Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Jerry Sandusky accused of child molestation (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter PoliSciGuy
- Start date
The_Burning_Bush
Footballguy
Who cares?
PlasmaDogPlasma
Footballguy
I don't think you can dismiss anything out of hand at this point. This is one big stinky onion being peeled at State College.
Go DC Yourself
Footballguy
Without more, the Paterno house transfer indicates nothing. Surely the NYT has reporters that can figure out that even a half million dollar home represents a small fraction of Paterno's assets.
Idiot Boxer
Footballguy
Sure, I agree. However, most who are proffering this or other ancillary items are doing it for the OMG can you believe how deep this conspiracy goes?! effect. You're the first to suggest that the land transfer to Sandusky's charity was done because PSU had no idea of Sandusky's monstrous nature and that they merely felt that they were donating to a charity. Most are suggesting that it is a payoff as part of a massive coverup by the university. That is the kind of implication the Leeroy is calling 'dumb' and I tend to agree.If the University knew of Sandusky's issues you don't think it's a problem if they sold him land so he could build a campground for kids?
Maybe they simply sold him the land at a discount and had no clue what he wanted it for. In that case maybe they get a pass. I'm skeptical they would sell the land to him at a discount unless they knew it was going for his charity.
Dragons
Delusions of Grandeur
That doesn't appear to be what he's suggesting at all.Sure, I agree. However, most who are proffering this or other ancillary items are doing it for the OMG can you believe how deep this conspiracy goes?! effect. You're the first to suggest that the land transfer to Sandusky's charity was done because PSU had no idea of Sandusky's monstrous nature and that they merely felt that they were donating to a charity. Most are suggesting that it is a payoff as part of a massive coverup by the university. That is the kind of implication the Leeroy is calling 'dumb' and I tend to agree.
Maybe they simply sold him the land at a discount and had no clue what he wanted it for. In that case maybe they get a pass. I'm skeptical they would sell the land to him at a discount unless they knew it was going for his charity.
Wadsworth
Footballguy
While I agree that it would be reasonable to expect Paterno to be worth far more than the value of his home, I would not go so far as to say it indicates nothing. Reporters and investigators are just starting to follow the paper trail and this transfer of ownership of the home may be a singular situation or the first discovered of many moves Paterno has taken to protect assets. By itself the transfer means little, but should it turn out to be one of many such moves it would have meaning.
E-Z Glider
Footballguy
Shared assets with a spouse are not subject to civil judgements. The house was shared before the transfer. Nothing to see here.
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
Thats pretty much exactly what i am suggesting actually.That doesn't appear to be what he's suggesting at all.Sure, I agree. However, most who are proffering this or other ancillary items are doing it for the OMG can you believe how deep this conspiracy goes?! effect. You're the first to suggest that the land transfer to Sandusky's charity was done because PSU had no idea of Sandusky's monstrous nature and that they merely felt that they were donating to a charity. Most are suggesting that it is a payoff as part of a massive coverup by the university. That is the kind of implication the Leeroy is calling 'dumb' and I tend to agree.
Maybe they simply sold him the land at a discount and had no clue what he wanted it for. In that case maybe they get a pass. I'm skeptical they would sell the land to him at a discount unless they knew it was going for his charity.
Wadsworth
Footballguy
I did not take the sale of land to be any part of a cover up, just another example of extremely poor decision making by Penn State. At least some of the people involved had to be aware of the accusations against Sandusky and yet it appears they facilitated a cheap land sale to help him build a dormitory for sleep over camp for small boys. As least on the surface with admittedly limited data this looks like another amazingly poor choice made by those in charge.Sure, I agree. However, most who are proffering this or other ancillary items are doing it for the OMG can you believe how deep this conspiracy goes?! effect. You're the first to suggest that the land transfer to Sandusky's charity was done because PSU had no idea of Sandusky's monstrous nature and that they merely felt that they were donating to a charity. Most are suggesting that it is a payoff as part of a massive coverup by the university. That is the kind of implication the Leeroy is calling 'dumb' and I tend to agree.
Maybe they simply sold him the land at a discount and had no clue what he wanted it for. In that case maybe they get a pass. I'm skeptical they would sell the land to him at a discount unless they knew it was going for his charity.
Idiot Boxer
Footballguy
Who? Dr. Awesome? I know that. Read the original posts about the land transfer.That doesn't appear to be what he's suggesting at all.Sure, I agree. However, most who are proffering this or other ancillary items are doing it for the OMG can you believe how deep this conspiracy goes?! effect. You're the first to suggest that the land transfer to Sandusky's charity was done because PSU had no idea of Sandusky's monstrous nature and that they merely felt that they were donating to a charity. Most are suggesting that it is a payoff as part of a massive coverup by the university. That is the kind of implication the Leeroy is calling 'dumb' and I tend to agree.
Maybe they simply sold him the land at a discount and had no clue what he wanted it for. In that case maybe they get a pass. I'm skeptical they would sell the land to him at a discount unless they knew it was going for his charity.
Idiot Boxer
Footballguy
Or evidence that very few people knew the truth about this monster and Penn State was doing what would otherwise be a genuinely good deed.I did not take the sale of land to be any part of a cover up, just another example of extremely poor decision making by Penn State. At least some of the people involved had to be aware of the accusations against Sandusky and yet it appears they facilitated a cheap land sale to help him build a dormitory for sleep over camp for small boys. As least on the surface with admittedly limited data this looks like another amazingly poor choice made by those in charge.Sure, I agree. However, most who are proffering this or other ancillary items are doing it for the OMG can you believe how deep this conspiracy goes?! effect. You're the first to suggest that the land transfer to Sandusky's charity was done because PSU had no idea of Sandusky's monstrous nature and that they merely felt that they were donating to a charity. Most are suggesting that it is a payoff as part of a massive coverup by the university. That is the kind of implication the Leeroy is calling 'dumb' and I tend to agree.
Maybe they simply sold him the land at a discount and had no clue what he wanted it for. In that case maybe they get a pass. I'm skeptical they would sell the land to him at a discount unless they knew it was going for his charity.
E-Z Glider
Footballguy
That doesnt make a very good story. Needs way more outrage.Or evidence that very few people knew the truth about this monster and Penn State was doing what would otherwise be a genuinely good deed.I did not take the sale of land to be any part of a cover up, just another example of extremely poor decision making by Penn State. At least some of the people involved had to be aware of the accusations against Sandusky and yet it appears they facilitated a cheap land sale to help him build a dormitory for sleep over camp for small boys. As least on the surface with admittedly limited data this looks like another amazingly poor choice made by those in charge.Sure, I agree. However, most who are proffering this or other ancillary items are doing it for the OMG can you believe how deep this conspiracy goes?! effect. You're the first to suggest that the land transfer to Sandusky's charity was done because PSU had no idea of Sandusky's monstrous nature and that they merely felt that they were donating to a charity. Most are suggesting that it is a payoff as part of a massive coverup by the university. That is the kind of implication the Leeroy is calling 'dumb' and I tend to agree.
Maybe they simply sold him the land at a discount and had no clue what he wanted it for. In that case maybe they get a pass. I'm skeptical they would sell the land to him at a discount unless they knew it was going for his charity.
Dr. Awesome
Footballguy
If that is the case (and I think it's the most likely scenario), it points to gross incompetence at best. I don't believe this sale would happen without at least 1-2 higher ups who knew about the Sundusky scandal also being notified of this. The board that approved the sale was likely in the dark but you're telling me not one person was aware of both things happening and didn't think to themselves "Wait a second...isn't the charity we're selling to also run by the guy we forced into retirement for diddling kids?"Still, I agree we're at a relative lull right now and the mainstream media which has been so embarrassingly behind in their coverage is now making up for lost time even if that means making up stories.Or evidence that very few people knew the truth about this monster and Penn State was doing what would otherwise be a genuinely good deed.I did not take the sale of land to be any part of a cover up, just another example of extremely poor decision making by Penn State. At least some of the people involved had to be aware of the accusations against Sandusky and yet it appears they facilitated a cheap land sale to help him build a dormitory for sleep over camp for small boys. As least on the surface with admittedly limited data this looks like another amazingly poor choice made by those in charge.Sure, I agree. However, most who are proffering this or other ancillary items are doing it for the OMG can you believe how deep this conspiracy goes?! effect. You're the first to suggest that the land transfer to Sandusky's charity was done because PSU had no idea of Sandusky's monstrous nature and that they merely felt that they were donating to a charity. Most are suggesting that it is a payoff as part of a massive coverup by the university. That is the kind of implication the Leeroy is calling 'dumb' and I tend to agree.
Maybe they simply sold him the land at a discount and had no clue what he wanted it for. In that case maybe they get a pass. I'm skeptical they would sell the land to him at a discount unless they knew it was going for his charity.
