Silence of the Lambs

December 28, 2011 1 Comment

Judge Amanda F. Williams, of Brunswick, GA, possibly the toughest drug court judge in America, has announced she will step down from the bench after 21 years on Jan. 2, 2012 in the wake of a complaint filed by the Georgia Judicial Qualifications Commission.

Williams’ achieved national notoriety in March 2011 when she became the focus of an hour-long program by the American Public Radio show, This American Life, which questioned Williams’ punitive approach to drug offenders.

The radio show featured one case in which Williams sentenced a drug offender who had experienced his first relapse to 17 days in detention and added a year and a half to his time in the drug court program.  A spokesperson for National Association for Drug Court Professionals said the NADCP recommends no jail time at all for a first relapse.

In recent months, the Georgia judicial commission said it received several complaints from lawyers against Williams, who was the chief judge of the Superior Court of the Brunswick Judicial Circuit.

The commission finally brought a formal complaint against Williams on December 11, 2011, charging Williams violated judicial ethics when she gave special treatment to relatives of friends, allowed her relatives and her personal attorney to appear before her without recusing herself, and generally behaved in a “tyrannical” manner.

Perhaps the most controversial complaint facing Williams involved a girl who entered her drug court program in 2005 after pleading guilty to forging two of her parents’ checks.

In 2008, Lindsey Dills violated her “drug court contract.” Williams initially sentenced Dills to 28 days in jail but later modified her order to indefinite detention with no contact from anyone except her drug court counselor. The commission states that Dills remained in solitary confinement for 73 days, during which time she attempted suicide. Although Dills’ suicide attempt occurred on Dec. 9, 2008, the commission states that Dills was not transferred to an in-patient medical facility until Dec. 22, 2008.

The case raises the question? Why did it take so long to address what the commission refers to as Williams’ tyrannical behavior?  Why did it take a radio show to shine a spotlight on Williams’ antics?  Where were the court staff and the attorneys who dealt with Williams every day?

The New York Times quotes one attorney as stating: “Judge Williams was a person you did not cross. She ruled by fear and intimidation. I’ve been in front of 50 judges in 34 years and I’ve never seen anything like her.”

Because Williams, 64, vowed not to seek another judgeship, the judicial commission said the complaints against her will be dropped. However, she could still face criminal charges related to her conduct.

In an interview with The Atlanta Journal-Constitution in April, she defended her behavior. “I didn’t just decide I was going to be mean to these people,” she said. “These people aren’t sitting in jail forever and ever and ever and ever. I’m fair. I’m consistent. I do care.”

Filed under Assorted Articles, DISPATCHES Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

‘TIS THE SEASON

December 23, 2011 Leave a Comment

*** As we read about the one percent who own 40 percent of our nation’s wealth, the millions of unemployed, the plague of home foreclosures, the failure of schools, and the GOP’s insistence upon extending Bush tax cuts to the richest Americans, let us remember the lessons of the original bully boss. PGB

 

The Wisdom of Ebenezer Scrooge

Spirit of Christmas Past: And as your business prospered, Ebenezer Scrooge, a golden idol took possession of your heart, as Alice said it would.

——————————

Ebenezer: I suppose you’ll be wanting the whole day tomorrow.

Bob Cratchit: If quite convenient, sir.

Ebenezer: Every Christmas you say the same thing. And every Christmas it’s just as inconvenient as the Christmas before. Good night.

———————————

Jacob Marley: In life, my spirit never rose beyond the limits of our money-changing holes! Now I am doomed to wander without rest or peace, incessant torture and remorse!

Ebenezer: But it was only that you were a good man of business, Jacob!

Jacob Marley: BUSINESS? Mankind was my business! Their common welfare was my business! And it is at this time of the rolling year that I suffer most!

—————————————–

Spirit of Christmas Present: My time with you is at an end, Ebenezer Scrooge. Will you profit from what I’ve shown you of the good in most men’s hearts?

Ebenezer: I don’t know, how can I promise!

Spirit of Christmas Present: If it’s too hard a lesson for you to learn, then learn this lesson!

[opens his robe, revealing two starving children]

Ebenezer: [shocked] Spirit, are these yours?

Spirit of Christmas Present: They are Man’s. This boy is Ignorance, this girl is Want. Beware them both, but most of all, beware this boy!

Ebenezer: But have they no refuge, no resource?

Spirit of Christmas Present: [quoting Scrooge] Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?

———————————-

Tiny Tim: God bless us, every one!

*From A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens

Filed under Assorted Articles, DISPATCHES Tagged with , , , Scrooge

Where’s the Civil Justice?

December 21, 2011 Leave a Comment

A one-two punch makes it very difficult for workers to combat the epidemic of workplace bullying and abuse in the United States.

For one thing, unlike many industrialized countries, there is no law or regulatory scheme in the United States prohibiting workplace bullying.

With respect to the laws that do exist and which might offer workers some protection, the American civil justice system is simply out of reach for many Americans.

The World Justice Institute’s 2011 study of legal systems across the globe shows the United States ranks far behind other countries on providing an accessible legal system to the public.

The group’s report,  Rule of Law Index, analyzed nine different factors of legal systems around the world to gauge how well they function and serve each country’s residents.

In assuring access to the legal system, the U.S. ranked 21st out of the 66 countries included in the study. The U.S.’s lowest scores came from the “Access to Legal Counsel” and “Access and Affordability of Civil Courts.”

When the World Justice Institute’s study compared the U.S. to 23 other countries with similar average incomes, the U.S. ranked 20th, coming in ahead of only Croatia, Poland, and Italy. The “high income” countries (like the U.S.) with the most accessible civil justice systems are Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, New Zealand, Norway, Estonia, Austria and Japan, Belgium and the United Kingdom.  (So, Estonia beats us again!)

In the area of affordability of legal counsel, the U.S. ranked 52nd out of the 66 countries studied. “Legal assistance is expensive or unavailable, and the gap between rich and poor individuals in terms of both actual use of and satisfaction with the civil courts system remains significant,” the report’s authors said.

There also is a general perception in the U.S. that ethnic minorities and foreigners receive unequal treatment from the police and the courts.

The bottom line is that American workers have a much more difficult time than workers in other countries accessing the civil justice system to prevent employers from engaging in discrimination or workplace bullying.

The World Justice Project (WJP) is a multinational and multidisciplinary effort to strengthen the rule of law throughout the world. The WJP Rule of Law Index  is a quantitative assessment tool designed to offer a detailed and comprehensive picture of the extent to which countries adhere to the rule of law in practice. Data comes from a global poll of the general public and detailed questionnaires administered to local experts.

Filed under Assorted Articles, DISPATCHES Tagged with , access to legal counsel, Austria, Belgium, civil justice systems, Croatia, Estonia, gap between rich and poor, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Rule of Law Index, Sweden, the United Kingdom, world justice, World Justice Institute

Target can have job, not $4.4 million

December 16, 2011 Leave a Comment

Here’s yet another case where a jury “got it” but the court did not.  Not only did the appeals court minimize the trauma of workplace abuse in its ruling but it did not hold the employer accountable for failing to halt workplace abuse. PGB

Court Overturns Jury Award in Workplace Abuse Case

James McKelvey was an Army soldier in 2004 when he lost his right hand trying to defuse a roadside bomb in Iraq.

After recovering at a base in Germany and at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, McKelvey moved back to Michigan, and in February 2006 accepted a civilian job with the army as an operations specialist first at Selfridge Air National Guard Base and eventually at the Detroit Arsenal.

There he was subjected to verbal abuse regarding his injury by his supervisor and co-workers, and his supervisor either failed to give him work to do or gave him demeaning work assignments.

McKelvey quit on February 16, 2007 to take a non-military job in the local sheriff’s department, saying he had only stayed that long at the armory because he had a wife and child to support. He then filed a lawsuit alleging he was essentially fired – or constructively discharged – because of a hostile work environment stemming from discrimination because of his disability.

A Michigan federal court jury ruled for McKelvey on both claims but it awarded no damages on the hostile-work-environment claim.  Instead, the jury awarded McKelvey $4,388,302 in front pay on the constructive-discharge claim. Front pay is money awarded for lost compensation during the period between judgment and reinstatement, or if reinstatement is not feasible, instead of reinstatement.

The trial court judge immediately vacated the jury’s award, finding that it was not supported by law.

This week, an appellate court found that McKelvey was constructively discharged from his job at the armory but agreed with the trial court that the proper remedy is reinstatement and not the $4.4 million jury award. (See McKelvey v. Secretary of United States Army, No. 10-1172 (Dec. 14, 2011).

The appeals court said “reasonable minds” could find that McKelvey was constructively discharged from his job at the armory because “ … the crux of this claim turns on the harassment McKelvey endured. McKelvey presented evidence that (a supervisor and coworker) repeatedly called him, among other derogatory things, “all fucked up,” “a piece of shit,” “worthless,” and “a fucking cripple.” … Repeated over the course of nine months, this constant stream of invective could sustain a finding of constructive discharge.”

And yet, the appeals court said, the proper remedy in McKelvey’s case is reinstatement. The court said the $4.4 million award of front pay was too “speculative” for a relatively young man of 38 years old and any trauma McKelvey might experience by returning to the job would be mitigated by the fact that he would have different supervisors and four of his six co-workers would be new, with no connection to the prior harassment.

The  Army had argued that McKelvey could not claim constructive discharge because conditions had improved two months before he quit. According to the appeals court,“This gap is too short for us to say as a matter of law that McKelvey’s workplace was no longer intolerable, and is shorter than the gaps in cases where an employee’s delay in leaving precluded a finding of constructive discharge.”  However, the court said it might agree that McKelvey had waited to long to quit if he had stayed much longer.

The appeals court said McKelvey is entitled to back pay from the time he was constructively discharged until the Army offered him reinstatement  following the trial in his case.

Filed under DISPATCHES, Assorted Articles Tagged with , , , U.S. Army, C, , James McKelvey, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, Detroit Armory, , Selfridge Air National Guard Base

The Veil over the U.S. Supreme Court

December 14, 2011 Leave a Comment

Our society is increasingly divided between the “haves” and the “have nots,” with the vast majority of Americans now strongly disapproving of the way that government is operating.

The President and the U.S. Congress receive much of the blame because they are seen fumbling in prime-time under glare of the television spotlight. But there is another equally or even more powerful branch of government that manages to stay out of the spotlight – the judiciary, led by the U.S. Supreme Court.

If you think that corporations have disproportionate influence in American government, you need only look to the Court’s 5-4 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 08-205 (2010), holding that corporate funding of “independent” political broadcasts in elections is protected speech under the First Amendment. That ruling alone has spurred a tsunami of money into partisan election politics from corporations seeking to advance their interests.

Most people today “watch” their news on television or the Internet. Refusing to be televised is akin to insisting in 1440 that the bible be penned in ink by monks, longhand, rather than printed on the newfangled Gutenberg printing press. However, federal judges are elected for life and if they don’t want to be televised then who’s going to make them?

Now the Court is getting another opportunity to affect the balance of interests between corporate America and the average American. The Court has agreed to review the constitutionality of President Obama’s health care law, which is being challenged by 26 states and the National Federation of Independent Business.

A recent USA TODAY/Gallup Poll found that 72% of the people surveyed think the Court should allow cameras to televise oral arguments on the health care law, which are scheduled to be held in March.

Courts in the United States generally are unsympathetic to issues surrounding workplace abuse and unfair dismissal,  especially when compared to courts in many other industrialized societies.  Last summer, for example, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to certify a class action involving 1.5 million workers at Walmart who allege sex discrimination in violation of Title VII. The Court’s ruling will have an enormous  impact upon the ability of workers to secure fair treatment in the workplace.

Unfortunately, most non-union workers are clueless about how few  protections they really have until  they are escorted from the building with their possessions in a cardboard box.  Televising the proceedings of the U.S. Supreme Court is important to the goal of having an informed and educated public. Or is that what the Court is afraid of?

Filed under Assorted Articles, DISPATCHES Tagged with , , Cameras in the Courtroom, , Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, , Gutenberg, , , USA Today, ,

Bullying v. Accountability

December 5, 2011 Leave a Comment

A Rein of Terror at the SEC?

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Inspector General H. David Kotz has come under increasing fire from within the agency for allegedly instilling a climate of fear among employees in the organization.

Of course, Kotz won no friends when he blasted the SEC for missing the Bernard Madoff fraud, cast a spotlight on employees who viewed online pornography, and called for a criminal probe into the ethics of the SEC’s former top lawyer. In his latest 220-page semi-annual report to Congress, Kotz questioned the SEC’s decision to lease vastly more office space than the agency needs.

Is Kotz a bully or is he simply demanding accountability?

It is Kotz’ job as the SEC’s internal watchdog to investigate and report upon ethical and legal violations by SEC employees.

However, at least two SEC employees who were targeted for investigation by Kotz have filed formal complaints against him.

One complaint was filed by Nancy McGinley, an enforcement attorney at the SEC whom Kotz investigated in 2009 for allegedly using confidential information before trading in shares of Citigroup. Federal prosecutors declined to act on a criminal referral sent to them by Kotz with respect to McGinley’s trading.  However, the feds refusal to prosecute may simply reflect an assessment of competing priorities and limited resources.

McGinley’s complaint states that Kotz’s tactics “have caused SEC employees to fear the OIG’s false allegations and retaliations.”

In a recent email obtained by Bloomberg News, former SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt, who has represented several people involved in Kotz’s investigations, wrote:  “For those who may be unaware of what is going on at the SEC, there is a reign of terror in effect.”

Pitt is an advocate, representing paying clients, and he is probably no fan of Kotz anyway. Kotz uncovered embarrassing documents showing what some might call a too cozy relationship between the SEC under Pitt’s leadership and King-of-all-Ponzi schemes, Bernie Madoff.

Yet, many observers say Kotz is investigating alleged employee lapses that fall below the radar screens of his counterparts at other regulatory agencies.  But what kind of fraud and waste is too little for notice?

For example, Kotz apparently undertook an exhaustive investigation of a “senior officer” who was found to have used two weeks of sick leave rather than annual leave to go on vacation Hawaii.

According to the Blog of the Legal Times, Kotz contacted several airlines, then “issued a subpoena to an airline for the senior officer’s airline tickets and related reservation information.” The IG determined she flew to Hawaii on May 8, 2011, and returned on May 19, 2011, when she was supposedly out sick. Kotz recommended disciplinary action up to dismissal, but the employee already announced she was resigning from the SEC in August 2011. The 80 hours of vacation, however, were counted as annual leave, not sick time.

Kotz’ actions do not appear to fit within any definition of workplace abuse in that he appears to be acting in good faith and within the parameters of his job to root out corruption, fraud, and waste at the SEC.  Plus, there is an inherent vulnerability attached to Kotz’ position. Senior officials and other powerful interests within the agency don’t like being investigated or even second-guessed.

Is he using a hammer to smash an ant?  It depends on your perspective. Quite understandably, few taxpayers would defend a government employee who uses sick leave to vacation in Hawaii so that she can use vacation time for more vacation time.

Millions of Americans have no vacation time, in that they are unemployed.

In the final analysis, one also might observe that there is an irony here. It would have been nice if the SEC had acted as aggressively as Kotz is accused of acting to do its job to protect the American public from the financial fraud, swindles and outright hucksterism that has contributed to the worst depression in modern history.

Filed under Assorted Articles, DISPATCHES Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Politics and Workplace Abuse

December 1, 2011 Leave a Comment

A new report by Center for Economics and Policy Research (CEPR) has concluded that union membership in the United States is at an all-time low because of the “broad national political environment” and not, as some have theorized, because of globalization and technological changes.

One reason that so many American workers are vulnerable to bullying, harassment, and unfair termination is the low rate of unionization in the United States.

There is no law in the United States against workplace bullying and non-unionized workers are the mercy of a judicially created rule of law called the Employment at Will rule, which means they can be fired for any reason – even a bad one – as long as it does not violate a collective bargaining agreement, the law, or a recognized public policy.

Whatever one thinks of unions, there can be no denying that unions mean clout for workers.  Unions represent workers at the bargaining table, and they defend workers in grievance proceedings. Unions historically have led the way toward improving working conditions for all workers.

“In half of the rich countries we studied, the share of the workforce covered by a collective bargaining agreement has remained constant or even increased since 1980 –despite being exposed to the same kinds of pressures from globalization and technology that we experienced here in the United States,” said John Schmitt, a senior economist for the CEPR in Washington, D.C.

In a, 11/17/11 report entitled Politics Matter: Changes in Unionization Rates in Rich Countries, 1960-2010, Schmitt and co-author Alexandra Mitukiewicz review unionization data covering the last five decades for 21 rich economies.

The report demonstrates that national politics are a major determinant of national unionization rates in recent decades, more important than globalization and the new economy.

The researchers found that  countries typically identified with social democratic parties – Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Finland – generally saw small increases in union coverage and only small decreases in union membership since 1980. Countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and other liberal market economies with less protective labor-market systems have generally experienced sharp drops in union coverage and membership. Countries referred to as continental market economies, including Germany and France, saw small drops in union coverage and moderate declines in union membership.

Of course, this probably comes as no surprise to public sector workers who are fighting to retain union bargaining rights, or to unions battling to keep American companies from relocating overseas or to states that are hostile to unions.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the union membership rate in the United States -the percent of wage and salary workers who were members of a union–was 11.9 percent in 2010, down from 12.3 percent a year earlier. The number of wage and salary workers belonging to unions declined by 612,000 to 14.7 million. In 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 per- cent, and there were 17.7 million union workers.

Filed under Assorted Articles, DISPATCHES Tagged with , , Center for Economics and Policy Research, employment at will, John Schmit, Politics Matter: Changes in Unionization Rates in Rich Countries, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, union membership,

Herman Cain: A Workplace Bully?

November 14, 2011 3 Comments

Since this article was written another woman came forward and claimed that she had an affair that lasted more than a decade with Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain .  After denying it, Cain dropped out of the race on 12/3/11. 

*    *    *

Three women independently say Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain sexually harassed them when they worked for him while he served as President and CEO of the National Restaurant Association between 1996 and 1999.

A fourth woman, Sharon Bialek,  said that during this time period she contacted Cain to ask for a job. Sitting in a parked car with Cain, she says, Cain pushed his hand under her skirt and pushed her head toward his crotch.  “I was very, very surprised and very shocked. I said, ‘What are you doing? You know I have a boyfriend. This isn’t what I came here for.’ Mr. Cain said, ‘You want a job, right?’”

Other women may have come forward but for a vague threat of retribution made last week by Lin Wood, Cain’s defense attorney, who said that any new women who are thinking of coming forward with allegations against the candidate should “think twice” before they do.

So there Cain stood, Saturday night, behind a podium in South Carolina, alongside other Republican candidates, answering questions about foreign policy in a nationally televised debate, as if there is no question but that he possesses the character to occupy the highest office of our land, the President of the United States.

What happens when a worker is subjected to sexual harassment by the CEO of the company? Most are shocked and emotionally traumatized. They fear, justifiably, that they will lose their job or suffer retribution if they do not submit. This is not like innocent flirting or misguided chivalry. Sexual harassment is on a continuum of violence that includes rape and bullying.

Karen Kraushaar, one of the two women who settled sexual harassment claims while they worked at the National Restaurant Association while it was led by Cain, told the New York Times:

When you are being sexually harassed in the workplace, you are extremely vulnerable. You do whatever you can to quickly get yourself into a job someplace safe, and that is what I thought I had achieved when I left.”

Ms. Kraushaar now works as a spokeswoman for one of the three inspectors general at the Treasury Department.

