Penn State trustees: ‘We’re trying to get where we need to be’ [PSU alumni still on attack]

Centre Daily [State College, PA] ^ | March 10, 2013 | Mike Dawson

[Uncle Chip]

You conveniently left this out of your timeline:

The 1998 University Park Police Report detailed the actions taken by Jerry Lauro of the DPW in the 1998 investigation.

May 5, 1998 1:55PM J. Lauro, DPW, informed police he was assigned to case.
Lauro stated Sandusky will be interviewed on 7 May.

May 7, 1998 11:00AM Lauro met with police.
Lauro rec’d transcribed interviews of V6 & B.K.
Lauro reviewed case file of J. Miller (CYS).

May 7, 1998 11:15AM Lauro and police went to residence of Victim 6.
Lauro interviewed mother of Victim 6.
Lauro obtained clothing given to Victim 6 by Sandusky.

May 8, 1998 11:55AM Lauro informed police that DPW was going forward with evaluation of V6 (over objections of police and ADA Karen Arnold)

June 1, 1998 11:00AM Schreffler and Lauro interviewed Sandusky. Determined no sexual assault occurred. The result of that determination: CASE CLOSED

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/redactedpolicereport.pdf

Those who accuse the wrong people are despicable.

[Uncle Chip]

The real story of the story of the boy in the shower:

http://www.framingpaterno.com/definitive-case-mike-mcquearys-story-not-be-believed

[Alaska Wolf]

he was acquitted of the most serious charge regarding Victim #2

All felony charges are serious. Guilty of numerous felony charges. Why do you child molester defenders believe otherwise?

[Alaska Wolf]

The real story of the story of the boy in the shower:

Seriously, a blog? LOL! Why would anyone want to frame Paterno?

[Uncle Chip]

All felony charges are serious

Sure they are but a Felony 1 is more serious than a Felony 3.

Surely you are not going to equate involuntary deviate sexual intercourse [Felony 1] with a grooming activity [Felony 3].

[Alaska Wolf]

a grooming activity

A grooming activity? You are one sick SOB!

[Uncle Chip]

Second Mile Sandusky Sex Scandal: Why Victim 6 should have ...

Feb 04, 2013 In this case, Sandusky waited six or seven years, when Victim 5 was 13 to begin grooming him. Given what is known about pedophile behavior, children are groomed at an earlier age when they are unsure about what is ... http://notpsu.blogspot.com/

Second Mile Sandusky Sex Scandal: Letter to Jennifer Storm, head ...

Feb 11, 2013 These caseworkers also possessed a damning psychological report from Dr. Alycia Chambers stating that Sandusky was exhibiting pedophile/grooming behaviors. Their response was to find an unlicensed counselor to ... http://notpsu.blogspot.com/

What's Really At Stake In Tom Corbett's NCAA Lawsuit

Jan 23, 2013 Anyone who has read this blog knows that the DPW and CYS reacted similarly to a recommendation from Dr. Alycia Chambers, who concluded Sandusky was exhibiting grooming behaviors typical of a pedophile. http://notpsu.blogspot.com/

Second Mile Sandusky Sex Scandal: Ganim Preview: Article on ...

Feb 16, 2013 The report of the female psychologist who evaluated the boy right after the incident found Sandusky was exhibiting signs of grooming a victim for sexual abuse. 8. Lauro may have been honest about Schreffler not sharing the ... http://notpsu.blogspot.com/

"Grooming" was the terminology that the Sandusky jury used to describe the lesser charges that they convicted Sandusky of regarding Victim #2.

Now return to your cave.

[Alaska Wolf]

"Grooming" was the terminology

Grooming isn't a class 3 felony, is it pervert apologist?

[Uncle Chip]

It certainly is according to professionals:

“Dr. Alycia Chambers, who concluded Sandusky was exhibiting grooming behaviors typical of a pedophile.”

[Alaska Wolf]

No, pervert apologist, “Sandusky was exhibiting grooming behaviors typical of a pedophile.” He was convicted of child endangerment, a class 3 felony.

[Uncle Chip]

He was convicted of child endangerment, a class 3 felony.

Actually -- unlawful contact with minors was the 3rd degree felony. Child endangerment was one of the misdemeanors. But facts are not your strong suit.

The AG went for two first degree felony charges based upon all the pretrial ESPN hype, but the jury returned only one felony third degree. The evidence wasn't there for anything more.

All the accusatory hype about anal rape and all the jury found from McQueary's testimony was a third degree felony that child psychologists refer to as grooming.

............................

BTW on this forum the first person to resort to name-calling loses the debate.

You have been a loser for a long time.

But now it's official.

YOU LOSE

[Alaska Wolf]

Child endangerment

Class 3 felony, pervert apologist.

the jury returned only one felony third degree

Guilty as I've repeatedly stated, not exonerated.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/10/jerry_sandusky_gets_30-60_year.html

On the day of sentencing, Sandusky was officially designated a sexually violent predator. Sandusky was sentenced on October 9, 2012 to a minimum of 30 years and maximum of 60 years in prison. Judge John Cleland stated that he intentionally avoided a sentence with a large number of years, saying it would be "too abstract" and also said to Sandusky that the sentence he handed down had the "unmistakeable impact of saying 'the rest of your life'."

"The crime is not only what you did to their bodies, but the assault to their psyches and souls and the assault to the well-being of the larger community in which we all live."

[Uncle Chip]

YOU LOSE

[Alaska Wolf]

No, the victims, the university and the taxpayers all have to pay for the crimes of a pervert and his protectors.