Penn State Officials Face Trial In Abuse Case, radio interview on child molesters

Penn State Officials Face Trial In Sex Abuse Case
by Jeff Brady
December 17, 2011

Accused of trying to cover up Penn State’s child sex abuse scandal, two former administrators will face a trial on perjury charges. A judge made that decision at a preliminary hearing on Friday, as NPR’s Jeff Brady reports. Warning: This segment contains language that may not be suitable for all audiences. http://www.npr.org/2011/12/17/143886780/penn-state-officials-face-trial-in-sex-abuse-case

Penn State officials to stand trial in abuse case
By Mark Shade HARRISBURG, Pa  Fri Dec 16, 2011

(Reuters) – A judge ruled on Friday that two former senior Penn State officials must stand trial on charges of lying to a grand jury about what they knew of sexual abuse allegations against former coach Jerry Sandusky.

District Judge William Wenner decided there was enough evidence against former Penn State athletic director Tim Curley and finance official Gary Schultz that they should be brought to trial. The ruling capped a court hearing where a key witness, Mike McQueary, testified in public for the first time that he saw Sandusky in a sex act with a 10-year-old boy in 2002.

The explosive allegations against Sandusky have shocked the university and the college-sports world, and focused national attention on the serious problem of child sex abuse. The story told by McQueary, a graduate assistant in the university’s football program at the time, is key to the case against the two Penn State officials and Sandusky.

This is because McQueary testified that he personally witnessed the abuse and then told his boss, former head coach Joe Paterno, who in turn told Curley. Even though McQueary’s account was passed up the line of authority at Penn State, no one told police and Sandusky’s alleged behavior continued for years.

Curley and Schultz deny that they lied to the grand jury and say that Paterno and McQueary only told them in general terms about the incident and not in graphic detail. Sandusky has been charged with 52 counts of child sexual abuse involving 10 victims over 15 years. The identity of two of the victims, including the boy in the shower, remains unknown, prosecutors said. Sandusky has said he is innocent….

“I believe he was sexually molesting the boy,” McQueary testified at the hearing in the Dauphin County Courthouse on Friday. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/17/us-crime-coach-pennstate-idUSTRE7BF01R20111217

Radio talk show host Keith Hansen interviews researcher and former therapist, Lynn Crook, M.Ed., on current issues related to child molesters.   Where do we find them?  How do they operate?  When should we decide what to do if our child is molested? http://vyzygothraw.com/audio/crook.mp3

review of “Sybil Exposed” by Lynn Crook

review of “Sybil Exposed” by Lynn Crook

permission from author of review to post

Sybil Exposed: The Extraordinary Story Behind the Famous Multiple Personality Case

This book “reads like fiction” as the cover says.

But is it “fact” as the cover claims?

On page 222 of “Sybil Exposed,” Nathan says, “Roseanne Barr . . . would later describe her twenty alter personalities. They included `Piggy,’ `Bambi and `F . . . . . ‘” Nathan’s cite for this statement is People Magazine, October 7, 1991.

However, there is no mention of any alter personalities in the 1991 article (pp. 84-88) by correspondent Vickie Bane. None of these names are mentioned in the article. Nathan also says that Barr “forgot about it until she entered therapy.” But in the People Magazine article, Barr says she started to recover memories of abuse after her then-fiancé Tom’s telephone call from rehab in 1989 telling her he was molested by a babysitter (p. 85). After she began to recall, then Barr saw a therapist.

On page 225 of her book Nathan says, “The state of Texas closed Peterson’s dissociative disorders unit after determining it had overused physical restraints . . . ” This claim may have originated with Frontline’s 1995 documentary, “Divided Memories.” In 1996, when I reviewed this Frontline documentary for a news journal, I contacted the Texas Department of Health. A spokesperson there denied any such closing of the unit. The review was published in 1996.

Nathan fails to mention that the trial of US v. Peterson et al. on mail and insurance fraud vindicated Peterson and the others of all charges. Here’s what happened in this Houston trial. By February 1999, the federal government had been presenting its case for six months. The government’s first expert, Dr. James Hudson, had just undergone a rigorous cross-examination by Peterson’s attorney. The jury was down to 12 members and the defense was prepared to continue. The government dropped all the charges.