OT: FYI, JZ says Newsweek article is still a go. (edit: Story now spiked)

[indynittany]

It’s a fact that Schultz testified under oath he told Spanier about 98. Spanier’s lawyers didn’t contest it in anyway.

It’s a fact that Spanier replied to an email in 2001 that referenced the 98 incident.

It’s a fact that any reasonable discussion on how to deal with the situation in 2001 would require mentioning 98.

“But it was just emails Spanier didn’t see” is the distraction.

I think '98 shaped their entire response in '01. It wouldn't have mattered how that investigation turned out. V6's mom could have lawyered up right then and there. PSU would have paid to make her go away as quietly as possible. Preventing a future he said/he said situation, like the one in '98, was their sole motivation.

Did their lawyers tell them not to spin it that way? People are thinking Sandusky was going around plowing everything that moved. It wouldn't look good if C/S/S were only concerned about the possibility of a future lawsuit.

 

[indynittany]

Sure Indy, you can spin with the best if them, but the reality is normal grown men told not to shower with boys would never do it to begin with, let alone again.

Normal grown men wouldn't have done anything in the shower for the cop to say that. They would just take a shower and leave.

I'm not supporting Sandusky's behavior. He's not normal. Like I've said, nothing I believe about this whole mess makes any sense if Jerry is innocent.

In this situation, I'm not convinced he understood the risk he was taking, but I also don't think he believed he was doing anything wrong either.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Normal grown men wouldn't have done anything in the shower for the cop to say that. They would just take a shower and leave.

I'm not supporting Sandusky's behavior. He's not normal. Like I've said, nothing I believe about this whole mess makes any sense if Jerry is innocent.

In this situation, I'm not convinced he understood the risk he was taking, but I also don't think he believed he was doing anything wrong either.

He denied it initially for a reason Indy.

 

[L.T. Young]

I think '98 shaped their entire response in '01. It wouldn't have mattered how that investigation turned out. V6's mom could have lawyered up right then and there. PSU would have paid to make her go away as quietly as possible. Preventing a future he said/he said situation, like the one in '98, was their sole motivation.

Did their lawyers tell them not to spin it that way? People are thinking Sandusky was going around plowing everything that moved. It wouldn't look good if C/S/S were only concerned about the possibility of a future lawsuit.

This is why people shouldn’t pay attention to Ziegler’s drivel.

Nobody actually believes they were convinced Jerry’s behavior was completely innocent. It was inconvenient for them to report it to DPW so they attempted to deal with it themselves. Otherwise they would have in a heartbeat and slept well at night.

 

[Connorpozlee]

NP, but it's clear you responded to me by mistake.

Emphasis is not necessary, it seems intellectually dishonest. Everyone showers naked.

Sometimes people wear swim trunks in the shower. On a related note, no grown men take showers with unrelated boys and hug them without sexual motivation.

 

[Connorpozlee]

Showering and hugging while naked are two separate things. However, even the hug is no big deal as long as it's not sexual and it's your own kid. Not my style of parenting, but we need to stop thinking the worst of people just because we disagree with them.

The shower in question is a communal shower. It's designed to be used by more than one person at a time, as long as they're of the same gender.

I'm 62. I showered along with grown men at the "Y" when my stepfather would bring me with him during businessmen's hours, which wasn't often. In fact, we all swam naked. I'll admit that took some getting used to. But the experience helped me learn not to be self conscious in situations like that. I realized nobody was looking at me and I sure as hell wasn't looking at them. Eyes up! I also showered along with grown men at our country club. Sometimes in the men's locker room after golfing with my stepfather. Again, not very often. It happened more often at the pool, though usually I still had my swim suit on and only went in to warm up. But the adults were usually taking a real shower. What I don't recall ever doing was showering 'alone' with a grown man not my (step)father. I probably did at the pool, although kids were running in and out of there all the time. It just wasn't a thing that you worried about.

I’ll take this step by step.
Showering and hugging while naked are indeed two separate things. Unless you are doing them both at the same time. Then they are the same thing. Regardless, hugging somebody else’s kid naked is so far beyond acceptable that it’s mind boggling.
The shower used indeed was a communal shower. Which would absolutely mean that there was no reason for Sandusky to be having any physical contact unless he desired it.
The naked swimming thing that has been mentioned on here many times is stunning to me, but I accept that was the way it must have been done back in the day. But you point out several things in here that are relevant to Sandusky. You were uncomfortable to shower with grown men but did so, keeping your eyes up. I’m assuming (and hoping for your sake) that none of these men hugged you while you were taking a shower. And sometimes you even kept your trunks on because of the awkwardness. And you don’t recall ever showering alone with a grown man. That is probably because the grown men- even back then- knew that it was proper to do that.

