Jackson Jambalaya

Good article I found tonight and the paper in PA who broke the Sandusty story months back has an article coming out tomorrow about more details of the story.

http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/colleges/penn_state/20111113_Penn_State_sex_scandal_could_very_well_widen.html

Here it is. The investigative report on why it took PA authorities so long on the Sandusty case.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/special_report_why_the_jerry_s.html

Reading the timelines on the 'Net was interesting.
Apparently, there have been 3 witnesses to molestation. Sandusky is on tape apologizing to one victim's mother.
One of the victims was in the Sandusky " family party" at the Alamo Bowl which explains Texas' interest.
There is a lesson here and in the Cain allegations. If a sexual assault takes place, do not report it " up the chain" in the system . The system exists to protect the system. Report to the police.

Today's news reveals the 'lady judge' who put him back on the streets with an unsecured bond is a contributor and volunteer for his little charity program. How convenient.

Info on judge. No contact with Sandusty at charity and no work with charity when Sandusty was there.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/judge_had_no_contact_with_sand.html

Newsflash:

Sandusky formed this program ostensibly to serve and protect program.

This judge became intimately familiar with this program and decided it was worthy enough for her to volunteer and contribute.

Everything she read and heard about this program was closely linked in print and audio to Sandusky.

She knew full well of Sandusky's role forming this charity.

It matters not that he had left by the time she made her last contribution. A clear conflict of interest exists.

Judge; are you familiar with the accused by name? Yes.

Judge; are you familiar with his association with the charity in question? Yes.

Judge; do you know he was at the head of and was spokesman for this children's cause for a number of years? Yes.

Judge; do you think there might be the perception of a conflict of interest here in your bond decision? Well, ah, I...ah..well.

Great point,,,, I odnt think for a minute that the judge is protecting a guilty man, because from the judge's eyes , he isnt guilty of anything yet, but I do think her association with the 2nd mile should disqualifiy her.

How coincidental that the Sandusky matter went before a judge that was invested (in time and money) in his life's cause. Could it be that he had personally visited her to solicit her support and contributions? Very likely. Recusal screams from the rafters. There were other judges she could and should have punted to.

So thought provoking 3:38. DUH.

I am not in the law profession, but it seems to me that someone with several alleged crimes for sexually molestation, rape, and sodomy with 10-12 year old boys, would be cause for tighter control from a judge. The Sandusky has money and many contacts that are more than willing to aide and abet him would make me (and likely to the majority of the general public) hesitant to let him go for free and unmonitored.

What I think is sick is hearing people say that he ruined the reputation of Penn State. I think the lives of the young children he ruined should be at be of utmost concern. I could give a f%$& about Penn State's reputation. I do feel much sorrow for the young boys that will forever be haunted by Sandusky.

Perhaps the judge let him go freely so that society could carry out the sentence without wasting time and money in court???

Ten more victims have come forward:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/sports/ncaafootball/jack-raykovitz-chief-of-second-mile-resigns-amid-penn-state-scandal.html?_r=1

Sandusty is going to be interviewed by Bob Costas on NBC at 9:00PM CST tonight on Rock Center with Brian Williams.

You can't make this stuff up. Sandusty's OLD lawyer knocks up teenage girl

http://m.nypost.com/p/news/national/sandusky_lawyer_impregnated_teenage_7jKwQMCeBlm9RSdr9zeutK

So, he admits to 'showering with boys and touching their legs', but 'nothing with sexual intent'.

OK.

(another thought provoking comment for you log sitters)

This morning's news has Sandusky's attorney saying, "Jerry is a Jock and anybody who has played sports knows you take showers and you have horseplay". I wonder how embarassed this attorney and his family members were when they watched this on the news.

The proper length of time to pause after being asked "Are you sexually attracted to underage boys?" is 0.000000 seconds. Credit: TOG

And why in the world would Sandusky answer that question by restating the question, as if he were unsure of how to answer it. He also seemed to me to be sedated during this interview, at minimum, a very dull/dim bulb. Even if you give this man the maximum benefit of the doubt and take his replies at face value, no man, jock or not, showers with eight to ten year old boys.

http://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-penn-state-scandal-mcqueary-20111115,0,1687969.story

Grand report lacks all the details about McQueary's actions after discovering the coach and the child. See above story for further details. Did stop Sandusky and did talk to campus police and local police.

Why would any grown man think it was OK to "horse around" while naked and alone with an 8-12 year old boy? Surely that is not a "guy thing" that women don't know about. Are there any non-pedophile men reading this that could come up with a scenario in which this behavior would be considered acceptable?

Pretty interesting story on McQueary and how people really react when they witness something so shocking like this young man did. Sandusky was someone he had known and respected all his life


http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/7237700/in-penn-state-child-sexual-abuse-scandal-there-no-easy-answers-assistant-mike-mcqueary

One more twist:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/sports/ncaafootball/in-july-paterno-transferred-ownership-of-home-to-his-wife-for-1.html?_r=1&ref=sports

7:20pm some pedophiles have a twisted view of their interaction with children. They actually "believe" that the children want their " love" and that sexual contact with children is, by definition, " innocent" because the children are innocent.

Other pedophiles are more into the power and control and are more likely to be violent rather than to attempt to " court" the child.

Bizarre, I know, but these guys aren't wired like everyone else. That's part of the reason they don't get " cured".

Are there any non-pedophile men reading this that could come up with a scenario in which this behavior would be considered acceptable?


NO , NO , NO

11:47, assuming you are correct, I'm reminded of Michael Jackson's characterization of his interraction with children. Sounds exactly like you explain it.

Meanwhile: Holder is on it!

I heard on Fox News yesterday that Sandusky lives next door to an elementary school and that the principal was having to institute some security procedures. For the life of me, I can't understand why the judge wouldn't make him wear a monitoring device and confine him to his home.

I'm sort of wondering if he's brave enough to leave his house.

One more NY Times article. Know how the authorities found McQueary? A brief mention on an internet forum where people chatted about Penn State athletics.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/17/sports/ncaafootball/internet-posting-helped-sandusky-investigators.html?pagewanted=all?src=tp