Sandusky: The Enablers

[dgs49]

Mainly out of boredom I have been closely following the court case of Jerry Sandusky, the retired Penn State football coach who is currently in trial for a decades-long campaign of sexually assaulting young boys whom he met through a foundation that he created, “The Second Mile.”

It is not possible to read the findings of the Grand Jury and the accounts from the trial, and not conclude that Sandusky is not only guilty of every crime for which he has been charged, but that these are clearly just a sampling of what he did routinely to a small army of victims over a period spanning several decades. As painful as it is reading the accounts from victims and witnesses, it will be even more painful to see the Defense next week, as they slander the victims, laud the virtues of this fiend, and try to get the jury to buy into the fantasy world in which middle-aged men shower naked with pre-pubescent boys, wrestle with them, fondle them, crawl into their beds at night and hug them, and massage their legs while driving (all of which Sandusky admits) – and it’s all perfectly innocent.

All normal stuff, right?

But another aspect of this case that is really bothering me is, what the fuck is wrong with the people surrounding this monster? They see him bringing a steady stream of young boys to games, practices, social events, awards ceremonies; they see him constantly laying hands on these boys, dozens of them must have been aware that he was regularly showering with them after private “workouts”…and nobody thought anything of it? Give me a fucking break.

And what about his wife? The testimony records that he must have spent thousands of nights alone with these boys in the basement bedroom of their home. HELLO???? IS ANYONE HOME IN THAT BIG FUCKING SKULL OF YOURS? This is normal behavior? And she never questioned that he was constantly carting around these boys – one on one – and SHE was never invited to any of the Penn State functions? If she didn’t know what was going on, she ought to be shot for her sheer stupidity.

Maureen Dowd said in her column the other day that it was a common joke around the football team that you shouldn’t bend over in the shower when Jerry was around. This could be simply made-up bullshit – like most of what she writes – but where did she get that? If there is any truth to it at all, then there are ARMIES of Penn Staters who have, as Ricky Arnaz used to say, “…some ‘splainin’ to do.”

There is a precedent in Pennsylvania for public figures to put a bullet through their brains at times like this. What the hell is stopping Sandusky from doing the only honorable thing that remains for him to do?

[Lord Jim]

What the hell is stopping Sandusky from doing the only honorable thing that remains for him to do?

A complete lack of honor...

Honorable people do not do what piece of filth has done....

Ricky Arnaz

Davey, that's either Desi Arnaz or Ricky Ricardo....

[Joe Guy]

I can't understand why Sandusky got away with this for so long. One of the "victims" claimed that he screamed as Sandusky sodomized him many times in the basement of his home and that Sandusky's wife was home when that was happening.

I believe there are many people who should be punished for covering up or whatever the hell they were/were not doing.

Sandusky is a sick man and anyone who enabled him is just as sick as him.

He should be given no pain medication before being castrated with a rusty scalpel and then immediately be locked into a facility with sex starved & crazed gorillas for the rest of his pathetic life.

[Crackpot]

Never underestimate the power of denial Joe

[dales]

@ c/p

[Guinevere]

There are very few people I wish horrible things to happen to, or who would entice me to violence -- Sandusky and his enablers are near the top of my list. I cannot imagine "ignoring" what he has put those poor boys through, or "denying" he did those things. If he came anywhere near my boyz, I'd cut off his balls and his dick, and then before he bled out, douse him in gasoline and set him on fire.

[rubato]

It does provide some insight into why the Catholic church covered up and enabled child rape in every inhabited continent for centuries (or all of recorded history anyway).

Its nasty and nobody wants to look at it. But people who claim to be moral exemplars are supposed to be better than that ... aren't they?

yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

Gee rube, this thread's been up for a little over 24 hours....

What took you so long?

[dgs49]

This thread was partly a ploy to bring rubato's bigotry to the fore.

It has noting to do with any church, let alone the RC Church, and yet, somehow, he manages...

Rube, thank you for being so fucking predictable.

[dgs49]

Well, the Defense rested its case today, and they did not call Sandusky to testify. Many thought that he would have to testify after the prosecution made its case, but I suppose they figured they planted enough doubt in the minds of the jurors without him contributing.

Certainly, his testimony could have been a disaster, so the general rule of not letting the Defendant on the stand prevailed.

I have mixed feelings about "character" testimony in this phase of a trial. What difference does it make what a wonderful person he is when he's not sodomizing little boys? Does that make his crimes less worthy of conviction and punishment?

It will be interesting to see how long the jury wrestles with this and what their conclusions will be.

[Blueyes]

We had something similar going on in town here, with a guy named Skip ReVille. He went ahead and pleaded guilty to all accounts. Not sure if he just didn't want to put his family through anymore torment than what was already going on as his wife JUST had triplets while this case was beginning to come to light.

RE: Sandusky case tho, I could have sworn I heard on the radio about a telephone interview with the wife stating she saw him with some boys and that she, herself, was also having sex with some of them? Or is that another case?

[Crackpot]

Long time no see blueyes!

[Blueyes]

ya twitter was down so i decided to go through some of my bookmarks deleting crap off this work computer since i'm leaving in august and i was like plan b, hmm lol

[Gob]

Nice to see you again!

[dgs49]

Now one of Sandusky's adopted sons comes forward. Apparently, he notified the AG that he was willing to testify for the proscution (he had been listed as a potential defense witness) during the last week of the trial. For some reason they elected not to use his testimony.

One can imagine him offering to testify "if you need me to make your case," and not being called.

Jury seems to be taking the defense seriously. They asked to see video of McQueary's testimony.

With all the Penn-State-connected jurors, I hope there is not a hung jury.

[alice]

Now one of Sandusky's adopted sons comes forward. Apparently, he notified the AG that he was willing to testify for the proscution (he had been listed as a potential defense witness) during the last week of the trial. For some reason they elected not to use his testimony.

One can imagine him offering to testify "if you need me to make your case," and not being called.

Jury seems to be taking the defense seriously. They asked to see video of McQueary's testimony.

With all the Penn-State-connected jurors, I hope there is not a hung jury.

I'm feeling a bit dumb, because I'm sure there's an obvious answer, but I can't think of what it would be.
.... Why wouldn't the prosecution take up the offier of using the testimony of the adopted son? Surely it wuld have the potential to be quite powerful?

[Crackpot]

It could also have the potential to blow up in their faces. If you have what you consider to be a rock solid case why risk it with a late coming and unknown quantity?

[Lord Jim]

Why wouldn't the prosecution take up the offier of using the testimony of the adopted son? Surely it wuld have the potential to be quite powerful?

Probably the same reason they didn't cross-examine Mrs. Sandusky more thoroughly....

They think they've got a slam dunk case already....(and with 48 counts, nine complaining witnesses, the love letters, Sandusky's own public statements and McQueary's testimony they certainly should have one...but that doesn't mean that there still might not be one or two holdouts that could hang the jury. )

Matt Sandusky was reluctant to testify, and there's also a bit of a problem in that up to the past few days, he has denied that he was abused and been a defender of his father's.

I think the prosecution made a blunder when they essentially used the threat of Matt Sandusky's testimony (they said they would call him as a rebuttal witness) to get Jerry Sandusky not to take the stand.

The DA should have been salivating at the prospect of getting the elder Sandusky on the stand. He would have been a terrible witness in his own defense, and they could have ripped him apart. They should have seen his taking the stand as a gift.

[alice]

Thank you, both.

I knew there would be a logical reason, but I couldn't think of it. I think I've seen too many movie or TV court cases, and I was only seeing 'who' the witness was - the dramatic impact, I suppose. Not the potential for it to backfire.

Much appreciated.

[Lord Jim]

The longer the deliberations go on, the more it starts to look like that if the jury isn't going to hang, at least there's somebody on it who wasn't immediately convinced by the prosecutions case....

Last night they came back to deliberate after a dinner break which made it look like maybe they were very close to a verdict....

The jury has been sequestered for their deliberations....(Probably because of all the publicity about Matt Sandusky which didn't come out in trial, and therefore shouldn't be considered) which normally brings about relatively swift verdicts, so if this goes on a few more days it will really start to look like Sandusky's got at least one hold out in his corner.