Pete C Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 Could be a job for Andrew Vachss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Kart Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 What I hope a good novel about Sandusky would show is something I don't know except in an intuitive, guess-like manner -- what a man like this really thinks and feels. For one thing, I've heard a number of people say that his whole kid rescue foundation thing was just a coldblooded candy-like screen so he could troll for the kind of vulnerable kids whom he hoped to lure/coerce into becoming his sexual objects. I'd bet a good deal that instead for Sandusky and his ilk the helping and the coercion/seduction are all of a piece and/or chapters in single unfolding hotblooded fantasy. If so, I would further bet that there is, in effect, little or no cynicism or hypocrisy involved on Sandusky's part. Rather, in his head the "helping"/"rescuing" process and the coercive -- you should pardon the expression -- "intimacy" he experiences are inseparable from his point of view and serve to powerfully reinforce (to say the least) the fantasy"s coherence and "rightness." A final guess -- it's a would-be magical attempt to transform the profoundly coercive into -- again, please pardon the expression -- a form of "love." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slide_advantage_redoux Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 Sadusky's Christmas wish list is a short one. Soap-on-a-rope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 I seem to recall hearing somewhere that pedophiles are at the bottom of the food chain (as it were) in prison society. So I don't think he's going to have a very easy time of it - if he survives, that is. Yes, there's even a good chance that even the prison guards will "turn a blind eye" to ensure that he gets taken out. I'd be more than a little surprised if he gets to serve even 3 months of his sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.D. Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 Surely he'll request some kind of "protective custody" or whatever the term is. But guards could still turn blind eyes, etc. (one recalls Jeffrey Dahmer's demise, though he apparently refused PC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 Surely he'll request some kind of "protective custody" or whatever the term is. But guards could still turn blind eyes, etc. (one recalls Jeffrey Dahmer's demise, though he apparently refused PC). Protective custody or not, my observation stands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertoart Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 (edited) I seem to recall hearing somewhere that pedophiles are at the bottom of the food chain (as it were) in prison society. So I don't think he's going to have a very easy time of it - if he survives, that is. Yes, there's even a good chance that even the prison guards will "turn a blind eye" to ensure that he gets taken out. I'd be more than a little surprised if he gets to serve even 3 months of his sentence. The prison system would have more than a few perpetrators like this guy. The difference being this guy was famous and influential and was able to construct systems to gain opportunities to offend. He will serve his time. I would be surprised if anyone got to him fatally in prison. Money still talks (and swears). There was another similar case to this that UK members will know, regarding a wealthy and influential Cricket writer/identity. Similar to the scenario Larry Kart has outlined above, this person - Peter Roebuck - constructed elaborate structures to 'support' Black African male youth. It was shamefully overlooked by the 'establishment', who obviously couldn't confront the pathetic reality underlining Roebuck's exploitation. When eventually, it appeared his 'world' was about to unravel - through people speaking out - he jumped to his death from his hotel window. Edited June 24, 2012 by freelancer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 I seem to recall that one of the worst pedophile priests was killed by an inmate very shortly after he was convicted and incarcerated - within months, iirc. I'd be shocked if Sandusky doesn't suffer the same fate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertoart Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 I seem to recall that one of the worst pedophile priests was killed by an inmate very shortly after he was convicted and incarcerated - within months, iirc. I'd be shocked if Sandusky doesn't suffer the same fate. He wont. Time will tell though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 I seem to recall that one of the worst pedophile priests was killed by an inmate very shortly after he was convicted and incarcerated - within months, iirc. I'd be shocked if Sandusky doesn't suffer the same fate. He wont. Time will tell though. Everyone will want a crack at the bad famous guy. To be applauded and get their 15 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertoart Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 It's a pity the death penalty is negatively weighted against the innocent and usually disadvantaged. While jails remain full of people who otherwise have done no lasting harm over time to anyone but themselves - and their loved ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 (edited) It's a pity the death penalty is negatively weighted against the innocent and usually disadvantaged. While jails remain full of people who otherwise have done no lasting harm over time to anyone but themselves - and their loved ones. Hey, this is supposed to be a non-political thread! Those are some pretty sweeping generalized statements. Crimes against oneself may not be, but crimes against one's family can be considered crimes against humanity. The bigger picture crime exposed here is the way the NCAA and college sports programs treat student athletes like cattle to make a buck in the name of providing an education to those who can't afford one. THIS is what needs to change in the world of supposed academia. This is why I can tell anyone who asks without having to think about it the exact number of college sporting events I watch each and every year -- ZERO. Edited June 24, 2012 by JETman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ValerieB Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 i don't think it's been mentioned here that Sandusky even legally adopted more than one of his victims!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertoart Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 (edited) It's a pity the death penalty is negatively weighted against the innocent and usually disadvantaged. While jails remain full of people who otherwise have done no lasting harm over time to anyone but themselves - and their loved ones. Hey, this is supposed to be a non-political thread! Those are some pretty sweeping generalized statements. Crimes against oneself may not be, but crimes against one's family can be considered crimes against humanity. The bigger picture crime exposed here is the way the NCAA and college sports programs treat student athletes like cattle to make a buck in the name of providing an education to those who can't afford one. THIS is what needs to change in the world of supposed academia. This is why I can tell anyone who asks without having to think about it the exact number of college sporting events I watch each and every year -- ZERO. No I meant when you hurt yourself - you are also hurting the people who love you. I didn't mean intentionally hurting those people, just that they are also the inadvertent victims of (usually what is) drug and alcohol abuse and also things related to Mental Health issues. With regards to the political content - what is the difference between raising the issue of harm to this person, Sandusky, (with a diagonal nod of approval for this person being harmed and/or killed by other inmates as some posts suggest) or raising the spectre of the State doing it? BTW I disagree with death penalties for the reason that innocent people will always be sentenced. Edited June 24, 2012 by freelancer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFrank Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 Joe Nocera has written several columns in the NY Times this year about the many problems with the NCAA and big-time college sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 It's a pity the death penalty is negatively weighted against the innocent and usually disadvantaged. While jails remain full of people who otherwise have done no lasting harm over time to anyone but themselves - and their loved ones. Hey, this is supposed to be a non-political thread! Those are some pretty sweeping generalized statements. Crimes against oneself may not be, but crimes against one's family can be considered crimes against humanity. The bigger picture crime exposed here is the way the NCAA and college sports programs treat student athletes like cattle to make a buck in the name of providing an education to those who can't afford one. THIS is what needs to change in the world of supposed academia. This is why I can tell anyone who asks without having to think about it the exact number of college sporting events I watch each and every year -- ZERO. No I meant when you hurt yourself - you are also hurting the people who love you. I didn't mean intentionally hurting those people, just that they are also the inadvertent victims of (usually what is) drug and alcohol abuse and also things related to Mental Health issues. With regards to the political content - what is the difference between raising the issue of harm to this person, Sandusky, (with a diagonal nod of approval for this person being harmed and/or killed by other inmates as some posts suggest) or raising the spectre of the State doing it? BTW I disagree with death penalties for the reason that innocent people will always be sentenced. I understood what you meant. There is a "diagonal nod of approval" for hurting Sandusky because what he did is considered disgusting to the core of every decent human being. For me, being a parent only serves to drive this point even further home. Don't turn this into yet another legalize mary jane debate. Maybe we need more mental health hospitals in this country. Good luck finding top notch shrinks to work 'em though! Your critique of the penal system in this country is tired and old. It's what we got. It's really quite simple -- you wanna avoid experiencing its shortcomings firsthand, you stay on the straight and narrow. Dig? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JETman Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 Joe Nocera has written several columns in the NY Times this year about the many problems with the NCAA and big-time college sports. Yeah, but did he say anything even close to what I said (and nobody else here has said)? I know firsthand that ALL Penn Staters (and all of Pennsylvania for that matter) have drunk the JoePa Kool-aid for far too long. Sacrificing our principles for the sake of college athletics needs to end here, or this has all been meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFrank Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 Joe Nocera has written several columns in the NY Times this year about the many problems with the NCAA and big-time college sports. Yeah, but did he say anything even close to what I said (and nobody else here has said)? I know firsthand that ALL Penn Staters (and all of Pennsylvania for that matter) have drunk the JoePa Kool-aid for far too long. Sacrificing our principles for the sake of college athletics needs to end here, or this has all been meaningless. Yeah - pretty much. You should look some of them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertoart Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 (edited) It's a pity the death penalty is negatively weighted against the innocent and usually disadvantaged. While jails remain full of people who otherwise have done no lasting harm over time to anyone but themselves - and their loved ones. Hey, this is supposed to be a non-political thread! Those are some pretty sweeping generalized statements. Crimes against oneself may not be, but crimes against one's family can be considered crimes against humanity. The bigger picture crime exposed here is the way the NCAA and college sports programs treat student athletes like cattle to make a buck in the name of providing an education to those who can't afford one. THIS is what needs to change in the world of supposed academia. This is why I can tell anyone who asks without having to think about it the exact number of college sporting events I watch each and every year -- ZERO. No I meant when you hurt yourself - you are also hurting the people who love you. I didn't mean intentionally hurting those people, just that they are also the inadvertent victims of (usually what is) drug and alcohol abuse and also things related to Mental Health issues. With regards to the political content - what is the difference between raising the issue of harm to this person, Sandusky, (with a diagonal nod of approval for this person being harmed and/or killed by other inmates as some posts suggest) or raising the spectre of the State doing it? BTW I disagree with death penalties for the reason that innocent people will always be sentenced. I understood what you meant. There is a "diagonal nod of approval" for hurting Sandusky because what he did is considered disgusting to the core of every decent human being. For me, being a parent only serves to drive this point even further home. Don't turn this into yet another legalize mary jane debate. Maybe we need more mental health hospitals in this country. Good luck finding top notch shrinks to work 'em though! Your critique of the penal system in this country is tired and old. It's what we got. It's really quite simple -- you wanna avoid experiencing its shortcomings firsthand, you stay on the straight and narrow. Dig? Not turning it into anything. Just a bit bemused by posters suggesting there is some kind of moral order in the penal system that's going to give this perpetrator his just desserts. The reality will be far more mercantile and pragmatic. Could be someone murders him for reasons you suggest, like a chance to grab the spotlight, but I doubted. A lot of circumstances would have to be aligned for that to happen. He will more than likely just rot quietly away. At least his victims were vindicated by their day in court, because that's more than most victims get. Hopefully it will help their healing, if that's possible. Edited June 24, 2012 by freelancer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 You'd have to live under a rock to be ignorant of the fact that there is a pecking order in prison and that child abusers are the lowest of the low. Do all incarcerated child abusers get killed? I'm sure they don't. Doesn't mean that Sandusky won't suffer that fate, or that absent protective custody he won't get gang-raped or brutally beaten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertoart Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 You'd have to live under a rock to be ignorant of the fact that there is a pecking order in prison and that child abusers are the lowest of the low. Do all incarcerated child abusers get killed? I'm sure they don't. Doesn't mean that Sandusky won't suffer that fate, or that absent protective custody he won't get gang-raped or brutally beaten. Yeah everybody knows their the lowest of the low. But there's a lot of low to go around. Ever been close to the prison population beyond TV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Train Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 "As soon as the lights went out at night, Sandusky's fellow inmates at the Centre County Correctional Facility serenaded him with a chorus from Pink Floyd's "The Wall": "Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone!" Anyway, while those who do anything to children are considered the lowest of the low. Very few are actually killed. Someone as well known as him will go into protective custody. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2011/11/jerry_sandusky_out_on_bail_are_child_molesters_tormented_in_american_prisons_.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soulstation1 Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 Soulstation1: [narrating] I wish I could tell you that Jerry fought the good fight, and the Sisters let him be. I wish I could tell you that - but prison is no fairy-tale world. He never said who did it, but we all knew. Things went on like that for awhile - prison life consists of routine, and then more routine. Every so often, Jerry would show up with fresh bruises. The Sisters kept at him - sometimes he was able to fight 'em off, sometimes not. And that's how it went for Jerry - that was his routine. I do believe those first two years were the worst for him, and I also believe that if things had gone on that way, this place would have got the best of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertoart Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 (edited) "As soon as the lights went out at night, Sandusky's fellow inmates at the Centre County Correctional Facility serenaded him with a chorus from Pink Floyd's "The Wall": "Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone!" Anyway, while those who do anything to children are considered the lowest of the low. Very few are actually killed. Someone as well known as him will go into protective custody. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2011/11/jerry_sandusky_out_on_bail_are_child_molesters_tormented_in_american_prisons_.html Exactly. And he will rot away and die. Eventually. "But a convict’s crime plays only a small role in his social status and safety. Most jailhouse assaults happen because the victim violated prison norms, not because of the crime he committed on the outside. Those who steal tobacco, disrespect the members of an opposing gang, or snitch are in for a much rougher ride than the average molester". Edited June 24, 2012 by freelancer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soulstation1 Posted June 24, 2012 Report Share Posted June 24, 2012 One more thing How many other men did JS fuck up and now are afraid to come forward? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts