Crimes of this magnitude towards children should be punishable by death, seriously!

Castration, prison time, political correctness and all that B*llsh!t is not gonna cut it, they will still find a way to abuse children even without a d!ck...

it's time for jerrys turn in the shower, expose him for what he is: a monster!

Sandusky has acknowledged showering and embracing young boys but denies molesting them.

He's not only a pedophile, but also a liar.

Any grown man who wants to soap up a child and hug them in a shower is a SLIMY ASS PIG and PEDOPHILE.

If it walks like a duck.....

It's obvious that Sandusky has gotten away with this because he's done it for a long, long time. I can't help but feel that a lot of people knew about this guy and ALL of them did NOTHING to help these young boys. Now Sandusky is out on bail without putting up even one thin dime. Whatever kind of folks these all, they all need to be severely punished for their crimes against all of these children!

let em all hang.

now that the little boys are men I hope they all reap down on those who caused and allowed their suffering a hell as dark and frightening as the one they have been put in.........

since the prisons are over crowded let the victims set the terms of punishment...

skies the limit.

The students that protested Paterno being fired should also chip in to settle the claims.

Good old football. Violent, homoerotic, ego driven. What the hell do people expect to come out of such activity? The United States places way too much emphasis on sports in academic institutions, protecting it even through sex scandal cover-ups. Perhaps, this is part of the reason the United States is so far behind other nations in education. People would rather watch a bunch of steroid-pumped airheads run around patting each other on the ass rather than get a decent education. That old crap that sports are necessary to teach teamwork is absolute nonsense. Football does nothing but divide people and divert resources that would normally go to real education programs. The "us against them" dichotomy that football fosters is wrong and should be rejected by decent people.

Right on Mark! And let's not forget teaching our young girls to provide pagentized rectal display (i.e. cheerleading) for the biggest most violent boys in school. Kind of like mountain goats and lowland gorillas. Go! Fight! Win! Big Guy! Then our educators all act dumb-founded and ask "Where's the violence come from?"

Yes, it's all footballs' fault. Anyone who enjoys football is indecent. In my day, I would have beaten you on the gridiron or in an academic competition.

Mark -

Football does nothing but divide people and divert resources that would normally go to real education programs.

I can't disagree with the dividing of people part of your comment, but you are 180 degrees off with the "divert resources" part. College athletics is a MAJOR part of revenue generation for educational institutions. Penn State's net profit from only the football program in 2009 - 2010 year was 50.4 million! I saw one article that said because of the tremendous impact on revenue, Penn State football was too big to fail...

I agree with Buzz Bissinger, sports commentator and author of "Friday Night Lights." He suggests getting pro sports out of the educational system completely. Sounds extreme but think about it.

Tax payer money provides recruitment and training facilities for a private entertainment industry that is exempt from anti-trust legislation. Essentially every boy in America is recruited to play football starting in grade school.

The justification that sports bring in so much money to the school system rings hollow with me. Where's all that money going? Right into the pockets of the likes of Sandusky and his enabler Paterno. If all that revenue truly went back into the educational system there would be no need to raise real estate taxes or establish state lotteries.

The NFL, NBA and NCAA should pay stiff excise taxes that go directly back into education. And not just for more sports facilities to find prospective players and solicite a captive audience. The money should go to inner city schools, after school programs and teacher salaries

Absolutele !

Paying these coaches millions $$$ !

Players and coaches's indescretions are swept under the rug to keep the $$$ comming !

These guys are too big for their britches !

Take this man for every dime and penny he has and owns. All these people at Penn State imo were operating a Child Molesting Operation that they all participated in. Why else would any one of them cover it up if they were not involved in it somehow.

All these people involved need to be sentenced to life.

These comments are pretty off the wall. Sandusky is a slime and should be punished along with ANYONE who knew of the situation and did nothing. The problem isn't the football program or any other sports program. There are a lot of young people who would be in bad places without the help of organized athletic programs. You can not lump everything as evil due to the disgusting actions of a few. I personally know of several kids who would have ended up in jail if they hadn't gotten into organized sports programs.

