What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Jerry Sandusky accused of child molestation (3 Viewers)

johnnycakes said:
Raider Nation said:
BELLEFONTE, Pa. — A son of former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky is seeking to have his name changed more than a year after his adoptive father was convicted of child sexual abuse.

Matt Sandusky filed papers Tuesday in Centre County Court seeking to have the names of him and his family changed. Though the documents are sealed, they show he filed for a name change, along with his wife and four children.

Matt Sandusky had been expected to be a defense witness until the trial, when he told investigators that he also had been abused by Jerry Sandusky.

Jerry Sandusky was convicted on 45 counts of sexual abuse. He is serving a 30- to 60-year prison sentence and maintains he was wrongfully convicted. He is pursuing appeals.
Click to expand...
Ooof. Another skeleton falls out of the closet.
Click to expand...
That's been out for a while.

I can't imagine being in the son's shoes, let alone after having been abused. The nightmare never ends apparently.

 
PatsFanCT said:
Raider Nation said:
BELLEFONTE, Pa. — A son of former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky is seeking to have his name changed more than a year after his adoptive father was convicted of child sexual abuse.

Matt Sandusky filed papers Tuesday in Centre County Court seeking to have the names of him and his family changed. Though the documents are sealed, they show he filed for a name change, along with his wife and four children.

Matt Sandusky had been expected to be a defense witness until the trial, when he told investigators that he also had been abused by Jerry Sandusky.

Jerry Sandusky was convicted on 45 counts of sexual abuse. He is serving a 30- to 60-year prison sentence and maintains he was wrongfully convicted. He is pursuing appeals.
Click to expand...
Is he changing his name to Jerry?
Click to expand...
Peter Fileson.

 
mad sweeney said:
Mr. Retukes said:
Dragons said:
This may have been addressed in the past few pages since the Sandusky trial, but my memory sucks. What has happened to McQueary?
Click to expand...
He was fired last year and has been unemployed ever since. He's filed a $4 million dollar whistleblower lawsuit against Penn State:http://deadspin.com/5948411/mike-mcqueary-has-filed-a-4-million-lawsuit-against-penn-state
Click to expand...
Guy deserves to be in jail as an accomplice to covering that up. Staying at the school and advancing in the coaching ranks knowing that they covered up rape and molestation?! Piss off coward.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he may not have broken any laws, but I have a tough time sympathizing with him at all. How do you not follow that up aggressively? He committed the same (at least) moral wrong that Paterno did, by doing the barest minimum he needed to to pass the buck off to someone else so he could go about his job undisturbed.

 
T Bell said:
mad sweeney said:
Mr. Retukes said:
Dragons said:
This may have been addressed in the past few pages since the Sandusky trial, but my memory sucks. What has happened to McQueary?
Click to expand...
He was fired last year and has been unemployed ever since. He's filed a $4 million dollar whistleblower lawsuit against Penn State:http://deadspin.com/5948411/mike-mcqueary-has-filed-a-4-million-lawsuit-against-penn-state
Click to expand...
Guy deserves to be in jail as an accomplice to covering that up. Staying at the school and advancing in the coaching ranks knowing that they covered up rape and molestation?! Piss off coward.
Click to expand...
Yeah, he may not have broken any laws, but I have a tough time sympathizing with him at all. How do you not follow that up aggressively? He committed the same (at least) moral wrong that Paterno did, by doing the barest minimum he needed to to pass the buck off to someone else so he could go about his job undisturbed.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's a bigger deal than people think. Nothing excuses Paterno, but Mike was a QB for him and was showing the potential to be a good coach and wanted to be a lifer at PSU. If he suddenly leaves after that, it might signal something more to people. There would be questions about why he left suddenly and what happened among fans and media following the team because we knew he loved PSU and wanted to be a future coach. Might have exposed something sooner. But by staying he almost unintentionally signalled that it wasn't a big deal. Very frustrating.

 
Emails may reveal more to scandal?

HARRISBURG, Pa. — It was late at night on Feb. 27, 2001, and Penn State's then-president, Graham Spanier, one of academia's most prominent administrators, typed a brief email to two other top administrators as they debated how to respond to a thorny situation.


He was, he wrote, supportive of the athletic director's proposed approach.

"The only downside for us is if the message isn't 'heard' and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it," Spanier wrote.

The question of what exact situation the three men were discussing will go before a judge Monday to determine whether Spanier, retired university vice president Gary Schultz and then-athletic director Tim Curley must face trial on charges they covered up an allegation that Jerry Sandusky was sexually preying on boys.

The men say they are innocent and were never aware that an allegation at the time involved anything of a sexual nature. Rather, they say, they had believed that Sandusky, a former top assistant coach on Penn State's heralded football team, and the boy known in court papers as Victim 2 were engaged in nothing more than horseplay in a university locker room shower earlier that month.

Instead of reporting it to police, Sandusky was told not to bring boys onto the campus anymore, according to a grand jury report released Nov. 1 that recommended charges against the men. At the time, nobody sought to learn the identity of the boy. Sandusky is now serving a 30- to 60-year prison sentence after being convicted last year of sexually abusing 10 boys. The conviction included molesting Victim 5 in those showers a mere six months later, sexually abusing Victim 3 around the same period and molesting Victims 1 and 9 in later years.

The case will go in front of District Judge William Wenner, a former Dauphin County detective, and the preliminary hearing is expected to last a day or two. In recent years as a district judge, Wenner has carved out a niche in handling many of the biggest grand jury cases developed by the state attorney general's office.

In these cases, Wenner has found, with the exception of a few charges he has dismissed, state prosecutors have met the low burden of evidence necessary to win approval to take their cases to a full court trial.

For this hearing, state prosecutors led by Chief Deputy Attorney General Bruce Beemer are not trying to prove the men's guilt. Rather, they just have to prove that enough evidence exists to warrant a trial.

No witness list was available Friday, but one key piece of evidence at the hearing could be that email exchange among the men.

"My eyes popped out of my head when I saw those emails because they are just so dramatically significant and documentary evidence of a then-conscious state of mind," said Thomas Kline, a Philadelphia lawyer whose client, Victim 5, testified against Sandusky.

A football team graduate assistant in 2001, Mike McQueary, has testified that he saw Sandusky and a boy engaged in a sex act in the locker room shower and within days reported it to coach Joe Paterno, Curley and Schultz. However, Curley and Schultz say McQueary never reported that the incident was sexual in nature, and Spanier, in turn, has said Curley and Schultz never told him about any sort of sex abuse of a boy.

The three are charged with perjury, obstruction, endangering the welfare of children, failure to properly report suspected abuse and conspiracy. Those charges include allegations of hiding evidence from investigators and lying to the grand jury.

Curley and Schultz were initially charged in November 2011, when Sandusky was arrested, and accused of perjury and failure to properly report the incident.

Spanier was forced out as president at that time. A year later, he was charged with covering up a complaint about Sandusky while additional charges were filed against Curley and Schultz. Spanier remains a faculty member on administrative leave.

Paterno was fired and died in January 2012.
Click to expand...
 
From today's WSJ:

Three former Pennsylvania State University administrators will stand trial for allegedly covering up sexual abuse by Jerry Sandusky, a former assistant football coach there, a judge ruled Tuesday.


Following a preliminary hearing in Dauphin County Court, Magisterial District Judge William C. Wenner said that the case should proceed. Penn State's former president Graham Spanier, former senior vice president of business Gary Schultz and former athletic director Tim Curley each face five felony counts for perjury, endangering the welfare of children and criminal conspiracy related to their alleged failure to report abuse by Mr. Sandusky and efforts to cover it up during the investigation.
Prosecutors argued that the three administrators knew about allegations of abuse by Mr. Sandusky but didn't report a 2001 incident to authorities.

The three men have maintained their innocence and said they believed the 2001 incident involved horseplay rather than a sexual assault. Defense lawyers for the three men have argued that some testimony shouldn't be allowed at trial and that the three men weren't required to report abuse.

Mr. Sandusky was convicted a year ago on more than 40 counts related to sexually abusing 10 boys over more than a decade.
Click to expand...
 
The articles being written by Pgh journalists and the twitter feeds of Pgh media members covering this has brought out the sickest, most demented PSU grads(#Paternowackos) you could imagine. These people attack any journalist or person saying anything bad about Joe and will defend him endlessly. It might be a minority of the PSU alumni but they're very vocal and extremely vicious. It really is a cult.

It's sad to see Franco Harris embarrass himself the way he has through all of this. He's making a fool of himself and really has no clue how pathetic he looks. I read an article that basically said he decided to defend JoePa within the first week of the initial allegations against JS coming out. He never waited to hear the details, he had already made up his mind, he was gonna defend his former coach no mater what.

 
"It wasn't sexual in nature. It was just horseplay...involving a naked man, late at night, in a secluded locker room, in the shower, with a naked young boy..."

 
HughHoney said:
The articles being written by Pgh journalists and the twitter feeds of Pgh media members covering this has brought out the sickest, most demented PSU grads(#Paternowackos) you could imagine. These people attack any journalist or person saying anything bad about Joe and will defend him endlessly. It might be a minority of the PSU alumni but they're very vocal and extremely vicious. It really is a cult.

It's sad to see Franco Harris embarrass himself the way he has through all of this. He's making a fool of himself and really has no clue how pathetic he looks. I read an article that basically said he decided to defend JoePa within the first week of the initial allegations against JS coming out. He never waited to hear the details, he had already made up his mind, he was gonna defend his former coach no mater what.
Click to expand...
Agree with most of this. Of course, minorities almost by definition need to be more vocal and driven to get their message across, regardless of whether that message is valid or not. So I'm not sure what people expect. Of course the "Paterno defenders", for lack of a better term, are going to act like that. Conversely the fact that they need to act like that means that they don't have the greater power of a larger organization and are therefore, truly the minority.

 
Dragons said:
This may have been addressed in the past few pages since the Sandusky trial, but my memory sucks. What has happened to McQueary?
Click to expand...
McQueary was kind of a perv himself. He used to randomly add attractive Penn State undergrads as friends on Facebook while he was a married 35-year old coach working on campus. He randomly added my wife as a friend, even though they had no connection and had never met. Not exactly Sandusky-level perv status, but still kinda creepy.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
T Bell said:
mquinnjr said:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2014/01/07/jerry-sandusky-penn-state-tries-to-get-pension/4353797/

What's this, is Jerry sweating a little being past due on January's protection invoice due to the Aryan Brotherhood? Why else would he need his pension at this point except for spite?
Click to expand...
I would imagine that his wife has something to do with it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's a good point. Still, looks like the State might have him on this one.

 
mquinnjr said:
Zow said:
For my death pool's sake, I hope you're right.

I'm due, baby!
Click to expand...
Seriously...I know he's probably in some sort of protective custody, but, don't prisoners find ways around that? Or is it just the movies?
Click to expand...
It's not unheard of for there to be beatings or even killings, but generally people are way safer in jail than movies/tv make it seem.

For someone in Sandusky's position, he's going to be in a unit with other sex offenders. They are generally pretty good to each other in my experience. The guys most at risk IMO are the guys in gen pop with gang ties since they are more accessible and gangs still operate plenty well in prisons.

 
AAABatteries said:
I'm curious what the PSU folks around here think about the statue.
Click to expand...
Don't really care either way. I think his legacy is tarnished but not completely obliterated by his failure to follow up in 2001. I think he still did a great job coaching and helping young men. I think he meant a lot to the university, town and state. People with those credentials generally get a statue somewhere. Hell, Nick Saban has a statue, doesn't he?

Anyway, if people want to get fired up about it, go nuts. I think that's a waste of breath and outrage myself.

 
No school admin nor fan base better supports my hatred for their program as much as Penn State. The fact they there is not outcry, IMO, is evidence enough.

That so many support such a sick gesture is, unfortunately, only a sad matter of degree.

 
ConstruxBoy said:
AAABatteries said:
I'm curious what the PSU folks around here think about the statue.
Click to expand...
Don't really care either way. I think his legacy is tarnished but not completely obliterated by his failure to follow up in 2001. I think he still did a great job coaching and helping young men. I think he meant a lot to the university, town and state. People with those credentials generally get a statue somewhere. Hell, Nick Saban has a statue, doesn't he?Anyway, if people want to get fired up about it, go nuts. I think that's a waste of breath and outrage myself.
Click to expand...
Obliterated SHOULD be an understatement.

Apparently not. And my post above rings all the more true. Really unfortunate.

:sigh:

 
I get those two responses. I figured some would prefer it just not be brought up again and some wouldn't care. One thing I'll say is even though I've disagreed with some of the PSU Alums it's been impressive how supportive they've been of the school and each other. I would call it almost loyal to a fault though as I think that is why some still defend Paterno or have a don't care attitude. They don't want to turn on one of their own out of loyalty. I get it but also understand why others can find it appalling.

 
Just to clarify - I was referring to Contrux and Joffer, not Koya. I get Koya's indignation too. To this day this story is one of the more shocking storyline so can remember following.

 
I have a topic-related question.

This guy I work with, who has always creeped me out going back to when we worked in overseas together, got caught with child porn on his computer when he was working out west. Now I don't have direct knowledge of this, but I got it from an extremely reliable source. This guy is in a supervisory position above military people and I feel like I need to do something.

Now when he worked out west it was part of the organization I work in now, but it was swept under the rug because apparently it wasn't "excessive." There was also a much bigger issue at that place at the very same time, which ended up taking the focus off of him. To me one of those pictures is "excessive" and I don't think he should be working in our establishment at all. What is the right move here? I can't just accuse him of doing this without real proof. People know about it out west though, all it would take is a few calls.

 
Build a statue of him and then tear it down?

Seriously though, that's a tough one. I would maybe talk to your boss about it but don't mention who it is??

 
AAABatteries said:
Build a statue of him and then tear it down?

Seriously though, that's a tough one. I would maybe talk to your boss about it but don't mention who it is??
Click to expand...
I actually flat out told my boss. He's leaving too though and he's not going to pass this info on IMO. I thought about dropping an anonymous note in the suggestion box, but that's just not my style. It would at least make them look at him a little closer though. This guy is angling to become one of the bigger bosses, I don't think that should happen.

 
Doctor Detroit said:
I have a topic-related question.

This guy I work with, who has always creeped me out going back to when we worked in overseas together, got caught with child porn on his computer when he was working out west. Now I don't have direct knowledge of this, but I got it from an extremely reliable source. This guy is in a supervisory position above military people and I feel like I need to do something.

Now when he worked out west it was part of the organization I work in now, but it was swept under the rug because apparently it wasn't "excessive." There was also a much bigger issue at that place at the very same time, which ended up taking the focus off of him. To me one of those pictures is "excessive" and I don't think he should be working in our establishment at all. What is the right move here? I can't just accuse him of doing this without real proof. People know about it out west though, all it would take is a few calls.
Click to expand...
I say: call your contacts "out west", but be discreet. Make copious notes of all conversations. You never know who might be on this guy's side (for whatever reasons). At this point you would not only be exposing a child porn user, but you'd also be exposing all the people who protected him and covered up a felony.

 
Joe Summer said:
Doctor Detroit said:
I have a topic-related question.

This guy I work with, who has always creeped me out going back to when we worked in overseas together, got caught with child porn on his computer when he was working out west. Now I don't have direct knowledge of this, but I got it from an extremely reliable source. This guy is in a supervisory position above military people and I feel like I need to do something.

Now when he worked out west it was part of the organization I work in now, but it was swept under the rug because apparently it wasn't "excessive." There was also a much bigger issue at that place at the very same time, which ended up taking the focus off of him. To me one of those pictures is "excessive" and I don't think he should be working in our establishment at all. What is the right move here? I can't just accuse him of doing this without real proof. People know about it out west though, all it would take is a few calls.
Click to expand...
I say: call your contacts "out west", but be discreet. Make copious notes of all conversations. You never know who might be on this guy's side (for whatever reasons). At this point you would not only be exposing a child porn user, but you'd also be exposing all the people who protected him and covered up a felony.
Click to expand...
The guy who initially told me this is definitely not on his side, he was pissed the guy was fired back then. The other people who I know know, I don't trust them at all. I have a dilemma here trying to do the right thing, but I'm not really sure what the right thing is.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

offdee
Getting out of jury duty
3 4 5
Replies
208
Views
7K
Zow
Zow
JohnnyU
Devil's Den Random Murders - Now a possible serial killer?
Replies
15
Views
478
Ilov80s
Ilov80s
HellToupee
FBG Murda
Replies
13
Views
423
mr. furley
mr. furley

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top