Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ex-Coach (Sandusky) Denies Charges Amid New Accusations (close to 10 additional suspected victims)
NYTimes ^ | November 14, 2011 | MARK VIERA and JO BECKER

Posted on 11/15/2011 6:54:56 AM PST by maggief

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. — Close to 10 additional suspected victims have come forward to the authorities since the arrest of the former Penn State defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky on Nov. 5 on 40 counts of sexually abusing young boys, according to people close to the investigation. The police are working to confirm the new allegations.

The news of additional accusations came on a day when Sandusky made his first extended public comments since his arrest, and the resignation of the chief executive of the Second Mile foundation, the charity founded by Sandusky, was made public. They were the latest developments in a case that has led to the ouster of several top university officials, including the football coach, Joe Paterno, and the president, Graham B. Spanier.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: pedstate; psu; sandusky
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

1 posted on 11/15/2011 6:54:57 AM PST by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: maggief

Good luck with that Jer


2 posted on 11/15/2011 6:59:28 AM PST by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maggief

I thought the first victim denied anything happened?


3 posted on 11/15/2011 7:01:00 AM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maggief
I have followed the Penn State scandal for a week or so now and something is kinda nagging me. Has Sandusky been tried yet? I know he is guilty because the media and the Internet told me so. But has he been tried yet?
Just curious.
4 posted on 11/15/2011 7:03:18 AM PST by Tupelo ( 2012 TEA PARTYER but no longer a Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk
Why is he always referred to as a “Pedophile”, and not a “Homosexual Child Rapist”?
5 posted on 11/15/2011 7:03:24 AM PST by Cowboy Bob (Greed + Envy = Liberalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk

It worked for Michael Jackson...I’m telling you right now, he walks.


6 posted on 11/15/2011 7:03:56 AM PST by dfwgator (I stand with Herman Cain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: maggief
Actually some good news. From the article:
"On Sunday, Jack Raykovitz, the chief executive of the foundation for 28 years, resigned. Raykovitz’s failure to do more to stop Sandusky has been a focal point of criticism."

Looks like Second Mile's lawyer said adios:
"The Second Mile also announced that Archer & Greiner, including Lynne M. Abraham, a partner at the firm, would become the organization’s general counsel, replacing Wendell V. Courtney, who resigned last week."

When your lawyer bails on you, you know you're in trouble.
7 posted on 11/15/2011 7:04:44 AM PST by Shannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Protect the Bill of Rights; BossLady; abb; All

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/941431-mike-mcqueary-changing-stories-will-doom-jerry-sandusky-case

Mike McQueary: Changing Stories Will Doom Jerry Sandusky Case

McQueary e-mailed the following about the 2002 incident when he was a graduate assistant at the school:

“I did the right thing…you guys know me…”

“... the truth is not out there fully... I didn’t just turn and run... I made sure it stopped...”

“... I had to make quick tough decisions…”


8 posted on 11/15/2011 7:06:16 AM PST by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

“I’m telling you right now, he walks.”

See post #8.


9 posted on 11/15/2011 7:07:26 AM PST by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tupelo
Such a witty comment. He's been tried in the court of public opinion. Read the article, specifically the parts where Sandusky admits to showering with children and maybe you too will be able to form an opinion.
10 posted on 11/15/2011 7:07:38 AM PST by Shannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cowboy Bob

The don’t want to upset the “gays”


11 posted on 11/15/2011 7:08:59 AM PST by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tupelo
"But has he been tried yet?"

He was indicted by a grand jury. He is set to go to trial. You can say all you want about a ham sandwich could get indicted by a grand jury, but read the grand jury transcripts. McQuarry testified under oath that he witnessed Sandusky anally raping what looked to be a 10 year old boy. If he's lying, he can be charged with perjury and go to jail himself. He apparently was very emotional while on the stand giving his testimony.

There is other stuff in the grand jury transcripts. Sure, he's innocent until proven guilty in our court of law. It doesn't mean that the rest of us can't read and use our brains to figure out this guy is a pedophile.
12 posted on 11/15/2011 7:09:05 AM PST by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: maggief

Jerry "I shouldn’t have showered with those kids" Sandusky

13 posted on 11/15/2011 7:09:17 AM PST by BossLady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Well, since he is a HOMOSEXUAL pedophile, I guess we have to give him a pass, because he was “born that way”,

right?


14 posted on 11/15/2011 7:09:22 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cowboy Bob

“Why is he always referred to as a “Pedophile”, and not a “Homosexual Child Rapist”?”

Well, they are the same thing: Toe-mae-toe, Toe-ma-toe, Poe-tae-toe, Poe-ta-toe.

The reason the media refers to him as a “pedophile” rather than an “homosexual child rapist” is because they don’t want to offend the “homosexual community”, in an effort to minimize the fallout onto the “gay agenda”.

As far as I am concerned, homosexuals are the devil’s spawn, regardless what label they pin on their perverted chests.

JMO.

Ernie


15 posted on 11/15/2011 7:10:07 AM PST by Ernie Kaputnik ((It's a mad, mad, mad world.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tupelo

yeah you’re funny. Would that you gave the priests in the Catholic church so much leeway


16 posted on 11/15/2011 7:10:18 AM PST by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MrB

This is precisely why the only response to seeing someone anally raping a child, is a bullet to his brain pan.


17 posted on 11/15/2011 7:10:39 AM PST by dfwgator (I stand with Herman Cain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: maggief
"the truth is not out there fully... I didn’t just turn and run... I made sure it stopped"

If that's true, it would have been in the grand jury testimony. I'll choose to believe the story he told when he was under oath. Not the backtracking after he realizes he comes off as the biggest pussy alive who doesn't stop a rape, but goes and tells Daddy...
18 posted on 11/15/2011 7:12:03 AM PST by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MrB
I wonder what NAMBLA’s position is on this one?
19 posted on 11/15/2011 7:13:37 AM PST by Awgie (truth is always stranger than fiction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: freekitty
"I thought the first victim denied anything happened?"

Sandusky's lawyer is now claiming that. I'll wait until I see written or oral testimony from witness to that effect.
20 posted on 11/15/2011 7:14:02 AM PST by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Awgie

Right behind Sandusky I would presume. Someone should investigate any links between Sandusky and NAMBLA.


21 posted on 11/15/2011 7:16:29 AM PST by tioga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Shannon
Nothing witty intended. Just wondering. Public opinion is fine for elections but not too good for criminal allegations. convicting anyone via public opinion is a surefire route to a way of life I am sure I do not want. But then I am just an old guy who believes in the rule of law. As in “The rule of law not the rule of man”.
So of course others, such as you who are much more learned than I are correct in convicting Jerry Sandusky in a court of public opinion. Will your execution be public or behind closed doors?
22 posted on 11/15/2011 7:17:11 AM PST by Tupelo ( 2012 TEA PARTYER but no longer a Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

I really recommend to my fellow freepers - DON’T read the grand jury transcripts, you’ll be better off.

I haven’t read them, but was told by someone that did that it will make you physically ill.


23 posted on 11/15/2011 7:17:21 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

Would YOU want your name dragged through the national media declaring you had been anally raped?


24 posted on 11/15/2011 7:18:28 AM PST by tioga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: maggief

Sandusky is guilty but you know how this works - there will be people coming forward who never was in the presence of Sandusky.


25 posted on 11/15/2011 7:19:04 AM PST by Jukeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

“I really recommend to my fellow freepers... DON’T read the grand jury transcripts”.

I kindly disagree with you. The transcripts are sickening and will make your stomach turn. I grant you that. However, there are times in life when we have to look at evil right in the face and refuse to turn our heads. Is it ugly? Yes. Is it disturbing? Yes. However, if this is what is in our society right now... we have almost an obligation of sorts to read it. If you have kids or grandkids... one needs to be aware of everything that could possibly affect them. Just my opinion.


26 posted on 11/15/2011 7:22:32 AM PST by momtothree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

McQueary consulted Monday with:

http://www.strokoffandcowden.com/CM/Custom/Firm-Overview.asp


27 posted on 11/15/2011 7:23:33 AM PST by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: MrB
"I really recommend to my fellow freepers - DON’T read the grand jury transcripts, you’ll be better off."

I disagree. If reading these transcripts make you physically ill, then that is what needs to happen to be convinced in your mind that this guy is a pedophile of the worst sort and don't believe his crap right now. People can say anything on a talk show. Get people under oath and get their testimony. That's where the truth will come out.
28 posted on 11/15/2011 7:25:23 AM PST by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

Exactly, like watching the videos of the jumpers from the WTC...people need to see the truth, lest the MSM frame the picture in such a way as to minimize the truth.


29 posted on 11/15/2011 7:27:07 AM PST by dfwgator (I stand with Herman Cain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: maggief

So now he’s worried about his job? If he had shown enough concern for the 10 year old as he did his job, his job would have been secure.

Then again, there is the fact that shortly after this incident in 2002, he apparently went from grad assistant to a coaching position so maybe it was his job he was thinking about back then after all. Or it could just be mere coincidence.....


30 posted on 11/15/2011 7:30:30 AM PST by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Tupelo; All
Public opinion is fine for elections but not too good for criminal allegations. convicting anyone via public opinion is a surefire route to a way of life I am sure I do not want. But then I am just an old guy who believes in the rule of law. As in “The rule of law not the rule of man”. So of course others, such as you who are much more learned than I are correct in convicting Jerry Sandusky in a court of public opinion. Will your execution be public or behind closed doors?

Go read all 23 pages of the grand jury report and get back to us Gramps.
31 posted on 11/15/2011 7:31:58 AM PST by mkjessup (I stand with Herman Cain, a God-fearing, Jesus-loving, Constitution-honoring PATRIOT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Shannon

Wendell Courtney knew about the 1998 incident...he has much to answer for.


32 posted on 11/15/2011 7:34:01 AM PST by Tex-Con-Man (T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII 2012 - "Together, I Shall Ride You To Victory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: freekitty

http://www.tmz.com/2011/11/15/jerry-sandusky-lawyer-mcqueary-liar/

Jerry Sandusky’s Lawyer
McQueary May Be a Liar

Jerry Sandusky’s lawyer says he thinks he found the boy who was allegedly raped in the shower that has become the flashpoint for the scandal, and the man — now in his 20’s — is saying it never happened.

Joe Amendola told Ann Curry on “Today” ... prosecutors have never given him the names of the accusers, but he believes he’s found the alleged victim, and if indeed it is him Mike McQueary is lying.

Amendola also concedes, “It is possible Jerry did this [molested kids]” and if he did he should be punished.

(snip)

VIDEO:

http://www.tmz.com/videos/1_hzezmqfu


33 posted on 11/15/2011 7:35:29 AM PST by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tex-Con-Man
Wendell Courtney knew about the 1998 incident...he has much to answer for.

Maybe that's why he bolted; trying to save his own hide. Who knows. All I do know is that this is one unholy mess. The DA probably has a white board taking up an entire wall diagramming all the connections.
34 posted on 11/15/2011 7:38:42 AM PST by Shannon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MrB

The meltdown at Penn State continues. the more that comes out the more things start to blurr


35 posted on 11/15/2011 7:39:58 AM PST by Busko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

I read the transcript. The grand jury explicitly writes they find McQueary credible and the indictment specifies eight victims. However, I think the trial itself will prove to be a lot more of a gray area than the media lets on.

Certainly strange to read McQueary claiming to witness a man sexually assaulting a child and as an initial response he calls his dad to find out what to do, then he meets with Joe Paterno and then with the AD.

The reports portray this as clearcut child rape, but I just cannot wrap my head around McQueary relaying the incident in such a way to his father, Paterno, and Spanier and none of these people reacting in any way. Sandusky will forever be known for these accusations, but I don’t think the indictment will lead to a guaranteed legal conviction.

The fact no one said “Did you call the police? Let’s call the police.” leads me to believe McQueary relayed the incident differently to the Penn State staff than he did to the grand jury.


36 posted on 11/15/2011 7:53:56 AM PST by SorbetCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
Yep, I am a Grampa and I am sure the grand jury report is damning. I still prefer a trial by jury. But if a grand jury incitement is good enough for you, good luck to you. That style of justice has worked very well in dictatorships for thousands of years. Me, I'll stick with the Constitution of the United States. But, I am just an old man, so cleverly derided by folks like you as “Gramps”.
37 posted on 11/15/2011 8:01:34 AM PST by Tupelo ( 2012 TEA PARTYER but no longer a Republican)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: tioga

Of course not, but that’s not the point. Either this guy is a child molester or he is not.


38 posted on 11/15/2011 8:03:31 AM PST by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: maggief
Ahh, the famous old "Michael Jackson Defense", "I seemed to constantly find myself in compromising situations with naked young boys, but it was always completely innocent and nothing ever happened..."

Well it worked for Micheal so might as well give it a shot...

39 posted on 11/15/2011 8:08:15 AM PST by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

I read the grand jury report - 23 pages. it took just a few minutes.

My opinion is now based on testimony given on the penalty of perjury.

As disturbing the acts described were, I’m glad I did it.

The grand Jury report makes it very clear that Penn State officials (the AD and a VP) lied under oath to protect themselves, Penn State, and Sandusky.

I feel very sorry for Penn State fans - their leadership let them down. They have nothing to be proud of anymore in Penn State.

The victims, however, are not Penn State and its students. The victims are those children, now men, who were molested by Sandusky and a complicit Penn State administration.

I would be fine with PSU losing its accreditation and being prosecuted under RICO.


40 posted on 11/15/2011 8:10:04 AM PST by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: SorbetCon
"The fact no one said “Did you call the police? Let’s call the police.” leads me to believe McQueary relayed the incident differently to the Penn State staff than he did to the grand jury."

That is what JoePa is claiming. However, in Joepa's own grand jury testimony he says that McQuarry told him that he saw Sandusky with what appeared to be a 10 year old boy in the shower and there was touching of a sexual nature going on. That's not word for word, but close enough. When Joepa heard the key words "of a sexual nature" that should have set off bells in his head to find out more info. Instead he seems to have done the minimal to cover his own rear end.
41 posted on 11/15/2011 8:18:11 AM PST by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Cowboy Bob

The correct term for this behavior is pederast.

I had never seen or heard the term before Sandusky, but after looking it up, it is the correct description .


42 posted on 11/15/2011 8:22:02 AM PST by wrench
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: maggief
I suspect he went after the children without fathers - and with broken mothers. The creep needs to be put against a wall and shot - slowly - starting feet - up...

ALL sports at the school should be suspended for 3 years...

43 posted on 11/15/2011 8:22:22 AM PST by GOPJ ( Democrats are the only reason to vote for Republicans.... Will Rogers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tupelo
"I still prefer a trial by jury. But if a grand jury incitement is good enough for you, good luck to you."

And Sandusky will get his trial by jury. I seriously doubt that any of us will be on that jury. That being the case, we can make informed judgements about this based on the facts presented. Just like we do in countless everyday situations in the rest of our lives. If you read the testimony given under oath it is pretty clear that Sandusky is a serial pedophile. If we just went by the jury trial, I guess we would all still believe that O.J. was innocent of brutally murdering his ex-wife.
44 posted on 11/15/2011 8:23:49 AM PST by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: apillar
Ahh, the famous old "Michael Jackson Defense", "I seemed to constantly find myself in compromising situations with naked young boys, but it was always completely innocent and nothing ever happened..." Well it worked for Micheal so might as well give it a shot...

Thank God for Dr. Conrad Murray.

45 posted on 11/15/2011 8:24:08 AM PST by dfwgator (I stand with Herman Cain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Tupelo

I’m no spring chicken myself, but I have lived long enough to know the difference between guilt in fact and guilt in a court of law. Citizens have both a right and a duty to assess other people on the basis of current knowledge. If you’re the parent of a child, it’s indispensible. Jerry Sandusky down the road may not have been proven a child molester in a court of law, but are you going to let your pre-adolescent boys go camping with him? Are you going to leave them alone in the company of a little league coach or a Scoutmaster whom you’ve noticed has a tendency to put his hands all over the children in his charge?


46 posted on 11/15/2011 8:26:22 AM PST by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Awgie

I wonder what NAMBLA’s position is on this one?

You could always call the White House and ask for a referral to the expert on man/boy love, Kenneth Jenning. He got to be the czar to coordinate the “safe schools” program in the White House. My how lying liberals use language. A safe school is one safe for homo sex “victims” like Sandusky to act out without judgement and rejection.


47 posted on 11/15/2011 8:27:31 AM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Tupelo

So, you must believe OJ is innocent too ... after all, that was the result in a Court of Law!

Of course legal burdens of proof must apply in court. But commonsense is generally good enough when it comes to private citizens forming their own opinions.


48 posted on 11/15/2011 8:28:23 AM PST by oilwatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

“I made sure it stopped” may only mean that McQueary’s sudden appearance in the shower area stopped the rape cold, and that Sandusky grabbed the boy and fled, while McQueary was still reeling in shock. I never once thought McQueary left the boy behind with Sandusky continuing the assault. Failing to wrench the boy away from Sandusky immediately was plenty bad enough though.


49 posted on 11/15/2011 8:32:51 AM PST by GAgal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson
Sara Johnson Post #47...”A safe school is one safe for homo sex “victims” like Sandusky to act out without judgment and rejection.”

Very true Sara and yet perverse in it's logic and perverse in the effect it has. It seems like Liberal Orthodoxy is perverse in it's very nature.

A related thought...We are loosing the language battle. We have lost the word “pervert.” It no longer has any common use in our culture. It has been banned. When do you hear the word “pervert” used to describe an individual...NEVER.

Politicol Correctness and Speech Police dominate.

50 posted on 11/15/2011 8:37:48 AM PST by Awgie (truth is always stranger than fiction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson