Penn State Sandusky cover-up: AD arrested, Paterno fired, dies; cover-up charged #8

Status
Not open for further replies.
No, but as a summary it's rare to see everything mentioned in one article: the University Cover Up, possible pay-offs, possible RICO and CLERY charges, Sandusky's emails, crossing state lines to have sex with a minor, the connection to Second Mile, etc...

Isn't that enough? ;)

The only that I can say is "Oh God, I hope not!"
 
JJ: clipping from your post, just for reference, "...the possibility that Arnold, an ADA, pushed for more to be done; that has not played out yet so I can't say for sure. [And you read he googlepages, you'll see that we do not get along at all.]"

All I've read is her 2007 tome. What's amazing to me is that in it, she practically accused the poster she called "JJ" and "JJinPhila", a person supposedly unknown to her, of conducting either a disinformation campaign re Gricar's disappearance. Or, something even more nefarious--at least in my interpretation of what she wrote.

Now, that's going pretty far just to conduct a spirited intellectual debate. It sounded to me like she really meant it. And questioned how her "JJ" came to have knowledge of so many of Gricar's old cases and of office events, such as the unpublished info about her location around the time he disappeared. Suggesting her "JJ" had personal knowledge, or info from someone close to that office who had personal knowledge. As well as the similar, vague, "horse-in-the-race" theorizing.

What I'd like to see now is where her "JJ" responded in print to those speculative comments she made. Got a link for me?

It's just an amazing thing to watch this take place in print, as it were. I understand that JKA lost a longtime associate, is upset, and wants answers. You didn't; IIRC, you never met Gricar--or Patty. I just don't get your part in the debate. Not at all. Help??
 
What I'd like to see now is where her "JJ" responded in print to those speculative comments she made. Got a link for me?

As to the information: http://www.centredaily.com/2009/07/08/2396970/how-i-got-here.html

It's just an amazing thing to watch this take place in print, as it were. I understand that JKA lost a longtime associate, is upset, and wants answers. You didn't; IIRC, you never met Gricar--or Patty. I just don't get your part in the debate. Not at all. Help??

Why I'm doing it is here: http://www.centredaily.com/2009/02/05/2397032/why-i-am-interested-in-the-gricar.html Basically, if it was related to his official conduct, someone with a grudge against an elected official, 15 years before, it could have been me. If you're just looking with someone with a judge against a functionary, I'd only have to go seven years before 2005 to say it could have been me.

About six months out, I became very frustrated that a guy, a sitting district attorney, who had a good record, vanished, might have been murdered, and there was a killer (possibly a very bright one) still walking around.

As for the "good record," I've made so secret that I think the 1998 Sandusky was hideously bad. I've looked, as much as I can, at the rest of his cases, even after that came out, and they were not hideously bad. It is otherwise a fairly good record. That's a bit like asking, "Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play," at this point. One of the problems that I have with 1998 is that it is a complete anomaly.

If I was sure RFG's departure was voluntary (suicide or walkaway), my interest would end. And the problem is, the odds on foul play have not down, even before Sandusky.

[This is more appropriate for the Gricar thread.]
 
As to the information: http://www.centredaily.com/2009/07/08/2396970/how-i-got-here.html



Why I'm doing it is here: http://www.centredaily.com/2009/02/05/2397032/why-i-am-interested-in-the-gricar.html Basically, if it was related to his official conduct, someone with a grudge against an elected official, 15 years before, it could have been me. If you're just looking with someone with a judge against a functionary, I'd only have to go seven years before 2005 to say it could have been me.

About six months out, I became very frustrated that a guy, a sitting district attorney, who had a good record, vanished, might have been murdered, and there was a killer (possibly a very bright one) still walking around.

As for the "good record," I've made so secret that I think the 1998 Sandusky was hideously bad. I've looked, as much as I can, at the rest of his cases, even after that came out, and they were not hideously bad. It is otherwise a fairly good record. That's a bit like asking, "Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play," at this point. One of the problems that I have with 1998 is that it is a complete anomaly.

If I was sure RFG's departure was voluntary (suicide or walkaway), my interest would end. And the problem is, the odds on foul play have not down, even before Sandusky.

[This is more appropriate for the Gricar thread.]

