ShareThis Page
Sports

Second civil suit filed against Sandusky

| Sunday, Dec. 25, 2011

A second man claiming he was sexually abused by former PSU assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky began legal proceedings against him. The man represents a 12th alleged victim of Sandusky.

The purported victim filed notice in Philadelphia of an impending suit and has 20 days to enter an outline of his allegations against the former coach.

His filing also names as defendants Penn State and the Second Mile, the nonprofit organization Sandusky founded for troubled youths. It comes after another Philadelphia lawsuit became the first civil action filed in the widening sex scandal.

Miller's attorney, Charles Schmidt, didn't return calls for comment. He previously described his client as a Central Pennsylvania man who met Sandusky through Second Mile programs.

Sandusky invited the young man, who was 12 at the time of the alleged abuse, to his office, gave him whiskey and touched his genitals, Schmidt has said. After the death of his mother, the boy purportedly formed a close relationship with the Second Mile founder.

Attorney Jeff Anderson made similar accusations on behalf of his client last month at a news conference announcing the filing of his own suit. That man, a 29-year-old, claimed Sandusky abused him more than 100 times during a four-year period starting when he was 10.

Both legal actions were filed in Philadelphia because they allege the abuse occurred there.

Neither Schmidt's client nor Anderson's was among the 10 victims at the center of Sandusky's ongoing criminal case.

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.

click me