ConstruxBoy
Kate's Daddy
I'm not an expert in Elder Law like this guy, but what about estate taxes? If Joe dies first, and he's older and in worse health, wouldn't she avoid some estate taxes by having the house in her name instead of in joint? Anyone know the answer?
Idiot Boxer
Footballguy
Usually property held as Joint Tenants is with right of survivorship, which means title would pass to his wife without going through the estate, and therefore without taxation.So no, I don't believe that is the reason.
However, as has been pointed out, if the asset was held jointly, then a judgment against JoePa would not be able to get at that asset anyways, so those suggesting it was in anticipation of this event seem similarly off base.
Wadsworth
Footballguy
Penn State sold land on the cheap to a man accused of being a pedophile to help him build a dorm for sleep away camp for young children. That is a problem. That does not mean it was part of some vast conspiracy or cover up, but it is still a problem.I suspect at least the majority of people(if not all) voting to give Second Mile a deal on land to build a dorm did it with the best of intentions. Like IB said it could indicate that few people knew the truth and this deal was viewed a genuinely good deed. But that does not change that fact that these accusations against Sandusky were known by high ranking people in the Penn State administration and at the least that information apparently was not made available to the people voting to approve this deal. The motivations of the people approving this deal might have been genuine, but there was a serious breakdown in the flow of relevant information related to Sandusky to the people making this decision.That doesnt make a very good story. Needs way more outrage.Or evidence that very few people knew the truth about this monster and Penn State was doing what would otherwise be a genuinely good deed.I did not take the sale of land to be any part of a cover up, just another example of extremely poor decision making by Penn State. At least some of the people involved had to be aware of the accusations against Sandusky and yet it appears they facilitated a cheap land sale to help him build a dormitory for sleep over camp for small boys. As least on the surface with admittedly limited data this looks like another amazingly poor choice made by those in charge.Sure, I agree. However, most who are proffering this or other ancillary items are doing it for the OMG can you believe how deep this conspiracy goes?! effect. You're the first to suggest that the land transfer to Sandusky's charity was done because PSU had no idea of Sandusky's monstrous nature and that they merely felt that they were donating to a charity. Most are suggesting that it is a payoff as part of a massive coverup by the university. That is the kind of implication the Leeroy is calling 'dumb' and I tend to agree.
Maybe they simply sold him the land at a discount and had no clue what he wanted it for. In that case maybe they get a pass. I'm skeptical they would sell the land to him at a discount unless they knew it was going for his charity.
So at minimum it is another example of managerial incompetence at the highest level of of the Penn State administration. Normally managerial incompetence might not be a big deal, but in this case it helped build a dorm so a monster could have easier access to more children. That kind of makes it a big deal. And worthy of of plenty of outrage on its own.
ConstruxBoy
Kate's Daddy
Ah, OK thanks. Weird, usually the NYT is better than that in terms of finding out all the angles. I guess they want in on the biggest scandal in world history as well.
dhockster
Footballguy
Do we know when Sandusky bought the land? If it was at the time of his retirement (1999) then it was after the 1998 incident which had been cleared by police. Not giving PSU a pass, but I don't think this is as big a deal as if it would have been if it had happened after the 2002 incident.Penn State sold land on the cheap to a man accused of being a pedophile to help him build a dorm for sleep away camp for young children. That is a problem. That does not mean it was part of some vast conspiracy or cover up, but it is still a problem.I suspect at least the majority of people(if not all) voting to give Second Mile a deal on land to build a dorm did it with the best of intentions. Like IB said it could indicate that few people knew the truth and this deal was viewed a genuinely good deed. But that does not change that fact that these accusations against Sandusky were known by high ranking people in the Penn State administration and at the least that information apparently was not made available to the people voting to approve this deal. The motivations of the people approving this deal might have been genuine, but there was a serious breakdown in the flow of relevant information related to Sandusky to the people making this decision.That doesnt make a very good story. Needs way more outrage.Or evidence that very few people knew the truth about this monster and Penn State was doing what would otherwise be a genuinely good deed.I did not take the sale of land to be any part of a cover up, just another example of extremely poor decision making by Penn State. At least some of the people involved had to be aware of the accusations against Sandusky and yet it appears they facilitated a cheap land sale to help him build a dormitory for sleep over camp for small boys. As least on the surface with admittedly limited data this looks like another amazingly poor choice made by those in charge.Sure, I agree. However, most who are proffering this or other ancillary items are doing it for the OMG can you believe how deep this conspiracy goes?! effect. You're the first to suggest that the land transfer to Sandusky's charity was done because PSU had no idea of Sandusky's monstrous nature and that they merely felt that they were donating to a charity. Most are suggesting that it is a payoff as part of a massive coverup by the university. That is the kind of implication the Leeroy is calling 'dumb' and I tend to agree.
Maybe they simply sold him the land at a discount and had no clue what he wanted it for. In that case maybe they get a pass. I'm skeptical they would sell the land to him at a discount unless they knew it was going for his charity.
So at minimum it is another example of managerial incompetence at the highest level of of the Penn State administration. Normally managerial incompetence might not be a big deal, but in this case it helped build a dorm so a monster could have easier access to more children. That kind of makes it a big deal. And worthy of of plenty of outrage on its own.
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
Right. Which is why I was confused in the first place.
Sea Duck
Footballguy
Maybe, but it reminds me of this excerpt from Gary Schultz's grand jury testimony:
Maybe they conspired to give him that land in exchange for his early retirement and his silence?
Idiot Boxer
Footballguy
Unlikely. This is written as though the benefit is part of the state pension package offered to many/most state employees, as Sandusky would have been as an employee of a state school. This doesn't read as though it was a 'special' retirement benefit for him going away quietly.But keep looking.
CrossEyed
Footballguy
You're not really saying that you think land is offered to every state employee when they retire are you?
Joe T
Footballguy
Probably the same reason they didn't do anything in 1998 when they were told about it the first time.
being told about a hug in the shower is a bit different than being told about a rape.
Idiot Boxer
Footballguy
No I'm saying the land was not the "enhanced retirement benefit" referenced in quote 2.'CrossEyed said:
CrossEyed
Footballguy
Gotcha. Wasn't following what you were saying.
The State College house is less than 1/6 of the value of his house in Avalon, NJ.
Joe T
Footballguy
Agree with your anecdote. Not sure that is what happened in this case.
beer 30
Footballguy
You're just post padding now
Short Corner
Footballguy
Best exchange in the Vacation movies'Doctor Detroit said:
Idiot Boxer
Footballguy
It's being covered up. This is the first I've heard of it.
harryhood
Footballguy
Do you think this whole land sale/2nd mile/ect theory ties into the rumor Mark Madden talked about on the WEEI radio station? I have not been able to go through this whole thread, so I am not sure if it has been discussed. In regards to using this organization to funnel young boys to sicko boosters. Has that theory been debunked yet?
Idiot Boxer
Footballguy
No, I don't think it does. I'm sure some do.That theory hasn't been debunked yet. But it is without any source or backup. The flimsiest of all of the deep conspiracy/coverup theories going as of right now.
ClownCausedChaos
I ain't got time to bleed
Is this the same house he sold to his wife for $1?
Zow
Footballguy
Since our justice system believes in the presumption of innocence, people have a right to a reasonable bail. I'd guess there are additional terms of his release (probably similar to sex offender terms) and wouldn't doubt that the whole community is on the lookout for him. Therefore, if he takes any step towards violating the conditions of release, especially my trying to commit a new crime, he'd have to forfeit the 100k, likely forfeits his right to bail, and could be facing much harsher sentencing ranges (admittedly, I'm not familiar with PA sentencing structures but in AZ his range of potential sentences would increase significantly). He is a weirdo pedophile, but I don't think he is a total idiot. While in my experience that is a lower bond for these charges and his background, the kids should still be safe.
Reepicheep
Footballguy
Other than being an unsubstantiated rumor, no it has not be debunked.
100k vs life in prison. tough call.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
The original source of the rumor claimed it was being investigated by some top journalists as if that lent credence to the rumor. Now if those top journalists end up missing or dead like the DA, there may be something to it...
mad sweeney
Footballguy
$2500 per charge, not counting of course any new charges that crop up with new alleged victims, is an absolute steal.
mr roboto
Footballguy
He bought it when he was 22. It's really hard to leave your first house in Denver.
Zow
Footballguy
i'm not sure what your point is. If you're suggesting he may run, then sure the 100k forfeit may be a small price to pay to maybe keep/get more time out given his potential sentence. I would agree the bond is pretty low because he is a strong flight risk IMO. However, I was replying to a guy who was upset he was out and close to a school. This implies he is a danger to the community, particularly to the children at that school. I was pointing out why his release conditions will likely deter him from doing anything there.
Sconch
Footballguy
You think he's going to start snatching up kids on the monkey-bars?
ClownCausedChaos
I ain't got time to bleed
Obviously he's a huge flight risk. I also don't think the 100k means anything to him. Sounds like he didn't even put anything up.
Last edited by a moderator:
