Penn State Sandusky Trial #12 (GUILTY-post verdict discussion) [Archive]

ynotdivein

06-30-2012, 02:04 AM

Continue your discussion here.

ynotdivein

06-30-2012, 02:05 PM

Mod note: As the fallout from this case ripples on, some of you have suggested that we create a forum for discussion of JS and related cases. We are watching the ongoing developments and will let you know when a decision is made about this. For the time being, please keep up the good work you are doing in this thread. :tyou:

Pensfan

06-30-2012, 02:28 PM

From the last thread, BigCat wrote:
That's why PSU admins. should have turned the info over to the proper authorities.

The '"proper authorities" were the PSU Police Department headed by Shultz. PSU has their own police department which is larger than the city's police department. PSU department doesn't report to the city's PD. The DA of that county had previously chosen to not prosecute Sandusky.

Someone should have reported this to the State Police which are controlled by governor, so....uh....forget that. Someone should have called the FBI.

wfgodot

06-30-2012, 02:53 PM

Vitriolic piece by CBS Sports's Gregg Doyel following the CNN report:

Emails show Paterno legacy, Penn State officials should face reckoning (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/19452572/internal-emails-show-paterno-penn-state-officials-should-face-reckoning)
---
Paterno's statue outside Beaver Stadium has to come down, because otherwise Penn State would be celebrating a man who helped talk school officials into leaving Jerry Sandusky alone in 2001, letting an alleged pedophile escape detection for another decade, giving that alleged pedophile -- and it's not "alleged" anymore -- unfettered access to campus for another decade.

After the statue comes down, then what? Well, then his statue would be disposed of, possibly melted down into prison bars -- maybe the bars that will hold Sandusky. Or maybe someone could just toss Paterno's statue into a landfill, throw it away as easily as Paterno and his underlings threw away the lives of so many boys in their community.
---
much more at link above, w/link to the CNN story

IzzyBlanche

06-30-2012, 03:01 PM

Interesting two paragraphs at the very end of this article BBM:

Freeh’s investigators are also exploring the circumstances surrounding Paterno’s decision to eventually hire McQueary as an assistant coach, the person familiar with the investigation said. McQueary, a former quarterback for Paterno at Penn State, has testified under oath that when he first contacted Paterno to inform him of what he had seen in the showers, Paterno assumed he was calling to ask for a job, and that Paterno brusquely told him he would not be hired.

McQueary was ultimately hired over another, more experienced candidate, and investigators are curious about whether that development came as a consequence of what he told Paterno that morning in 2001.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/sports/ncaafootball/paterno-may-have-influenced-decision-not-to-report-sandusky-e-mails-indicate.html?pagewanted=all

IzzyBlanche

06-30-2012, 03:27 PM

Vitriolic piece by CBS Sports's Gregg Doyel following the CNN report:

Emails show Paterno legacy, Penn State officials should face reckoning (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/19452572/internal-emails-show-paterno-penn-state-officials-should-face-reckoning)

much more at link above, w/link to the CNN story

From the article. This is to me truly the most appalling part of the whole story and Doyel nails it:

"I am supportive," Spanier wrote in an email obtained by CNN. "The only downside for us if the message isn't heard and acted upon, and then we become vulnerable for not having reported it."

Read that again.

The only downside for us if the message isn't heard and acted upon is that we become vulnerable for not having reported it.

Never mind the downside of another boy -- or 10 more boys -- being molested by a pedophile. That wasn't the downside that scared Spanier. What scared Spanier? That Penn State, and Penn State officials, would be "vulnerable."

:furious:

BigCat

06-30-2012, 03:32 PM

Interesting two paragraphs at the very end of this article BBM:

Freeh’s investigators are also exploring the circumstances surrounding Paterno’s decision to eventually hire McQueary as an assistant coach, the person familiar with the investigation said. McQueary, a former quarterback for Paterno at Penn State, has testified under oath that when he first contacted Paterno to inform him of what he had seen in the showers, Paterno assumed he was calling to ask for a job, and that Paterno brusquely told him he would not be hired.

McQueary was ultimately hired over another, more experienced candidate, and investigators are curious about whether that development came as a consequence of what he told Paterno that morning in 2001.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/sports/ncaafootball/paterno-may-have-influenced-decision-not-to-report-sandusky-e-mails-indicate.html?pagewanted=all

Here's another interesting tidbit from that same article:

"To that end, Freeh’s investigation has identified previously undisclosed billing records showing that officials of the university, when deciding what to do in 2001, consulted with the law firm that served as its outside counsel on their legal obligation to report the assault, the person familiar with the inquiry said. It is unclear from the billing records whether the officials disclosed the nature of the accusations against Sandusky or simply made a general inquiry. Several hours were billed, beginning on a Sunday night, the person said. The lawyer who represented the university at the time did not return a phone call requesting comment."

A poster on a PSU football message board passed along the above information earlier in the week, scooping the New York Times, which leads me to further suspect these leaks are coming from Freeh or persons within the university.

The question I have is -- did Curley and Schultz contact an attorney on the Sunday night after their initial meeting with Paterno?

If they were in CYA mode from the beginning, that might explain why it took them 10 days to meet with MM.

JMO

back2back19

06-30-2012, 04:13 PM

I really have no doubt that McQueary got that job to keep him quite. He may not think about it that way but I really think that's why he was hired. It is very curious.

I also don't believe Curley/Schultz were just given "vague" information from McQueary; I think they were straight out told or at the very least it was made clear something sexual happened, hence why they may have sought outside counsel. I mean if McQ only gave a vague statement to them, only said "horseplay", then I doubt they'd have discussed going to the proper authorities or talked about telling Sandusky to get help. They wouldn't have been freaking out over how it would get PSU into trouble. McQueary had to have been clear and rather specific.

I just hope Joe Pa didn't tell them to back off Sandusky, as is implied. All these people look so bad. So, so, so bad. How do they live with themselves? Even worse? How does Spanier think PSU's reputation being shredded is worse than more young boys being victimized by a predator? Sick. :/

ynotdivein

06-30-2012, 04:29 PM

Vitriolic piece by CBS Sports's Gregg Doyel following the CNN report:

Emails show Paterno legacy, Penn State officials should face reckoning (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/19452572/internal-emails-show-paterno-penn-state-officials-should-face-reckoning)

much more at link above, w/link to the CNN story

I see that you were being polite by terming it "vitriolic," Woofie...

<respectfully snipped from link above>

"The civil suits are coming, and they probably will name Spanier along with Curley, Schultz, Paterno's estate and of course Penn State itself. Everyone should pay, but the first check must be written by Graham Spanier. It needs to have a one, followed by a lot of zeroes before he even thinks about writing the decimal. A million dollars? That's a start, but how much does he have? Sell his house. Raid his 401(k). Take the damn dentures out of his mouth and hawk them on eBay."

BrownRice

06-30-2012, 06:05 PM

Vitriolic piece by CBS Sports's Gregg Doyel following the CNN report:

Emails show Paterno legacy, Penn State officials should face reckoning (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/19452572/internal-emails-show-paterno-penn-state-officials-should-face-reckoning)

much more at link above, w/link to the CNN story

Thanks for this article. By far, the very best I've read about this. You can smell and taste his furor and outrage.

J. J. in Phila

06-30-2012, 06:17 PM

And then we have 1998. :(

katydid23

06-30-2012, 06:18 PM

The stupid thing is, imo, that if they had just called LE and reported Sandusky from the start, it would have been over and done with, no huge taint of shame to take Penn. State down at all. Pathetic decisions all the way around.

HMSHood

06-30-2012, 06:24 PM

Sandusky’s Body Language During and After Verdict Shows Shock and Fear
http://drlillianglass.com/body-language-blog/2012/06/23/sanduskys-body-language-during-and-after-verdict-shows-shock-and-fear/

I wonder if anyone here has done a psychological profile on Jerry Sandusky. My thinking is he is a narcissist with obsessive compulsive personality disorder.

Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001938/

I think Sandusky is a Bureaucratic Compulsive.
http://www.millon.net/taxonomy/summary.htm

Sandusky is very controlling, intrusive, meddling, nosy, petty, and closed-minded. He has traits similar to Osama bin Laden, Lori Drew, and Casey Anthony (don't think she is obsessive compulsive).

pinktoes

06-30-2012, 07:14 PM

Can anyone help me with this? How do you research how many people have the same name?

I'm trying to find out how many people have the name Gerald Arthur Sandusky.

And to find out where they live/have lived.

Many thanks for any help.

pinktoes

06-30-2012, 07:34 PM

Can anyone help me with this? How do you research how many people have the same name?

I'm trying to find out how many people have the name Gerald Arthur Sandusky.

And to find out where they live/have lived.

Many thanks for any help.

Never mind. Someone is apparently filing prank lawsuits all over the country, listing GAS as a party:

"...The filing is similar to others filed in federal courts during the past two weeks in Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio and Wisconsin under such names as Jonathan Bollinger, Tom N. Jerry, Jonathan Paterno and Gino Romano."

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/state/pittsburgh-judge-addresses-sandusky-prank-filings-642483/#ixzz1zK3Q7yww

Must be someone with Histrionic Personality Disorder!

StellarsJay

06-30-2012, 08:17 PM

Gitana1 said:
"Don't you hate how Paterno describes it? "Sex between a man and a boy". Really? I have heard variations on the theme so many times in various cases. "We saw a man having sex with a child in a car." "The child was involved in a sexual relationship with the man."

Little kids can't have sexual relationship with adults. They are not having sex with adults. They are being molested, victimized, raped.

I know Paterno has passed away but were he alive I would tell him that there is no such thing as "sex" between a man and a boy. That's called child rape, buddy.

Funny how we never use those descriptors when it is a woman getting raped. I never hear anyone say, "I turned the corner and saw a man having sex with a woman." It's always, "I saw a man raping a woman."

So why are kids different? Why are kids deemed capable of having a "relationship" or "sexual intercourse" with their attacker/abuser?

Drives me crazy. Sorry for the rant.
__________________
It was such a great rant that I've bumped it up to this thread!

wfgodot

06-30-2012, 08:29 PM

Another CBS Sports story, this one by Dennis Dodd, discussing the NCAA's role in days to come:

Emmert, NCAA in position to send important message: Make Penn State pay (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/19453429/emmert-ncaa-in-position-to-send-important-message-make-penn-state-pay)
So now the NCAA is officially engaged in the Jerry Sandusky scandal. More than seven months after the sickening news broke, the central figure himself is in jail. There are civil suits still to be tried. And Penn State seems willing and ready to pay, lots.

But it's only now, today, that the NCAA becomes a central figure in the proceedings. In fact, the association is suddenly up to its Oxford-shirted armpits in the mess. The NCAA didn't have to get involved. Many were more than surprised when president Mark Emmert sent a sternly worded letter to Penn State's acting president on Nov. 17, 2011.

The letter seemed incredibly self-aggrandizing. The head of the country's most powerful amateur athletic body injected himself and his association into the story. But he did and now this rocket ride to hell has a whole new path, and the NCAA is carving it.
---
the rest at the link above

Rlaub44

06-30-2012, 08:45 PM

Interesting two paragraphs at the very end of this article BBM:

Freeh’s investigators are also exploring the circumstances surrounding Paterno’s decision to eventually hire McQueary as an assistant coach, the person familiar with the investigation said. McQueary, a former quarterback for Paterno at Penn State, has testified under oath that when he first contacted Paterno to inform him of what he had seen in the showers, Paterno assumed he was calling to ask for a job, and that Paterno brusquely told him he would not be hired.

McQueary was ultimately hired over another, more experienced candidate, and investigators are curious about whether that development came as a consequence of what he told Paterno that morning in 2001.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/sports/ncaafootball/paterno-may-have-influenced-decision-not-to-report-sandusky-e-mails-indicate.html?pagewanted=all

That article is interesting, because that is the first time I have seen Paterno's reply to McQueary's call described as "brusque". In reading about the conversation before, I always got the impression that the comment was made in teasing, as Paterno was known for.

Also, McQueary witnessed the sexual assault in 2001, and was hired as an assistant coach in 2004, after serving as a graduate assistant and then as an administrative assistant for the team in 2003. I'm not sure it is as "A leads to B" as this article suggests.

BigCat

06-30-2012, 08:59 PM

Here's the latest column from Dan Wetzel of Yahoo Sports:

It is now perfectly reasonable to postulate that Joe Paterno protected Jerry Sandusky, who had been a Penn State assistant coach from 1969 until retiring in 1999. Sandusky went right along with his business of showering with boys in the locker room, of bringing kids to the sidelines during games, of sitting in the press/luxury box area of home games. Sandusky used the program's allure like a lollipop to draw kids into his van.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--joe-paterno-role-jerry-sandusky-coverup-grows.html

The simile in the last sentence is perfect.

Reader

06-30-2012, 10:43 PM

Here's another interesting tidbit from that same article:

"To that end, Freeh’s investigation has identified previously undisclosed billing records showing that officials of the university, when deciding what to do in 2001, consulted with the law firm that served as its outside counsel on their legal obligation to report the assault, the person familiar with the inquiry said. It is unclear from the billing records whether the officials disclosed the nature of the accusations against Sandusky or simply made a general inquiry. Several hours were billed, beginning on a Sunday night, the person said. The lawyer who represented the university at the time did not return a phone call requesting comment."

A poster on a PSU football message board passed along the above information earlier in the week, scooping the New York Times, which leads me to further suspect these leaks are coming from Freeh or persons within the university.

The question I have is -- did Curley and Schultz contact an attorney on the Sunday night after their initial meeting with Paterno?
If they were in CYA mode from the beginning, that might explain why it took them 10 days to meet with MM.

JMO

And then we have 1998. :(

According to the GJ presentment, then-university counsel Wendell Courtney, who then and now (at time of the report) also worked for the 2nd Mile as counsel, was consulted concerning the 1998 abuse allegation. I wonder if he was the same attorney consulted by Curley and Schultz in 2001? I hope whoever this attorney was will have to testify at their trials about exactly what he advised them to do in both cases.

Here's the latest column from Dan Wetzel of Yahoo Sports:

(snipped)

It is now perfectly reasonable to postulate that Joe Paterno protected Jerry Sandusky......

The simile in the last sentence is perfect.

What I thought was true about Paterno now seems to be proved as true. He did nothing to protect the child from 2001 that he knew about or future victims of Sandusky. The 'moral god' of Penn State was a false god, as humans usually are. His holy football program was more important than ANYTHING. NO, they must treat Sandusky, the rapist, HUMANELY, to heck with the children! I was almost sure about this but this just seals the deal to me. I'm beginning to think when he said he 'should have done more' he really meant 'more to cover this mess up for good'. Tearing his statue down should be just the beginning of correcting this false 'legacy' IMO.

Another CBS Sports story, this one by Dennis Dodd, discussing the NCAA's role in days to come:

Emmert, NCAA in position to send important message: Make Penn State pay (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/19453429/emmert-ncaa-in-position-to-send-important-message-make-penn-state-pay)

the rest at the link above

Great article, was just reading it myself. Boy, Dennis Dodd is very mad also, along with the other sports writers. They all were probably hoping that Paterno was not involved and things were as he said and are very disappointed. I hope you don't mind me using another quote, TIA:

Penn State must pay. Take your pick: TV ban, postseason ban, shutting down the program. I don't know if I'd go so far on that last one, but I have turned 180 degrees since November.........

Now that letter, an investigation and the possibility of NCAA sanction don't seem so outrageous. Based on the CNN report alone, Emmert has his proof that -- in his words -- "individuals with present or former administrative or coaching responsibilities may have been aware of this behavior." He has proof that Penn State as a living, breathing, enabling institution -- an administrative monster itself -- violated NCAA Bylaw 10.1, which deals with ethical conduct. ...........

Think of that clause at the front of the manual as the association's Book of Genesis. Before anything else happens, you believe with all your heart in the beginning. In this case, Constitution, Article 2, Bylaw 2.1.2:

An institution's responsibility in rules compliance includes "the actions of its staff members." The president is specifically mentioned.

Victims have suffered. Those in power are culpable. Now it's time for the NCAA to do the right thing, to go to a place we never thought it would: Penalize an institution for gross moral misconduct. It would send the most important message in the NCAA's 107-year history.

Football can't be that important. Ever.

Marigold

06-30-2012, 10:54 PM

Gitana1 said:
"Don't you hate how Paterno describes it? "Sex between a man and a boy". Really? I have heard variations on the theme so many times in various cases. "We saw a man having sex with a child in a car." "The child was involved in a sexual relationship with the man."

Little kids can't have sexual relationship with adults. They are not having sex with adults. They are being molested, victimized, raped.

I know Paterno has passed away but were he alive I would tell him that there is no such thing as "sex" between a man and a boy. That's called child rape, buddy.

Funny how we never use those descriptors when it is a woman getting raped. I never hear anyone say, "I turned the corner and saw a man having sex with a woman." It's always, "I saw a man raping a woman."

So why are kids different? Why are kids deemed capable of having a "relationship" or "sexual intercourse" with their attacker/abuser?

Drives me crazy. Sorry for the rant.
__________________
It was such a great rant that I've bumped it up to this thread!

Kudos to gitana for an excellent rant. I have one of my own to post:

It really bothers me when I read statements like "Sandusky displayed inappropriate behavior" or "Sandusky inappropriately touched the boys". Imo, inappropriate actions are things like wearing black socks with brown shoes, slurping soup out of a bowl, or singing Christmas carols at a Fourth of July picnic.
"Malicious"
"Criminal"
"Depraved"
"Evil"
Those are just a few of the words I find that are better suited to describe Sandusky's behavior. I think that when people and the media use the term "inappropriate", they make Sandusky's crimes sound like nothing more than a mere faux pas. His victims deserve more respect than that, imo.

IzzyBlanche

06-30-2012, 11:22 PM

Another CBS Sports story, this one by Dennis Dodd, discussing the NCAA's role in days to come:

Emmert, NCAA in position to send important message: Make Penn State pay (http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/19453429/emmert-ncaa-in-position-to-send-important-message-make-penn-state-pay)

the rest at the link above

Bah. (Not intended at you, WFGODOT, just jumping off from your post).

IMO the NCAA has about as much credibility as that man behind the curtain that Dorothy wasn't supposed to pay any attention to.

It only now butts in after the conviction?

Again I say bah.

(and O/T, I can't believe I just now figured out what WFGODOT refers to. And my degree is in English! :ashamed:

Reader

06-30-2012, 11:27 PM

Sex abuse reporting requirements taking effect nationwide, in wake of Sandusky case

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/sex-abuse-reporting-requirements-taking-effect-nationwide-in-wake-of-sandusky-case

...........In Florida, legislators this year approved what many child advocates consider the toughest mandatory reporting legislation in the country for sexual abuse in universities and other schools.

The “Protection of Vulnberable Persons” law, SB 1816, states that anyone who suspects a child is being abused must report it. ........ In addition, failure to report suspected child abuse is now a third-degree felony, not just a misdemeanor, and universities could face fines of $1 million if officials do not report the abuse. Universities could also lose state funding for two years, according to the law............

Penn State University, where Sandusky abused 10 boys over a 15-year period, instituted a policy requiring employees to report suspected child abuse to state authorities.

But legislators nationwide also acted in response to the Penn State scandal. About 105 bills have been introduced in 2012 legislative sessions in 30 states and the District of Columbia.

More at link....

IzzyBlanche

06-30-2012, 11:31 PM

What I thought was true about Paterno now seems to be proved as true. He did nothing to protect the child from 2001 that he knew about or future victims of Sandusky. The 'moral god' of Penn State was a false god, as humans usually are. His holy football program was more important than ANYTHING. NO, they must treat Sandusky, the rapist, HUMANELY, to heck with the children! I was almost sure about this but this just seals the deal to me. I'm beginning to think when he said he 'should have done more' he really meant 'more to cover this mess up for good'. Tearing his statue down should be just the beginning of correcting this false 'legacy' IMO.

Eloquently put and I couldn't agree more. What a hypocrite JP was. Success with honor, my aunt's fanny. :furious:

IzzyBlanche

06-30-2012, 11:38 PM

Kudos to gitana for an excellent rant. I have one of my own to post:

It really bothers me when I read statements like "Sandusky displayed inappropriate behavior" or "Sandusky inappropriately touched the boys". Imo, inappropriate actions are things like wearing black socks with brown shoes, slurping soup out of a bowl, or singing Christmas carols at a Fourth of July picnic.
"Malicious"
"Criminal"
"Depraved"
"Evil"
Those are just a few of the words I find that are better suited to describe Sandusky's behavior. I think that when people and the media use the term "inappropriate", they make Sandusky's crimes sound like nothing more than a mere faux pas. His victims deserve more respect than that, imo.

You are so correct. Picking your nose in church = inappropriate.

Raping children = evil.

Once again: :furious:

elmomom

06-30-2012, 11:41 PM

Paterno quote
"They ask me what I'd like written about me when I'm gone. I hope they write I made Penn State a better place, not just that I was a good football coach."
:sick:

J. J. in Phila

06-30-2012, 11:57 PM

I don't like to make judgments without evidence, but there is now evidence that Paterno did the follow up, and it was a recommendation not to go to C&YS or DPW.

IzzyBlanche

07-01-2012, 12:12 AM

I don't like to make judgments without evidence, but there is now evidence that Paterno did the follow up, and it was a recommendation not to go to C&YS or DPW.

What evidence? Please share.

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 12:17 AM

P-N coverage: http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/07/emails_drag_joe_paterno_back_i.html

Commentary: http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/06/david_jones_joe_paterno_fans_m.html

According to the e-mail, Curley talked to Paterno and after talking with him, Curley changed the plan.

IzzyBlanche

07-01-2012, 12:37 AM

Excellent summation and so short I fear quoting it that I might violate WS copyright rules.

However I think one sentence is all that is needed for illumination: "Paterno apparently persuaded the group to go easy on old Jerry."

http://www.sfgate.com/sports/ostler/article/Uncovered-e-mails-close-book-on-Paterno-s-legacy-3676513.php

Paterno = HIP. O. CRIT. :furious:

IzzyBlanche

07-01-2012, 12:54 AM

I don't like to make judgments without evidence, but there is now evidence that Paterno did the follow up, and it was a recommendation not to go to C&YS or DPW.

Am I being stupid? :waitasec:

Because if I am interpreting today's news stories correctly, they strongly suggest that JP quashed his higher-ups' instincts to do the right thing by reporting JS's activities to the Second Mile and child welfare authorities.

How does that equate to JP doing the follow up?

Reader

07-01-2012, 01:40 AM

I don't like to make judgments without evidence, but there is now evidence that Paterno did the follow up, and it was a recommendation not to go to C&YS or DPW.

Just flabbergasting, J. J.!

I criticized Paterno because he did not report directly to police or CPS after the report from MM, because the way I read Pa. reporting law, he had that responsibility. After that was shown incorrect, I still criticized him for not reporting as a moral duty to protect the children, and because of his high stature and influence. Even considered some of the excuses given for his not having done so...but being from Fl. and not used to 'gothic PA', I still considered it a failing that he did not 'follow up', as did a lot of others.

But, I have to admit, never did I conceive that he would be the force behind a conspiracy to not report the abuse and to cover up for JS, to not regard how this would affect the boy and other children at risk, or even the school if it was discovered.

How could a man who preached 'doing the right thing' let himself even consider this decision for any reason? (not really a question)

elmomom

07-01-2012, 04:00 AM

Am I being stupid? :waitasec:

Because if I am interpreting today's news stories correctly, they strongly suggest that JP quashed his higher-ups' instincts to do the right thing by reporting JS's activities to the Second Mile and child welfare authorities.

How does that equate to JP doing the follow up?

I think, if I read JJ correctly, he means that the follow-up JP did was that he quashed a follow up with C&YS and DPW. In other words, JJ is acknowledging that there is now evidence that Paterno did not do the right thing by the children.

BrownRice

07-01-2012, 05:16 AM

Am I being stupid? :waitasec:

Because if I am interpreting today's news stories correctly, they strongly suggest that JP quashed his higher-ups' instincts to do the right thing by reporting JS's activities to the Second Mile and child welfare authorities.

How does that equate to JP doing the follow up?

My understanding of the emails was Curley had a 3 step plan in place (1. Talk to JS; 2. Report it to 2nd Mile; 3. Report it to authorities). However, after Schultz (and Curley?) spoke with Joe, they decided to do nothing. Hence, the thought would be Joe persuaded them to keep it "in house" and not go further with it.

ThoughtFox

07-01-2012, 05:28 AM

Just flabbergasting, J. J.!

I criticized Paterno because he did not report directly to police or CPS after the report from MM, because the way I read Pa. reporting law, he had that responsibility. After that was shown incorrect, I still criticized him for not reporting as a moral duty to protect the children, and because of his high stature and influence. Even considered some of the excuses given for his not having done so...but being from Fl. and not used to 'gothic PA', I still considered it a failing that he did not 'follow up', as did a lot of others.

But, I have to admit, never did I conceive that he would be the force behind a conspiracy to not report the abuse and to cover up for JS, to not regard how this would affect the boy and other children at risk, or even the school if it was discovered.

How could a man who preached 'doing the right thing' let himself even consider this decision for any reason? (not really a question)

I have to say I'm really not surprised. To me it's always seemed that the "higher ups" were probably taking direction from Paterno, not the other way around.

And we sort of knew there had to be a conspiracy of some kind involving Paterno, since McQueary got a job and Jerry was still around campus involved with Second Mile and getting tickets to take boys to games with him. It always smelled like a cover-up, but with this new information it seems worse.

My only problem is that now J.J. and I don't have anything to argue about. ;) Just kidding!

back2back19

07-01-2012, 07:14 AM

Bah. (Not intended at you, WFGODOT, just jumping off from your post).

IMO the NCAA has about as much credibility as that man behind the curtain that Dorothy wasn't supposed to pay any attention to.

It only now butts in after the conviction?

Again I say bah.

Honestly, I don't think the NCAA will anything to Penn State, unless the Freeh report uncovers NCAA violations. I really don't think they will touch the Sandusky stuff.

costalpilot

07-01-2012, 09:57 AM

The stupid thing is, imo, that if they had just called LE and reported Sandusky from the start, it would have been over and done with, no huge taint of shame to take Penn. State down at all. Pathetic decisions all the way around.

Yes. This gets to the heart of the matter. It seems that's exactly what the administrators were inclined to do when they were just talking to each other about the problem. They were going to do the right thing, for whatever reason, it doesnt matter. IMO because they realized the potential liability they might face if they did the wrong thing, but it doesn't matter why. Fact is they were going to come clean, report jer and get right with the law.

Then spannier talked to. Joe. You know, the old man who had never heard of a man havin sex with a boy---not to mention, raping a boy in the Penn state showers.

And that was the end of it. Joe squashed everything.

That's the problem wi

costalpilot

07-01-2012, 10:00 AM

Th absolute power. It corrupts absolutely, to borrow an over used cliche.

StellarsJay

07-01-2012, 10:27 AM

Here's a repeat of the link to the Vicky Triponey vs Paterno story.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/11/23/meet-penn-state-s-new-whistleblower-vicky-triponey.html
I have no surprise at all that Paterno was the core validator of an instinctive desire to make Sandusky mess go away. His "I don't know about man-boy sex" was such a blatant lie, that I've never believed he was honest.
Somewhere I read that Spanier describes himself as an abused child- how could he ignore others?

believe09

07-01-2012, 10:54 AM

Victoria Balfour, an investigator for some of the attorneys and victims in the first Sandusky trial, will be on Websleuths Radio tonight. Listen, call in....this is your chance to let the men who bravely stood up know how much you support and admire them. This is also a chance to let other potential victims know that there is justice for them as well.

The trial we just experienced is merely round one. Be ready...there is so much that will be happening these next few months. Bobbing and weaving from Penn State, Freeh's report, more men coming forward...

believe09

07-01-2012, 10:57 AM

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/websleuths/2012/07/02/websleuths-radio

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 11:14 AM

I have to say I'm really not surprised. To me it's always seemed that the "higher ups" were probably taking direction from Paterno, not the other way around.

And we sort of knew there had to be a conspiracy of some kind involving Paterno, since McQueary got a job and Jerry was still around campus involved with Second Mile and getting tickets to take boys to games with him. It always smelled like a cover-up, but with this new information it seems worse.

My only problem is that now J.J. and I don't have anything to argue about. ;) Just kidding!

Well, I'm still not convinced that Paterno knew about 1998 (though it is clear Curley did in 2001 and that Schultz did in 1998), or that McQueary's career development had anything to do with 2001 (I think the timing is against it).

I don't move without evidence, but, unless Curley decided to lie on that one detail in private e-mails in 2001 (and there is no apparent reason for it), Paterno was involved after he reported and encouraged not reporting Sandusky to LE.

That is damning.

We have returned to Central Pennsylvania Gothic.

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 11:37 AM

Am I being stupid? :waitasec:

Because if I am interpreting today's news stories correctly, they strongly suggest that JP quashed his higher-ups' instincts to do the right thing by reporting JS's activities to the Second Mile and child welfare authorities.

How does that equate to JP doing the follow up?

I had been mildly critical of Paterno for not checking with Curley and Spanier after the 2001 incident was reported and checking to see if there was a proper investigation; I'd often ask if he would have gotten a straight answer.

Now it turns out that Paterno did talk with Curley, after the fact, according to that e-mail. The "followup" that he did was suggesting that it not be reported to LE. :(

ohiogirl

07-01-2012, 11:56 AM

Bah. (Not intended at you, WFGODOT, just jumping off from your post).

IMO the NCAA has about as much credibility as that man behind the curtain that Dorothy wasn't supposed to pay any attention to.

It only now butts in after the conviction?

Again I say bah.

(and O/T, I can't believe I just now figured out what WFGODOT refers to. And my degree is in English! :ashamed:

the ncaa sent the letter in November, iirc.

IzzyBlanche

07-01-2012, 12:56 PM

My understanding of the emails was Curley had a 3 step plan in place (1. Talk to JS; 2. Report it to 2nd Mile; 3. Report it to authorities). However, after Schultz (and Curley?) spoke with Joe, they decided to do nothing. Hence, the thought would be Joe persuaded them to keep it "in house" and not go further with it.

OK, if that's what J.J. meant, then I was being dumb. I interpreted J. J. as saying Curley, not Paterno, was the driving force behind changing the plan.

believe09

07-01-2012, 01:07 PM

I think JoPa passed away at a convenient time. JMVHO.

IzzyBlanche

07-01-2012, 01:11 PM

the ncaa sent the letter in November, iirc.

You're right. Thanks for the correction.

Reader

07-01-2012, 01:12 PM

the ncaa sent the letter in November, iirc.

That's correct, here is a report dated 11/19/11 on NCAA involvement and the letter to Penn. State. :

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7251458/penn-state-nittany-lions-ncaa-launching-investigation-wake-scandal
------

And on that same page, there is this link with some Paterno quotes at the time:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/7462065/penn-state-nittany-lions-joe-paterno-says-know-how-handle-jerry-sandusky-abuse-report

"I didn't know exactly how to handle it and I was afraid to do something that might jeopardize what the university procedure was," ........ Pa. "So I backed away and turned it over to some other people, people I thought would have a little more expertise than I did. It didn't work out that way."

and

Paterno said he wished he knew how allegations against Sandusky didn't come to light until this year. "I don't know the answer to that," he said. "It's hard."

Gag! He was lying as he was dying!

Reader

07-01-2012, 01:19 PM

OK, if that's what J.J. meant, then I was being dumb. I interpreted J. J. as saying Curley, not Paterno, was the driving force behind changing the plan.

Not dumb...do that all the time myself...it's easy to misunderstand on the internet when no conversation is involved....

BigCat

07-01-2012, 01:31 PM

Curley's and Schultz's lawyers issued a joint statement:

"For Curley, Schultz, Spanier and Paterno, the responsible and 'humane' thing to do was, like Governor Corbett, to carefully and responsibly assess the best way to handle vague, but troubling allegations. Faced with tough situations, good people try to do their best to make the right decisions."

The subtle inclusion of Paterno with the three stooges is interesting. It definitely seems to contradict Paterno's testimony that he simply kicked the allegation upstairs and was done with it.

Does anyone know how grand jury proceedings are conducted? Were MM, Paterno, Curley, Schultz, and Spanier aware of each other's testimony?

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 02:02 PM

Curley's and Schultz's lawyers issued a joint statement:

Quote:
"For Curley, Schultz, Spanier and Paterno, the responsible and 'humane' thing to do was, like Governor Corbett, to carefully and responsibly assess the best way to handle vague, but troubling allegations. Faced with tough situations, good people try to do their best to make the right decisions."

The subtle inclusion of Paterno with the three stooges is interesting. It definitely seems to contradict Paterno's testimony that he simply kicked the allegation upstairs and was done with it.

I just wanted to point this out, directed at the statement, not at you BigCat.

Corbett investigated. The Three Stooges did not.

Does anyone know how grand jury proceedings are conducted? Were MM, Paterno, Curley, Schultz, and Spanier aware of each other's testimony?

Curley and Schultz had the same attorney. Paterno didn't, and I'm not sure about Spanier.

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 02:06 PM

OK, if that's what J.J. meant, then I was being dumb. I interpreted J. J. as saying Curley, not Paterno, was the driving force behind changing the plan.

I wouldn't call Paterno the "driving force," but that e-mail indicates he advocated it to Curley. He was on board with it. :(

Reader

07-01-2012, 02:31 PM

I wouldn't call Paterno the "driving force," but that e-mail indicates he advocated it to Curley. He was on board with it. :(

Just jumping off your post, J. J., to point out the rest of what this article says was on the emails:

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/06/30/justice/penn-state-emails/index.html

In the same purported e-mail provided to CNN, Curley goes on to suggest that if Sandusky "is cooperative," Penn State "would work with him" to tell Second Mile. If not, Curley states, the university will inform both Second Mile and outside authorities............

"The only downside for us is if the message (to Sandusky) isn't 'heard' and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it," Spanier purportedly writes.

"But that can be assessed down the road. The approach you outline is humane and a reasonable way to proceed," he adds............

"This is a more humane and upfront way to handle this,' Schultz purportedly writes. But he makes clear Penn State should inform Sandusky's charity Second Mile "with or without (Sandusky's) cooperation."

As for telling child welfare authorities, he adds, "we can play it by ear."

ETA: Curley purportedly writes to Spanier, saying he wants to meet with Sandusky, tell him there's "a problem," and that "we want to assist the individual to get professional help."

So what happened that none of them, including Paterno who apparently suggested the new plan, followed up on 'assessing down the road' and 'playing it by ear' concerning reporting to outside authorities, and getting JS professional help?

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 02:43 PM

A damning commentary from the Patriot News:

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/07/jerry_sandusky_scandal_at_penn.html

Is there anyone out there wondering why I call this Central Pennsylvania Gothic. :(

Reader

07-01-2012, 02:49 PM

Honestly, I don't think the NCAA will anything to Penn State, unless the Freeh report uncovers NCAA violations. I really don't think they will touch the Sandusky stuff.

You may be right and we'll see what happens, but I think they will get involved in some type of sanctions...it's been pointed out in a couple of sports articles that the school violated ethics standards, moral standards and lost control of the football program.

At FSU down here, due to a much more simpler testing scandal, the NCAA sanctioned them by taking away 14 game wins, a bowl win and disqualifying a bunch of players. Penn State's violations are much more serious to me as they concern how the entire athletics program was run and the lack of ethical leadership when it was needed, which has affected the school negatively in many ways.

LinasK

07-01-2012, 02:51 PM

I wouldn't call Paterno the "driving force," but that e-mail indicates he advocated it to Curley. He was on board with it. :(
From the recent articles I've read in the last couple of days it seems Paterno was. Curley didn't "change" his mind until right after the meeting with him. Seems to me like Paterno used some powerful dissuasion with him- like how it would impact the precious football team...
I am now in agreement with those who call for taking down the statue of Paterno. He is no hero! How humane was it to let more boys be victimized while turning a blind eye? And nothing was done when Sandusky didn't change and just kept bringing more victims to the Penn State locker rooms and showers!:behindbar:behindbar:behindbar
More heads need to roll for enabling Sandusky, and the NCAA should also take severe action against Penn State.
Maybe we should have a forum on this with threads for actions against Dottie, Penn State (Curley, Spanier, Shultz), and The Second Mile. Anyone else I've left out???

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 03:04 PM

From the recent articles I've read in the last couple of days it seems Paterno was. Curley didn't "change" his mind until right after the meeting with him. Seems to me like Paterno used some powerful dissuasion with him- like how it would impact the precious football team...
I am now in agreement with those who call for taking down the statue of Paterno. He is no hero! How humane was it to let more boys be victimized while turning a blind eye? And nothing was done when Sandusky didn't change and just kept bringing more victims to the Penn State locker rooms and showers!:behindbar:behindbar:behindbar
More heads need to roll for enabling Sandusky, and the NCAA should also take severe action against Penn State.

We don't know how powerful.

It could have been, "Can we just get Jerry some treatment?" It could have been something more forceful.

costalpilot

07-01-2012, 03:08 PM

Curley's and Schultz's lawyers issued a joint statement:

The subtle inclusion of Paterno with the three stooges is interesting. It definitely seems to contradict Paterno's testimony that he simply kicked the allegation upstairs and was done with it.

Does anyone know how grand jury proceedings are conducted? Were MM, Paterno, Curley, Schultz, and Spanier aware of each other's testimony?

they really didnt have much choice at that point. it was either, keep lying, keep lying but hedge the truth as much as possible (in light of recent events) or tell the truth.

heres an intertersting reaction to recent disclosures:

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--joe-paterno-role-jerry-sandusky-coverup-grows.html

"....What remains is the question of why otherwise reasonable people would make such an ethically bankrupt and criminal decision. These are highly educated, high-functioning men. The answer may never be determined. It may help to go back to that moment.

In hindsight, the smart move would have been to have Sandusky arrested. Viewed from today, Curley, Paterno, et. al. would have been lauded for making the correct decision.

At the time, however, the story would've been about a recently retired defensive coordinator molesting kids in JoePa's locker room.

Paterno was 74 and coming off a 5-7 season. He didn't have much of a team for the foreseeable future, either. Rumblings were growing that it was time for him to retire, that the game had passed him by, that at his age he couldn't handle the responsibilities of a major college football program.

An act of child molestation in the locker room would have only fueled that. When word would have eventually leaked out that in 1998 Sandusky had been investigated for the same charge yet still maintained all-hour access to the facilities, it may have too much for Paterno to survive, let alone explain.

In the precise moment, each of the men must have feared being fired. Even Joe Paterno.
...."

LinasK

07-01-2012, 03:16 PM

We don't know how powerful.

It could have been, "Can we just get Jerry some treatment?" It could have been something more forceful.
True, but my gut tells me some verbal arm twisting went on, on Paterno's part... He minimized the victims the way he worded it as "sex between a man and boy", as if it was consensual.

Reader

07-01-2012, 03:24 PM

A damning commentary from the Patriot News:

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/07/jerry_sandusky_scandal_at_penn.html

Is there anyone out there wondering why I call this Central Pennsylvania Gothic. :(

Interesting information from your link:

Pennsylvania launches far fewer child sexual abuse investigations than other states: 8 per 1,000 children versus 40 per 1,000 children nationally.

The Keystone State also lags behind in determining a child to be a victim of child abuse: 1.3 per 1,000 children compared with 9.2 per 1,000 nationally, according to the Child Abuse Coalition of the state District Attorney’s Association.

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 03:59 PM

True, but my gut tells me some verbal arm twisting went on, on Paterno's part... He minimized the victims the way he worded it as "sex between a man and boy", as if it was consensual.

Well, his shocked statement is questionable, though McQueary said that he was visibly shocked.

LinasK

07-01-2012, 04:15 PM

Well, his shocked statement is questionable, though McQueary said that he was visibly shocked.
Maybe Paterno was shocked when McQuery first told him, but then had time to go into denial mode. I know from personal experience when I told my mother of my molestation, the denial mode only took about 30 seconds or less to happen...

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 04:48 PM

Maybe Paterno was shocked when McQuery first told him, but then had time to go into denial mode. I know from personal experience when I told my mother of my molestation, the denial mode only took about 30 seconds or less to happen...

I don't think he would have been shocked if he was aware of Victim 6/B. K.

He would have had time to process it by the conversation with Curley.

costalpilot

07-01-2012, 05:12 PM

if you have the time, the "comments" section of the local rag is a wealth of information, speculation, indgination and hyperbole.

some of the commentors are state insiders with connections. a few are die hard fans, trying to keep the sinking ship afloat with smoke and mirrors. what seems clear is that as bad as we might have thought it actually is, its worse, much worse.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/06/more_penn_state_emails_surface/3032/comments-13.html

4Jacy

07-01-2012, 05:23 PM

From the recent articles I've read in the last couple of days it seems Paterno was. Curley didn't "change" his mind until right after the meeting with him. Seems to me like Paterno used some powerful dissuasion with him- like how it would impact the precious football team...
I am now in agreement with those who call for taking down the statue of Paterno. He is no hero! How humane was it to let more boys be victimized while turning a blind eye? And nothing was done when Sandusky didn't change and just kept bringing more victims to the Penn State locker rooms and showers!:behindbar:behindbar:behindbar
More heads need to roll for enabling Sandusky, and the NCAA should also take severe action against Penn State.
Maybe we should have a forum on this with threads for actions against Dottie, Penn State (Curley, Spanier, Shultz), and The Second Mile. Anyone else I've left out???

I absolutely agree - take down the statue. He knew what was going on but felt the football team was more important. How much did his wife know? And what about Dottie, no one could be that much in denial.

Reader

07-01-2012, 05:29 PM

Well, I'm still not convinced that Paterno knew about 1998 (though it is clear Curley did in 2001 and that Schultz did in 1998), or that McQueary's career development had anything to do with 2001 (I think the timing is against it).

I don't move without evidence, but, unless Curley decided to lie on that one detail in private e-mails in 2001 (and there is no apparent reason for it), Paterno was involved after he reported and encouraged not reporting Sandusky to LE.

That is damning.

We have returned to Central Pennsylvania Gothic.

Leaving the question of MM's job out, since I don't know anything about his job performance and if he was qualified or not...

But I have always thought that Paterno had to know about 1998 also....from all the reports we've seen he was very proprietary about the football program and his players, even being instrumental in the VP of student affairs Vickey Triponey leaving her job. She stated Paterno urged her, in an email that has since become public, to “leave discipline of football players to the coach”......How she describes the culture? “A blind sense of loyalty—not just at the top, but at all levels.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/11/23/meet-penn-state-s-new-whistleblower-vicky-triponey.html
(previously posted by StellarsJay)

Take this atmosphere and Paterno's attitude about control of his program, the fact that JS still worked for him at the time and include the circumstances and content of Curley's email:

Except that Curley sent an email to Schultz and school president Graham Spanier on Feb. 27, 2001, that changed everything.

"After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday, I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps. I am having trouble with going to everyone but the person involved. I would be more comfortable meeting with the person and tell them about the information we received and tell them we are aware of the first situation," Curley's email said, according to CNN.

Now, to me it's obvious that his 'we' means all of them involved in this change of plan including Paterno whom he had just talked to about the plan and how to handle this new allegation. It makes no sense that Paterno and Curley would not discuss the 'first situation' in 'talking it over'. Do you really think that the man in control was not informed of a police, CPS and DA investigation of a coach that still worked for him?

This may not be 'hard evidence' but circumstantial evidence and use of deduction is also allowed in court, that's what helped convict JS.

IMO

back2back19

07-01-2012, 05:30 PM

if you have the time, the "comments" section of the local rag is a wealth of information, speculation, indgination and hyperbole.

some of the commentors are state insiders with connections. a few are die hard fans, trying to keep the sinking ship afloat with smoke and mirrors. what seems clear is that as bad as we might have thought it actually is, its worse, much worse.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/06/more_penn_state_emails_surface/3032/comments-13.html

Thanks. Will have to check it out. I have absolutely no doubt it's much worse than any of us can imagine but I do sorta, kinda worry that the Freeh report won't get into everyting. I guess I still have some fear of a coverup. There's no way that report should be mild.

costalpilot

07-01-2012, 06:13 PM

Thanks. Will have to check it out. I have absolutely no doubt it's much worse than any of us can imagine but I do sorta, kinda worry that the Freeh report won't get into everyting. I guess I still have some fear of a coverup. There's no way that report should be mild.

from what I read about Freeh, no need to worry. personally i have no knowledge, but a commentator said freeh would positiively do a thorough and complete investigation and that he would pull no punches. interestingly, the most "connected" of the commentators in the response column seem to be the most pessimistic, especially a guy named bierce(?)1 on page 11, who several responders acknowledged as being closer to the program than everyone else. this guy said the filth goes way, way back. way b4 anything that has as yet even been alluded to.

frankly, I'm not surprised. joepa has been in charge a long time in happy valley. one road in;one road out.

one more thing, the people that say, "this could have happened anywhere", are way off. no way it happens anywhere else. this was a unique situation. nowhere else is anything like this. this is the biggest scandal in SPORTS history. no doubt in my mind.

all you had to know (to guess at how bad it REALLY was) is that joepa got summarily fired, in the middle of the season, the day after he announced his resignation at the end of the season.

joe pa didnt get fired because his assistant was a pervert. and he didnt get fired cause he was an old man who didnt know a man could have sex with a boy. (funny about that, but in a way, its true. all an adult man can do is rape a minor boy, but that misses joes bs, misleading, lying point).

imo joe got fired because he masterminded a massive, long running cover up that in part enabled a predator to find, stalk and victimize children. but joe wasnt alone. he just ran the show. apparently he had lots of help.

in essence, the email meant this> the cover up is on. we have our orders. or, the cover up is on, Joes on board with it. if the latter, curly unilaterally altered a plan the three had agreed to. but that makes NO sense. not after he links joe to the reversal.

one is left to conclude...joe directed the cover up.

someone said, leave the statute. paint it yellow. but that's the color of cowardice. whats the color of evil?

ann rule needs to cover this.

HMSHood

07-01-2012, 06:40 PM

Even with Sandusky convicted, it gets worse and worse for Penn State. It is obvious they knew what was going on, but they ignored it. Turned the other cheek mentality. What happened at Penn State is reminds me what happened with Soviet Union, Axis, Khmer Rouge, Maoist China, Rwanda, Uganda, and South Hadley. People knew what was going on, but no action was taken.

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 06:46 PM

But I have always thought that Paterno had to know about 1998 also....from all the reports we've seen he was very proprietary about the football program and his players, even being instrumental in the VP of student affairs Vickey Triponey leaving her job. She stated Paterno urged her, in an email that has since become public, to “leave discipline of football players to the coach”......How she describes the culture? “A blind sense of loyalty—not just at the top, but at all levels.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/11/23/meet-penn-state-s-new-whistleblower-vicky-triponey.html
(previously posted by StellarsJay)

I will wait for actual evidence regarding Paterno and 1998. He was not in on the e-mails, so that could include Curley, Schultz, and Spanier, but not Paterno.

Reader

07-01-2012, 07:14 PM

David Jones: Joe Paterno fans must accept that he was flawed

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/06/david_jones_joe_paterno_fans_m.html#incart_hbx

........Today, we begin to deal with the man’s dark side. As it was the time then to extol some of Paterno’s virtues, now it is time to examine his liabilities.

We all have both. Our culture seems more and more addicted to the concept of white hats and black hats, to taking sides, to painting the world and its inhabitants as either “good” or “evil.” It’s an infantile way to look at life and people, in my opinion........

Those people will never believe what I have to say here because they are zealots in need of a hero, even if it’s someone they never knew.

I can only tell you that when I read Saturday’s CNN report implicating Paterno in keeping the lid on Sandusky’s activities, I was not in the slightest surprised. I’ve suspected as much for almost two years. I did not print my full sentiments in the interest of fairness.......

In covering the man and his football program for 21 seasons, the single most dominant thread is this: his ambition and drive. He would allow nothing and no one to disparage the institution he had built without some form of retribution. And he had complete power over his domain...........

We don’t know the totality of what the Freeh investigation will uncover. I would just ask those who cannot get their minds around the concept of Joe Paterno acting in self-interest — acting to preserve his institution rather than individuals — to prepare themselves to have their bedtime story disrupted. You don’t get to be as powerful as this man was by sitting idly by and allowing others to call shots.

More at link....

Pensfan

07-01-2012, 07:24 PM

This article shows the severe problem with PA's Code § 42.42. Suspected Child Abuse—Mandated Reporting Requirements.
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/07/jerry_sandusky_scandal_at_penn.html

Mandated reporters should be required to report those suspected of child abuse directly to LE or face jail time. Requiring that they only report the suspected behavior to their superiors is fatally flawed. Some "superiors" will refuse to contact LE and others will refuse to immediately contact LE.

I am referring to the incidents at Central Mountain High School (as it is still unclear if PSU's officials fall under the mandated reporter law.) One CMHS coach strongly suspected Jerry was a pedophile after seeing his clingy behavior and witnessing him lying next to a child on a wrestling mat, but he didn't call LE. The guidance counselor at CMHS did nothing after she was told except "gossip" with the principal about the boy, IMO. CMHS's principal was told about Jerry's crimes and she scolded the victim and his mother and told them to go home to think about what they were doing to good ol' Jerry.

It's still unclear whether PSU officials and McQueary were mandated reporters. (Oh lawdy, don’t jump on me. Everyone should have demanded justice for the little boys regardless of whether they were a mandated reporter or not. I am just pointing out the flaws in PA's code. Knowing jail time would await them for failing to report MIGHT have altered their behavior. Notice that I used the word "might".)

Bev Mackereth of Pennsylvania's Office of Children, Youth and Families declined to comment on whether that would cover the Penn State officials embroiled in the scandal.
"The interpretation of who is and isn't (a mandated reporter) really belongs in the court," she said.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-11-11/news/ct-met-mandated-reporters-20111111_1_report-abuse-team-showers-grand-jury-report

Bev Mackereth is the Director of the York County Department of Human Services. She has also served eight years as the Pennsylvania State Representative for the 196th District.

wfgodot

07-01-2012, 07:29 PM

David Jones: Joe Paterno fans must accept that he was flawed

Somehow, I don't think "flawed" is the word I'd choose.

Reader

07-01-2012, 07:31 PM

I will wait for actual evidence regarding Paterno and 1998. He was not in on the e-mails, so that could include Curley, Schultz, and Spanier, but not Paterno.

Now why did I know that would be your response, J. J.? lol

Wasn't trying to change anyone's mind, just stating where I am coming from with what we know now....

costalpilot

07-01-2012, 07:49 PM

Even with Sandusky convicted, it gets worse and worse for Penn State. It is obvious they knew what was going on, but they ignored it. Turned the other cheek mentality. What happened at Penn State is reminds me what happened with Soviet Union, Axis, Khmer Rouge, Maoist China, Rwanda, Uganda, and South Hadley. People knew what was going on, but no action was taken.

you forgot an example. maybe the closest one.

nazie germany.

its the same. "cult of the individual" mentality" with pretty much the same outcome. the big difference (and its a huge one, thankfully, for penn state) is that in germany pretty much everyone was involved.

in happy valley, the participants were limited to, what, ten, twenty, a hundred at most.

other than that, its the same phenomena...absoulte power corrupts absolutely.

one man gets power, wins a lot, consolidates that power, is lionized as a god, and has a massive moral failure. he covers it up, because he can. for a time.

in the end, though, he cant. everything unravels. he brings it all down.

its a tragedy. literally.

if you dont believe that, just go to the penn state boards, he is STILL being defended there by well over half the posters. they STILL can't believe it.

and they defend him by saying, "hes dead. he cant defend himself."

well, so what. Hitlers dead too.

dont get me wrong. im not sayin joepa is comparable to hitler. Im saying what happened at penn state is a lot like what happened in germany.

one man rule.

Rlaub44

07-01-2012, 08:02 PM

We don't know how powerful.

It could have been, "Can we just get Jerry some treatment?" It could have been something more forceful.

I have been wondering the same thing JJ. I also noted the wording in Curley's e-mail - "After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe"; as if the second thoughts about the plan occurred before the conversation with Paterno.

This whole thing is horrific - Central PA Gothic to be sure - but I wish I knew exactly how this happened. In any case, it was a horrible decision and a terrible lack of judgment by people who should have known better, especially if, as we now have heard, they sought legal advice before choosing Plan B.

ynotdivein

07-01-2012, 08:07 PM

Tonight's WS Radio show may be of interest to folks here:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/websleuths/2012/07/02/websleuths-radio

BennyProfane

07-01-2012, 08:13 PM

I don't think he would have been shocked if he was aware of Victim 6/B. K.

He would have had time to process it by the conversation with Curley.

In the GJ presentment, Victim 6 isn't "B.K.", but an acquaintance of Victim 5 and "B.K.", all of whom were Second Mile kids.

believe09

07-01-2012, 08:55 PM

Sanduskyvictims@websleuths.com

Please send in letters of support for the brave men who came forward for the first trial, please send along any information regarding other victims, or if you are a victim. Ms Balfour has contact information for the Attorney General's office, private attorneys, counselors set up to speak with victims....

Please-you are not alone.

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 09:22 PM

In the GJ presentment, Victim 6 isn't "B.K.", but an acquaintance of Victim 5 and "B.K.", all of whom were Second Mile kids.

I was referring to two separate victims.

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 09:27 PM

Now why did I know that would be your response, J. J.? lol

Wasn't trying to change anyone's mind, just stating where I am coming from with what we know now....

Well, I think you need evidence that he knew. It is possible, certainly, but possible isn't the same as, "It happened."

costalpilot

07-01-2012, 10:01 PM

Well, I think you need evidence that he knew. It is possible, certainly, but possible isn't the same as, "It happened."

whatever.

you think "you" need "evidence that he knew". for what?

today, newspapers and commentators across the country are calling joepa a liar, a conspirator, indeed, the leader of a conspiracy that resulted in the rapes of many young men.

maybe you need more "evidence" but most have got all they need. its a personal choice in every case.

you may never get there. most already have.

many of your state colleagues know.

HMSHood

07-01-2012, 10:03 PM

you forgot an example. maybe the closest one.

nazie germany.

its the same. "cult of the individual" mentality" with pretty much the same outcome. the big difference (and its a huge one, thankfully, for penn state) is that in germany pretty much everyone was involved.

in happy valley, the participants were limited to, what, ten, twenty, a hundred at most.

other than that, its the same phenomena...absoulte power corrupts absolutely.

one man gets power, wins a lot, consolidates that power, is lionized as a god, and has a massive moral failure. he covers it up, because he can. for a time.

in the end, though, he cant. everything unravels. he brings it all down.

its a tragedy. literally.

if you dont believe that, just go to the penn state boards, he is STILL being defended there by well over half the posters. they STILL can't believe it.

and they defend him by saying, "hes dead. he cant defend himself."

well, so what. Hitlers dead too.

dont get me wrong. im not sayin joepa is comparable to hitler. Im saying what happened at penn state is a lot like what happened in germany.

one man rule.

Nazis were the Axis, which includes Imperial Japan and Fascist Italy.

costalpilot

07-01-2012, 10:11 PM

Nazis were the Axis, which includes Imperial Japan and Fascist Italy.

nazi germany was nazi germany.

HMSHood

07-01-2012, 10:12 PM

nazi germany was nazi germany.

The scary fact is Germany was a very advanced and civilized nation. It could fall to such evil and be manipulated by a megalomaniac. Jerry Sandusky was powerful, but no megalomaniac like Adolf Hitler. Interestingly, both are emotionally immature. They act like overgrown adolescents.

costalpilot

07-01-2012, 10:19 PM

The scary fact is Germany was a very advanced and civilized nation. It could fall to such evil and be manipulated by a megalomaniac. Jerry Sandusky was powerful, but no megalomaniac like Adolf Hitler. Interestingly, both are emotionally immature. They act like overgrown adolescents.

there is something very appealing about the cult of the individual. nations arent the only entities to fall victim to its allure....corporations, colleges, institutions of every type....you name it.

ive not compared sandusky to hitler. i wouldnt.

HMSHood

07-01-2012, 10:23 PM

there is something very appealing about the cult of the individual. nations arent the only entities to fall victim to its allure....corporations, colleges, institutions of every type....you name it.

ive not compared sandusky to hitler. i wouldnt.

That is a sad fact. It could be school, company, religious organizations, and even nations. These are all human institutions, so they can fall under control.

Same here. Sandusky molested children. Hitler killed many millions in the Holocaust and World War II.

ynotdivein

07-01-2012, 10:32 PM

Please all, let's keep the focus in this thread on Sandusky's victims and on the alleged/apparent coverup by those in power at Penn State, and leave aside the comparisons to Nazi Germany or to other perps and other coverups.

Where this post lands is random, and :tyou:

HMSHood

07-01-2012, 11:23 PM

I have been wondering the same thing JJ. I also noted the wording in Curley's e-mail - "After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe"; as if the second thoughts about the plan occurred before the conversation with Paterno.

This whole thing is horrific - Central PA Gothic to be sure - but I wish I knew exactly how this happened. In any case, it was a horrible decision and a terrible lack of judgment by people who should have known better, especially if, as we now have heard, they sought legal advice before choosing Plan B.

This leads me to thinking, could this happen at other universities.

Rlaub44

07-01-2012, 11:37 PM

whatever.

you think "you" need "evidence that he knew". for what?

today, newspapers and commentators across the country are calling joepa a liar, a conspirator, indeed, the leader of a conspiracy that resulted in the rapes of many young men.

maybe you need more "evidence" but most have got all they need. its a personal choice in every case.

you may never get there. most already have.

many of your state colleagues know.

Respectfully, why is it difficult to accept that some people may want to withhold complete judgment until more evidence is released? Nobody (at least not that I have seen on WS) is stating as fact that Paterno absolutely didn't know about '98; but many people have declared for certain that he did, and seem to be calling into question the motives of those who are waiting to see more. I can't speak for JJ in Phila, but I am completely prepared to admit that you may be right, but I can't say that just yet.

During the Curley/Schultz trial, I am certain that there will be plenty of testimony about what role each person had, and with Paterno's death, there is no reason for the accused to protect Joe's legacy at the expense of their own interests, so I am certain at that time, or when more e-mails have been released (remember that CNN hasn't actually seen the e-mails; only sharing what a source told them), I will be able to state with reasonable certainty what level of complicity Paterno held.

Until then, I don't think it is unreasonable for me to suspect something, but wait for the evidence to confirm it. As JJ indicated, the new evidence is damning, but I still don't know what Paterno said that apparently changed the minds of each of Curley, Spanier, and Schultz. All of the media outlets you mentioned seem to know that, but I don't yet.

Please be patient with some of us; if the evidence leads there, we will get there with the rest of you. :fence:

Rlaub44

07-01-2012, 11:43 PM

This leads me to thinking, could this happen at other universities.

As much as I identify with Penn State, I have to admit that it could, but it is probably not as likely. With Paterno coaching there for over 60 years, the administration was too tied to the football program, and thus there wasn't the oversight, or the levels of administration that were removed enough, to do the right thing regardless of how it might reflect on the program.

J. J. in Phila

07-01-2012, 11:57 PM

Respectfully, why is it difficult to accept that some people may want to withhold complete judgment until more evidence is released? Nobody (at least not that I have seen on WS) is stating as fact that Paterno absolutely didn't know about '98; but many people have declared for certain that he did, and seem to be calling into question the motives of those who are waiting to see more. I can't speak for JJ in Phila, but I am completely prepared to admit that you may be right, but I can't say that just yet.

I'm waiting for evidence, but I would not be surprised if the evidence was forthcoming. I will reserve judgment because it could strongly impact the Gricar case.

Until then, I don't think it is unreasonable for me to suspect something, but wait for the evidence to confirm it. As JJ indicated, the new evidence is damning, but I still don't know what Paterno said that apparently changed the minds of each of Curley, Spanier, and Schultz. All of the media outlets you mentioned seem to know that, but I don't yet.

Please be patient with some of us; if the evidence leads there, we will get there with the rest of you. :fence:

Even if there is no evidence that Paterno knew about 1998, in 1998, there is now evidence, yes damning evidence, that Paterno was complicit in the decision not to report Sandusky in 2001. I will add that being complicit in that decision does not mean strongly supporting it and pushed it.

Rlaub44

07-02-2012, 12:09 AM

Even if there is no evidence that Paterno knew about 1998, in 1998, there is now evidence, yes damning evidence, that Paterno was complicit in the decision not to report Sandusky in 2001.

You are probably right; I just would have felt more comfortable labeling Paterno the ringleader if Curley's email said, "After talking with Joe, he thinks we should ... ". Again, if the emails were meant to be privately between them, and Curley wanted to persuade Spanier and Schultz, why not tell them it was Joe's idea? He didn't write that Joe was uncomfortable, he wrote that he was.

Curley wrote "I am having trouble with going to everyone but the person involved". Could Paterno have simply suggested they talk to Sandusky also, and that sparked Curley's new plan, to start there and go further if it didn't work?

The full release of e-mails will probably clear it up for me.

J. J. in Phila

07-02-2012, 12:29 AM

You are probably right; I just would have felt more comfortable labeling Paterno the ringleader if Curley's email said, "After talking with Joe, he thinks we should ... ". Again, if the emails were meant to be privately between them, and Curley wanted to persuade Spanier and Schultz, why not tell them it was Joe's idea? He didn't write that Joe was uncomfortable, he wrote that he was.

Curley wrote "I am having trouble with going to everyone but the person involved". Could Paterno have simply suggested they talk to Sandusky also, and that sparked Curley's new plan, to start there and go further if it didn't work?

In real life, I am a consultant. I will have a client. I may advise a client to do X in Situation Y, saying based on my experience and training, I think you should do X.

Now, am I advocating that my client do X? Yes. Am I complicit in the decision to do X. Yes, because I advocate that position and know about Situation Y. Am I the ringleader, forcing my client to do X? I would say, no. I would put Paterno's presumed advice in that context (and no, it would have been my advice).

Pensfan

07-02-2012, 12:36 AM

Respectfully, why is it difficult to accept that some people may want to withhold complete judgment until more evidence is released? Nobody (at least not that I have seen on WS) is stating as fact that Paterno absolutely didn't know about '98; but many people have declared for certain that he did, and seem to be calling into question the motives of those who are waiting to see more. I can't speak for JJ in Phila, but I am completely prepared to admit that you may be right, but I can't say that just yet.

During the Curley/Schultz trial, I am certain that there will be plenty of testimony about what role each person had, and with Paterno's death, there is no reason for the accused to protect Joe's legacy at the expense of their own interests, so I am certain at that time, or when more e-mails have been released (remember that CNN hasn't actually seen the e-mails; only sharing what a source told them), I will be able to state with reasonable certainty what level of complicity Paterno held.

Until then, I don't think it is unreasonable for me to suspect something, but wait for the evidence to confirm it. As JJ indicated, the new evidence is damning, but I still don't know what Paterno said that apparently changed the minds of each of Curley, Spanier, and Schultz. All of the media outlets you mentioned seem to know that, but I don't yet.

Please be patient with some of us; if the evidence leads there, we will get there with the rest of you. :fence:
It's possible that one of Shultz', Raykovitz', Curley, and/or Spanier's defense attorney(s) spread this info to place all the blame on the dead guy who can't defend himself. Yep, all their clients wanted to do the "right thing", but most evil JoePa coerced them not to do the right thing.

(Remember the putrid actions of Jerry's defense attorneys? They gave Matt S's tape describing his embarrassing abuse to the Today Show without his permission in an attempt to punish him and make it appear that he was a horrid liar. MS finally was able to admit he was also sexually abused after his grand jury testimony had occurred.)

Pensfan

07-02-2012, 12:57 AM

One of the most gut-wrenching scenarios a general counsel ever faces is learning that a top executive is accused of personal or professional misconduct. The damage potential moves from an individual lawsuit to a major reputational hit, possible shareholder actions and even federal investigation. In that case, in-house counsel must take great care that investigation is fully independent.

“If the misconduct is at the CEO level or there’s any allegation of a cover-up that might taint or involve the CEO, then the in-house counsel has a duty to notify someone independent on the board,” says Cooley partner Frederick Baron. “The people who conduct the investigation should also be in an absolutely independent chain.”

The general counsel must also exhaustively record the investigation and decision-making process to ensure transparency, Baron says.
“You definitely don’t want any second-guessing later about whether the fact gathering was part of a cover-up rather than part of a thorough investigation,” he says. Anytime such allegations arise in the executive ranks, counsel must take swift action to avoid any secondary liability.

“If you don’t take rapid investigative action and make appropriate remedial or disciplinary steps, then you’re increasing risk to the institution,” says Frederick Baron, who leads the labor and employment practice at Cooley. “You’re taking what may be a case of individual misconduct or perhaps individual criminal conduct, and adding institutional exposure for failure to act.”
http://www.insidecounsel.com/2012/01/01/lessons-from-the-penn-state-scandal?page=2

Apparently counsel for Penn State slept through this lecture.

Rlaub44

07-02-2012, 01:01 AM

In real life, I am a consultant. I will have a client. I may advise a client to do X in Situation Y, saying based on my experience and training, I think you should do X.

Now, am I advocating that my client do X? Yes. Am I complicit in the decision to do X. Yes, because I advocate that position and know about Situation Y. Am I the ringleader, forcing my client to do X? I would say, no. I would put Paterno's presumed advice in that context (and no, it would have been my advice).

In a previous life, I was a counselor. When talking with someone trying to make a life decision, we would often look at all sides of an issue and the client would talk through the pros and cons of each option, helping them to determine the direction they felt most comfortable with.

Would I be responsible for the actions my client chose to take? Not if I didn't personally advocate for any of the possibilities, but the client simply crystallized their own beliefs based on the questions I asked.

Again, I expect the evidence on this is probably forthcoming, but not knowing how Curley came to change his mind is just holding me back a bit. It's easy to imagine that Paterno suggested it, but there are other possibilities that haven't yet been ruled out for me.

LaLaw2000

07-02-2012, 01:08 AM

Interesting two paragraphs at the very end of this article BBM:

Freeh’s investigators are also exploring the circumstances surrounding Paterno’s decision to eventually hire McQueary as an assistant coach, the person familiar with the investigation said. McQueary, a former quarterback for Paterno at Penn State, has testified under oath that when he first contacted Paterno to inform him of what he had seen in the showers, Paterno assumed he was calling to ask for a job, and that Paterno brusquely told him he would not be hired.

McQueary was ultimately hired over another, more experienced candidate, and investigators are curious about whether that development came as a consequence of what he told Paterno that morning in 2001.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/sports/ncaafootball/paterno-may-have-influenced-decision-not-to-report-sandusky-e-mails-indicate.html?pagewanted=all

The bolded part about McQueary being ultimately hired over a much more experienced candidate just makes me believe even more that McQueary sold those victims (or at least the one he saw being assaulted) out as well. I know he testified at trial as to what he saw in that locker room shower, but he had to, IMO. I have thought McQueary was more or less bribed by giving the job to him. Was he given the job to stay quiet? I will be very interested in what might be coming to light before this is over and done.

JMO, of course.

*Sorry if I have interrupted the flow of posts, but I did want to comment on this as I was catching up.

J. J. in Phila

07-02-2012, 01:42 AM

The bolded part about McQueary being ultimately hired over a much more experienced candidate just makes me believe even more that McQueary sold those victims (or at least the one he saw being assaulted) out as well. I know he testified at trial as to what he saw in that locker room shower, but he had to, IMO. I have thought McQueary was more or less bribed by giving the job to him. Was he given the job to stay quiet? I will be very interested in what might be coming to light before this is over and done.

Well, I think the job aspect is way overblown. McQueary was a graduate assistant, a non permanent position. When he called Paterno, Paterno basically said, we don't have any openings now, so if it's about that, don't bother me.

The incident occurred in 2001 (February?) and throughout the 2001, and 2002, seasons, he was still in the same positions. In 2003, he was an administrative assistant, and wasn't named to the coaching position until 2004. http://www.gopsusports.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/mcqueary_mike00.html

McQueary could have been "hired away" at some point, and he, arguably, did a good job. They were also kind of know for hiring from within.

LaLaw2000

07-02-2012, 02:01 AM

Well, I still believe in what I wrote in my post. Why didn't McQueary stop JS the moment he saw what was happening? All he did was leave a child victim in the hands of a child rapist in the shower, IMO. He left. He called his Dad, then they told Paterno the next morning, IIRC. That young boy was failed at every level.

As for McQueary could have been 'hired away' at some point, McQueary was exactly where he wanted to be, IMO. Penn State. He probably would have never left. His aspirations were most likely to be the new Paterno when Paterno left. It is my opinion that McQueary knows even more than what he has said.

Just my thoughts and opinion. It's cool for each of us to have a differing opinion. :)

MOO

J. J. in Phila

07-02-2012, 02:50 AM

Well, I still believe in what I wrote in my post. Why didn't McQueary stop JS the moment he saw what was happening? All he did was leave a child victim in the hands of a child rapist in the shower, IMO. He left. He called his Dad, then they told Paterno the next morning, IIRC. That young boy was failed at every level.

I think because McQueary was in a complete state of shock. The act obviously stopped. We've even heard from Dranov as to McQueary's state when he told his father, who said the same thing.

As for McQueary could have been 'hired away' at some point, McQueary was exactly where he wanted to be, IMO. Penn State. He probably would have never left. His aspirations were most likely to be the new Paterno when Paterno left. It is my opinion that McQueary knows even more than what he has said.

Until someone offers him a lot of money to go someplace, and maybe a better chance to become a head coach. In 2001, Paterno wasn't making any noises about retiring. He'd already outlasted one "successor," Sandusky.

Jay Paterno was also in the program, and the logical successor. The timing isn't right either, as noted.

BigCat

07-02-2012, 06:52 AM

It's possible that one of Shultz', Raykovitz', Curley, and/or Spanier's defense attorney(s) spread this info to place all the blame on the dead guy who can't defend himself. Yep, all their clients wanted to do the "right thing", but most evil JoePa coerced them not to do the right thing.

(Remember the putrid actions of Jerry's defense attorneys? They gave Matt S's tape describing his embarrassing abuse to the Today Show without his permission in an attempt to punish him and make it appear that he was a horrid liar. MS finally was able to admit he was also sexually abused after his grand jury testimony had occurred.)

It wouldn't shock me to learn Schultz's attorney leaked the email. Based on his grand jury testimony, Schultz thought Curley had implemented the steps he suggested in his email, including reporting the incident to an outside agency. I can't say Schultz was entirely convincing, since he couldn't even name the agency, but it does give him a little separation from the rest of the Penn State 4.

As for as blaming the dead guy who can't defend himself, I wouldn't worry about Paterno -- he's got legions of defenders. :)

pinktoes

07-02-2012, 09:39 AM

BigCat: How would Schultz' atty have gotten those 2001 emails?

In 2004 there was a system change at PSU. Spanier thought that all the data (well, at least the emails) prior to that had been lost. Then, recently, it was determined that it was recoverable. So, it had been backed up prior to installing the new system.

And, it was turned over to the Atty Gen. That's why Spanier is now suing PSU. He wants his email traffic for the years 1998-2004. So he can refresh his memory when he cooperates with the Freeh investigation, he said.

So, Atty Gen has the emails. That man who was fired in the past few months over some related issue might have had them--at least Curley's--perhaps printed out. What does Freeh have and where did he get it?

And how would anybody's atty have the emails in question at this juncture?

pinktoes

07-02-2012, 09:47 AM

Mark Sherburne is the man i was referencing who was fired at PSU. His wife also works there. She does/did some coordinating of programs related to TSM. For a refresher on the details, it's at:

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/04/penn_state_assistant_athletic_2.html

Wait a minute, do Curley and Schultz have the same atty? If so, and IF Curley has a copy of those emails, then that's how Schultz's atty would've gotten them. Even if they have different attys, they could share evidence with each other.

BigCat

07-02-2012, 10:00 AM

BigCat: How would Schultz' atty have gotten those 2001 emails?

In 2004 there was a system change at PSU. Spanier thought that all the data (well, at least the emails) prior to that had been lost. Then, recently, it was determined that it was recoverable. So, it had been backed up prior to installing the new system.

And, it was turned over to the Atty Gen. That's why Spanier is now suing PSU. He wants his email traffic for the years 1998-2004. So he can refresh his memory when he cooperates with the Freeh investigation, he said.

So, Atty Gen has the emails. That man who was fired in the past few months over some related issue might have had them--at least Curley's--perhaps printed out. What does Freeh have and where did he get it?

And how would anybody's atty have the emails in question at this juncture?

If he has them, then he got them from his client. I thought Schultz received a copy of the emails he did not send himself. I know if I was recommending going to an outside agency, I would have kept as much documentation as possible. Just a guess on my part.

J. J. in Phila

07-02-2012, 10:07 AM

BigCat: How would Schultz' atty have gotten those 2001 emails?

The "secret file" was in Schultz's Office.

Further, they might have gotten them on discovery.

J. J. in Phila

07-02-2012, 10:21 AM

A call for a special prosecutor to investigate both Corbett's conduct and Gricar's 1998 decision:

http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2012/07/time_for_special_prosecutor_in.html

pinktoes

07-02-2012, 11:33 AM

So...it was Curley/Schultz' atty who leaked those recent emails to CNN? They have a hearing coming up in mid-July, related to their Aug trial.

BennyProfane

07-02-2012, 12:46 PM

I was referring to two separate victims.

You've referred to "B.K." as a victim in past posts as well, but the GJ presentment was very careful NOT to identify the victims by anything other than their initials:
"Victim 6, who is now 24 years old, was acquainted with Victim 5 and another young boy inThe Second Mile program, B.K.; their interaction with Sandusky overlapped."
I think "B.K." is listed as he is since he corroborated part of Victim 6' story, but was a minor at the time. If he were a victim, he would have been assigned a number.
Using initials on message boards is a slippery slope, especially when referring to victims and even worse when getting it wrong.

J. J. in Phila

07-02-2012, 01:17 PM

You've referred to "B.K." as a victim in past posts as well, but the GJ presentment was very careful NOT to identify the victims by anything other than their initials:
"Victim 6, who is now 24 years old, was acquainted with Victim 5 and another young boy inThe Second Mile program, B.K.; their interaction with Sandusky overlapped."
I think "B.K." is listed as he is since he corroborated part of Victim 6' story, but was a minor at the time. If he were a victim, he would have been assigned a number.
Using initials on message boards is a slippery slope, especially when referring to victims and even worse when getting it wrong.

First, "B. K." is how he is identified in the public grand jury report. I have no idea if those are his actual initials or not. They might have discussing how to identify him after getting take out at a Burger King for all I know. I have no idea if your real name is Benny or not either. :)

B. K. was subjected to similar treatment by Sandusky as Victim 6. He was known in 1998, but in 2011 he was overseas in the military and could not testify. That is why there were not 11 victims and he was not called. The statute of limitations has not expired on the incident and Sandusky might yet face charges relating to B. K.

StellarsJay

07-02-2012, 01:21 PM

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/06/david_jones_joe_paterno_fans_m.html

"Patriot-News Capital Bureau Chief Jan Murphy had simultaneously been trying to get an answer out of Spanier — via email, his preferred avenue of correspondence — about what he knew of any improper conduct by Sandusky. On the afternoon of Sept. 16, 2010, she forwarded me this exchange:

Murphy: “Hi — Are you aware of any police investigation into Jerry Sandusky for suspected criminal activity that occurred while he was a Penn State employee? If so, can you elaborate on what you know. Thanks.”

Spanier: “I haven’t heard this. Can you tell me more?”

Murphy: “By ‘this,’ you are referring to any police investigation into Jerry Sandusky, correct?”

Spanier: “Correct.”

Murphy: “One more clarifying question on your statement. Are you aware of any suspected criminal behavior that Jerry Sandusky engaged in while he was a Penn State employee?”

Spanier: “I think I answered your question. The answer is ‘no.’ ”

Ganim wasn't working alone...

Mama-cita

07-02-2012, 02:21 PM

Well, I still believe in what I wrote in my post. Why didn't McQueary stop JS the moment he saw what was happening? All he did was leave a child victim in the hands of a child rapist in the shower, IMO. He left. He called his Dad, then they told Paterno the next morning, IIRC. That young boy was failed at every level.

As for McQueary could have been 'hired away' at some point, McQueary was exactly where he wanted to be, IMO. Penn State. He probably would have never left. His aspirations were most likely to be the new Paterno when Paterno left. It is my opinion that McQueary knows even more than what he has said.

Just my thoughts and opinion. It's cool for each of us to have a differing opinion. :)

MOO

Amen and hallelujah. McQueary was in his late 20s and a division 1 (D1) college quarterback who by size alone could easily overpower Sandusky. A D1 quarterback (who started every game of his senior season) has to know how to think quickly and react quickly. He "slammed his locker shut" to stop it? Please. And what must have been going through the poor victim's head? He must have thought it was someone who could save him. Too bad the person who showed up was spineless. I'm not buying what McQueary is selling. He is a coward. IMO

Pensfan

07-02-2012, 03:05 PM

BigCat: How would Schultz' atty have gotten those 2001 emails?

In 2004 there was a system change at PSU. Spanier thought that all the data (well, at least the emails) prior to that had been lost. Then, recently, it was determined that it was recoverable. So, it had been backed up prior to installing the new system.

And, it was turned over to the Atty Gen. That's why Spanier is now suing PSU. He wants his email traffic for the years 1998-2004. So he can refresh his memory when he cooperates with the Freeh investigation, he said.

So, Atty Gen has the emails. That man who was fired in the past few months over some related issue might have had them--at least Curley's--perhaps printed out. What does Freeh have and where did he get it?

And how would anybody's atty have the emails in question at this juncture?

I don't know, but one of the articles I read last night (sorry, no link) stated that one of the victim's attorneys had READ the emails. Exaggeration? I don't know that either.

Perhaps smelling settlement $$$, the attorneys for Curley, Moe, and /or Larry are sharing the emails with the victims' attorneys.

Pensfan

07-02-2012, 03:15 PM

A call for a special prosecutor to investigate both Corbett's conduct and Gricar's 1998 decision:

http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2012/07/time_for_special_prosecutor_in.html
:rocker:
There is a bit of bias in this article, but others without knowledge of PA's history of questionable AGs might find it interesting.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:a3JJAvkhWMsJ:protecthersheychildren.org/documents/Essays/the-lambs-and-the-wolves.pdf+charles+koons+molestation+prosecution&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESilCyWVrdPWybXWCZtwzB8u8fh_ZzHHCNx2u70L lpoDuOv2lsz6Fihf6SFa7iFPIB3w70tmVze7Y1XQWeoBWOiROI iA3ocMeYOwT2chm5gMC_SiFLSdZxCi4VTco1HL7OcqUYOC&sig=AHIEtbSMnS62HcJNTsAjeW6msuNKC2p1zg

Reader

07-02-2012, 03:39 PM

I don't think he would have been shocked if he was aware of Victim 6/B. K.

He would have had time to process it by the conversation with Curley.

I've posted before that what MM interpreted as 'shock', in that he said JP slumped back in his chair and looked stunned, could also be that JP WAS stunned, to learn that here these allegations were again after 1998, when he knew JS had been investigated and hopefully scared off abusing children, even though he was not charged. JS was at least out of the football program and JP thought his own involvement was over. Now, here is it again and happened in HIS program's quarters with an independent witness that did still work for him...it would be known, discussed, what to do to get it away from me and my program?...who can I trust to handle it? Why now, why me??

To me, this is just as plausible a scenario as him being just 'shocked'. IMO

I have been wondering the same thing JJ. I also noted the wording in Curley's e-mail - "After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe"; as if the second thoughts about the plan occurred before the conversation with Paterno.

This whole thing is horrific - Central PA Gothic to be sure - but I wish I knew exactly how this happened. In any case, it was a horrible decision and a terrible lack of judgment by people who should have known better, especially if, as we now have heard, they sought legal advice before choosing Plan B.

BBM - However, even the way you put it with the 2nd thoughts by Curley coming first (about changing the plan) and then the convo with Paterno possibly running those changes by him, he still indicates no argument from Paterno about the changes and indicates he is on board, as J. J. also said.

Well, I think you need evidence that he knew. It is possible, certainly, but possible isn't the same as, "It happened."

I fully understand that. I never stated 'it happened' this way. Did you and others miss that in my post it was explained this was a process of deduction I was making from the available information and that it was IMO? I think that's allowed here, right?

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Penn State Sandusky Trial #12 (GUILTY-post verdict discussion)

BigCat: How would Schultz' atty have gotten those 2001 emails?

In 2004 there was a system change at PSU. Spanier thought that all the data (well, at least the emails) prior to that had been lost. Then, recently, it was determined that it was recoverable. So, it had been backed up prior to installing the new system.

And, it was turned over to the Atty Gen. That's why Spanier is now suing PSU. He wants his email traffic for the years 1998-2004. So he can refresh his memory when he cooperates with the Freeh investigation, he said.

So, Atty Gen has the emails. That man who was fired in the past few months over some related issue might have had them--at least Curley's--perhaps printed out. What does Freeh have and where did he get it?

And how would anybody's atty have the emails in question at this juncture?

From their clients? It's very possible various ones involved, seems Schultz most possible since he supposedly has the 'secret file', copied all the emails written between the 3 of them, as a record and protection in the future. They all obviously knew this was a very sticky situation and might come back to bite them in the butt later on, which it did and has.

Been there, done that...when I was a state admin, used to copy a lot of emails between my boss and myself regarding various cases being worked on in the district offices, as he waved with the wind and HIS bosses, and liked to delete his emails so he could have deniability. I did it for the same reasons, a record and protection/proof of what he had earlier agreed to and/or told me to do.

Reader

07-02-2012, 06:01 PM

:rocker:
There is a bit of bias in this article, but others without knowledge of PA's history of questionable AGs might find it interesting.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:a3JJAvkhWMsJ:protecthersheychildren.org/documents/Essays/the-lambs-and-the-wolves.pdf+charles+koons+molestation+prosecution&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESilCyWVrdPWybXWCZtwzB8u8fh_ZzHHCNx2u70L lpoDuOv2lsz6Fihf6SFa7iFPIB3w70tmVze7Y1XQWeoBWOiROI iA3ocMeYOwT2chm5gMC_SiFLSdZxCi4VTco1HL7OcqUYOC&sig=AHIEtbSMnS62HcJNTsAjeW6msuNKC2p1zg

Read and saved....very interesting...thanks!

Reader

07-02-2012, 06:26 PM

Paterno family: Release all emails and records

http://www.centurylink.net/news/read.php?rip_id=%3CD9VP1E4G2%40news.ap.org%3E&ps=1011

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP) — Joe Paterno's family is calling on the Pennsylvania attorney general and former FBI Director Louis Freeh to release all emails and records related to their investigations into the Penn State child sex abuse scandal.
------

CNN reported one email outlined a change in plans among administrators after Athletic Director Tim Curley spoke to Paterno.

Short article....

Reader

07-02-2012, 06:37 PM

2001 Penn State Officials Discussed Jerry Sandusky With Lawyers For 3 Hours

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/7/2/3131816/joe-paterno-penn-state-jerry-sandusky-coverup/in/2304037

That's three hours of lawyering, at least two rounds of emails, at least one meeting with accuser Mike McQueary, one apparent meeting with Joe Paterno and a potential eventual sit-down with Sandusky himself, but not a single phone call to police or child welfare authorities. Unsurprisingly, Curley and Schultz face perjury charges.

Little more at link....

Bravo

07-02-2012, 06:47 PM

This case is/was relatively simple. I'm glad the jury saw that. If we take away all of the grandeur of Penn State, the positions held, those who held them, football etc. etc. It's simple. Jerry Sandusky is a Pedophile who raped young boys while some chose to allow it. Now on to who turned a blind eye :maddening:

J. J. in Phila

07-02-2012, 07:16 PM

Read and saved....very interesting...thanks!

As soon as you start citing Keisling, you lose me completely.

J. J. in Phila

07-02-2012, 07:32 PM

Paterno family: Release all emails and records

http://www.centurylink.net/news/read.php?rip_id=%3CD9VP1E4G2%40news.ap.org%3E&ps=1011

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP) — Joe Paterno's family is calling on the Pennsylvania attorney general and former FBI Director Louis Freeh to release all emails and records related to their investigations into the Penn State child sex abuse scandal.
------

CNN reported one email outlined a change in plans among administrators after Athletic Director Tim Curley spoke to Paterno.

Short article....

Be careful what you wish for, you might get it. :(

elmomom

07-02-2012, 07:35 PM

Be careful what you wish for, you might get it. :(

I look at it like a bandage over hairy skin. Just rip it off, as soon as possible and as fast as possible, so it gets the pain over and done in one big jolt. I think both Paterno's supporters and family members need this to happen!

Mama-cita

07-02-2012, 07:40 PM

Be careful what you wish for, you might get it. :(

And it may not be the result they hope for. But maybe they know Joe didn't use email and would would take it as vindication that there is no paper "proof" that Joe acted improperly, only the words of Curley and Spanier?

Bravo

07-02-2012, 07:40 PM

I look at it like a bandage over hairy skin. Just rip it off, as soon as possible and as fast as possible, so it gets the pain over and done in one big jolt. I think both Paterno's supporters and family members need this to happen!

I agree. Who knows what may have been said on his deathbed. Regardless thankfully there are people who choose to accept the true rather than live with a despicable lie.

J. J. in Phila

07-02-2012, 08:11 PM

And it may not be the result they hope for. But maybe they know Joe didn't use email and would would take it as vindication that there is no paper "proof" that Joe acted improperly, only the words of Curley and Spanier?

Curley, Schultz, and Spanier, and maybe a few others from 1998.

Reader

07-02-2012, 08:14 PM

As soon as you start citing Keisling, you lose me completely.

I have not cited him, and don't intend to since it is not MSM, only stated it was interesting...what's wrong with that?

LNL

07-02-2012, 08:18 PM

Paterno family: Release all emails and records

http://www.centurylink.net/news/read.php?rip_id=%3CD9VP1E4G2%40news.ap.org%3E&ps=1011

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP) — Joe Paterno's family is calling on the Pennsylvania attorney general and former FBI Director Louis Freeh to release all emails and records related to their investigations into the Penn State child sex abuse scandal.
------

CNN reported one email outlined a change in plans among administrators after Athletic Director Tim Curley spoke to Paterno.

Short article....
I'm tired of all the Paternos.

I wish they would just go away. None of them had any direct involvement, so they should just remain quiet.

Reader

07-02-2012, 08:19 PM

Be careful what you wish for, you might get it. :(

I'm not wishing for anything but want the truth to come out no matter what it is or who it is about. We need to get to the bottom of how this situation happened and who was involved in allowing it to get so out of hand for so long. The family said Paterno did not even use email so they feel fairly safe in this request it seems.

Bravo

07-02-2012, 08:43 PM

I'm not wishing for anything but want the truth to come out no matter what it is or who it is about. We need to get to the bottom of how this situation happened and who was involved in allowing it to get so out of hand for so long. The family said Paterno did not even use email so they feel fairly safe in this request it seems.

Agree wholeheartedly and beyond. The truth needs come out. For the Victims. I hope this brings about new Protocols. Perhaps those never driven by morality in the future will be by Policy and Procedure. How tragically sad it came to this.

J. J. in Phila

07-02-2012, 08:52 PM

I have not cited him, and don't intend to since it is not MSM, only stated it was interesting...what's wrong with that?

The link did.

J. J. in Phila

07-02-2012, 08:54 PM

I'm not wishing for anything but want the truth to come out no matter what it is or who it is about. We need to get to the bottom of how this situation happened and who was involved in allowing it to get so out of hand for so long. The family said Paterno did not even use email so they feel fairly safe in this request it seems.

I'm not referring to you, but to the family. I think this could get a lot worse.

(Yes, I said worse.)

back2back19

07-02-2012, 09:49 PM

And it may not be the result they hope for. But maybe they know Joe didn't use email and would would take it as vindication that there is no paper "proof" that Joe acted improperly, only the words of Curley and Spanier?

I'm sure that's what will happen. I think it's been said that Paterno didn't e-mail, so I don't think there will be an e-mail trail with Paterno. There might be more discussion about Paterno and what he did/didn't do/say though but I do think there won't be any direct proof to what Curley said about the meeting, unless Curley kept detailed records about his conversations with Paterno to protect himself. If he kept a "secret" file on Sandusky, I suppose he could have kept records on his conversations with others.

But I just wish the darn Freeh Report would come out now. :/ End of July is too long. :/ And I hope it gets at the truth. The real truth. About everything. No matter how ugly it is.

ThoughtFox

07-02-2012, 10:42 PM

Two Videos:

Fascinating discussion of the emails and Paterno from Hardball with Michael Smerconish, journalist Jeremy Roebuck of the Philadelphia Inquirer, and Buzz Bissinger, author of Friday Night Lights and Sports columnist for Daily Beast.

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/hardball/48050844/#48050844

In-depth focus by Smerconish on McQueary's resume and why he believes McQ was hired by Paterno.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/ns/msnbc_tv-hardball_with_chris_matthews/#48051055

Reader

07-02-2012, 11:38 PM

The link did.

The link was not posted by me.

Reader

07-02-2012, 11:44 PM

I'm not referring to you, but to the family. I think this could get a lot worse.

(Yes, I said worse.)

That was unclear...and I really don't care who it gets worse for..it's time for everything that went on in this cover up to come out...as Bravo said, for the victims. If the truth is not found it only leaves the possibility of this same situation happening again at Penn State or anywhere in the state. If it hits Paterno, so be it...

J. J. in Phila

07-02-2012, 11:50 PM

That was unclear...and I really don't care who it gets worse for..it's time for everything that went on in this cover up to come out...as Bravo said, for the victims. If the truth is not found it only leaves the possibility of this same situation happening again at Penn State or anywhere in the state. If it hits Paterno, so be it...

I'm sorry for the lack of clarity.

This certainly looks like a major coverup and that Paterno was aware of it, and, at least, not object to it.

I'm now wondering about Gricar. If he didn't prosecute the case in 1998, could he have been civilly liable for doing so?

J. J. in Phila

07-03-2012, 12:07 AM

For no reason, other than just to show how far we've come, this is the first mention of the Penn State Scandal (and it no longer just Sandusky) was mentioned on the board: Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - PA PA - Ray Gricar, 59, Bellefonte, 15 April 2005 - #6

The story was less than two hours old.

HMSHood

07-03-2012, 12:28 AM

This case is/was relatively simple. I'm glad the jury saw that. If we take away all of the grandeur of Penn State, the positions held, those who held them, football etc. etc. It's simple. Jerry Sandusky is a Pedophile who raped young boys while some chose to allow it. Now on to who turned a blind eye :maddening:

There are many who turned a blind eye from Penn State to The Second Mile. Makes me wonder if the leadership of The Second Mile knew about Sandusky's perversion.

I wonder if Sandusky has been molesting people as early in his youth. :maddening: :sick:

Pensfan

07-03-2012, 02:33 AM

There are many who turned a blind eye from Penn State to The Second Mile. Makes me wonder if the leadership of The Second Mile knew about Sandusky's perversion.

I wonder if Sandusky has been molesting people as early in his youth. :maddening: :sick:
Out of anyone in this warped story, a PH.D child psychologist and his wife a school guidance counselor (admins of TSM) would recognize the tactics and behavior of a pedophile.

When Jerry was given a chance to molest children, he likely did. Abel's and Rouleau’s study found that in 561 fixated pedophiles, they had an average of 281 offenses and an average of 150 victims.

Abel, G., and Rouleau, J. (1990), The Nature and Extent of Sexual Assault: In W. L. Marshall, D.R. Laws, & H.E. Barbaree (Eds.), Handbook of Sexual Assault: Issues, Theories, and Treatment of the Offender (pp. 9-12). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
__________________

The recreation center that his dad operated for underprivileged kids would have also allowed him access to boys. I wonder if Jerry molested any boys during the student teaching required for his bachelor's degree in Health and Physical Education. I read that he volunteered to supervise playground activities for an elementary school for one course that he took in college because he just loooooooved children.

If he volunteered for youth activities in any capacity in his Methodist church, he probably scouted those events for potential victims too. His book (Hell no, I didn't buy it! You can read a few pages on Amazon.com.) states that when his parents retired that he bought them a home next to an elementary school. Jerry bought himself a home next to an elementary school also. He was a predator looking for prey at all times.

fran

07-03-2012, 08:02 AM

Jerry Sandusky case: Paterno family urges release of all Penn State memos in scandal

Published: Tuesday, July 03, 2012, 5:00 AM Updated: Tuesday, July 03, 2012, 7:14 AM

the family criticized Penn State’s administration and trustees, its investigation headed by former FBI Director Louis J. Freeh and the state attorney general’s office for not doing more to stop them.

“It is clear that someone in a position of authority is not interested in a fair or thorough investigation,” the statement asserts. “The question that needs to be asked is why this breach of confidentiality, which seeks to pre-empt the Freeh report and undermine the courts, is not being objected to or otherwise addressed by those in a position of authority.”

full article at link ....................... http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/07/jerry_sandusky_case_paterno_fa.html

pinktoes

07-03-2012, 10:08 AM

CDT's headline:
Police investigate 'suspicious activity' at Jerry Sandusky home

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/07/02/3249564/police-investigate-suspicious.html#storylink=omni_popular#wgt=pop#sto rylink=cpy

Late at night over the weekend. I'm sure Dottie has someone staying with her, behind those closed drapes. And I hope no one harms her; we need her for any future legal action that might arise.

She has excellent hearing, so I guess she's staying up 24 hours to hear any trouble brewing. Or, maybe she just thinks she's hearing things.

Anyway, it's good to see local LE is immediately able to rule out any connection to Jerry's crimes. R-I-G-H-T...

waltzingmatilda

07-03-2012, 10:44 AM

CDT's headline:
Police investigate 'suspicious activity' at Jerry Sandusky home

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/07/02/3249564/police-investigate-suspicious.html#storylink=omni_popular#wgt=pop#sto rylink=cpy

Late at night over the weekend. I'm sure Dottie has someone staying with her, behind those closed drapes. And I hope no one harms her; we need her for any future legal action that might arise.

She has excellent hearing, so I guess she's staying up 24 hours to hear any trouble brewing. Or, maybe she just thinks she's hearing things.

Anyway, it's good to see local LE is immediately able to rule out any connection to Jerry's crimes. R-I-G-H-T...

I beleive them! (sarcasm)

StellarsJay

07-03-2012, 11:20 AM

Amendola interview-
http://www.110sportspodcast.com/2012/06/episode-161-joe-amendola/
Blurry sound, I think he said he cut Jerry a deal on fees and when he found out that Second Mile's insurance was paying, he had to stay with the low quote.
Asked if he planned to write a book about the Sandusky trial, Amendola said something to the effect that if he wrote about his law experiences it would fill more than one book but one might be called "Travels with Jerry" after Steinbeck's "Travels with Charlie".
Modest as usual.

believe09

07-03-2012, 11:20 AM

How does the Paterno family know the content of all emails involving Joe? If they have them, they should release them I would think. *shrug*

StellarsJay

07-03-2012, 12:35 PM

Has the date been set for the Curley and Schultz trial or just for a preliminary thing?
My experience with people with lung cancer is that they're often dead in 4 to 6 months- Curley may not make it and then these emails can make him the scapegoat.

pinktoes

07-03-2012, 12:45 PM

I'm trying to find out if the juvie probation officer Terry L Trude worked with Patty Fornicola. I know Patty and her former husband Tom Blackenstoe were both probation-parole officers in Centre County when they married in 1989. I saw Trude's name on a legal document in another case in 1994. We know he was the probation officer for Matt (Heichel) Sandusky in 1995-1996.

So, did he and Patty ever work together? When did she leave Centre County probation-parole?

Thanks for any help.

ohiogirl

07-03-2012, 12:49 PM

Pennsylvania legislator wants to revoke Jerry Sandusky retirement payout

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/07/03/3250460/pennsylvania-legislator-wants.html#wgt=rcntnews#storylink=cpy

pinktoes

07-03-2012, 12:54 PM

Has the date been set for the Curley and Schultz trial or just for a preliminary thing?
My experience with people with lung cancer is that they're often dead in 4 to 6 months- Curley may not make it and then these emails can make him the scapegoat.

Don't think so, although I believe they're aiming for August. Here's the last court activity on their joint cases. It requires defense atty to file Omnibus Pretrial Motions by July 30, and Commonwealth's atty to file its response by August 14:

http://www.dauphincounty.org/_files/3416.pdf

And here's where you can read all the activity in their cases. Looks like most recent activity will be at the end of the entries:

http://www.dauphincounty.org/court-departments/curley-schultz/

pinktoes

07-03-2012, 01:22 PM

Don't go read this if you're gonna come back here and complain about me. I'm as full of rage and sadness as I can be. And don't know what role Paterno played.

However, sometimes I need a little comic relief. And it's in the article linked below. A parody of how it might have gone in Paterno's conversations with the PSU admins if he were innocent:

art.titled: What If Joe Paterno Was Innocent? Hypothetical Dialogues From A Dark Time At Penn State

http://deadspin.com/5923000/what-if-joe-paterno-was-innocent-hypothetical-dialogues-from-a-dark-time-at-penn-state?tag=penn-state-scandal

seattlechiquita

07-03-2012, 01:24 PM

Pennsylvania legislator wants to revoke Jerry Sandusky retirement payout

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/07/03/3250460/pennsylvania-legislator-wants.html#wgt=rcntnews#storylink=cpy

...and I hope they succeed. Would hate that him or Sarge would get one cent. Pair of !@$%% :banghead:

Reader

07-03-2012, 01:59 PM

Don't go read this if you're gonna come back here and complain about me. I'm as full of rage and sadness as I can be. And don't know what role Paterno played.

However, sometimes I need a little comic relief. And it's in the article linked below. A parody of how it might have gone in Paterno's conversations with the PSU admins if he were innocent:

art.titled: What If Joe Paterno Was Innocent? Hypothetical Dialogues From A Dark Time At Penn State

http://deadspin.com/5923000/what-if-joe-paterno-was-innocent-hypothetical-dialogues-from-a-dark-time-at-penn-state?tag=penn-state-scandal

No complaints!

believe09

07-03-2012, 02:06 PM

Pennsylvania legislator wants to revoke Jerry Sandusky retirement payout

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/07/03/3250460/pennsylvania-legislator-wants.html#wgt=rcntnews#storylink=cpy

Oh I think he is doing Jerry a favor. Reducing his income....

Pensfan

07-03-2012, 02:15 PM

Pennsylvania legislator wants to revoke Jerry Sandusky retirement payout

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/07/03/3250460/pennsylvania-legislator-wants.html#wgt=rcntnews#storylink=cpy
Why stop there? Revoke Corbett's, the 3 Stooges', Paterno's, and any others that went into CYA mode and failed to stop Jerry from raping more boys!

Pensfan

07-03-2012, 02:21 PM

Has the date been set for the Curley and Schultz trial or just for a preliminary thing?
My experience with people with lung cancer is that they're often dead in 4 to 6 months- Curley may not make it and then these emails can make him the scapegoat.

Good call! There is a reason that only a few emails were leaked. (Blame it all on the dead guys.)

If this is recorded in history as "Curley and JoePa were the only two bad men that enabled Sandusky", it will be a filthy disgrace. There were clearly others and they need to be punished and shamed.

Sociopaths are four times as likely to be at the top of the corporate ladder. ~Robert Hare (Canadian psychologist who created the "famous" checklist for recognizing sociopaths)

Release alllllllllllll the emails!

pinktoes

07-03-2012, 03:03 PM

I'm mixed about Jer's pension. There are already civil suits against him by his victims and will no doubt be more. So, I'm thinking it'd be nice for them to get a Judgment and attach that income.

There is a precedent for denying him his pension, but it won't hold legally because it derives from Social Security. A SSI recipient receives their benefits for some number of days after an incarceration, after which time it is withheld. IDK if that's only in the case of incarceration in federal pen or also applies to states.

If it's gonna go to him, not his victims, then I wish it could be taken away. He certainly won't need $59K a year. And I don't care for Dottie to have it either.

J. J. in Phila

07-03-2012, 04:22 PM

Good call! There is a reason that only a few emails were leaked. (Blame it all on the dead guys.)

If this is recorded in history as "Curley and JoePa were the only two bad men that enabled Sandusky", it will be a filthy disgrace. There were clearly others and they need to be punished and shamed.

Sociopaths are four times as likely to be at the top of the corporate ladder. ~Robert Hare (Canadian psychologist who created the "famous" checklist for recognizing sociopaths)

Release alllllllllllll the emails!

Schultz is facing charges because of his grand jury testimony. Even with Curley and Paterno out of the picture, hypothetically, he still has a problem.

LaLaw2000

07-03-2012, 04:55 PM

Two Videos:

Fascinating discussion of the emails and Paterno from Hardball with Michael Smerconish, journalist Jeremy Roebuck of the Philadelphia Inquirer, and Buzz Bissinger, author of Friday Night Lights and Sports columnist for Daily Beast.

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/hardball/48050844/#48050844

In-depth focus by Smerconish on McQueary's resume and why he believes McQ was hired by Paterno.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/ns/msnbc_tv-hardball_with_chris_matthews/#48051055

RE: BBM

I have always felt it was very odd that McQueary got that job with so little experience and posted as much night before last. When you hear that report, you hear that a much more experienced ex Penn State All American was available at the time McQueary was hired.

hhhhhhhmmmmm, indeed.

JMO

BigCat

07-03-2012, 05:40 PM

I still don't know what to make of these leaks. Anthony Lubano, who was elected to the Penn State BOT back in May, posted the damaging info in the leaked email on a PSU football message board early last week. The guy is a real loose-cannon and the number one Joe Pa cultist.

I have some hypothetical questions for all of you. What if, on a very high level, Joe was aware in 98 of the JS investigation? Furthermore, what if JVP initiated JS's separation months before the 98 investigation began, thus confirming that his decision had nothing to do with the investigation? What if Spanier, Schultz and Curley conferred with legal counsel in 2001 as well as with JVP before deciding on a plan of action? I'd like to know your knee-jerk reactions to these hypothetical situations.6/27 10:36 PM | IP: Logged ]

And why were these emails made public on the Friday evening before the 4th of July? Obviously the intent was to mitigate the damage caused by release of the information contained in the emails. It's a classic political maneuver.

I wouldn't put it pass the Paternos to be playing some PR game here. Scott Paterno styles himself a political strategist.

http://www.politico.com/arena/bio/scott_paterno.html

J. J. in Phila

07-03-2012, 05:54 PM

And why were these emails made public on the Friday evening before the 4th of July? Obviously the intent was to mitigate the damage caused by release of the information contained in the emails. It's a classic political maneuver.

I wouldn't put it pass the Paternos to be playing some PR game here. Scott Paterno styles himself a political strategist.

http://www.politico.com/arena/bio/scott_paterno.html

It would have had less impact if it came out today, or Thursday or Friday.

I do not see an upside, unless Curley stands up and said, **I was lying in that e-mail. I never talked to Joe.** The problem is, it makes no sense for him to lie in an e-mail to Spanier and Schultz.

J. J. in Phila

07-03-2012, 05:57 PM

Why stop there? Revoke Corbett's, the 3 Stooges', Paterno's, and any others that went into CYA mode and failed to stop Jerry from raping more boys!

Corbett didn't go into CYA mode. He was actually on the DPW list because of Corbett's investigation.

BigCat

07-03-2012, 07:29 PM

It would have had less impact if it came out today, or Thursday or Friday.

I do not see an upside, unless Curley stands up and said, **I was lying in that e-mail. I never talked to Joe.** The problem is, it makes no sense for him to lie in an e-mail to Spanier and Schultz.

I only suggested it because their man, Lubrano, was leaking information on a message board and then sending out a press release a few days later condemning leaks.

The information was going to eventually going to get out. So seize the narrative. Release the damaging info during a holiday week and then scream for the release of all the emails.

Besides, as someone else suggested in this thread, why don't they just not comment? They have no direct knowledge of what happened.

The answer: they need to feel in control

JMO

J. J. in Phila

07-03-2012, 07:57 PM

The information was going to eventually going to get out. So seize the narrative. Release the damaging info during a holiday week and then scream for the release of all the emails.

Besides, as someone else suggested in this thread, why don't they just not comment? They have no direct knowledge of what happened.

The answer: they need to feel in control

Well, they might be trying to minimize the damage. Make it look like the leaks are a smear campaign. What is out may be the worst for the Paterno family.

Somebody tried something similar on behalf of RFG, releasing a secret, but long rumored, letter RFG wrote complaining about Corbett. It got coverage on one TV station, and the text managed to make RFG look bad, at any rate. (That's one of the reasons you don't hear me mentioning it too often.)

pinktoes

07-03-2012, 08:34 PM

Big Cat: i just found this and am reading it myself. It clarifies for me why Curley's atty, at least, would want to put the blame on Paterno. Don't know if it explains why the leaks are coming out now. Still reading:

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/7/3/3134523/joe-paterno-penn-state-scandal-trial-tim-curley

BigCat

07-03-2012, 09:05 PM

Corbett is denying the leaks are coming from the AG's office.

That makes sense. Paterno is not charged with a crime. There is no reason the AG's office would want to weaken his grand jury testimony.

Leaked e-mails have surfaced implicating Penn State officials in a cover-up. They appear to point toward legendary late head coach Joe Paterno. They are emails the AG's office didn't know existed until they were uncovered by investigator Louis Freeh.

Noonan said the AG's office never had these emails -- but Freeh did.

"They hired their own people to go through the computers and found them," he said.

Gov. Tom Corbett confirmed Tuesday that Penn State's Board of Trustees was briefed on the existence of the emails, but he's not happy they've been haphazardly released.

"I don't like leaked information," Corbett said.

http://m.abc27.com/default.aspx?pid=2705&wnfeedurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.abc27.com%2fstory%2f189 45913%2fpolice-comissioner-psu-culture-of-silence-kept-witnesses-silent%3fclienttype%3drssstory

BigCat

07-03-2012, 09:21 PM

Big Cat: i just found this and am reading it myself. It clarifies for me why Curley's atty, at least, would want to put the blame on Paterno. Don't know if it explains why the leaks are coming out now. Still reading:

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/7/3/3134523/joe-paterno-penn-state-scandal-trial-tim-curley

Do we know if Curley and Schultz are represented by different attorneys? I know they released a joint statement over the leaked emails.

Pensfan

07-03-2012, 09:24 PM

Corbett didn't go into CYA mode. He was actually on the DPW list because of Corbett's investigation.

I don't believe the following statement and I'm tired of reading about him mentioning it.

Prosecutors needed about two years between the first report of child sexual abuse involving Jerry Sandusky and the filing of charges because authorities needed to build an "ironclad case" against him, Gov. Tom Corbett said Monday.
http://triblive.com/home/2092441-74/sandusky-corbett-case-investigation-attorney-state-jury-kelly-assistant-charges

IMO, AG Corbett's office stalled in its investigation of Sandusky from the earliest days when Corbett became AG while he collected hundreds of thousands of dollars for his political campaigns from the filthy rich BOC at TSM. Past and present board members of TSM and their businesses or families are reported to have given $640,000 to Corbett’s various campaigns.

There were alternatives to letting Sandusky roam Pennsylvania while hoping he wouldn't rape any more little boys.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/11/20/penn-state-s-new-villain-pennsylvania-gov-tom-corbett.html

J. J. in Phila

07-03-2012, 09:32 PM

Big Cat: i just found this and am reading it myself. It clarifies for me why Curley's atty, at least, would want to put the blame on Paterno. Don't know if it explains why the leaks are coming out now. Still reading:

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/7/3/3134523/joe-paterno-penn-state-scandal-trial-tim-curley

I really don't think that is too accurate.

First, even if you want to argue that Paterno was all powerful:

1. He did complete his legal duty in reporting, which takes him immediately off the hook, criminally.

2. Formally, Paterno didn't have the authority to order the Three Stooges around. I'm not sure if Curley was a mandatory reporter, but the other two were. Paterno could have told them he'd start coaching (and fundraising) for Pitt, but that wouldn't give them any legal cover.

McQueary did what he was required to do, under the law, so I don't think he would face liability.

My question is, will one of these guys turn?

That possibly could take us back to Gricar. Is there a connection between his disappearance and the Penn State scandal? That could move this entire thing onto a whole new level.

Pensfan

07-03-2012, 09:57 PM

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2012/07/03/suspicious_activity_reported_at_Sandusky_home.aspx

I seriously hope the noise was fraternity reconnaissance surveillance for the intended mission of removing all Penn State insignia clothing in Sarge's and Jer’s closets.

elmomom

07-03-2012, 10:24 PM

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2012/07/03/suspicious_activity_reported_at_Sandusky_home.aspx

I seriously hope the noise was fraternity reconnaissance surveillance for the intended mission of removing all Penn State insignia clothing in Sarge's and Jer’s closets.

I went to the link, and while There I noticed that they are advertising a Joe Paterno Memorial Edition to be published on Monday. Wtf, really, still?

:sick:

pinktoes

07-03-2012, 10:37 PM

Do we know if Curley and Schultz are represented by different attorneys? I know they released a joint statement over the leaked emails.

Different ones. The Commonwealth is trying their cases as one. Look at the distribution list at end of the most recent court filing. At:

http://www.dauphincounty.org/_files/3416.pdf

CAROLINE ROBERTO is atty for Curley; Farrell is atty for Schultz

BigCat

07-03-2012, 10:51 PM

I don't believe the following statement and I'm tired of reading about him mentioning it.

Prosecutors needed about two years between the first report of child sexual abuse involving Jerry Sandusky and the filing of charges because authorities needed to build an "ironclad case" against him, Gov. Tom Corbett said Monday.
http://triblive.com/home/2092441-74/sandusky-corbett-case-investigation-attorney-state-jury-kelly-assistant-charges

IMO, AG Corbett's office stalled in its investigation of Sandusky from the earliest days when Corbett became AG while he collected hundreds of thousands of dollars for his political campaigns from the filthy rich BOC at TSM. Past and present board members of TSM and their businesses or families are reported to have given $640,000 to Corbett’s various campaigns.

There were alternatives to letting Sandusky roam Pennsylvania while hoping he wouldn't rape any more little boys.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/11/20/penn-state-s-new-villain-pennsylvania-gov-tom-corbett.html

IF you're correct that Corbett stalled the case until after he was elected governor, he didn't stall for any reasons related to The Second Mile. He stalled to protect Paterno. Any Republican candidate that is seen as bringing down Joe Paterno and the football program is dead meat in Central PA, which meant he wouldn't have been elected governor.

Now I admit that I know zero about PA politics compared to J.J., and he believes Corbett is in good shape for re-election. Nevertheless, I have an unofficial wager with him that Corbett won't get re-elected based strictly on my familiarity with rabid college football fans and Republican politics.

JMO

Pensfan

07-03-2012, 11:15 PM

IF you're correct that Corbett stalled the case until after he was elected governor, he didn't stall for any reasons related to The Second Mile. He stalled to protect Paterno. Any Republican candidate that is seen as bringing down Joe Paterno and the football program is dead meat in Central PA, which meant he wouldn't have been elected governor.

Now I admit that I know zero about PA politics compared to J.J., and he believes Corbett is in good shape for re-election. Nevertheless, I have an unofficial wager with him that Corbett won't get re-elected based strictly on my familiarity with rabid college football fans and Republican politics.

JMO
I think he also stalled to avoid infuriating TSM's BOC who could have been disparaged and possibly implicated as enablers to Sandusky. Many of the BOC members had been on the board for years.

Pensfan

07-03-2012, 11:23 PM

I went to the link, and while There I noticed that they are advertising a Joe Paterno Memorial Edition to be published on Monday. Wtf, really, still?

:sick:
It's a reprint. It's about $4.00 and dropping on Ebay and Amazon.

J. J. in Phila

07-03-2012, 11:42 PM

Now I admit that I know zero about PA politics compared to J.J., and he believes Corbett is in good shape for re-election. Nevertheless, I have an unofficial wager with him that Corbett won't get re-elected based strictly on my familiarity with rabid college football fans and Republican politics.

JMO

I think it would have hurt him in 2010 for governor, and that could be part of the reason. That said, let's remember how difficult it has been to find victims. Two never came forward (and I'll agree that perhaps they couldn't), but two that did come forward came in after the initial indictment.

Corbett was also scoring big points prosecuting "Bonusgate" and was focusing on that. He directed the resources at that high profile case.

And yes, I think Corbett will be re-elected and might end up in the Senate one day.

For the record: I contributed to Ridge (1994, 1998), Fisher (2002), and Swann (2006) for PA Governor; I have never contributed to a Democrat for that post. Note the name of the candidate missing from that list.

J. J. in Phila

07-03-2012, 11:51 PM

If 2001 had been reported to DPW, how much damage to Penn State/Penn State football would this have done? Sandusky was a former coach. 1998 had been reported to DPW and LE.

Pensfan

07-04-2012, 12:28 AM

Big Cat: i just found this and am reading it myself. It clarifies for me why Curley's atty, at least, would want to put the blame on Paterno. Don't know if it explains why the leaks are coming out now. Still reading:

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/7/3/3134523/joe-paterno-penn-state-scandal-trial-tim-curley

That article is ludicrous. First of all, you have to understand that a sizable percentage of people in PA thought elderly JoePa was senile and wanted him to retire from coaching for at least a decade. (You don't need to shoot the messenger for explaining the public's sentiment in PA. TIA)

Curley, Spanier and Shultz aren’t going to be able to convince anyone but cretons, that JoePa was running the university and therefore, they (Three Stooges) didn’t violate PA’s Failure to Report Law and should be immune from civil liability. Most people didn't think elderly JoePa was actually still running the football program; most considered him to be more of a "grandpa" mascot.

Second, it's unknown whether PSU officials and McQueary were legally mandated reporters. Bev Mackereth of Pennsylvania's Office of Children, Youth and Families declined to comment on whether that would cover the Penn State officials embroiled in the scandal.
"The interpretation of who is and isn't (a mandated reporter) really belongs in the court," she said.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-11-11/news/ct-met-mandated-reporters-20111111_1_report-abuse-team-showers-grand-jury-report

Bev Mackereth is the Director of the York County Department of Human Services. She served eight years as the Pennsylvania State Representative for the 196th District.

Pensfan

07-04-2012, 12:49 AM

The state legislature and governor could face pressure to implement external oversight of the football program to prevent another coach from amassing power.....
http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/7/3/3134523/joe-paterno-penn-state-scandal-trial-tim-curley

ROFL Somebody needs to get back on his meds. I can see the governor and allllllll members of the legislature wanting to call plays from their state capital offices.

J. J. in Phila

07-04-2012, 01:27 AM

IMO, AG Corbett's office stalled in its investigation of Sandusky from the earliest days when Corbett became AG while he collected hundreds of thousands of dollars for his political campaigns from the filthy rich BOC at TSM. Past and present board members of TSM and their businesses or families are reported to have given $640,000 to Corbett’s various campaigns.

Well, I think there is a problem here. Corbett became AG in January 2005. The report was sent to him in Jan-Feb 2009. I don't see how you could claim that this should have been investigated "from the earliest days."

Second, we do know that after the indictment, others not found came forward. They had one victim, and not a particularly strong case, in 2009. There were witnesses to Sandusky's unusual behavior, but unusual does not equate with illegal.

Third, $640,000 wasn't even a tenth of what of what he raised. Corbett raised at least $24,000,000. This is less than 3% of what he raised.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2010/10/pennsylvania_gubernatorial_can_7.html

I'm also not sure why there should be any focus on previous TSM directors.

There were alternatives to letting Sandusky roam Pennsylvania while hoping he wouldn't rape any more little boys.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/11/20/penn-state-s-new-villain-pennsylvania-gov-tom-corbett.html

Fourth, one point this article made was that Corbett should have used the 1998 report. He didn't know about it until late 2010. The DA who referred the case, Madeira, didn't know about it.

Now, all that said, I think that there some reasons why Corbett didn't move on this are not ideal. I don't think he wanted to upset Paterno fans and he was too focused on Bonusgate.

Pensfan

07-04-2012, 03:25 AM

Well, I think there is a problem here. Corbett became AG in January 2005. The report was sent to him in Jan-Feb 2009. I don't see how you could claim that this should have been investigated "from the earliest days."

Second, we do know that after the indictment, others not found came forward. They had one victim, and not a particularly strong case, in 2009. There were witnesses to Sandusky's unusual behavior, but unusual does not equate with illegal.

Third, $640,000 wasn't even a tenth of what of what he raised. Corbett raised at least $24,000,000. This is less than 3% of what he raised.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2010/10/pennsylvania_gubernatorial_can_7.html

I'm also not sure why there should be any focus on previous TSM directors.

Fourth, one point this article made was that Corbett should have used the 1998 report. He didn't know about it until late 2010. The DA who referred the case, Madeira, didn't know about it.

Now, all that said, I think that there some reasons why Corbett didn't move on this are not ideal. I don't think he wanted to upset Paterno fans and he was too focused on Bonusgate.

Before Gricar disappeared in 2005, AG Corbett had worked with him on a huge narcotics case. Corbett knew Gricar personally and knew him at least from 1998 (see below link). After Gricar disappeared, AG Corbett would have been very interested to know info surrounding Gricar's disappearance. AG Corbett would have been informed from detectives about various things r/t missing DA Gricar's life and one of those would have been that Gricar had reviewed an allegation that "famous" Sandusky was a pedophile. Another thing that Corbett would have learned from detectives in 2005 was that Gricar didn’t prosecute Sandusky. Corbett may/may not have read the 1998 report, but he heard about Sandusky from detectives investigation Gricar's disappearance. (mo link, just common sense)

Gricar and Corbett had issues in 1998 which would have also led Corbett to have an interest in Gricar disappearance (leading to knowledge in 2005 of Sandusky's pedophilia).
http://www.wjactv.com/videos/news/sandusky-scandal-sheds-new-light-on-link-between/vFXfR/

$640,000 may be small change in relation to Corbett's total campaign donations, but angering the Sheetz family, numerous pro athlete millionaires, and other extremely wealthy PA individuals that served on the TSM's BOC would be a politically fatal mistake. Do you remember the allegations about the TSM board members which occurred on this forum for weeks? (none from me) The generous benefactors of TSM somehow escaped being implicated as Sandusky enablers by the general public.

Corbett, a politically savvy man, knew that prosecuting Jerry could bring investigations upon TSM, its administration, and its wealthy BOC members. (This occurred with the Milton Hershey School pedophile investigations occurring around the same time.) With an investigation, the top admins, and its generous BOC could have their reputations smeared even if illegal behavior was not identified. Angry philanthropists are dangerous political enemies and a savvy man with higher political aspirations would want to avoid this. Yes, Bonusgate was his main platform, but I think there were personal aspiration reasons why Corbett didn't move on Sandusky.

J. J. in Phila

07-04-2012, 08:16 AM

Before Gricar disappeared in 2005, AG Corbett had worked with him on a huge narcotics case.

Ah, no. RFG was at a press conference for the multicounty case, along with other DA's in the area. Neither he nor the Centre county DA's Office worked on the case or had any involvement with it.

Corbett knew Gricar personally and knew him at least from 1998 (see below link).

Ah, Corbett was a defense attorney at the time representing a client. That was there relationship.

After Gricar disappeared, AG Corbett would have been very interested to know info surrounding Gricar's disappearance. AG Corbett would have been informed from detectives about various things r/t missing DA Gricar's life and one of those would have been that Gricar had reviewed an allegation that "famous" Sandusky was a pedophile.

Under PA law, the only way that the AG can become involved is if the local DA has a conflict of interest or claims his office lacks the resources. Two DA's, of different parties, declined to claim either. I declined to cite a conflict of interest until Gricar's involvement in the Sandusky case was revealed.

In 2009 and until late 2010, nobody at the AG's office knew about the 1998 incident. Madeira, the DA at the time did not know when he sent the case out. There were no records of Sandusky in the DA's Office.

Gricar and Corbett had issues in 1998 which would have also led Corbett to have an interest in Gricar disappearance (leading to knowledge in 2005 of Sandusky's pedophilia).
http://www.wjactv.com/videos/news/sandusky-scandal-sheds-new-light-on-link-between/vFXfR/

The issue was that Gricar didn't like Corbett, no longer a prosecutor, representing a client as a defense attorney. Corbett was holding a position, Chair of the PA Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD), that doled out federal funds to police, prosecutors, and public defenders. It didn't prosecute or investigate and Corbett had one vote, out of several dozen people. The PCCD meets for several hours twice a year.

The issue was that Gricar lost the case, well, the charges were reduced, and wanted to whine about it. He did within a few weeks of not prosecuting Sandusky. He did more to complain about Corbett, who was a defense attorney, than he did to prosecute Sandusky.

(Remember me saying it made Gricar look bad.)

$640,000 may be small change in relation to Corbett's total campaign donations, but angering the Sheetz family, numerous pro athlete millionaires, and other extremely wealthy PA individuals that served on the TSM's BOC would be a politically fatal mistake. Do you remember the allegations about the TSM board members which occurred on this forum for weeks? (none from me) The generous benefactors of TSM somehow escaped being implicated as Sandusky enablers by the general public.

First, what makes you think that any of the TSM board members had any idea what Sandusky was doing? They were not involved in the day to day running of the group. The executive director was, but not the board as a whole.

Second, going after Paterno in 2010 might have been a political minus for Corbett, but not TSM. They never had the public profile of Penn State or Paterno. I'd also question why these members would not be just as appalled at Sandusky's actions as everyone else was.

Third, until late 2010, none of the other victims were known. The Centre County DA's Office didn't have the records of it.

BigCat

07-04-2012, 11:51 AM

New info from the Chronicle of Higher Education:

Top Pennsylvania State University officials held a three-hour meeting to discuss Jerry Sandusky in 2001 over concerns about the former coach's behavior with a boy in the football showers. A law-firm billing record from that conversation describes a "report of suspected child abuse," according to a person with knowledge of an independent investigation into the matter.

http://chronicle.com/article/Records-Raise-More-Questions/132725/

J. J. in Phila

07-04-2012, 12:20 PM

Good post, BigCat:

I was again struck be this statement from the article. It was the Paterno family spokesman: "From the beginning, Joe Paterno warned against a rush to judgment in this case."

The problem is, as we wait, the information keeps getting worse. :(

passionflower

07-04-2012, 01:44 PM

I agree,things seem to be getting worse. IMOO I think this is the tip of the iceberg and more cover up, lies and people exposed.

back2back19

07-04-2012, 02:01 PM

Good post, BigCat:

I was again struck be this statement from the article. It was the Paterno family spokesman: "From the beginning, Joe Paterno warned against a rush to judgment in this case."

The problem is, as we wait, the information keeps getting worse. :(

Yup, it really does seem to be getting worse and worse. It's just so appalling. Like it wasn't bad enough to begin with... :/

Pensfan

07-04-2012, 02:13 PM

Ah, no. RFG was at a press conference for the multicounty case, along with other DA's in the area. Neither he nor the Centre county DA's Office worked on the case or had any involvement with it.

I realize this. I will be very specific. I was trying to emphasize WHY Corbett would have been interested in knowing the facts surrounding Gricar's disappearance which would have given Corbett knowledge in 2005 about Sandusky's crime from 1998.

Ah, Corbett was a defense attorney at the time representing a client. That was there relationship.

I realize that. Ditto above response.

Under PA law, the only way that the AG can become involved is if the local DA has a conflict of interest or claims his office lacks the resources. Two DA's, of different parties, declined to claim either. I declined to cite a conflict of interest until Gricar's involvement in the Sandusky case was revealed.

In 2009 and until late 2010, nobody at the AG's office knew about the 1998 incident.
In 2005, investigators in Gricar's case would have told AG Corbett about Gricar's knowledge of Sandusky's crime. It had to be considered as a factor in Gricar's disappearance.

Madeira, the DA at the time did not know when he sent the case out. There were no records of Sandusky in the DA's Office.

I agree.

The issue was that Gricar didn't like Corbett, no longer a prosecutor, representing a client as a defense attorney. Corbett was holding a position, Chair of the PA Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD), that doled out federal funds to police, prosecutors, and public defenders. It didn't prosecute or investigate and Corbett had one vote, out of several dozen people. The PCCD meets for several hours twice a year.

The issue was that Gricar lost the case, well, the charges were reduced, and wanted to whine about it. He did within a few weeks of not prosecuting Sandusky. He did more to complain about Corbett, who was a defense attorney, than he did to prosecute Sandusky.
(Remember me saying it made Gricar look bad.)

First, what makes you think that any of the TSM board members had any idea what Sandusky was doing?
:) I DON'T THINK THAT! GO BACK AND READ MY POSTS WHEN THIS STORY HIT THE HEADLINES. I WAS THE ONLY PERSON SUPPORTING THE GENEROUS BENEFACTORS/BOC MEMBERS FOR WEEKS ON WS.
They were not involved in the day to day running of the group. The executive director was, but not the board as a whole.
Agreed. They are generous people that sit on multiple boards and give millions of their own money away to such charities. God bless them!

Second, going after Paterno in 2010 might have been a political minus for Corbett, but not TSM. They never had the public profile of Penn State or Paterno.

Didn't you read Websleuth posters ripping TSM's BOC for weeks? The BOC was lucky that they somehow escaped the public's wrath. The BOC at MHS were not so fortunate when Charles Koons was arrested.

I'd also question why these members would not be just as appalled at Sandusky's actions as everyone else was.
Yes, IMO, they would have been appalled. Ditto above answers.

Third, until late 2010, none of the other victims were known. The Centre County DA's Office didn't have the records of it.
I certainly hope not. I hope an investigation into Centre County's CPS occurs next to verify that they didn't refuse to act/report to the DA's office Sandusky's victims' reports. (Several years ago, The Dept of Justice actually took over control of CPS in Washington County because of extreme corruption. I have heard that two other county CPS offices may also be investigated by that federal agency.)

J. J. in Phila

07-04-2012, 04:00 PM

I realize this. I will be very specific. I was trying to emphasize WHY Corbett would have been interested in knowing the facts surrounding Gricar's disappearance which would have given Corbett knowledge in 2005 about Sandusky's crime from 1998.

I realize that. Ditto above response.

In 2005, investigators in Gricar's case would have told AG Corbett about Gricar's knowledge of Sandusky's crime. It had to be considered as a factor in Gricar's disappearance.

BBM

Until late 2010, the AG's Office, Corbett, had no idea about 1998, Victim 6, or Gricar. Nobody, including me, was looking at any cases RFG did not prosecute. The BPD had no idea about 1998. This thing popped up when they started looking at activities on campus.

Maybe it came out in the SPM review panel of Gricar; I don't know. That is a possibility, however.

Okay, on the board; we're in agreement that it wouldn't be a board coverup, I take it?

I certainly hope not. I hope an investigation into Centre County's CPS occurs next to verify that they didn't refuse to act/report to the DA's office Sandusky's victims' reports. (Several years ago, The Dept of Justice actually took over control of CPS in Washington County because of extreme corruption. I have heard that two other county CPS offices may also be investigated by that federal agency.)

The only involvement with the DA's Office was 1998, and there is no record of it. They couldn't forward any files because there were not any files; that was not unusual. There is no way that anyone could have known prior to discovering the file, unless someone remembered it and told them.

Even if someone did, there was no focus on it in 2005-10. Everyone knew (well, they thought they knew) what a hard hitting DA Gricar was. If he didn't file charges, there would be a good reason; everybody thought this. That was the general impression of Ray Gricar; that was my impression of Ray Gricar. Heck, that was Schreffler's impression of Ray Gricar.

Corbett didn't know about 1998 until 2010; Madeira didn't know about it until 2011. The Bellefonte Police Department didn't know about it until at least 2010. I didn't know about it until 2011.

I still think RFG's decision in 1998 was just bad judgment, exceptionally, horrifically, terrible judgment. Had Sandusky not been indicted, we wouldn't have known about it at all.

Reader

07-04-2012, 04:12 PM

Our View | Expose all with culpability in Sandusky scandal

Jerry Sandusky now sits in the Centre County jail, convicted by a jury of his peers of sexually abusing 10 young boys over a 15-year period.

Will Sandusky be the only one who pays a high price in connection with his misdeeds?

What penalties are yet to be confronted — by Penn State, its top officials and others who may have been positioned to stop the abuse years ago but who chose to turn away rather than take action?

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/07/01/3248050/anxious-region-watching-waiting.html#storylink=cpy

J. J. in Phila

07-04-2012, 04:22 PM

Yup, it really does seem to be getting worse and worse. It's just so appalling. Like it wasn't bad enough to begin with... :/

And, as always:

Central Pennsylvania Gothic.

It keeps on getting worse. Even if the Three Stooges were acting out of completely altruistic purposes, really thought they were being "humane," it blew up in their faces. Good Lord, even saying that they wanted Sandusky to get help doesn't mean anything if he doesn't get any help.

Maybe, this could be at least partly justifiable if someone would have forced him to get help, and made sure he wasn't around young boys.

(Yes, I'm in full rant today!) :)

Reader

07-04-2012, 04:44 PM

Penn State Scandal: Louis Freeh Report Could Mean NCAA Action

http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-football/2012/6/30/3128792/penn-state-scandal-ncaa-investigation/in/2304037

After the bombshell dropped Saturday that the late Joe Paterno may have been involved in the Penn State administration's coverup of the Jerry Sandusky child abuse scandal, more bad news is coming for the athletic department in Happy Valley.

According to a report in the Chronicle of Higher Education, the independent investigation led by Louis Freeh has honed in on, among other things, special treatment the athletic department sought for some university athletes. According to a report by the Harrisburg (Pa.) Patriot-News, emails between former university President Graham Spanier and the school's former general counsel, Wendell V. Courtney, "describe steps the two men took to protect players."
--------

Patriot-News article:

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/06/post_371.html

........Erickson said he expects the report to be completed in mid- to late July, and reiterated that it will be issued publicly at the same time it goes to university trustees.

Reader

07-04-2012, 05:12 PM

Joe Paterno's appointment books shed no light on whether Tim Curley is telling the truth

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--joe-paterno-appointment-books-tim-curley-jerry-sandusky-email-.html

.............While it often lacked great detail, for a Penn State community desperate for any facts or explanations, the appointment book could offer a morsel of truth.

Unfortunately it doesn't; at least not yet.

The library's collection of Paterno appointment books run from 1985 to 2000, the last entry being Dec. 30, 2000. There is nothing from 2001 until Paterno's firing in November 2011.

Seven weeks after the last item in the appointment book, Curley's email stated that he and the iconic coach talked about how to handle Sandusky. There is no publicly available documentation that the meeting did or didn't occur, let alone the subjects discussed.

The paperwork of Paterno's whereabouts ending so close to these critical days appears to be coincidental..........

At this moment though, little is available for a public seeking answers.

The hole in the Paterno Papers, as the university calls them, only deepens the power Tim Curley holds over Paterno's legacy.
-------

The second possibility is the most unlikely. It would suggest Curley, who was Paterno's boss in name only, was willing to go against the wishes of the powerful coach he played for and, as a State College native, grew up cheering for the Nittany Lions. It also would mean Paterno, when later finding out Curley had defied his wishes and essentially harbored a child molester, didn't overrule him and himself go to the police, child services or Spanier.

That's just not plausible.

More at link....

BigCat

07-04-2012, 05:50 PM

And, as always:

Central Pennsylvania Gothic.

It keeps on getting worse. Even if the Three Stooges were acting out of completely altruistic purposes, really thought they were being "humane," it blew up in their faces. Good Lord, even saying that they wanted Sandusky to get help doesn't mean anything if he doesn't get any help.

Maybe, this could be at least partly justifiable if someone would have forced him to get help, and made sure he wasn't around young boys.

(Yes, I'm in full rant today!) :)

As of yet, however, I've seen zero evidence that Sandusky received professional help for either the 98 or 2001 incident. (I guess I can refer to them as "crimes" now that they have been adjudicated).

We know for a fact that Curley testified no attempt was made to find the boy.

Those two actions -- finding the boy and getting Sandusky help -- were the bare minimum they could have done to make me believe they were genuinely concerned about the humans involved. It's unclear if they attempted to do either.

From what we've seen and heard so far, it appears their defense is going to be that, based on what MM told them, they weighed their options and made a difficult, "humane" decision. That defense reminds me of Hemingway's warning to "never confuse movement with action." In the end, they did nothing except ban JS from bringing children on campus.

Now you got me ranting. :)

Pensfan

07-04-2012, 06:01 PM

BBM

Until late 2010, the AG's Office, Corbett, had no idea about 1998, Victim 6, or Gricar. Nobody, including me, was looking at any cases RFG did not prosecute. The BPD had no idea about 1998. This thing popped up when they started looking at activities on campus.

Maybe it came out in the SPM review panel of Gricar; I don't know. That is a possibility, however.

Okay, on the board; we're in agreement that it wouldn't be a board coverup, I take it?

The only involvement with the DA's Office was 1998, and there is no record of it. They couldn't forward any files because there were not any files; that was not unusual. There is no way that anyone could have known prior to discovering the file, unless someone remembered it and told them.

Even if someone did, there was no focus on it in 2005-10. Everyone knew (well, they thought they knew) what a hard hitting DA Gricar was. If he didn't file charges, there would be a good reason; everybody thought this. That was the general impression of Ray Gricar; that was my impression of Ray Gricar. Heck, that was Schreffler's impression of Ray Gricar.

Corbett didn't know about 1998 until 2010; Madeira didn't know about it until 2011. The Bellefonte Police Department didn't know about it until at least 2010. I didn't know about it until 2011.

I still think RFG's decision in 1998 was just bad judgment, exceptionally, horrifically, terrible judgment. Had Sandusky not been indicted, we wouldn't have known about it at all.
When detectives investigating Gricar's disappearance questioned Gricar's assistants (Yes, I did read that one was never questioned, but there were others in his office) do you believe Gricar's assistants really didn't tell the detectives about Gricar's knowledge of the Sandusky allegation?

