I swear people who continue this bullshit aren't even Penn State fans, they are trying to give our fans a bad name.
Jerry Sandusky’s adopted son arrested for sexually assaulting a child
- Thread starter NC2017
- Start date
I swear people who continue this bullshit aren't even Penn State fans, they are trying to give our fans a bad name.
Sexting a underage child under law is still sexual abuse of a minor.. I can't believe you don't think this is bad.
Because the real story is that Jerry's son is being charged with child sex offenses, not Jeffrey himself.
I guess I shouldn't differentiate, but I would place sending sexual texts to a teenage girl a bit below "sexually assaulting a child" in my hierarchy of criminal offenses. Guess I'm the crazy one.
Well......until the charges are made public, we won't even know for sure what he is accused of.
The only thing we have now (unless you have access to some other information) is from the news reports - - - - - which lists the accusations as "SOLICITATION TO......."
While those charges (if the report is accurate) are certainly very serious, there is also a whole 'nuther level between "IDSI" (or "Rape"), and "SOLICITATION TO....IDSI"
So.....unless you have different information from everyone else.....your accusation of "Rape" is either a simple mistake, or a bit disingenuous.
Who cares? The whole family should be behind bars..
Unfortunately this cycle of abuse is not that uncommon now is it? Most people who abuse, were abused. I bet some point Jerry himself was a victim of abuse.
Not saying anything more than why the story is being reported as it is. Someone asked a question and I answered it.
For goodness sakes. No one is condoning this behavior, simply trying to determine the facts.
Are soliciting and actually doing an act with a child illegal and reprehensible, yes of course. But that doesn't mean they are the same thing. I would bet there are sentencing guidelines differentiating between the two as well. That doesn't mean whomever wrote these guidelines is condoning one thing over the other, there's just a difference between the two.
There already seems to be a lot of misreporting on this which fails to separate the two.
Are soliciting and actually doing an act with a child illegal and reprehensible, yes of course. But that doesn't mean they are the same thing. I would bet there are sentencing guidelines differentiating between the two as well. That doesn't mean whomever wrote these guidelines is condoning one thing over the other, there's just a difference between the two.
There already seems to be a lot of misreporting on this which fails to separate the two.
That definitely isn't true. The last 5 years taught me to be wary of media reports and very wary of stuff people post on the internet as fact. My lesson served me well, since your post here was false. At least you admitted it later, but you should probably just delete the one I quoted here. Not only is it spreading false info, but it makes you look bad.
You are such a fool.. You got to be a troll.. Read the court documents. Do you believe them or are you continue to stick up for child molestors?
Here are the charges:
- Criminal solicitation of statutory sexual assault by a person 11 years older
- Criminal solicitation of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse of a person less than 16 years old
- Two counts of criminal solicitation of photograph or film depicted on the computer of a sex act knowingly involving a child
- Six counts of communicating with a minor – sexual abuse
- Two counts of criminal solicitation of child pornography
I read the court documents. I suggest you do the same. He is not charged with rape.
The self righteous really don't care about facts. That's another thing I've learned in the last 5 years.
Read the court documents..
And there are about 5-8 people on here already sticking up for this dirt bag. I hope these people don't have young kids, if they do, they probably need to be looked into. Apple doesn't fall far from the tree in these situations. They all stick up for one another.
Differently? No. What he did was terrible. However, if we found out that was the case it could go a long way to understanding the why behind these crimes. There is no "one size fits all" for the terrible people in our society, and there is probably no way to ever eliminate these from every happening again to anyone ever, but I still think it's important to understand why these things happen, even if they don't excuse them.
I know Coach Nickerson and he is a good man, not just a typing teacher. He would appreciate a creep and apologist like you not use his likeness. No need for Holocaust Deniers like yourself around here.
Criminal solicitation of statutory sexual assault by a person 11 years older..
I am glad you are ok with this..
Well, we know this will hurt CSS' chances of getting an impartial jury. The media and others will no doubt find a way to frame this as a tangential effect of their supposed cover-up. And there will be no mention of MM and others' culpability.
Wtf are you talking about?? Not one person in this thread is condoning his behavior. There are people pointing out the misreporting and trying to clarify facts, you can't conflate that with people condoning something.
Heaven forbid we actually sort out fact from fiction re: what he was charged with! He's going down due to the texts and I have no problem with that.
For everyone other than the most self righteous, I think we can agree that we would categorize texting a teenage girl and asking for nude pics as bad, but nowhere near as bad as raping a child. Can we agree on that?
My point here is that the media will undoubtedly make the headline as inflammatory as possible (sound familiar, readers of the Sandusky Grand Jury Presentment?) and link this whole story to the "Penn State culture." Texting a teenage girl doesn't sound as bad as raping a child, so we will get headlines like, "Ex Penn State coach Sandusky's son charged with sexually assaulting a child".
My point here is that the media will undoubtedly make the headline as inflammatory as possible (sound familiar, readers of the Sandusky Grand Jury Presentment?) and link this whole story to the "Penn State culture." Texting a teenage girl doesn't sound as bad as raping a child, so we will get headlines like, "Ex Penn State coach Sandusky's son charged with sexually assaulting a child".
So "charges" mean he's been convicted?? Interesting . . .
I thought they had to go through a trial or something. Silly me.
On the bright side, it only took law enforcement a few weeks to arrest him, so, compared to the 20 years it took them with his father, they're vastly improving.