The problem is there is no accountability for any actions, by anyone. The individual who commented that cheerleaders turn guys into brutes and gorillas only helps to substantiate that there is no accountability. Are you kidding me, a guy isn't responsible for his actions if he sees a pretty girl in a short skirt? I call BS on that. But I'm willing to bet there are plenty who subscribe to that thought process.

The article says that this boy's family was threatened in order to keep him quiet. What kind of parents would not have gone to the cops if they thought their son was being abused? Where is their accountability in this? I have two children and believe me, if I even remotely thought something was up, no threat would keep me from reporting it to someone and most certainly that child would NEVER have contact with the indivdual again.

Again, Sandusky and anyone that had knowledge of this slimy behavior should be punished to the highest degree. But place the blame where blame lies, not in a blanket order that everything associated with this situation is bad. Football, cheerleaders, education, etc. didn't cause this situation. Sandusky is what caused this situation, the lack of responsibility and accountability allowed it to continue.

I wonder about the guy who claims he was horribly traumatized by the experience, but went back 100 times for more. Of course, nothing heals trauma like huge quantities of other people's money. I'm not a football fan, and I don't give a dam about Sandusky one way or another, but this whole thing stinks to high heaven.

I'm concerned that he will kill himself. That is what some do when they know they are caught and will have to face charges and humiliation.

TO: ram-762581 who wrote:

"I'm concerned that he will kill himself. That is what some do when they know they are caught and will have to face charges and humiliation."

This guy has got waaay too much hubris to even think about killing himself. I wouldn't be at all surprised if he were to go into court and tell the judge that the kids were in love with him and begged him to do it, just like Conrad Murray said Michael Jackson begged him to kill him and then was competely SHOCKED when he was convicted of involuntary manslaughter.

These types of criminals don't know ANYTHING about "humiliation".

Baffale- I could care less if some prison justice sees him exterminated in the exact same way he victimized these boys. The only downside is that they wont get some of that money from HIM if he is dead. I think they should be allowed to take everything he has, and then some more from the university and that sick charity. Thats all I want. To see sicko set them up for life, and then get offed by Big Bubba. Fitting in more ways than one.

Narcissists don't kill themselves...

Sure they do. Look at family annihilators, for example. "My family can't possibly live a good life without me. I am their everything." They feel the need to kill their family before they kill themselves.

Of course there will be more than nine. The University is worth millions. There will be all kinds of "victims" crawling out of the woodwork when they start announcing settlements.

Doesn't work, the abuse isn't just sexual; It's about domination and control. These guys can not be fixed they will go to their graves with same inclinations. Death is the only way to be sure they will not abuse another child.

I dont think Henry meant as a way of "fixing" them, more as a way of torture. I say castrate him with a meat cleaver and then kill his ass by anal route.

It doesn't add up. Any kid who was molested over 100 times and didn't go to his parents, the police, a teachor, or someone is telling a lie, or is retarded. He wants the money and his parents are i on the con game.

You would be wrong, though. Parents don't always protect their kids and that is a fact. Besides, it looks to me as if he threatened the family to the boy...kid, I'll (do whatever is scariest)...it happens way more than one would think and is a classic way to keep kids quiet.

The father could have also been in on it or not known the extent of the abuse. It still doesn't excuse his actions but it sheds some light on the situation.

MichaelH,How do you know the boy's father was involved in his life? The article said Sandusky threatened the boys family,there was no mention specifically of a father and mother. Sandusky set up that charity for disadvantaged kids and I'm willing to bet that many of them especially the ones Sandusky molested were being raised by single mothers. Disadvantaged means these kids most likely came from broken or single parent homes or homes where one or both parents were abusive or drug addicted. These kids were all most likely poor and lucky to have a roof over their heads and who ever was raising them whether a single parent or two parents were most likely struggling to make ends meet. And they were certainly in no position to go up against Jerry Sandusky who was a big shot on the Penn State campus and revered by many people at that time. He had the money and the power to take advantage of these kids.

A couple of things DAZ (#5.3). The article was poorly written, it only briefly mentions that the boy's family was threatened & doesn't say another word about it. Another thing is that if the family, as you speculate, was struggling financially & sandusky had money & power why wouldn't he be a large target for a civil suit or extortion/blackmail?

Let's not blame the parents here. You have no idea how much power Penn State and it's athletic dept wielded. It's believable that the parents would have kept quite to protect their child from additional torment. Believe me, fear works.

The article says he "threatened the boy's family to keep him quiet." That may only mean that he threatened the boy with causing harm to the family. He may not have actually made threats to the family directly. That is a common threat from predators to keep children in fear for others. Admittedly, it is not very well written to prevent another possible meaning, if this is indeed correct.

He probably payed the father off. And the fathers probably a drunk and Sandusky prob just had to show up with a bottle of vodka for the dad and the dad would give him his son for the day. Now that the kids older and more cases have appeared im sure they want more money and are gonna sue him for everything. I think the parents of these kids should be looked at very closly. Theres no way my parents would have ever let something like this happen to me when i was that young more than once. Cause i know my dad would have shot Sandusky right in the balls and probaly would have let me kill him afterwards.

I work with abused children. Every single victim of sexual abuse that I have ever spoken to was told in one way, shape, or form by the abuser that he (or she) would hurt someone or something that the victim loved if the victim spoke of the abuse.........could be a parent, a sibling, a pet, etc. When you hear that a pedophile "threatened the victim's family" it doesn't mean that the abuser called up the victim's family and said "I'm abusing your kid and I'll kill you if you report it"...it means that that abuser told the victim all of the terrible things that would happen if the victim spoke up. Abusers become masters at this sick, powerful way of controlling children.........and Sandusky appears to fit the bill.

I have to agree with MichaelH2011. There is something missing from this case. The people who are investigating it, who are responsible for dealing with the fallout, legal and otherwise, just aren't reacting enough. I fear more than anything the rumor these boys were being pimped out to high profile donors at Second Mile may prove to have some truth to it. There are just far too many people involved for this to be a cover up for a single person.

My thoughts too. The acts are basically cowardly in the first place, and I can't imagine him making it through a trial. These guys often do that...awful for the victims is the bad part since they unjustifiably blame themselves...sigh.

I was thinking the same thing. But, it would be a terrible injustice for the young boys, now young men, he abused. In strange way I hope he does testify. So he can verbalize the things he did in the light of public.

I only HOPE he makes it to Jail - He will get his due there....killing him or having him kill himself would be way too easy....I hope he is under guard so that he can go to jail and get it up the ass with brooms, and VERY large penis'....and I wold ove to hear him scream and see blood.

Would save tax payers a lot of money. But personally, I think he will go to trial, find religion in jail and be freed a year after he enters prison. Put on probation, write a book and make a few million while he travels as a consultant for Obamacare or is appointed on of O'Bama's Czar's. At the very least, Penn State owes those abused a top notch FREE college education. Who knows, they may even play on the football team.

I don't think he will kill himself, at least not anytime soon. He is in such denial that he doesn't think he did anything wrong, he just "loves" kids.

Appalled is right....you'd be surprised how few of these monsters even have the capacity for guilt, let alone the shame that is necessary for suicide. Did you hear the Costas interview? That wasn't an act. These people really believe they've done nothing wrong.

Joe B...what in the world does the President of this country have to do with any of this. So stupid...why even reference that. You make yourself look pitiful. Sick of it. And as I said before, narcissists do not kill themselves. They just don't.

@ Joe B

"

Would save tax payers a lot of money. But personally, I think he will go to trial, find religion in jail and be freed a year after he enters prison. Put on probation, write a book and make a few million while he travels as a consultant for Obamacare or is appointed on of O'Bama's Czar's. At the very least, Penn State owes those abused a top notch FREE college education. Who knows, they may even play on the football team.

• What kind of an a$$hole would get the President in on this?
• !

But Mike, the Gov now was the State DA in 2002 when this first came out.....hmmmm...the story deepens.....

There is sooo much more to come out yet, it's a shame people like Curley, Spanier, mcQueery, Shultz, etc are STILL walking around collecting their money after this! don't hold Penn State as a whole accountable for the actions of a few, let's just get their punishment over with and have them made accountable. Nothing will bring back the innocence that was stolen from these kids, but accountability may help a little.

