have tax implications (to keep people from merely selling their assets to their kids for $1). This was clearly done for some reason that had nothing to do with estate planning unless Paterno has the dumbest advisers on the planet.

In PA it is common to transfer to your children for $1. There is an exception to transfer tax.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

So can we all agree then that the NYT article is just there to rile people up for no reason?

 

[Steve Tasker]

I completely understand that there may not be a need for it, but it isn't uncommon for estate planners (who maybe aren't as good at it as you are), or for lay people who have some understanding of the exemption, to transfer assets bxt spouses.

I asked what the benefit was to doing this. So, the answer is none?

Actually there may be - but it has nothing to do with the estate tax exemption, and likely nothing to do with protecting the asset from litigation (which, we have previously established, is exempt from creditors because it is their Primary Homestead).The NYT article states that "Documents filed in Centre County, Pa., show that on July 21, Paterno's house near campus was turned over to "Suzanne P. Paterno, trustee" for a dollar plus "love and affection." The key word is "trustee."

The fact that it says trustee clearly shows that it was not just transferred to his wife, but to a trust in which she is the trustee. We have no idea what this trust says, because the NYT only (in broad general terms) described the documents, they never scanned and uploaded them.

It was probably just a revocable living trust. A revocable living trust can be used to avoid probate, because when you die, the trust owns the property and not you (actually the revocable living trust owns everything while you are alive, but I don't want to bog this down in details). Whether it is his revocable living trust, or his wife's is unclear. She can be the trustee of either, both, or neither. It's also possible that the transfer was to a special kind of tax planning trust called a QPRT, or qualified personal residence trust, which is used to transfer the house to younger generations for tax planning.

The NYT didn't publish the documents, so we don't know for sure. However, I do think it's far more likely that this was a routine estate or tax planning transaction, and has nothing to do with the ongoing scandal.

 

[Gachi]

I wonder what is (or was) on Sandusky's computer. Did we ever hear anything about search warrants being served? It seems like that would be SOP but I don't remember hearing anything.

In other news, the judge that gave him the sweetheart deal has been replaced for the preliminary hearing.link

This gives me hope in humanity again..

 

[Penguin]

Joe Paterno from the point of view of former Penn State grad assistant Matt Paknis Link

 

[apalmer]

I completely understand that there may not be a need for it, but it isn't uncommon for estate planners (who maybe aren't as good at it as you are), or for lay people who have some understanding of the exemption, to transfer assets bxt spouses.

I would say it's incredibly uncommon as there is no estate planning benefit to doing such. In addition, a sale below FMV like this would have tax implications (to keep people from merely selling their assets to their kids for $1). This was clearly done for some reason that had nothing to do with estate planning unless Paterno has the dumbest advisers on the planet.

In PA it is common to transfer to your children for $1. There is an exception to transfer tax.

Common and stupid. You avoid the 4.5% inheritance tax but transfer your basis in the house so that when they sell, the kids pay the IRS on the profit (difference between sale price and basis) at a much higher tax rate. Pay the 4.5% inheritance tax and their basis is the value they paid inheritance tax on and there's little or no profit when the property is sold.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Lawyer: Client ready to testify against Sandusky

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP)—A lawyer said Wednesday that his client will testify that he was sexually abused by former Penn State assistant coach Jerry Sandusky, and Pennsylvania state lawmakers are starting to plan for a special commission that will examine the legal issues raised by the child sex-abuse scandal.

Harrisburg attorney Ben Andreozzi said he represents a client who will testify against Sandusky, who is accused of abusing eight boys, some on campus, over 15 years.

“I am appalled by the fact that Mr. Sandusky has elected to re-victimize these young men at a time when they should be healing,” Andreozzi said, in a statement released by his office. “He fully intends to testify that he was severely sexually assaulted by Mr. Sandusky.”

Sandusky’s lawyer, Joe Amendola, appeared with him on NBC’s “Rock Center” on Monday night and cast doubt on the evidence in the case.

