Jerry says he horsed-around & showered | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Jerry says he horsed-around & showered

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can understand Sandusky. He is what he is - a monster. What I can't understand is how all the "normal" adults in this fiasco could let this slide.

If I were to walk in on a naked adult male engaging in "horseplay" with a child - well I posted what my response would be previously and it was removed from hte board. Putting the physical response aside I would have kept screaming rapist until the SOB was arrested.

Nobody needs to know what the law is here. I don't give a rat's patoot what someone is or is not required to report. All that needs to be known is that a child was being harmed by an adult.
 
Sandusky struggled to answer Costas' question about whether he's sexually attracted to boys. He eventually denied it

I once read a professional interrogator's comment that when somebody repeats the question a time or two like that, the next words out of his mouth will be a lie.
 
Jerry is one sick puppy and I hope he gets everything thats coming to him!
 
I once read a professional interrogator's comment that when somebody repeats the question a time or two like that, the next words out of his mouth will be a lie.

That makes a lot of sense. I used to regularly cross-examine an expert economist who cleared his throat before every lie. It was a signal to me to stick with the line of questioning.
 
Various news outlets reporting that the US Attorney for PA (middle district) has announced his office has offered to assist in the investigations and possibly prosecution of Sandusky. His office will also assist with Dept of Education investigation.

U.S. Attorney Peter J. Smith today pledged his office's support to state and federal investigations regarding child molestation charges lodged against Jerry Sandusky, former defensive coordinator for Penn State University's football team.

Smith, who is assigned to U.S. Middle District Court for Pennsylvania, said his office's general practice is to not comment on ongoing investigations. However, since Sandusky was charged by the state attorney general's office on Nov. 4, his office is receiving questions concerning potential federal involvement in the case.

"We recognize that the public disclosures concerning (the Sandusky case) are extremely disturbing because they involve the safety of children and therefore merit thorough review of the facts and appropriate action by law enforcement at all levels, including federal agencies," Smith said.

He said his office will assist a U.S. Department of Education investigation as to whether Penn State officials failed to report incidents of sexual abuse on campus, as required by federal law. Smith said he cannot discuss specifics of that probe.

Also, Smith said his office has contacted the attorney general and offered to provide assistance, including prosecutorial help, if needed. "We will coordinate the work of both offices in this important matter as much as possible," he said.
 
I once read a professional interrogator's comment that when somebody repeats the question a time or two like that, the next words out of his mouth will be a lie.
If not a lie it will be the best version of limited truth and less than full disclosure. In addition, some attention to eye movement and whether it is to the up and left or up and right is helpful.
 
.-.
JS, I don't need to do that google you suggested. That victim's brother has been my neighbor for about 25 years.
 
That's the part I just can't understand. Something that would make me vomit, some how they have an uncontrollable compulsion for. Just don't get it.
I completely agree emotionally but training and reading and counseling with them tells me otherwise. Many are in full blown denial of that reality itself.
 
McQueary saying he went to police in another released email. What is going on?

In the email obtained by The Morning Call, McQueary wrote that he "did have discussions with police and with the official at the university in charge of police" following the alleged incident between Sandusky, a former Penn State assistant coach, and a boy. McQueary also wrote that he "is getting hammered for handling this the right way or what I thought at the time was right."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/breaking/chi-mcqueary--1115,0,2227303.story
 
McQueary saying he went to police in another released email. What is going on?

In the email obtained by The Morning Call, McQueary wrote that he "did have discussions with police and with the official at the university in charge of police" following the alleged incident between Sandusky, a former Penn State assistant coach, and a boy. McQueary also wrote that he "is getting hammered for handling this the right way or what I thought at the time was right."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/breaking/chi-mcqueary--1115,0,2227303.story
I think when all of the dirty laundry comes out we will be shocked at the extent of the cover-up. And not just by the university.
 
I think when all of the dirty laundry comes out we will be shocked at the extent of the cover-up. And not just by the university.

I'm getting the same feeling. McQueary is clearly trying to defend himself by having friends leak emails. I don't blame him given the beating he's taken the past week.
 
An ESPN has confirmed from someone inside the investigation that Mike McQueary did stop the assault on the child.

http://espn.go.com/college-football...-mcqueary-stopped-alleged-assault-source-says

Apparently, he made sure the event was stopped and was later interviewed by both the police and Schultz who was the head of the police. A lot of folks may some apologizing to do to McQueary and I don't mean folks here.

