Penn State Scandal: In Order to Prevent Another Jerry Sandusky, Empower Victims

One of the common refrains from nearly everybody involved in the Penn State scandal at this point—from the scorched-earth Nancy Graces to the most hardcore denialists alike—is that it's important to make sure something like this never happens again. And that's absolutely right. We should make sure nothing like this ever happens again, whether it involves a football program or not.

But this one did involve a football program, and it did involve a coach who was well-respected in town, so all of a sudden, everyone who says they'd line up to stop child abuse starts singing a different tune. And if that sounds like an unfair interpretation of the facts, check out this report from the USA Today about what Victim No. 1 endured from his community after coming forward to the police about what Jerry Sandusky did to him:

"

The conclusion triggered a series of notifications and telephone calls to the Pennsylvania State Police, to Sandusky's charity for troubled children, known as The Second Mile, and to the boy's high school, where officials were notified of the claims against Sandusky.

The county report resulted in Sandusky's required separation from the school pending the resolution of the allegations.

The public backlash, [Victim 1's psychologist Michael] Gillum said, was almost immediate and jarring. Within weeks, the boy's mother reported to state investigators that she was confronted in a Lock Haven business by an unhappy local resident who had learned that her son had been linked to the allegations triggering Sandusky's removal as a volunteer.

The child's identity spread rapidly through the community, the psychologist said, making him and his mother the target of harassment — and ultimately threats of harm — by locals upset that Sandusky had been dismissed from the school.

"We started putting a (witness) relocation plan together almost from the first week," Gillum said, adding that an undisclosed sum of county money was dedicated to the effort. "There was huge fear."

"

The harassment wasn't isolated to the victim's mother, either. From the same USA Today report:

"

Tense encounters with fellow students after the release of the graphic grand jury report led to the victim's transfer midway through the school year.

Gillum said the move became necessary after some students, angered that the allegations would taint Penn State and the reign of legendary coach Joe Paterno, began making physical threats against his young client.

"

Of course, ignorance from random members of a community and from high school students—and what a culture of cruelty high school can be—is one thing. It doesn't mean the power structures are failing anybody. That said, though, there is this part about Victim 1 from the Esquire profile on the Penn State scandal: 

"

Let's say that it's rumored that before the runner left his old high school behind, he visited a different administrator's office on a matter unrelated to the scandal.

He visited to complain about the dismissal of an assistant track coach, an assistant coach who had clashed with the head coach, but whom the runner and all the other members of the team admired.

"What," the school official replied, "are you sleeping with him, too?"

Is the rumor true?

The runner doesn't want to talk about it.

"

But let's be clear: This is not a Penn State problem. This is a societal problem. This is a college football problem. Only a few years ago, another Big Ten program—Iowa—had its own sexual assault scandal. It wasn't just that the alleged assault had occurred (though that's certainly reprehensible on its own), it was the way both students and administrators reacted to it.

According to the alleged victim's family, the alleged victim was encouraged repeatedly to keep her complaint of the sexual assault "informal," so as to keep the punishment in-house. Once that decision was made, however, the alleged victim's experience with the school turned into a nightmare. Here's an excerpt from a letter the alleged victim's mother wrote to the University of Iowa, via AOL News:

"

"They were aggressive and forceful in their interviewing tactics and accusatory in their stance. She told me afterwards, while crying, that they basically accused her of bringing this upon herself. She was interviewed with the intention of making her feel that she caused this. ...

"Her friends were called in as well, not having any idea what they were being called in for, and without the mention, again, of the right to an advocate, and they also left crying feeling as if they had committed some kind of crime by being associated with the victim and this situation."

"

In addition, the mother's letter alleges that the alleged victim was subject to repeated harassment from football players on campus and that one of the alleged assailants even moved in three doors away from her. Further, the letter alleges the family was stonewalled by the UI's general counsel (which isn't even a normal part of the sexual assault policy of the school) for weeks on end before the family got in touch with the president's office. 

We won't know more about that case, however, because as the Iowa City Press-Citizen notes, the University of Iowa recently won a court case to have all its records of the case sealed. Iowa cited FERPA laws to keep the records private; if their decision was actually made out of concern for the alleged victim, well, that'd be a first in this case.

So if you want to prevent another Jerry Sandusky case from happening, don't make these mistakes. Don't use shame in dealing with those who say they've been assaulted; they're humiliated enough already. Don't assume anyone "could never" commit such a crime; those people are just as capable of it as anyone else. Support alleged victims. Empower them. Get them a victim's advocate. Be the protection they need, not the type of person they need protection from. That is how we solve these problems.