Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

madashelltoo

(1,698 posts)
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 05:51 PM Jun 2012

Now I know why none of Sandusky's children came forward

Matt Sandusky was prepared to rebutt his father's testimony and tell the court he had witnessed and potentially was a victim. They are discussing it on Matthews' show (MSNBC) now.

14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

elleng

(130,974 posts)
3. Because Sandusky didn't take the stand and profess his innocence.
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 05:57 PM
Jun 2012

Had he done so, Matt was willing to 'confront' that evidence with history of him and his father.

Case based on testimonies of other kids, not his children.

lunatica

(53,410 posts)
4. Don't tell me you can't figure that out
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 06:02 PM
Jun 2012

Big damn family secrets kept because there's shame and love and anger and pity all mixed up in you when you're a child. Maybe it's to protect siblings or the mother, or the grandparents, uncles and extended family.

If his son was going to do this it must have been incredibly difficult for him to make that decision. Incest and pedophilia hurts much more than just the immediate victims. Especially when it becomes out. It destroys everyone.

Proud Liberal Dem

(24,415 posts)
6. I'm not sure
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 06:12 PM
Jun 2012

how that would have been obvious to me. I get what you're saying and know somewhat about the dynamics of sexual abuse (I work for CPS) but I don't know anything personal about the Sandusky family or what the motivations of his son may or may not have been about testifying (or not).

SoutherDem

(2,307 posts)
5. I think we would be shocked if we knew how many children this man abused.
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 06:10 PM
Jun 2012

I may be wrong, but I think the ones we have heard about are just the tip of the iceberg. He was in a position to have abused possibly hundreds of children and have the officials at Penn State and the reputation of Penn State to cover it up.

blue neen

(12,322 posts)
7. Agreed.
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 06:14 PM
Jun 2012

One other thing to mention---the governor of Pennsylvania, Tom Corbett, also covered up Jerry Sandusky's crimes.

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
9. I think it goes way deep and they want this case over ASAP with Sandusky taking the blame for it all
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 06:21 PM
Jun 2012

I think the charity (since closed down) was a front for a child prostitution ring. I think that a lot of important people paid for services that these children were forced to provide by making donations to that charity. Of course we will never know.

 

kestrel91316

(51,666 posts)
13. That's the exact feeling I got, too. The charity was a way for Sandusky and
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 07:27 PM
Jun 2012

fellow wealthy, influential pedophiles to get fresh meat.

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
8. I understand that Matt was a foster child and was adopted by Sandusky as an adult
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 06:17 PM
Jun 2012

I'm curious to know why he was adopted as an adult?

yellerpup

(12,253 posts)
11. From the minute the media announced
Thu Jun 21, 2012, 06:25 PM
Jun 2012

that he and his wife had adopted five boys (1 girl) I knew this would happen. Child rapists are notorious serial criminals and the usually go for their own children first because that's the most convenient. I didn't believe his wife about not hearing screams from the basement, especially when she said she had 'very good hearing.'

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Now I know why none of Sa...