Jerry Sandusky “Rot in Hell” UPDATED

That was the last shout to Jerry by a member of the public as he was whisked away in handcuffs (with hands in front which is a form of respect for someone just convicted of heinous crimes)  after bail was revoked. Jerry was convicted the evening of June 22, 2012 of 45 of 48 counts. The three not guilty counts involved endangerment of a child. Each victim had at least one guilty count attached to him. This is update 41.

For each 10 updates, we will have a new post.

Part One can be found here .

Part Two can be found here.

Part Three can be found here .

Part Four can be found here .

Freeh’s report can be found here

Last night, NBC news with Brian Williams aired a segment with one victim who was not part of the trial, but is suing. His name is Travis Weaver, age 30, a white man.  Jerry held him down on bed. Travis claims to have been abused from age 10 to 14 and alleges that Jerry threatened to get his dad fired (his dad worked for PSU) if he ever told anyone.

More about our Update 40/Matt: “Citing anonymous sources, NBC News reported Thursday  afternoon that Matt Sandusky’s willingness to testify prompted an abrupt decision by Jerry Sandusky and his  lawyers not to put the defendant on the witness stand.”

“Jerry and Dottie Sandusky adopted Matt in 1995 after bringing him into their home as a foster child. The couple tried to have children of their own but couldn’t conceive, Dottie Sandusky testified this week. They adopted six children, five of whom are males, including Matt.

Although he didn’t take the stand during his father’s trial on 48 counts of child sexual abuse, Matt Sandusky figured in other witnesses’ testimony.

The accuser known as Victim 4 said Matt Sandusky was in a shower with him at Penn State when the elder Sandusky began pumping his hands full of soap, a precursor to the physical contact the former coach called “horsing around.”

The younger Sandusky turned off his shower and left with a nervous look on his face, Victim 4 testified. He finished his shower in a different part of the on-campus locker room.

Dottie Sandusky said Matt shared a room with Victim 4 on a trip to the Alamo Bowl in Texas, where the now 28-year-old man said Jerry Sandusky demanded oral sex in a hotel bathroom.

Sandusky, 68, wrote in his autobiography “Touched” that his family met Matt through The Second Mile, a charity Sandusky founded for underprivileged children, when the boy was 7 or 8 and began visiting their home. He conceded that the road to Matt’s adoption, granted in the boy’s late teens, was rocky.

Matt Sandusky’s biological mother, Deborah Long, said shortly after Jerry Sandusky’s arrest in November that authorities ignored her concerns about her son’s relationship with his foster father. Matt went from being an outgoing child to a sullen teen, often hiding when Jerry Sandusky visited.

“This has been an extremely painful experience for Matt, and he has asked us to convey his request that the media respect his privacy. There will be no further comment at this time,” Matt Sandusky’s attorneys, Andrew Shubin and Justine Andronici, said in a statement Thursday.”

More About Travis Weaver

“Sandusky abused Weaver more than 100 times over four years beginning in 1992, when he was 10 years old, Weaver alleges in a lawsuit filed last year. He was not among the 10 alleged victims Sandusky is criminally charged with abusing.

Weaver met Sandusky through The Second Mile. The suit alleged Sandusky earned the boy’s trust with gifts and trips to sporting events. Sandusky abused him in the locker rooms at Penn State’s football facility, at Sandusky’s home and when the boy traveled to another state with Sandusky for a Penn State bowl game, according to the suit.

“In telling his story he is able to vanquish the guilt and sorrow he expressed to us after having read about Sandusky’s indictment and all the other children affected by Sandusky’s abuse,” Weaver’s attorney, Jeff Anderson, said in a statement.”

Sandusky’s adopted son says he was abused

[The Morning Call 6/21/12 by Peter Hall and Adam Clark]

 

REFORM Puzzle Piece

Update 42/July 10, 2012. The following updates have occurred since the conviction:

(1) “Jerry Sandusky’s adopted son  revealed to police he had been sexually abused by the convicted pedophile – but worried he would be charged with perjury for not admitting the attacks under oath to a grand jury.

Matt Sandusky, now 33, reportedly  can be heard on a 25-minute recording admitting to officers that  he had been abused by the man who adopted him when he was a  teenager.”

Sandusky’s adopted son ‘feared he would be charged with perjury’ after failing to admit he was sexually abused at grand jury trial [Daily Mail 6/26/12 by Louise Boyle]

(2)”Debra Long fought the court system over her son’s placement in the home of the famed Penn State assistant football coach, who was convicted Friday of sexually abusing 10 boys.

Her objections, which she discussed in a December interview with The Associated Press, add a new dimension to the grim trial testimony that illustrated how Sandusky wooed the victims he culled from his charity for at-risk youth.

Prosecutors said Sandusky used gifts, trips and access to Penn State’s vaunted football program to attract and abuse vulnerable boys he met through the charity, The Second Mile.

“If they’d have listened, these boys didn’t have to be abused,” Long said. “They would have found the problem back then, and a whole lot of kids wouldn’t be victims now.”

Instead, she said, “we couldn’t get anything done. It was Jerry Sandusky. He started The Second Mile home. He could’ve done nothing wrong.”

Matt Sandusky said that Jerry Sandusky, once Hall of Fame coach Joe Paterno’s heir apparent, began sexually abusing him in the late 1980s, when he was 8 years old, and continued until he was 15, according to a police interview recording that NBC aired Tuesday.

He was placed in foster care with the Sandusky family in January 1995, about a month after he set fire to a barn and several months after Long tried to cut him off from Sandusky and The Second Mile.

Matt Sandusky, who was adopted after he turned 18, described for investigators showering with the ex-coach and trying to avoid being groped in bed, according to the police recording. He said he was undergoing therapy, that his memories of abuse were only now surfacing and that he was coming forward so his family would know what happened.

His attorneys confirmed the recording’s authenticity to the AP, but declined to comment beyond a statement.

“Although the tape was released without Matt’s knowledge or permission, it illustrates that he made the difficult decision to come forward and tell the painful truth to investigators despite extraordinary pressure to support his father,” the lawyers, Justine Andronici and Andrew Shubin, wrote in the statement.

Jerry Sandusky hasn’t been charged with abusing his son. Unless Matt Sandusky alleges rape, which he didn’t do in the police recording, the ex-coach cannot be charged criminally based on his son’s accusations, because of the statute of limitations.

In the December interview with the AP, Long said that Sandusky was pushy, was controlling and estranged Matt from his birth family — but that Centre County’s court system ignored her concerns because of Sandusky’s stature.

Long did not return several messages left for her on Monday and Tuesday.

Records provided to AP by Long in December show that after Matt Sandusky attempted suicide in 1996, his probation officer wrote, “The probation department has some serious concerns about the juvenile’s safety and his current progress in placement with the Sandusky family.”

Despite those concerns, probation and child welfare officials recommended continued placement with the Sandusky family, and the judge overseeing his case agreed.

Centre County President Judge Thomas Kistler, who joined the bench in 1997 and was not involved in Matt Sandusky’s juvenile case, said he saw “legitimate questions” about the decision to keep Long’s son in the Sandusky home, but “I can’t shed any light on them.”
“In the early years of his relationship with Jerry Sandusky, Matt would hide behind a bedroom door and beg his mother to tell the coach he wasn’t home when he spotted Sandusky pulling in the driveway, Long said.

Her son never said why.

“Nobody could ever get that out of him. But then again, Matt was afraid of Jerry,” she said.

Long said Matt was a good kid but began acting out after Sandusky entered the picture, and his behavior got progressively worse. She became alarmed by Sandusky’s controlling behavior and tried to stop visitation in the fall of 1994.

But Sandusky continued taking Matt out of school, without her knowledge or consent, she said.

“I didn’t like his treatment of Matt,” she said. “I thought he was a little too possessive, and it was my son, not his son.”

In early December 1994, Matt set fire to a barn. He spent his 16th birthday, on Dec. 26, in juvenile detention. On Jan. 6, 1995, records show, he was placed in foster care — with the Sandusky family.

Long said she knew Matt would be placed in a Second Mile foster home but didn’t think it would be with the Sandusky family. Of all the foster families in Centre County, “he had to end up with that one,” she said. It struck her as odd.

“Jerry told Matt that he had a judge ready to sign the order and nobody could stop it,” she said. “He told Matt before we ever went to court that I wouldn’t win against him. Matt came right to me and told me, he said, ‘Mom, Jerry said you wouldn’t win against him.'”

Long was initially limited to a half-day a month with her son. Her lawyer repeatedly petitioned the judge for greater access.

Matt attempted suicide in March 1996, swallowing 80 to 100 pills, according to the probation department report.

He referred to it in the recent police interview.

“I know that I really wanted to die at that point in time,” he said.

But he nevertheless indicated he wanted to remain in the Sandusky home.

“I would like to be placed back with the Sandusky’s, I feel that they have supported me even when I have messed up,” Matt Sandusky wrote shortly after the suicide attempt. “They are a loving caring group of people.”

Long said she once called the Sandusky house when Matt’s biological brother, Ronald, was in an accident. She said Sandusky’s wife, Dottie, answered the phone and said, “What are you calling him for? It’s no longer his brother.”

“I said, ‘I’m sorry, but the same blood courses through his veins (that) courses through his brother’s veins. They’re not separated by a name change,'” Long recalled. “She was downright rude.”
Birth mom: I raised questions about Jerry Sandusky

[Fox News 6/27/12 by Associated Press]

(3) Finally someone questions Dottie’s role. Is Dottie Sandusky guilty of child sexual abuse, too? [Fox News 6/25/12 by Dr. Keith Ablow]

“Jerry Sandusky has been found guilty of dozens of charges relating to him  sexually abusing boys he was supposedly mentoring.  His adopted son claims  that he was victimized, too. Yet Sandusky’s wife Dottie has testified she never  suspected her husband was hurting anyone, ever. And the abuse occurred, in part,  inside the Sandusky home, while Dottie was reportedly there.

After harrowing, painful testimony from a victim was presented in court,  Dottie Sandusky  even shared a chuckle with her husband Jerry, the  pedophile and serial rapist who anally raped boys and wrote them love  letters.

Presuming that Dottie Sandusky is not a pedophile herself, who enjoyed  listening in on the suffering of rape victims (something that would require  extensive investigation of Mrs. Sandusky, criminally and psychologically), then  she lived with a serial rapist and never consciously suspected him of  wrongdoing.

How can that be?

One possibility is that Dottie Sandusky’s entire life story has been one of  burying the facts, again and again, in order to preserve some semblance of  normality.  Children who are themselves traumatized, again and again–and  who never could face just how bad things were–sometimes grow up into adults who  are subject to pathological denial–instinctively burying their heads in the  sand, because it is what they have always done.

Indeed, people victimized or traumatized in childhood often recreate and  attempt to triumph over the earliest chapters of their life stories by selecting  spouses who are just as dangerous–full of potential violence-but who don’t  express it toward them (but may well toward others).

Male predators are on the lookout for these psychologically blind, deaf and  dumb women, because they offer camouflage from being seen as deviant.  Who  better to marry to perpetrate a fiction than someone who has always gravitated  toward fiction as an antidote to harsh realities.

Of course, there is another possibility:  There are people in the world  who have horrifically violent and abusive fantasies, but may swear to themselves  and others that they do not.  Such individuals may “recruit” destructive  people into their lives, in order to vicariously enjoy their aggression.   In this way, they are assailants “by proxy.”

(4) Sandusky to appeal based on “ineffective counsel”

“Sandusky’s defense team plans to file a motion for appeal, claiming he had ineffective counsel, defense attorney Karl Rominger said Sunday. Under Pennsylvania law, that motion cannot be filed until after sentencing.

If Cleland agrees to a hearing on the motion, lead defense attorney Joe Amendola would step aside and appear as a witness, the attorney said. Rominger said either he or another attorney would argue the motion.

The appellate claim will be based on Amendola’s “talking to the media,” Rominger said. And a linchpin of the appeal will be prosecutor Joe McGettigan’s statements during his closing argument, when he told jurors that Sandusky could have proclaimed his innocence during an interview with NBC’s Bob Costas. That violates Sandusky’s right to post-arrest trial silence, Rominger said.”

Attorney: Sandusky to appeal child sex abuse convictions

[CNN 6/26/12]

(5) “The look on his face… no real emotion, just kind of accepting,” said juror Joshua Harper, a high school teacher in State College, Pa., in an interview with NBC. “You know, because he knew it was true.”

Harper on Saturday morning became the first juror to speak publicly about the experience of the five men and seven women who effectively handed the 68-year-old former Penn State coach a sentence of life in prison. The jurors convicted Sandusky on 45 counts related to the sexual abuse of 10 young boys over a 15-year period. The convictions carry a maximum sentence of 442 years in prison.

But the jury also acquitted Sandusky on three counts, and Harper said it did so because testimony related to those incidents was essentially incomplete.

One indecent-assault charge concerned an incident with Victim 6. The man, now 25, testified that Sandusky gave him a bear hug in the shower, but that at certain points, he just “blacked out” and could not remember other details.

The second acquittal was an indecent assault charge related to Victim 5, who said Sandusky had touched him in the shower.

The third was an involuntary deviate sexual intercourse charge for Victim 2, the boy that graduate student and football assistant Mike McQueary said he saw and heard being attacked in a locker room shower.  The jury did not acquit Sandusky of any other counts related to Victim 2, Harper said.

“The reason we held back is because… McQueary did not see any actual penetration,” Harper told NBC. “I kept just going back in my mind: ‘Why would McQueary  lie about this?’ He was sure. He made it very apparent that he saw something that was wrong and extremely sexual.”

Jurors expressed misgivings over inconsistencies in testimony, which slowed the decision-making process, Harper said.  He said they stayed patient and worked systematically, but did not say which inconsistencies had been the sticking points. Overall, the jury deliberated 21 hours.

During the deliberation, Sandusky’s adopted son said that he, too, had been a victim. Matt Sandusky is one of six adopted children in the Sandusky family, and had been a participant in Sandusky’s charity, the Second Mile, where he found some of the young boys he abused.

Because the jury was sequestered, they did not hear of the allegations until after the verdict was read, Harper said. The 12 jurors looked at each other as they were told.

“That was just confirmation,” Harper said. “We had suspected that, but we had no evidence of it. It just solidified our decision.”

Juror on Jerry Sandusky’s crimes: ‘He knew it was true’

[Los Angeles Times 6/23/12 by Laura J. Nelson]

(6)”Jerry Sandusky’s lawyers said Saturday they tried to quit at the start of jury selection in his child sex abuse trial because they weren’t given enough time to prepare, raising an argument on the trial’s speed that could become the thrust of an appeal.”

Jerry Sandusky convicted: Judge denied Sandusky lawyers’ request to resign before trial

[CBS News 6/24/12 by Associated Press]

(7) “In the chilly November days following Jerry Sandusky’s indictment on child sexual abuse charges, his likeness was scrubbed from the giant mural splashed across a brick wall at a bookshop near Penn State’s campus, replaced by a blue ribbon to signify awareness for abuse victims.

And after Sandusky’s conviction Friday on 45 out of 48 counts related to the child sex abuse case, artist Michael Pilato has returned to put some finishing touches on his mural. Sandusky has now been replaced by Dora McQuaid, an advocate for victims of domestic and sexual violence and a Penn State grad.

Pilato’s mural, titled “Inspiration,” stands across the street from the Penn State campus in State College, Pa. The painting features dozens of lauded members of the university community. Sandusky, once seated in a chair in a prominent section of the painting, was erased the weekend after the scandal broke, leaving an empty section. But Pilato waited for the verdict to bring closure — or at least a modicum of it — before filling the disgraced former assistant coach’s chair. Pilato told the Centre Daily Times he knew instantly he wanted to paint in McQuaid, a victim of sexual abuse who wrote poetry to help the healing process. McQuaid and Pilato felt it was important to portray the scandal that rocked the sleepy Pennsylvania town. “What we’re seeing is a revolution in the willingness to talk openly and publicly about these experiences that are most often suffered in silence,” she said.”

Sandusky’s Portrait Replaced on Penn State Mural

[Time 6/27/12 by Nick Carbone]

(8)”Pennsylvania taxpayers have underwritten nearly $1.4 million in contributions to The Second Mille, the disgraced charity founded by convicted pedophile Jerry Sandusky where testimony showed he groomed some of the boys he later molested.

The taxpayer-subsidized donations — which support The Second Mile’s summer camp and an annual Leadership Institute — come through a controversial scholarship program called the Educational Improvement Tax Credit, or EITC, that may be dramatically expanded as lawmakers in Harrisburg look to pass a new state budget this weekend.

Despite the uproar over Sandusky, the former Penn State assistant football coach who was convicted last week on 45 of 48 charges that he molested 10 boys, The Second Mile continues to receive the state-backed donations — $122,861 in the current fiscal year, according to records.

Officials with the state Department of Community and Economic Development said the State College-based charity could soon lose its status as an approved Educational Improvement Organization — not because of Sandusky but because its assets may be sold to an outfit based in Texas, out of the state.”

