Penn State Sandusky Trial #12 (GUILTY-post verdict discussion)

[BigCat]

I am still confused at to why Lauro was involved at all in this case. The social workers at Centre County CPS were qualified and had experience to determine if Jer’s behavior had a pedophile stench. I’ve worked with numerous hospital social workers and CPS social workers and never heard any mention involving an "investigator" from the DPW. Was CPS just passing the buck because the perv was Sandusky (associated with TSM and PSU)?

Was Lauro's opinion that Sandusky was a pedo required for the DA to press charges against Sandusky or was this more of a second opinion? In my county, CPS reports pedos to LE without a DPW investigator's opinion. ??????

Here's a quote from a Sara Ganim article on the case.

In this case, since Centre County CYS worked closely with Sandusky’s charity, The Second Mile, Lauro was brought in from the state Department of Public Welfare to do the child abuse investigation.

http://www.adkanenough.com/1998-jerry-sandusky-investigator-would-have-pursued-dropped-case-if-he-had-seen-hidden-penn-state-police-report.html

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I am still confused at to why Lauro was involved at all in this case. The social workers at Centre County CPS were qualified and had experience to determine if Jer’s behavior had a pedophile stench. I’ve worked with numerous hospital social workers and CPS social workers and never heard any mention involving an "investigator" from the DPW. Was CPS just passing the buck because the perv was Sandusky (associated with TSM and PSU)?

They had a conflict of interest because of Sandusky's involvement with TSM, I think.

Was Lauro's opinion that Sandusky was a pedo required for the DA to press charges against Sandusky or was this more of a second opinion?

Neither, according to JKA. There is a separate (civil) reporting requirement to DPW. They maintain a list of people with with a "founded" or "indicated" determination of child abuse. That is separate from any criminal determination. They may indicate that something is "founded," based on their criteria, and a DA could determine that there was no adequate evidence to prosecute. In that case, Sandusky would have gone the "founded/indicated" list.

In any event, Lauro indicated that the DA's Office made its decision prior him, Lauro, making the determination. He insisted there was no evidence at the time, until he saw the Chambers' Report. He didn't see the report until 2012. The DA's Office had that report, but it was never sent to Lauro.

 

[Elley Mae]

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/b...enn_State_probe_may_go_far_beyond_Sandus.html

Freeh probe may go far beyond Sandusky

 

[costalpilot]

I am still confused at to why Lauro was involved at all in this case. ..... Was CPS just passing the buck because the perv was Sandusky (associated with TSM and PSU)?...........
Was Lauro's opinion that Sandusky was a pedo required for the DA to press charges against Sandusky or was this more of a second opinion? In my county, CPS reports pedos to LE without a DPW investigator's opinion. ??????

yeph on the first question and anser....they moved it out of the county to rid themselves of responsibility/culpbality...which, considering the makeup of the power structure there, wasn't a bad decision....

but as to yr second,

a da can do whatever he wants..i suspect in this case, the absence of an affirmative report left the da free to do what he preferred to do. that position would have been difficult to defend if there would have been a "pedophile" assesment. maybe impossible to defend...certainly risky.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/b...enn_State_probe_may_go_far_beyond_Sandus.html

Freeh probe may go far beyond Sandusky

Very surprising!

 

[BigCat]

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/b...enn_State_probe_may_go_far_beyond_Sandus.html

Freeh probe may go far beyond Sandusky

Football players not cooperating with an outside investigation seems to be a pattern at Penn State.

Gricar won't charge players

Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar will not file charges stemming from an April altercation between members of the Penn State wrestling and football teams, following what he said to be lack of cooperation from those involved.

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2003/07/30/gricar_wont_charge_players.aspx

Good luck, Louis!

