the_archfiend: (Default)

Just when you thought the Jerry Sandusky serial molestation debacle couldn't get any worse, this particular legal tidbit get revealed and causes yet another round of "how low can you go?" on the issue all over again:

In 2014, a man testified that Penn State football coach Joe Paterno ignored his complaints of a sexual assault committed by assistant coach Jerry Sandusky in 1976 when the man was a 14-year-old boy, according to court documents unsealed Tuesday in a Philadelphia court.

Four other former assistant football coaches at the school also were aware of Sandusky acting inappropriately with boys before law enforcement was first notified in 1998, according to testimony contained in the documents.

The allegations suggest that Paterno may have been made aware of Sandusky’s actions far earlier than has previously been reported, and that knowledge of Sandusky’s behavior may have been far more widespread among the Penn State football staff than previously known.

The Post article points out that former Paterno assistants Greg Schiano and Tom Bradley denied the allegations, but those denials really might not matter all that much to Paterno's already hideously tarnished reputation:

The 1976 victim, identified in court records as John Doe 150, said that while he was attending a football camp at Penn State, Sandusky touched him as he showered. Sandusky’s finger penetrated the boy’s rectum, Doe said, and the boy asked to speak with Paterno about it. Doe testified that he specifically told Paterno that Sandusky had sexually assaulted him, and Paterno ignored it.

“Is it accurate that Coach Paterno quickly said to you, ‘I don’t want to hear about any of that kind of stuff, I have a football season to worry about?’ ” the man’s lawyer asked.

“Yes . . . I was shocked, disappointed, offended. I was insulted. . . . I said, is that all you’re going to do? You’re not going to do anything else?”

Paterno, the man testified, just walked away.

This isn't merely another dagger in Paterno's rep, though. It's also another reason to look askance at any collegiate sports program that puts its success ahead of keeping other athletes, students or even the general public safe from people like Sandusky or others who engage in criminal behavior and then get to walk away because of all the clichéd Big Man on Campus bullshit that's used to protect them even when caught red-handed. The only reason why Paterno and various other PSU functionaries allowed this to happen not merely for years but for decades is that they literally did not care about anything except winning. And that's nearly as disgusting as the actual crimes Sandusky committed.

I don't care how much money is thrown the way of NCAA programs by alumni, boosters or sports apparel companies these days; it won't save them from their worse enemy: namely, themselves. I'm now having trouble enjoying college football even when a program is apparently scandal-free, and I used to follow college sports a lot more closely than I do now. And if an AD or university president thinks that the general public is going to magically come forth and save their bacon when the next scandal erupts when even sports fans like me are getting completely sick of this shit, they're living in the same dream world where Paterno's supporters are apparently residing.

the_archfiend: (Default)

There's an old truism that the cover-up is far worse than the crime. That definitely fits the bill with the crisis at Baylor, where a series of assaults against women by members of the football team (and others, but mainly the football team) led to the firing of head coach Art Briles and the demotion (reassignment, really) of former Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr from his position as university President to university chancellor. He'll also continue to be a professor at the Baylor school of law, and all of this is especially ironic considering where he made his bones as a prosecutor:

Mr. Starr’s demotion delivered a twist to the biography of a man whose reputation was built on what many considered an overzealous pursuit of allegations of sexual transgressions by Mr. Clinton. Now he is being punished for leading an administration that, according to a report by an outside law firm commissioned by the university’s governing board, looked the other way when Baylor football players were accused of sex crimes, and sometimes convicted of them.

The report (link here) is horrifying enough, but it's made even worse by the fact that - as usual - there's already a squad of numbskulls lining up to support Briles because he is, after all, the coach. If this sounds at all familiar, it should. Because St. Joe Paterno (the greatest man who's ever lived, according to a group of similar-minded dolts) had a whole parcel of losers in the ethical behavior sweepstakes (for example John Ziegler; for another, Franco Harris) lining up to defend him in the wake of the Penn State scandal. The similarities are disturbing enough (again, the leadership teams of a major college sports program and university just sat there with their collective junk in their hands and did next to nothing about the scandal), but the added weight of attempts to coerce the victims into not reporting the assaults only made things that much worse.

And this brings up the following issue: I'm a sports fan. I'm also hardly deaf to the fact that university programs are now (and perhaps always have been) perfectly willing to put the success of their athletic programs above the safety of the general public. I guess I could be optimistic and hope that this, and Penn State, will finally sink in and that the NCAA and individual schools will stop this outright sociopathic behavior once and for all.

I could be optimistic about that.

But I'm not.    

the_archfiend: (Default)

The John Ziegler angle on the Jerry Sandusky debacle has just turned completely nauseating. Dom Cosentino again, in Deadspin:

We told you yesterday about filmmaker John Ziegler's lunatic shouting tour to promote his jailhouse interview with Jerry Sandusky. Ziegler had hoped to use that interview to help rescue Joe Paterno and other Penn State officials from allegations that they covered up Jerry Sandusky's sex crimes against children. That effort has backfired spectacularly.

Ziegler's plan, which included airing portions of the Sandusky interview on television, was so misguided even the Paterno family has distanced themselves from him. Another part of that plan called for revealing the name of the victim from the infamous 2001 Penn State shower episode. Ziegler eventually reconsidered, but then it was posted on his site anyway, where it remained for several hours. In the text, the victim's first name appeared five times, his last name once, and the name also showed up for a while in the URL link to a separate document. Ziegler admitted he made a "stupid mistake," but he also claimed that his websites "were immediately hit with a massive and coordinated cyber attack" that initially prevented him from making post-publication edits.

So Ziegler's excuse for outing a (previously) underage, (previously) anonymous victim of sexual assault by a male adult is that he was originally going to do so, changed his mind, then changed his mind back, was subsequently hacked or DDoS'ed (or so he claims; there is, of course, no real proof offered up for this) and thereby prevented from removing the material in question.

Sure.

Never mind the fact that several of Ziegler's Tweets (included in the article) first sell the salaciousness of "the real story of Victim 2", take time out to respond to a series of Twitter trolls, pull back on the "real story" angle and eventually go into "I was hacked!" mode shortly thereafter.

Seriously, is anyone out there gullible enough to take Ziegler's bullshit seriously? Anybody?

Ziegler's case isn't helped by the following, either:

Now keep in mind that Ziegler had every intention of outing the man known as Victim 2. He made a subtle reference to it in his stupid challenge to the media published last week. Monday morning, Matt Lauer had to interrupt Ziegler to assure viewers of Today that the name wouldn't be revealed on the air. Yesterday afternoon, Ziegler wrote that if Victim 2 "agreed to speak to me and explain this to me himself, that I would gladly consider not releasing his identity." He later denied that was a threat and accused TMZ of defaming him after the site called him out on it.

That last sentence is especially telling, since it comes perilously close to the old "I'm sorry if I made anybody uncomfortable by something I refuse to own up to" non-apology. But then again, Ziegler seems completely comfortable with such actions:

By this morning the victim's name had been removed. Ziegler tweeted out a link to what he called a "series of apologies." He mentioned victims' rights advocates, his webmaster, his many supporters, "members of the Sandusky family and their representatives," his own wife, and "those, who like me, [sic] desperately want the truth to come out here." John Ziegler did not apologize to the child-sex abuse victim whose identity he shared with the world because of his "stupid mistake."

So the only person who was left out of that cascade of mea culpas is the victim himself. He even managed to apologize to "members of the Sandusky family and their representatives", but not one of his victims. Fantastic.

My wish, of course, is that Ziegler has run afoul of some Pennsylvania rape-shield law that will make his 15 minutes very, very expensive and uncomfortable. It's exactly what the douchebag deserves.

the_archfiend: (Default)

From Dom Cosentino at Deadspin:

Let's first get this out of the way: Ziegler's two previous films alleged that the Clinton administration was responsible for 9/11 and that Barack Obama got elected in 2008 because the media were really mean to Sarah Palin. That ought to give you an idea of the sort of mind we're dealing with here, as should the fact that he and Palin are no longer on speaking terms. Ziegler and I have had a number of exchanges about the Penn State case since last summer, some cordial, some not, all of them conducted on his end with a paranoid and martyred air of lonely genius.

He isn't an easy person to get along with, even if you see things by his weird lights. The Paterno family no longer supports whatever the fuck he's now doing.

Cosentino's piece goes on to quote the previously mentioned Paterno family's Disavowal Of Everything Ziegler, but the most galling aspect of Ziegler's one-man publicity act isn't that he's engaging in one; after all, who doesn't try to get their 15 minutes of fame by rolling around in their own shit these days? It's that his little project to exonerate St. Joe Paterno hinges on a nauseating strategy (namely, painting Jerry Sandusky's victims as false accusers in order to paint Paterno as a fellow victim) and that he's willing to scream this garbage out of a bullhorn even as the ship he helped wrecked continues to sink.

Something a bit (but only a bit) less galling follows:

Ziegler went through with a scheduled appearance on The Today Show, and at one point host Matt Lauer had to interrupt him to inform viewers that Ziegler would not be outing one of Sandusky's victims on the air, as he still may do on his website at some point today. After Lauer read a portion of the Paterno family's statement, Ziegler said the statement was "sad, heartbreaking for me, considering I've put a year of my life into this with no compensation, no thought of compensation." Because this is all about Joe Paterno and not John Ziegler, see. Ziegler will also tell you this is not a commercial endeavor and that he hasn't made any money from it. Just be aware that you can contribute to his film project here. (Self-serving link removed by me, of course).

I have no real idea if there's a shield law in force in Pennsylvania that's intended to protect the victims of sex crimes, but if there is, Ziegler really might want to rethink the idea of outing that victim -.if he can find the time to stop coming off as a self-pitying little creep, that is. You may remember that I previously thought that's exactly how Jerry Sandusky comes off, which is quite telling indeed. And so is the fact that Ziegler wants people to actually contribute money to his as yet uncompleted pile of celluloid horseshit.

Ah, but like most people who grasp at straws, Ziegler's unaware of the horseshit that lies underneath. How unaware? Read on:

Last night, Ziegler allowed himself to get trolled by Piers Morgan on CNN, which you can see above (see the Deadspin link for the embedded video). Ziegler began raising his voice almost from the start. It got no better from there, in part because Morgan has little grasp of the facts surrounding Paterno's firing. But Ziegler walked right into his trap anyway. Sara Ganim made an appearance toward the end, only to have Ziegler repeatedly attempt to shout over her. When Ziegler finally attempted to question whether Ganim deserved to win last year's Pulitzer Prize, Morgan cut him short and said, "I would take the Paterno family's advice, and just disappear."

At this point, some people would realize how much of a public nuisance they've become and head off into the sunset, intent on preserving what little dignity they have left. I get the sinking feeling that Ziegler won't be one of them. Far from it.

the_archfiend: (Default)
A new spin on the sordid Jerry Sandusky/Penn State saga got dropped on the American public like bird shit a few days ago when a certain John Ziegler (whose previous efforts at "documentaries" include a pro-Sarah Palin screed that I'm sure utterly enthralled the 62 or so Palin supporters who apparently saw it nationwide) filmed an interview of Sandusky in which the convicted pedophile/self-pity machine stated that Mike McQueary was wrong, wrong, wrong to think that Sandusky was engaging in sex with an underage boy when McQueary caught Coach Mumbles with the boy in a locker room shower in 2001.

In an interview excerpt broadcast on NBC's "Today" show on Monday, Sandusky said he doesn't know why Mike McQueary claimed "that sex was going on" when he saw the convicted sex offender with a boy in 2001.

"That would have been the last thing I would have thought about," Sandusky said. "I would have thought maybe fooling around or something like that."

As per usual, Sandusky doesn't quite come off as a particularly good anything: witness, substitute father figure, founder of a charity, table lamp. The only thing he seems adequate at is being a creep in public. It's almost as if he revels in it.

But why the attempt to interview him in the first place? Why now?

Well, here's the fun part.

Ziegler, a former radio talk show host, is obsessed with media conspiracies. One of his films says President Obama was elected in 2008 as the result of a media conspiracy.

Yup. He's one of them, too. Fantastic.

He told "Today" host Matt Lauer on Monday that Penn State icon Joe Paterno was the victim of a bloodthirsty media.

"I personally believe the media in this particular case has an agenda they don't want to hear what the truth is," Ziegler told Lauer. "This has been a rush to judgment from the beginning."

So, yeah, you guessed it: this is part of Ziegler's half-assed attempt to reinstate St. Joe Paterno to the status of untouchable college sports legends everywhere. As stated in the Daily News article I'm quoting, the interview is actually part and parcel of - wait for it - a documentary intended to exonerate Paterno's legacy.

As you might guess, some people besides me have taken issue with such a project:

Advocates for sex abuse victims, meanwhile, criticized NBC and "Today" for airing the interview excerpts, which where filmed for a documentary currently being produced by right-wing filmmaker John Ziegler.

"Ziegler is seeking to profit by capitalizing on the controversy of the Sandusky scandal by producing and distributing a film," a statement released by victim advocates said. "By airing these interviews, and capitalizing on the ensuing storm of controversy unleashed by this announcement, NBC has chosen to give national exposure for a second time to a child rapist whose indisputable guilt on over 40 counts of sexual abuse of children was agreed upon by a jury of his peers."

The statement was signed by Christopher Anderson, the executive director of MaleSurvivor; Cardozo Law School professor Marci Hamilton, who represents a Sandusky abuse victim; John Salveson and Tammy Lerner of the Foundation to Abolish Child Sex Abuse; and Roger Canaff of End Violence Against Women.

In other words, I can think of quite a few people who probably won't be shelling out money to see the "documentary" Ziegler's concocting.

But what of the Paternos themselves? How do they feel about this "help" that Ziegler is providing them, especially in the wake of their own watery attempt to counter the Freeh Report? Read on:

Paterno family lawyer Wick Sollers released a statement released shortly after midnight, saying:

“The release of the audio recording of Jerry Sandusky is a sad and unfortunate development. Sandusky had the opportunity to speak, under oath, during his trial and he chose not to do so. Releasing a recording at this time, nearly a year after he was found guilty on 45 counts, is transparently self-serving and yet another insult to the victims and anyone who cares about the truth in this tragic story.

“The Paterno family would prefer to remain silent on this matter, but they feel it is important to make it clear that they had no role in obtaining or releasing this recording. Moreover, they believe that any attempt to use this recording as a defense of Joe Paterno is misguided and inappropriate. I encourage anyone who wants to understand the facts of this case to go to Paterno.com and read the reports of former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, former FBI profiler, James Clemente, noted pedophilia expert, Dr. Fred Berlin and the King & Spalding legal team.

“From the beginning, the family has been committed to due process and a careful, objective examination of the facts. This is the path they will continue to follow.”

I'm doubtful about that last paragraph, but not what preceded it.

And that's hardly a bus they just threw Ziegler under; try a 18-wheel Peterbilt instead.

the_archfiend: (Default)
I'm not particularly surprised at Jerry Sandusky acting like this after being found guilty. Honestly. I'm just startled that Lawyerin' Joe Amendola and his crack(ed) team of lawyers didn't make more of an effort to shut him up before his sentencing or any appeals have even been filed.

In previous appearances in front of the media (witness his immortally suspect appearance on NBC's Rock Center, a massive gaffe that could've been even worse for him if a certain portion of the interview had actually aired), Sandusky came off as a shifty, incredibly unsavory Dirty Old Uncle who came off that way for exactly one reason and one reason only: he knew what he had done and was still unprepared to admit it to himself or anyone else. As with most people like this (or anyone else who has a similar lack of insight regarding their past bad behavior), he still hasn't learned shit about himself. He has learned who to blame, though - everybody else:

"A young man who was dramatic a veteran accuser (sic), and always sought attention, started everything. He was joined by a well-orchestrated effort of the media, investigators, the system, Penn State, psychologists, civil attorneys and other accusers. They won. I've wondered what they really won: Attention, financial gain, prestige… will all be temporary. Before you blame me, as others have, look at everything and everybody. Look at the preparation for the trial and the trial. Compare it to others. Think about what happened. Why, and who made it happen? Evaluate the accusers and their families. Realize they didn't come out of isolation. The accusers were products of many more people and experiences than me. Look at their confidants and their honesty. Think about how easy it was for them to turn on me given the information, attention and potential perks. I never labeled or put down them or their families."

That smoking turd of craziness is from Penn State's ComRadio (click on the first link above for a transcript); I'm not sure why Lawyerin' Joe didn't tell him to actually shut the fuck up for once and let him do his supposed job, but my guess is that Amendola is just as not in control of the situation as he was when he gave the OK for Sandusky to make that fateful appearance on Rock Center. That appearance cemented his reputation as the current Most Guilty-Looking Man in America, 2011 edition, and it was all downhill from there. Either way, this conspiracy theory craziness is too little, too late; if Amendola and company had voiced it during the actual trial, it might not have saved their client's bacon (or even be taken seriously, for that matter), but at least it would've looked more like an actual defense strategy and less like the incoherent ramblings of a convicted serial sex criminal. And that is what Sandusky is, after all, bizarre sentencing hearing statement or not.
the_archfiend: (Default)

Well, how else do you explain these reactions to the NCAA sanctions? 

OTOH, if you're a member of the Paterno family, you can just whine about it:

Sexual abuse is reprehensible, especially when it involves children, and no one starting with
Joe Paterno condones or minimizes it.


Two problems: referring to a deceased individual in the present tense as if he was still capable of condoning or minimizing anything is a bit creepy. As to everything else, the Freeh report says otherwise, says it repeatedly, and says it in such a way that there can be no real ambiguity about the matter.

The horrific acts committed by Jerry Sandusky shock the conscience of every decent human being. How Sandusky was able to get away with his crimes for so long has yet to be fully understood, despite the claims and assertions of the Freeh report.

Wrong again. The Freeh report is quite clear about how he got away with it. Pull the other leg, please.

The release of the Freeh report has triggered an avalanche of vitriol, condemnation and posthumous punishment on Joe Paterno. The NCAA has now become the latest party to accept the report as the final word on the Sandusky scandal.

Nope. Just wait until law enforcement and prosecutors start throwing subpoenas around, guys. That will probably qualify as the final word, not that you'll like that alternative any better than the current one.

The sanctions announced by the NCAA today defame the legacy and contributions of a great coach and educator without any input from our family or those who knew him best.

Translation: "parties that have a vested interest in maintaining the inaccurate saintly image of JoePa (like the Paterno family, and - feel sorry for him, if you can - Franco Harris) are beginning to find out what it's like to end up on the short end of the stick. Therefore, it's now time to become petulant about the matter and start tossing out words like "legacy" and "educator" as if the mere evocation of those words will somehow change anything uncovered by the Freeh report."

Later on in this mass emailed screed, we get this gem:

The point of due process is to protect against this sort of reflexive action.

Unfortunately, this isn't a courtroom. If it were, the point about "due process" of some sort would be valid. But this was a decision handed down by a private organization that's supposed to oversee college athletics, which makes the issue of "due process" rather irrelevant.

Still, wait until actual subpoenas start getting tossed around like live grenades. Then the real fun starts.

Joe Paterno was never interviewed by the University or the Freeh Group.

Largely because it's difficult to interview dead witnesses, but hey...

His counsel has not been able to interview key witnesses as they are represented by counsel related to ongoing litigation.

