Saturday, June 23, 2012

Sandusky's Guilty. Now what?

The Jerry Sandusky guilty verdict undoubtedly surprised no one, except maybe for the news breaking so late in the evening. This time is a good time to point out a few things about this entire debacle. .Now that Sandusky is convicted on 45 counts of sexual abuse, you must take a hard look at this man in relation to Megan's Flaw.

Megan's Law and subsequent laws, like the Adam Walsh Act and Jessica's Law, were birthed in high-profile cases. When we think of the registry, we think of people like Sandusky. However, if you look on the Megan's Law list, you would not find Jerry Sandusky's face. I discussed this detail in a previous blog post.No registry, no residency restriction, no GPS monitoring, no signs in the lawn, and no scarlet letter law could have prevented this man from committing sex crimes, because he is among the about 95% of sex crime cases that are committed by those with no prior record.


The second point. We think everyone on the registry is a Jerry Sandusky type offender, they all got a slap on the wrist, and so on. Well, people like Jerry Sandusky will never see the light of day. Then there are those who are out and on the list. All 750,000 of them will pay for what Sandusky did somehow. Some new law, some more tightening of the screws, and more vigilante violence.

Across the country, in Washington state, two people were being put to rest as a criminal with a history of drugs and assault shot and killed two people on the list and planned to kill a third. Both were free, they served their time and had been out for years without incident. One of the men was a 28 year old man who, at age 17, had a consensual relationship with another teen who was deaf. The parents did not approve and the boy was charged with the ominous sounding "first-degree rape." Since then, he got married and had two kids. These two children will grow up with out their father, and the person who murdered their father is declared a hero by society with Jerry Sandusky on their minds.

Patrick Drum did not kill two "Jerry Sanduskys." Nor did Sandusky's victims ever find him on the list.

The registry protects no one.

For another take on this, read Shana Rowan's blog:

http://www.iloveasexoffender.blogspot.com/2012/06/jerry-sandusky-never-was-never-will-be.html

Another take on this, from Shaun Webb:

http://amotionforinnocence.wordpress.com/2012/06/24/i-believe-sandusky-did-it-but/

2 comments:

  1. Great post Derek, as usual you make good points in a great argument. Your keen legal, and practical, perspective helps make better sense of things.

    However, the only thing I wont go so far to say, is that Jerry Sandusky is the worst of the worst, but that he is only perceived as the worst. I have learned that the more vile you are made out to be, the more transgressions have been done unto you.

    He, like all RSOs, and all people in general who get caught up in the system, should not be judged. We weren't there and we don't know what really went on, physically, mentally or emotionally. I even question those 'victims' who came forward. What we do know, is that the medias spreads gossip, lies and deception to get a story. The police will inevitably twist things around in the worst ways, or even break the laws they are to uphold, to save face. And the prosecutors will do everything in their power to make someone out as evil as they can, even if they are good, to make a name for themselves. We know, the system is corrupt.

    So Sandusky, like us all, is man now down and who needs a hand to help back him up again...although that will never happen.

    We have become a sad race, indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. All of my fellow writer have made good points. Shaun Webb pointed out how there was no evidence just testimony. When you consider Bakersfield and McMartin's cases were handled the same way, it opens up the possibility that Sandusky was innocent. There is such a thing as False Memory Syndrome. There are also people who make up lies looking for sympathy or even a payout.

    Personally I think there is some degree of untruth to this case.

    ReplyDelete