In our criminal justice system an individual is deemed innocent until proven guilty but this is an election and not a criminal trial where an innocent defendant might be imprisoned or executed.

What does it take to raise serious questions about whether a person possesses the good moral character that one would at least hope to see in a future U.S. President?

Is it enough that four women independently accuse the same man of essentially the same type of abusive behavior over a period of years? Suppose one of these women is lying? That would leave three.  Is that enough?

Kraushaar and another woman who worked for Cain at the National Restaurant Association received substantial financial settlements (one got a year’s salary) from the association in exchange for their silence and agreeing to forfeit their right to sue for damages. Generally employers do not shell out tens of thousands of dollars without proof of wrongdoing. Had there been no settlements, it is quite possible that at least one lawsuit would have been filed against Cain and the restaurant association.  Presumably that is what the restaurant association paid to avoid.  What weight should society now place on Cain’s claims of innocence?

If that’s not enough, Cain initially said there were no financial payoffs to the women.

Cain has inferred that the allegations by the women represent a Machiavellian plot dreamed up by Democrats to assassinate his character but isn’t it more likely that the Democrats would prefer Cain, a former head of Godfather Pizza, to former governors Mitch Romney and Rick Perry?

Ultimately, this is less a question of politics than it is a question of character. Cain was a man who had supervisory authority over three women who say he sexually harassed them, and he had the power to hire the fourth. What did he do with that power? When all is said and done, Cain sounds more like a workplace bully than a credible candidate for  U.S. President.

Filed under Assorted Articles, DISPATCHES Tagged with , Herman Cain, Lin Wood, Mitt Romney, National Restaurant Association, Rick Perry, , Sharon Bialek

‘The Little Guy Did It’ Syndrome

November 9, 2011 Leave a Comment

He acted alone?

The University of Illinois College of Law has concluded that a former assistant dean for admissions and financial aid at the law school was solely responsible for a six-year pattern of misreporting the Law School Admission Test scores and grade point averages of incoming students. The bogus figures were designed to elevate the standing of the school so more students would enroll.

The National Law Journal has reported that a team of investigators concluded that administrator Paul Pless alone altered numbers to meet recruiting goals and to meet targets. Pless, who’d held his post since 2004, resigned on Nov. 4.

The university based its final report on the findings of a team of investigators hired by the university, including a data analysis firm, Duff & Phelps, and law firm Jones Day. The investigators examined LSAT scores, GPAs, bar passage rates, financial aid, scholarships and career placement data.

 Their report cleared law school Dean Bruce Smith of involvement in or knowledge of the deception — although it noted that his “intense” management style could make employees reluctant to bring him bad news. Additionally, the report concluded, the law school’s lack of oversight of the admissions office was one reason the deception went on for years before being discovered.

The findings stand in contrast to an admissions data scandal at Villanova University School of Law, where  the former law dean and three admissions officials were blamed for inflating LSAT scores and GPAs for years.

Dean Smith issued the following statement, presumably with a straight face:

“The investigation has concluded that a single individual – no longer employed by the college – was responsible for these inaccuracies.  The College takes seriously the issue of data integrity and intends to implement the report’s recommendations promptly and comprehensively.  As the report properly recognizes, the College of Law remains one of the nation’s premier law schools.  We are confident that we will justify that assessment with data that are accurate, transparent, and unimpeachable.”

It is a law school but one is tempted to note that lack of evidence that senior officials typed incorrect statistics into a computer program is not the same as the issue of who is responsible for a six-year campaign to dupe prospective students .

Whatever happened to: “The Buck Stops Here?”

Filed under Assorted Articles, DISPATCHES Tagged with Dean Bruce Smith, Duff & Phelps, Jones Day, , University of Illinois College of Law

See No Evil at Penn State

November 8, 2011 3 Comments

Coach Joe Paterno and Penn State President Graham Spanier were fired, effective immediately, on Nov. 9, 2011 by the PSU Board of Trustees. The troubling culture at Penn State was in evidence when students sympathetic to Paterno erupted into violence at the news until they were subdued by police with tear gas. Meanwhile, more victims of alleged pedophile Jerry Sandusky surfaced. PGB

SEE NO EVIL …

In light of the horrifying and unfathomable nature of the pedophile scandal at Penn State University, it is easy to forget that Penn State is a workplace.

The leader sets an important tone for a workplace in terms of signalling what behaviors will and will not be tolerated.  Which raises a question.  What did Penn State President Graham Spanier know of the incident in 2002 in which Jerry Sandusky, a retired long-time football coach at Penn State, allegedly showered and engaged in sexual conduct with a young boy at Penn State’s  football building?

According to a grand jury report, Spanier said he was told that a staff member had reported that Sandusky was “horsing around” with a young boy in the shower in a way that made the staff member “uncomfortable.”  However, Spanier says that he did not  know that Sandusky was engaging in inappropriate sexual behavior with the boy.

Wasn’t it enough that Sandusky was engaging in horseplay with a young boy in the shower area?  That a staffer was made to feel “uncomfortable” witnessing the behavior?  Did Spanier have an obligation to inquire further?

Spanier obviously felt that something improper had occurred. In response to the incident, Spanier said he approved of a plan to take Sandusky’s locker room keys away and to inform him that he could not use Penn State’s athletic facilities with young people, an order that officials later agreed was unenforceable.  Was there any protocol at Penn State for investigating and disciplining alleged misconduct on campus?  Sandusky was still a professor emeritus at Penn State, and had an office there.

Sandusky is the founder of The Second Mile, a charity dedicated to helping impoverished youth who have absent or dysfunctional families. Sandusky allegedly abused at least eight boys through his contact with the club, which hosts sporting camps and events at Penn State.

According to a grand jury investigation, in addition to Spanier, the following adults were allegedly aware of the 2002 incident:

  • A 28-year old Penn State Graduate Assistant who said he saw Sandusky nude in the shower and thought Sandusky was having sex with a boy. (He reported the incident to Paterno.)
  •  The graduate assistant’s father.
  • Penn State Coach Joseph V. Paterno (who reported the incident to his bosses).
  • Penn State Athletic Director Tim Curley.
  • Penn State Senior Vice President for Finance and Business Gary Schultz.
  • Dr. Jack Rayovich, executive director of the Second Mile Club.

None of these people, including Spanier, reported Sandusky’s conduct to the police or to child protective services.

Incredibly, this was not the first time that Penn State officials had notice that Sandusky was engaging in questionable behavior with children in a shower on the campus.

Schultz told the grand jury that he knew that Sandusky was investigated by child protective services in 1998 for allegedly showering with young boys and behaving in a sexually inappropriate manner. According to the grand jury report:  “Schultz testified that the 1998 incident was reviewed by the University Police and ‘the child protection agency’ with the blessing of then-University counsel Wendell Courtney (who)  was then and remains counsel for The Second Mile.”

Spanier, who was appointed president in 1995, denied knowing of the 1998 University Police investigation of Sandusky.

There was yet another incident at Penn State in 2000 in which a janitor allegedly saw Sandusky having sex with another boy, this one aged 11 or 12.  The janitor  told his co-workers, who expressed fear they could lose their jobs, and then he told his immediate supervisor Jim Witherite. No one called the police that time either.

State police commissioner Frank Noonan was quoted Monday as stating:  “Somebody has to question about what I would consider the moral requirements for a human being that knows of sexual things that are taking place with a child, … Whether you’re a football coach or a university president or the guy sweeping the building. I think you have a moral responsibility to call us.”

Both Schultz and Curley have been arrested for allegedly lying to the grand jury and failing to report the alleged 2002 sexual assault to authorities as required by law.

Spanier may avoid arrest but it remains to be seen whether he can avoid responsibility for the tsunami wave of bad publicity that has washed over Penn State’s campus because the highest ranking officials there saw no evil.

Filed under Assorted Articles, DISPATCHES Tagged with Dr. Jack Rayovich, Gary Schultz, Gerald Sandusky, , Joe Paterno, , , sexual assault, Tim Curley, ,

← Older posts

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Powered by WordPress.com