Newspaper article Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pittsburgh, PA)

Sandusky Victim Sues Penn State 18-Year-Old Claims Psu Officials Concealed Crimes

Newspaper article Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pittsburgh, PA)

Sandusky Victim Sues Penn State 18-Year-Old Claims Psu Officials Concealed Crimes

Article excerpt

The 18-year-old youth whose allegations of sexual abuse by Jerry Sandusky eventually resulted in the conviction of the former assistant Penn State University football coach for widespread and longstanding abuse of boys has filed a civil suit against the school.

Filed by the young person known as Victim 1 at Mr. Sandusky's trial, the suit described Mr. Sandusky as "a pedophile, a rapist disguised as an avuncular sports figure," whose crimes were concealed by Penn State's top officials -- former President Graham Spanier; former administrator Gary Schultz; athletic director Tim Curley, who is on leave; and legendary head football coach Joe Paterno, who died in January. Mr. Schultz and Mr. Curley are awaiting trial of lying to a grand jury that investigated the case and with failing to report suspected child abuse.

"By its negligent and/or reckless oversight of Sandusky and/or by its intentional concealment of multiple episodes of abuse of children by Sandusky, Penn State enabled Sandusky to molest many other young boys, including the plaintiff," the suit said.

The suit, filed in Philadelphia Common Pleas Court on Friday, seeks damages in excess of $50,000 along with interest, costs, compensatory and punitive damages.

Particularly "outrageous," the suit said, was that the four officials did not report to law enforcement authorities, as required, a 2001 incident in which then-graduate assistant coach Mike McQueary said he saw Mr. Sandusky raping a young boy in the shower of the Lasch Building, the football facility. Moreover, the suit said, they didn't adequately alert The Second Mile, the Sandusky-founded program for at-risk youth from which he picked those he groomed for abuse.

The suit alleged they didn't do so "because they believed that the publicity associated with any such reporting would besmirch the reputation and 'brand' of Penn State, adversely impact the University's lucrative football program, negatively affect the University's financial standing, reflect poorly upon their own individual reputations, and potentially expose the University to liability for the acts of sexual abuse committed by Mr. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.