“We anticipate we’re going to have at least several of those kids come forward and say, `This never happened. This is me. This is the allegation. It never occurred,”’ Amendola said.

Andreozzi said he has his “finger on the pulse” of the case and knows of no accusers changing their stories or refusing to testify.

“To the contrary, others are actually coming forward, and I will have more information for you later this week,” Andreozzi said.

Sandusky, 67, appeared on the show by phone and said he had showered with boys but never molested them.

Meanwhile, Pennsylvania legislative leaders said they will set up a bipartisan, bicameral commission to consider changes to state law in the wake of the scandal. The plan was described as being in the planning stage, including meetings of leaders and their aides.

Topics are likely to include mandatory reporting of suspected abuse, and the legal definition of child abuse, said Senate Democratic spokeswoman Lisa Scullin.

Also Wednesday, Penn State campus police and their counterparts in State College said they had no record of Mike McQueary reporting an alleged sexual assault by Jerry Sandusky on a 10-year-old boy in a campus shower.

The details ran counter to McQueary’s claims in an email to former teammates and made available to The Associated Press this week.

McQueary, then a graduate assistant for the football team, wrote in the email that he had discussions with police about what he saw. In the email, McQueary did not specify which police department he spoke to.

State College borough police Chief Tom King said McQueary didn’t make a report to his department.

Campus police referred questions on the Sandusky case to the university’s public information office.

“At this point we have no record of any police report being filed in 2002” by McQueary in connection with the Sandusky case, university spokeswoman Annemarie Mountz said, adding police searched their records Wednesday.

The football building is on university property, so campus police would have been the most likely to respond for a police call.

Mountz also noted the 23-page grand jury report was the state attorney general’s summary of testimony, so it’s unclear what McQueary’s full testimony was.

The news came after a new judge was assigned to handle the child sex abuse charges against Sandusky, whose televised defense earlier this week drew a rebuke from a lawyer for one of his accusers.

The change removed a State College judge with ties to a charity founded by Sandusky for at-risk children, The Second Mile.

Sandusky is due in court on Dec. 7, and the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts announced that a Westmoreland County senior district judge would preside over his preliminary hearing. Robert E. Scott is taking over the hearing from Centre County District Judge Leslie Dutchcot.

Dutchcot has donated money to The Second Mile, where authorities say Sandusky met his victims.

The office said Scott has no known ties to Penn State or The Second Mile.

It remains unclear how many accusers have surfaced more than a week after state police and the attorney general’s office said at a news conference they were seeking additional potential victims and witnesses.

State police spokeswoman Maria Finn said investigators have told her that published accounts reporting how many people have come forward are inaccurate and they are not disclosing their internal figures.

Some plaintiffs’ lawyers are starting to advertise on their websites for potential Sandusky victims, vowing to get justice. Jeff Anderson, a St. Paul, Minn., attorney, has long represented clergy abuse victims and told The Associated Press that he has been retained by several people he described as Sandusky victims.

“There’s a great deal of fury and confusion,” particularly because Sandusky is free on bail, Anderson said. “Getting (them) help and cooperating with law enforcement is our first priority.”

The “time for reckoning,” in the form of civil lawsuits, will come later, Anderson said.

Anderson declined to say whether his clients are among the eight boys who were labeled as victims in the grand jury report.

In State College, Penn State announced a physician and member of its board of trustees who played football and wrestled for the school would serve as acting athletic director. The school named Dr. David M. Joyner, an orthopedic surgeon who specializes in sports medicine and is a business consultant, as the interim replacement for Tim Curley.

Curley is on leave as athletic director as he defends himself against criminal charges that he failed to properly alert authorities when told of an allegation of a sexual assault by Sandusky against a child and that he lied to a grand jury. He maintains his innocence.

Joyner’s position on the board, where he has been a trustee since 2000, is being suspended as he takes on the new duties.