“State records provided Wednesday to the Daily News show that the state-backed contributions to The Second Mile began in the 2004-05 fiscal year and have added up to $1,378,159.

Current Second Mile President Dave Woodle said in a phone interview yesterday that EITC funds have paid about 50 percent of the costs of two programs, an annual Leadership Institute program for hundreds of high school students and summer Challenge Camps for youth. The camps are slated to go ahead next month despite the charity’s woes, including the Sandusky verdict. He noted that none of Sandusky’s criminal activity involved either of the two programs.”

Pa. taxpayers underwrite Sandusky charity

[Philadelphia Inquirer 6/28/12 by Will Bunch]

(9)”There is controversy over Jerry Sandusky still getting a  state pension after being found guilty of forty-five molestation charges.

Under Pennsylvania law, a pension can only be forfeited  for “act one-forty” crimes — like extortion and bribery. Those crimes don’t cover sexual  abuse or violent crimes.  Therefore, Sandusky will still receive $59,000 a year for life.”

Sandusky still getting $59K yearly state pension

[Fox DC 6/28/12 by Associated Press]

(10)”E-mail correspondence among senior Penn State officials suggests that Paterno influenced the university’s decision not to formally report the accusation against Sandusky to the child welfare authorities, the person said.”

“But the e-mails uncovered by investigators working for Louis J. Freeh, the former F.B.I. director leading an independent investigation ordered by the university’s board of trustees, suggest that the question of what to do about McQueary’s report was extensively debated by university officials. Those officials, the e-mails show, included the university’s president, Graham B. Spanier; the athletic director, Tim Curley; the official in charge of the campus police, Gary Schultz; and Paterno.

The existence of the e-mail correspondence was first reported by CNN. The person familiar with aspects of the Freeh investigation was not identified because the investigation is continuing and no one is authorized to speak about it.

The Penn State e-mails, according to the person with knowledge of the Freeh investigation, indicate that Spanier, Curley and Schultz seemed at one point to favor reporting the assault to the state child welfare authorities, recognizing that if they did not, they could later be vulnerable to charges that they had failed to act.

But in one e-mail, Curley wrote that after talking to Paterno, he no longer wanted to go forward with that plan.

In the end, the university told no one other than officials with Second Mile, the charity for disadvantaged youngsters founded by Sandusky.

The e-mails suggest that the officials decided that Sandusky could be dealt with by barring him from taking children onto the campus and encouraging him to seek professional help.

Not reporting the accusation to the authorities, the men determined, was the more “humane” way to deal with Sandusky, according to the e-mails.

Curley and Schultz were indicted last fall on charges of failing to report the assault to the police and child welfare authorities, and then lying about their conduct under oath before a grand jury. Curley and Schultz, through their lawyers, have insisted that they were never told of the graphic nature of the assault in the showers, saying they were under the impression that it had amounted to little more than “horsing around.”

Lawyers for Curley and Schultz, contacted about the e-mails, issued a statement saying in part: “For Curley, Schultz, Spanier and Paterno, the responsible and ‘humane’ thing to do” in 2001 “was to carefully and responsibly assess the best way to handle vague but troubling allegations. Faced with tough situations, good people try to do their best to make the right decisions.”

Spanier, who resigned as Penn State’s president in November, declined to comment when reached by phone on Saturday.”

“McGinn said there was no evidence that Joe Paterno interfered with any investigation and that the e-mails could be interpreted in various ways. “If Joe Paterno wanted to interfere, why did he report the incident immediately” to university officials? McGinn said, adding that he was disturbed by what he called the “selective leaking” of the e-mails. “You are only seeing a piece of the puzzle,” he said.

Wick Sollers, a lawyer for the Paterno family, said in a statement: “To be clear, the e-mails in question did not originate with Joe Paterno or go to him, as he never personally utilized e-mail.

“From the beginning, Joe Paterno warned against a rush to judgment in this case. Coach Paterno testified truthfully, to the best of his recollection, in the one brief appearance he made before the grand jury. As he testified, when informed of an incident involving Jerry Sandusky in 2001, Coach Paterno followed university procedures and promptly and fully informed his superiors. He believed the matter would be thoroughly and professionally investigated.”

The e-mails have been turned over to the state attorney general’s office.”

“Freeh’s investigation, begun last fall, is expected to be the most thorough examination of the university’s dealings with Sandusky, including the question of whether there was a cover-up involving the 2001 accusations.

To that end, Freeh’s investigation has identified previously undisclosed billing records showing that officials of the university, when deciding what to do in 2001, consulted with the law firm that served as its outside counsel on their legal obligation to report the assault, the person familiar with the inquiry said. It is unclear from the billing records whether the officials disclosed the nature of the accusations against Sandusky or simply made a general inquiry. Several hours were billed, beginning on a Sunday night, the person said. The lawyer who represented the university at the time did not return a phone call requesting comment.

Freeh’s investigators are also exploring the circumstances surrounding Paterno’s decision to eventually hire McQueary as an assistant, the person familiar with the investigation said. McQueary, a former quarterback for Paterno at Penn State, has testified under oath that when he first contacted Paterno to inform him of what he had seen in the showers, Paterno assumed he was calling to ask for a job, and that Paterno brusquely told him he would not be hired.       

McQueary was ultimately hired over another, more experienced candidate, and investigators are curious about whether that development came as a consequence of what he told Paterno that morning in 2001. 

It is not clear when Freeh’s investigation is expected to be made public.”

E-Mails Suggest Paterno Role in Silence on Sandusky

[New York Times 6/30/12 by Jo Becker]

Update 43/July 23, 2012

(1) Nike’s Chief Executive was friends with Paterno so much that their Child Development Center was named for him. After the Freeh report, they have dropped the Paterno name. Nike to remove Joe Paterno’s name from Child Development Center [Death and Taxes Magazine 7/13/12 by Carmel Lobello]

(2)Now 3 new men come forward claiming abuse from the 1970s and 1980s.”The men are the first alleged victims with complaints dating back to the 1970s against Sandusky, who was convicted in June of sexually abusing 10 boys over a 15-year period beginning in 1994, the newspaper said.

Police are aware of the men’s claims, said the article by reporter Sara Ganim, who won a Pulitzer Prize this year for her coverage of the scandal.

It was not clear if the men had been interviewed by former FBI director Louis Freeh, who last week released a report excoriating the late Pennsylvania State University football coach Joe Paterno and other school officials for failing to take steps for 14 years to protect children victimized by Sandusky.

Freeh’s report, commissioned by the Penn State board of trustees, did not mention any cases prior to the 1990s.

Nils Frederiksen, spokesman for the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s office, said he could not comment on matters before a grand jury. The grand jury investigation into the Sandusky case remains open.”

Paterno’s family vehemently disagrees with the Freeh report.

Three men claim earlier abuse by Sandusky: newspaper

[Reuters 7/16/12 by Dave Warner]

(3) Three more removals for Paterno

Paterno’s name removed from annual athletic award from his Alma Mater Brown University Paterno alma mater removes name from sports award [Chicago Tribune 7/17/12 by  Daniel Lovering/Reuters]

Halo on Penn State mura l(placed after his death) removed. Halo on Joe Paterno mural at Penn State removed by artist [Los Angeles Times 7/16/12 by Chris Barton]

Paterno statue outside stadium was removed 7/22/12. Joe Paterno statue taken down [ESPN 7/23/12 by Don Van Natta, Jr.]

(4) Key Trustee Board Finding left OUT of Freeh Report

“in November 2004, seven Penn State trustees proposed major reforms that would have strengthened their power over Spanier, then the university president, and other top officials such as Paterno. But the board never voted on the proposals. Three current trustees told Van Natta that Spanier and former board chair Cynthia Baldwin stopped the proposal from proceeding.

Joel Myers, a longtime trustee, said the Freeh investigators told him that if the good-governance proposal had been adopted by the board back in 2004, “This [crisis] could have been avoided.”

Avoided is probably the wrong word as Sandusky committed many of his crimes before 2004 and Freeh’s group showed evidence that top Penn State officials were aware of allegations as far back as 1998. But the reforms could have put a stop to things long before Sandusky’s arrest last November.

From Van Natta’s report:

“It was a big, missed opportunity,” said Al Clemens, another longtime trustee. “Back in 2004, we just knew there wasn’t enough accountability, and it seemed like a reasonable step to try to protect the university. It seemed like the right thing to do.”

After the good-governance proposal was discussed in a private board session in 2004, at least four young boys were sexually abused by Sandusky. Two trustees who spoke on condition of anonymity said they fear the board’s failure to adopt the good-governance proposal will be used by victims’ lawyers in the negligence lawsuits against Penn State.

“This could increase our liability,” a current trustee said, “possibly by millions.”

The other key point is that Freeh’s report had no mention of the terminated proposal. Although Freeh came down hard on the board in general terms, criticizing trustees for creating a culture of non-accountability, it seems odd he would have omitted such an important element from an otherwise thorough report.
This certainly raises more questions about the trustees, none of whom have resigned since the report came out, as well as Freeh and his investigative team.
Baldwin’s attorney claims she didn’t interfere with the board’s consideration of the good-governance proposal. ”

PSU trustees passed on reform in 2004

[ESPN 7/18/12 by Adam Rittenberg]

(5)Former PSU President drops lawsuit after Freeh Report

“Penn State University’s former president Graham Spanier is dropping a lawsuit that sought the release of his university emails involving convicted predator Jerry Sandusky.

Spanier moved Wednesday to dismiss the case he had filed in May, according to online court records.

He had sought the emails to refresh his memory before being interviewed by ex-FBI chief Louis Freeh as part of an investigation on behalf of the school’s board of trustees, according to his complaint.

The issue now appears moot because Freeh issued his report last week.”

“Spanier isn’t charged, but the 267-page report offered withering criticism of his leadership.”

“”By not promptly and fully advising the board of trustees about the 1998 and 2001 child sexual abuse allegations against Sandusky and the subsequent grand jury investigation of him, Spanier failed in his duties as president,” the report concluded.

Spanier’s lawyers have criticized the Freeh report, saying it contains inaccuracies. They didn’t return phone messages Wednesday from The Associated Press.”

Graham Spanier, Former Penn State President, Drops Lawsuit Againts University Over Email Access

[Huffington Post 7/18/12 by MaryClaire Dale]

(6) Pennsylvania Governor Corbett says PSU Top Officials Did Not Cooperate in Freeh Probe

“Former top officials at Pennsylvania State University did not fully cooperate with state investigators in the Jerry Sandusky case, Gov. Corbett said Thursday, and are likely now the focus of an investigation by the state Attorney General’s Office.

The governor, who as attorney general launched the child sexual-abuse investigation into Sandusky in 2009, said investigators had subpoenaed e-mails of top university officials, but did not receive critical exchanges until after Sandusky was charged last fall.

Those e-mails came to light last week in a report by former FBI Director Louis Freeh, who was hired by Penn State to assess the university’s handling of the matter.

The e-mails revealed that football coach Joe Paterno, former Penn State president Graham B. Spanier, and other top administrators were aware of allegations against Sandusky as long ago as 1998. According to Freeh, they show a conspiracy to cover up Sandusky’s wrongdoing.

“I am very disappointed in the lack of forthcoming evidence to the subpoena that was given to them by the Attorney General’s Office,” Corbett said in response to reporters’ questions at an unrelated news conference Thursday.

Asked whether he believed the university deliberately withheld the e-mails, Corbett said: “I think that is the subject of an investigation at the Attorney General’s Office right now.”

Attorney general’s spokesman Nils Frederiksen declined to discuss Corbett’s comments. He did say that Attorney General Linda Kelly had made it clear that the Penn State case remains “an active and ongoing investigation.”

Nonetheless, Corbett’s comments were notable in that they were the furthest the governor has gone in revealing details of his former office’s dealings with Penn State.

Although he did not name names, the governor blamed the university’s uncooperative stance on the prior administration, under Spanier.

Spanier resigned in November under pressure by the university’s board of trustees in the wake of the Sandusky scandal. He has not been charged with a crime, but sources close to an ongoing grand jury investigation have said he has recently become a potential target.

David La Torre, a spokesman for Penn State, would not comment on Corbett’s remarks.”

Corbett: Top PSU officials didn’t fully cooperate in probe

[The Inquirer 7/20/12 by Angela Couloumb]

(7) On July 23, 2012, the NCAA sanctioned PSU

The sanctions include the following:

• $60 million fine
• the loss of all the school’s victories from 1998-2011, knocking Joe Paterno from  his spot as major college football’s winningest coach. He now stands at #12 in all-time ranking and #7 for Division 1 after 111 wins are removed.  Bobby Bowden of Florida State will take the #1 spot with 377 wins vs the now 298 Paterno wins.
• four-year ban on postseason games that will prevent Penn State from playing for  the Big Ten title
• the loss of 20 scholarships per year over four years (The cap will be 65 scholarships instead of 85)
• five years’ probation
• any current or incoming football players are free to immediately transfer and  compete at another school

“Emmert fast-tracked penalties rather than go through the usual circuitous  series of investigations and hearings. The NCAA said the $60 million is  equivalent to the annual gross revenue of the football program. The money must  be paid into an endowment for external programs preventing child sexual abuse or  assisting victims and may not be used to fund such programs at Penn State.

“Football will never again be placed ahead of educating, nurturing and  protecting young people,” Emmert said.”

“There had been calls across the nation for Penn State to receive the “death  penalty,” and Emmert had not ruled out that possibility as late as last week —  though Penn State did not fit the criteria for it. That punishment is for teams  that commit a major violation while already being sanctioned.

Penn State has already agreed to not fight the sanctions.

Emmert said the university and the NCAA have signed a consent decree,  essentially a pact signing off on the penalties.”

Penn State fined $60M, Paterno’s wins vacated from 1998-2011

[Fox News 7/23/12 by The Associated Press]

Rally would have preferred the DEATH PENALTY. (Yes I am mean.)But all of these sanctions together could in effect be a slow death penalty.

(8) PSU Trustee Board President Resigns Ahead of Sanctions

“Steve Garban resigned Thursday from the Penn State Board of Trustees, becoming the first board member to step down following the release of a scathing report that found it was part of the failure that allowed a longtime sexual predator to prey on boys at the school.”

Penn State board member resigns over Sandusky scandal

[CNN 7/19/12]

Update 44/July 27,2012

Victim #2 ,who was the child in the shower that Mike McQueary eyewitnessed, has come forward with his lawyer to sue PSU. His lawyers released voicemails from September 2011 that were left for the now-grownup man. Ew!

“The lawyers said in a statement they have gathered “overwhelming evidence” of the abuse, and they released recordings of two voicemails they say were from Sandusky last year, both saying “love you” to the victim.

The voicemails are dated Sept. 12 and Sept. 19, 2011, less than two months before the former assistant coach was arrested on child sex abuse charges.

The second voicemail asks whether Victim 2 would like to attend Penn State’s next game.

Sandusky left “numerous” voicemails for their client in the fall of  2011, the attorneys said.”

“The statement from the attorneys said Victim 2 suffered “extensive sexual abuse over many years both before and after the 2001 incident.”

In the recording of a pair of voicemails released with the statement and posted online by the lawyers, a voice that purportedly is Sandusky’s expresses his love and says he wants to express his feelings “up front.”

“”Our client has to live the rest of his life not only dealing with the effects of Sandusky’s childhood sexual abuse, but also with the knowledge that many powerful adults, including those at the highest levels of Penn State, put their own interests and the interests of a child predator above their legal obligations to protect him,” the attorneys’ statement said.

The victim is not named.

The university said in a statement that it is taking the case seriously but cannot comment on pending litigation.”

Sept. 12, 2011 voicemail:
“…Jere. Um. I am probably not going to be able to get a hold of anybody. Um. Uh. Probably ought to just go forward. Uh. I would be very firm and express my feelings, uh, upfront. Um. But, uh, you know, there is nothing really to hide so. Um. If you want, give me a call. You can call me on my other cell phone or on this one, either one so. Alright, take care. Love you. Uh. Hope you get this message. Thanks.”
Sept. 19, 2011 voicemail:

“…Just calling to see you know whether you had any interest in going to the Penn State game this Saturday. Uh. If you could get back to me and let me know, uh, I would appreciate it and when you get this message, uh, give me a call and I hope to talk to you later. Thanks. I love you.”

Jerry Sandusky voicemails to “Victim 2” released by lawyers who plan to sue Penn State

[CBS News 7/26/12]

Update 45/August 21, 2012

(1) Possible porn ring being investigated

“U.S. Postal inspectors are leading a federal investigation into whether former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky shared child pornography with other individuals, CBS News has learned.

 

Analyzing a computer seized from Sandusky, investigators are also looking into whether he sent “seductive letters” across state lines for sexual purposes. Some of these letters were said to be sent to some of his sexual abuse victims.

 

CBS News has learned that at the end of 2011, allegations were forward by the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. that Sandusky used the mails to seduce individuals to cross state lines for sexual purposes, with trips and gifts offered. Investigators are looking at 6-7 victims who might have gotten letters.

 

Also in March of this year, U.S. Postal inspectors were tasked to investigate The Second Mile charity, which was founded by Sandusky. That investigation is on hold, awaiting for documents to be released by the State Attorney.

