Mediaite columnist John Ziegler has written extensively about the case, and has spoken with Sandusky about it. If the judge sides with Sandusky, there could be a new trial. Have a tip we should know? Watch Our Live Network Now. Filed Under: Jerry Sandusky. You may also like:. And if guilty, then these professionals utterly ignored signs of grooming, failed to implement state mandated procedures, exposed even more kids to Sandusky, therefore enabling the abuse, and they did so for decades.
It simply boggles the mind that someone who is the founder and face of a successful childrens charity did not take common sense steps to protect himself and his family from accusations. You do this, and if a parent wanted to escalate a complaint…. As you may know, Frank Fina has been embroiled in a hard-core pornography, ex-parte and ethics scandal that has ripped open a constitutional crisis here in our state.
Fina culled, cached and shared on his workplace computer — during work hours and on the taxpayer dime — hundreds, possibly thousands of images of women engaged in anal sex, oral sex and group sex and having various items inserted where Mother Nature never intended. Which by law here in PA is rape. These images Fina prized were beyond the pale — especially considering who was swapping them with who and doing it across state servers.
Spanier — the true target of that presentment. They tried to walk it back later in a few milquetoast interviews — but by then, the damage had been done. You conspire with Louis Freeh to manage the message to the nation and hope for the best. Ironically, our recent interim Attorney General Bruce Castor — when asked back in the beginning of all this by prosecutor Joe McGettigan both run in the same Philadelphia legal circles on using Cynthia Baldwin as part of their prosecution strategy — he told them NOT to do it.
They did it anyway. The irony in all this? Had Frank Fina and Tom Corbett left Penn State out of it, and prosecuted Sandusky on credible victim testimony alone, Fina would most likely have gained election points. Tom Corbett would have likely gained election points.
Porngate and Hategate never happens. Wensilver, for some reason I did not read this long September 7 post carefully until now, well over a month later. So let me quickly respond. You are certainly correct that it is amazing that Jerry Sandusky behaved in a way that seemed guaranteed at least in these times to raise red flags — showering with boys, hugging them, etc.
On the other hand, Sandusky grew up in a recreation center run by his parents, and this sort of behavior was normal back then in the s. In fact, if Sandusky were a serial pedophile, it is difficult to imagine that he would have been stupid enough to engage in such behavior, so in a way, this argues in his favor.
I did not have room here to go into details about Frank Fina and his pornographic emails to his buddies, but they are certainly disturbing — and ironic, given his prosecutorial role in the Sandusky case. That is surprising, if he was indeed a pedophile. Another factor that was not mentioned is that Mike McQueary told his players that he had been a victim of child sexual abuse.
The Sandusky jury was never told that. It certainly raises a lot of questions, such as when, where and how was Mike abused and if his father, Dranov or Paterno knew about it. When he was approached by detectives and asked about what he saw ten years prior, he had been engaging in illegal gambling and as a Penn State employee sent a shot of his penis to a coed while he was married.
He had reasons to want to please the interrogators. There are many reasons to disbelieve Mr. His story of being abused was most likely just another fabrication. If Mike McQueary lied to his players about being victim of child sexual abuse, that further undermines his credibility.
If he was abused, it also undermines his credibility for not revealing that to the jury. Two Vanderbilt football players convicted of rape had their convictions thrown out because one male juror failed to mention that he had been a victim of child sexual abuse.
They had to be retried, and were easily convicted again. Mark has done a great and thorough job of sifting through the evidence and finding numerous examples of prosecutorial misconduct and attorney incompetence. His work is something that needs to surface because Sandusky was railroaded and did not get a fair trial, and I was an eyewitness, I attended every day of the trial, to that.
The author shines a light on imbalance, both in the system and in our attitudes. Misplaced faith and unfounded fear. We have faith in the concept of our justice system, but rarely question whether the reality is living up to the promise of the concept. We can all agree that pedophilia is evil, but fear of this evil should not make us abandon the pursuit of equal justice under the law. I never followed the Sandusky case closely, and like so many others, after a barrage of news reports after the story broke, I assumed he was guilty.
Hell, spectral evidence worked at the Salem witch trials. Was there any physical evidence of anal rape? I highly doubt there could be no physical trace if a grown man raped a year-old boy. The youths Sandusky mentored were all troubled, in need of great help, as I understand it, and could possibly have been the type to falsely accuse a man.
This is understandable, given their past abuse, and the manipulations of a therapist could easily taint their testimony, as could the monetary incentives. Maybe he feels better about being known as a victim of abuse rather than as the son of an abuser. That he was a wealthy, powerful man, imbued with white privilege, no less, made him a less than sympathetic defendant, as did his demeanor, it seems.
Many people, in a position to help him or not, would have been squeamish about coming to the defense of a supposed pedophile and molester, especially in light of the NAMBLA comments above in this thread, and the like. Sandusky may simply have been naive enough to be unable to protect himself from accusations. Thanks for the facts, Mark. Do you leave room for the fact that he may have molested some of the complainants.
Besides you, is anyone supporting your thesis. Just wondering if you are out there alone in your research. Mark has done a laborius and thorough job of sifting through the evidence and finding numerous examples of prosecutorial misconduct and attorney incompetence. His work is something that needs to surface because Sandusky was railroaded and did not get a fair trial, and I was an eyewitness to that. I attended every day of the trial. I have no opinion as to innocence or guilt, but what Mark writes, and I trust him very much, certainly suggests that the courts need to take another look at the case.
Innocent or guilty, Mr. Any case that uses it is contaminated. I am grateful to everyone who took the time to read my article on the Sandusky case with care, and perhaps to look at some of the links from the article to court transcripts, articles, books, and legal documents. My wife and I have been on a short camping trip to Maine, so I am just getting back to my computer. Truth be known, if I had thought I could make a living as a singer, the books might not have been happened.
Or of course, see Amazon. Some of you clearly know a lot about the Sandusky case. Others raised questions that were already answered in the article, so I suggest you go back to read it more slowly. I am still seeking a publisher, which surprises me, since I am a well-established non-fiction author with a reputation for extremely thorough research, and I would have thought that I could easily find a major publisher for this book, which takes a controversial look at a very high-profile case, so it would almost certainly find a ready market.
In my book proposal, I have recommendations for the book from heavy hitters in the memory field, such as Elizabeth Loftus and Frederick Crews, as well as sex abuse expert Fred Berlin, legal expert Richard Leo, and sports commentator Bob Costas. Yet I have yet to find a publisher. Perhaps that will change soon with the publication of this article, who knows?
FYI, here is the bio from my website: Mark Pendergrast was born and raised in Atlanta, Georgia, the fourth of seven children in a family that valued civil rights, the environment, sailing, reading, and games of chase and charades. He earned a B. If he really is innocent, and simply a "father figure" for all those boys, as he likes to try and portray himself, then where are all his supporters?
Why, Jerry, if you never did anything questionable with any of those young men, are there so many coming out against you? Why aren't there at least a competing number of those same young men who will vouch for you, your character, and what you claim you stood for all those years? It seems that if a truly honorable man was misrepresented in such a egregious manner, as Sandusky indicates he has been, there should be supporters coming forward, willing to testify on behalf of what he is saying. It could be that the media isn't interested in representing that side of the story, even if it does exist, but it really is telling how he seems to be the only one telling it right now.
0コメント