Gov. Tom Corbett again defended the pace of the investigation, which he helped launch and oversaw while serving as attorney general until January.

“Could anybody guarantee he wasn’t out there touching children? There are no such guarantees, unless he was sitting in jail,” Corbett, a Republican, said in Philadelphia. “But we did what we thought was in the best interests of the investigation in getting a good case put together.”

And new details were emerging about how the case ended up in the hands of the state attorney general’s office.

Former Centre County District Attorney Michael Madeira said that his wife’s brother was Sandusky’s adopted son.

“I reviewed it, and I made the decision it needed to be investigated further,” Madeira said. “But the apparent conflict of interest created an impediment for me to make those kinds of decisions.”

Scolforo reported from Harrisburg. Dale and AP writer Kathy Matheson reported from Philadelphia.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

This is what happens when you're so arrogant as to go on TV and proclaim innocence when you are Sandusky.

link

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. -- Jerry Sandusky’s primetime television interview Monday led several potential victims to come forward and consider sharing their story, according to two State College attorneys.

Hearing his voice and his words proclaiming no wrong — while admitting he showered innocently with young boys — was a trigger for some who say they were abused by the former Penn State defensive coordinator. One said it went back to the 1970s, around the time Sandusky founded the charity that prosecutors say was his axis for finding victims.

“They’re literally processing it right in front of us,” attorney Andy Shubin said. “They have kept it from their families, moms, brothers and sisters. ... The folks we talked to are largely folks in their 20s, who in a lot of cases have never told their story before.”

Shubin, who is working closely with attorney Justine Andronici, has also teamed up with psychologists, social workers and a national child sex abuse organization so that these people can seek mental help along with possible legal recourse.

Many, Shubin says, haven’t yet decided if they are going to talk to police. Some cases might be too old for a viable prosecution.

But all are seeking to heal, Shubin said, and their pain was re-triggered by Sandusky’s interview Monday night with NBC’s Bob Costas.

“I spent about half the day in kitchens and living rooms, speaking with victims of Sandusky’s molestation and processing with them the effects of Jerry Sandusky being on television and Jerry Sandusky denying wrongdoing," Shubin said. "And what I found was that these folks are being re-traumatized.”

Shubin said he couldn’t put a number to his conversations. At this point, he said, it isn’t clear how many people he consulted with will end up coming forward and telling their stories to police.

Authorities have set up a tip line for this case, but won’t say how many new victims have come forward. No more charges have been filed, and state police rebutted claims by the New York Times that there were 10 new victims.

Some of those who talked to Shubin are afraid of retribution from Penn State-crazed fans, or being blamed — like one victim — for the downfall of Joe Paterno.

Mike Gillum, the psychologist working with the Clinton County boy who first came forward to authorities in 2008 and whose statement led to the grand jury investigation, said Wednesday that the teen boy is having trouble in school because he is being bullied.

Coming forward has led to threats and verbal abuse, Gillum said.

“In some cases we’re finding that they are hiding in a fairly remote area, they are afraid of being discovered,” Shubin said about the people he talked to Wednesday.

Others have already come forward and say they were dissuaded from being honest, he said.

“In some cases they have disclosed something in careful ways to people in positions of authority and they were not believed,” Andronici said. “They were, in some cases, scolded and silenced.”

Shubin and Andronici released a statement Tuesday outlining their plan to take civil action on behalf of victims who want to pursue that kind of relief.

Shubin is well-known in State College for his civil rights work, and is often sought out by crime victims for representation. He has a reputation for taking on Penn State in other lawsuits.

“The word is getting out that we have the interest of the victims,” Andronici said. “People know who Andy is, they know who I am. They see that we’re in a position to advise them as they navigate this. It’s an extremely daunting process — getting prepared in their mind to deal with this.”