 

[Pensfan]

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/b...enn_State_probe_may_go_far_beyond_Sandus.html

Freeh probe may go far beyond Sandusky

That article implies that the team cleaned the enormous stadium (106,000 seats with of spilled nachos and pop) only one time. The team cleaned it after every game. They also built a house for Habitat for Humanity as "punishment" for their fighting. They also were forced to volunteer every day for the Special Olympics in that county. Was that enough punishment? I dunno.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

but several listeners pointed out to him that by covering up what would have been massive negatve publicity for the team in 1998 and 2001 the school was preventing damage to its reputation and consequesntly recruiting. and gaining an unfair advantage thereby.

makes sense. but nothing the 2A does makes sense to anyone but itself (apparently).

Okay, in 1998, so far as we know, PSU had nothing to do with the decisions of LE. Unless it can be shown that there was some suppression of the evidence by the Univ. Police, and it looks like the opposite was true, or that someone from PSU improperly influenced RFG, this decision was not PSU's.

There is zero evidence that RFG was either bribed or blackmailed regarding 1998.

In 2001, how much damage would be done to the football program if a former coach was revealed as a child molester? The damage was done by covering it up.

 

[StellarsJay]

Sort of off topic:
An archived news story announcing Sandusky's retirement announcement July 2, 1999 says that he and Dorothy by that time had adopted 5 children and had 3 foster children. One of the foster kids would be Matt, another could be the girl with whom Matt overdosed on aspirin a few months after being placed with the Sanduskys. That leaves one unknown foster child. I wonder who that was?

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...DAAAAIBAJ&pg=6549,523580&dq=joe+paterno&hl=en

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Lubrano will not be pressing the BOT for an apology for the handling of Paterno's termination, currently.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/07/freehs_report_puts_penn_state.html

This was Lubrano's major point for running for the board, so this marks a major change in his position. I think something is up, or at least they think it could be.

 

[StellarsJay]

Bits from the archives:
Four months before the 1998 shower incident, Spanier sets the dogs on and agent who bought a football player a gift.

January 7, 1998- Bangor Daily News
State College, Pa. Penn State wants two district attorneys to prosecute a sports agent who bought star running back Curtis Emis a suit and shirt in violation of NCAA rules and Pennsylvania laws.
Penn State is also considering a lawsuit against Nalley to recoup the money spent to investigate the incident and to restore the university’s good name, Spanier said. In addition, the agent has been declared ‘persona non grata’ on all Penn State campuses – in effect a banishment – that university president Graham Spanier declared would be backed up with legal action.
Nalley did not return a telephone call seeking comment. Ennis was suspended from the team after admitting Dec. 23 that he accepted gifts from Nalley then lied to Joe Paterno about the incident.

`The $400 gift caused Enis to be barred from the Citrus Bowl.

"After the meeting, Paterno hugged Enis, a player he has always spoken about with affection. Paterno's emotion spilled over in a conference call announcing the action.
''He said he was sorry,'' Paterno said.
The coach then read a statement from Enis in which he said: ''I know I made a mistake. I apologize to my teammates and my fans and ask for their understanding.''

Paterno said he was disappointed. This is his 32d year as the Penn State coach and, he said, ''the first time we've ever had this happen to us.''
''I also want to be fair,'' Paterno said. ''He made a mistake. It happened -- what time, when, we didn't get into that.''
See also http://www.nytimes.com/1997/12/24/s...enn-state-bars-enis-from-the-citrus-bowl.html

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Lubrano will not be pressing the BOT for an apology for the handling of Paterno's termination, currently.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/07/freehs_report_puts_penn_state.html

This was Lubrano's major point for running for the board, so this marks a major change in his position. I think something is up, or at least they think it could be.

I find it very interesting how many of those posting comments about this article believe the Freeh investigation was/is nothing more than window dressing for the PSU BOT to cover its butt and throw JP under the bus.

 

[BigCat]

In 2001, how much damage would be done to the football program if a former coach was revealed as a child molester? The damage was done by covering it up.

*Respectfully shortened*

A former coach who was investigated for child sexual abuse in 1998 while still on the staff. A former coach who spent 20 plus years on Penn State staff alongside Paterno. A former coach who took victim 4 to the Outback Bowl as his guest in 1999 while still on staff and AFTER he was investigated for abusing a child. All this would have been revealed by an investigation into the 2001 incident.

In my opinion, Paterno would not have survived those revelations, which is to say no coach in America could have survived those revelations. Without the coverup, he would have never set the record for the most wins by a college football coach. So revealing Sandusky's crimes would have severely harmed Paterno, and in Paterno's eyes, and in the eyes of many Penn State football fans, Paterno and the football program are one and the same.

Now, what was the motivation of Curley, Schultz and Spanier to coverup the 2001 incident? That's a more difficult question.

 

[costalpilot]

Okay, in 1998, so far as we know, PSU had nothing to do with the decisions of LE. Unless it can be shown that there was some suppression of the evidence by the Univ. Police, and it looks like the opposite was true, or that someone from PSU improperly influenced RFG, this decision was not PSU's.

There is zero evidence that RFG was either bribed or blackmailed regarding 1998.

In 2001, how much damage would be done to the football program if a former coach was revealed as a child molester? The damage was done by covering it up.

heres what happened on cowherts show on friday:

1. he argued all morning that since psu was not gaining anything for the football program from the coverup, the 2A should not look into it.

(you should know, Cowhert is a ESPN national talk show host..one of its primary talk show hosts, on espn radio four hours a day, 5 days a week. he does NOT reverse himself very often at all. Talk is argument. he rarely second guesses himself, preferring to re state his posiition ad nauseaum all day long)

2. towards the end of his show, he reported that "several listeners" pointed out to him that he was wrong, that by not reporting sandusky to the authorities, the administrators had in fact been protecting penn states reputation and "honor" and that WAS an attempt to help the football program.

3. cowhert, on espn, the most popular national radio network, then said he was in fact wrong, that he had not realized it, but they were right, and maybe the 2A would look at it that way as well.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


the above is what happened live on the show. i am not making any kind of an argument here. just relaying what happened.

as i said, i doubt the 2A gets into it at all.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

*Respectfully shortened*

A former coach who was investigated for child sexual abuse in 1998 while still on the staff. A former coach who spent 20 plus years on Penn State staff alongside Paterno. A former coach who took victim 4 to the Outback Bowl as his guest in 1999 while still on staff and AFTER he was investigated for abusing a child. All this would have been revealed by an investigation into the 2001 incident.

He was not still on staff, however. In 2001, Sandusky was retired, though his retirement perks included use of the facilities.

As for 1998, so far as the University is concerned, they did everything. They turned everything over to the DA's Office. The DA didn't press charges. The path for 1998 leads right off campus, unless someone pressured or persuaded RFG.

In my opinion, Paterno would not have survived those revelations, which is to say no coach in America could have survived those revelations.

Well, we still have no evidence that Paterno even knew about 1998, certainly not in 1998. Had 1998 been a coverup, without the police being involved, I could see it being a problem. Paterno, and even the other three others, have complete CYA, because the police handled it.

It could have been a problem for RFG. He had his first contested primary in May of 2001. Had it been released, prior to the primary, that he didn't prosecute in 1998, he may not have been re-elected. It was his only primary challenge, and he got less than 60% of the vote; that is a very poor showing for a 16 year incumbent.

The problem is, there is absolutely no suggestion RFG knew about 2001.

 

[BigCat]

He was not still on staff, however. In 2001, Sandusky was retired, though his retirement perks included use of the facilities.

As for 1998, so far as the University is concerned, they did everything. They turned everything over to the DA's Office. The DA didn't press charges. The path for 1998 leads right off campus, unless someone pressured or persuaded RFG.

Well, we still have no evidence that Paterno even knew about 1998, certainly not in 1998. Had 1998 been a coverup, without the police being involved, I could see it being a problem. Paterno, and even the other three others, have complete CYA, because the police handled it.

It could have been a problem for RFG. He had his first contested primary in May of 2001. Had it been released, prior to the primary, that he didn't prosecute in 1998, he may not have been re-elected. It was his only primary challenge, and he got less than 60% of the vote; that is a very poor showing for a 16 year incumbent.