Seriously, according to the article the family only learned of the abuse after it had already occurred and the family was probably grateful that there was such a, then, reputable man caring for their child. It's now glaringly obvious why he founded this charity; how would a parent know, why would they suspect the worst from something that superficially appeared so good to them.

"Jerry Sandusky sexually abused a young boy more than 100 times after meeting him through the charity he founded, then threatened the boy's family to keep him quiet about the encounters..."

If this horrific scenario is found to be true, there may even be other predators involved. Pedophiles are birds of a feather that often flock together. They exchange photos, share their stories, and in some instance even share their victims; there's even an association called NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) that some discretely belong to.

It was seriously bad judgement to let him out. Not only is he at risk from the public, but suicide is a really huge risk here, and he could disappear as well. Horrible judgement, and I don't think it is related to the victims being boys. I think she may not have been able to reconcile the man she had heard of through the charity with the reality of what he has done. It is a common mistake and one reason these creeps keep getting opportunities to hurt more kids.

Suicide is actually rare for molesters once they are caught. They are inherently narcissistic and pathological liars. Sandusky will likely maintain his innocence until the day he rots in prison.

RevSpinnaker YOU ARE CORRECT! Thank you.

Most likely he threatened the boy that various things would happen to his family if he spoke up. It is the best way to keep silence:(

Sorry there "cms5", but the reality is that as of now there are only "alleged victims". If I accuse you of stealing my property, you won't soon tire of the judicial system "stoically" defending your presumption of innocence.

By all means Rick-881466 - accuse me of stealing your property.

Maybe I'll defend myself and force you to answer MY questions. You can be the "alleged victim"...the one without any rights.

You should chill a bit, "cms5". Without the courts considering me an "alleged victim" and simultaneously defending your presumption of innocence, you wouldn't get to ask any questions.

So, you're saying that the courts recognize that they must have a 'case' prior to proceeding with a trial? They must also recognize that they have an 'alleged victim'?

Guess that's why there are Grand Juries...to issue the indictments and start the court process.

Aside from the related requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the presumption of innocence is largely symbolic. The reality is that no defendant would face trial unless somebody—the crime victim, the prosecutor, a police officer—believed that the defendant was guilty of a crime. After the government has presented enough evidence to constitute Probable Cause to believe that the defendant has committed a crime, the accused need not be treated as if he or she was innocent of a crime, and the defendant may be jailed with the approval of the court.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Presumption+of+Innocence

Again, I understand the presumption of innocence. I just feel that victims are not treated fairly...especially in cases of sexual abuse against minors. They are forced to reveal as many details as possible in front of the accused and strangers.

Children do as adults tell them. They try their best to please the adults in their lives. A child in a disadvantaged home learns quickly to please those who can give them the things they wouldn't have otherwise. That makes them the perfect victim.

Tell me, the child that McQueary saw Sandusky in the shower with...the child who knew that McQueary saw what was happening...do you think that at that moment, that child thought that what Sandusky was doing must not be wrong if McQueary didn't do anything?

This isn't unusual. Victims are terrified, confused, feel helpless and are victimized over and over for years. That you find this unbelievable shows you know nothing about this. They're threatened, the abusers threaten the family, tell the child no one will believe him. Your comment is simply despicable.

Agreed RRuin. To call the victim a "sis" looking for a "big brother" implies he was asking for it. It also suggests a tacit approval. That belle of the South sounds more like a chauvinette bogot to me.

I don't normally revert to name calling but you are an idiot jbirdofthe south.

When you are threatened by an adult, you will believe that they will hurt the people you care about. You also believe then when they tell you if you tell no one will believe you and they will hate you. You are ashamed, you think it's your fault, even adult women feel that way when they are raped. That is why he didn't tell. You are thinking like someone who never had that happen to you. This is why you don't understand it. Don't blame the kid, blame the adult who did these horrible things to him.

Fantastic explanation Renee, for those who can't imagine what it's like because they were fortunate not to have to deal (or know of someone who had to deal) with such horrific abuse as a child.

Please, please! Don't blame the victims. That attitude is one of the reasons it is so hard for them to come forward.

There is not a shred of evidence that has been released suggesting that Paterno covered anything up. Perhaps he will be suing you.

