7 more agree to settlements with Penn State in Sandusky abuse case
At least eight men, including Jerry Sandusky's adopted son, have reached settlement agreements with Penn State University over alleged abuse by the former assistant football coach, their lawyers say.
Matt Sandusky, a young man known as “Victim 2”in court records, and three other victims who testified against Jerry Sandusky at his criminal trial last summer are among those who finalized deals with the school, attorneys said.
Reached Saturday, a Penn State spokesman acknowledged the school is “making progress” but had no further comment.
“By coming forward, these courageous men did so much more than the institutions that were supposed to protect them. They spoke truth to power,” said Andrew Shubin, a State College-based attorney, who represents seven men claiming abuse by Sandusky.
Shubin said the resolution of their claims “is but one small step and a long and difficult recovery process.”
Neither Penn State nor the men's lawyers have disclosed dollar amounts involved in the individual settlements. University trustee Ted Brown said in July that the school's governing board authorized about $60 million for an initial batch of payouts.
Thirty-one men have alleged abuse by Sandusky in civil claims against Penn State. Earlier last week, a lawyer brought in by the school to facilitate negotiations said he expected two dozen cases to settle in the near future.
He could not be reached on Saturday.
Matt Sandusky had been expected to testify in his father's defense until the criminal trial, when he told investigators that he also had been abused by Jerry Sandusky.
“Victim 2” has said he was the boy whom then-graduate assistant Mike McQueary testified he saw being attacked by Jerry Sandusky in a team shower in 2001. McQueary notified school officials at the time, but police were never called.
Matt Casey, a Philadelphia attorney working with Shubin, said their clients' deals took shape some time ago and were completed this month, with paperwork being passed back and forth to finalize them.
“To say they're relieved, I think, is a fair statement,” Casey said. “But it's also accurate to say that while we've closed this chapter, there's a whole lot of this that's necessarily inadequate.”
A week ago, another lawyer disclosed the first settlement.
The school has spent nearly $50 million on the Sandusky scandal, not including any payments to the victims and accusers.
Sandusky spent three decades at Penn State under former head coach Joe Paterno.
The response of university leaders, including Paterno, was heavily criticized in a report commissioned by the school last year. Paterno died in January 2012, but criminal charges for an alleged cover-up are pending against three others: former president Graham Spanier, retired vice president Gary Schultz and retired athletic director Tim Curley. All three deny the allegations.
Sandusky, 69, was convicted of 45 counts of child sexual abuse and is serving a decades-long state prison sentence. He maintains he is innocent, and an appeals hearing is scheduled for next month in Dallas, Pa.
Adam Smeltz is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-380-5676 or firstname.lastname@example.org. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.