Penn State scandal (merged)

#4,827
#4,827
McQueary claimed he didn't physically stop it but he did stop it? By what method? Slamming doors? His story has changed three times now. I'm beginning to doubt McQueary.
 
#4,833
#4,833
Sandusky interview is bringing out more victims, can't link while mobile but all over the news. They are saying just his voice is pissing them off. Maybe victims early as mid-70s.
 
#4,834
#4,834
YorkVol said:
Sandusky interview is bringing out more victims, can't link while mobile but all over the news. They are saying just his voice is pissing them off. Maybe victims early as mid-70s.
Click to expand...


Anyone who thinks the molesting started when he first got caught is truly naive.
 
#4,835
#4,835
YorkVol said:
Sandusky interview is bringing out more victims, can't link while mobile but all over the news. They are saying just his voice is pissing them off. Maybe victims early as mid-70s.
Click to expand...

Is it possible that the possibility of being a plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit is also bringing out more "victims"?

Not saying this is the case for all or even a majority of those stepping forward; just raising the possibility.
 
#4,836
#4,836
therealUT said:
Is it possible that the possibility of being a plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit is also bringing out more "victims"?

Not saying this is the case for all or even a majority of those stepping forward; just raising the possibility.
Click to expand...

This kind of thing almost always brings out those looking to make an easy buck, which is incredibly pathetic.

But, the majority will probably be legit victims. If a few liars get paid so that the true victims are compensated fairly, I think we can all live with that.
 
#4,838
#4,838
therealUT said:
Is it possible that the possibility of being a plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit is also bringing out more "victims"?

Not saying this is the case for all or even a majority of those stepping forward; just raising the possibility.
Click to expand...

Certainly it is entirely possible and I could see victims who may have been reluctant to come forward use this as their motivation to speak up. If you are going to subject yourself to the level of public scrutiny they will endure, they may as well reap some financial benefit.
 
#4,839
#4,839
YorkVol said:
Certainly it is entirely possible and I could see victims who may have been reluctant to come forward use this as their motivation to speak up. If you are going to subject yourself to the level of public scrutiny they will endure, they may as well reap some financial benefit.
Click to expand...

For the ones who are actual victims, I see no problem.
 
#4,840
#4,840
I'm not following this as close as some of the other people here. But I'm wondering what sort of an effect it would have if McQueery turned out to have screwed up his credibility as a witness by misstating the facts.

I know many have come forward, but what sort of evidence exists to convict Sandusky? Is this just going to turn into a massive game of he-said, he-said. Not to suggest that I doubt his guilt, but not everyone who's guilty gets convicted.
 
#4,841
#4,841
jvol1 said:
I know many have come forward, but what sort of evidence exists to convict Sandusky? Is this just going to turn into a massive game of he-said, he-said. Not to suggest that I doubt his guilt, but not everyone who's guilty gets convicted.
Click to expand...

Cases of child molestation are almost always cases of he said / he said. Child molesters tend to be careful about being seen.

That said, there are about 20 alleged victims claiming the same thing. They could certainly all be lying, but there is strength in numbers when it comes to believability. Further, there are other witnesses, like McQueary (although he may be torpedoing his effectiveness as a witness) and the two high school coaches.
 
#4,842
#4,842
bamawriter said:
Cases of child molestation are almost always cases of he said / he said. Child molesters tend to be careful about being seen.

That said, there are about 20 alleged victims claiming the same thing. They could certainly all be lying, but there is strength in numbers when it comes to believability. Further, there are other witnesses, like McQueary (although he may be torpedoing his effectiveness as a witness) and the two high school coaches.
Click to expand...

agreed
 
#4,843
#4,843
therealUT said:
Is it possible that the possibility of being a plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit is also bringing out more "victims"?

Not saying this is the case for all or even a majority of those stepping forward; just raising the possibility.
Click to expand...

It's not going to be a class-action lawsuit.
 
#4,845
#4,845
DjCrenshaw said:
Ah, what do you know?
Click to expand...

These victims are going to sue Penn State as individuals. I don't think it would even be possible to have a class action suit with 20 victims. I believe about the minimum number for a class to be certified is 35. And, a victim would get much, much less compensation if they elected to be apart of a potential class action.

So to sum up, they won't do it because

1) There aren't enough people; and
2) They would get far less money in a class action than if they sued individually.
 
#4,846
#4,846
LawVol13 said:
These victims are going to sue Penn State as individuals. I don't think it would even be possible to have a class action suit with 20 victims. I believe about the minimum number for a class to be certified is 35. And, a victim would get much, much less compensation if they elected to be apart of a potential class action.

So to sum up, they won't do it because

1) There aren't enough people; and
2) They would get far less money in a class action than if they sued individually.
Click to expand...

This will be an ass action lawsuit.
 
#4,848
#4,848
LawVol13 said:
It's not going to be a class-action lawsuit.
Click to expand...

DjCrenshaw said:
Ah, what do you know?
Click to expand...

Great question. I think it is possible, he knows it won't happen.

"I think they are liable. They may not be liable if this activity occurred outside the confines of the university premises, but from what I understand, he [Sandusky] was given wide access to a lot of facilities," said Sol Weiss, a partner in the prominent Center City plaintiffs firm Anapol Schwartz.

"It is a big exposure," Weiss said.

Weiss, whose firm has filed a class action on behalf of youths illegally sentenced in the Luzerne County judicial scandal, likened Penn State's legal liability to that of the Roman Catholic Church, which has been slammed with huge verdicts and criminal prosecutions for failing to root out sexual abuse by priests.

...

Jeff Anderson, a high-profile plaintiffs lawyer based in Minnesota who is representing clients in several lawsuits against the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, says the Penn State scandal bears striking similarities to cases of sexual abuse by priests of young boys that have plagued the church for more than a decade.

Penn State's legal liability is serious, analysts say - Page 2 - Philly.com
Click to expand...

Could you also cite where the 35-plaintiff minimum comes from?

RULE 23. CLASS ACTIONS
(a) Prerequisites.

One or more members of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all members only if:

(1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable,

(2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class,

(3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class; and

(4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.
Click to expand...

I am sure there is case law regarding how numerous a body constitutes impracticability; again, please cite it for my edification.
 
#4,849
#4,849
therealUT said:
Great question. I think it is possible, he knows it won't happen.



Could you also cite where the 35-plaintiff minimum comes from?



I am sure there is case law regarding how numerous a body constitutes impracticability; again, please cite it for my edification.
Click to expand...

From my Civil Procedure II class outline.

o numerosity—the number of people in the class has to be so numerous that joinder is impracticable.
• When would it be impracticable (Rule 20)
Geography is a factor (ex. If the P’s lived all over the country.)
 The number of people is so large. (usually it’s about 40—that’s the limit.)—if it is below 25, they won’t certify because the person should join.
 The monetary value of each individual’s claim.—(the smaller the claim, the harder it is to join all the plaintiffs—the bigger the claim, the more likely it is for them to sue on their own or join an existing lawsuit.)
Click to expand...

I'm sure you know much more about it by randomly quoting some law and quoting an article which is talking about Penn State's liability to a lawsuit, which isn't even talking about a classaction. Believe it or not, you don't know everything.
 
#4,850
#4,850
I bolded the points because the copy and paste didn't make it very easy to read. Again, a class action would be completely pointless to one of the victims because they'd take a huge cut on possible awards. And, also, there's not even close to enough to certify a class because the potential plaintiffs would most likely only be able to sue Penn State after they were on notice about Sandusky, which is presumably 1998.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top