Penn State Sandusky Trial #11 (Verdict - GUILTY!)

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

How long will the jury deliberate?


  • Total voters
    166
Status
Not open for further replies.
I was looking to see what McQueary would have learned was the right way to handle a football mess. Found this 1992 article, quoted here:

August 1992: Four Penn State football players are arrested, three for fights, one for selling cocaine. In a widely published interview, John J. Coyle, PS rep to NCAA, says "I do not like to see instances of this reported because it obviously reflects negatively on our program.”
Coyle credits Paterno for the generally good behavior at Penn State, saying,”Penn State players are told from their freshman year on to avoid situations that could draw attention to the university or the football team. Joe runs a tight ship on that stuff. He lectures to these people. He takes time to explain to them they’re representing the university community. They’re supposed to walk away from it. They’re not supposed to be drawn into it.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...4&dq=penn+state+football+player+trouble&hl=en

Paterno controlling football discipline was still continuing in 2007, when Vicky Tripony was working at PS>
April 2007: Football players brawl. The brawl—which the Office of Judicial Affairs called “brutal in nature”—involved at least a dozen people, and led to the arrest of six football players, who were charged with crimes ranging from criminal trespassing to assault. Most of the criminal charges were dropped, but the university opened its own inquiry. There were at least half a dozen meetings about how to deal with the sanctions. At one point, Triponey says, witnesses—most of whom were footballers—were ordered to appear at a judicial hearing, as was school policy. But Paterno sent a text message to the whole team, saying, “If you show up for this, you’re off.”
A year later, Paterno told reporters at a press briefing that “maybe I didn't do the best job I could have” related to the incident.

No whistles allowed...
 
With regard to Jer's mentally challenged childhood friend, I find it interesting that in one of Jer's letters to one of the victims, JS compares "himself" to Forest Gump...

"I have many Forrest Gump qualities and I thought a lot about that movie as I was driving home. As you would expect I cried at that movie.

“I remembered Forrest and how he was so naive (oblivious to the world) and not very smart. He was so happy because he wasn't caught up in being anything other than a caring person. I wish that I had more of that in me.”

Sandusky signed it “Forrest Jer.”


http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-sanduksy-victims-letters-20120623,0,4704807.story


I tend to wonder about Jerry's friend that he mentioned in his biography, Ern? The "mentally challenged" boy Jerry hung around with growing up. Here's an excerpt from an in depth article (from Nov. 2011) that mentions him:

Was Big Ern Jerry's childhood sweetheart? The prototype for all the moves and "relationships" (except Dottie, of course) that followed?

Azwriter??? Do you recall Big Ern? If you do, could you elaborate on his relationship with Jerry? tia
 
Here's the link to the full interview of Travis Weaver: msnbc.com Video Player
Thanks for re-posting that link! I finally got a chance to watch it. Seeing it makes me want to cry for Travis, you can see the emotion in his eyes, NO WAY is this guy just "out for the money".
 
I find it really interesting that dotti was allowed to visit him the next morning after he was jailed.. I know someone in calif who son was arrested and we couldnt visit at all at county jail.. and didnt get to see him till he was processed and put in the actual state prison.. it was actually inhuman for the parents..... in a way.. even to try to figure out where he was and what was going on...
 
I find it really interesting that dotti was allowed to visit him the next morning after he was jailed.. I know someone in calif who son was arrested and we couldnt visit at all at county jail.. and didnt get to see him till he was processed and put in the actual state prison.. it was actually inhuman for the parents..... in a way.. even to try to figure out where he was and what was going on...
Do we know that she actually "visited"?

She could have just been dropping off whatever was in the plastic bag that someone saw her carrying.
 
Do we know that she actually "visited"?

She could have just been dropping off whatever was in the plastic bag that someone saw her carrying.

thats true.. only what the news said.. but they could be wrong in why she was there.. wouldnt be the first time..
 
I do believe the amount of the settlement is not the only thing PSU would like to control in its invitation to the victims. The University would also like this to all be settled outside a court of law.

Enjoy your posts.

jmo
The victims might want it settled out of the court also. They could likely receive their money more expeditiously and begin to focus on activities that bring happiness rather than continuing their personal horror.
 
I'm curious to know if Sandusky had a morals clause in his contract that would cause him to lose his pension. Anyone here know?

http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt?open=514&objID=593234&mode=2

Pension Forfeiture
A public office is indeed a public trust, and Pennsylvania has laws in place to penalize those who violate that trust by stripping them of their pension. The Public Employee Pension Forfeiture Act 1978-140 (Act 140) applies to all SERS members who commit certain crimes in relation to their employment. In addition, the Pennsylvania Constitution and Judicial Code contain pension forfeiture provisions applying to judicial members. Those provisions can be triggered even if no crime has been committed.

Act 140
Act 140 requires forfeiture of all pension and retirement benefits by any SERS member who commits certain crimes that breach the member's duty of faithful and honest public service. Also forfeited are any benefits for the member's beneficiaries and survivor annuitants.

The only benefits Act 140 allows a SERS member to receive are his or her contributions paid into the pension fund, without interest. Even these contributions may be lost, however, because Act 140 requires they be used to pay fines and restitution associated with the criminal conviction.

Act 140 is triggered if a SERS member is convicted of or pleads guilty or no defense to any listed crime committed through the member's public office or position or when public employment puts the member in a position to commit the crime.

I began to research this, thinking it would be an absolute that he would forfeit his retirement benefits, but the Chapter listed under Act 140 doesn't list crimes such as Sandusky's.

Then I found this article, which unbelievably indicates that while Schultz would lose his pension for perjury, Sandusky won't necessarily lose his!

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories...-lose-pension-if-convicted-of-perjury-324755/

At first I was outraged, but then I realized that with the civil suits to come, his retirement benefits will probably be one of the first assets to be divided up among the victims, so thank heavens neither he nor Dottie will see the money once the settlements will come in, and it will provide more compensation for those that he damaged.
 
A parole officer neighbor mentioned that a county review board's psych assessment which is given in prison will impact the judges' sentencing of Jerry and the prison where he will be assigned (related to PA's mandatory sexual predator "treatment"...ugh). Does anyone know more info about this sexual offender assessment review board? Please share if you do. :)
 
A parole officer neighbor mentioned that a county review board's psych assessment which is given in prison will impact the judges' sentencing of Jerry and the prison where he will be assigned (related to PA's mandatory sexual predator "treatment"...ugh). Does anyone know more info about this sexual offender assessment review board? Please share if you do. :)

Has anyone seen the mandatory minimum sentences for these crimes posted anywhere? I am looking. Thanks in advance.
 
I find it really interesting that dotti was allowed to visit him the next morning after he was jailed.. I know someone in calif who son was arrested and we couldnt visit at all at county jail.. and didnt get to see him till he was processed and put in the actual state prison.. it was actually inhuman for the parents..... in a way.. even to try to figure out where he was and what was going on...

probably a special kind of torture Pa laid on mr boy lover....
 
A parole officer neighbor mentioned that a county review board's psych assessment which is given in prison will impact the judges' sentencing of Jerry and the prison where he will be assigned (related to PA's mandatory sexual predator "treatment"...ugh). Does anyone know more info about this sexual offender assessment review board? Please share if you do. :)

The process and the board is briefly mentioned in this article:
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20120623_ap_whatsnextforjerrysanduskyafterthetrial.html

HTH
 
All these fantasies about JS being sexually attacked in prison... .

I understand how many want Sandusky to get a taste of his own medicine, but I don't want to see him raped or otherwised harmed in prison. We are a civilized society or we are not. Prisoners have rights - rights against cruel and unusual punishment. A prison environment where this can happen is cruel -- we are better than this.
 
I understand how many want Sandusky to get a taste of his own medicine, but I don't want to see him raped or otherwised harmed in prison. We are a civilized society or we are not. Prisoners have rights - rights against cruel and unusual punishment. A prison environment where this can happen is cruel -- we are better than this.

I agree. And besides that, if he were attacked, he might die from a heart attack.

I really don't want that to happen. I want to make sure he lives a long long time - in jail. :)
 
I began to research this, thinking it would be an absolute that he would forfeit his retirement benefits, but the Chapter listed under Act 140 doesn't list crimes such as Sandusky's.

Then I found this article, which unbelievably indicates that while Schultz would lose his pension for perjury, Sandusky won't necessarily lose his!

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories...-lose-pension-if-convicted-of-perjury-324755/

At first I was outraged, but then I realized that with the civil suits to come, his retirement benefits will probably be one of the first assets to be divided up among the victims, so thank heavens neither he nor Dottie will see the money once the settlements will come in, and it will provide more compensation for those that he damaged.

I hope you're right and that they haven't hidden their assets long ago in anticipation of this verdict! Hope Dottie will enjoy her downfall
 
I began to research this, thinking it would be an absolute that he would forfeit his retirement benefits, but the Chapter listed under Act 140 doesn't list crimes such as Sandusky's.

Then I found this article, which unbelievably indicates that while Schultz would lose his pension for perjury, Sandusky won't necessarily lose his!

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories...-lose-pension-if-convicted-of-perjury-324755/

At first I was outraged, but then I realized that with the civil suits to come, his retirement benefits will probably be one of the first assets to be divided up among the victims, so thank heavens neither he nor Dottie will see the money once the settlements will come in, and it will provide more compensation for those that he damaged.

I really doubt he is going to lose his retirement pension or any 401K plans he may have. OJ didnt when he was civilly sued for the murders of Ron and Nicole. OJ was able to live quite comfortably all of those years despite the 33 million dollar law suit awarded to the Goldmans.
 
I began to research this, thinking it would be an absolute that he would forfeit his retirement benefits, but the Chapter listed under Act 140 doesn't list crimes such as Sandusky's.

Then I found this article, which unbelievably indicates that while Schultz would lose his pension for perjury, Sandusky won't necessarily lose his!

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories...-lose-pension-if-convicted-of-perjury-324755/

I think the key is that it has to involve the public service. If I provide a false alibi to someone, and get convicted of perjury, I'd still get a pension. If I falsified a client's welfare application, I'd lose my pension.

It's nice to know that I can commit triple homicide, and still get my pension. ;)
 
I really doubt he is going to lose his retirement pension or any 401K plans he may have. OJ didnt when he was civilly sued for the murders of Ron and Nicole. OJ was able to live quite comfortably all of those years despite the 33 million dollar law suit awarded to the Goldmans.

I think that depends on where you live... I think that is why oj moved to florida.. if im not mistaken

ok sorry correctiong myself here .... but.. i just googled... and it says OJ moved to florida because they cant get your house there... if sued.. so I was wrong.. in my comment. i guess
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
73
Guests online
2,057
Total visitors
2,130

Forum statistics

Threads
601,662
Messages
18,127,940
Members
231,120
Latest member
GibsonGirl
Back
Top