To continue the OT just a moment, I read the links above and wanted to read more of your blog but some of the posts are not available, such as, "Extensive Disagreements' which is recent and also 'Central Penn. Gothic'. Can you help with that for those interested? TIA
 
To continue the OT just a moment, I read the links above and wanted to read more of your blog but some of the posts are not available, such as, "Extensive Disagreements' which is recent and also 'Central Penn. Gothic'. Can you help with that for those interested? TIA

There is a problem accessing it with some browsers or you may have to register. There is nothing I can do about it at my end. Sorry.

I don't have a problem with Firefox, if it is a browser problem.
 
Sandusky Attorney Seeks Trial Delay

http://www.myfoxphilly.com/dpps/news/sandusky-attorney-seeks-trial-delay-dpgonc-20120227-bb_18252307

BELLEFONTE, Pa. -- The attorney for accused child molester Jerry Sandusky filed a motion Monday asking to have his client's trial delayed until July.

Joseph Amendola wants the May trial postponed as he works to analyze the "great volume" of material related to the case and attempts to line up his defense witnesses, The Patriot-News reported.


Little more at link...
 
OK, question:

Kane, running for DA, is saying that she would have moved on just one victim and not bothered with a grand jury because the process is so slow. I do undestand that more investigators could have been assigned to the case to speed it up, but wouldn't betting the moon on just one victim have been very risky and not looking for the probable other victims also be kind of a coverup? Is the statement below an indication that she is overconfident or foolhardy?

What was gained by using the grand jury- is it customary in major crime cases or just the controversial ones, or what? Would Schultz and Curley be charged without it?


See below.
"Kane says she has tried hundreds of child sex abuse cases and is sharply critical of former Attorney General Tom Corbett’s approach to the Jerry Sandusky case at Penn State, especially Corbett’s use of a grand jury.

[She says] I have never once used a grand jury to investigate a case of child sexual assault for one reason – it takes too long. Your first priority is to get a sexually violent predator off of the streets.”

Kane says had she been attorney general, the case would not have been delayed so long after knowledge of the first victim.

“We would have put as many investigators on as we needed to put on the case. I would not have waited as long as that case was delayed.”

Kane says Corbett was just wrong in his belief that he needed more victims before prosecuting Sandusky.

In her view, one victim of child abuse is one too many and she would have acted a whole lot faster to get Sandusky off the street.

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2012...itical-of-corbetts-handling-of-sandusky-case/
 
OK, question:

Kane, running for DA, is saying that she would have moved on just one victim and not bothered with a grand jury because the process is so slow. I do undestand that more investigators could have been assigned to the case to speed it up, but wouldn't betting the moon on just one victim have been very risky and not looking for the probable other victims also be kind of a coverup? Is the statement below an indication that she is overconfident or foolhardy?

It can be used to investigate a number of aspects of the case. It has the power to subpoena people and lock in their testimony, and to subpoena documents.

What was gained by using the grand jury- is it customary in major crime cases or just the controversial ones, or what?

It is useful with people hiding things.

Would Schultz and Curley be charged without it?

Probably not.

I won't be voting for Kane.
 
OK, question:

Kane, running for DA, is saying that she would have moved on just one victim and not bothered with a grand jury because the process is so slow. I do undestand that more investigators could have been assigned to the case to speed it up, but wouldn't betting the moon on just one victim have been very risky and not looking for the probable other victims also be kind of a coverup? Is the statement below an indication that she is overconfident or foolhardy?

What was gained by using the grand jury- is it customary in major crime cases or just the controversial ones, or what? Would Schultz and Curley be charged without it?


See below.
"Kane says she has tried hundreds of child sex abuse cases and is sharply critical of former Attorney General Tom Corbett’s approach to the Jerry Sandusky case at Penn State, especially Corbett’s use of a grand jury.

[She says] I have never once used a grand jury to investigate a case of child sexual assault for one reason – it takes too long. Your first priority is to get a sexually violent predator off of the streets.”

Kane says had she been attorney general, the case would not have been delayed so long after knowledge of the first victim.

“We would have put as many investigators on as we needed to put on the case. I would not have waited as long as that case was delayed.”

Kane says Corbett was just wrong in his belief that he needed more victims before prosecuting Sandusky.

In her view, one victim of child abuse is one too many and she would have acted a whole lot faster to get Sandusky off the street.


http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2012...itical-of-corbetts-handling-of-sandusky-case/

BBM

But the thing is, what if she lost that one case against Sandusky? Then the other victims would see that he could get away with what he had done and I doubt any of them would have come forward. I'm glad they had the GJ and were able to build a better case with more evidence and victims willing to give evidence. (and we all know these are not all of them) It makes it much more likely for guilty verdicts to me plus more of the ones who have been abused will have a chance at justice.

I have read many comments complaining that Corbett did not get enough investigators to do the job and blaming him for the delay in getting charges, even hinting that he was part of a cover up. Don't know if all that is true or not but it does seem that it all got going when Kelly came in.

I'm glad it's been handled the way it has been so far. As shown by ThoughtFox's post above, there are so many threads to all of this and so many people involved that it took GJ powers to be able to investigate it all...and it's not over yet. Now that the feds are involved it will get even deeper and hopefully we'll find out all the nasty little secrets that allowed this predator (IMO) to continue to operate so openly for so many years right under the noses of his enablers (or accomplices?).
 
BBM

But the thing is, what if she lost that one case against Sandusky? Then the other victims would see that he could get away with what he had done and I doubt any of them would have come forward. I'm glad they had the GJ and were able to build a better case with more evidence and victims willing to give evidence. (and we all know these are not all of them) It makes it much more likely for guilty verdicts to me plus more of the ones who have been abused will have a chance at justice.

I have read many comments complaining that Corbett did not get enough investigators to do the job and blaming him for the delay in getting charges, even hinting that he was part of a cover up. Don't know if all that is true or not but it does seem that it all got going when Kelly came in.

I'm glad it's been handled the way it has been so far. As shown by ThoughtFox's post above, there are so many threads to all of this and so many people involved that it took GJ powers to be able to investigate it all...and it's not over yet. Now that the feds are involved it will get even deeper and hopefully we'll find out all the nasty little secrets that allowed this predator (IMO) to continue to operate so openly for so many years right under the noses of his enablers (or accomplices?).

Yes, I have no doubt that there are many more secrets in this complicated case.

I'm optimistic because I feel with the Feds it won't just be business as usual. Fresh eyes always find new angles. Maybe some people in the legal system there have just been looking at everything one way for too long.

High time things got shaken up! :woohoo:
 
Sandusky Attorney Seeks Trial Delay

http://www.myfoxphilly.com/dpps/news/sandusky-attorney-seeks-trial-delay-dpgonc-20120227-bb_18252307

BELLEFONTE, Pa. -- The attorney for accused child molester Jerry Sandusky filed a motion Monday asking to have his client's trial delayed until July.

Joseph Amendola wants the May trial postponed as he works to analyze the "great volume" of material related to the case and attempts to line up his defense witnesses, The Patriot-News reported.


Little more at link...
Line up his defense witnesses?

Let's guess who Jerry's defense witnesses will be besides his wife? Dr Raykovitz, the child psychiatrist and his wife, the child guidance counselor (aka the ones with professional licenses to lose)

Will the feds ever investigate The Second Mile's enablers?
 
Yes, I have no doubt that there are many more secrets in this complicated case.

I'm optimistic because I feel with the Feds it won't just be business as usual. Fresh eyes always find new angles. Maybe some people in the legal system there have just been looking at everything one way for too long.

High time things got shaken up! :woohoo:

Believe that one of the biggest stumbling blocks has been removed from this equation-- that being protecting Joe Paterno.
 
Pensfan, you got me looking at Jack Raykovitz's state licensure, just on the remote chance that he had any complaints filed against him. I found none; license still intact (as Clinical Psychologist, BTW). John Robert Raykovitz.

Interestingly, since he has a colleague at MidStep Centers who specializes in child abuse, that means The Second Mile had a known resource available to make referrals to, or to recommend to the professionals who worked with TSM kids. So, that's nice. She is:

"Dr. [Georgianna] Achilles is experienced in treating behavioral and emotional problems in children and adolescents, and has specialized training in child abuse treatment." [And she takes payment thru several insurers, although MidStep's founder, Dr. Peter Montminy takes no insurance--private pay only.]

http://www.midstep.com/achilles/

I also verified the licenses of Dr. Montminy; and the lack of any state license per PA's records for Katherine Genovese (formerly Bernecker).

Apparently, Raykovitz was allowed to stay with MidStep till Aug, 20ll:

"Raykovitz stepped away from his a part-time child psychology practice at MidStep Centers for Child Development around August, when the grand jury investigation became public, said Dr. Peter Montminy, the office’s founding director."

per: http://www.thedaily.com/page/2011/11/15/111511-news-penn-state-1-3

Dr. Montminy has known of the good work of Second Mile a long time. When TSM was looking for money in 1994 he gave them this endorsement:

"Giving children positive reinforcement and increasing self-esteem by accomplishing various activities makes Second Mile a strong program for children with problems, said Peter Montminy, a child psychologist with the University's Psychological Clinic."

from:
http://www.collegian.psu.edu:8080/archive/1994/04/04-25-94tdc/04-25-94dnews-1.asp

Also at the link immediately above, in 1994, Katherine Genovese (Bernecker), TSM's Program Director, was quoted:

"Sometimes a volunteer will be assigned to help a specific child overcome a problem by talking and spending extra time with him or her, Bernecker said."

Genovese/Bernecker, best I can see, after her education at PSU never worked substantially anywhere other than TSM. Nor would she have the license to do so.

Raykovitz also had another professional practice in town, where Carol L Skinner, also a licensed clin psychologist worked. I've forgotten the name. I could hop on one foot from its location to MidStep's State College office.

Anyone wanting to check on any others Raykovitz may have had an affiliation with can find some of those here:

http://www.cityfos.com/Raykovitz-John-R-PhD-1036988.profile.htm


Just keeping up with the pros.
 
I'm a relative and sporadic poster here, so please forgive if I'm redundant with my posts.

I'm just getting around, myself, to looking at Jack Raykovitz. I rarely saw his name before the recent calamity. Here is one finding, where he was given an honorary membership in 2003, to that august organization Skull & Bones:

Jack Raykovitz (Honorary) - Psychologist
President of The Second Mile
Congratulations to the newest members of Skull and Bones!

"...University
President Graham Spanier (F ‘02H) spoke next,
recalling his experiences with Skull and Bones, and
introduced AIG Board Member and University
Trustee Dave Joyner (Sp ‘71)..."

from:
http://www.skullandbones.org/Members/nwsltrarchives/03-04.pdf
 
Too bad William Schreyer died last year (Jan?). Although it did spare him seeing this horrible mess come out. He's the one person who had the power to rout anything he wanted to. IMO.

Here's lots of photos where PSU's Skull and Bones awarded the Schreyers their SABRE award in 2007. Everybody who's anybody in S&B/PSU is there: Spanier, Curley, the Schreyers and daughter DrueAnn, Dave Joyner(in his capacity as PSU Trustee), and a special invitee Bob Poole.

http://www.skullandbones.org/Members/sabre2007.html

Wm Schreyer was heavily involved in Spanier's recruitment. And, of course, donated $1 million to have the former Schreyer home renovated to meet the needs of the Spaniers before they moved in.

Small town.
 
According to the article, most people agreed with him.

Not my point; I should've said more. Point is, Schreyer and Joan can pretty much do what they want. And local press, esp PSU press would be well advised not to take him/them on. (Not that it matters, but I did read a little in some of that neighborhood's discourse, and the neighbors who dared to go public wanted the house to be placed on the historic register.)

Bigger point: Someone such as Schreyer could have put an end to Sandusky's shenanigans long ago, had he known about Sandusky and chosen to do so. There's where the power is in that town. Gone now, like his friend JoePa. The wives live on, though. And DrueAnn.

They're in the inner circle of people who choose the hired-help at PSU and thereabouts. I'd like to know what's happening now behind the scenes.
 
Do any of you locals know of any specific benefit Jack Raykovitz would have gained from being tapped into PSU's Skull and Bones? Or that Schreyer would have gained from getting Jack in as a member?

Jack might have scrubbed the internet after things heated up last year. I wonder, because I thought that in his position he would have been very active in civic groups. And I can't find that online. If anyone, esp locals, knows what community organizations Jack was involved in, I'd appreciate your help.

I can see that Sandusky was the front man, but Jack should've been seen around town more I think, and not just as a representative of TSM.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
180
Guests online
1,199
Total visitors
1,379

Forum statistics

Threads
589,160
Messages
17,914,958
Members
227,743
Latest member
McKeith
Back
Top