Penn State Sandusky cover-up: AD arrested, Paterno fired, dies; cover-up charged #8

[J. J. in Phila]

From Chambers' report:
Mother had contact with a policeman's wife and so knew who to report to.
Would policemen's wives be very discrete? Or is this more to argue that lots of people must have thought JS was creepy?
And I'll give Seasock a point- of everyone who has written about "bear hug", he's the only one to get the kid's joke- it was a "bare" hug.

Well, would the mother give the policeman's wife all the details? I know I wouldn't.

She might have said, "There might have been some sexual contact between my son and a man, some type of molestation. Who do I call?" She said that was worried about overreacting.

I would be equally worried a "bear" hug, in the context of two males.

 

[azwriter]

I agree that there is plenty of blame to spread around, but we can't really pretend at this point that Paterno was just an ordinary coach going about ordinary business all the time.

When all of this started, many fans reacted as if Paterno was completely untouchable just because of his fame and revered position at the university.

And now we are supposed to believe he was always an old decrepit bureaucrat who didn't even know what his coaches were doing, and if he did he had no control over them?

I guess I just can't suspend belief and accept that a man who was synonymous with Penn State football wouldn't be informed about possible legal troubles with one of his staff members back in 1998. And there's the point that many have made - he didn't name Jerry his successor in 1999 - why not? To me the logical answer is that he knew about the kid in 1998.

But that could still be a coincidence, if you believe in coincidences.

On the other hand, Paterno just may not have believed the kid's story in 98. That still doesn't explain why he didn't act more aggressively when more victims came forth. And I think even more stuff is going to come out about what Paterno knew and when he knew it. I don't think it's going to be all that easy to separate him from the rest of the university and Second Mile crowd.

Jerry and Coach, 1999
Via Newsday

Thoughtfox, for what it is worth, I agree with your post. The only thing I can add is what I picked up from rumors or comments when I visited my hometown (Washington, Pa.) in 2000. Folks there, many of my former classmates (Jerry Sandusky and I attended the same high school and were in the same graduating class) were expressing surprise and disappointment that Jerry had suddenly taken a retirement after being told by Coach Joe that he was not turning the head coach role over to Jerry. An expected event everyone was waiting on for many years in the traditional "local boy makes good" sense.

The reason on everyone's lips for Jerry stepping down was that Paterno wasn't about to retire anytime soon. The comments included "poor Jerry and boo on Coach Joe for taking back what he promised Jerry."

However, as this case has been exposed, I now believe Coach Joe had to have known of Jerry's actions and forced him off the staff and into retirement. From the standpoint of what everyone back home was expecting, that Jerry claim the head coaching position at Penn State, it certainly was a big surprise to the town folks

But to add, if that was the case, and I don't know if it was, Coach Joe should have taken further action when and if he learned of Jerry's behavior in 2011.

jmo

 

[J. J. in Phila]

Thoughtfox, for what it is worth, I agree with your post. The only thing I can add is what I picked up from rumors or comments when I visited my hometown (Washington, Pa.) in 2000. Folks there, many of my former classmates (Jerry Sandusky and I attended the same high school and were in the same graduating class) were expressing surprise and disappointment that Jerry had suddenly taken a retirement after being told by Coach Joe that he was not turning the head coach role over to Jerry. An expected event everyone was waiting on for many years in the traditional "local boy makes good" sense.

The reason on everyone's lips for Jerry stepping down was that Paterno wasn't about to retire anytime soon. The comments included "poor Jerry and boo on Coach Joe for taking back what he promised Jerry."

However, as this case has been exposed, I now believe Coach Joe had to have known of Jerry's actions and forced him off the staff and into retirement. From the standpoint of what everyone back home was expecting, that Jerry claim the head coaching position at Penn State, it certainly was a big surprise to the town folks

I think you are missing the obvious. In 1995, Jay Paterno was hired as an assistant coach. In 1999, the same that Joe told the 55 year old Sandusky that he'd never be head coach, Jay was promoted. He was about 31.

