Published: Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Mother of Sandusky's grandchildren aims to bar him from visitation
The mother of three of Jerry Sandusky's grandchildren is vowing to fight to bar the former Penn State assistant football coach from having access to her children while he awaits trial on child sex abuse charges.
In a statement sent to reporters hours after a judge approved visits between Sandusky and his 11 other grandchildren on Monday, former daughter-in-law Jill Thomas said psychologists who had treated her 5-year-old son "could not rule out that Jerry Sandusky was grooming him for sexual abuse."
Thomas, 29, is currently involved in a custody dispute with her former husband, Sandusky's son, Matt.
Judge John M. Cleland, who issued the pretrial order involving the other children, opted to leave any decisions involving Thomas' youngsters to the judge presiding over her custody case.
"I cannot understand how a court could place the desires of someone who is criminally charged with sexually abusing children above the safety of children," Thomas said. "I will continue my fight to protect them in hopes that at some point, someone in a position of authority will do what is necessary."
An attorney appointed to represent the interests of Thomas' children in the custody case has recommended they be allowed to visit Sandusky but under strict restrictions.
Sandusky's attorney Joseph Amendola insisted that Thomas was trying to use the criminal charges against his client to bolster her own custody claim.
"Unfortunately, Jerry appears to have been dragged into this battle," he said. "We have the utmost faith that the judge will make his decision based upon the best interests of Jerry's grandchildren."
Sandusky has denied charges that he molested at least 10 boys he met through The Second Mile, a charity he founded in the 1970s.
But soon after his November arrest, Thomas told authorities that the former assistant coach had "inappropriately touched" her son.
Earlier this year, the Centre County Children and Youth Services office found those allegations to be unfounded, Amendola said.
State child services workers typically do not discuss their investigations publicly.
But on Monday, Thomas characterized their findings as simply a determination that there was not enough evidence to charge Sandusky.
In a statement sent to reporters hours after a judge approved visits between Sandusky and his 11 other grandchildren on Monday, former daughter-in-law Jill Thomas said psychologists who had treated her 5-year-old son "could not rule out that Jerry Sandusky was grooming him for sexual abuse."
Thomas, 29, is currently involved in a custody dispute with her former husband, Sandusky's son, Matt.
Judge John M. Cleland, who issued the pretrial order involving the other children, opted to leave any decisions involving Thomas' youngsters to the judge presiding over her custody case.
"I cannot understand how a court could place the desires of someone who is criminally charged with sexually abusing children above the safety of children," Thomas said. "I will continue my fight to protect them in hopes that at some point, someone in a position of authority will do what is necessary."
An attorney appointed to represent the interests of Thomas' children in the custody case has recommended they be allowed to visit Sandusky but under strict restrictions.
Sandusky's attorney Joseph Amendola insisted that Thomas was trying to use the criminal charges against his client to bolster her own custody claim.
"Unfortunately, Jerry appears to have been dragged into this battle," he said. "We have the utmost faith that the judge will make his decision based upon the best interests of Jerry's grandchildren."
Sandusky has denied charges that he molested at least 10 boys he met through The Second Mile, a charity he founded in the 1970s.
But soon after his November arrest, Thomas told authorities that the former assistant coach had "inappropriately touched" her son.
Earlier this year, the Centre County Children and Youth Services office found those allegations to be unfounded, Amendola said.
State child services workers typically do not discuss their investigations publicly.
But on Monday, Thomas characterized their findings as simply a determination that there was not enough evidence to charge Sandusky.
Comments
(