Tough. Feel free to wait until those cases are finished like everybody else would have to do.

We have had no access to the records reviewed by the Freeh group.

The Paternos can issue subpoenas of their own, now? News to me...

The NCAA never contacted our family or our legal counsel.

Because they don't have to, you idiots. This is an issue between the NCAA and Penn State, not between the NCAA and the Paterno family.

And the fact that several parties have pending trials that could produce evidence and testimony relevant to this matter has been totally discounted.

Boy, you people really do want to see those subpoenas flying, don't you? Not if they reveal something suspect about certain business deals that JoePa and board members of the Second Mile Foundation were about to make serious money on, I'll bet.

Unfortunately all of these facts have been ignored by the NCAA, the Freeh Group and the University.

Unfortunately, all of these "facts" are largely irrelevant, are intended to whitewash JoePa's now thoroughly tarnished reputation or are merely out and out lies. 

While some of you who read this might be tempted to tell the Paterno family to go hoist a nice big mug of Shut The Fuck Up, keep in mind that you can find the actual Freeh report here or (if you're pressed for time, since it is some 267 pages long) read the press release for it here. And keep in mind the following paragraph from the press release:

Taking into account the available witness statements and evidence, it is more
reasonable to conclude that, in order to avoid the consequences of bad publicity, the
most powerful leaders at Penn State University – Messrs. Spanier, Schultz, Paterno and
Curley – repeatedly concealed critical facts relating to Sandusky’s child abuse from the
authorities, the Board of Trustees, Penn State community, and the public at large.
Although concern to treat the child abuser humanely was expressly stated, no such
sentiments were ever expressed by them for Sandusky’s victims.

the_archfiend: (Default)
Although this is the first post I've made on WTTFTG in a month (F***book and contributing to RationalWiki are taking up much of my online spare time as of late), nothing could be more timely than detailing the beginning of the end of the disgusting Penn State coverup of Jerry Sandusky's crimes. This link from Deadspin runs down the details of Louis Freeh's report on the ridiculous efforts by PSU's alleged academic leadership to do practically everything in their power except report Sandusky to the proper law enforcement officials. 

As you've probably read by now, Joe Paterno is far from the saint that some really stupid people (Franco Harris, anyone?) made him out to be. Some other stupid people (Matt Millen, anyone? No? How about Pennsylvania governor Tom Corbett?) have some major issues concerning conflict of interest problems with Sandusky's victim farm (errrr...charity, sorry) the Second Mile Foundation as well. But the person who takes the "you don't shit where you eat" prize for ending up embroiled in a controversy he had absolutely no good reason to blunder into in the first place is baseball pundit Bill James, who stepped in a big pile of his own crap (examples here and here) before his bosses - the Boston Red Sox - told him to STFU, already

There's a difference between being a successful contrarian and coming off as a complete dope; James, unfortunately, seems to have grown tone deaf to what that difference actually is.
the_archfiend: (Default)
This is beginning to take on the nature of a scab you keep picking at that just won't heal.

First off, there's the televised interview that Jerry "Mumbles Aplenty" Sandusky blundered through with Bob Costas on NBC's Rock Center: Deadspin's take on it includes the interview itself and a bit of appropriate snark concerning Sandusky's inability to outdo an electronic device in answering Costas' questions accurately and honestly (A more serious listing of the allegations contained in the grand jury report can also be found here if you haven't looked at the actual report itself). But there's more. Oh so much more.

First off, if you think that State College and its environs aren't much more than a cesspool of clueless enablers and brain-dead Nittany Lion fans who consider Joe Paterno's reputation more important than keeping an alleged serial pedophile off the streets, Dan Bernstein's latest blog entry isn't going to help calm you down. And neither, for that matter, is this:

When Jerry Sandusky was initially arraigned, as previously reported by Sara Ganim, prosecutors requested $500,000.00 bail and that Sandusky be required to wear a leg monitor. District Judge Leslie Dutchcot, however, ordered that Sandusky be freed on $100,000 unsecured bail. She ordered that Sandusky be freed and pay nothing unless he failed to show up for a court hearing.

(...) Of course, also according to her profile, Judge Dutchcot is a volunteer for Sandusky's group, The Second Mile. Sandusky turned himself in the morning of Nov. 5, a Saturday, at Judge Dutchot's Centre County office. He was released, under the aforementioned terms, shortly thereafter.

Attorneys often serve charitable foundations in their pro bono capacities, or just volunteer in their spare time, so there is nothing weird about that. It just seems that, given the nature of the charges, the small-town atmosphere, and her relationship to Second Mile, Judge Dutchcot should have recused herself from being involved with this process. Or that could be precisely why she did not.

Apparently, the words "conflict of interest" or "recusal" never get used as part of a sentence at State College.

If that isn't enough to make your head spin clean off of your neck, consider the following tidbit concerning Sandusky's lawyer, Joe Amendola. If this isn't a perfect example of an utter douchebag representing a complete monster in court, I don't know what is:

Joe Amendola, the State College, Pa., attorney representing accused child molester Jerry Sandusky, has an interesting back story himself: He got a teen-age client pregnant during the mid-1990s.Amendola, 63, married the girl several years after the birth of their child, The Daily reported Monday night, citing documents filed at the Centre County, Pa., courthouse.

Amendola represented a 16-year-old girl then known as Mary Iavasile when she filed an emancipation petition in September 1996. The emancipation petition said the girl had graduated from high school in two years with a 3.69 GPA and held a fulltime job at Amendola's law office.

The girl gave birth to Amendola's child when she was 17 years old, her mother, Janet Iavasile, said. Amendola would have been about 49 years old at the time. The age of consent in Pennsylvania is 16.


Janet Iavasile said she didn't know the extent of the relationship between her daughter and the attorney. She thought he was more of a mentor than a paramour.

"She was interested in law," the mother said.

Oh, I'll just bet she was. And never mind the fact that what Amendola did is actually legal in PA; if it isn't grounds for disbarment, it should be. At the very least, it's about as huge an ethical lapse in judgment that a grown man who should know better could have concerning a teenage girl who is also his client.

And Mike McQueary? The PSU assistant who - according to the grand jury report - apparently ran like a scared kid when he caught Sandusky in the act in the showers with a victim? He's treading on very, very thin ice if he's ever asked to testify under oath:

Mike McQueary, the Penn State assistant football coach under fire for his reported lack of action in an alleged 2002 rape of a boy by Jerry Sandusky, said in an email to a former classmate that he stopped the assault in an athletic facility shower and discussed it with police.

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."

Except that the grand jury report on Sandusky begs to differ, of course:

According to the grand jury report, the graduate assistant said he saw a boy, whose age he estimated at 10 years old, "being subjected to anal intercourse" by a naked Sandusky in a shower at the Penn State football building in March 2002. The graduate assistant left "immediately," was "distraught" and called his father, according to the presentment. His father told him to leave the building and come to his home, according to the presentment.

In the email obtained by The Morning Call, dated Nov. 8, McQueary said "I did stop it, not physically, but made sure it was stopped when I left that locker room."

That's not what the report said, Mike. But hey, let's get a little self-pitying while we're at it, shall we?

"No one can imagine my thoughts or wants to be in my shoes for those 30-45 seconds," McQueary wrote. "Trust me."

"Trust you"? Trust you?  Kind of a tall order at this moment, don't you think?

But don't worry folks. Just like Sandusky, he's going to be on the tube (and in fact probably has been as I'm typing this). Look at it this way: It's just another way to have any remaining trust you have in college sports in particular and humanity in general sorely tested.
the_archfiend: (Default)
Back in the early '90s, it was something of a truism that students who posted to Usenet from psu,edu were either complete idiots, raging assholes or perhaps a stunning combination of the two. I'm not sure if that's changed, but the rioting that occurred in the wake of the Joe Pa firing is enough to make me think that things haven't (although, to be fair, there were counter-protests today in sympathy with Jerry Sandusky's victims). And there's more. Two days ago, an alleged ninth victim not included in the initial grand jury investigation was reported to have turned up, and the following bombshell from Pittsburgh area sports radio host Mark Madden was dropped on Boston's WEEI:

I hear there’s a rumor that there will be a more shocking development from the Second Mile foundation. Hold onto your stomach boys. This is gross. I’ll use the only language I can. That Jerry Sandusky and Second Mile were pimping out young boys to rich donors. That is being investigated by two prominent columnists even as I speak.

Madden is hardly a Johnny-come-lately to the Sandusky scandal. He authored an article at the Beaver County Times detailing some ominous early information on Sandusky in April of this year; even though his new assertions concerning Second Mile can't be termed anything other than a rumor at this point, it may become something far, far more tangible if the grand jury investigation were to go further in the direction of how Second Mile was run and what purpose it was run for.

Here's hoping that Madden wasn't entirely right when the wrote the following at the end of his Times piece:

A grand jury, spurred by a complaint made by a 15-year-old boy in 2009, has been investigating Sandusky for 18 months.

Witnesses include Paterno and Penn State athletic director Tim Curley. Interviewing Paterno about a subject like this had to have been one of the single most uncomfortable acts in the history of jurisprudence.


Plenty of questions remain yet unanswered. Potentially among them: What's more important, Penn State football or the welfare of a few kids? You might not want to hear the answer.

On the other hand, Madden may be right. From John Gonzalez:

In the report, (receivers coach Mike) McQueary is identified as a “graduate assistant who was then 28 years old” in 2002 when he witnessed an alleged incident between Sandusky and a 10-year-old boy in the shower at Lasch Football Building.

(
NOTE: as before, the information that Gonzalez reproduces is directly from the aforementioned grand jury report; you can read it at the link if you so choose, but I'm not reproducting it here.)

Distraught or not, the operative part of that last sentence is “the graduate assistant left immediately.” McQueary was a grown man – a former starting quarterback for a college football powerhouse who was listed at over 6-feet and 200 pounds – and he chose to flee rather than intervene.

The Grand Jury report goes on to detail how McQueary called his father, a long-time friend of Sandusky, and told him about the incident. His father instructed McQueary to leave the building immediately, which he did. McQueary went to his father’s house, where the two decided that McQueary should “promptly” report what he had seen to Paterno rather than the police. “Promptly” in the McQueary household must have a different definition than anywhere else, because McQueary didn’t discuss the matter with Paterno until the next day.

There are some who defend McQueary and believe he handled the matter appropriately. Their argument is that Paterno was a deity and the supreme authority at State College, and so telling him was as good or better than informing the police. Those people are wrong and possibly delusional.


"Delusional" is a far too polite way to put it, if you ask me.

And then there's the issue of prosecutor Ray Gricar, who could have gone after Sandusky as early as 1998 but ultimately chose not to file criminal charges. You could try to ask him about that, but good luck to you if you try: in what can only be called a "WTF?" factoid of truly gargantuan proportions, he's been missing under suspicious circumstances since 2005.

the_archfiend: (Default)
To be completely accurate, I was just as surprised by the Jerry Sandusky scandal at PSU as anyone else with even a passing interest in sports. The charges seemed sadly predictable, though, since it was yet another example of an adult using his position of trust and authority (and - what a surprise! - covering himself in phony religious sanctimony, if his Second Mile Foundation is any indication) to allegedly engage in sexual assault against several minors of his choosing. Although Dan Bernstein and Tim Baffoe said it far better than I can, reading the actual grand jury report (WARNING: if the graphic nature of the report made me feel sick to my stomach, take that as a hint if you choose to read it) will convince you that anyone who states that there isn't a deep-seated problem at PSU in general and their athletic department in particular is completely, utterly out of their mind.

September 2017

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
1718 1920212223
24252627282930

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 25th, 2017 04:09 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios