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

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally Posted by pinktoes

TY, JJ. I'm so suspicious now, I'm verifying in several places what I read. So far I've found actual press releases authored by Petito into 2005, but not past Ray's disappearance date. Still looking.

Petito does say she was AG's Deputy Press Sec till 2006. That's from her Linked-In, though, and sometimes people give kinda loose dates on that. If all I've seen is correct, she was still in that AG press position past the date gricar disappeared. (Just away at her relative's event during the crucial time).

snip from her Linked-in:

Deputy Press Secretary Public Protection Division
Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General

Government Agency; 501-1000 employees; Law Enforcement industry

1997 – 2006 (9 years) Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Area

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/barbara-petito/b/a12/53a

It's interesting that she left the AG's and went to National Center for Missing and Exploited Children for 2 yrs. as media mgr.

I have, in the past years, seen some media references to her after 4/15/05, but I know that she left about 18 months after the disappearance and went to the next place.

I found two press released she wrote in July 2005. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Or...27m_working_on

Here is one from July 2006: http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-148243443.html

Here is one from about 3 1/2 weeks after RFG disappeared: http://articles.mcall.com/2005-05-07...laimed-freight

I think it would be far better to discuss anything about Ms. Petito on the Gricar thread, since she not involved in the Sandusky case.

[wfgodot]

Penn State Will Pay Two PR Firms $2.5 Million To Help School "Rebuild Trust" (Deadspin)

[Tipstaff]

Sandusky lawyer called improper



By Paula Reed Ward / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette


The lead prosecutor in the case against former Penn State football coach Jerry Sandusky filed an unusual motion in Centre County Court Friday, accusing the defense of improperly using subpoenas and violating an order that protects the names of the alleged victims in the case.

Senior Deputy Attorney General Joseph McGettigan accused defense attorney Joseph Amendola of revealing the names of people known in court records as "Victims 1 through 10 in a number of subpoenas he's served, including to the Pennsylvania State Police, a Clinton County school district and the Penn State University police."


The remainder of the article can be read at

www.postgazette.com

[Tipstaff]

More from the Post Gazette article written by Paula Reed Ward 4/28/12.

Senior Judge John M. Cleland previously issued an order directing that
the names of the victims identified in the two grand jury presentments against Mr. Sandusky "shall remain protected under the seal of the court and may not be disclosed by any person, except pursuant to court order or other authorization of the court."

According to the March 13 order, subpoenas must include with them a notice, in all capital letters and at least 18-point font the following:

"The name or any identifying information of the person for whom the records or other information is sought is protected by the seal of the court. Under potential penalty of contempt of court, the person's name or identifying information may not be disclosed to any person except as required to comply with this subpoena."

According to the attorney general's motion, Mr. Amendola complied with providing the required notice, yet still included the names of the victims in either the body of the subpoena, in attachments or in cover letters.

"The commonwealth need not underscore to this honorable court the spectacular irresponsibility of treating secret information in that fashion," Mr. McGettigan wrote.

He alleges that the way Mr. Amendola handled his subpoena power is "manifestly improper."

Again the article continues www.postgazette.com today 4/18/12

[StellarsJay]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/...sandusky-trial

I'd like to see any answer to this question:
"The defense lawyer also subpoenaed Steve Shelow, director of Penn State University Police Services, for various records pertaining to eight of Sandusky's 10 alleged victims.

He also asked Shelow for audio and video recordings made during a 1998 investigation that began when a mother complained that her son had showered with Sandusky. Amendola's letter to Shelow said the '98 investigation had been reclassified from an "incident investigation" to an "administrative file," and the defense wants to know who made that decision.
Amendola asked Shelow for directives from Penn State's board, president or other officials "that mandated/directed the 1998 Sandusky investigation be handled in any particular manner/fashion by the PSU police department." The 1998 investigation was closed without charges being filed, but the boy in that matter is one of the alleged victims in the current case."

How long are old investigation files normally kept?

[Rlaub44]

WJAC-TV from Johnstown spoke with Ben Novak, who was on the PSU Board of Trustees from 1988-2000, and is currently running again. He said that Sandusky's predilections were pretty well-known as far back as the early 90's, saying (paraphrased) "Everybody knew to keep your boys away from Jerry Sandusky."

He was most critical of Shultz and Spanier, observing that the law was clear to report up the chain of command to the head of the institution, and noted that was where everything stopped.

I wish I had a link, but the website doesn't have anything related to the interview, which aired at 5 and 6 this evening. If I find any supporting links, I will be sure to post them.

[HMSHood]

Originally Posted by Rlaub44

WJAC-TV from Johnstown spoke with Ben Novak, who was on the PSU Board of Trustees from 1988-2000, and is currently running again. He said that Sandusky's predilections were pretty well-known as far back as the early 90's, saying (paraphrased) "Everybody knew to keep your boys away from Jerry Sandusky."

He was most critical of Shultz and Spanier, observing that the law was clear to report up the chain of command to the head of the institution, and noted that was where everything stopped.

I wish I had a link, but the website doesn't have anything related to the interview, which aired at 5 and 6 this evening. If I find any supporting links, I will be sure to post them.

I am not surprised by that. I have wondered if his adopted and foster children are victims as well.

[Rlaub44]

Originally Posted by Rlaub44

WJAC-TV from Johnstown spoke with Ben Novak, who was on the PSU Board of Trustees from 1988-2000, and is currently running again. He said that Sandusky's predilections were pretty well-known as far back as the early 90's, saying (paraphrased) "Everybody knew to keep your boys away from Jerry Sandusky."

He was most critical of Shultz and Spanier, observing that the law was clear to report up the chain of command to the head of the institution, and noted that was where everything stopped.

I wish I had a link, but the website doesn't have anything related to the interview, which aired at 5 and 6 this evening. If I find any supporting links, I will be sure to post them.

Here is the link if anyone is interested.

http://www.wjactv.com/news/news/form...aks-out/nNQ94/

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally Posted by Rlaub44

Here is the link if anyone is interested.

http://www.wjactv.com/news/news/form...aks-out/nNQ94/

That is damning.

[azwriter]

Originally Posted by HMSHood

I am not surprised by that. I have wondered if his adopted and foster children are victims as well.

HMSHood, that is a scary question but one that should be asked. I would suppose and hope officials have interviewed these children who are linked to Sandusky through adoption or foster care.

Who knows, there may be other charges coming on, or perhaps one or more among the 10 boys sited already, are his children or foster children. I can say if any of them are identified that way in court during his trial, it will be absolutely tragic. It's bad enough that children from Second Mile were vicitms. But imagine those who lived in the same household not being able to get away from him.

The more I hear, the sicker it gets. And, I personally know Jerry Sandusky.

JMO

[J. J. in Phila]

Hear is an article looking at Amendola's defense strategy: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/05/0...-accusers.html

Basically, it is to hit the victims and say that there is a conspiracy.

Victims 1, 2, and 6 are not really subject to this.

Victim 1: Younger, not too connected to people in the 1990-2000 period. While no witnesses to the rape, there were witnesses to Sandusky's behavior around him. Reported contemporaneously.

Victim 2: Independent witness, McQueary, reported contemporaneously. No victim.

Victim 6: Reported contemporaneously. Multiple witnesses to Sandusky's admission. Not rape.

And that assumes that Amendola is successful in attacking all the other victim's credibility.

[J. J. in Phila]

Court documents indicate there may be 17 victims in total: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/05/0...-mentions.html

We knew of one from the grand jury report, B. K. He was associated with Victim 6, but he could not testify as he was in the military and out of the country.

[Reader]

Originally Posted by J. J. in Phila

Court documents indicate there may be 17 victims in total: http://www.centredaily.com/2012/05/0...-mentions.html

We knew of one from the grand jury report, B. K. He was associated with Victim 6, but he could not testify as he was in the military and out of the country.

From your link:

In the motion, Amendola asks for the names and additional details of accusers who have been identified as number 11 through 17, as well as those who are numbers 18 and beyond.

Amendola will blow a gasket trying to find out who all of these new victims are, LOL.....my answer, ask Jerry and Dottie....wonder if JS will give it up and want a deal since the victims keep increasing....what is his limit? 20? 50? I am really hoping he will and none of them will have to testify....

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally Posted by Reader

Amendola will blow a gasket trying to find out who all of these new victims are, LOL.....my answer, ask Jerry and Dottie....wonder if JS will give it up and want a deal since the victims keep increasing....what is his limit? 20? 50? I am really hoping he will and none of them will have to testify....

I should have said, "at least."


It will be difficult to say that 14 are lying.

[Reader]

Originally Posted by J. J. in Phila

I should have said, "at least."


It will be difficult to say that 14 are lying.

No prob.... thanks for the article...I haven't been keeping up lately...

Well, even tho it will make a better case for the state, it's sad to see that we were right....there are more victims out there...and these are just the ones that are willing to come forward and testify.

Yes, it will be difficult to say all these people are lying or in a conspiracy against JS....and even tho I do wish they didn't have to testify, in a way I want JS and Dottie to have to sit there and be shamed and humiliated by the horrible accounts of his crimes. I'm torn.....

[J. J. in Phila]

Originally Posted by Reader

No prob.... thanks for the article...I haven't been keeping up lately...

Well, even tho it will make a better case for the state, it's sad to see that we were right....there are more victims out there...and these are just the ones that are willing to come forward and testify.

Yes, it will be difficult to say all these people are lying or in a conspiracy against JS....and even tho I do wish they didn't have to testify, in a way I want JS and Dottie to have to sit there and be shamed and humiliated by the horrible accounts of his crimes. I'm torn.....

I went back and looked at the original grand jury report. Victims 3, 4, 5, and 7 have no corroborating evidence. The whole thing thing with these are their credibility. Victim 8 has neither a direct witness nor a victim.

If the victims are not credible under oath, Sandusky could win all charges. They will have to testify (unless there is a plea deal). McQueary has to be credible, in regard to Victim 2.

[Reader]

Originally Posted by J. J. in Phila

I went back and looked at the original grand jury report. Victims 3, 4, 5, and 7 have no corroborating evidence. The whole thing thing with these are their credibility. Victim 8 has neither a direct witness nor a victim.

If the victims are not credible under oath, Sandusky could win all charges. They will have to testify (unless there is a plea deal). McQueary has to be credible, in regard to Victim 2.

Yes, I did mean they wouldn't have to testify if JS made a deal...and as I said before he and his lawyerin' Joe might start thinking about it as more victims pile up...

I do believe we can't just go by what's in the GJ report at this point...I'm pretty sure the AG's office has been working on firming up these cases with the victims and finding other witnesses and proof to back them up if possible...such as JS's emails and phone calls to them...their mothers can verify how he called and visited to pick them up for trips and brought them gifts, friends can do the same...people at their schools can verify he visited them on campus, much like the other cases...there are ways and means to back up what they testify to about his actions...

[StellarsJay]

Was the daughter-in-law, Matt's wife, saying only one of her kids complained about Jerry, or did than one?

[Reader]

Originally Posted by StellarsJay

Was the daughter-in-law, Matt's wife, saying only one of her kids complained about Jerry, or did than one?

IIRC, I think it was just the son...I'll try to find the article about it tomorrow, unless somebody else can before I get back.

[Tipstaff]

Originally Posted by Reader

No prob.... thanks for the article...I haven't been keeping up lately...

Well, even tho it will make a better case for the state, it's sad to see that we were right....there are more victims out there...and these are just the ones that are willing to come forward and testify.

Yes, it will be difficult to say all these people are lying or in a conspiracy against JS....and even tho I do wish they didn't have to testify, in a way I want JS and Dottie to have to sit there and be shamed and humiliated by the horrible accounts of his crimes. I'm torn.....

To add to your thoughts - if HLN or In Session covers this case LIVE it would be interesting to watch Sandusky's behavior in the court room - but I feel for the victims - perhaps they could testify and not be filmed.

[StellarsJay]

More theories on the additional victims:
http://news.findlaw.com/apnews/e634c...d196549ab19cd7
and
"Another discovery request, dated March 27, sought nine documents that Amendola said were removed from football coach Joe Paterno's office and copied by state police. Amendola wrote that the documents had undergone a "supervised review" and been protected by a "police seal of evidence."

It was not clear what the documents were, or when the state police may have taken them."

[Reader]

Originally Posted by StellarsJay

Was the daughter-in-law, Matt's wife, saying only one of her kids complained about Jerry, or did than one?

Former daughter-in-law said Sandusky abused her son

In Thomas' statement, she said that after the charges were filed against her former father-in-law, one of her three children [all sons] told her that Sandusky had “inappropriately touched” him.

She said she was told that there was not enough evidence to charge Sandusky from her son’s account, but a psychologist recommended counseling for him.

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive..._charges_.aspx

Originally Posted by Tipstaff

To add to your thoughts - if HLN or In Session covers this case LIVE it would be interesting to watch Sandusky's behavior in the court room - but I feel for the victims - perhaps they could testify and not be filmed.

Yes, this is one I will certainly watch if possible, and agree about Sandusky. Hope there is someway they can protect the victims' identities but not sure in a criminal trial (right to confront your accuser?) and since most are now adults. IDK, anyone else?

Originally Posted by StellarsJay

More theories on the additional victims:
http://news.findlaw.com/apnews/e634c...d196549ab19cd7
and
"Another discovery request, dated March 27, sought nine documents that Amendola said were removed from football coach Joe Paterno's office and copied by state police. Amendola wrote that the documents had undergone a "supervised review" and been protected by a "police seal of evidence."

It was not clear what the documents were, or when the state police may have taken them."

This is a great article and has more details about the additional victims...it seems they may be accusers but charges are not made for their cases. Also has information about Curley and Schultz wanting their cases thrown out.

The criminal charges against the former Penn State assistant football coach only pertain to boys named as Victims 1 through 10 in court records.

The April 16 discovery request asked for information on "uncharged conduct evidence," while the one filed a week later pertained to employment records.

The court filing did not name the people, explain what might make them accusers or indicate what role, if any, they play in the criminal case in which Sandusky has denied all allegations.

"This in all likelihood means that there are other people who have come forward who have accused him of improper sexual conduct," said Wes Oliver, a Widener Law School professor who specializes in criminal law.

[Reader]

Curley, Schultz seek dismissal of cases

http://www.centredaily.com/2012/05/0...dismissal.html

The two former Penn State administrators who are facing perjury charges for testimony they gave in the Jerry Sandusky case argue there isn’t enough evidence for the case to continue.

******

Judge in Sandusky case orders a hearing on subpoenas

http://www.centredaily.com/2012/05/0...districts.html

Senior Judge John Cleland will hold a hearing May 9 on filings by two school districts and The Second Mile that subpoenas from Jerry Sandusky's attorney aren't valid.

The Mifflin County and Keystone Central school districts, along with The Second Mile, filed motions asking Cleland to quash the Sandusky subpoenas seeking information including student records, psychological evaluations, grade reports and attendance records.

Mifflin County and Keystone Central argue the information requested in the subpoenas is protected and the defense doesn't have a right to the records.

More at links....

[Quiche]

More Penn State child sex abuse accusers: defense

(Reuters) - There may be more accusers than originally thought in the Penn State University scandal involving former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky, who has been charged with sexually abusing 10 boys, according to court filings.

Sandusky attorney Joseph Amendola, in legal papers filed on Thursday in Common Pleas Court in Bellefonte, Pennsylvania, made a reference to "accusers 11 through 17 as well as 18 through an unknown number."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...84409W20120505


We knew it, though, didn't we? I'm thinking Amendola will try to use these boys to debunk Sanducky's modus operandi (which looks pretty darn unwavering in victims 1-10, imo). It's a tight rope they're trying to walk-- not sure it's going to work for them because I'm sure the prosecution is more than ready for any cheap trick they can pull out of the hat. As a matter of fact, I'm sensing a spectacular backfire. jmo

[ohiogirl]

They ae desparate grasping at anything that they feel will possibly stick.
It may be too late at this point for JS' defense. You have to try anything, I guess.