Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Sounds like Joe P...

Discussion in 'Sport & Athletics' started by brndirt1, Jul 21, 2012.

  1. tomflorida

    tomflorida Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    215
    Likes Received:
    23
    Penalties were severe but deserved for the University, but as far as people high-up, well I sure hope more then just one goes to jail. All that anyone had to do is dial 911. Thats it. Just dial the numbers.
     
  2. brndirt1

    brndirt1 Saddle Tramp

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,713
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    Does this seem right, or is it "how sweet it is" (sarcasm here)?

    HARRISBURG, Pa. -- Pennsylvania's public employee retirement system says Jerry Sandusky will get to keep more than $900,000 in state pension payments he received after his 1999 retirement from Penn State University.

    The State Employees' Retirement System said Thursday it won't seek repayment of the money Sandusky received from 1999 to September 2012 because the state's forfeiture law does not authorize SERS to go after money paid before the date of a plea or conviction.

    Goto:

    Jerry Sandusky Will Keep His Pension After Conviction, Sentencing For Charges Of Raping Children
     
  3. Clementine

    Clementine Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    906
    Likes Received:
    252
    Does it seem right? No. It wouldn't bother me a bit if someone marched in every single day and had him hand over any form of money he has(I'm not too familiar with the money system in prison) every single day and take it back $1 at a time, if they have to. As far as I am concerned there's nothing bad enough that can happen to this guy. But so long as he stays in jail for the rest of his miserable life, and doesn't profit off of his notoriety, what are they going to do? I doubt he has that kind of money.

    One article I read said he "would be able" to work and collect some money every month. Really? He has a choice?
     
  4. belasar

    belasar Court Jester

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,515
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    Most likely it is a matter of diminishing returns. After legal costs in his conviction, and the fact he was retired, his estate does not have the money to return. What it does have would likely hurt his remaining family if any proceedings take place. This of course does not take into account any suit's raised by the victims.
     
  5. brndirt1

    brndirt1 Saddle Tramp

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,713
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    I think that refers to work in the prison, like in the laundry and such. He would probably go for "book" delivery from the library to the cells and common areas. I don't believe a prisoner can be forced to work, or at least not since the bad old days of chain gangs. Even those you see cleaning up trash on the side of the roads in some states do so on a voluntary basis. Sometimes boredom just gets to ya sitting in your cell, even Al Copone mopped floors at Alcatraz after he was transferred from the Federal Prison in Atlanta where he almost lived like a king.

    Those laws (which are Federal now I believe) which cover book writings transfer the proceeds to the victims, not the felons. So even writing an apologetic book won't make he or his family any money. And as mentioned, the lawyers will be getting their share as well. I just thought it was a weird law which protected his past pension savings from before his conviction. No more pension funds coming in, but the old ones are untouchable it seems.
     
  6. belasar

    belasar Court Jester

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,515
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    Consider, he commits a crime, unrelated to his state job, (Say bank robbery) if he then did his job otherwise effectively then his pension should be safe. The factor here is that it was a crime against children, and may have taken place on school/state property. We naturaly take a more severe view as a crime against children. Kill your spouse because she nagged you, you get 10 years, kill your child because they wouldn't behave, get 15 to 20 years. Its a double standard, understandable, but still a double standered.
     
  7. Clementine

    Clementine Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    906
    Likes Received:
    252
    Yes, he'd be working in the prison. What I don't get is why he'd have the choice.
     
  8. brndirt1

    brndirt1 Saddle Tramp

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,713
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    Simply because it (work) cannot be forced upon he or any other inmate, and his choice is limited to tasks which are open of course. He cannot just say " I wanna do that" and take that job.
     
  9. Clementine

    Clementine Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    906
    Likes Received:
    252
    Again, I still don't get it. The irony is just too much for me. We can take him away his freedom, lock him in a hell hole, but we don't want to infringe upon his right to choose whether or not he wants to work.

    (Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing with you, Clint, nor am I arguing the fact that Sandusky needs to be locked up. It's just too ridiculous for me.)
     
  10. Volga Boatman

    Volga Boatman Dishonorably Discharged

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    1,640
    Likes Received:
    154
    It's not a question of his 'rights'. It comes under "Duty of Care" by the State. Once the state had committed any individual for incarceration, their are certain obligations to the prisoner that must be met. Regardless of the reason for his imprisonment, these obligations to the health and well being of the prisoner whilst under state care are the same.

    In days gone by, prisoners were exploited for their labor, or anything else to turn a dollar at their expense. What you have to wrap your head around is the very fact that care under the auspicies of a State Correctional facility is not what it used to be. For the greater majority of the prison population, it's a step in the right direction.

    Capital punishment invites all sorts of abuses of the system. If a prisoner is found to have not committed the crime in question that he was put to death for, it's very hard, nay impossible, to put all the pieces back together and re-animate him/her for release. consequently, most legislatures in the Western world no longer use the death penalty, and good show too! It's not unheard of for the death penalty to be used to silence a man while the gulity go free, (remember Lee Harvey Oswald?). We do not live in the type of society that subscribes to the theory that it's "better to kill ten innocent men than watch one guilty one go free".

    If you live in Texas, don't be outraged. Your state will catch up with the standards of the rest of the free world one fine day!
     
  11. muscogeemike

    muscogeemike Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2010
    Messages:
    175
    Likes Received:
    7
    I once read, years ago, that a retired Army WO was convicted of killing his wife and was still getting his retired pay while in prison!

    My understanding is that is no longer possible, if a retiree is convicted of a felony he looses his benefits.

    When I retired (1991) I had to get my ex wife to sign a release or she would have been entitled to half my retired pay, even though she abandoned me and her sons when they were 4 and 6 years old. This was due to legislation promoted by Rep Pat Schroeder of CO, meant to “protect” female spouses of men in the military.

    My ex wife never paid any child support (lawyers in three states said I could get court orders for her to pay but no state would enforce it - but if the situation were reversed they would have gone to the ends of the earth to get me, since I was in the Army) and her reason for leaving was being a military wife was just too hard.

    Without her release the government have happily taken half the money from my and my sons and given it to her.
     

Share This Page