[h4z1XBI7]

http://www.montrealgazette.com/sport...359/story.html


Two Penn State administrators were arraigned Monday on charges of perjury and failure to report abuse - a case their attorneys called "weak" and a "prosecutor's charge of last resort."

Athletic Director Tim Curley and Gary Schultz, senior vice president of business and finance for Penn State, were each released on $75,000 unsecured bail, meaning they don't have to pay bail unless they fail to appear at any court-mandated hearing. They also were required to surrender their passports.

The charges are related to an incident in 2002, when a former graduate assistant, identified as assistant football coach Mike McQueary, reported seeing Sandusky sexually assaulting a boy, about 10 years old, in a shower at the Lasch Football Building.

Plenty more articles to be found. Anyone who assaults or rapes another person is a sick creature but to do it to children?!? THAT is probably the worst thing anyone can do - or tops the list. I read the grand jury indictment of the 8 alleged victims and it's disgusting.

The graduate assistant who said he saw Sandusky raping a 10 year old boy in the shower - why didn't he stop him?! Why did he just leave that child there to get violated that way?

Why didn't Paterno follow up? Yes legally he did what he was supposed to do - he told school officials who obviously covered it up. But morally...this guy was on his staff for years. He did this on school property in the football team's showers. So just because he wasn't on the coaching staff anymore that means don't find out what's going on?

The allegations in the indictment are disgusting. Also the fact he met these boys in his organization to HELP children is even worse. I hope that the first time that the Second Mile found out about this was when they dismissed Sandusky from the organization in 2008 I believe. If they had known about this and let him stay there to stalk his prey, that's worse than the school.

However, I've seen comments other places of people calling to boycott the football team or boycott the school. I don't see where blaming the football team comes into play. The athletes had nothing to do with this. The only blame can be laid at the graduate assistant who said he saw the rape and in some aspects Paterno - him at least morally. Then the school as a whole didn't do this - a few people who were supposed to be in charge did this and they should be punished for covering it up.

I just don't know how someone could take advantage of children. Who knows how many kids there actually were. Sandusky started the organization in 1977.

[Kamendoriks]

I don't pretend to be some bad ass or tough guy but if I saw anyone hurting ANYONE I would intervene. And if it was a child being hurt I would beat the assailant senseless.

IMO if you know a child is being abused and do nothing.....you are just as guilty as the molester.

[MightyMasc]

I don't pretend to be some bad ass or tough guy but if I saw anyone hurting ANYONE I would intervene. And if it was a child being hurt I would beat the assailant senseless.

IMO if you know a child is being abused and do nothing.....you are just as guilty as the molester.

That's what I thought. I by no means claim to be able to beat up anyone but you better believe I see a 10 year old boy getting raped by anyone, I'm going to do what I can to stop it. I'll make noise, throw something, beat the pervert in the head with whatever I can find. But that is just disgusting and appalling.

People wonder why "troubled" youths don't go to places like what Sandusky started. They hear about these things and wonder "Who can I trust?" I don't fault the organization unless someone there knew what he was doing and didn't stop it. But the athletic director and the university president...really? Someone tells you about a sexual assault and you don't do anything? And now your memory is "fuzzy" about what was said? He was RETIRED - Sandusky - why was he trolling around the campus still? Why was he in the shower area after hours?

In the indictment, a janitor said back in 98 or 99 he saw Sandusky giving oral sex to a boy in the showers. He told a supervisor but for some reason it didn't go anywhere. I'll have to find the grand jury findings because they are disturbing.

But this was Paterno's response:

But Paterno said in his statement that McQueary had not been specific with him.

"As my grand jury testimony stated," Joe Paterno said in the statement, "I was informed in 2002 by an assistant coach that he had witnessed an incident in the shower of our locker room facility. It was obvious that the witness was distraught over what he saw, but he at no time related to me the very specific actions contained in the Grand Jury report. Regardless, it was clear that the witness saw something inappropriate involving Mr. Sandusky. As Coach Sandusky was retired from our coaching staff at that time, I referred the matter to university administrators."

That's fine and he legally did what he had to do but wouldn't you want to know what happened? This happened in the athletic facilities your team uses and by someone who was on your staff for 32 years. Someone who you probably knew pretty well and may have been friends at one time. You wouldn't follow up with either the school officials or someone to find out what happened? Just because he was retired doesn't mean stop being a person.

His son who is a lawyer said this:

Sandusky retired with tenure, and, as such, came under the supervision of Schultz. Paterno referred the matter to Curley, his superior.

"Unfortunately," Scott Paterno said, "once that happened, there was really nothing more Joe felt he could do because he did not witness the event. You can't call the police and say, 'Somebody tells me they saw somebody else do something.' That's hearsay. Police don't take reports in that manner. Frankly, from the way he understood the process, he passed the information on to the appropriate university official and they said they were taking care of it. That's really all he could do."

Really? You can't call the police and report that someone told you they saw an incident? People do it all the time. I'm not saying Paterno should've called the cops - that grad assistant definitely should have called the cops the second he saw it- after subduing the pervert. The police might have asked Paterno to give them the name of who told him and then they would've talked to the grad assistant. But I guarantee you that if someone told the cops they had knowledge of child sex abuse going on they'd take it seriously.

A lot of missteps and covering up it sounds like. Those poor kids.

[pXss8cyx]

Sounds like a terrible lack of leadership at all levels. IMO, all that had any knowledge whatsoever should be removed from the administration.

[njfeedd3w]

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...-document.html

This should have the report. If this is all true (which I'm not sure why two different people at two different times would make up seeing him raping and giving oral sex to boys), I hope he gets his just due in prison. I hear they don't take kindly to pedophiles and people who sexually abuse children.

[poonnassunlix]

Goodness, this is all so crazy. Especially now there are riots because Paterno got fired?? It's just football. (I'm from Nebraska and saying that too). The outrage should be over the children who were victimized by this creature.

[bahrain41]

This whole situation makes me sick. That creature (he's not a man) had the nerve to say this:

"I could say that I have done some of those things," Sandusky said. "I have horsed around with kids. I have showered after workouts. I have hugged them and I have touched their legs without intent of sexual contact," he said. "Am I sexually attracted to underage boys? Sexually attracted, no -- I enjoy young people, I love to be around them ... but no, I am not sexually attracted to young boys," Sandusky replied to Costas.

On what planet is showering with young boys, hugging them in the shower or out and touching their legs innocent? I do not know of one coach who showers with his players, especially young boys. I don't know of any guys who say they "wrestle" in the shower.

Then the grad assistant claims he went to the police and he did everything he could - or that he thought was right - at the time. No everything would have been grabbing a monster off a 10 year old boy. The guy is huge - he could've stopped it!

This whole thing makes me sick. No one deserves to have that happen to them especially children.

Then this from his lawyer and him:

On Tuesday, TODAY spoke with Sandusky's attorney Joe Amendola, who conceded that the former coach had some lapses in judgment.

'"The easy answer is he didn’t use a whole lot of common sense because obviously he had the warning in the late ‘90s, in the 1998 situation, and certainly should’ve ceased it then," Amendola told TODAY about Sandusky's showering with boys. "I’ve grilled him on that many times, but showering with kids doesn’t make him guilty."

In his Rock Center interview, Sandusky countered the allegation that then-graduate assistant McQueary witnessed him engaged in a sexual act in 2002 with a minor in the Penn State locker room's showers.

"I would say that's false,’’ Sandusky told Costas. “We were showering, and horsing around. And (the boy) actually turned all the showers on and was actually sliding across the floor. And we were, as I recall, possibly like snapping a towel, horseplay."

Maybe in his twisted memory it was "horsing around." Okay so you're warned once about conduct with children so...you keep doing it?

I'm sure some say "Innocent until proven guilty" (which technically doesn't exist). It should be "Guilty until proven innocent." It sure sounds like from the grand jury testimony that he did this stuff. Just disgusting.

