Skip to main content

View Diary: Gov. Corbett tries to defend his failure to prosecute Jerry Sandusky (143 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  There is no mystery here (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CherryTheTart, tobendaro

    it happens all the time, and it's more about human psychology than it is any kind of conspiracy. Judith Herman M.D. describes this best:

    Those who bear witness are caught in the conflict between victim and perpetrator. It is morally impossible to remain neutral in this conflict. The bystander is forced to take sides. It is very tempting to take the side of the perpetrator. All the perpetrator asks is that thebystander do nothing. He appeals to the universal desire to see, hear, and speak no evil. The victim, on the contrary, asks the bystander to share the burden of pain. The victim demands action, engagement, and remembering.

    [...]

    In order to escape accountability for his crimes, the perpetrator does everything in his power to promote forgetting. Secrecy and silence are the perpetrator’s first line of defense. If secrecy fails, the perpetrator attacks the credibility of his victim. If he cannot silence her absolutely, he tries to make sure that no one listens. To this end, he marshals an impressive array of arguments, from the most blatant denial to the most sophisticated and elegant rationalization. After every atrocity one can expect to hear the same predictable apologies: it never happened; the victim lies; the victim exaggerates; thevictim brought it upon herself; and in any case it is time to forget the past and move on. The more powerful the perpetrator, the greater is his prerogative to name and definereality, and the more completely his arguments prevail.

    The perpetrator’s arguments prove irresistible when the bystander faces them inisolation. Without a supportive social environment, the bystander usually succumbs to the temptation to look the other way. This is true even when the victim is an idealized and valued member of society. Soldiers in every war, even those who have been regarded as heroes, complain bitterly that no one wants to know the real truth about war. When the victim is already devalued (a woman, a child), she may find that the most traumatic events of her life take place outside the realm of socially validated reality. Her experience becomes unspeakable.

    What was done to those boys was outside of the sphere of socially validated reality in Happy Valley. How many times have we heard things like this don't happen here.

    Add to that the power and position of Sandusky, and the devalued social status of the victims (not only children, but children from broken homes and troubled backgrounds) Add to that the close ties between PSU and Second Mile, and many other factors that just made it easier to look the other way.

    Trust me-they knew.

    You must work-we must all work-to make a world that is worthy of its children -Pablo Casals Please support TREE Climbers for victims of child sexual abuse and exploitation.

    by SwedishJewfish on Wed Jul 25, 2012 at 10:10:14 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Absolutely they knew. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SwedishJewfish

      And they did what incest families/groups do: they hid and they lied and they pretended it never happened.

      I used to be Snow White. And then I drifted. - Mae West

      by CherryTheTart on Thu Jul 26, 2012 at 12:24:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Based on your article, every single person reacted (0+ / 0-)

      exactly the same, and exactly as you described.  That doesn't seem possible to me.

      Where is there any evidence any of these men, devalued anyone, or thought anyone was lying, or dismissed what the victim said?  No victim ever spoke to any of the PSU people.  In fact, the '98 victims claims were reported, believed, investigated by both the police and childrens services, and deemed to be "unfounded".  And, please remember, even the Freeh report stated PSU did not influence this investigation or the decision to drop.  Also, no one to this day even knows who the child was in 2001.  So I don't see evidence they choose to not believe any victims.

      Everyone seems to ignore or dismiss that Sandusky was investigated in '98 and found to not be the man we know he is now.  If only police or children's services would have done a better job, Sandusky would have been stopped in '98.  Should PSU have ignored the results of the investigation and decided they were smarter than the "experts".  I don't think that would have been received well by anyone in '98.

      But at least, with PSU handled to many's satisfaction (I know--not everyone's), the focus will shift to the Pa. officials and those that were charged with protecting children, had how the completely failed.  FINALLY!!!!

      I would love to "trust you", but trust isn't proof.  Trust doesn't convict.  And trust only works if it is reciprocated .  I don't think you will accept , "trust me...they never thought he was raping children".  And nor should you.  Nor will I.  

      •  Actually (0+ / 0-)

        The 1998 investigation included a report by a psychologist which said that Sandusky was a likely pedophile

        “There was very little doubt in my mind (Sandusky) … was a male predator, someone that was in the process of grooming a young man for abuse ,” said Chambers, speaking publicly for the first time, with the permission of her client’s family, in an interview with NBC News. “I thought…my report was strong enough to suggest that this was somebody who should be watched.”
        According to the Department of Public Welfare (now Children and Youth Services) official who oversaw that case, he was never provided with a copy of that report. He was provided with a second psychologists report, which determined that no sexual contact had occurred.

        As to this...

        Where is there any evidence any of these men, devalued anyone, or thought anyone was lying, or dismissed what the victim said?  No victim ever spoke to any of the PSU people.  In fact, the '98 victims claims were reported, believed, investigated by both the police and childrens services, and deemed to be "unfounded".  And, please remember, even the Freeh report stated PSU did not influence this investigation or the decision to drop.  Also, no one to this day even knows who the child was in 2001.  So I don't see evidence they choose to not believe any victims.
        To this day no one knows who that child was because there was never any attempt to locate him! A child was found being raped in the Penn State locker room by a grown man, and nothing was done to try to locate that child and make sure he was OK, let alone get his side of the story. If that is not evidence that they devalued the victims, I don't know what is.

        As for "trusting" me... I think the evidence here speaks for itself and I'm frankly perplexed that you could look at it and draw any other conclusion. But consider that my insight is based on my experiences both as a victim of child sexual abuse myself (abuse that at least one other adult was aware of, but never reported) and as a victims advocate who has talked to hundreds of other survivors, so I know that it's far from uncommon. With that insight, and after spending 2 weeks in Bellefonte attending the trial, and talking to those with intimate knowledge of what happened-including Matt Sandusky's biological mother, and the mother of victim #6 (who was at the center of the 1998 incident), I can tell you with as much certainty as I'm living and breathing that those men knew.

        You must work-we must all work-to make a world that is worthy of its children -Pablo Casals Please support TREE Climbers for victims of child sexual abuse and exploitation.

        by SwedishJewfish on Thu Jul 26, 2012 at 04:57:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I am aware of all of the information you have (0+ / 0-)

          metioned.  But, I simply don't accept some of your conclusions.

          First, CYS screwed up royally.  That there were two psychologist commissioned to do an evaluation in '98, and only one report was shared, is a disgrace, especially being because they only shared the "Sandusky is ok" report.  Exactly who is involved in the cover up?  Not PSU at this time.  How can CYS claim to be competent?  And they broke or ignored the law by not reporting that Sandusky was under investigation to 2nd Mile.  Completely incompetent, and lacking of the necessary skills required to do their job.  But how can that be held against PSU?  Again, according to Freeh they stayed completely out of the investigation.  

          I agree with you that PSU officials failed in their duty to attempt to located the child in 2001.  To me, this was their largest mistake, and makes them deserving of all the outrage.  But, I do not think they believed the child was being raped in 2001.  Based on the fact that every person who heard McQueary's account, didn't call the police, (including McQueary), makes it quite plausible he never reported what he later described to the DA.  The family friend who was a Dr. (forget his name) testified he asked McQueary 3x if he saw a rape and McQueary answered no each time.  I'm not making accuses for these guys.  They failed.  But there is no evidence that they thought a rape occurred.  In fact, all evidence points to them not believing a rape occurred.  They all reacted exactly the same.

          As to the abuse you suffered, I am truly sorry.  I applaud your dedication to this horrible scandal.  However, I have to say that simply because of your experience, that you believe you have a greater ability to discern "facts", is unfair.  Saying this means you have no want or need to hear any other opinion.  That I must accept what you say as fact.  You do not have any idea of my past or my experience.  I will not throw that out there to lend credence to my arguments.  I have been trying to simply review that facts in an unbiased manner, and base my conclusions strictly on that.  Not what I want or expect the conclusions to be.

          Would it be fair for Mr. Spainer to say, "you have to believe my version, regardless of the facts, because I too an a survivor of  child abuse"?  I think we would all rightly say "no" to that.

          They may well have known.  However, the facts at this time do not make that clear.

          What is clear is that CYS knew something was wrong and did nothing.  What is clear is that the DA allowed Sandusky 3 yrs of unsupervised access to children while they investigated he may well be a serial pedophile.  What is known is the state placed 20+ forster children in Sandusky's home.  And finally, what is known is that 2nd Mile ignored verbal warnings and signs that Sandusky was a serial pedophile.

          Nothing to date has been done to investigate how this guy existed in the world of child care experts and law enforcement officials, and no one tried to stop him.  The PSU punishments, while possibly deserved (I'm still not in complete agreement and really isn't revelant) have done nothing to protect 1 child in Pa.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site