From the article, "McQueary said he, "did have discussions with the police and the official at the university in charge of the police" after the incident."

The police at PSU are an official police force of the unincorporated area known as University Park.
 
.-.
I remember the Kitty G story well. The whole city, indeed the country was compelled to take a good look at itself in the mirror; reams of mea culpa's; nothing changed. On the Mike Francesa show on Friday an old cynic suggested that if McQueary
had shut his mouth and walked away ( a psychologist later said 50% of the American population would have done that), he would be completely in the clear today.
Again speaking of Kitty Genovese, there was a incident in China a few weeks ago, widely reported, that a toddler, wandering in an alley was hit by not one but two trucks and that bystanders just walked by...All captured in living color:
http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlhtKyaeKVg
Its so awful that you have to be 21 to see ity
 
In the email obtained by The Morning Call, McQueary wrote that he "did have discussions with police and with the official at the university in charge of police"

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/breaking/chi-mcqueary--1115,0,2227303.story
I assume he means with campus police and Schultz, who oversaw them and is under indictment for failing to report and perjuring himself. Does McQ mean he went to Schultz's office where there was someone from the campus cops present? No details yet.

Seems to me the reporting law contemplates a report outside the University, such as the Bureau of Child Welfare. I don't think these emails actually go much beyond the already known fact that McQ met with Schultz, who's under indictment for what he didn't do with the information.

However, I've never had a problem with McQ's initial efforts to report either as a legal or personal responsibility matter, and in the former regard question whether he was a mandated reporter at all.

As for "making sure it stopped," I'd think he means he stood and looked long enough to see Sandusky back away. Have never quite accepted as very likely that the rape just continued when an observer showed up and made eye contact.

On the other hand, I don't see anything to the effect that he "stopped it" in an activist sense such as his emails might imply. He took no physical action, as he acknowledges, and there's no hint of stopping it in a take-charge way such as "Get the hell out of there, Jerry, and get dressed. What's your name son, and where do you live? I'm taking you there."

But then, I can see how he felt he'd stopped the episode, and whatever his actions going forward McQ is not, on the facts as they've emerged so far, on my list of probable members of the cover-up club.
 
I assume he means with campus police and Schultz, who oversaw them and is under indictment for failing to report and perjuring himself. Does McQ mean he went to Schultz's office where there was someone from the campus cops present? No details yet.

Seems to me the reporting law contemplates a report outside the University, such as the Bureau of Child Welfare.

I am not sure that is necessarily true, JS, since sexual assaults are regularly reported to the University Police according to local police reports.

It is very likely under PA law that it does not do so as far as McQueary is concerned. See the section of the law applying to those working in institutional structures. Certainly under that section of the law Curley and or Schultz had that responsibility being at the pinnacle of authority within the AD and the university police. Did you read the summary I posted from Hayes Hunt and Brian Kint of Cozen O'Connor? The summaries of the PA and Federal laws were there.

The campus police have full police power to conduct investgations and bring charges unlike on some campuses where campus security is a better description. Here is a link to their responsibility and services. LINK http://www.police.psu.edu/
 
I am not sure that is necessarily true, JS, since sexual assaults are regularly reported to the University Police according to local police reports. It is very likely under PA law that it does not do so as far as McQueary is concerned. See the section of the law applying to those working in institutional structures. Certainly under that section of the law Curley and or Schultz had that responsibility . . .

The campus police have full police power to conduct investgations and bring charges unlike on some campuses where campus security is a better description. Here is a link to their responsibility and services. LINK http://www.police.psu.edu/
Under Pennsylvania law, a mandated reporter does have to report outside the university, specifically, to "the department," i.e. the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services, initially through its delegate the "appropriate county agency." From other reading, I believe reports of child abuse are appropriately made to the Bureau of Child Welfare.

More difficult is the question whether someone like McQ was a mandated reporter. In an institutional setting, the law specifically covers administrators and teachers, but not coaches. Moreover, with someone like McQ, the "comes into contact with children" part is problematical (regularly? on occasion? as part of his regular duties?).

McQ's status as first reporter at the bottom of a chain of command may have to be hashed out if the transferred reporting responsibility to administrators like Curley and Schultz is to hold up. Certainly their defense will claim that the applicability of the statute was tainted at the first rung on the reporting ladder.

