|
| FILE - In this Nov. 8, 2011 file photo, Scott Paterno, left, looks on as students greet his father Penn State football coach Joe Paterno as he arrives at his home in State College, Pa. Scott Paterno said in a tweet sent May 6, 2016 that an allegation made by insurers that a boy told the longtime Penn State football coach in 1976 that he had been molested by former assistant coach Jerry Sandusky is “bunk.” |
PHILADELPHIA
(AP) -- A new legal document that claims a boy told Joe Paterno
in 1976 that Jerry Sandusky had molested him has dropped like a
bombshell and reignited debate about what the Penn State coach knew
about his longtime assistant decades before his arrest.
Details
of the testimony remain hidden inside a sealed deposition in Penn
State's court fight with the Pennsylvania Manufacturers' Association
Insurance Company.
Paterno family members
immediately dismissed the accusation, and even an attorney for victims
of Sandusky cautioned that he did not know of irrefutable evidence
supporting the claim.
Paterno, who died in
2012, had said that an assistant's report in 2001 of Sandusky attacking a
boy in the shower was the first he knew of such allegations against
Sandusky.
Details of the 1976 claim were not
included in the court document - a judge's ruling in Penn State's
dispute with its insurer - and a lawyer for the company declined to
comment.
Sandusky is serving a lengthy prison
sentence for his conviction in the sexual abuse of 10 children. The
university has also paid out more than $90 million to settle 32 civil
claims involving Sandusky. How far back in time all the acts occurred
has not been made public.
Penn State's insurer
claims there is evidence of several early acts of molestation by
Sandusky, and not just the one by a boy who allegedly went to Paterno
with his report in the 1970s, according to the ruling by Philadelphia
Judge Gary Glazer. He said the events are described "in a number of the
victims' depositions."
The insurer's evidence
includes an allegation that one assistant coach saw "inappropriate
contact" between Sandusky and a child at the university in 1987 and a
second assistant "reportedly witnessed sexual contact" between Sandusky
and a child a year later, the judge said. Also in 1988, the insurer
claims, a child's report of his molestation by Sandusky was referred to
Penn State's athletic director.
The judge wrote there was no evidence that reports of the incidents went "further up the chain of command at PSU."
In
his ruling, the judge found that Penn State had to assume the costs of
settlements stemming from claims over most of the 1990s because its
insurance policies did not cover abuse or molestation.
When
Sandusky abused children at his home or at events held by the
children's charity he started, "he was still a PSU assistant coach and
professor, and clothed in the glory associated with those titles,
particularly in the eyes of impressionable children," Glazer wrote.
"By
cloaking him with a title that enabled him to perpetuate his crimes,
PSU must assume some responsibility for what he did both on and off
campus," he said.
Penn State issued a
statement late Friday saying it has "no records from the time to help
evaluate the claims," noting Paterno could not defend himself.
Tom
Kline, a lawyer who settled an abuse allegation with Penn State, said
he and other lawyers were aware of claims dating back to the '70s.
Kline
said the new disclosure "provides one more link in the chain which has
been repeatedly denied by those who refuse to come to terms with the
tragic reality here."
But another plaintiff's lawyer in Sandusky scandal, Michael Boni, urged caution in weighing the new Paterno allegation.
"The
headlines of these stories is Paterno knew of Sandusky's molestation in
the '70s, '76 or '77. I'm unaware of direct, irrefutable evidence that
that's the case," Boni said. "Believe me, I'm the last person to defend
the guy, but I am the first person to believe in our justice system. And
I think you need more than anecdotal evidence or speculative evidence."
The
coach's son Scott Paterno called the new claim "bunk," tweeting Friday
that "it would be great if everyone waited to see the substance of the
allegation before they assume it's true. Because it's not." Sue Paterno,
the coach's widow, said in a letter to the Penn State board that the
family had no knowledge of the new claims.
Defense
attorney Al Lindsay said after speaking with Sandusky that his client
denied that any of the incidents described in the court ruling occurred.
Sandusky also maintained his innocence throughout the trial.
The
school fired Paterno and removed his statue from the front of its
football stadium - a decision that still rankles many fans and alumni -
but his name adorns a university library, and the NCAA last year
restored 111 of his wins vacated after Sandusky's 2012 conviction.
Paterno
was not charged with any crime, and his family is pursuing a lawsuit
against the NCAA for commercial disparagement, arguing the association's
since-abolished consent decree with Penn State over the Sandusky
scandal damaged their commercial interests and value.
In addition, three university officials await trial on criminal charges for their handling of the Sandusky scandal.