Joe wanted to build a dynasty, literally the "House of Paterno." One of the people blocking that succession is Sandusky. Sandusky, even in ten years, can take the thrown; he'll still be younger than Joe. So Joe makes it clear that he won't retire and Sandusky will never take the thrown. Sandusky realizes that Paterno will still be marquee name, and one plastered all over the campus, so he gets out.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I think you are missing the obvious. In 1995, Jay Paterno was hired as an assistant coach. In 1999, the same that Joe told the 55 year old Sandusky that he'd never be head coach, Jay was promoted. He was about 31.

Joe wanted to build a dynasty, literally the "House of Paterno." One of the people blocking that succession is Sandusky. Sandusky, even in ten years, can take the thrown; he'll still be younger than Joe. So Joe makes it clear that he won't retire and Sandusky will never take the thrown. Sandusky realizes that Paterno will still be marquee name, and one plastered all over the campus, so he gets out.

You can tell it was late and sinsus medication was kicking in.

It should be "throne."

 

[pittsburghgirl]

If a Paterno succession was the point, why had Tom Bradley stayed all those years? Why would Paterno not have told him the same thing? And there was no way to know whether Jay would ever have the capacity to be a head coach. Let's see where he ends up in the football world. The fact is that Paterno had no intention of retiring anyway in 1999 anyway.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Schreffler said he talked with both; it has been indicated that JKA "extensive disagreements" with Gricar over the case. JKA has also said, publicly, that she had the case for a bit. Now, bluntly, I believe her.

The DA's Office is always sent police reports. It is inconceivable that they would write it up, and not send it. They may not forward it to DPW.

A few things to remember and consider.

1. Only what Victim 6 said is admissible, as corroborating evidence. In both reports, Victim 6 told the same story, so that increases his credibility. The opinion that Sandusky was grooming Victim 6, or the opinion that he wasn't, are not admissible.

2. Sandusky admitted to in front of witnesses, so no one, in 1998, was denying it.

3. RFG was not known to put a lot of trust in psychologists, either in his personal or professional life. It would be likely that neither report would carry too much weight with him, except where it could be used as evidence.

The police report indicates that JKA was involved in the case so it doesn't require belief. Fact. Now what interests me is that she asked PSU LE to hold off on a psychologist eval. And it appears they didn't. Gricar is only mentioned re: the stalking. So the evidence we have, the police report, says nothing about their involvement in closing the case.

We don't know why JKA and RG were in disagreement. She may have been angry about PSU bringing in a psychologist with ties to Second Mile. And maybe RG stepped in because of the conflict. We don't know. Yet.

We do know that DPW in the person of Jerry Lauro was supposed to be part of the investigation and certainly should have seen both reports, and if there was not enough to prosecute, there could have been a DPW investigation into a man who was at that point a foster parent. We know from Lauro's comments in the media what he says Schreffler told him--there was nothing to it and he was closing his case. We know that Schreffler writes case closed with no mention of anyone in the "courthouse."

1. It doesn't matter what was admissible. The first and most important issue for a psych report on a child sex abuse victim is--was the child molested? is there a problem with this guy? is the adult's behavior as described by the child behavior concerning? are the child's stories consistent and credible, from interview to interview, and not prompted by interviewer questions? The issue first is the child, not some trial that may never happen.

2. I presume you are talking about bare/bear hugs. We have known all along he admitted to doing that but as the police report clearly shows, he denies it was sexual in any way. Seasock's report appears to support those denials. So it wasn't like Sandusky was going to stand up at trial and admit to a sex offense or take a plea bargain. He would have done what he is doing now--lawyering up and defending himself.

3. See #1. With child sex abuse victims, psychologists are the only way to gauge what a child understands, whether there is trauma, etc.

I don't see why everything must go back to suggesting "Ray Gricar was the guy who closed the case, against a mountain of evidence"--which we can pretty much see from this weekend's release of documents just is not true. What his role was probably awaits revelation of JKA's testimony.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

If a Paterno succession was the point, why had Tom Bradley stayed all those years? Why would Paterno not have told him the same thing? And there was no way to know whether Jay would ever have the capacity to be a head coach. Let's see where he ends up in the football world. The fact is that Paterno had no intention of retiring anyway in 1999 anyway.

Jay had the prime qualification, the surname Paterno.

Bradley's seniority was decade behind Sandusky and was always second fiddle to Sandusky. Bradley also didn't crave the throne as much as Sandusky had. Prior to the scandal, he was looking at other opportunities, according to Wikipedia. http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/11006/1115900-233.stm

Here is 2007 interview: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=schlabach_mark&id=2903926

I think the key quote is:

'Why didn't you go? Why didn't you do this? Why didn't you do that?' If I could find something better, I'd know it. But I haven't found something better. It's a great atmosphere to work. Joe lets us coach and he treats us fairly and treats us like men."

Sandusky really cared. He wanted to be THE HEAD COACH of Penn State.

For Bradley, if it happened, it happened, great. If it didn't, okay, great.

"I don't worry about that," Bradley, the Penn State defensive coordinator said recently. "I like what I do. Everybody says, 'You have to be a head coach.' I've had such a great experience, great things have happened. The people that I've met, I wouldn't trade for the world."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/22/SPPD13MO0I.DTL#ixzz1qEpeVHO3

Bradley is the man Sandusky should have been.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

We don't know why JKA and RG were in disagreement. She may have been angry about PSU bringing in a psychologist with ties to Second Mile. And maybe RG stepped in because of the conflict. We don't know. Yet.

He didn't get involved until a week later and I have not seen any evidence that Seasock was involved with Second Mile.

We do know that DPW in the person of Jerry Lauro was supposed to be part of the investigation and certainly should have seen both reports, and if there was not enough to prosecute, there could have been a DPW investigation into a man who was at that point a foster parent. We know from Lauro's comments in the media what he says Schreffler told him--there was nothing to it and he was closing his case. We know that Schreffler writes case closed with no mention of anyone in the "courthouse."

Scheffler did not have the authority to prevent prosecution. That had to be Gricar.

1. It doesn't matter what was admissible.

A. Of course it does. Chambers (probably right) conclusions cannot go into a prosecution. It might prompt someone to call a grand jury, but that wasn't done.

2. I presume you are talking about bare/bear hugs. We have known all along he admitted to doing that but as the police report clearly shows, he denies it was sexual in any way. Seasock's report appears to support those denials. So it wasn't like Sandusky was going to stand up at trial and admit to a sex offense or take a plea bargain. He would have done what he is doing now--lawyering up and defending himself.

B. And there you have made the mistake. Sandusky isn''t charged with sexual assult and none of the felonies and only one of the misdemeanors (there are six others) have a purely sexual element. None are technically "sexual assault."

3. See #1. With child sex abuse victims, psychologists are the only way to gauge what a child understands, whether there is trauma, etc.

See Answer B. It is not relevant to the charges.

I don't see why everything must go back to suggesting "Ray Gricar was the guy who closed the case, against a mountain of evidence"--which we can pretty much see from this weekend's release of documents just is not true. What his role was probably awaits revelation of JKA's testimony.

Because, in 1998, that decision was soley Ray Gricar's. Even JKA has said that, already. The documents added a bit of credibility to Victim 6, making him a bit stronger, but that isn't even necessary with Sandusky's admission.

Schreffler, Harmon, Chambers, Seasock, or even Arnold, didn't have the ability to decide whether or not to prosecute. That ability rested with one person, Gricar.

 

[azwriter]

I think you are missing the obvious. In 1995, Jay Paterno was hired as an assistant coach. In 1999, the same that Joe told the 55 year old Sandusky that he'd never be head coach, Jay was promoted. He was about 31.

Joe wanted to build a dynasty, literally the "House of Paterno." One of the people blocking that succession is Sandusky. Sandusky, even in ten years, can take the thrown; he'll still be younger than Joe. So Joe makes it clear that he won't retire and Sandusky will never take the thrown. Sandusky realizes that Paterno will still be marquee name, and one plastered all over the campus, so he gets out.

I see what you mean, but my post points out only what was being talked about in JS's hometown among those of us who grew up there with him and expected him to someday be head coach at Penn State.

I was sharing what I overhearing as we all sat around the brunch table at the Holiday Inn. The story I heard had to start somewhere and I suspect it came from the locals. I don't think I missed anything obvious. I was just repeating the story that was being told among the hometown folks about one of their own.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

If the Penn State football program had devolved to the point where seniority determined the next coach, it was already doomed. What Paterno might have wanted to see happen after he left would. Of have made an ounce of difference if the administration wanted to contend for a BCS bowl. They would have been looking for the big name Urban Meyer (sp?) type.