[Nigeopire]

From this incident I tend to get a similar vibe from the Michael Jackson trials as I do here. I have to wonder whether we are legitimately dealing with someone who derives sexual arousal from the children or is really just someone who's more than a little eccentric with really poor judgement. I do value the "Innocent until proven guilty" mentality (which does exist in the courts, an absence of available evidence will always result in a defendant going free, anyone who cries about the Casey Anthony ruling should appreciate this). Were I put on trial on false charges I like to think the system in place would have to try extra hard to put me away, more so than if someone were engaged in criminal behavior I would be concerned they got overlooked in a single trial because if they don't correct the behavior that put them there they will likely be put in that position again, likely under a lot more scrutiny the next time around. Whatever the results of the trial, it is highly doubtful the man will ever be allowed to be in a position to hurt children in the near future, just because of the level of social awareness of the issue will see to it. Therefore the only real motivator towards convicting the man absent sufficient evidence is a need to see the man suffer for the sins we individually perceive he has committed. I say let the judge and jury worry about seeing justice served, and the lawyers present the best case for both parties. He'll never regain the status he had, and his professional reputation is shattered, if bad judgment is all he's guilty of I can personally say he's been disciplined, although the presiding justice may feel somewhat differently. I'll let the courts sort out the rest.

[BaselBimbooooo]

From this incident I tend to get a similar vibe from the Michael Jackson trials as I do here. I have to wonder whether we are legitimately dealing with someone who derives sexual arousal from the children or is really just someone who's more than a little eccentric with really poor judgement. I do value the "Innocent until proven guilty" mentality (which does exist in the courts, an absence of available evidence will always result in a defendant going free, anyone who cries about the Casey Anthony ruling should appreciate this). Were I put on trial on false charges I like to think the system in place would have to try extra hard to put me away, more so than if someone were engaged in criminal behavior I would be concerned they got overlooked in a single trial because if they don't correct the behavior that put them there they will likely be put in that position again, likely under a lot more scrutiny the next time around. Whatever the results of the trial, it is highly doubtful the man will ever be allowed to be in a position to hurt children in the near future, just because of the level of social awareness of the issue will see to it. Therefore the only real motivator towards convicting the man absent sufficient evidence is a need to see the man suffer for the sins we individually perceive he has committed. I say let the judge and jury worry about seeing justice served, and the lawyers present the best case for both parties. He'll never regain the status he had, and his professional reputation is shattered, if bad judgment is all he's guilty of I can personally say he's been disciplined, although the presiding justice may feel somewhat differently. I'll let the courts sort out the rest.

Yes I've thought of Michael Jackson in this but I don't know if it's exactly the same. I do think that in a way it should be guilty until proven innocent because if you're charged, there's (usually) evidence that you did something wrong. These children accused him so until he's proven innocent... I don't know. It made more sense in my head lol.

But in this case you have eight adults who testified to a grand jury that they were molested by this man. I don't think he's "eccentric" who made poor choices. AND if it's true that McQeary SAW him raping a boy and now that coach says he did go to the police and the university police - if they have that report (if one was filed) there's another instance. However, Sandusky's lawyer says they "may have found the boy who was allegedly raped" and he tells a "different story." Well if they don't know that he is the boy, then what does that prove? And they need to find the janitor who said he saw Sandusky giving oral sex to a boy in the shower.

Hopefully they do have evidence - but you know most of that will be based on the testimonies of the children who are now adults. But I don't like how his lawyer is saying "You have to wonder what the motivation of these people are." I hate the automatic response when someone who is a victim of sexual abuse is "Oh they must be after something." I know that there are people who falsely accuse but that doesn't help someone report abuse when they think no one will believe them.

Now when people come out after a case has been announced, you can maybe suspect but I just think that they were too scared to come out when it happened and thought they were the only one. Now that they see there were others, they want to report it. There may be some in that mix who are making it up. I understand his lawyer's job is to protect his client but still.

