Pennsylvania “Justice” System Favors Perpetrators

A parade of “witnesses” have made their way through the courtroom today in the Jerry Sandusky child rape trial.

Several people, including a medical doctor, have taken the stand today, all of them telling the jury what a “great guy” Jerry is.

How ridiculous for the Pennsylvania court system to allow this. Do they not get the fact that most child sexual abusers are employed, go to church, are married or in a relationship with a woman, and are often considered upstanding members of the community?

Do the people who set the laws for the court system not understand that these acts of sexual violence are done in locker rooms, bedrooms, basements, bathrooms, cars, and showers when these character “witnesses” are miles away? These people aren’t witnesses to anything except what Jerry Sandusky wanted them to see.

The other issue in favor of the defendant, is that the prosecution was not allowed to call any mental health professionals who could testify about the complex and multiple facets of child sexual abuse victims, their behavior, and the grooming process used by the perpetrator.

Yet Sandusky’s attorney was allowed to call a mental health expert who claims Sandusky suffers from “Histrionic Personality Disorder.”

The psychologist says he diagnosed Jerry Sandusky with having this personality disorder after spending six hours with him, by talking to Dottie Sandusky, and by reading Sandusky’s book “Touched,” which by the way, any lay person can see the Freudian slip in the title.

Dr. Elliot Atkins testified that the “creepy” love letters presented by the man known as “Victim number 4” can easily be explained in context of Jerry’s “personality disorder.”

According to Atkins, people with this disorder:

  • Consider relationships to be more intimate than they actually are
  • Are easily influenced
  • Have interaction that is often characterized as inappropriate sexually
  • Show shallow expressions of emotion
  • Feel unappreciated when not the center of attention
  • Have a speech style that is impressionistic and lacking in detail

How much more vague and scarce can a “diagnosis” be? And if you look at these “symptoms” they can easily be applied to someone who has been sexually abused as a child. If Sandusky is as guilty as I think he is, someone, most likely a man, sexually abused him as a boy.

Even if you apply this diagnosis to Sandusky, it doesn’t explain the man’s attraction to being around and playing with little boys for hours in a basement, and showering with little boys.

Nor does it justify a grown adult man sending letters of a love-nature to little boys.

“[Dr. Atkins] pointed to several passages of the letters, including “I write because of the turning in my stomach when you don’t care,” from a letter written to Victim 4.”

My stomach churns when I read that a grown man wrote that to a little vulnerable boy.

_____________________________________________________________

pennlive

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Child Abuse, child molestation, child sexual abuse, rape and abuse, repressed memory and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Pennsylvania “Justice” System Favors Perpetrators

  1. little nel says:

    “If Sandusky is as guilty as I think he is, someone most likely a man, sexually abused him as a boy.”

    The frequency and severity would only be known to Jerry, unless he has suffered amnesia from the trauma.

    I wonder if the emotional testimony of these boys has had any impact on Jerry or is Jerry still indifferent to their pain?

  2. Beverley says:

    In the first court case against my father, his lawyer used his age as a defence. But each time his lawyer used his age, the judge would come in and say I don’t care if he is such an such an age. The judge always quoted at least ten years younger than what the lawyer said. It sickens me to read how the perpetrators are cared for. And yet the victims are futher victimised and traumatised.

    • little nel says:

      It sickens me too, Beverly that the perps get all the protections under the law.

      I’m sad to know that you were victimized and had to experience more trauma than you had already endured.

  3. little nel says:

    There is no law against being a “great guy” but Jerry ceased to be a great guy when he sexually abused those helpless boys.

    Does this mean that “great guys” are excused from being prosecuted and/or convicted for the sexual abuse of children?

    Does this mean that “great guys” are entitled to special rights that include covering up their crimes?

    Is Jerry the new model for others to emulate?

Comments are closed.