Scott Dierking Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Yeah, I knew that was long known. But you made it sound like the source of the rift was mysterious, when it was quite obvious. The thing is, the 1998 allegation was the first "showering" incident. JoePa knew Sandusky was a pedophile at least 4 yrs before the incident which has now led to his dismissal. I was being sarcastic, obviously not successfully. Yes, people (Joe!) knew in 1998. It most likely precipitated his release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMC Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I was being sarcastic, obviously not successfully. Yes, people (Joe!) knew in 1998. It most likely precipitated his release. LOL. My bad for missing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted November 10, 2011 Author Share Posted November 10, 2011 I thought everyone knew that days ago. This has been known. As an adjunct to that situation, Sandusky basically told the mother of a child he "showered with" that he was ashamed and "wished he could die". He did this in the presence of police offers in hiding, as the DA requested. The DA, Gricar, never prosecuted. This whole sordid mess could have been concluded there. Gricar, BTW, is missing and presumed dead. The Gricar tangent story is very weird. Think it's probably unrelated. Questions on Sandusky Are Wrapped in a 2005 Mystery By KEN BELSON One of the questions surrounding the sex-abuse case against Jerry Sandusky is why a former district attorney chose not to prosecute the then-Penn State assistant coach in 1998 after reports surfaced that he had inappropriate interactions with a boy. The answer is unknowable because of an unsolved mystery: What happened to Ray Gricar, the Centre County, Pa., district attorney? Gricar went missing in April 2005. The murky circumstances surrounding his disappearance — an abandoned car, a laptop recovered months later in a river without a hard drive, his body was never found — have spawned Web sites, television programs and conspiracy theories. More than six years later, the police still receive tips and reports of sightings. The police in central Pennsylvania continue to investigate even though Gricar’s daughter, Lara, successfully petitioned in July to have her father declared legally dead so the family could find some closure and begin dividing his estate. Yet as the Sandusky investigation moves forward, questions will be asked anew about why Gricar did not pursue charges against him 13 years ago. A small but strident minority believes Gricar did not want to tackle a case that involved a hometown icon. Others who knew and worked with Gricar say he was a meticulous, independent and tough-minded prosecutor who was unbowed by Penn State, its football program and political pressure in general. “No one got a bye with Ray,” said Anthony De Boef, who worked as an assistant district attorney under Gricar for five years. “He didn’t care who you were; he had a job to do.” De Boef said Gricar did not share any information with him about the case in 1998, which involved Sandusky allegedly showering with an 11-year-old boy. (Don't know if it translates but in a big city DA's office even the Boss shares details with his staff on big caes. That part of this rings hollow; if his assistant didn't know any details about the sandusky mess, either he is lying or clueless.) Gricar, he said, reviewed the police reports in private including, presumably, notes or recordings of two conversations that the police heard between Sandusky and the boy’s mother. But Gricar had a reputation for thoroughness, and if he thought he had enough to charge Sandusky, he would have, De Boef and other lawyers said. Still, the circumstances surrounding Gricar’s disappearance prompt many questions. On April 15, 2005, Gricar, then 59, took the day off. At about 11:30 a.m., he called his girlfriend, Patricia Fornicola, to say he was taking a drive on Route 192. About 12 hours later, she reported him missing. The next day, Gricar’s Mini Cooper was found in a parking lot in Lewisburg, about 50 miles from his home in Bellefonte. Gricar’s cellphone was in the car, but not his laptop, wallet or keys, which were never recovered. Months later, the laptop was found in the Susquehanna River without its hard drive, which was discovered later. It was too damaged to yield any information. On the fourth anniversary of his disappearance, investigators revealed that a search of his home computer yielded a history of Internet searches for phrases like “how to wreck a hard drive,” according to a report at the time in The Centre Daily Times. When Gricar disappeared helicopters, dive teams and patrol cars were deployed, and the F.B.I. was brought in. Reports of Gricar turning up in Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Maryland and other states proved to be dead ends. So what happened? Friends and colleagues say Gricar was not the type to walk away. His bank accounts were not touched after he disappeared, he had no other sources of income and he had no major debts, said Robert Buehner Jr., a friend and the district attorney in Montour County. Though divorced twice, he seemed happy with his girlfriend and close with his daughter. Gricar had already announced that he was retiring at the end of his term. “He was absolutely looking forward to his future,” Buehner said. If Gricar committed suicide, Buehner added, he would have wanted the body to be found. Foul play is the next possible conclusion. By the nature of their jobs prosecuting criminals, district attorneys end up having many enemies. But no credible suspects have emerged. “I don’t think you’ll find too many district attorneys who disappear,” said Ken Mains, a detective who works on cold cases in Lycoming County. “D. B. Cooper, Amelia Earhart, Jimmy Hoffa, until a body is found, there are going to be conspiracy theories.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I mean if Sandusky was pimping kids to donors, the Gircar disappearance would most likely be related. It seems like a rabbit's hole has been discovered that leads far. I really hope that Sandusky acted independently, but ....gut feeling he wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 CNN reports one of Sandusky's victims has a sister currently enrolled at PSU. When asked what she thought about last night's JP firing she told reporters Joe should have been allowed to finish out his season. That's some astounding brain wash. Peer pressure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted November 10, 2011 Author Share Posted November 10, 2011 I mean if Sandusky was pimping kids to donors, the Gircar disappearance would most likely be related. It seems like a rabbit's hole has been discovered that leads far. I really hope that Sandusky acted independently, but ....gut feeling he wasn't. Looking at the time line, in 1998 Sandusky gets dumped afetr the 30-page campus police report in which he apologizes to the victim's mom and admits in front of 2 cops that he molested a child. He gets canned but not banned from campus.Paterno is the Pope of State College; he saw that report before anyone else. Sandusky, big heart that he is, promises not to shower with boys ever again. Killing nuns, driving drunk and assassinating presidents are also verboten, I guess. Sandusky opens the foundation with Paterno (and Matt Millen!) nominally as board members. Sandusky still allowed on campus. Sandusky, 55 years old and defensive coordinator for 2 national chanpionship teams with vast experience and by all acounts a brilliant football mind, never interviews for another job opening. That makes no sense. In 2002, we have the 10 year old in the shower. Paterno and the entirety braintrust of PSU do not ban him from the campus. To the point that Sanduskya s late as last week is in the PSU gym(undoubetedly one of those odl guys who walk around towless with their junk in full view, bt I digress). Question I have; how did Sandusky support himself since 1998? The foundation looks like ...something else. Something that pays Sandusky some cash to live. And then it could get even uglier, because there's only so mnay ways such an operation can make money. And this stuff starts to look likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Looking at the time line, in 1998 Sandusky gets dumped afetr the 30-page campus police report in which he apologizes to the victim's mom and admits in front of 2 cops that he molested a child. He gets canned but not banned from campus.Paterno is the Pope of State College; he saw that report before anyone else. Sandusky, big heart that he is, promises not to shower with boys ever again. Killing nuns, driving drunk and assassinating presidents are also verboten, I guess. Sandusky opens the foundation with Paterno (and Matt Millen!) nominally as board members. Sandusky still allowed on campus. Sandusky, 55 years old and defensive coordinator for 2 national chanpionship teams with vast experience and by all acounts a brilliant football mind, never interviews for another job opening. That makes no sense. In 2002, we have the 10 year old in the shower. Paterno and the entirety braintrust of PSU do not ban him from the campus. To the point that Sanduskya s late as last week is in the PSU gym(undoubetedly one of those odl guys who walk around towless with their junk in full view, bt I digress). Question I have; how did Sandusky support himself since 1998? The foundation looks like ...something else. Something that pays Sandusky some cash to live. And then it could get even uglier, because there's only so mnay ways such an operation can make money. And this stuff starts to look likely. Your timeline is wrong, in that the foundation was around long before Sandusky left PSU. It was not created as he left PSU. I keep telling you that I think you are wrong in the thinking that Paterno was an active member of the Board after 1999. there was a falling out, so I would find it hard Joe being active on the Board. Who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Looking at the time line, in 1998 Sandusky gets dumped afetr the 30-page campus police report in which he apologizes to the victim's mom and admits in front of 2 cops that he molested a child. He gets canned but not banned from campus.Paterno is the Pope of State College; he saw that report before anyone else. Sandusky, big heart that he is, promises not to shower with boys ever again. Killing nuns, driving drunk and assassinating presidents are also verboten, I guess. Sandusky opens the foundation with Paterno (and Matt Millen!) nominally as board members. Sandusky still allowed on campus. Sandusky, 55 years old