I am leaning toward it wasn't "bad judgment." I think he did do things to these boys but HE doesn't think it was wrong. If that's true, he needs some serious help. I mean kids aren't stupid and at 10-13 years old, they know the difference between what is right behavior from adults and what isn't. I'm sorry but taking showers with 10 year olds, wrestling naked in the shower, touching them on the leg to start with that isn't just "bad judgment." He also shows the signs of how pedophiles act.

We'll find out as the case goes along but I just don't know. If he's found guilty in court - oh he'll get what he has coming to him. He'll get to do all the naked wrestling in the showers he wants - just not with boys.

This is from his lawyer:

"We are looking for the young man involved, who is now in his 20s," Amendola tells Today. "We believe we have found him, and if we have found him, he is telling a very different story than Mike McQueary, and that's big news."

He also says some of the other alleged victims, none of whom have been named, have spent time with Sandusky and his family and even had dinner at his home in recent years.

You don't know any of the alleged victims but you can guarantee it's all made up? So how do you know these boys were at his home in "recent years" if you don't know who they are?!? And you don't know who the kid is who was allegedly raped but you "think" you found him and "if" it's him, he has a different story? He probably has no idea why you're talking to him.

[hwood]

Yes I've thought of Michael Jackson in this but I don't know if it's exactly the same. I do think that in a way it should be guilty until proven innocent because if you're charged, there's (usually) evidence that you did something wrong. These children accused him so until he's proven innocent... I don't know. It made more sense in my head lol.

But in this case you have eight adults who testified to a grand jury that they were molested by this man. I don't think he's "eccentric" who made poor choices. AND if it's true that McQeary SAW him raping a boy and now that coach says he did go to the police and the university police - if they have that report (if one was filed) there's another instance. However, Sandusky's lawyer says they "may have found the boy who was allegedly raped" and he tells a "different story." Well if they don't know that he is the boy, then what does that prove? And they need to find the janitor who said he saw Sandusky giving oral sex to a boy in the shower.

Hopefully they do have evidence - but you know most of that will be based on the testimonies of the children who are now adults. But I don't like how his lawyer is saying "You have to wonder what the motivation of these people are." I hate the automatic response when someone who is a victim of sexual abuse is "Oh they must be after something." I know that there are people who falsely accuse but that doesn't help someone report abuse when they think no one will believe them.

Now when people come out after a case has been announced, you can maybe suspect but I just think that they were too scared to come out when it happened and thought they were the only one. Now that they see there were others, they want to report it. There may be some in that mix who are making it up. I understand his lawyer's job is to protect his client but still.

I am leaning toward it wasn't "bad judgment." I think he did do things to these boys but HE doesn't think it was wrong. If that's true, he needs some serious help. I mean kids aren't stupid and at 10-13 years old, they know the difference between what is right behavior from adults and what isn't. I'm sorry but taking showers with 10 year olds, wrestling naked in the shower, touching them on the leg to start with that isn't just "bad judgment." He also shows the signs of how pedophiles act.

We'll find out as the case goes along but I just don't know. If he's found guilty in court - oh he'll get what he has coming to him. He'll get to do all the naked wrestling in the showers he wants - just not with boys.

This is from his lawyer:

"We are looking for the young man involved, who is now in his 20s," Amendola tells Today. "We believe we have found him, and if we have found him, he is telling a very different story than Mike McQueary, and that's big news."

He also says some of the other alleged victims, none of whom have been named, have spent time with Sandusky and his family and even had dinner at his home in recent years.

You don't know any of the alleged victims but you can guarantee it's all made up? So how do you know these boys were at his home in "recent years" if you don't know who they are?!? And you don't know who the kid is who was allegedly raped but you "think" you found him and "if" it's him, he has a different story? He probably has no idea why you're talking to him.

It looks pretty bad, I'll give ya that. But still, whether it's eight or eighty there is still a "He said, she said" element to be taken into consideration, and I have known an adult or two who might make an exaggerated claim against another adult for any offense based on a combination of over-protectiveness or who knows what combination of reasons. It's also possible and even likely that they might find others in a similar situation and come at it as a group to make the situation appear even worse. What motive would they have? It depends I suppose, I know other adults have approached my wife complaining that his pre-school was teaching my son to take his clothes off and put them back on. I basically responded to the effect of "Big surprise, he's a toddler and that would be a good skill for him to have, don't go blowing it out of proportion." His circumstances are different of course, but there may be some mitigating factors we're not already aware of (maybe he had volunteer ties in the local community, for instance, that had him working regularly with younger children.) I just know it's very easy for grown adults to blow things out of proportion and I deem that worthy of individual consideration. Predators exist out there, doesn't mean I'm ready to go Salem Witch Hunt on them for the cause of protecting the innocent.

[Bobdilan]

coaches should NEVER shower with the players. don't have a private shower? wait until everyone is gone. or shower at home.
when this story first came out, i thought the "kids" they were talking about were collage kids (just like anti gun folks call a 22 year old with a huge record "an innocent child")
and who answers the question of being sexually attracted to a child, like he did. most folks wouldn't let you finish the question before wanting to rip your throat out, just for even asking. he's a nut job. and i know this is only starting.
wounder what other news we're missing because of this piece of dirt? (sorry dirt, didn't mean to insult you)

[zlopikanikanz]

coaches should NEVER shower with the players. don't have a private shower? wait until everyone is gone. or shower at home.
when this story first came out, i thought the "kids" they were talking about were collage kids (just like anti gun folks call a 22 year old with a huge record "an innocent child")
and who answers the question of being sexually attracted to a child, like he did. most folks wouldn't let you finish the question before wanting to rip your throat out, just for even asking. he's a nut job. and i know this is only starting.
wounder what other news we're missing because of this piece of dirt? (sorry dirt, didn't mean to insult you)

What do you mean "other news we're missing" because of him? I would say allegations of child molestation and sexual abuse are extremely newsworthy and should be taken seriously unless proven otherwise.

The kids are now teenagers and college aged and if this is true and they've had to deal with it this whole time...

[Sandra_18X]

not saying this isn't news worthy. BUT you have to admit, sometimes the news blows a story way out of wack. or talks about nothing about it, just because they want to give the story a certain amount of time.
give me the details and move on.

[flueftArete]

It looks pretty bad, I'll give ya that. But still, whether it's eight or eighty there is still a "He said, she said" element to be taken into consideration, and I have known an adult or two who might make an exaggerated claim against another adult for any offense based on a combination of over-protectiveness or who knows what combination of reasons. It's also possible and even likely that they might find others in a similar situation and come at it as a group to make the situation appear even worse. What motive would they have? It depends I suppose, I know other adults have approached my wife complaining that his pre-school was teaching my son to take his clothes off and put them back on. I basically responded to the effect of "Big surprise, he's a toddler and that would be a good skill for him to have, don't go blowing it out of proportion." His circumstances are different of course, but there may be some mitigating factors we're not already aware of (maybe he had volunteer ties in the local community, for instance, that had him working regularly with younger children.) I just know it's very easy for grown adults to blow things out of proportion and I deem that worthy of individual consideration. Predators exist out there, doesn't mean I'm ready to go Salem Witch Hunt on them for the cause of protecting the innocent.

Yes it is a "he said, she said" situation. I do think though the fact it took the grand jury two years to investigate this and then release the information seems like they went to at least some lengths to determine what was going on.

Key word is adults - yes the alleged victims are now adults but they were kids when it happened. The one referred to as victim 1 not sure how old he is now or how long after it happened before he came forward. But I do know that anyone who is a victim of sexual abuse it's very hard for him or her to report it or face the perpetrator.

I just think it needs to be found out what happened and Sandusky seriously needs help. Yes some adults take things too far and look for wrongdoing but in this case - look at it this way.

Say your kid was in this Second Mile group or any organization that has mentors, etc. Say he says something taking showers with one of the adults, or that an adult there touched his legs and kept doing it, or that an adult hugged him while both were naked in the showers. Wouldn't you be concerned? I would be and the first thing I'd do is go to the cops.

That's why when I hear that McQeary says he saw a boy getting raped, why wouldn't he physically stop it? We can always say "hindsight" but if I ever saw anyone being assaulted or raped, I'm going to either stop it, distract the attacker or pull out my phone and call the cops to get there and catch the person.

I just think Sandusky honestly needs some help. Some wires are crossed in his brain somewhere.

[TheBest-Host]

not saying this isn't news worthy. BUT you have to admit, sometimes the news blows a story way out of wack. or talks about nothing about it, just because they want to give the story a certain amount of time.
give me the details and move on.

I don't think they blew this out of proportion. The grand jury report is 23 pages - read it. If the two alleged accounts of him raping a boy and performing oral sex on a boy are true - he's a sick bastard. Even all that other stuff, the showers, the naked hugs, the touching boys' legs...that's not normal behavior. I don't know what kind of coaches he grew up with, but I've never heard of coaches showering with the team.

The case is unfolding so there will continue to be more about it until he's gone to trial and the verdict is read. If this is all made up, then whoever made it up needs help. BUT he admitted he took showers with them and it was just "horsing around." Again, in what world outside his is that 'normal' in our society?

[Alex Photographer]

candy, calm down. i agree with you. what i'm asking (the paranoid part of my brain) is what else is going on in the news. why this story now?
and you have to admit, the news will get folks on and "speculate" until we all drop dead of old age. i want only the proven facts. i don't want to hear a bunch of other b.s. if it ain't true, i don't want to hear it.

[weO1bVp1]

I just think Sandusky honestly needs some help. Some wires are crossed in his brain somewhere.

You'll get no argument from me here, but the question of course is how and why. There is a lot of circumstances worthy of questioning and there's always the concern whether those are elements of "fog of war" or if the inconsistency is because someone is actually lying. I'm certain at the very least he's made some very bad decisions that put him in an even worse predicament, the rest I'll leave to the people on the stands. In the situations you mentioned it could be a lot of things, including the kids just making things up, like you said, they're not stupid at that age but they do come up with some interesting false accusations against adults from time-to-time. The McQueary thing I agree is very questionable, bystander interventionism is a huge factor in dealing with the problem but I think we can both agree not all individuals will respond in the very same way. These are all reasons I'm more than happy to let the process play out as it was intended. I would really hate to be wrong on this and convict the man as a rapist when in fact he wasn't guilty of the crime. I'm much less afraid of a guilty Sandusky being released to the public, I doubt a sane parent would let him and their kids get anywhere near a shower together. The public attention to the case has very well seen to that.

[feeshyLew]

candy, calm down. i agree with you. what i'm asking (the paranoid part of my brain) is what else is going on in the news. why this story now?
and you have to admit, the news will get folks on and "speculate" until we all drop dead of old age. i want only the proven facts. i don't want to hear a bunch of other b.s. if it ain't true, i don't want to hear it.

I am calm but like I said read the grand jury report. That's the closest thing to official you're going to get - and that's where the media is getting all its information.

Little reported is this concerning the Citadel and child abuse allegations: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...=feeds-newsxml

There are pedophiles everywhere and as some pro-Penn State people say it happens "all the time" but when it happens to their beloved god of a coach being involved, it's different?

Everyone becomes a lawyer or a doctor or a cop when they read the news. Right now, no one knows for sure what the deal is except for what is in the grand jury report. Eight alleged victims testified in that investigation.

[HOTgirlsXXL]

i don't give a crap who or what you are - hurt a kid - go to jail, meet bubba. when bubba is done with you, we'll decide on whether or not he gets to play more.

does this make it simple for folks

[hrotedk]

i don't give a crap who or what you are - hurt a kid - go to jail, meet bubba. when bubba is done with you, we'll decide on whether or not he gets to play more.

does this make it simple for folks

Yes - after they prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did do these things. Then he will go to prison. Then he can get all the hugging and wrestling and leg touches he wants. If they can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt, he'll be free. But I agree with AJ he will be hard pressed to go anywhere after all this - and no parents will ever let him near their children. He'll be an outcast.