 

[Reader]

Key question in Penn State case: Who is Victim 2?

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/03/...called-likely.html#wgt=rcntnews#storylink=cpy

...........But the only person who says he saw it happen is another assistant. Prosecutors don't know who the boy is, while Sandusky says he believes he does know, and that the now-grown man, referred to in court papers only as Victim 2, could exonerate him.

Even the timing of the allegation is in question, as is the age of the boy a decade ago.

All the conflicting information presents tough challenges for prosecutors - not just at the sex abuse trial beginning in mid-May, at which the defense does not plan to call the man, but also in the court of public opinion.
------

The lawyer, Joe Amendola, told The Associated Press that a young man contacted him after Sandusky's November arrest to say he believed he might be the person referred to as Victim 2. After meeting with him, along with his mother and adult brother, Amendola was left with doubts.

"I wasn't sure he was," Amendola said. "I'm still not sure. I haven't been able to verify it. Jerry's very sure."

Amendola said that the young man told him Sandusky had not abused him, but that he later obtained a lawyer and cut off contact. Amendola does not plan to subpoena the young man and declined to identify him or his lawyer.
------

State prosecutors, who need to be able to prove the ages of victims, declined to discuss the issue of the two identities.

"This case has been the result of an extensive investigation and an extensive grand jury investigation," said Nils Frederiksen, a spokesman for the attorney general's office. "We have a high degree of confidence in the case, but we're not going to discuss the strategy of how our prosecutors plan to present the case in court. It's just not appropriate."

To establish the age of anonymous children in child cases, prosecutors sometimes have pediatric specialists apply standard measures of development, a technique that might be used in the Sandusky case.
------

Jurors may wonder why the young men have not stepped forward, despite the detailed reports of abuse and the extensive publicity surrounding Sandusky's arrest. But that would not be surprising, Mallios said, given what he saw during investigations in Philadelphia of abuse allegations against Roman Catholic clergy members.

"A lot of the victims did not tell anyone about what had happened to them until well into their 50s," he said. "They just couldn't talk about it. Even when the investigators were able to piece together their identities by talking to other victims, some just wouldn't talk about it."

More at link.....

 

[pittsburghgirl]

If a police investigation concludes "there is nothing to it" the DA doesn't have anything to prosecute. There had to be a crime. The police report concludes without noting a crime was committed. It says "cased closed" immediately after the 2 detectives tell Sandusky not to shower with kids. No mention of any discussion with DAs office. No mention of meeting with Lauro to share what they had.

Moreover, let's not get the cart before the horse. Without doing an investigation, there is no way to figure out what the charges would be. If one of the psych reports turned up an indication of rape or oral sex or fondling--that would be sex assault or child abuse or maybe 2-3 things. First comes the complaint, then investigation and gathering evidence. Then charges and arrest. If the police conclude there wasn't a crime, that's it. Many murder cases or what we think are murder cases get hung up a the investigation stage. If there isn't evidence of a crime, why would a DA get involved? And if RG or JKA arbitrarily close the case why is that not noted in the report? That would be a sure CYA moment for any LE officer. And Schreffler noted other conversations with the DAs office.

The evidence points to PSU shutting it down, just as they did in 2002.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

JJ, the CDT timetable linked above has Seasock talking about what Second Mile "typically" does, which indicates some familiarity with Second Mile. It would be unlikely that anyone working with CYS in that area would not be familiar.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

If a police investigation concludes "there is nothing to it" the DA doesn't have anything to prosecute. There had to be a crime. The police report concludes without noting a crime was committed. It says "cased closed" immediately after the 2 detectives tell Sandusky not to shower with kids. No mention of any discussion with DAs office. No mention of meeting with Lauro to share what they had.

The police do not make that call. They didn't determine the was "nothing to it." That was the DA. You will note is 25 pages. It skips from Page 22 to 25. The events on page 22 are 5/13/98 and the events on page 25 are on 6/1/98. The text on page 22 concludes with "INVESTIGATION TO CONTINUE," emphasis not added.

Gricar was only noted as talking to the police on 5/13/98. Now we have about 18 days that were not released.