The problem is, there is absolutely no suggestion RFG knew about 2001.

You also believe Paterno met his legal obligation to report MM's allegation to his superior (Curley) and to the police (Schultz) and, thus, was not part of a coverup. So why was Paterno fired?

 

[J. J. in Phila]

You also believe Paterno met his legal obligation to report MM's allegation to his superior (Curley) and to the police (Schultz) and, thus, was not part of a coverup. So why was Paterno fired?

They cited "moral duty." The AG's Office (or the PSP) said that Paterno did his legal duty.

The question is, now, did Paterno know was Curley, Schultz and Spanier were doing.

 

[Reader]

Questions raised by Penn State e-mails

http://www.philly.com/philly/column...8_Questions_raised_by_Penn_State_e-mails.html

.........Recall that before his death, Paterno told the Washington Post, "I had never heard a thing" about prior bad behavior by Sandusky. But he hedged when asked in front of the grand jury, according to the testimony released by prosecutors: "I think you said something about a rumor. It may have been discussed in my presence, something else about somebody. I don't know. I don't remember, and I could not honestly say I heard a rumor."

It's entirely possible that Paterno was referring to the 1998 incident, which would strengthen speculation that the investigation into that incident precipitated Sandusky's "retirement" the following year. Schultz told the grand jury that "Sandusky retired when Paterno felt it was time to make a coaching change and also to take advantage of an enhanced retirement benefit under Sandusky's state pension." But that strains credulity.

Why, after the success of the 1999 season, would Paterno have desired to make a coaching change? Sandusky was just in his mid-50s. Published accounts indicate that in 1998 or 1999, he sought to institute a football program at Penn State's Altoona campus, and later, he interviewed for a head coaching position at the University of Virginia. Does that sound like a man ready to retire from football?...........

That is a reference to something I reported here last February, that 29-year-old former quarterback McQueary was hired to coach wide receivers four years after witnessing the shower incident, at a time when 42-year-old former all-American receiver Kenny Jackson (who had coached receivers at Penn State and for the Pittsburgh Steelers) was available. Of course, McQueary's resume had one thing over Jackson, who told me he never solicited the job: a report to Paterno about what he'd seen in the Lasch building showers in 2001.

If the e-mails are accurate, here are the questions they raise: Did a small circle of Penn Staters know about Sandusky in 2001 and make a decision not to report him? Did some of those involved in evaluating the 2001 incident know of reports in 1998? If they were willing to treat Sandusky humanely in 2001, were they also willing to allow him a quiet exit from coaching three years before? Was McQueary rewarded with a job for not violating the circle of trust?


Questions we all want answers to.....

 

[Reader]

READER POLL

Has Joe Paterno's legacy been tarnished?


Yes, new revelations look bad for the coach

731 (60.5%)


No, he is the winningest college football coach

92 (7.6%)


Maybe, but we shouldn't jump to conclusions until the investigation is complete

386 (31.9%)


Total votes = 1209


http://www.philly.com/philly/polls/161711285.html?results=y

 

[Hardymum]

Hardymum, your post brings up so many "could have beens." I agree that it would have been ideal to have help for Jerry. But can you imagine the difficulty of keeping him away from young boys. With TSM, he had a compound of fresh candidates at his picking. Besides, treatment wouldn't help if Jerry refused to believe he had a problem to begin with.

I haven't been on here in a few days, and should explain that I was being a bit sarcastic, and wasn't actually suggesting that would have worked.

I was just pondering the "humane" solution that the 3 Stooges proposed: that Jerry get help, not bring boys to campus anymore, tell the Second Mile about it, but not involve the police or child welfare services.

What if the "help" he was to get was offered by Raykovitz if/when they DID tell the Second Mile? He's a psychiatrist. The Penn Stooges have then done what they thought was the "humane" thing to do...except it didn't solve the problem for anyone but them, and only temporarily.