A technicality? Sure. But the defense team won't be invoking the spirit of the statute. They'll be looking for any loophole they can find. If their esteemed clients lied their butts off under penalty of perjury, they'll be headed for the slammer anyway. But the bigger picture for child safety is that the narrowness and vagueness of the mandated reporting statute should be addressed by reform legislation in Pennsylvania. And I trust reform efforts will be undertaken in other states as well as a result of this case.

Of course, non-mandated reporters may make an outside report anyway. And someone should have done so regardless of legal niceties as to who is mandated to report, don't you agree?

My concern about reporting only to the campus police, and I'm sure you share that concern, is that restricting the reports to such an avenue heads off the governmental/public involvement contemplated by the statute and can be a dead-end if the campus police are under the control of people intent on a cover-up.
 
.-.
Under Pennsylvania law, a mandated reporter does have to report outside the university, specifically, to "the department," i.e. the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services, initially through its delegate the "appropriate county agency." From other reading, I believe reports of child abuse are appropriately made to the Bureau of Child Welfare. Did you check the section I mentioned about reporting within institutions because what you are suggesting goes against both the Hunt Hayes piece and the training that teachers receive in PA. I know this for fact for the two local school districts.

This is the section I mean: Under Pennsylvania law, 23 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6311 creates a duty to report suspected child abuse, including sexual abuse. That law, however, applies only to people who come into contact with children in the course of employment, and it applies only to children under the care or supervision of the organization with which that person is affiliated. When staff members at an institution have a legal duty to report under the statute, they fully discharge that duty upon notifying the person in charge of the institution. At that point, the person in charge assumes the legal duty to report the suspected abuse to Child Protective Services.

More difficult is the question whether someone like McQ was a mandated reporter. True. In an institutional setting, the law specifically covers administrators and teachers, but not coaches. A strange idea, if that applies at the local educational level don't you think. Moreover, with someone like McQ, the "comes into contact with children" part is problematical (regularly? on occasion? as part of his regular duties?). Plus there is the outside of professional duties aspect of the law, too.

McQ's status as first reporter at the bottom of a chain of command may have to be hashed out if the transferred reporting responsibility to administrators like Curley and Schultz is to hold up. Certainly their defense will claim that the applicability of the statute was tainted at the first rung on the reporting ladder.

A technicality? Sure. Technicalities are a way of life in the law. But the defense team won't be invoking the spirit of the statute. They'll be looking for any loophole they can find. Absolutely. If their esteemed clients lied their butts off under penalty of perjury, they'll be headed for the slammer anyway. But the bigger picture for child safety is that the narrowness and vagueness of the mandated reporting statute should be addressed by reform legislation in Pennsylvania. And I trust reform efforts will be undertaken in other states as well as a result of this case. Let us hope so.

Of course, non-mandated reporters may make an outside report anyway. And someone should have done so regardless of legal niceties as to who is mandated to report, don't you agree?

My concern about reporting only to the campus police, and I'm sure you share that concern, is that restricting the reports to such an avenue heads off the governmental/public involvement contemplated by the statute and can be a dead-end if the campus police are under the control of people intent on a cover-up. Absolutely. My preference would be to make report to both the State Police and the Department of Child Welfare or its local agency mandatory.
 
Did you check the section I mentioned about reporting within institutions

Yes. I linked it and discussed how the reporting responsibility passes up the chain of command with those below being relieved of the responsibility once they pass it higher. What I should have stated more clearly is that it's the ultimate mandated reporter in the chain who must report outside the university, not somebody like McQ who was the first rung on the intramural reporting ladder.

My point was that when McQ says in an email that he did go to the police, I'm betting he means the campus police under the aegis of Schultz. And I'll add that I don't think that happened right away, but later on when the wagons were being circled.

You seemed to be saying that the campus police were good enough to report to, they have unusual authority etc. And I'm saying that, whoever the mandated reporter may be, there has to be an outside report where the law applies, and this case well illustrates the reason for that.
 
Kib had posted information about the pensions involved earlier. Here is a report on Paterno's likely pension under PA law. http://espn.go.com/college-football...aterno-line-554000-annual-pension-report-says

$554,000 per year 100% of the average of his 3 highest years' average salary.