Moreover, let's not get the cart before the horse. Without doing an investigation, there is no way to figure out what the charges would be. If one of the psych reports turned up an indication of rape or oral sex or fondling--that would be sex assault or child abuse or maybe 2-3 things. First comes the complaint, then investigation and gathering evidence. Then charges and arrest. If the police conclude there wasn't a crime, that's it.

Again, not even close, and especially since Schreffler thought their should be charges. The police investigate, in cases like this, then they report what happened to the DA; they report the act or acts. It is up to the DA to determine if these acts violate various statutes. I'm sorry, but this is high school civics.

And if RG or JKA arbitrarily close the case why is that not noted in the report?

I have never suggested that JKA arbitrarily closed this case; it was not her decision. Never have I suggested it was.

It was the decision the DA, Ray Gricar.

The evidence points to PSU shutting it down, just as they did in 2002.

They do not shut this down by sending it off campus to the Courthouse. They don't shut this down by involving another police department, over which they had no control.

This case was shut down by the DA. We just don't know why. "Too little evidence" is becoming laughable.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

JJ, the CDT timetable linked above has Seasock talking about what Second Mile "typically" does, which indicates some familiarity with Second Mile. It would be unlikely that anyone working with CYS in that area would not be familiar.

Or somebody told him at CYS. Victim 6's mother said that it was not typical.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

If the Penn State football program had devolved to the point where seniority determined the next coach, it was already doomed. What Paterno might have wanted to see happen after he left would. Of have made an ounce of difference if the administration wanted to contend for a BCS bowl. They would have been looking for the big name Urban Meyer (sp?) type.

Remember what I said about Paterno and fundraising? It's just a few pages back. That was where his power was. The name "Paterno" was a marquee name. Joe and Jay shared it.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Or somebody told him at CYS. Victim 6's mother said that it was not typical.

I was not arguing the accuracy of the point, which doesn't seem very important to me. I was j ust indicating for your benefit that Seasock was evidently familiar with Second Mile, which may be very important.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

Remember what I said about Paterno and fundraising? It's just a few pages back. That was where his power was. The name "Paterno" was a marquee name. Joe and Jay shared it.

Fundraising in football means winning games and going to bowls. A BCS is worth multi-millions. If the football program languishes, and alumni interest wanes, even that sort of fundraising declines. That's why PSU wanted Meyer or someone like him.

 

[pittsburghgirl]

JJ: When I wrote that police said there was "nothing to it" [nothing to the allegations against JS] I was referring to Lauro's characterization of what Schreffler said to him. There is no mainstream reference or document that I am aware of that indicates that anyone in the DA's office every spoke publicly about the 1998 case, outside of JKA's cryptic post-GJ comments. We have seen no documentary evidence aboutnthe da role other than the two references to the DA's office, one about JKA and the other about RG. We do have the final page, which says what it says: essentially that the investigating officers from PSU told JS not to shower with kids. Cased closed. And we have Schreffler's statement that Chief Harmon was the source who told him RG said to close the case. And we believe anyone from PSU administration for what reason? Two adminsitrators are now charged with perjury. It is unfair to all concerned to assume we posters know anything beyond what has been released in terms of evidence and official statements from the AG office. So I can't accept continued implications that RG made some unilateral decision to close the 1998 case, when even the statements of Schreffler and Lauro point elsewhere.

I mentioned JKA and RG in regard to closing the case because I don't know who made that decision. I was not suggesting you said that; I was indicating we don't have evidence about anyone, whether JKA or RG, closing the case. I think it's very clear that we should all go slowly and be cautious as more will come out before the trial and during the trial. We can all hope for definitive answers.

Yes, DAs decide what to charge, given an investigation. But many cases investigated by police never get to the DA's desk. If police investigate and say no crime was committed ("there's nothing to it," Schreffler told Lauro), then what would the DA be using to file charges? How does anything hold up in court if a defense attorney asks Lauro about that conversation?

Right now, what we have doesn't say anything about what RG learned, when and how he learned it. If you have the full police report, with the redacted pages, please post it so we can all see it and judge for ourselves.

 

[J. J. in Phila]

I was not arguing the accuracy of the point, which doesn't seem very important to me. I was j ust indicating for your benefit that Seasock was evidently familiar with Second Mile, which may be very important.

The accuracy is the key however. If Seasock is not able to accurately report how Second Mile did things, that would indicate an unfamiliarity with Second Mile.