 

A source has been told that child pornography was found in at least one of Sandusky’s computers. According to the source, there is no evidence that the pornography was of his victims. There is also no mention of a ring or sharing of boys with others. CBS News investigative producer Pat Milton reports that a second source said that none of Sandusky’s victims have indicated that there was shared sex with them, Sandusky and any other individual.

 

The investigation is being carried out of the U.S. Postal Inspectors office in Harrisburg, Pa. and the U.S. Attorney Office of the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

 

“I haven’t heard a thing about this latest allegation,” Sandusky’s attorney Joe Amendola, told CBS News. “Jerry continues to maintain his innocence. We think the allegation is ridiculous.””

 

Feds probe possible Sandusky child porn ring

[CBS News 8/10/12 by The Associated Press]

Radar Online’s David Perel on 8/11/12 reported that Feds Question Another Man About Possible Sandusky Sex Ring. The probe is into whether a “prominent Penn State booster” engaged in  “illegal activity with children” along with Sandusky.

“In that interview a man claimed to be an eyewitness to sexual  abuse of boys by both Sandusky and a prominent Penn State  booster. Both the FBI and Postal Inspectors were present  during the interview and the man gave them details including  the time and place.

Now Radar has learned exclusively that the feds are following  up on the allegation and have questioned at least one other  man about them.

“After the interview with the man who claims to be an  eyewitness, law enforcement questioned another man involved in  the case and asked if he knew anything about it,” the source  said.

“They are taking the allegation seriously and they are  continuing to pursue it. The witness did not know if the boys  he saw are any of the already identified victims.”

While some headlines about the new investigation have  centered on possibly seductive letters Sandusky sent to his  victims and child porn sent through the mail, the even more  sickening allegations from the eyewitness could lead to  criminal charges against another Penn State-affiliated man and  the feds are pursuing the lead diligently, the source reveals.

“They are starting with the known victims in trying to run  this down,” the source says, “because unfortunately the eyewitness does not know who the boys are.”

“But the eyewitness did provide an exact place and time,  details that the feds are trying to check.

“This interview did not take place in the state of  Pennsylvania and there are documents linking the eyewitness to the man he claims abused children with Sandusky. There is  enough evidence that this is being taken very, very   seriously.”

So far none of Sandusky’s known victims have  been proven to been victimized by a booster and the feds  realize they may be hunting for new victims.”

(2) Sara Ganim investigates Second Mile in a 5-part report

August 12,2012 Part 1: In, 2009, Jerry “lost his clearance from the state to work with children, and charity officials were taking a stand.

It’s over, they told him.

And so, reluctantly, the then-65-year-old local hero walked into the annual statewide board meeting at the State College Ramada Inn in November 2009 and sat before dozens of volunteers who were giving their time because of what they thought he represented and what he had built.

Sandusky began to cry.

Letters would go to the public explaining that he was retiring to spend more time with family.

But, as Sandusky told his board in short detail, he was resigning because he had been accused a year earlier of molesting a boy, and he was under investigation.

Sandusky left the room in tears.

Members of the board were stunned. Some cried.”

Second Mile “abandoned its own internal review in December [2011] when criminal authorities asked officials to keep quiet about what they knew. Instead, the law firm hired to find out what happened decided to focus on how the children’s charity could move forward.

That decision to abort the internal review has left donors, parents, students, teachers, counselors, volunteer, many board members, some employees, and a shaken community with many unanswered questions.

The most basic being: What happened? What did charity officials know? And how did they respond?

These are questions that investigators are trying to answer.

A joint federal investigation is under way, and a team of officers from the FBI, the U.S. attorney’s office and U.S. Postal Inspection Service are searching records and interviewing people.”

Heads of Charity

“Almost since the beginning, its two leaders had been Raykovitz and Genovese.

Raykovitz is a licensed psychologist whom Sandusky tapped from the inception to lead the charity. Genovese was the program director for many years before becoming vice president.

And after working together for decades, they married in 2000.

Most who worked with them said the couple did a good job of balancing work and marriage, but their leadership style could come off as seclusive, and it turned off some employees.

Their salaries, which combined amounted to roughly 10 percent of the charity’s annual budget, also raised eyebrows.

When the Sandusky scandal came crashing down on the charity in November, Raykovitz almost immediately resigned under pressure from the board.

Genovese left with the first round of layoffs the charity was forced to make because financial support all but vanished.

Both have testified more than once before the statewide grand jury.

In addition, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service is investigating the charity and its mailings that boasted reaching more than 200,000 children in the state each year.

Those ongoing investigations affirmed new CEO David Woodle’s decision to abandon an internal investigation into how the charity handled the Sandusky scandal, which he initially said would bring answers that board members, employees and the community longed for.'”

Asset Transfer Halted

“Woodle is hoping to complete a transfer of assets — through orphans-court proceedings — that would allow the Texas charity, Arrow Ministries, to take over the programs. But those proceedings have been delayed by victims of Sandusky who are seeking to block any transfer of money before lawsuits are settled. ”

August 12 Part 2 The Force Out

“On Nov. 25, 2008, Jerry Sandusky told Second Mile leader Jack Raykovitz that he had been accused of something inappropriate by a Clinton County boy.

Sandusky said the accusation involved touching, over clothing, and he insisted he was innocent.

That boy later became known as Victim 1 — the teenager who is credited with launching the investigation that led to 10 child sex abuse victims, a nationally conversation about sex abuse, and allegations of a systematic cover-up at Penn State. Sandusky was convicted in June on 45 counts of sexual abuse of 10 victims.

Raykovitz, a well-known and respected child psychologist in central Pennsylvania, immediately removed Sandusky from all events involving children, and strongly urged him to stay away from children outside of charity functions, too.

A Children and Youth Services investigation began, and a hearing in 2009 — it was closed to the public because it wasn’t a criminal case — was scheduled.

Sandusky vowed to fight the allegations, but changed his mind after Victim 1 told authorities he was subjected to mutual oral sex over several years. When the hearing was over, Sandusky lost his clearance from Childline — the state sex abuse registry and reporting center.

For months, Sandusky told Raykovitz he was going to fight that Childline ruling. But when Sandusky dropped the appeal later in 2009, Raykovitz knew Sandusky needed to cut off all ties with The Second Mile.

If he did not resign, Raykovitz told Sandusky, he would go to the executive board members and have them do it on his behalf.

Further, Raykovitz wanted Sandusky to tell the board the truth about why he was leaving.

Adamant in his defense, Sandusky didn’t want to tell dozens of people — on the state and regional boards combined — what was happening for fear they would started talking to the public or to the press.

After all, no investigators had ever informed The Second Mile that Sandusky had been accused, and many at the time believed the allegations would prove to be false.

The emotional board meeting where Sandusky announced his resignation ended with a decision to hire Burson-Marsteller, the public relations firm credited with helping Tylenol recover from the cyanide crisis in 1982.

Larry Foster, the vice president for public relations at Burson-Marsteller, has a home in State College.

But when the recommendations from Burson-Marsteller came back, the board was torn about what to do next.

Confusion and rumors

Some board members thought The Second Mile should get out in front of what would inevitably become big news. Others wanted to keep quiet.

The divide was mostly between those involved in public relations and those in the legal and corporate world.

The board decided to stay silent, but the decision wasn’t unanimous.

As a result, Woodle helped Sandusky write a letter for the public announcing his retirement but making no mention of controversy.

Genovese publicly corrected people who said Sandusky resigned. He retired, she would say.

The confusion led to a firestorm of rumors when Sandusky was noticeably absent from the annual golf tournament in 2009.

As members were approached and asked why Sandusky — a figure at fundraisers for decades — was missing, they gave different explanations. Some said he had family obligations. Others said he was ill.

It caused confusion and rumors.

The following year, board members couldn’t agree on whether Sandusky should be invited, or if he should again be asked to stay away.

They settled on allowing him to go if he were to be invited by an individual, but choosing as an organization not to formally invite him.

This time, Sandusky showed up. And there were more whispers and speculation.

Again, some board members asked: Why aren’t we getting in front of this?

But by then, one thing had become clear: The Second Mile wasn’t going to be the entity to make this investigation public.

Anything it was preparing — letters for donors, for teachers, counselors, parents, and the community — would go out only in response to someone else making the news public.”

August 12 Part 3:

“I was kept out of things’

In January 2011, Second Mile’s married leaders Jack Raykovitz and Katherine Genovese were vacationing when their cellphone rang.

On the other end was development director Bonnie Marshall — someone Raykovitz had looped in about the Jerry Sandusky allegations immediately after she was hired in 2009.

“We were just served with a subpoena,” she said. “An investigator with the attorney general’s office — Tony Sassano — just came to the office.”

Raykovitz, at first, thought she said “Tony Soprano” and figured it was a joke. It wasn’t.

The request was broad. It asked for thousands of pages of documents, lists of participants, photographs going decades back, and travel logs along with employee and finance records.

Soon, Raykovitz and Genovese were called to testify.

By then, it had been 18 months since board members were told about the investigation, and some of them were getting antsy. Many were hearing rumors that the investigation was expanding — it was — and that The Second Mile was under scrutiny.

But few answers were coming from Raykovitz, said two of them, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

In hindsight, Marshall says it was the same default that Penn State went to: silence.

“As I’m reading the Freeh Report, I’m seeing the same parallel track,” she said, referencing the internal report of how Penn State handled the Sandusky case performed by a team lead by former FBI Director Louis Freeh.

“Only a few people need to know this. Circling the wagons,” she said.

Considering that Marshall was out every day asking people to write checks to the charity, “I’m feeling more and more that, yes, I was deliberately kept out of things I should have known about and that my staff should have known about,” she said. “We were brought in much later than what would have been above board.”

When a March 31, 2011, story ran in The Patriot-News detailing some of the grand jury investigation, The Second Mile responded with a statement that had been prepared based on recommendations from Burson-Marsteller. The release attempted to distance the organization from the allegations.

But the board decided it needed bigger guns. It hired Philadelphia law firm Archer & Greiner.

And unbeknownst to the full board, Raykovitz and Genovese already knew that the grand jury was going farther back than the allegations made by Victim 1. 

‘Nothing inappropriate happened’

“Has this ever happened before?”

That was the first thing Marshall asked when Raykovitz told her in early 2009 about the accusations against Sandusky.

“He looked at me and said, ‘Yes, we knew of something in 2001 that Tim Curley talked to me about.’ At that point, I didn’t particularly want to know any more and he didn’t volunteer anything else.”

Raykovitz was talking about the infamous February 2001 incident in which then-graduate assistant Mike McQueary witnessed sexual abuse in the showers of the Lasch Building, where the Penn State football program is housed. It’s the case of Victim 2.”

Second Mile Told of Victim 2 by Curley

“Authorities have said that after deciding to not report the abuse, Curley, Schultz and Spanier instead banned Sandusky from bringing children to campus showers.

Penn State officials talked to Sandusky about it, and Curley talked to Raykovitz.

According to the grand jury presentment, Curley told Raykovitz only that someone had witnessed something inappropriate, it was investigated and the result was to tell Sandusky not to shower on campus with kids.

Heim asked Raykovitz if anything inappropriate happened between the boy and Sandusky, and Raykovitz answered, “No.”

That’s what Raykovitz believed, based on what Curley had told him.

“They looked into it,” Raykovitz told Heim, according to Heim’s memory. “And nothing inappropriate happened.”

Raykovitz then asked Heim — a local real estate investor and someone who isn’t shy about his loyalty to Penn State, the Paterno family and many of the key players in this scandal — if he should relay this to the full board.

“And I said no,” Heim said.

“For five years, I worked out at the football facility, several times a week, and saw Jerry showering with children,” he said. “I said I don’t think it’s relevant. It happens every day at the YMCA. I remember the conversation specifically because it seemed like a nonstarter because of what Penn State said went on.”

On that advice, Raykovitz didn’t tell the board. He did have a talk with Sandusky, and told him to be more careful.

Sources say Raykovitz told Sandusky that as silly as it might sound, maybe he should wear swim trunks if he’s showering with kids after a workout.

Jack told me he had a few conversations with Jerry, that this isn’t the 1960s, you can’t do these things and not expect consequences and people to question motives,” Marshall recalled.

But Sandusky was stubborn, she said. He often fought with Genovese about programming, and — before the accusations — he had free reign to spend time alone with kids.

In fact, many of the victims who testified at his June trial said Sandusky used The Second Mile to continue having contact with them and even to divert others from talking to their parents. Victim 4 produced “contracts” Sandusky wrote under Second Mile letterhead that forced the youth to spend time with his molester.

During the months of uncertainty, when everyone knew Sandusky was under investigation but few were in the loop about how severe the accusations had become, sources say that Raykovitz was convinced that prosecutors had built a case around one boy’s shaky claims and a group of grown men who testified they had showered naked with Sandusky.

That, of course, wasn’t the case.

Fast-forward almost 10 years. Sandusky has just been charged with abusing 10 boys — most of them he met through his charity. It feels like Happy Valley has imploded, and The Second Mile is caught up in the firestorm.

Raykovitz has written and signed his letter of resignation and submitted it to the board.

But not everyone is convinced they should accept it.

The grand jury report says that he knew something in 2001, and some members are upset that Raykovitz didn’t speak up then.

Raykovitz in turn told a few members of his staff and the board’s executive members what Curley had told him.

Bruce Heim was one of them.

“It goes right to the heart of what Tim Curley said to the grand jury, and that is that Tim Curley told him that he didn’t want Jerry Sandusky on campus anymore in the showers, because we were in a day and age where that was inappropriate,” Heim said.”

Bruce Heim stands up.

“The executive staff knew in 2001, staff and executive board,” he said. “I stood up in that meeting and said that happened and I told them I advised Jack not to go to the board with it.”

The board accepted Raykovitz’s resignation on Nov. 13, 2011.”

August 12  Part 4: Department of Welfare does NOT inform Second Mile in 1998 as they were required to

“Required safety plans aren’t written

The Second Mile was supposed to know more.

Not necessarily in 2001.

But in 1998, when a six-week police investigation took place on Penn State’s campus after a boy — now known as Victim 6 — and his mother told police that Jerry Sandusky hugged him during a shower.

The state Department of Welfare got involved and conducted an investigation simultaneous to the criminal one. Both ended with no finding of wrongdoing after then-District Attorney Ray Gricar decided there wasn’t enough evidence.

Regardless of how it ended, there is a state law that says that if anyone associated with a child care agency is under investigation for child abuse, the agency and the welfare department are supposed to work together to develop a written safety plan until the investigation is complete.

That never happened,

It’s impossible to say for sure if it would have changed anything. But perhaps when Penn State athletic director Tim Curley went to Second Mile chief Jack Raykovitz in 2001 and said there was another incident reported in that same shower facility, Raykovitz might have responded differently.

Instead of hearing about a concern for the first time, Raykovitz would have known this was a second report.

DPW says it is not conducting an internal review of how the agency handled interactions with Sandusky during the last several decades.

As a foster and adoptive parent and the founder of a child care agency that aided foster families, Sandusky had a lot of dealings — mostly positive — with the welfare department.

But one, which would eventually lead to his arrest, was in November 2008, when Victim 1 told a counselor that he was being abused.

Immediately upon hearing the allegation, Gerald Rosamilia, director of Children and Youth Services in Clinton County, called The Second Mile.

Rosamilia was associated with the Clinton County branch of The Second Mile, and told Genovese over the phone that he needed to cut all ties with the charity because one of its employees was under investigation.

She pressed him about who. He told her it was Sandusky.

Several people with knowledge of that conversation say that Genovese responded by saying, “We’ve had to tell him to back off certain kids before.”

A source close to the couple vehemently denies that.

In any case, the state law that says a written safety plan should be put into place was again not followed.

There also has been criticism of Gov. Tom Corbett, who was attorney general for the first two years of the grand jury investigation.

Current and former Second Mile board members, their businesses and families, contributed more than $640,000 — according to a tabulation done by Deadspin.com — to various runs for office since 2003, including more than $200,000 to his gubernatorial campaign. Corbett accepted the money in 2010, knowing the charity’s founder was under investigation by his office.

Corbett also knew Sandusky was still attending fundraising events until his retirement but didn’t say anything to charity officials about the nature of the allegations.

Corbett says he couldn’t, citing grand jury secrecy rules. He also defends giving The Second Mile a $3 million grant after taking office as governor.

In interviews following Sandusky’s arrest, Corbett also said The Second Mile charity was never under investigation. Given the scope of current federal probes, some have questioned why he would not have taken a closer look at the organization before giving it state money.

The criticism continues to haunt him. Just last month, Corbett was caught on video angrily chastising a reporter who asked if the former AG would have done anything differently in the Sandusky investigation.

 

That state grant — it was later rescinded — was supposed to have gone to the building of a recreation center. The project has now been abandoned. But one of the charity’s biggest financial supporters is suing the organization over his donation to the project.

Local businessman Lance Shaner said he wants his $250,000 back, but the charity has resisted, saying it was advised not to move any money.

Scrutiny of Raykovitz, Genovese

There is no doubt that The Second Mile made a significant and memorable impact on the children who attended its summer camps and after-school programs.

As scrutiny mounted, and a black cloud settled above its State College offices, youngsters began writing in: “Please let me come to camp.” Several young adults who were former campers went on national television to talk about their positive experiences.

Even now, there remains a group of supporters who see the charity as the 11th victim of the Sandusky case.

They blame sensational headlines, such as those that offer no proof but theorize that The Second Mile was a prostitution ring for high-paying pedophiles.

It’s something that federal investigators could have in the scope of their probe, although there has been no indication that children at The Second Mile were abused by anyone but Sandusky.

Mostly, it’s just become a subject of conjecture on Twitter that started when a New Jersey man, Greg Bucceroni, told a blogger that he was brought to Second Mile fundraisers by a man who he says was sexually abusing him. However, he told the blogger he wasn’t a victim of Sandusky. Bucceroni then posted to the comments section of the Penn State student newspaper, The Daily Collegian, that he was a Sandusky victim from the 1970s but was “blackballed” from testifying at the trial.

Hours later, he wrote on Twitter that he and Sandusky talked about exchanging “sex with me for $$$” money. He also tweeted about being interviewed by federal investigators about Philadelphia “mobsters” sharing child pornography.

Bucceroni couldn’t be reached for comment for this story. But he did talk to a Philadelphia Inquirer reporter in December — on the heels of Sandusky’s arrest — about his convicted abuser, and that reporter said he never mentioned Sandusky or The Second Mile.

So there is overreaction on both sides.

It’s more likely federal investigators are focused on The Second Mile’s advertising.

Brochures and radio advertisements promoted that the charity reached more than 280,000 children across the state each year. Most of those children reached were simply given trading cards printed by The Second Mile with inspirational messages and helpful tips.

That’s how the numbers ballooned from reaching about 6,000 families through direct services — such as its leadership institute, counseling services, foster family support and early intervention programs.

Andrea Boyles, the director of the Youth Service Bureau in State College, said she noticed that distinction when she was considering acquiring some of The Second Mile programs in the wake of the scandal.

When compared to an organization such as Big Brothers Big Sisters in Centre County, the funding-to-child ratio for direct services is lower and the staff salaries are higher, said Boyles, who reviewed its finances before deciding to begin her own camps instead.

No doubt those larger numbers helped the charity raise an average of $2 million a year. Sandusky’s name and a strong affiliation with Penn State helped, too.

Despite criticism of some programs and the high salaries of the staff, Bonnie Marshall, who was the director of development for The Second Mile, said she never had any doubt the money it brought in was going to help kids.

But she paused at the concept that $230,000 — nearly one-eighth of what she raised — went to one household through the salaries of Raykovitz and Genovese.

Marshall wasn’t a fan of the couple’s management style, which she said was not open and inclusive.

“Talk to the other development directors who worked for me, they’d say my management style and [Raykovitz’s] management style was night and day,” she said. “As the vice president of development, I was not involved in the level of discussions that I felt would be helpful. It was just not an inclusive, collaborative atmosphere.”

Marshall has spent her career raising money.

She has raised money for several colleges within Penn State, the hospital and the annual Arts Fest.

But this was an experience complicated by working for a married couple.

“Should it have been? No,” she said, when asked if she thought the board should have allowed Raykovitz and Genovese to be in the top two charity positions after they married. “Any good management person would say that.”

Many people said Raykovitz and Genovese were very good at keeping their personal lives separate from work. So good that some board members didn’t even know they were married.

The ignorance was there own fault. The marriage is no secret — it’s disclosed on the charity’s tax forms each year.

Still, there was an infamous story about board members learning only by attending the couple’s Christmas party, held at their home, that they were husband and wife.

Claudia Williams was one of the newer board member who didn’t know about the relationship.

“I was surprised that it wasn’t something disclosed up front,” Williams said. “This was my first participation in a nonprofit board. So I think it’s fair to say I learned a lot about what I want to know up front, what to ask. I was completely naive to think that nonprofit meant nonprofit. Who knew Jack Raykovitz and Katherine Genovese were married and making a ton of money.”

Supporters of Raykovitz and Genovese argue that he could have been making a lot more money in private practice, and the salaries of the entire charity staff were on par with other nonprofits.

That hasn’t stopped the scrutiny.

Heim, who was interviewed by federal investigators and is scheduled to appear before the state grand jury on Wednesday, said the questions he was asked were mostly about the couple, their salaries, the decision to allow Sandusky to continue fundraising after losing his Childline clearance, and the conversations in 2001.

The fundraising fight

The pre-arrest fight over fundraising went down like this:

Many members of the board knew that Sandusky was the face of the charity and they needed him to continue to raise money.

Others felt all ties should be severed.

“I know the people who run the golf outing said, ‘He’s a big reason why people come — to see him.’ That makes sense, in my opinion. That’s not involved in programming,” said Louie Sheetz, executive vice president of marketing for his family’s chain of Pennsylvania gas stations and convenience stores.

Sheetz joined in 2009, and his first board meeting was Sandusky’s resignation. “Welcome to the board,” he said. “That was the very first agenda item.”

Myra Toomey, who was hired to work in the development office in 2011, said she wasn’t told about the accusations against Sandusky until after she accepted the job.

Now it’s a giant black mark on her resume.

But back then, it didn’t make her stop and think. Toomey and Marshall said they understood that when working with troubled kids, there is always a risk of being accused.

Sandusky had such a great reputation, it seemed impossible.”

August 12  Part 5

“Ex-board members felt excluded

In the 1970s, when Sandusky got the idea to build a children’s charity and began filling out tax forms, he told friends and neighbors, “In case you are asked, you ARE on the board of directors for The Second Mile.”

Those are his own words from his autobiography, “Touched: The Jerry Sandusky Story.”

The core of his charity still included some of those people he talks about in the book.

But as it grew into an institution with a very good reputation, community members with no personal ties to Sandusky began to take seats on the board.

Some of them served almost a decade and never really felt like they were making any major contributions.

“I didn’t even have the opportunity to even be a part of those discussions,” said Claudia Williams, who had recently become a board member when she read in The Patriot-News that Sandusky was under investigation.

She wasn’t yet on the board when Sandusky informed them of what was happening, and so she learned about it in the newspaper.

“I asked the foundation staff and leadership for some answers for some very direct questions, and when it became clear that I wasn’t going to get any answers, I resigned,” she said. “I’m disappointed, and I think the best way to describe it is that it was a tremendous learning experience for me.”

Two more former board members, both speaking on the condition of anonymity, said the executive committee was like an exclusive schoolyard club.

“Us volunteers were rank-and-file,” one said. “We showed up and went through the agenda and went home. I never felt tension, but I also felt I wasn’t really involved. I thought that might come with time, but it didn’t.”

The experience was so off-putting, that one former member has since declined all invitations to do similar work for other organizations. “I never thought advocates for kids could make me so upset. I’m just pissed,” the former member said.

Someone else, who was on the board for almost a decade, had a similar experience of being pushed out of important conversations.

Both recalled showing up, being told what would happen, and then voting for it without much discussion.

“The friendships seemed a little too close,” one of them said. “But having been on the board and having gone to events with all these people, I just assumed it was status quo. It wasn’t until after I was off the board that it seemed a little too close. I wasn’t enlightened about that until within the last year. I guess I was naive enough to believe what they said. If they said they reached 200,000 kids, I believed them.”

A third former board member said many people now feel they put their “ass on the line,” using their positions in the community to help raise money, and essentially were used by an organization that wasn’t transparent with them.

Look who’s on the board

Then there is Bryce Jordan’s rather bizarre story.

Jordan was the president of Penn State from 1983 to 1990. He is now retired in Texas, living with his wife. The all-purpose sports arena adjacent to the stadium at Penn State is named after him.

He was president when Sandusky’s defensive scheme helped Paterno win two national championships. Jordan’s wife, Barbara Brueggebors, had been The Centre Daily Times’ reporter and editor who covered the Patton Twp. supervisor meeting where Sandusky was granted approval to rezone the land where the charity’s offices would be built.

When Sandusky was charged in November, the couple began to wonder if they knew anyone on The Second Mile board.

From their computer in Texas, Barbara pulled up the charity’s website and was astonished to find that her husband — who is 87 and hasn’t lived in State College in 22 years — was listed as a member of the board.

“[I] said, ‘Well guess what? You’re on that board.’” she said. “It was one thing that’s kind of amusing in an unamusing situation.”

Jordan wasn’t the only one. A few “honorary members” called up with a similar complaint after the charges were filed. They claimed they had never given such permission.

Among them was Baltimore Orioles baseball great Cal Ripken Jr.

Some of them had accepted the recognition in very public situations, sources close to the organization said. But because of the complaints and the fact that they served no real purpose in the organization, all of the honorary board members were removed from the charity’s website in November.

Feelings of betrayal

Feelings of betrayal

It’s the afternoon of Nov. 4, 2011, and stories are beginning to appear on the Internet.

Charges against Jerry Sandusky have been filed — more than 40 counts of child sex abuse against eight victims.

“We were just waiting for it to appear on the [state court] website,” Myra Toomey said.

Few could have anticipated how big it would be.

The charges would eventually exceed 50 counts involving 10 children.

That left The Second Mile staff feeling betrayed.

“Jack (Raykovitz) kept telling the staff that none of the allegations involved The Second Mile, and none of the abuse was alleged to have happened during programs,” Marshall said.

Marshall and Toomey, along with an anonymous board member, said Raykovitz repeated a mantra that would become Sandusky’s defense at trial: “He blamed the [victim’s] mother,” they said.

Marshall had already had a few experiences that made her pause. She knew the board had gone behind Raykovitz’s back and hired a local fundraiser without his knowledge.

She also quickly began to understand why people in the office didn’t see eye to eye with the charity’s beloved founder.

Sandusky, she said, was hard to control, and she saw Genovese butt heads with him a lot.

“Jerry was difficult to work with,” Marshall said. “This was his organization, and he was going to do what he wanted.”

Too much access is a blinding theme in Sandusky’s saga.

He had unprecedented access at the high school where he was a volunteer coach in Clinton County. He had too much access to Penn State’s locker rooms after he retired. And within The Second Mile, Sandusky was given a pass on behavior such as singling out children and being alone with them.

He was, after all, a foster parent entrusted with the care of kids on a daily basis.

But many wanted to see an independent authority decide if anyone could have seen this coming.

And that’s what they thought Lynne Abraham’s internal review would accomplish.

State Sen. Jake Corman, who was a visible member of the board, has been quoted many times in the last eight months as saying that he hoped for answers from the internal report.

Last month, he said he must have misunderstood its purpose.

“Maybe that’s just my misunderstanding,” he said. “Maybe because the organization is clearly not going to continue, maybe that sort of review isn’t necessary. I’m not on the board anymore, so I guess I don’t have a lot of standing.”

Others are less forgiving.

“It stinks,” Marshall said. “We all thought an investigation was going to take place on who knew what and when.”

Since leaving the organization in January, Marshall has been disheartened by a lack of transparency.

One example: She and her husband, who had once donated to the charity, received a letter in the mail seeking permission to transfer the money they donated to The Second Mile over to Arrow Ministries.

There is no place in the letter for people to answer “no,” and when she called to ask what would happen if she simply didn’t give an answer, she was told her money would be transferred anyway.

“There was no return envelope. No place to say no. How many people just threw that out and don’t know this?” she said.

When Penn State’s internal report was released, secrecy was the theme.

The idea that things are better handled internally. The Second Mile shared with Penn State the blue and white colors and the Nittany Lions mascot. It had use of Penn State facilities. They had many of the same donors.

Genovese was on the alumni board, and many others had joint connections.

They even had a famous face in common: Jerry Sandusky.

So, to some who once proudly stated that they worked at The Second Mile, it’s becoming more clear that the charity might have also shared with Penn State the culture of silence.

“What is there to be secretive about?” Marshall said. “I just don’t get it. You start to think, ‘Am I being duped? I don’t think so, but…’”

She hesitates.

They’ve all been duped before.”

(3) Penn State Formally Accept Sanctions

“Pennsylvania State University trustees voiced overwhelming support Sunday night for the decision by university President Rodney Erickson to sign an NCAA consent decree that imposes harsh sanctions on the university after the Jerry Sandusky child-abuse scandal.

Though a majority of board members were sharply critical of the severity of the penalties, nearly all endorsed Erickson’s actions and said it was important to look toward the future.

“It is my belief that we must move forward,” board member Keith W. Eckel said. “It is critical that we unite as one behind the courageous leadership of our president, Rod Erickson, indeed, as he leads this great university in a time of unprecedented challenge”

Penn State trustees back president’s assent to sanctions

[The Inquirer 8/14/12 by Martha Woodall]

(4) Abuse from Sandusky and wealthy booster said to have taken place on private jet and Status Hearing for Second Mile scheduled

note: names are not disclosed but Part 5 of Sara Ganim’s report has comments that indicate that Second Mile executive board members have private jets, thus leaving questions of whether Second Mile has more to do with the abuse.

“A man has come forward alleging he saw Jerry Sandusky and a prominent Penn State University donor sexually abusing two boys together aboard a private plane, it was claimed on Monday [August 13, 2012]”

“RadarOnline.com reports that the witness, who has business ties to the Penn State booster, told postal inspectors and the FBI that he was aboard the private plane when the alleged abuse occurred.

He said he remained silent about what he saw until now and does not know whether the boys are new victims or if they have already been identified as having been abused by the former defensive coordinator. ”

“‘The witness does not know who the boys are and if they were from Sandusky’s Second Mile charity. He can prove his tie to the booster but the Feds are going to have to prove the rest.’

According to Radar Online, federal authorities are looking into the possibility that Sandusky shared his young victims with other pedophiles including a ‘very rich, very powerful man connected with the university.'”

Status Hearing for Second Mile Asset Transfer on September 7, 2012

“Meanwhile, a status conference has been scheduled for September 7 in a Pennsylvania courtroom as Second Mile seeks to shut down and transfer its assets.

Sandusky’s charity is hoping to give its assets to Houston-based Arrow Child & Family Ministries Inc., but lawyers for some of the child abuse victims have objected. ”

Jerry Sandusky and major Penn State donor ‘abused two boys aboard a private plane’, claims new witness

[Daily Mail 8/13/12]

(5) Penn State accreditation warning given

“Higher education experts say an accreditation warning issued to Penn State is serious and appropriate given the issues raised by a recent child sex-abuse scandal, but the school is unlikely to lose its accreditation.

They also expect the university to comply quickly with demands to show its governance, finances and integrity meet standards set by its accreditation agency.

The Middle States Commission on Higher Education issued the warning last week based on the school’s handling of molestation allegations against former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky.

Judith Eaton, president of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, said Tuesday that it’s highly unlikely Penn State will end up on probation or lose its accreditation.

Students cannot use federal funds — including Pell grants and government loans — to attend unaccredited schools.”

Experts approve of accreditation warning given to Penn State, expect school to recover quickly

[Washington Pst 8/14/12 by The Associated Press]

(6) Penn State says it has adequate insurance coverage to handle lawsuits. Two victims file lawsuits-Victim 1 and Victim 2. Victim 2 says he was the one in the shower, which is a new revelation.

“Settlements in civil cases could potentially run upwards of $100 million.

Penn State’s general liability insurer sought last week to deny or limit coverage for Sandusky-related claims. Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association Insurance argued that Penn State withheld key information needed to assess risk, at least after school officials investigated a May 1998 complaint that Sandusky had inappropriately showered with a boy on campus.

In a memo filed in court in Philadelphia, the company argued that Penn State failed to disclose that it had information about Sandusky that “was material to the insurable risk assumed by PMA.”

The company also argued that its policies after March 1, 1992, were amended to exclude “abuse or molestation” and that coverage for such behavior is excluded as a matter of public policy in Pennsylvania.

Two of the victims filed paperwork this past week in preparation for suits against the university.

On Thursday, attorneys announced that a man identified as Victim 2 has come forward to say that he was the one that prosecutors say Sandusky assaulted in the school’s football locker room showers in 2001. The identity of that boy has been one of the biggest mysteries of the case, and the handling of that accusation against Sandusky cost late coach Joe Paterno his job and brought accusations of a cover-up by high-level university officials, two of whom await trial on charges of perjury and failure to report suspected child abuse.

Another accuser, known as Victim 1, has indicated an additional complaint is in the works, while other lawyers also have indicated they represent men with potential claims.”

PSU president says school is coverd for lawsuits

[New York Daily News 7/29/12 by Dick Weiss]

(7) Sandusky attorney files document appealing judge’s protective order on leaks

[Centre Daily Times 8/13/12 by Mike Dawson]

“The process for one of Jerry Sandusky’s defense attorneys to appeal the presiding judge’s protective order to find out who received materials related to the case has begun again.

On Monday, Karl Rominger re-filed a document with his reasons for appealing Senior Judge John Cleland’s order two months ago.

Rominger filed a nearly identical pleading a month ago, but Cleland invalidated it because it didn’t follow the proper appeal procedure.