Helluva a pension. Not to be a cynic, but I don't know how much of that Joe will collect, given how long he might live. He's 84, and this sort of situation seems like it would lessen ones lifespan, what with stress involved and the removing of one of the most important thing in a person's life (one's purpose).
 
As for "making sure it stopped," I'd think he means he stood and looked long enough to see Sandusky back away. Have never quite accepted as very likely that the rape just continued when an observer showed up and made eye contact.

On the other hand, I don't see anything to the effect that he "stopped it" in an activist sense such as his emails might imply. He took no physical action, as he acknowledges, and there's no hint of stopping it in a take-charge way such as "Get the hell out of there, Jerry, and get dressed. What's your name son, and where do you live? I'm taking you there."

I agree... he gave him the "what are you doing in there" look.
 
My point was that when McQ says in an email that he did go to the police, I'm betting he means the campus police under the aegis of Schultz. And I'll add that I don't think that happened right away, but later on when the wagons were being circled.

I agree with this point and so do most who have tried to reconcile McQ's emails and the findings by the Grand Jury about what McQ did and whom he spoke to after witnessing the incident.
 
Yes. I linked it and discussed how the reporting responsibility passes up the chain of command with those below being relieved of the responsibility once they pass it higher. What I should have stated more clearly is that it's the ultimate mandated reporter in the chain who must report outside the university, not somebody like McQ who was the first rung on the intramural reporting ladder. OK, now I understand your point. I thought you were talking of all mandated reporters in the more generic sense. Absolutely, someone must report outside of the university system and if it wasn't under PA law, certainly, under the federal law.

My point was that when McQ says in an email that he did go to the police, I'm betting he means the campus police under the aegis of Schultz. And I'll add that I don't think that happened right away, but later on when the wagons were being circled. I agree with that assumption. My understanding from folks at PSU is the University Park Police do not function under the supervision of the State College town police. It is why I suggest that the PA State Police would be the best group to be designated.

You seemed to be saying that the campus police were good enough to report to, they have unusual authority etc. And I'm saying that, whoever the mandated reporter may be, there has to be an outside report where the law applies, and this case well illustrates the reason for that.Not unusual authority but usual or ordinary authority equivalent to other local police departments.
 
.-.
I agree with this point and so do most who have tried to reconcile McQ's emails and the findings by the Grand Jury about what McQ did and whom he spoke to after witnessing the incident.
Not sure what you mean here Cat by "most who have tried to reconcile ...", most speculating, most involved, most speaking with knowledge? Remember word has been released from within the investigation that McQ did do what he reported in the e-mails. It is no longer the e-mails that are the sole source of this information.
 
Not sure what you mean here Cat by most, most speculating, most involved, most speaking with knowledge? Remember word has been released from within the investigation that McQ did do what he reported in the e-mails. It is no longer the e-mails that are the sole source of this information.

I mean people, including lawyers, who have discussed it on tv. There was some question about whether McQ's emails were inconsistent with the findings of the GJ and those familiar with both say no. He says the incident stopped before he left and he says he spoke with police and I agree with JS that he's referring to the university police under the auspices of Schultz. The GJ report found that no university police interviewed McQ and there was no other investigation. His emails are interesting but let's not think they somehow represent new information not considered by the GJ based on an investigation and sworn testimony.
 
I mean people, including lawyers, who have discussed it on tv. There was some question about whether McQ's emails were inconsistent with the findings of the GJ and those familiar with both say no. He says the incident stopped before he left and he says he spoke with police and I agree with JS that he's referring to the university police under the auspices of Schultz. The GJ report found that no university police interviewed McQ and there was no other investigation. His emails are interesting but let's not think they somehow represent new information not considered by the GJ based on an investigation and sworn testimony.
Thanks I just needed clarity.

I fully agree the emails are not important in themselves at all since they can be purely self serving more significant is information from within the investigation confirming aspects about them.

I am heading to a PSU men's hoops game tonight and will be with some folks from the university, one connected to the Athletic Department.
 
I am heading to a PSU men's hoops game tonight and will be with some folks from the university, one connected to the Athletic Department.
Tell them we're with 'em.

Hard as the majority of the hounds on this board have been baying on the trail of the Penn State officialdom and coachdom, the cumulative arguments of the unsilent minority have finally sunk in with me. In a dream last night the truth finally came. So to make amends for my prior attitude on the case, I’ll share it with the board.