and defensive coordinator for 2 national chanpionship teams with vast experience and by all acounts a brilliant football mind, never interviews for another job opening. That makes no sense. In 2002, we have the 10 year old in the shower. Paterno and the entirety braintrust of PSU do not ban him from the campus. To the point that Sanduskya s late as last week is in the PSU gym(undoubetedly one of those odl guys who walk around towless with their junk in full view, bt I digress). Question I have; how did Sandusky support himself since 1998? The foundation looks like ...something else. Something that pays Sandusky some cash to live. And then it could get even uglier, because there's only so mnay ways such an operation can make money. And this stuff starts to look likely. Just saw it-Paterno (along with Arnold Palmer and Franco Harris!!!!!) were "honorary" Board members. Really nothing to that-They lent their names. Bugg-I think you may actually be on some honorary boards. It does not mean you decide the business at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I mean, conspiracy wise, if this was a pedo ring ala that Liam Neeson movie and it was THAT big...maybe Paterno couldn't do anything about it...considering they got Grincar offed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 The old man is getting away with it by just being fired. This is the most despicable crime of them all with innocent defenseless victims. No legal expert here but if possible all the PSU members involved in this should be tried in a criminal court of law. The 2 police officers should be kicked out from the force and charged criminally. And so too the DA. These people witnessed a confession of a heinous crime and walked away from it with a simple verbal apology was enough. Wow. Just WOW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I mean, conspiracy wise, if this was a pedo ring ala that Liam Neeson movie and it was THAT big...maybe Paterno couldn't do anything about it...considering they got Grincar offed. Your imagination is getting carried away. As of this point, there has been NO connection to Gricar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Your imagination is getting carried away. As of this point, there has been NO connection to Gricar Which is why I said conspiracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Just saw it-Paterno (along with Arnold Palmer and Franco Harris!!!!!) were "honorary" Board members. Really nothing to that-They lent their names. Bugg-I think you may actually be on some honorary boards. It does not mean you decide the business at all. How can you even want to lend your name and association to a pedophile ? Were this people so naive as to believe he was out to do any good. Maybe some of the outsiders didn't know. But the old man knew it first hand! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 How can you even want to lend your name and association to a pedophile ? Were this people so naive as to believe he was out to do any good. Maybe some of the outsiders didn't know. But the old man knew it first hand! I am sure Jo was honorary BEFORE this information was known. Once you become honorary anything, they are going to keep your name attached as publicity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Which is why I said conspiracy. Soon, the Loch Ness monster will be seen outside Beaver Stadium. The story is lurid enough, without people letting their imaginations run wild Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Soon, the Loch Ness monster will be seen outside Beaver Stadium. The story is lurid enough, without people letting their imaginations run wild This is already being classified as the biggest scandal/cover up in sports history...anything is possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotReign37 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I mean if Sandusky was pimping kids to donors, the Gircar disappearance would most likely be related. It seems like a rabbit's hole has been discovered that leads far. I really hope that Sandusky acted independently, but ....gut feeling he wasn't. Gricars lap top in the Susquehanna river minus its hard drive? Reports are that prior to Gricars disappearance he was researching how to destroy a hard drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsFanInDenver Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I am sure Jo was honorary BEFORE this information was known. Once you become honorary anything, they are going to keep your name attached as publicity. You mean before he found out about the incident. Maybe. I am not so sure.So I will take you word for it. But i am sure there is always a way for somebody no wanting to have his/her name associated with anything to get out the arrangement! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotReign37 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Why is Sandusky not in jail? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jbro22 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 This sh*t is so ****ed man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Why is Sandusky not in jail? 100k bail-can you believe that? 100k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gainzo Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Why is Sandusky not in jail? Why is Scott Dierking claiming that he is not sticking up for Penn State/Paterno even though he is? If this was my alma mater I would be horrified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Why is Scott Dierking claiming that he is not sticking up for Penn State/Paterno even though he is? If this was my alma mater I would be horrified. Exactly where have I defended anybody here? Just keeping facts straight, because there are some doozies out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aten Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 McQueary is a small fish, and is guilty of being a coward and some of his own moral complications. You can't fire him for that. Why on earth not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizard King Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 This is turning into the mother of all scandals. Seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Why on earth not? Most likely, they are afraid for legal repercussions, but it would not shock me to still see it happen. I wish him gone, but I wished that 20 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotReign37 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Why is Scott Dierking claiming that he is not sticking up for Penn State/Paterno even though he is? If this was my alma mater I would be horrified. WTF are you asking me for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotReign37 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 100k bail-can you believe that? 100k. No, he needs to be locked up before he offs himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 No, he needs to be locked up before he offs himself. Honestly, that would make things almost too easy. My simple guess is that most pedophiles are huge cowards, and he could not summon the guts. As cocky (no pun meant) as he acted, he probably thinks he will beat the wrap. From the interview that he conducted in front of his house a couple of days ago, he seems out of touch (again, no pun intended). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jbro22 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 No, he needs to be locked up before he offs himself. THIS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aten Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Most likely, they are afraid for legal repercussions, but it would not shock me to still see it happen. I wish him gone, but I wished that 20 years ago. That's not a reason why they 'can't' fire him. That's your guess as to why they haven't yet. There's some applicable code of conduct; I dunno what it is specifically, whether GAs are part of some CB unit or whatever, but there was definitely some kind of affirmative obligation for McQueary as the only staff on scene witnessing a sex crime in progress to do something beyond running it up the flagpole to his superiors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 That's not a reason why they 'can't' fire him. That's your guess as to why they haven't yet. There's some applicable code of conduct; I dunno what it is specifically, whether GAs are part of some CB unit or whatever, but there was definitely some kind of affirmative obligation for McQueary as the only staff on scene witnessing a sex crime in progress to do something beyond running it up the flagpole to his superiors. By the law, all his is legally required to do is report it to his superiors. That is why he is not charged currently. Same as Paterno. Obviously, we realize the moral problems with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aten Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 By the law, all his is legally required to do is report it to his superiors. That is why he is not charged currently. Same as Paterno. Obviously, we realize the moral problems with this. I don't know why I even bother. You were saying he couldn't be fired. Now you're talking about whether he committed a crime. These are separate issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I don't know why I even bother. You were saying he couldn't be fired. Now you're talking about whether he committed a crime. These are separate issues. I don't know why I even bother. You were saying he couldn't be fired. Now you're talking about whether he committed a crime. These are separate issues. I never said he COULDN'T be fired, I speculated why they may be waffling. There is a difference. You aren't trying hard enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatriotReign37 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Honestly, that would make things almost too easy. He has names the police need in light of these recent rumors involving rich donors and Second Mile children. My simple guess is that most pedophiles are huge cowards, and he could not summon the guts. As cocky (no pun meant) as he acted, he probably thinks he will beat the wrap. I think youre right about the Coward part. Thats why he chose little kids, but the world is crashing down around Sandusky. Surely there have been death threats. From the interview that he conducted in front of his house a couple of days ago, he seems out of touch (again, no pun intended). JoPa fired. Just wait until the authorities file charges that he leased of children from the Second Mile to be used for sex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.