 

[Donsmith753]

This is what happens when you're so arrogant as to go on TV and proclaim innocence when you are Sandusky.

link

Coming forward has led to threats and verbal abuse, Gillum said.

“In some cases we’re finding that they are hiding in a fairly remote area, they are afraid of being discovered,” Shubin said about the people he talked to Wednesday.

Others have already come forward and say they were dissuaded from being honest, he said.

“In some cases they have disclosed something in careful ways to people in positions of authority and they were not believed,” Andronici said. “They were, in some cases, scolded and silenced.”

Ouch

 

[CrossEyed]

I hope that one of the things that results from this is that PSU, Pitt and Temple lose their ability to stay exempted from PA's Right To Know Law.

Too much secrecy going on at some of these places.

 

[Sammy3469]

So the current PA governor greenlighted 3 million dollars for Second Mile's dorms in August 2011 after being the AG that started the Sandusky investigation in 2008...all the while he never told Second Mile, Sandusky wasn't being investigated.

What the hell is going on there?

SportsByBrooks Link

 

[Wadsworth]

FWIW, it's not uncommon in estate planning to shift assets bxt husband and wife.

even if it was already owned by both? what is the possible benefit for transferring it from joint ownership to sole ownership by his wife?

Strangely, my dad said he has been considering selling the house he has owned since the 70s to his wife for $1. I asked him why and he said he was advised to do so for estate purposes but does not really understand the reasoning(which is why he hasn't done it yet). So there may be some reasoning behind the move.

 

[Fat Nick]

Joe Paterno from the point of view of former Penn State grad assistant Matt Paknis Link

Interesting read, but the guy has had a blog for a while now and only AFTER this comes out does he decide to write about how he feels about the PSU staff while fully admitting he never witnessed sexual misconduct. Seems if things were as whacky as he portrays them, he'd have mentioned this earlier on a blog about teams and leaders...just saying.

 

[ClownCausedChaos]

A thought on the Paterno house thing and the timing of it:

Years ago, I remember hearing a story (of which I have no link to) where a source close to Paterno was interviewed with regards to when Paterno would quit coaching. The source told the story of how Paterno and Bear Bryant were close friends. After Bryant stopped coaching, he died very soon there after. The source said that in speaking with Paterno in private, Paterno wondered that after coaching for so long, did Bear Bryant have nothing left to live for? Paterno was scared that the same thing would happen to him.

Now that his career is over, maybe the thought has moved from the back to the front of his mind? I dunno...just a theory.

 

[Wadsworth]

So the current PA governor greenlighted 3 million dollars for Second Mile's dorms in August 2011 after being the AG that started the Sandusky investigation in 2008...all the while he never told Second Mile, Sandusky wasn't being investigated.

What the hell is going on there?

SportsByBrooks Link

Come on, really? You could not sell this script in Hollywood, no one would think it believable.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Franco-Harris-stands-by-his-old-coach-and-loses?urn=ncaaf-wp9995

Franco Harris lost a job over his Paterno comments

 

[pollardsvision]

This is what happens when you're so arrogant as to go on TV and proclaim innocence when you are Sandusky.

link

Coming forward has led to threats and verbal abuse, Gillum said.

“In some cases we’re finding that they are hiding in a fairly remote area, they are afraid of being discovered,” Shubin said about the people he talked to Wednesday.

Others have already come forward and say they were dissuaded from being honest, he said.

“In some cases they have disclosed something in careful ways to people in positions of authority and they were not believed,” Andronici said. “They were, in some cases, scolded and silenced.”

Ouch

If true, this some horrible ####.

 

[Disco Stu]

A thought on the Paterno house thing and the timing of it:Years ago, I remember hearing a story (of which I have no link to) where a source close to Paterno was interviewed with regards to when Paterno would quit coaching. The source told the story of how Paterno and Bear Bryant were close friends. After Bryant stopped coaching, he died very soon there after. The source said that in speaking with Paterno in private, Paterno wondered that after coaching for so long, did Bear Bryant have nothing left to live for? Paterno was scared that the same thing would happen to him. Now that his career is over, maybe the thought has moved from the back to the front of his mind? I dunno...just a theory.

But that happened in July.

 

[CrossEyed]

So the current PA governor greenlighted 3 million dollars for Second Mile's dorms in August 2011 after being the AG that started the Sandusky investigation in 2008...all the while he never told Second Mile, Sandusky wasn't being investigated.

What the hell is going on there?

SportsByBrooks Link

Come on, really? You could not sell this script in Hollywood, no one would think it believable.

In fairness, the governor has stated that he could not discuss anything that he knew while at the AG office with anyone at the governor's office, particularly relating to an ongoing investigation. Not sure if that is legitimate or not, but that was his explanation. By the time the application gets to his desk, it's basically a rubber stamp kind of thing.Oh, and the grant has since been pulled.

 

[Disco Stu]

Joe Paterno from the point of view of former Penn State grad assistant Matt Paknis Link

Could he have maybe worded this a little differently?

It's reprehensible if the coaches I worked with at Penn State thrust and or allowed comparable trauma on innocent kids.

 

[ClownCausedChaos]

A thought on the Paterno house thing and the timing of it:Years ago, I remember hearing a story (of which I have no link to) where a source close to Paterno was interviewed with regards to when Paterno would quit coaching. The source told the story of how Paterno and Bear Bryant were close friends. After Bryant stopped coaching, he died very soon there after. The source said that in speaking with Paterno in private, Paterno wondered that after coaching for so long, did Bear Bryant have nothing left to live for? Paterno was scared that the same thing would happen to him. Now that his career is over, maybe the thought has moved from the back to the front of his mind? I dunno...just a theory.

But that happened in July.

I can only assume that Paterno and the rest of the guys at PSU saw the writing on the wall before the news broke. Again, pure theory and speculation on my part.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

But that happened in July.

I can only assume that Paterno and the rest of the guys at PSU saw the writing on the wall before the news broke. Again, pure theory and speculation on my part.

this was the last year of his contract so maybe he planned to retire at the end of the year anyway. although I wonder if he would have stopped before getting the wins record.

 

[Disco Stu]

A thought on the Paterno house thing and the timing of it:Years ago, I remember hearing a story (of which I have no link to) where a source close to Paterno was interviewed with regards to when Paterno would quit coaching. The source told the story of how Paterno and Bear Bryant were close friends. After Bryant stopped coaching, he died very soon there after. The source said that in speaking with Paterno in private, Paterno wondered that after coaching for so long, did Bear Bryant have nothing left to live for? Paterno was scared that the same thing would happen to him. Now that his career is over, maybe the thought has moved from the back to the front of his mind? I dunno...just a theory.

But that happened in July.

I can only assume that Paterno and the rest of the guys at PSU saw the writing on the wall before the news broke. Again, pure theory and speculation on my part.

Oh... Yeah, I think that's why this house thing was considered newsworthy in the first place.

 

[Tom Hagen]

I completely understand that there may not be a need for it, but it isn't uncommon for estate planners (who maybe aren't as good at it as you are), or for lay people who have some understanding of the exemption, to transfer assets bxt spouses.

I would say it's incredibly uncommon as there is no estate planning benefit to doing such. In addition, a sale below FMV like this would have tax implications (to keep people from merely selling their assets to their kids for $1). This was clearly done for some reason that had nothing to do with estate planning unless Paterno has the dumbest advisers on the planet.

Not if it was to his spouse. There are no tax implications for property transferred between spouses.

 

[Fat Nick]

A thought on the Paterno house thing and the timing of it:Years ago, I remember hearing a story (of which I have no link to) where a source close to Paterno was interviewed with regards to when Paterno would quit coaching. The source told the story of how Paterno and Bear Bryant were close friends. After Bryant stopped coaching, he died very soon there after. The source said that in speaking with Paterno in private, Paterno wondered that after coaching for so long, did Bear Bryant have nothing left to live for? Paterno was scared that the same thing would happen to him. Now that his career is over, maybe the thought has moved from the back to the front of his mind? I dunno...just a theory.

But that happened in July.

I can only assume that Paterno and the rest of the guys at PSU saw the writing on the wall before the news broke. Again, pure theory and speculation on my part.

Oh... Yeah, I think that's why this house thing was considered newsworthy in the first place.

Again, why would he do this with his $500K house in State College and NOT his $3 Million place in Avalon, NJ if he was trying to protect assets? It makes no sense as part of an asset protection ploy. It's simply estate management of some sort, but I'm no expert in that area.

 

[Tom Hagen]

Actually there may be - but it has nothing to do with the estate tax exemption, and likely nothing to do with protecting the asset from litigation (which, we have previously established, is exempt from creditors because it is their Primary Homestead).

The NYT article states that "Documents filed in Centre County, Pa., show that on July 21, Paterno's house near campus was turned over to "Suzanne P. Paterno, trustee" for a dollar plus "love and affection." The key word is "trustee."

The fact that it says trustee clearly shows that it was not just transferred to his wife, but to a trust in which she is the trustee. We have no idea what this trust says, because the NYT only (in broad general terms) described the documents, they never scanned and uploaded them.

It was probably just a revocable living trust. A revocable living trust can be used to avoid probate, because when you die, the trust owns the property and not you (actually the revocable living trust owns everything while you are alive, but I don't want to bog this down in details). Whether it is his revocable living trust, or his wife's is unclear. She can be the trustee of either, both, or neither. It's also possible that the transfer was to a special kind of tax planning trust called a QPRT, or qualified personal residence trust, which is used to transfer the house to younger generations for tax planning.

The NYT didn't publish the documents, so we don't know for sure. However, I do think it's far more likely that this was a routine estate or tax planning transaction, and has nothing to do with the ongoing scandal.

BL nails it as usual. Based upon the limited information we have, Paterno did not transfer the house to his wife, he transferred it to a trust of which she is the trustee. There are valid estate planning reasons for doing so.

 

[CrossEyed]

Starkey: Lessons from Paterno, Tressel

By Joe Starkey

PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE-REVIEW

Thursday, November 17, 2011

We should all be mortified at how we worship college coaches.

It's sickening.

We turn men who win football games into living gods. We allow them to build empires and wield unchecked power. We deny their wrongdoings in the face of hard evidence. We ascribe to them all manner of righteous attributes when 99 percent of us know almost nothing about them.

I've been part of the problem.

Just last fall, I went to Penn State and wrote a glowing piece about Joe Paterno's 400th victory. I made it about more than winning. I interviewed a woman who said, "I think (Paterno) likes the idea of winning, but I think he cares more about his players as students and people. I admire him for that."

Looking back on my next paragraph, I cringe:

Call me naive, but I think she's right. I believed Sue Paterno earlier this week, too, when she said it's not the milestones that are important to her husband but "the young men you develop."

That might well have been true. So might this: Other young men — boys, actually — were being sexually assaulted by one of Paterno's ex-coaches, if a state grand jury presentment is accurate. And nobody, including Paterno, kept Jerry Sandusky away from the football facilities even after a disturbing allegation in 2002 and a ban on Sandusky bringing children onto campus.

That said, the purpose here is not to demonize Paterno. This isn't about demonizing coaches.

It's about the pathetic practice of deifying them.

Media, fans and administrators advance the myth that coaches such as Paterno and Jim Tressel represent a higher form of life.

Those two were fired amid scandals and presumably will be far away from Ohio Stadium on Saturday, as Tom Bradley leads Penn State against Luke Fickell's Buckeyes.

I just wonder: If Paterno and Tressel were guilty of gross negligence — Paterno regarding a much more serious matter, obviously — what about us? What were we doing when these men were building their empires?