 

[wensilver]

Sandusky kept both in his repertoire, along with full body hugs and a hand on a boy’s knee while driving a car. When objections arose, Sandusky was slow to conform to the mounting paranoia about physical contact in American culture.

Slow to conform or not......Jerry was clearly accessing Second Mile minors in flagrant Out-Of-Program contact so all this bullshit about group showers and living in the 50's is exactly that...bullshit.

Once Tim Curley is meeting with charity CEO Dr. Jack Raykovitz at the Autoport March 2001, Jack is now fully aware of Jerry blowing off his prescribed role with the program. Had Jack clamped down on that Out-Of-Program access, enacted strict rules and reined Jerry in with that mandated safety plan - Aaron Fisher never happens.

If you don't access the minor inappropriately, you can't be accused of the inappropriate activity.

*And WHY did Jack have Tim meet him at the Autoport and NOT in Second Mile offices, I wonder. Would this have raised some eyebrows?

But hey, Slapping Sounds

 

[BobPSU92]

SWIM. TRUNKS.

 

[indynittany]

I’ll take this step by step.
Showering and hugging while naked are indeed two separate things. Unless you are doing them both at the same time. Then they are the same thing. Regardless, hugging somebody else’s kid naked is so far beyond acceptable that it’s mind boggling.
The shower used indeed was a communal shower. Which would absolutely mean that there was no reason for Sandusky to be having any physical contact unless he desired it.
The naked swimming thing that has been mentioned on here many times is stunning to me, but I accept that was the way it must have been done back in the day. But you point out several things in here that are relevant to Sandusky. You were uncomfortable to shower with grown men but did so, keeping your eyes up. I’m assuming (and hoping for your sake) that none of these men hugged you while you were taking a shower. And sometimes you even kept your trunks on because of the awkwardness. And you don’t recall ever showering alone with a grown man. That is probably because the grown men- even back then- knew that it was proper to do that.

Don't make a thing out of it. At the Y, I was probably two years younger than what I supposed to be to swim at that time of day. Those old guys didn't want young kids splashing around when they would swim their laps. I was a competitive swimmer, so I knew what to do to stay out of their way. Getting hugged was not something I was worried about. It was like the only time I got to swim in the winter. It didn't happen often.

At the club in the summer, I kept my trunks on because I was only in the shower to warm up. Our pool wasn't heated back than. It didn't warm up until July. We'd still swim all day and when we got cold we'd stand under the hot shower to warm up for a few minutes, then run back into the pool. It had nothing to do with awkwardness. We were all males, so it was okay. Nobody thought about this stuff in the 60's.

 

[indynittany]

Slow to conform or not......Jerry was clearly accessing Second Mile minors in flagrant Out-Of-Program contact so all this bullshit about group showers and living in the 50's is exactly that...bullshit.

Once Tim Curley is meeting with charity CEO Dr. Jack Raykovitz at the Autoport March 2001, Jack is now fully aware of Jerry blowing off his prescribed role with the program. Had Jack clamped down on that Out-Of-Program access, enacted strict rules and reined Jerry in with that mandated safety plan - Aaron Fisher never happens.

If you don't access the minor inappropriately, you can't be accused of the inappropriate activity.

*And WHY did Jack have Tim meet him at the Autoport and NOT in Second Mile offices, I wonder. Would this have raised some eyebrows?

But hey, Slapping Sounds

Great post!

 

[Connorpozlee]

Don't make a thing out of it. At the Y, I was probably two years younger than what I supposed to be to swim at that time of day. Those old guys didn't want young kids splashing around when they would swim their laps. I was a competitive swimmer, so I knew what to do to stay out of their way. Getting hugged was not something I was worried about. It was like the only time I got to swim in the winter. It didn't happen often.

At the club in the summer, I kept my trunks on because I was only in the shower to warm up. Our pool wasn't heated back than. It didn't warm up until July. We'd still swim all day and when we got cold we'd stand under the hot shower to warm up for a few minutes, then run back into the pool. It had nothing to do with awkwardness. We were all males, so it was okay. Nobody thought about this stuff in the 60's.

What would you have thought if you were showering alone with a grown man and he hugged you?

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Great post!

You do realize she is saying Jerry is what they say he is?

 

[pandaczar12]

Sometimes people wear swim trunks in the shower. On a related note, no grown men take showers with unrelated boys and hug them without sexual motivation.

Sometimes people are told to wear swim trunks by experts in the field of child abuse, rather than report them to DPW.

I'm not interested in getting drug into the discussion of your "related note".

 

[Connorpozlee]

Sometimes people are told to wear swim trunks by experts in the field of child abuse, rather than report them to DPW.

I'm not interested in getting drug into the discussion of your "related note".

Of course you’re not because there is no reasonable excuse for a grown man to be hugging a boy in a shower without sexual intent. Can you think of one?

 

[pandaczar12]

Of course you’re not because there is no reasonable excuse for a grown man to be hugging a boy in a shower without sexual intent. Can you think of one?

Why do you assume my stance simply because I don't want to get drug into a worthless discussion?

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Why do you assume my stance simply because I don't want to get drug into a worthless discussion?

Because you are walking and quacking like a duck....so you're a duck. It's why you and a few others taking JZ's lead are so offended by the word naked when it is used with the words Jerry and shower together. If you deny reality, you can pretty much make up your own version of what Jerry is I guess.

 

[Lattner]

There is no interpretation:

‘Schultz also testified that he told Spanier more than once of a similar 1998 incident involving Sandusky. Prosecutors presented an email chain discussing the incident, on which Spanier was copied.

"It was important and the president should hear about it, and he should hear about it from me," Schultz said.’


https://www.google.com/amp/www.mcal...se-spanier-trial-0322-20170322-story,amp.html


You guys like to pretend everything is debatable, it’s not.

Agree.
Spanier's conviction is for a misdemeanor crime, the same which former colleague's, and former co-defendants Tim Curley and Gary Schultz pleaded guilty to last week. The crime carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

Chief Deputy Attorney General Laura Ditka, the state's lead prosecutor in the case against Spanier, said the former university president failed children, specifically those sexually abused by Jerry Sandusky after February 2001.

"He had a duty of care and protection of children who came to Penn State's campus, and he failed in that duty," Ditka said.

When asked if the state expected Spanier to serve prison time, she responded, "We're not there yet."

Sentencing for Spanier, Curley, and Schultz will take place within the next 60 days.

"These leaders endangered the welfare of children by both their actions and inactions," said Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro. "There are zero excuses."

The jury found that Spanier was found guilty of knowingly violating the care of a child he was supervising. They determined Spanier was responsible for all children abused by Sandusky on Penn State's campus, after the former football coach was spotted by Mike McQueary abusing a young boy in February 2001.

McQueary reported the incident to Curley and Schultz, who relayed the information to then-President Spanier.

Spanier, who did not testify in his defense, maintains through his legal team that he, and former colleagues Tim Curley and Gary Schultz, only acted upon the information they had at the time, which they felt was that Sandusky was only engaging in "horseplay" with a child.

Spanier did not make any comment after the trial, and did not leave in handcuffs. He stood next to his attorney, Sam Silver, when the lawyer read a statement.

"This case has always been replete with significant issues, factual and legal, and those issues remain," Silver said.

Silver indicated his team plans to appeal the guilty verdict.

The trial is expected to be the final criminal case in the Sandusky child sex abuse scandal.

 

[wensilver]

You do realize she is saying Jerry is what they say he is?

It still doesn't matter. Jerry could be Mother Teresa for all I care.

Your defined role with the kids charity you founded is solely that of Chairman, Fundraiser and Emcee at events. Nowhere in those roles is the requirement that you be alone with a Second Mile minor.

So unless Jack "Swim Trunks" Raykovitz is bullshitting the jury - Jerry's role with Second Mile did not include working with those children in any kind of one-on-one capacity. It did not include counseling, being a "father figure", mentoring, babysitting, or even 'teaching them personal hygiene". Let's not even get into those bullshit sleepovers - which is a radioactive activity for ANYONE to be doing.

Once Tim was in front of Jack complaining that Jerry was tooling around with a Second Mile kid up on campus, and Tim consequently bounced ALL kids from being in campus buildings with Jerry, Jack should have immediately gotten with Jerry and slapped him upside the head reading him the riot act.