Jerry Sandusky was and is a prince among men, tirelessly devoting his time and energy to expanding the world of underprivileged youth. He developed such a rapport with the kids that others, such as their parents, occasionally grew jealous and provoked misunderstandings like occurred in 1998. That matter was thoroughly investigated and it was concluded that Sandusky had behaved even better than he claimed.

The prosecutor at the time was so embarrassed by even having looked into the activities of the sainted Sandusky that he decided to dispose of the evidence of his disgraceful suspicions. He threw his computer and its hard drive separately into the river and then disposed of himself even more thoroughly.

For his part, Sandusky, though he was Joe Pa’s heir apparent, decided to retire at age 55 to spend more time with the boys. But still the jealous critics would not be stilled.

Fortunately they never got hold of the snoopy janitors, who couldn’t seem to fathom anyone else’s efforts to promote cleanliness and hygiene in the showers.

But then in 2002 some drunken graduate assistant coach wandered into the locker room in the evening, where he shouldn’t have been, and heard the sounds of those janitors slapping their mops around. The sound conjured up a hallucinatory vision of Sandusky and a boy, possibly triggered by the provocative title of Sandusky’s autobiography Touched: The Jerry Sandusky Story, published the preceding year.

Having sobered up but still haunted by his hallucination, the grad assistant went the next morning to see Joe Pa. Joe told him he was reporting to the wrong guy, and stopped him before he could waste his time talking about what he thought he’d seen. “I’ll handle this,” said Joe. “Wail 'til you're called. You must give your report to the proper person.”

Joe then summoned his boss to his home (being one of the few people who can summon their bosses when they wish). “Curley,” Joe said, “Jerry may have been horsing around again. Do your duty, and although it’d be very nice if this didn’t get out to hurt our football program . . . and the University, of course . . . I want you and Schultz to pursue it to the full extent. Let the chips fall where they may, within the University walls.”

So Curley and Schultz investigated, interviewed the grad assistant and left no stone unturned. They eventually concluded that nothing had happened at all. So there it sat. But the prosecutorial hounds would not stop baying, and now they’ve brought false charges based on the scanty evidence of alleged assaults on only 20 or so boys, and they've quibbled about the conscientious investigation by PSU in which the files are so blank that they prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that nothing happened.

Since then those so willing to condemn the PSU officialdom have been acting like Nazis and genocidal African tribes. Thankfully, students have rioted on campus in a counter-display of violence aimed at protecting the innocent football program and its iconic, but fired, head coach. Well, we have to keep our priorities straight, do we not?
 
Tell them we're with 'em.

Hard as the majority of the hounds on this board have been baying on the trail of the Penn State officialdom and coachdom, the cumulative arguments of the unsilent minority have finally sunk in with me. In a dream last night the truth finally came. So to make amends for my prior attitude on the case, I’ll share it with the board.

......

Since then those so willing to condemn the PSU officialdom have been acting like Nazis and genocidal African tribes. Thankfully, students have rioted on campus in a counter-display of violence aimed at protecting the innocent football program and its iconic, but fired, head coach. Well, we have to keep our priorities straight, do we not?

Some of us just don't want all and sundry to be cut down in an overzealous attempt to clean house. eg There are plenty of people in the AD who likely had no clue. I'm still unsure who did what at this point, but I do know that there was a large amount of diddling going on. And definitely a significant cover up with a good number of 'officials' involved. There were also a bunch of bystanders who did nothing.
 
Tell them we're with 'em.

Hard as the majority of the hounds on this board have been baying on the trail of the Penn State officialdom and coachdom, the cumulative arguments of the unsilent minority have finally sunk in with me. In a dream last night the truth finally came. So to make amends for my prior attitude on the case, I’ll share it with the board.
....

Since then those so willing to condemn the PSU officialdom have been acting like Nazis and genocidal African tribes. Thankfully, students have rioted on campus in a counter-display of violence aimed at protecting the innocent football program and its iconic, but fired, head coach. Well, we have to keep our priorities straight, do we not?
To get out from under this Sandusky's defense will likely have to be at least that creative.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,154
Messages
4,554,963
Members
10,438
Latest member
UConnheart


Top Bottom