From what I have read, Gricar was respected and liked. I believe his assistants would have shared with the detectives everyone who had an interest in Gricar disappearing. Having a DA go "poof" in your state is very serious and threatening to all prosecutors. Corbett would have wanted to know the details the detectives gathered. (no link, just common sense)

{I hope your part of the state has less thunderstorms than Pittsburgh on this holiday. I am considering building an ark.}

Pensfan

07-04-2012, 06:05 PM

As of yet, however, I've seen zero evidence that Sandusky received professional help for either the 98 or 2001 incident. (I guess I can refer to them as "crimes" now that they have been adjudicated).

We know for a fact that Curley testified no attempt was made to find the boy.

Those two actions -- finding the boy and getting Sandusky help -- were the bare minimum they could have done to make me believe they were genuinely concerned about the humans involved. It's unclear if they attempted to do either.

From what we've seen and heard so far, it appears their defense is going to be that, based on what MM told them, they weighed their options and made a difficult, "humane" decision. That defense reminds me of Hemingway's warning to "never confuse movement with action." In the end, they did nothing except ban JS from bringing children on campus.

Now you got me ranting. :)
Unless Sandusky shared the true name of the 2001 victim with admins, how could anyone check on this child? I seriously doubt Sandusky would have shared this child's real name.

J. J. in Phila

07-04-2012, 06:35 PM

As of yet, however, I've seen zero evidence that Sandusky received professional help for either the 98 or 2001 incident. (I guess I can refer to them as "crimes" now that they have been adjudicated).

We know for a fact that Curley testified no attempt was made to find the boy.

Those two actions -- finding the boy and getting Sandusky help -- were the bare minimum they could have done to make me believe they were genuinely concerned about the humans involved. It's unclear if they attempted to do either.

I know; I'm agreeing, but I'm in full rant today (which might have something to with being in Philadelphia on July 4th!).

Assume that this was something less worse. Assume that Sandusky had kleptomania, and stole small thinks from area stores. I could tolerate a suspended sentence, with Sandusky going into therapy for treatment. This was like, "Let him steal things, but we'll ask him to stop it at the Penn State Book Store."

From what we've seen and heard so far, it appears their defense is going to be that, based on what MM told them, they weighed their options and made a difficult, "humane" decision. That defense reminds me of Hemingway's warning to "never confuse movement with action." In the end, they did nothing except ban JS from bringing children on campus.

Now you got me ranting. :)

If they had tried, it might be a point in their favor, but they didn't try. :(

It is absolutely appalling. Curley and Schultz both have master's degrees. Spanier has a doctorate. Spanier actually said that this could happen, and still did it. They are not stupid people.

BigCat

07-04-2012, 06:52 PM

Unless Sandusky shared the true name of the 2001 victim with admins, how could anyone check on this child? I seriously doubt Sandusky would have shared this child's real name.

You'll definitely never know if you don't ask.

Q: Did you ask Jerry Sandusky who the boy was that was with him in the shower?

A: I did not.

Q: Did you attempt to find out who that young man was?

A: I did not.

J. J. in Phila

07-04-2012, 07:07 PM

When detectives investigating Gricar's disappearance questioned Gricar's assistants (Yes, I did read that one was never questioned, but there were others in his office) do you believe Gricar's assistants really didn't tell the detectives about Gricar's knowledge of the Sandusky allegation?

Yes, in 2005; I believe that Sandusky never came up in regard to RFG. It wasn't an issue. The Sandusky case was a 3 1/2 weeks just under years before. There was no further investigation and no charges were brought. There was no indication, in 2005, that Sandusky had done anything to interest LE since that point. RFG wasn't working on it.

RFG dealt with 100's (if not 1000's) of cases as DA, and as an ADA prosecuted additional cases in both Centre and Cuyahoga Counties. Sandusky wasn't exactly on the radar in 2005. It wasn't current or the most violent case he handled.

There were interviews of of some of the ADA's from the period in the summer of 2010. That was after the grand jury had started looking at Sandusky. One said that the detectives said he told them things they never knew about RFG.

From what I have read, Gricar was respected and liked. I believe his assistants would have shared with the detectives everyone who had an interest in Gricar disappearing. Having a DA go "poof" in your state is very serious and threatening to all prosecutors. Corbett would have wanted to know the details the detectives gathered. (no link, just common sense)

Corbett had a hands off policy with the case. The local DA's declined to turn it over to him. I wasn't even calling for it to be turned over until 11/2011, because of the jurisdictional problem.

{I hope your part of the state has less thunderstorms than Pittsburgh on this holiday. I am considering building an ark.}

Sunny here, and I broke into Cool, Considerate Men. :)

IzzyBlanche

07-04-2012, 07:10 PM

Unless Sandusky shared the true name of the 2001 victim with admins, how could anyone check on this child? I seriously doubt Sandusky would have shared this child's real name.

A phone call to Second Mile would have been a good place to start.

Pensfan

07-04-2012, 07:16 PM

A phone call to Second Mile would have been a good place to start.
ITA. Raykovitz or his wife would have likely stated "Gee. We just don't know. Jerry has LOTS of little boys that he is interested in" because Jerry did and they had to witness this for decades. As a PH.D psychiatrist and a school guidance counselor they had to suspect something too, IMO.

IzzyBlanche

07-04-2012, 07:20 PM

ITA. Raykovitz or his wife would have likely stated "Gee. We just don't know. Jerry has LOTS of little boys that he is interested in" because Jerry did and they had to witness this for decades. As a PH.D psychiatrist and a school guidance counselor they had to suspect something too, IMO.

Maybe they would have dodged the question, but someone had to have known who Jerry was hanging out with on that particular day. The child didn't just materialize out of nowhere.

J. J. in Phila

07-04-2012, 07:58 PM

Maybe they would have dodged the question, but someone had to have known who Jerry was hanging out with on that particular day. The child didn't just materialize out of nowhere.

It should not have been too hard to figure out, at the time.

Second Mile had records of who was in the program. Sandusky claimed he'd identified the child.

Reader

07-04-2012, 08:39 PM

And, as always:

Central Pennsylvania Gothic.

It keeps on getting worse. Even if the Three Stooges were acting out of completely altruistic purposes, really thought they were being "humane," it blew up in their faces. Good Lord, even saying that they wanted Sandusky to get help doesn't mean anything if he doesn't get any help.

Maybe, this could be at least partly justifiable if someone would have forced him to get help, and made sure he wasn't around young boys.

(Yes, I'm in full rant today!) :)

What gets me is that these 3 men all knew about 1998 and 2001, and Paterno we know knew about 2001 and maybe 1998, but until 2009, I believe, when Sandusky found out he was being investigated, for 8 years, they still saw him around boys at the school, the hotels, the games, even out of state games, and never stopped to think what was going on, never asked, never got involved again, knowing what they knew about him.

What happened to the follow up they emailed about? Why did they take no action all those 8 years when they saw he was still behaving the same way with boys? Where was their concern for the children? Where was their concern for their own jobs if this came out? Where were their brains? Where was their thinking? Surely they had all realized if the situation became public this would be against them and the school...they acknowledged this before so why did they just stop being concerned about it after 2001? It's like they just put it in the back of their minds and used some magical thinking to dismiss it.

2002 - no more complaints about JS, we got by another year
2003 - ditto
2004 - ditto
2005 - ditto
2006 - ditto
2007 - ditto
2008 - ditto
2009 - oops, holy cow!
2010 - I'd love to see the emails for that year as they prepared to testity

No, they are not stupid men, in fact, very smart and well educated, but they made a very, very stupid decision and then stupidly stuck with it all those years without any concern about what JS was still doing with the boys, or even for their own jobs and school. Just frickin' unbelievable and they deserve whatever happens to them AFAIC.

Reader

07-04-2012, 08:50 PM

Jerry Sandusky evaluation will aid judge in sentencing

http://www.centredaily.com/2012/06/28/3244573/probation-office-eyes-evaluation.html

BELLEFONTE — Centre County Office of Probation workers soon will begin putting together Jerry Sandusky’s presentence investigation, a report that will aid the judge in sentencing the former Penn State defensive coach.

Thomas Young, the office’s director, said the report will include information on the range of prison time that each count carries, charging documents such as the grand jury’s presentment, any restitution owed, any psychological or psychiatric reports, Sandusky’s version of events if he chooses to offer one, and statements from the victims if they choose to offer them.

The office has 90 days to compile the presentence investigation report.
-------

“I expect to see a majority of the young men who testified at trial present again at sentencing,” said Tom Kline, the Philadelphia attorney representing a 23-year-old man known as victim 5.

“The commitment of the victims has been exemplar. I expect my client to participate in the sentencing phase.”

Sandusky was also ordered to be evaluated by the state Sexual Offenders Assessment Board to determine if he’s a sexually violent predator.

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/06/28/3244573/probation-office-eyes-evaluation.html#storylink=cpy

J. J. in Phila

07-04-2012, 09:50 PM

What gets me is that these 3 men all knew about 1998 and 2001, and Paterno we know knew about 2001 and maybe 1998, but until 2009, I believe, when Sandusky found out he was being investigated, for 8 years, they still saw him around boys at the school, the hotels, the games, even out of state games, and never stopped to think what was going on, never asked, never got involved again, knowing what they knew about him.

I don't know if Curley knew about 1998 in 1998. He knew about by 2001. Paterno obviously knew about 2001, and knew that Sandusky was involved in a children's charity. And if Raykovitz knew, my God!

How many failures were there?

StellarsJay

07-04-2012, 10:05 PM

"As The Second Mile’s CEO Jack Raykovitz testified to the grand jury, he was informed in 2002 by Pennsylvania State University Athletic Director Tim Curley that an individual had reported to Mr. Curley that he was uncomfortable about seeing Jerry Sandusky in the locker room shower with a youth. Mr. Curley also shared that the information had been internally reviewed and that there was no finding of wrongdoing. At no time was The Second Mile made aware of the very serious allegations contained in the grand jury report."
Second Mile's Press release
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/the_second_mile_releases_a_sta.html
Nov 7, 2011

J. J. in Phila

07-04-2012, 10:12 PM

http://www.centredaily.com/2011/09/09/2907646/why-july.html

I wrote that blog last September. I'm wondering if we'll see some additional fireworks this July.

J. J. in Phila

07-04-2012, 10:13 PM

"As The Second Mile’s CEO Jack Raykovitz testified to the grand jury, he was informed in 2002 by Pennsylvania State University Athletic Director Tim Curley that an individual had reported to Mr. Curley that he was uncomfortable about seeing Jerry Sandusky in the locker room shower with a youth. Mr. Curley also shared that the information had been internally reviewed and that there was no finding of wrongdoing. At no time was The Second Mile made aware of the very serious allegations contained in the grand jury report."
Second Mile's Press release
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/the_second_mile_releases_a_sta.html
Nov 7, 2011

Well, that could be all that was reported. "No wrongdoing" is the key. :(

BigCat

07-05-2012, 12:19 AM

http://www.centredaily.com/2011/09/09/2907646/why-july.html

I wrote that blog last September. I'm wondering if we'll see some additional fireworks this July.

Isn't there a grand jury meeting right now?

J. J. in Phila

07-05-2012, 12:41 AM

Isn't there a grand jury meeting right now?

They are still in session.

I'm sort of expecting something on TSM (Courtney) or Spanier.

I really am not sure of the extent that they are investigating Gricar. They obviously were looking at his 1998 decision, but they may have looked and found no illegality.

StellarsJay

07-05-2012, 03:16 AM

Wendell Courtnay
November 17, 2011
http://www.centredaily.com/2011/11/17/2989371/courtney-denies-knowledge-of-acts.html

“The man who served as attorney for both Penn State and The Second Mile said that, contrary to a state grand jury report, he was never aware of a 1998 investigation into possible allegations of sexual misconduct by Jerry Sandusky.

State College lawyer Wendell Courtney said he also never knew that then-graduate assistant Mike McQueary had told former Nittany Lions head football coach Joe Paterno about witnessing Sandusky allegedly sexually assault a boy in a Penn State shower in 2002. Paterno, according to the grand jury, in turn notified Athletic Director Tim Curley. Curley and Gary Schultz, senior vice president for finance and business, spoke with McQueary one week later.

Courtney served as counsel for Penn State from the time he passed the bar in 1980 until 2008, all while working with the McQuaide Blasko law firm. He said in an interview he never was asked by Penn State whether police should be notified about any allegations of sexual abuse involving Sandusky.
“Had I ever been asked, my response would have been, ‘Absolutely and immediately,’ ” Courtney said. “Had I ever had any inkling that Sandusky was engaging in behavior with children that was even remotely improper, nothing on God’s green earth would have kept me from making certain that the allegations were reported to the police authorities and thoroughly investigated.” According to the grand jury presentment: “Schultz testified that the 1998 incident was reviewed by university police and ‘the child protection agency’ with the blessing of then-university counsel Wendell Courtney. Courtney was then and remains counsel for The Second Mile.” Courtney also disputes the last sentence, saying he did not begin work for The Second Mile until April 2009.”

So who was the lawyer who billed for consulting at the “three hour meeting” in 2001?

BigCat

07-05-2012, 07:18 AM

So who was the lawyer who billed for consulting at the “three hour meeting” in 2001?

Could it be Cynthia Baldwin?

J. J. in Phila

07-05-2012, 07:39 AM

Could it be Cynthia Baldwin?

Baldwin was a judge at the time; as such, she technically was not a member of the bar and couldn't be taking clients.

pinktoes

07-05-2012, 09:46 AM

Lawyers lie sometimes to protect themselves.

However, if ya'll want to look for a candidate other than Wendell Courtney, try Dan Bright. Another McQuaide Blasko atty, PSU/Dickinson Law grad, on TSM's Board of Directors. But i don't think so.

Google Dan Bright McQuaide Blasko + Penn State

J. J. in Phila

07-05-2012, 11:07 AM

CDT reporting that discovery for Curley and Schultz is looking a Courtnay.

http://www.centredaily.com/2012/07/04/3251589/sandusky-trial-emails-may-alter.html#storylink=omni_popular#wgt=pop

(Note that the CDT in now a pay site, though you get 15 free views/month. I have to pay as well.)

HMSHood

07-05-2012, 12:18 PM

What gets me is that these 3 men all knew about 1998 and 2001, and Paterno we know knew about 2001 and maybe 1998, but until 2009, I believe, when Sandusky found out he was being investigated, for 8 years, they still saw him around boys at the school, the hotels, the games, even out of state games, and never stopped to think what was going on, never asked, never got involved again, knowing what they knew about him.

What happened to the follow up they emailed about? Why did they take no action all those 8 years when they saw he was still behaving the same way with boys? Where was their concern for the children? Where was their concern for their own jobs if this came out? Where were their brains? Where was their thinking? Surely they had all realized if the situation became public this would be against them and the school...they acknowledged this before so why did they just stop being concerned about it after 2001? It's like they just put it in the back of their minds and used some magical thinking to dismiss it.

2002 - no more complaints about JS, we got by another year
2003 - ditto
2004 - ditto
2005 - ditto
2006 - ditto
2007 - ditto
2008 - ditto
2009 - oops, holy cow!
2010 - I'd love to see the emails for that year as they prepared to testity

No, they are not stupid men, in fact, very smart and well educated, but they made a very, very stupid decision and then stupidly stuck with it all those years without any concern about what JS was still doing with the boys, or even for their own jobs and school. Just frickin' unbelievable and they deserve whatever happens to them AFAIC.

It is likely Jerry Sandusky molested boys during those times when no complaints were filed. There could be complaints that we do not know of outside of Penn State.

ohiogirl

07-05-2012, 12:31 PM

In the same e-mail, according to CNN, Mr. Curley also suggested that if Mr. Sandusky "is cooperative," Penn State "would work with him" to tell Second Mile. If not, Mr. Curley wrote, the university would inform both Second Mile and outside authorities

http://chronicle.com/article/Records-Raise-More-Questions/132725/

The really horrible part is that they didn't do any of these options, it seems.

Reader

07-05-2012, 07:56 PM

I don't know if Curley knew about 1998 in 1998. He knew about by 2001. Paterno obviously knew about 2001, and knew that Sandusky was involved in a children's charity. And if Raykovitz knew, my God!

How many failures were there?

Enough to ruin the lives of at least 10 boys and probably many more unknown to us.

Hardymum

07-05-2012, 07:56 PM

And, as always:

Central Pennsylvania Gothic.

It keeps on getting worse. Even if the Three Stooges were acting out of completely altruistic purposes, really thought they were being "humane," it blew up in their faces. Good Lord, even saying that they wanted Sandusky to get help doesn't mean anything if he doesn't get any help.

Maybe, this could be at least partly justifiable if someone would have forced him to get help, and made sure he wasn't around young boys.

(Yes, I'm in full rant today!) :)

If one wanted to keep the situation entirely confidential, they might not want Jerry to seek treatment from a therapist outside their "inner circle". If there was a convenient psychiatrist with an interest in keeping things quiet, however, who could also promise to keep Jerry away from young TSM boys, and also had his own position and salary to protect.......well, it just makes me wonder...

Reader

07-05-2012, 08:02 PM

Spanier asks court to overrule Penn State's objections to his lawsuit

STATE COLLEGE — Former Penn State president Graham Spanier is asking the court to overrule the university’s objections to providing him with emails he sent that may be part of an internal university investigation.

Spanier has filed suit against Penn State in an effort to obtain those emails, which he said he needs in order to cooperate with authorities investigating the university’s handling of child sexual abuse allegations against Jerry Sandusky.

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/07/05/3252597/spanier-asks-court-to-overrule.html#wgt=rcntnews#storylink=cpy

StellarsJay

07-05-2012, 08:42 PM

If one wanted to keep the situation entirely confidential, they might not want Jerry to seek treatment from a therapist outside their "inner circle". If there was a convenient psychiatrist with an interest in keeping things quiet, however, who could also promise to keep Jerry away from young TSM boys, and also had his own position and salary to protect.......well, it just makes me wonder...

Gosh, I didn't know Dottie was a psychiatrist!

pinktoes

07-05-2012, 09:08 PM

ohiogirl: you said "The really horrible part is that they didn't do any of these options, it seems."

Well, these people all knew each other; went to the same functions; Linette Courtney, Wendell's wife, was on TSM's Board in 1998 and Wendell was later, as well as doing pro bono work for them.

I imagine that rather than make an "official notification" to TSM, that they simply handled it informally. Thru Courtney or someone else. Just not on Penn State letterhead, so to speak.

Pensfan

07-05-2012, 09:42 PM

If one wanted to keep the situation entirely confidential, they might not want Jerry to seek treatment from a therapist outside their "inner circle". If there was a convenient psychiatrist with an interest in keeping things quiet, however, who could also promise to keep Jerry away from young TSM boys, and also had his own position and salary to protect.......well, it just makes me wonder...
Your right! It would take a very immoral psychologist to keep this secret and endanger other little boys, but I will bet my retirement that Sandusky never sought "help". In the fixated pedo's mind, nothing is wrong with "loving" little boys and "showing them affection".

Don't believe the pro-pedophile supporters' statistics that attempt to prove that pedophiles are very unlikely to rape/molest children after release from prison. Their desire to participate in deviant sexual behavior is a life-long problem.

The pro-pedophile (low recidivism) studies are skewed...
-because several studies failed to eliminate incest sickos who were no longer able to rape children because their children became adults while they were in prison.
-because the researchers only calculated the pedophiles' crimes that caused additional incarceration (How many crimes occurred but weren't caught?)
-because they only calculated recidivism within a very short length of time (failed to use long-term studies)
-because some of these studies relied on the pedophiles to honestly answer the researchers' questionnaires (How many do you really think honestly answered when they were asked if they were still raping/molesting children?)

J. J. in Phila

07-05-2012, 10:01 PM

Your right! It would take a very immoral psychologist to keep this secret and endanger other little boys, but I will bet my retirement that Sandusky never sought "help". In the fixated pedo's mind, nothing is wrong with "loving" little boys and "showing them affection".

I think licensed psychologist are mandatory reporters, at least as far as the victim is concerned. Dr. Chambers was, and did report it.

StellarsJay

07-05-2012, 10:45 PM

Jonathan Dranov
As of 2005, Dranov was the Assistant Chief of Medical Staff of Mount Nittany Medical Center.
Dranov is currently a Director of the Foundation that seeks its charitable funding. It is the only hospital where Dranov has admitting privileges..
Joe and Sue Paterno donated $1 MM to the Hospital for its new wing in 2009. The Mount Nittany fundraising foundation, headed by Dr. Jon Dranov and the Paternos, raised $9.7 million total.
John McQueary worked there, retiring sometime after 2007. He was Chief Operating Officer/Administrative Director of the Centre Medical and Surgical Associates, which was associated with the Mt. Nittany Center and has now been absorbed into it.

Let great men guide you, grasshopper.

J. J. in Phila

07-05-2012, 11:15 PM

Jonathan Dranov
As of 2005, Dranov was the Assistant Chief of Medical Staff of Mount Nittany Medical Center.
Dranov is currently a Director of the Foundation that seeks its charitable funding. It is the only hospital where Dranov has admitting privileges..
Joe and Sue Paterno donated $1 MM to the Hospital for its new wing in 2009. The Mount Nittany fundraising foundation, headed by Dr. Jon Dranov and the Paternos, raised $9.7 million total.
John McQueary worked there, retiring sometime after 2007. He was Chief Operating Officer/Administrative Director of the Centre Medical and Surgical Associates, which was associated with the Mt. Nittany Center and has now been absorbed into it.

Let great men guide you, grasshopper.

Dr. Dranov's specialty is internal medicine. http://foundation.mountnittany.org/about/board-of-directors

He would not be treating Sandusky for anything related to pedophilia or be qualified to even diagnose a psychological problem. He might have had some experience with it in residency, but not that much.

StellarsJay

07-05-2012, 11:52 PM

JJ, I was looking at the connection between Dranov and Paterno, not with Sandusky. I don't know how well the media quoted what Dranov told the Grand Jury but what came out initially made McQueary sound really bad. Then, at the trial, Dranov seemed to have shifted emphasis from "He told me three times he didn't see penetration/sex/whatever" to "He was shocked and shaking."
I think Dranov's first story was very cya for himself and Paterno et al, leaving lots of room for doubt. When it became clear that a lot of people wanted Sandusky convicted, Dranov subtly switched gears, but still didn't want to show that he as a doctor should have done more to get the crime reported. I would add Dranov to the stooges and think it was very unfortunate that the McQuearys sought his advice..
I see why you thought I was pursuing psychologists, though.

J. J. in Phila

07-06-2012, 01:05 AM

JJ, I was looking at the connection between Dranov and Paterno, not with Sandusky. I don't know how well the media quoted what Dranov told the Grand Jury but what came out initially made McQueary sound really bad. Then, at the trial, Dranov seemed to have shifted emphasis from "He told me three times he didn't see penetration/sex/whatever" to "He was shocked and shaking."
I think Dranov's first story was very cya for himself and Paterno et al, leaving lots of room for doubt. When it became clear that a lot of people wanted Sandusky convicted, Dranov subtly switched gears, but still didn't want to show that he as a doctor should have done more to get the crime reported. I would add Dranov to the stooges and think it was very unfortunate that the McQuearys sought his advice..
I see why you thought I was pursuing psychologists, though.

We don't have Dranov's grand jury testimony, so I'm not sure about that. McQueary, at the preliminary indicated that he was "distraught," and the good doctor confirmed that.

Dr. Dranov was not called at the preliminary hearing for Schultz and Curley.

Pensfan

07-06-2012, 02:39 AM

I think licensed psychologist are mandatory reporters, at least as far as the victim is concerned. Dr. Chambers was, and did report it.
All licensed health care professionals are mandated reporters in PA. Dr. Dranov is one...........
http://www.rainn.org/pdf-files-and-other-documents/Public-Policy/Legal-resources/2009-Mandatory-Report/Pennsylvania09C.pdf

J. J. in Phila

07-06-2012, 08:59 AM

All licensed health care professionals are mandated reporters in PA. Dr. Dranov is one...........
http://www.rainn.org/pdf-files-and-other-documents/Public-Policy/Legal-resources/2009-Mandatory-Report/Pennsylvania09C.pdf

It also notes: "...in the course of their employment... ." This wasn't in the course of employment. Dr. Danov was not in contact with children in this case.

IzzyBlanche

07-06-2012, 10:07 AM

Paterno Email Shows Coach's Influence on Disciplinary Matters

The documents, which The Chronicle acquired from a source close to the Jerry Sandusky investigation, contradict comments made in recent days by Mr. Paterno's representatives suggesting that the coach never used e-mail or played a role in influencing university investigations.

BBM

http://chronicle.com/article/Paterno-E-Mail-Shows-Coachs/132773/

costalpilot

07-06-2012, 03:19 PM

wow.....louis freeh is gonna make some penn staters wonder why he was selected.. picking freeh was a turnaround, whether they knew it or not.

azwriter

07-06-2012, 03:59 PM

If one wanted to keep the situation entirely confidential, they might not want Jerry to seek treatment from a therapist outside their "inner circle". If there was a convenient psychiatrist with an interest in keeping things quiet, however, who could also promise to keep Jerry away from young TSM boys, and also had his own position and salary to protect.......well, it just makes me wonder...

Hardymum, your post brings up so many "could have beens." I agree that it would have been ideal to have help for Jerry. But can you imagine the difficulty of keeping him away from young boys. With TSM, he had a compound of fresh candidates at his picking. Besides, treatment wouldn't help if Jerry refused to believe he had a problem to begin with.

I think it would have been very difficult to find the perfect therapist to match up to the goal of keeping Jerry in check and hiding his crimes. Of course that's just the way I see it.

Associates of Jerry at the University, who knew what he was up to, didn't sign up to take turns keeping a close eye on Jerry and stear him away from youngsters. No, it's painful to face, but these guys wanted this kept quiet. I don't believe they were that stupid to think he would stop on his own. But there was a strong compelling urge to hide Jerry's actions and in turn hide what they knew at the time. I suppose their own job and status depended on it. Why or why didn't one, just one of them, step outside the pack and do the right thing? My heart goes out to the victims who could have been protected if just one person acted with courage and followed the moral and legal path.

The outcome in the coming months should be quiet interesting and we may find that perhaps they did try your idea. Jerry may be in jail, but there is way more to come within this case that will further shock and sadden us, I'm sure.

just my O

back2back19

07-06-2012, 04:45 PM

wow.....louis freeh is gonna make some penn staters wonder why he was selected.. picking freeh was a turnaround, whether they knew it or not.

I really hope so. The truth needs to come out, no matter how bad it is. PSU can not move on without it and any sense of a coverup in the Freeh report will just make people think there's still some sort of conspiracy.

I am curious if the NCAA(or the Big Ten) will get involved now. I still don't think they will but more people are starting to think there's something there now they can work with.

IzzyBlanche

07-06-2012, 05:43 PM

I'm no expert on NCAA rules, but if JP was pulling the strings so that football players weren't disciplined like other students, I would think that would be a sanction-worthy infraction.

J. J. in Phila

07-06-2012, 07:58 PM

I'm no expert on NCAA rules, but if JP was pulling the strings so that football players weren't disciplined like other students, I would think that would be a sanction-worthy infraction.

I think there is something about institutional control and I expect the death penalty.

Reader

07-06-2012, 08:07 PM

Penn State's internal inquiry nears end, findings expected soon

.........Five people in leadership roles at the university told The Associated Press this week that they had either been told or received indications that findings could be released within weeks, if not sooner, and no later than the end of the month. Trustees could offer an update at the next board meeting July 13 in Scranton.

Recently revealed emails among top school officials about a 2001 molestation allegation also apparently led to another round of interviews............

Two people at the university familiar with the investigations told The Associated Press that athletic department staffers were among those interviewed by Department of Education officials since revelations about the email exchanges. The two people, who were also interviewed by Freeh's team, spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the investigations...........

The NCAA has said it expects the school to provide a more detailed response to its inquiry once Freeh's investigation was complete. The NCAA is examining Penn State's "institutional control" over the events that occurred, along with whether school officials followed policies on honesty and ethical conduct.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/football/ncaa/07/06/penn-state-jerry-sandusky-abuse-inquiry.ap/index.html#ixzz1ztFpTi00

IzzyBlanche

07-06-2012, 08:08 PM

I think there is something about institutional control and I expect the death penalty.

Yes, but I always thought "institutional control" meant control--or lack thereof--of the players. I'm not sure the NCAA could cite LOIC due to the Sandusky debacle.

I don't know, though.

CJMAJORGIRL24

07-06-2012, 08:34 PM

All licensed health care professionals are mandated reporters in PA. Dr. Dranov is one...........
http://www.rainn.org/pdf-files-and-other-documents/Public-Policy/Legal-resources/2009-Mandatory-Report/Pennsylvania09C.pdf

I am taking a Human Services class this semester, and we were just talking about mandated reporters. As bad as our society is-I believe we should ALL be mandated reporters!!

CJMAJORGIRL24

07-06-2012, 08:37 PM

Before Gricar disappeared in 2005, AG Corbett had worked with him on a huge narcotics case. Corbett knew Gricar personally and knew him at least from 1998 (see below link). After Gricar disappeared, AG Corbett would have been very interested to know info surrounding Gricar's disappearance. AG Corbett would have been informed from detectives about various things r/t missing DA Gricar's life and one of those would have been that Gricar had reviewed an allegation that "famous" Sandusky was a pedophile. Another thing that Corbett would have learned from detectives in 2005 was that Gricar didn’t prosecute Sandusky. Corbett may/may not have read the 1998 report, but he heard about Sandusky from detectives investigation Gricar's disappearance. (mo link, just common sense)

Gricar and Corbett had issues in 1998 which would have also led Corbett to have an interest in Gricar disappearance (leading to knowledge in 2005 of Sandusky's pedophilia).
http://www.wjactv.com/videos/news/sandusky-scandal-sheds-new-light-on-link-between/vFXfR/

$640,000 may be small change in relation to Corbett's total campaign donations, but angering the Sheetz family, numerous pro athlete millionaires, and other extremely wealthy PA individuals that served on the TSM's BOC would be a politically fatal mistake. Do you remember the allegations about the TSM board members which occurred on this forum for weeks? (none from me) The generous benefactors of TSM somehow escaped being implicated as Sandusky enablers by the general public.

Corbett, a politically savvy man, knew that prosecuting Jerry could bring investigations upon TSM, its administration, and its wealthy BOC members. (This occurred with the Milton Hershey School pedophile investigations occurring around the same time.) With an investigation, the top admins, and its generous BOC could have their reputations smeared even if illegal behavior was not identified. Angry philanthropists are dangerous political enemies and a savvy man with higher political aspirations would want to avoid this. Yes, Bonusgate was his main platform, but I think there were personal aspiration reasons why Corbett didn't move on Sandusky.

It is my wish that they KEEP digging, because the answer to Mr. Gricar's disappearance. jmo

BigCat

07-06-2012, 09:10 PM

Earlier in the week I speculated that the Paternos and their acolytes leaked the emails snippets as a form of damage control, and then they turned around and condemned the leaks in an effort to seize the narrative and make JoePa the victim.

Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong. For what it's worth, the below story is consistent with that theory.

JMO

Report to shed light on PSU scandal

This week, the Paterno family defended the coach's reputation and questioned the motives of the people leaking the material, which they say is out of context and designed to put the coach in the worst light. In a statement released Monday, Wick Sollers, a Paterno family attorney said: "With the leaking of selective emails over the last few days, it is clear that someone in a position of authority is not interested in a fair or thorough investigation." The Paterno family has called on the attorney general and Freeh to release all emails and records to allow the public to see all the evidence.

A source who has reviewed all the early 2001 emails said the few that have been leaked "are definitely out of context. We think the one that was released was the worst one for everybody."

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8136890/penn-state-abuse-report-expected-very-tough-joe-paterno-according-sources

Pensfan

07-06-2012, 09:26 PM

It also notes: "...in the course of their employment... ." This wasn't in the course of employment. Dr. Danov was not in contact with children in this case.
That’s debatable. There are unclear areas in PA’s code and in the mandated reporter training classes. If you are a mandated reporter and you attended a mandated reporter training class, you left with knowledge that you would be held legally responsible for not reporting child abuse regardless of whether that knowledge came to you while you where practicing your profession or not.

The CPSL does not require the child come directly before the mandated reporter in order for there to be an obligation to report.
http://www.pcar.org/sites/default/files/Mandated%20Reporter%20Training%20Curriculum.pdf

A mandated reporter need not make a first-hand observation of the suspected child abuse victim. Second-hand reports of abuse must be reported to the proper authorities if the mandated reporter has “reasonable cause to suspect” that child abuse has occurred.

back2back19

07-06-2012, 10:24 PM

I think there is something about institutional control and I expect the death penalty.

Would that include the Sandusky stuff or whatever the Freeh report finds pertaining to Paterno? I don't really understand how the NCAA woudn't come down hard on Penn State for the Sandusky stuff but so many experts kept saying the NCAA would avoid it.

J. J. in Phila

07-06-2012, 10:47 PM

That’s debatable. There are unclear areas in PA’s code and in the mandated reporter training classes. If you are a mandated reporter and you attended a mandated reporter training class, you left with knowledge that you would be held legally responsible for not reporting child abuse regardless of whether that knowledge came to you while you where practicing your profession or not.

I'm not sure of that point; that it is legitimately debatable indicates that the statute is ambiguous.

The CPSL does not require the child come directly before the mandated reporter in order for there to be an obligation to report.
http://www.pcar.org/sites/default/files/Mandated%20Reporter%20Training%20Curriculum.pdf

Respectfully, that is not the issue. Dr. Dranov was not acting in the course of his employment. He was there as a trusted friend of the family.

The question I have is "law enforcement official." That would include the DA's Office. Even though the Chambers' report was submitted to the DA's Office, Lauro said he never saw it. Administratively, that was a terrible decision, but the decision is neither criminal, unethical, nor an abuse of discretion. Legally, I'm not sure if it was required to be forwarded to DPW. If it was required, that would take this from a terrible decision to a criminal one.

J. J. in Phila

07-06-2012, 11:16 PM

Would that include the Sandusky stuff or whatever the Freeh report finds pertaining to Paterno? I don't really understand how the NCAA woudn't come down hard on Penn State for the Sandusky stuff but so many experts kept saying the NCAA would avoid it.

I think it would include the Sandusky stuff, that the administration was not properly supervising the program. I would not be too surprised if the Freeh Report didn't touch on the disciplining of football players or mentioned it only in passing. The issue is primarily what the administrators did.

Keep this in mind. The administrators had a responsibility to do the right thing. Even if Paterno threatened to resign, never raise another penny for Penn State, and become the head coach for Pitt, they had the obligation to say, "Well Joe, we're sorry to see you go," at least as far reporting Sandusky. Some other things, like voluntarily retiring, are different. If they really felt that Paterno shouldn't be there, for any reason, it was the administrators decision to remove him.

BigCat

07-06-2012, 11:41 PM

Would that include the Sandusky stuff or whatever the Freeh report finds pertaining to Paterno? I don't really understand how the NCAA woudn't come down hard on Penn State for the Sandusky stuff but so many experts kept saying the NCAA would avoid it.

I imagine the argument is the "Sandusky stuff" didn't give Penn State a competitive advantage.

Another argument is the crimes are so serious that any action by the NCAA would be trivial. SMU received the death penalty -- a 2 year ban on playing football -- in the 80's because several players received improper benefits. What would the appropiate NCAA penalty for covering up child sexual abuse?

Of course, a cynic might suggest that Penn State football is "too big to fail." A severe penalty from the NCAA would punish not only Penn State; it would harm the Big 10 conference as a whole.

BigCat

07-07-2012, 12:13 AM

I think it would include the Sandusky stuff, that the administration was not properly supervising the program. I would not be too surprised if the Freeh Report didn't touch on the disciplining of football players or mentioned it only in passing. The issue is primarily what the administrators did.

Keep this in mind. The administrators had a responsibility to do the right thing. Even if Paterno threatened to resign, never raise another penny for Penn State, and become the head coach for Pitt, they had the obligation to say, "Well Joe, we're sorry to see you go," at least as far reporting Sandusky. Some other things, like voluntarily retiring, are different. If they really felt that Paterno shouldn't be there, for any reason, it was the administrators decision to remove him.

I think you underestimate the man. He could not be fired. Well, I guess he was eventually fired. But only after he presided over the worst sports scandal in US history, and even then there were riots! And the ramifications have not fully been felt yet, IMO.

Here's the link to the story written back in 2005 about Spanier's and Curley's failed attempted to fire JoePa.

Penn State's Paterno proves his way works

Power corrupts, drop-kicking proud men from high places, and Paterno knew this even before he sat down in his home for what threatened to be the last fight of his career. In previous decades, Paterno grabbed all the power and reverence a coach could ever imagine. He studied power and, even as it grew, eclipsing that of his official superiors, he guarded it. He feared corruption, and his instincts helped him avoid it.

Read more: http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/05359/627761-143.stm#ixzz1zuEcy8Bd

Nevertheless, I do agree with you that the administrators failed in their obligation to do the right thing. They should have resigned if they did not have the power to fire a subordinate. They are paying the price for it now.

Pensfan

07-07-2012, 12:47 AM

I'm not sure of that point; that it is legitimately debatable indicates that the statute is ambiguous.

Respectfully, that is not the issue. Dr. Dranov was not acting in the course of his employment. He was there as a trusted friend of the family.

The question I have is "law enforcement official." That would include the DA's Office. Even though the Chambers' report was submitted to the DA's Office, Lauro said he never saw it. Administratively, that was a terrible decision, but the decision is neither criminal, unethical, nor an abuse of discretion. Legally, I'm not sure if it was required to be forwarded to DPW. If it was required, that would take this from a terrible decision to a criminal one.
Respectfully, I realize Dranov wasn't providing anyone dialysis at the McQueary's home that evening, but according to PA's CPSL laws and their mandated reporter training manual that doesn't matter.

This is how unclear the mandated reporter law is in PA. I just asked a practicing physician x 32 years if he was a mandated reporter outside of his place of his employment (in PA) and he said he wasn't sure. For the 2 decades I practiced inside PA, I believed and was told that I was mandated reporter at all times. I was encouraged to contact CPS as well as the city police department when there was reasonable cause to suspect child abuse. Local LE was contacted when physical abuse was evident.

I can't imagine CPS happily sharing their information from the psychologist with anyone. They are difficult to work with and in my opinion a vast majority of them have BPD. CPS is also known for being incompetent and overworked. These might have resulted in issues with Chamber's report making it to the DA's office. Perhaps CPS stated that it was submitted, but it wasn't.

J. J. in Phila

07-07-2012, 01:39 AM

I think you underestimate the man. He could not be fired. Well, I guess he was eventually fired. But only after he presided over the worst sports scandal in US history, and even then there were riots! And the ramifications have not fully been felt yet, IMO.

Here's the link to the story written back in 2005 about Spanier's and Curley's failed attempted to fire JoePa.

First, this was not an attempt to fire Paterno. It was an attempt to get him to leave voluntarily. Spanier and Curley were unwilling to pay the price of Paterno not raising funds anymore.

The thing was, the reason they wanted Paterno to retire was that he had several losing seasons, at that point. Six months after that meeting, Paterno said, "'If we don't win some games, I've got to get my rear end out of here. Simple as that.'' http://www.gainesville.com/article/20050514/GATORS20/50514005 Looking at the context, Paterno knew that either had to win or leave. He had a great season, and the pressure was off.

Second, you are confusing political clout with administrative authority. Spanier could have easily said, in 2004, "Well, Joe, you are destroying the football program, and even your fundraising won't make up for it. You retire, or you will be fired."

There was that thought out there at the time: http://www.athlonsports.com/college-football/joe-paternos-last-stand Spanier always had that ability, but lacked the will to use it. Now, with 20/20 hindsight, Paterno was right. 2005 was a great season. The football program continued to be a moneymaker; Paterno continued to raise funds. If, at the end of 2005, Paterno would have had another losing season, all of Paterno's clout would not have saved him.

Had there been strong opposition from Paterno about reporting Sandusky to DPW in 2001, that would have been the same situation (and there is no suggestion that there was strong opposition). Spanier, Schultz and Curley still the authority to order it reported. The administrative responsibility rested with them, not with Paterno.

Nevertheless, I do agree with you that the administrators failed in their obligation to do the right thing. They should have resigned if they did not have the power to fire a subordinate. They are paying the price for it now.

No, if they felt that a subordinate was not acting properly or successfully, they either should have ignored his advice or fired him.

J. J. in Phila

07-07-2012, 02:22 AM

Respectfully, I realize Dranov wasn't providing anyone dialysis at the McQueary's home that evening, but according to PA's CPSL laws and their mandated reporter training manual that doesn't matter.

According to the same training manual you quote, it only becomes mandatory when such suspicion occurs "...in the course of their employment... ." This, indisputably, was never in the course of Dr. Dranov's employment.

This is how unclear the mandated reporter law is in PA. I just asked a practicing physician x 32 years if he was a mandated reporter outside of his place of his employment (in PA) and he said he wasn't sure. For the 2 decades I practiced inside PA, I believed and was told that I was mandated reporter at all times. I was encouraged to contact CPS as well as the city police department when there was reasonable cause to suspect child abuse. Local LE was contacted when physical abuse was evident.

I even looked at statute a while back, and nothing supports that premise that you would be legally required to report it all times, only through the course of employment. What you were trained to do, and what the legal requirement is, are not necessarily the same.

I can't imagine CPS happily sharing their information from the psychologist with anyone. They are difficult to work with and in my opinion a vast majority of them have BPD. CPS is also known for being incompetent and overworked. These might have resulted in issues with Chamber's report making it to the DA's office. Perhaps CPS stated that it was submitted, but it wasn't.

The paper trail, that we know of, is that Lauro (DPW) first contacted Schreffler (Univ. Police) on 4/5/98. On 4/8/98, Schreffler got the Chambers' Report and attached it to the supplemental report. There has been no suggestion this report was ever sent to DPW or C&YS, by the Univ. Police.

I know that in other counties, those reports a sent to the DA's Office; part of an old friend's job was going out daily to collect them. I cannot image any DA in Pennsylvania making a decision on charging anyone for anything without looking at the police report first. They wouldn't have any idea what happened.

Reader

07-07-2012, 11:29 AM

Earlier in the week I speculated that the Paternos and their acolytes leaked the emails snippets as a form of damage control, and then they turned around and condemned the leaks in an effort to seize the narrative and make JoePa the victim.

Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong. For what it's worth, the below story is consistent with that theory.

JMO

Very interesting from your same link:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8136890/penn-state-abuse-report-expected-very-tough-joe-paterno-according-sources

A consulting firm's report offering new information about how Joe Paterno and Penn State senior officials responded to an allegation that Jerry Sandusky had sexually abused a boy inside the football team's showers could be made public as early as next week, several sources said Friday, and is expected to be tough on Paterno.

The report is expected to shed new light on administrators' handling of the Sandusky allegations, and also raise questions about Paterno's leadership of Penn State's vaunted football program, according to several people with knowledge of the inquiry's scope.

"Much of the focus will be on the culture of the football program, with findings that go back more than a decade," said a Penn State official briefed on the inquiry, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "It's going to be very tough on Joe (Paterno)."

Reader

07-07-2012, 11:35 AM

First, this was not an attempt to fire Paterno. It was an attempt to get him to leave voluntarily. Spanier and Curley were unwilling to pay the price of Paterno not raising funds anymore.

The thing was, the reason they wanted Paterno to retire was that he had several losing seasons, at that point. Six months after that meeting, Paterno said, "'If we don't win some games, I've got to get my rear end out of here. Simple as that.'' http://www.gainesville.com/article/20050514/GATORS20/50514005 Looking at the context, Paterno knew that either had to win or leave. He had a great season, and the pressure was off.

Second, you are confusing political clout with administrative authority. Spanier could have easily said, in 2004, "Well, Joe, you are destroying the football program, and even your fundraising won't make up for it. You retire, or you will be fired."

There was that thought out there at the time: http://www.athlonsports.com/college-football/joe-paternos-last-stand Spanier always had that ability, but lacked the will to use it. Now, with 20/20 hindsight, Paterno was right. 2005 was a great season. The football program continued to be a moneymaker; Paterno continued to raise funds. If, at the end of 2005, Paterno would have had another losing season, all of Paterno's clout would not have saved him.

Had there been strong opposition from Paterno about reporting Sandusky to DPW in 2001, that would have been the same situation (and there is no suggestion that there was strong opposition). Spanier, Schultz and Curley still the authority to order it reported. The administrative responsibility rested with them, not with Paterno.

No, if they felt that a subordinate was not acting properly or successfully, they either should have ignored his advice or fired him.

BBM - I agree with that and the admins failed in their duties to the victims shamefully, and if it was because of the football wins and Paterno's influence and fundraising, that is even more shameful to me. To place money and stupid football games above the abuse of children! Pure corruption of power, money and duty. Spanier had the ultimate authority as president of the school and I hope he is charged also.