I don't give a rat's ass what McQueary said. I don't give a rat's ass what Schultz did. I don't give a shit whether CYS/CPS/911 or the National Guard was ever called. I sure as hell don't give a damn about Fina/Freeh's bullshit "secret emails". Tim Curley sat with the CEO of Second Mile. That leader, and by extent the charity VP and the Board, are all now fully aware of Jerry accessing a Second Mile kid in clear Out-Of-Program contact.

Once those leaders chose NOT to shut down that access, they left Jerry open to Aaron Fisher and the others. So whether these guys are all liars or not is irrelevant, Raykovitz had a chance to mitigate risk and consciously chose not to.

For the life of me, why Zig doesn't acknowledge that?

Sorry for shouting, but Jeezus - Swim Trunks? And we continue to circle the drain for years over the same bullshit on McQueary, Curley, Schultz & Spanier. It would have been a no-brainer for Fina & McGettigan to just nail Raykovitz & Genovese from the start, have Linda Kelly grandstand about the legal-ethical-moral obligation of charity officials in the oversight of charity clients abused by their charity chairman, which neither of those ASSHOLES ever needed McQueary and his bullshit for.

So instead, the Arsonists Fina, McGettigan & Eshbach burn the place down, with the help of Louis Freeh, over some crummy cover-up that didn't happen to a victim they never got off their asses to ever identify, over a crime that didn't happen.

It would be nice if someone from the McQ clan would point that out.

 

[Misder2]

It still doesn't matter. Jerry could be Mother Teresa for all I care.

Your defined role with the kids charity you founded is solely that of Chairman, Fundraiser and Emcee at events. Nowhere in those roles is the requirement that you be alone with a Second Mile minor.

So unless Jack "Swim Trunks" Raykovitz is bullshitting the jury - Jerry's role with Second Mile did not include working with those children in any kind of one-on-one capacity. It did not include counseling, being a "father figure", mentoring, babysitting, or even 'teaching them personal hygiene". Let's not even get into those bullshit sleepovers - which is a radioactive activity for ANYONE to be doing.

Once Tim was in front of Jack complaining that Jerry was tooling around with a Second Mile kid up on campus, and Tim consequently bounced ALL kids from being in campus buildings with Jerry, Jack should have immediately gotten with Jerry and slapped him upside the head reading him the riot act.

I don't give a rat's ass what McQueary said. I don't give a rat's ass what Schultz did. I don't give a shit whether CYS/CPS/911 or the National Guard was ever called. I sure as hell don't give a damn about Fina/Freeh's bullshit "secret emails". Tim Curley sat with the CEO of Second Mile. That leader, and by extent the charity VP and the Board, are all now fully aware of Jerry accessing a Second Mile kid in clear Out-Of-Program contact.

Once those leaders chose NOT to shut down that access, they left Jerry open to Aaron Fisher and the others. So whether these guys are all liars or not is irrelevant, Raykovitz had a chance to mitigate risk and consciously chose not to.

For the life of me, why Zig doesn't acknowledge that?

Sorry for shouting, but Jeezus - Swim Trunks? And we continue to circle the drain for years over the same bullshit on McQueary, Curley, Schultz & Spanier. It would have been a no-brainer for Fina & McGettigan to just nail Raykovitz & Genovese from the start, have Linda Kelly grandstand about the legal-ethical-moral obligation of charity officials in the oversight of charity clients abused by their charity chairman, which neither of those ASSHOLES ever needed McQueary and his bullshit for.

So instead, the Arsonists Fina, McGettigan & Eshbach burn the place down, with the help of Louis Freeh, over some crummy cover-up that didn't happen to a victim they never got off their asses to ever identify, over a crime that didn't happen.

It would be nice if someone from the McQ clan would point that out.

I can't argue with that post at all.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

It still doesn't matter. Jerry could be Mother Teresa for all I care.

Your defined role with the kids charity you founded is solely that of Chairman, Fundraiser and Emcee at events. Nowhere in those roles is the requirement that you be alone with a Second Mile minor.

So unless Jack "Swim Trunks" Raykovitz is bullshitting the jury - Jerry's role with Second Mile did not include working with those children in any kind of one-on-one capacity. It did not include counseling, being a "father figure", mentoring, babysitting, or even 'teaching them personal hygiene". Let's not even get into those bullshit sleepovers - which is a radioactive activity for ANYONE to be doing.

Once Tim was in front of Jack complaining that Jerry was tooling around with a Second Mile kid up on campus, and Tim consequently bounced ALL kids from being in campus buildings with Jerry, Jack should have immediately gotten with Jerry and slapped him upside the head reading him the riot act.

I don't give a rat's ass what McQueary said. I don't give a rat's ass what Schultz did. I don't give a shit whether CYS/CPS/911 or the National Guard was ever called. I sure as hell don't give a damn about Fina/Freeh's bullshit "secret emails". Tim Curley sat with the CEO of Second Mile. That leader, and by extent the charity VP and the Board, are all now fully aware of Jerry accessing a Second Mile kid in clear Out-Of-Program contact.

Once those leaders chose NOT to shut down that access, they left Jerry open to Aaron Fisher and the others. So whether these guys are all liars or not is irrelevant, Raykovitz had a chance to mitigate risk and consciously chose not to.

For the life of me, why Zig doesn't acknowledge that?

Sorry for shouting, but Jeezus - Swim Trunks? And we continue to circle the drain for years over the same bullshit on McQueary, Curley, Schultz & Spanier. It would have been a no-brainer for Fina & McGettigan to just nail Raykovitz & Genovese from the start, have Linda Kelly grandstand about the legal-ethical-moral obligation of charity officials in the oversight of charity clients abused by their charity chairman, which neither of those ASSHOLES ever needed McQueary and his bullshit for.

So instead, the Arsonists Fina, McGettigan & Eshbach burn the place down, with the help of Louis Freeh, over some crummy cover-up that didn't happen to a victim they never got off their asses to ever identify, over a crime that didn't happen.

It would be nice if someone from the McQ clan would point that out.

We refer to that in the real world as passing the buck. Whether or not someone else could do right or wrong is irrelevant as that is out of your control. By passing the buck you're just assuming someone else will do the right thing.....guess what, they don't always do that. No doubt TSM should have said WTF and exposed Jerry right away and started interviewing any and all kids, but they didn't. Blaming TSM while sounds awesome in theory is a day late and a dollar short.

Nobody has ever said on this site...look away from TSM or glad they weren't investigate....so exactly who are you talking to there. Many are curious as to why, but that didn't happen. Yelling TSM is the equivalent of yelling squirrel to a dog at this point in time.

 

[fizzyskittles]

We refer to that in the real world as passing the buck. Whether or not someone else could do right or wrong is irrelevant as that is out of your control. By passing the buck you're just assuming someone else will do the right thing.....guess what, they don't always do that.

I don’t get that line of reasoning , if it’s nothing why bother reporting it over a month later to someone else who isn’t LE or CYS?
If it’s serious or any chance it’s serious why not do it yourself ?

 

[Connorpozlee]

Why do you assume my stance simply because I don't want to get drug into a worthless discussion?

Whether Jerry Sandusky is a pedophile or not is seemingly a worthless discussion as there is really not any question about it. Admitted shower hugging pretty much cements that. Yet people still try to defend it. Thus, the discussion ensues.

 

[Zenophile]

We refer to that in the real world as passing the buck. Whether or not someone else could do right or wrong is irrelevant as that is out of your control. By passing the buck you're just assuming someone else will do the right thing.....guess what, they don't always do that. No doubt TSM should have said WTF and exposed Jerry right away and started interviewing any and all kids, but they didn't. Blaming TSM while sounds awesome in theory is a day late and a dollar short.

Nobody has ever said on this site...look away from TSM or glad they weren't investigate....so exactly who are you talking to there. Many are curious as to why, but that didn't happen. Yelling TSM is the equivalent of yelling squirrel to a dog at this point in time.

Who of the below people had the obligation and immediate authority to stop Jerry from accessing kids:

A. Joe Paterno
B. Tim Curly
C. Gary Schultz
D. Jack Raykovitz​

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Who of the below people had the obligation and immediate authority to stop Jerry from accessing kids:

A. Joe Paterno
B. Tim Curly
C. Gary Schultz
D. Jack Raykovitz​

Can I play this game too?

Which of the people below KNEW of another earlier accusation and discussed being vulnerable for not reporting? In fact they discussed telling Jerry they knew about the earlier accusation and that too was presented as evidence at Spanier's trial. Then they discussed being vulnerable for not making a call to DPW. How do you think those words looked to investigators? I'll give you a hint....not very good.

A. Joe Paterno
B. Grahm Spanier
C. Tim Curley
D. George Shultz
E. Jack Raykovitz


Yes Jack should have and could have done much more to stop Jerry. Who has said otherwise? Can you point out one post where people are saying TSM did a great job? Just one post as I'm not seeing those posts. It is possible to have more than one person screw up and that is what actually occurred.

 

[WyomingLion]

Of course you’re not because there is no reasonable excuse for a grown man to be hugging a boy in a shower without sexual intent. Can you think of one?

We refer to that in the real world as passing the buck. Whether or not someone else could do right or wrong is irrelevant as that is out of your control. By passing the buck you're just assuming someone else will do the right thing.....guess what, they don't always do that. No doubt TSM should have said WTF and exposed Jerry right away and started interviewing any and all kids, but they didn't. Blaming TSM while sounds awesome in theory is a day late and a dollar short.

Nobody has ever said on this site...look away from TSM or glad they weren't investigate....so exactly who are you talking to there. Many are curious as to why, but that didn't happen. Yelling TSM is the equivalent of yelling squirrel to a dog at this point in time.

Except that Dr. Jack admitted, on the stand, under oath that he was a proper reporting authority. One would hope that the justice system would make it clear to a group like TSM that circumventing the law is unacceptable. That is what they did by not implementing an investigation and stopping Jerry from accessing kids. Instead the justice system (who had the legal and moral obligation) decided to go after non mandatory reporters. TSM should have been first on the prosecutors list if your goal was to protect children.
By not going after Dr. Jack with the same vigor as others it shows a bias on your part. Carry on.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Except that Dr. Jack admitted, on the stand, under oath that he was a proper reporting authority. One would hope that the justice system would make it clear to a group like TSM that circumventing the law is unacceptable. That is what they did by not implementing an investigation and stopping Jerry from accessing kids. Instead the justice system (who had the legal and moral obligation) decided to go after non mandatory reporters. TSM should have been first on the prosecutors list if your goal was to protect children.

Can you show where me people are saying TSM is innocent in all of this? You do realize many people screwed this thing up. DPW, MM, Doc D, MM's father, PSU admin, TSM, parents, police.....etc. It isn't an either or thing, but I get the anger at TSM not having the bullseye. That isn't and wasn't my point. Saying CSS are less guilty is like getting a participation trophy...yippee.

 

[Connorpozlee]

Except that Dr. Jack admitted, on the stand, under oath that he was a proper reporting authority. One would hope that the justice system would make it clear to a group like TSM that circumventing the law is unacceptable. That is what they did by not implementing an investigation and stopping Jerry from accessing kids. Instead the justice system (who had the legal and moral obligation) decided to go after non mandatory reporters. TSM should have been first on the prosecutors list if your goal was to protect children.

I’m not sure why my post was quoted in here, but I agree with you completely. It’s baffling that TSM has gotten a completely free ride in this whole ordeal.

 

[Bob78]

Normal grown men wouldn't have done anything in the shower for the cop to say that. They would just take a shower and leave.

I'm not supporting Sandusky's behavior. He's not normal. Like I've said, nothing I believe about this whole mess makes any sense if Jerry is innocent.

In this situation, I'm not convinced he understood the risk he was taking, but I also don't think he believed he was doing anything wrong either.

Regardless of what he understood or believed, he was exhibiting grooming behavior as defined by the experts, and was told to stop at least once (and likely more than that).

One of TSM's (and CYS/DPW/LE) failures in '01 was to not strongly advise him and leave no doubt that what he was doing was wrong in many ways. (I think that is part of "indicating" him and putting a plan in place to prevent further contact?) At that point, goofy ol' Jer or not, he has to take on adult responsibilities and stop the behavior or face severe consequences. And no matter his personality or make-up, he was capable of responsible, adult behavior when he had to be in probably all other areas of his life.

Instead, TSM gave him laughable advice and gave him a set of keys to the pool in a hotel in town.

This is why, imo, even if JS is truly innocent of CSA et.al., he still bears nearly all blame for all that happened because he just could not understand right from wrong as the average adult does. Any leftover blame can be divvied up between the expert agencies who knew something, but failed to act.

Edit: I posted this before reading Wensilver's posts. She understands it and lays it out much better than I can.

 

[86Engineer]

We refer to that in the real world as passing the buck. Whether or not someone else could do right or wrong is irrelevant as that is out of your control. By passing the buck you're just assuming someone else will do the right thing.....guess what, they don't always do that. No doubt TSM should have said WTF and exposed Jerry right away and started interviewing any and all kids, but they didn't. Blaming TSM while sounds awesome in theory is a day late and a dollar short.

Nobody has ever said on this site...look away from TSM or glad they weren't investigate....so exactly who are you talking to there. Many are curious as to why, but that didn't happen. Yelling TSM is the equivalent of yelling squirrel to a dog at this point in time.

Sometimes passing the buck is the proper thing to do, especially in situations where someone else is better equipped to handle it.

Also, what's not entirely clear still is what exactly they were passing the buck on. The actions of no less than 6 people, all college educated men, including the only true witness, tell me that they weren't sure themselves, so they passed the buck to someone they thought was better equipped to handle it. Keep in mind that all the while, the only true witness was still free to do whatever he wanted to do, and no one told him otherwise.

 

[WyomingLion]

I’m not sure why my post was quoted in here, but I agree with you completely. It’s baffling that TSM has gotten a completely free ride in this whole ordeal.

Sorry fat fingers

 

[LaJolla Lion]

Sometimes passing the buck is the proper thing to do, especially in situations where someone else is better equipped to handle it.

Also, what's not entirely clear still is what exactly they were passing the buck on. The actions of no less than 6 people, all college educated men, including the only true witness, tell me that they weren't sure themselves, so they passed the buck to someone they thought was better equipped to handle it. Keep in mind that all the while, the only true witness was still free to do whatever he wanted to do, and no one told him otherwise.

No doubt about that, but as the President of the University or a CEO of a company, are you not responsible for your institution? The witch hunt was wrong, but these guys didn't document this very well and the stuff they did have in emails simply look bad. I'm not saying they had some massive cover up, but they fumbled some things. TSM did as well as did many others. Somehow it's taboo to say people at PSU messed up as well as others. Some just want to hear it was anyone but CSS who made mistakes.

 

[Connorpozlee]

Sorry fat fingers

I can relate to that infliction.

 

[marshall23]

It still doesn't matter. Jerry could be Mother Teresa for all I care.

Your defined role with the kids charity you founded is solely that of Chairman, Fundraiser and Emcee at events. Nowhere in those roles is the requirement that you be alone with a Second Mile minor.

So unless Jack "Swim Trunks" Raykovitz is bullshitting the jury - Jerry's role with Second Mile did not include working with those children in any kind of one-on-one capacity. It did not include counseling, being a "father figure", mentoring, babysitting, or even 'teaching them personal hygiene". Let's not even get into those bullshit sleepovers - which is a radioactive activity for ANYONE to be doing.

Once Tim was in front of Jack complaining that Jerry was tooling around with a Second Mile kid up on campus, and Tim consequently bounced ALL kids from being in campus buildings with Jerry, Jack should have immediately gotten with Jerry and slapped him upside the head reading him the riot act.



I don't give a rat's ass what McQueary said. I don't give a rat's ass what Schultz did. I don't give a shit whether CYS/CPS/911 or the National Guard was ever called. I sure as hell don't give a damn about Fina/Freeh's bullshit "secret emails". Tim Curley sat with the CEO of Second Mile. That leader, and by extent the charity VP and the Board, are all now fully aware of Jerry accessing a Second Mile kid in clear Out-Of-Program contact.

Once those leaders chose NOT to shut down that access, they left Jerry open to Aaron Fisher and the others. So whether these guys are all liars or not is irrelevant, Raykovitz had a chance to mitigate risk and consciously chose not to.

For the life of me, why Zig doesn't acknowledge that?

Sorry for shouting, but Jeezus - Swim Trunks? And we continue to circle the drain for years over the same bullshit on McQueary, Curley, Schultz & Spanier. It would have been a no-brainer for Fina & McGettigan to just nail Raykovitz & Genovese from the start, have Linda Kelly grandstand about the legal-ethical-moral obligation of charity officials in the oversight of charity clients abused by their charity chairman, which neither of those ASSHOLES ever needed McQueary and his bullshit for.

So instead, the Arsonists Fina, McGettigan & Eshbach burn the place down, with the help of Louis Freeh, over some crummy cover-up that didn't happen to a victim they never got off their asses to ever identify, over a crime that didn't happen.

It would be nice if someone from the McQ clan would point that out.

a 14 year old "victim" who made a statement that nothing happened that night......didn't fit the Kelly, Fina Eshbach fable so in the immortal (or immoral) words of McGettigan, "God only knows."

 

[LundyPSU]

No one has testified that Tim met with Jack so that TSM could report him or investigate. Maybe that was an expectation but has not been stated by anyone as being the purpose of Tim meeting with Jack. The purpose was for Tim to get Jack to reinforce that Jerry could not bring kids into Lasch, etc. Interestingly, Tim took no other actions to restrict access.

Did TSM fail? Of course they did, probably way more than just the 2001 incident. I don't think anyone other than Jack R. or Katherine G. would argue that. That doesn't mean PSU didn't make a mistake in how they handled it. Of course there is hindsight bias and maybe they did think they were doing the right thing based on the information they had at the time. But, it was clearly a mistake. Don't need to ascribe bad intentions, because I don't believe there were any.

 

[fizzyskittles]

Except that Dr. Jack admitted, on the stand, under oath that he was a proper reporting authority. One would hope that the justice system would make it clear to a group like TSM that circumventing the law is unacceptable. That is what they did by not implementing an investigation and stopping Jerry from accessing kids. Instead the justice system (who had the legal and moral obligation) decided to go after non mandatory reporters. TSM should have been first on the prosecutors list if your goal was to protect children.
By not going after Dr. Jack with the same vigor as others it shows a bias on your part. Carry on.

Maybe penn state didn’t have phones in 2001?

 

[86Engineer]

No doubt about that, but as the President of the University or a CEO of a company, are you not responsible for your institution? The witch hunt was wrong, but these guys didn't document this very well and the stuff they did have in emails simply look bad. I'm not saying they had some massive cover up, but they fumbled some things. TSM did as well as did many others. Somehow it's taboo to say people at PSU messed up as well as others. Some just want to hear it was anyone but CSS who made mistakes.

Well, I can only speak for myself and I agree that they (CSS) messed up, but I don't think it was criminal. However, for some of the others that have gotten a pass so far, it may have been criminal.

I totally agree about the documenting part. I take better notes when I call Verizon.

 

[Zenophile]

Can I play this game too?

Which of the people below KNEW of another earlier accusation and discussed being vulnerable for not reporting? In fact they discussed telling Jerry they knew about the earlier accusation and that too was presented as evidence at Spanier's trial. Then they discussed being vulnerable for not making a call to DPW. How do you think those words looked to investigators? I'll give you a hint....not very good.

A. Joe Paterno
B. Grahm Spanier
C. Tim Curley
D. George Shultz
E. Jack Raykovitz


Yes Jack should have and could have done much more to stop Jerry. Who has said otherwise? Can you point out one post where people are saying TSM did a great job? Just one post as I'm not seeing those posts. It is possible to have more than one person screw up and that is what actually occurred.

I'm not playing games. Notifying the man who could immediately restrict Jerry's access to children isn't passing the buck.

 

[Zenophile]

No doubt about that, but as the President of the University or a CEO of a company, are you not responsible for your institution? The witch hunt was wrong, but these guys didn't document this very well and the stuff they did have in emails simply look bad. I'm not saying they had some massive cover up, but they fumbled some things. TSM did as well as did many others. Somehow it's taboo to say people at PSU messed up as well as others. Some just want to hear it was anyone but CSS who made mistakes.

It's not taboo to say they messed up, in fact it's ludicrous to deny that theirs was the wrong plan in hindsight. However referring to their plan of notifying the people who should have recognized this pattern & did have the immediate ability to stop it as "passing the buck" is equally ludicrous.

 

[marshall23]

I'm not playing games. Notifying the man who could immediately restrict Jerry's access to children isn't passing the buck.

A man eminantly more qualified to make the call.

 

[kevina001]

Your defined role with the kids charity you founded is solely that of Chairman, Fundraiser and Emcee at events. Nowhere in those roles is the requirement that you be alone with a Second Mile minor.

So unless Jack "Swim Trunks" Raykovitz is bullshitting the jury - Jerry's role with Second Mile did not include working with those children in any kind of one-on-one capacity. It did not include counseling, being a "father figure", mentoring, babysitting, or even 'teaching them personal hygiene". Let's not even get into those bullshit sleepovers - which is a radioactive activity for ANYONE to be doing.

Hindsight bias to the extreme here. No, Jerry wasn't required to work with these children, or have them at his house. He did it because he liked it. Did he do these things as a way to groom them for abuse? It's possible. But there wouldn't be a reason for people to think anything of it AT THE TIME.