Penn State Sandusky scandal: AD arrested, Paterno fired, dies; cover-up charged #9

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reader said:
I'm wondering if pension contributions working for the state in Pa. are the same as other states. In Al. and Fl. where I worked, the employee did contribute to their own pension, but the employer matched the contribution. So some of those funds might have been from the univ. Does anybody know if it is the same in Pa.?
Click to expand...

Yes, you do contribute and at 40 years, you get a full salary (average of the last three years) + Benefits. 15 years half salary, and no benefits. I think benefits cut in around 20-25 years.

Disability is about 5 years.

You have to remember that Paterno was in the system for 61 years.
 
J. J. in Phila said:
When he could talk to the press, he could see how arguments would play.
Click to expand...

Well, his main argument seems to be to attack the witnesses and that sure hasn't played very well so far, at least not here if he's reading, lol. So I'm wondering what other arguments he can use. With the detailed info. now in the information from the state, you know that the AG has all of these various dates and places verified. How can he argue against that when JS's whereabouts at the games, functions, schools with the children are already documented. The only recourse is to still attack the witnesses and I think that will really cause a backlash with the public and the jury. These men must have been very believeable to convince the grand jury and the prosecutors after all the vetting they have been through.
 
Reader said:
Well, his main argument seems to be to attack the witnesses and that sure hasn't played very well so far, at least not here if he's reading, lol. So I'm wondering what other arguments he can use. With the detailed info. now in the information from the state, you know that the AG has all of these various dates and places verified. How can he argue against that when JS's whereabouts at the games, functions, schools with the children are already documented. The only recourse is to still attack the witnesses and I think that will really cause a backlash with the public and the jury. These men must have been very believeable to convince the grand jury and the prosecutors after all the vetting they have been through.
Click to expand...

The credibility of the victims (well alleged victims), is key to the incidents relating to Victims 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, and 10. He will have to do that in court, and it may work.

Victim 8 is weak anyhow, because, there is no victim and no witnesses.

That leaves 2001 (McQueary) and 1998. We've debated McQueary and the trial balloon of "Gricar didn't prosecute," got laughed out of here. He didn't repeat it. Now he's trying the "no criminal intent" argument, that has been similarly to ones made here.
 
J. J. in Phila said:
He earned it. He'd been paying into it for 61 years. I won't begrudge the estate that.
Click to expand...

The 61 years is one of the things I have trouble with- sort of a combination of Paterno got way more than his fair share of pie, when he seems to have been slipping, was waaay too old, and was probably blocking others. (In a widgit business when the boss leaves suddenly, for whatever reason, and there are NO acceptable widgit managers who can step up - or even be allowed to stay in their current jobs-I would consider the top boss who left or was fired had been incompetent as a manager. Yeah, maybe he could make a widgit out of spit and used paper clips, but he didn't look after his company.

And whoever cut the pie supported this. [Meaning the Penn State bosses, not the retirement plan people.]
 
StellarsJay said:
The 61 years is one of the things I have trouble with- sort of a combination of Paterno got way more than his fair share of pie, when he seems to have been slipping, was waaay too old, and was probably blocking others. (In a widgit business when the boss leaves suddenly, for whatever reason, and there are NO acceptable widgit managers who can step up - or even be allowed to stay in their current jobs-I would consider the top boss who left or was fired had been incompetent as a manager. Yeah, maybe he could make a widgit out of spit and used paper clips, but he didn't look after his company.

And whoever cut the pie supported this.
Click to expand...

I think that it was more of the University not wanting his more or less chosen successor. Pensions are based on longevity in the PA Retirement System.
 
Reader said:
LOL...don't think a bunch of anonymous people on a forum who mostly are against his client will help him much....he doesn't know our demographics.....wonder if JS is considering a plea deal at this point, if nothing else but to spare his wife and family from hearing all the details.
Click to expand...


I would have thought the same as you, Reader, if I hadn't watched the Casey Anthony trial play out. Baez and the defense team made no secret of the fact that they were monitoring on-line forums to determine how different strategies would be received by common folks like us.
 
Reader said:
More new articles:

Insurer, Jerry Sandusky attorneys clash in federal court

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/05/insurer_jerry_sandusky_insurer.html

..........Federal Insurance Co., which has paid at least $125,000 to Joe Amendola, Sandusky’s lead attorney, seeks a rare “public policy” ruling that would exempt an insurer from having to pay for costs incurred by an individual as a result of allegations of child sexual abuse.

*******
Click to expand...

That's just wrong. That's part of what their coverage is and there is no way they should be let out of having to pay for it now. JS is still innocent until proven guilty and as much as I believe he is guilty and would love to see his defense cost coming from his own pocket, I'm just as sick of insurance companies ripping people off and taking their money then not wanting to cover them when they have a claim. :banghead:
 
seattlechiquita said:
BBM

Something tells me we will get a lot of victim bashing during defense's case. Bastards. :maddening:

oh, and I'm new to the case :wave:
Click to expand...

Welcome.

Well, it is standard. The credibility of the victims is key to every victim, except Victims 2, 6, and 8.
 
AG: Sandusky Dismissal Premature Without 'Facts'

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2012/05/25/us/ap-us-penn-state-abuse.html?ref=us

PITTSBURGH (AP) — A defense motion asking a judge to dismiss child sexual abuse charges against former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky is premature because there are no "facts" in the form of sworn testimony on which to base the request, state prosecutors said Friday.
-------

"The absence of a factual record requires this Court to deny those requests," the prosecutor wrote.

Fina also argued that because Sandusky waived his right to a preliminary hearing — thus acknowledging prosecutors had sufficient probable cause to take the charges to trial — dismissing the charges now would effectively nullify the waiver.
-------

Bruce Antkowiak, a criminal law expert at St. Vincent College near Pittsburgh, said the prosecutor is correct in saying it's premature for Sandusky to ask that the charges be dismissed.

Although Antkowiak disagrees with the prosecution argument that Sandusky has waived his right to challenge the charges because he waived his preliminary hearing, the "significant point is there is nothing upon which the court can rule now" because there's been no testimony, he said.


More at link.......

I'm sure the opposition is well aware of this basic trial requirement but is just trying to tie up things as much as possible and delay the inevitable...JS facing his accusers...
 
seattlechiquita said:
BBM

Something tells me we will get a lot of victim bashing during defense's case. Bastards. :maddening:

oh, and I'm new to the case :wave:
Click to expand...

Hi and welcome to the case, seattlechiquita!

Yep, gonna be a nasty trial of a nasty man and his nasty little lawyer...imo
 
Former Penn State president sues school over emails linked to Sandusky scandal

http://www.myfoxdfw.com/story/18628...school-over-emails-linked-to-sandusky-scandal

.........Graham Spanier, who was fired from Penn State in the immediate aftermath of the child sex abuse scandal involving the former assistant football coach, reportedly filed the suit Friday in Centre County Court.

According to the report, Spanier's suit seeks to force the university to hand over emails relevant to the case.

The emails, which reportedly date from 1998 to 2004, "would refresh [Spanier's] recollection significantly and allow him to assist the university fully in its investigation," the suit says, according to the paper.

More at link.....

LOL, so noooowwwww he wants to help!
 
Spanier's lawyers claim that Penn State attorneys were willing to send copies of the emails but allege the attorney general's office asked the school not to do so. The lawsuit seeks to have a court force the school to give copies of the emails to Spanier so he can be better prepared to testify for the internal investigation
http://espn.go.com/college-football...ent-graham-spanier-sues-jerry-sandusky-emails
STATE COLLEGE, Pa. (AP) - Penn State has named Stephen Dunham its new general counsel, pending approval of the university's trustees in July.

The university says Dunham will take over for former state Supreme Court Justice Cynthia Baldwin, who held the position since January 2010.
http://www.wfmj.com/story/18616162/psu-names-stephen-dunham-new-general-counsel

I was wondering if Spanier filed the day after Baldwin left because she would have given him the emails but the incoming guy might not, but it looks like she's still there till July.
 
"Recently, Spanier learned some emails from before 2004 were retrievable, the suit said, adding that Spanier has placed the condition on speaking with the Freeh investigators that the university first give him access to communications from 1998 to 2004.
Spanier had been told that emails from that time period couldn’t be obtained “inasmuch as a new email system installed in 2004 at Penn State had eliminated email records prior to 2004,” the suit said.

The suit also said that when Spanier spoke to the grand jury, he was accompanied by an attorney he thought was representing his interests, an apparent reference to Cynthia Baldwin, Penn State’s outgoing attorney.
“However, that counsel later (in 2012) took the position that she, in fact, was representing only the interests of Penn State,” the suit said."

Read more here: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/05/...nt-graham.html#storylink=omni_popular#wgt=pop

I had read before that Curley and Schultz thought Baldwin was representing them; this is the first time I've seen that Spanier had the same idea.
 
Duh....Spanier, Curley and Schultz did not know that Baldwin worked for Penn. State? lol

What held them back from a simple question: are you coming to the GJ for me or for the school?

I don't buy it....they didn't think anything would come out of the GJ and were there only to lie and protect the university and their jobs themselves...big backfire, eh?

imo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 215 more.
Total: 4,178 (members: 216, guests: 3,962)

Online statistics

Members online
216
Guests online
3,962
Total visitors
4,178
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,747
Messages
17,958,390
Members
228,602
Latest member
jrak
Back
Top