Well, Penn State did still give him access to their facilities even after he was accused the first time and when it was witnessed the second time. They should be liable for something. Pennsylvanians won't be paying for this. That university has made alot of money from their football program and has become one of the richest if not the richest public university in the country. Why do you think they took so much care to protect it?

Like it or not, you are innocent until proven guilty. In 1998 Sandusky was accused of showering with and inappropriately touching a boy, it was reported to the police, the County DA had it investigated and the case was closed with no charges ever being filed. PSU had no grounds at that time to ban him from their facilities. The kid suing Sandusky now says he was abused in 1992 -1996. Penn State & the Second Mile knew nothing about abuse back then and can't be liable for it. I understand that abuse like this is traumatizing but why didn't this guy say anything once he was an adult? If it did happen to him and he wanted to make sure it didn't happen to other kids then he should have said something sooner, even 5 0r 6 years ago. I think that there is a lot of blame to be spread around.

Wow, your compassion is underwhelming. Don't you know how traumatized, ashamed, embarrassed and tortured a child victim must feel after being subjected to this, plus having your family threatened with harm if you told? It takes years to come to grips with it. I hope no one you care about is ever hurt in this way.

I could not agree more about the Facebook situation. Facebook is for children, not adult conversation.

Now my hometown newspaper is changing to FB comments, effective Thursday!!! I don't have FB and can't even connect to it at work anyway!

I do not go on Facebook or any other social network after FACEBOOK notified me that my information had been hacked. I will never join any of that crap to leave a comment on them. I will make one comment and I am not a "sis" as the idiot who identified himself as a southerner inferred. I was the receipient of sexual abuse when I was 9 years old and yes I kept it quiet. WHY, because I was ashamed, and in my mind must have done something wrong to have it happen to me. Some of you in your comments hit the nail on the head as far as the reasons for not telling anyone about it. There will always be someone like the idiot who referred to himself as a southerner who will blame the child because he does not have the brains God gave a monkey. Would you want someone like him to single you out in public as the kid who was abused and must like it. Git real dick @!$%#.

Thank you CAnne. You are correct!

Yes, one hundred times over many years. Maybe you should read more or quit commenting about this.

@ SouthernGrrrl: "Puh-LEEZE! The little "sis" is probably still looking for somebody to be his "big brother".

"[S]omething is a bit fishy about this story."

The fishiest thing I've read so far is you calling a male victim of child sexual assault a "sis." You sound like Laurie Fine in that taped phone call.

To KNOW what was going on and to take NO ACTION is just as bad as the actual abuse.

you're putting JP on the same playin' field as Sandusky?....not saying what Joe DIDN'T do was right either

It doesn't matter how many points were scored or how many games were won. Innocent children were abused, or suffered continued abuse, because the program was more important.

I participated in a lot of sports and I never saw my coach undressed and certainly not in any showers.

All of us, at one point or another in our lives, have had a coach. A Gym coach, team coach, etc.

Remember, not everyone is Catholic.

Which means what? How many coaches have been accused in recent months of the sexual abuse of boys or girls? Why are these described or treated as isolated incidents? Why do many people stupidly bash or ridicule all priests because of a pedophilia scandal, but not bash or ridicule all coaches and schools for the same thing? It doesn't matter that everyone isn't a Catholic; that has nothing to do with anything. Public outrage over pedophilia has castigated many good priests and lumped them together with rotten ones, but public outrage over coach/school scandals pales in comparison, and treats bad coaches as individuals. This is hypocrisy.

When they protect the bad people, the good people also become the bad people.

So you're saying the public should look at all coaches as pedophiles?

It's estimated that 4-5% of the clergy has been involved in a sexual abuse case. Coaches are estimated at 2%.

While the numbers aren't far apart, I'm really not surprised there's such a stigma against the Catholic church now. There is a huge difference between coaches and the clergy. The clergy are suppose to be god's men. They are suppose to dedicate their lives to god, the church, and other believers to help their relationship with god. Those guilty of molesting children took that authority, abused it, and during the 80's when they were caught were simply moved by those higher up in the clergy. It's a massive cover up with people who are suppose to be devoting their lives to god and their fellow man. It's that hypocrisy that they themselves showed that enraged people. Catholics felt betrayed members of their own faith were involved with something so insidious, I know several who lost their faith from it, non Catholics felt discouraged that people supposedly devoting their life to god and the common good could be so vile.

Coaches, by comparison, are suppose to be trustworthy and a positive force for the children they deal with. But they aren't made out to be god's men. It's horrible, inexcusable, but not tied into religion. I believe that's why people have reacted so unfairly. The clergy are set at a higher standard. I don't think it's fair. I grew up Catholic and knew many kind and devoted priests. But I do see why it was seen as such a bigger betrayal when the scandal broke out about the clergy.

No, of course not. I'm saying that priests should be treated as coaches are, as individuals, without all getting tainted reputations because of what SOME do. Internet comments re: priests and religion in relation to pedophilia have been scathing. Internet comments re: coaches and sports in relation to pedophilia have not.

Not that people haven't looked up to their coaches over the years as role models, but priests in the catholic church set themselves up as MORAL GUIDES. The level of hypocrisy is WAY greater with them, and with those covering it up. That's why you read those comments. Your calling people hypocrites who make comments like that is almost funny when compared to the hypocrisy demonstrated by those in that "moral" institution. BTW, I think this is the first comment I've ever made on the subject of pedophile priests.

Coaches may not be "God's men", but they are held in high esteem and often treated as demi-gods in their own right. They symbolize integrity, fair play, and other virtues, even as priests symbolize good virtues. Coaches may not help people in their relationships with God, but they do shape relationships between team mates, fans, and the larger community. Priests are called "father". Many coaches are and have been father figures to young people who have known them. Schools have engaged in cover ups to save the reputation of institutions, even as churches have. I do not see how betrayal in one instance is less or more than betrayal in the other. The standards of secular schools and their sports programs, though not religious, touch on many of the same values that religious codes speak of. I don't expect more of priests because they are "religious". The values of secular institutions and the trust of those who embody them are no less important.

I suppose it's because I was once Catholic and never had a coach. I don't regard coaches as demi-gods or that they symbolize all these good virtues. The only coaches I see are football coaches, and that's just on the TV when they're screaming at the players for dropping the ball.

I'm simply trying to give you a reason, since you're asking, about why people would feel more betrayed by the clergy than a coach. From my own personal experience, I find both instances of betrayal horrible and unforgivable. But there was a time I held priests in a very high regard, and had absolute trust in them. So their betrayal and cover up hit me harder. I'm not saying that's true for everyone. But, again, you did ask "Why then, the hatred exhibited by so many for priests in general, Catholics in particular, but no generalizations about coaches and schools?" That would be my answer.

Hans, I appreciate your comment (as a Catholic myself) and I, too, wish that not all priests had a bad name because of the sins of a few. I truly wish people would realize how FEW "priests" (because they obviously are not true priests) committed these acts in comparison with how MANY good priests there are doing amazing things for the world. However, I think Sally made a good point. It's not that people just got together and decided to demonize the Catholic Church (although with some of the comments I've seen, it's possible that some did). They felt betrayed by an institution that is supposed to stand for everything good. Yes, coaches and priests are both leaders, role models, and guides. But priests are a representation of Christ while coaches are, at most, father figures. That's why the betrayals differ. But once again, I completely agree that people should look at the "priests" who commit such heinous acts individually rather than lumping them with so many good men.

My thanks to you and Sally for your thoughtful replies!

Hans

No, of course not. I'm saying that priests should be treated as coaches are, as individuals, without all getting tainted reputations because of what SOME do. Internet comments re: priests and religion in relation to pedophilia have been scathing. Internet comments re: coaches and sports in relation to pedophilia have not.

Believe it or not, I understand what you're trying to say. I don't think this is much different. Penn State, the football program, Penn State coaches, the Second Mile charity...all remotely involved will suffer the wrath of the public. Just as it was with the Catholic church and Priests.

BOTH involved a cover-up of sexual abuse against minors in order to savetheir 'name'. Penn State had their football program and the Catholic Church wanted to save themselves.

sidebar: I used to be Catholic and my experiences with Priests as a child were always good. I don't think that all Priests are pedophiles...nor do I think all coaches are pedophiles.