In the wake of the Penn State scandal, are we reflexively trying to defend Paterno?

Multiple examples tell us that protecting a coach and his program often comes at the expense of values such as honesty, fair play and, in the Penn State case, perhaps even the welfare of children.

If you think I cringe at my Paterno story, imagine how Jim Dent, then of the San Antonio News-Express, must feel about this long-ago column passage: "According to the values we should all set for ourselves, Joseph Vincent Paterno is the most divine human to ever coach college football."

Dave Anderson, Pulitzer Prize-winning writer for the New York Times, once wrote, "Joe Paterno's legacy isn't his won-lost record. His legacy is himself. His integrity. His guts to do the right thing."

At the funeral of his father-in-law, Hugh Rodham, former President Bill Clinton said, "Until his dying day, (Rodham) thought if there was a perfect person on earth, his name was Joe Paterno."

Indeed, we glorify these men as if they are cleansing sins, winning wars or curing cancer. Schools pay them far more than the people on campus who really are trying to cure cancer.

When trouble knocks, denial greets it at the door. The depth of said denial is proportionate to the height of the coach's pedestal.

How else to explain Ohio State officials recently unveiling a mural of the disgraced Tressel inside the Woody Hayes Athletic Center?

The sweater-vested Tressel came off as the most pious of coaches. He beat Michigan all the time, too, and even appeared to have a direct line to the divine, as evidenced by the title of one of his books: "Promises from God on Achieving Your Best."

If Tressel ever updates the book, he'll have to include a chapter on how he was forced to resign amid NCAA allegations that he withheld information and lied to keep key players eligible. He could talk about leaving a mess at Youngstown State, as well.

Maybe someday, Tressel will get a statue outside Ohio Stadium, matching the one of Paterno at Beaver Stadium.

The New York Times' Maureen Dowd recently quoted former Washington Star columnist David Israel on the coach-worshipping phenomenon. Israel called our sickness a "delusion that the ability to win football games indicates anything at all about your character or intelligence other than that you can win football games."

The lesson here is obvious.

Will we ever learn?

Joe Starkey can be reached at jraystarkey@gmail.com

Read more: Starkey: Lessons from Paterno, Tressel - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/print_767729.html#ixzz1dycFB9cA

 

[AmosMoses]

So the current PA governor greenlighted 3 million dollars for Second Mile's dorms in August 2011 after being the AG that started the Sandusky investigation in 2008...all the while he never told Second Mile, Sandusky wasn't being investigated.

What the hell is going on there?

SportsByBrooks Link

WTF? Should we just nuke the entire state?

 

[BobbyLayne]

So the current PA governor greenlighted 3 million dollars for Second Mile's dorms in August 2011 after being the AG that started the Sandusky investigation in 2008...all the while he never told Second Mile, Sandusky wasn't being investigated.

What the hell is going on there?

SportsByBrooks Link

WTF? Should we just nuke the entire state?

Yeah, you would think they would pull that grant. I know Colorado would.

 

[The Noid]

Here's what I'm tired of: PSU supporters now complaining about this being a witch hunt against Joe Paterno (and the school) and not enough focus on Sandusky. These are the same people that want to point out what a pillar Joe Paterno was/is to the PSU community, how his 60 years of service has done yadda yadda yadda for the school, students, etc. so he desrves to be treated better, blah blah, blah.

So, for someone so integral (and upstanding) to have this happen on "his watch" it is absolutely justifiable for him to be held accountable and the main lightning rod in the public and media's eyes.

You can't have it both ways.

 

[CrossEyed]

OK, so which one of these guys have posted in this thread?

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

OK, so which one of these guys have posted in this thread?

People are still calling that a riot?

 

[CrossEyed]

OK, so which one of these guys have posted in this thread?

People are still calling that a riot?

OK, are you the guy with the bandana over your face?