All Things Tim Curley

Discussion in 'Jerry Sandusky-Cover Up at Penn State' started by ynotdivein, Jul 23, 2012.

  1. ynotdivein

    ynotdivein Retired WS Staff

    Messages:
    11,425
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thread for conversation of Curley's involvement, his health battles, etc.

    Keep it civil and keep it on-topic please. :tyou:


    PennLive/Jan 11 2012/Sara Ganim: Penn State Official Tim Curley Has Lung Cancer, His Wife and Attorney Confirm

    "<snip>Cancer that caused doctors to remove part of one lung in 2010 is being monitored closely by doctors, his wife and attorney have confirmed.

    &#8220;During this difficult time, Tim did not want his health to be a distraction and has been dealing with this privately,&#8221; his wife Melinda Curley said in a statement to The Patriot-News.

    Sources close to the family said the Curley&#8217;s wanted to keep his situation private, because he didn&#8217;t want it to appear he was trying to get sympathy as his trial nears. <snip>"
     
  2. Loading...


  3. Reader

    Reader New Member

    Messages:
    7,020
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Originally posted by Rlaub44:

    Penn State penalties: With NCAA sanctions levied, time for Tim Curley to confess

    http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-fo...ctions-tim-curley-joe-paterno-spanier-schultz

    ...........It’s all on Tim Curley’s shoulders now. Every last shred of what’s left of the Penn State child abuse scandal is sitting right there in front of him: the last man with the last word.

    The man who played for his hero Joe Paterno at Penn State. The man who oversaw the athletics program at Penn State for two decades, speaking eloquently many times about his unwavering love and passion for his university. The man who the Freeh Report said was knee-deep in deception from the first of Jerry Sandusky’s multiple instances of abuse on young boys.

    The man who sat somewhere in State College on Monday morning, still collecting a paycheck from Penn State while on leave from his job, watching the NCAA carnage play out.

    At what point is Curley shamed into telling the truth? At what point is he so humiliated, so undeniably distraught over what his actions have caused, he simply gives in? His hero’s legacy is in tatters. His beloved university’s football program has been kneecapped. And more important, the lives of so many young boys—do we really know the extent of Sandusky’s awful deeds?—have been altered forever............
     
  4. Reader

    Reader New Member

    Messages:
    7,020
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    From the Freeh Report, the actions that were taken by either Schultz or Curley, after being informed of the 2001 incident but BEFORE they had even met with McQueary....

    What busy boys they were!

    This shows to me the panic they were all in to see this JS subject come up again after 1998, when they had taken no action to rein him in from abusing boys in the football facilities, plus this one in 2001 has a witness, and not 'just' a little 2nd Mile boy or a 'regular' citizen or janitor that they can discredit but one of their own!

    I bet they were all about to have heart attacks, lol....

    p.69

    Schultz Discusses "Reporting of Suspected Child Abuse" with University's Outside Legal Counsel

    On Sunday, February 11, 2001, Schultz had a conference call about the "reporting of suspected child abuse" with Penn State's then outside legal counsel, Wendell Courtney.z

    Courtney conducted legal research on this issue and had another conference that day with Schultz about the matter.286 Courtney charged 2.9 hours of time to Penn State for his legal work.

    Courtney's work on the 2001 matter is confirmed in an email Courtney sent to Schultz in 2011 when Penn State received subpoenas for testimony by Schultz and others concerning the criminal investigation of Sandusky.aa

    --------
    p.71

    On February 12, 2001, at about 11:10 a.m., Schultz researched the internet about the Board members of the Second Mile, the charitable organization Sandusky founded.303

    On February 12, 2001, Schultz also asked Penn State University Police Chief Tom Harmon if a police file still existed for the 1998 event.304

    At 9:56 p.m., Harmon emailed Schultz to report, "[r]egarding the incident in 1998 involving the former coach, I checked and the incident is documented in our imaged a[r]chives."cc

    By February 12, 2001, Schultz and/or Curley had:

    (i) given Spanier a "heads up" concerning a "unique" situation involving Sandusky in the showers with a child;305

    (ii) met with Paterno, who reported to them the "same information" McQueary had given to Paterno;

    (iii) discussed the "reporting of suspected child abuse" with Penn State's then outside legal counsel and also with Spanier,306

    (iv) reviewed the history of the 1998 Sandusky incident; 307

    (v) checked to see if the 1998 police report on Sandusky was documented in University police files;308

    (vi) agreed that Curley would discuss with Paterno the idea about approaching Sandusky to see if he "confesses to having a problem;"309

    and, (vii) researched the Board membership of the Second Mile.310

    There is no indication that Spanier, Schultz, Paterno, Curley or any other leader at Penn State made any effort to determine the identity of the child in the shower or whether the child had been harmed.

    D. Schultz and Curley Meet with McQueary - February 2001

    Schultz and Curley did not meet with McQueary to hear directly from him as to what he observed in the Lasch Building shower before taking these actions.

    cc

    Exhibit 5-D (Control Number 00675162).

    71
     
  5. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    6,947
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    48
  6. Reader

    Reader New Member

    Messages:
    7,020
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Case for, against Penn State execs

    http://espn.go.com/college-football...-penn-state-officials-gary-schultz-tim-curley

    Responding to charges of lying to a grand jury in the Jerry Sandusky investigation, former Penn State vice president Gary Schultz and former athletic director Tim Curley will try to convince a judge in Harrisburg, Pa., that there was a major difference between what Mike McQueary saw in the shower and what he told them about it.

    The differences in McQueary's descriptions of the now notorious shower incident are so significant, the former university officials and their lawyers assert, that the charges of perjury are "unprovable and unfounded" and must be dismissed.

    In more than 300 pages of legal briefs, they suggest that in a meeting 10 days after the incident early in 2001, McQueary gave them the impression that the shower incident was merely "horseplay," was "not that serious," and was at worst "inappropriate."................To prove perjury in Pennsylvania, both sides agree, the prosecution must show that the witness deliberately lied, knew he was lying, and lied to thwart the investigation........

    The lawyers will tell Judge Hoover on Thursday that their clients can be prosecuted for lies, but they cannot be prosecuted for their beliefs. If, based on what McQueary told them, they formed the belief that the shower incident was "not that serious," then they cannot be prosecuted for perjury -- they did not lie to the grand jury but instead merely offered their opinions........

    The incident was so appalling, the prosecutors will argue, that McQueary fled the building, called his father and, even though he was a graduate assistant on the lowest rung of the coaching ladder, vaulted the chain of command and went straight to head coach Joe Paterno to report what happened. How could the episode have been so frightening to McQueary, the prosecutors will ask, and so benign to Schultz and Curley?..........

    Instead of facing a jury trial on falsehoods somewhere in the 37 questions and answers in the current charges, Schultz and Curley will face a reduced number of more detailed charges. Each charge will describe what they said and what makes it false.

    Once they have enjoyed this bit of due process, Schultz and Curley and their lawyers will then face the daunting task of persuading a jury in Harrisburg that they were truthful when the testified that they listened to McQueary's story and concluded that it was "not that serious" and there was nothing "criminal" about it. How, for example, will they explain to a jury that wrestling with a naked boy and "grabbing his genitals" was merely "horseplay?"

    It's easy to see why they are devoting enormous efforts and resources to their attempt to obtain a dismissal before the trial.
     
  7. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    6,947
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The question recurs, if Curley and Schultz thought everything is just horseplay, why ever suggest calling DPW?
     
  8. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    6,947
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Curley and Schultz will be having a preliminary hearing today, and asking the judge to dismiss the charges. The charges are perjury before the grand jury, a felony, and failure to report child abuse, which is a misdemeanor. (Failure to report has since become a felony, IIRC.)

    The failure to report charge stems from Victim 2, the incident that was witnessed by McQueary.

    There is a reasonably good chance that the failure to report charges will be dismissed because, at the time charged, the statute of limitations had expired. The AG originally thought it was 2002. It has since been determined that it was 2001.

    Had Curley and/or Schultz been convicted of that failure to report charge, they would face a penalty of 90 days in jail, or a $500 fine, or both.
     
  9. believe09

    believe09 Active Member

    Messages:
    28,114
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    38
  10. StellarsJay

    StellarsJay New Member

    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  11. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    6,947
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I was surprised; I think they have an appeals issue there. However, it doesn't affect the perjury and, if convicted it's 90 days and/or $500 max.
     
  12. nittanylioness234

    nittanylioness234 New Member

    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  13. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    6,947
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    48
  14. nittanylioness234

    nittanylioness234 New Member

    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  15. Rlaub44

    Rlaub44 New Member

    Messages:
    584
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  16. Reader

    Reader New Member

    Messages:
    7,020
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
  17. Tipstaff

    Tipstaff New Member

    Messages:
    3,266
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  18. nittanylioness234

    nittanylioness234 New Member

    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  19. J. J. in Phila

    J. J. in Phila Verified Insider

    Messages:
    6,947
    Likes Received:
    63
    Trophy Points:
    48
  20. Lois Lane

    Lois Lane New Member

    Messages:
    978
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  21. nittanylioness234

    nittanylioness234 New Member

    Messages:
    177
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice