Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: bigdaddy45
Read the Footnote at the bottom of pg 51 of the Freeh Report. Paterno did not want Sandusky bringing his 2nd Mile kids to the workout and training facilities because of liability problems as far back as 1998. But he was allowed to do it by administrators who signed off on his retirement agreement.

If you read pgs 66 -- 79 of what happened after the shower incident in 2001, the AD Curley told Sandusky that no more kids were to be brought there, and Sandusky's charity TSM were also notified of the same. Heaven and earth were shaken. They contacted the university's legal counsel and called the Chief of the University Police to pull Sandusky's 1998 incident on file.

The Department of Public Welfare was supposed to be notified by Curley -- and Dr. Raykovitz of TSM. It was especially his responsibility by virtue of state law and his contacts in CYS and DPW. But no one is holding him accountable. Why???

Ultimately Sandusky was found not guilty of that particular shower incident.

81 posted on 08/18/2012 12:55:24 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies ]


To: Uncle Chip
It was every persons responsibility that had any knowledge of alleged sexual contact between Sandusky and even one boy to report it to the police. If nothing happened, report it to the police again or a different police agency. Yes, innocent until proven guilty but that's what a police investigation would and did find out.
82 posted on 08/18/2012 8:26:18 PM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]

To: Uncle Chip

Ultimately Sandusky was found not guilty of that particular shower incident.

...so I guess it must have never happened, right?...you are aware, as many people, including myself, have pointed out, that he was not found ‘innocent’, he was acquitted of that particular charge because the prosecution could not prove its charge...nothing about that aquittal says one word about his innocence...I see you PSU fans are all reading the same talking points, a guy I know claims that if Curley and Schultz are acquitted, then that means there was no coverup, because there was no crime committed, and that all the sanctions haave to be removed...I asked him if he thought OJ was guilty of killing Nicole and Goldman, and he said yes...I reminded him OJ was acquitted, and that by his logic, no crime had been committed, and those two must still be alive; he flipped me off and went on his way...
...


87 posted on 08/23/2012 3:49:20 AM PDT by IrishBrigade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson