35 sealed subpoenas in McQueary lawsuit
- Thread starter PSUEngineerx2
- Start date
Good catch! The update was provided at the Centre County website yesterday. I saw it when reviewing the order for JD71 and JD150 to produce their evidence for cross-exam in P Et Al v NCAA, (aka Andrew Shubin ordered to make a client available for once...) and copying it to provide the info to someone else.
Penn State is requesting 35 subpoenas. Will be interesting to find out of whom.
Direct link for those who prefer to go to the source instead of a media filter: http://centrecountypa.gov/index.aspx?NID=506
This one of the reasons CSS have not come to trial. CSS will be told to plead the 5th because of their own trials so they won't be called. The OGBoT wins the battle because not all of the info can come out. CSS's charges won't be dropped until JS appeal is denied and until after the MM trial. Its a game of chess to prevent info to come out. It will only work in the short run. 1-2 years. That said info will come out if MM goes to trial. All things considered OGBoT will settle for a couple of million to keep info from coming out. If I were MM and I an glad that I am not, I would hold out for $4MM. Once settled they will prevent MM from going on the record unless he is under oath in a court room.
And I'm not sure that the 35 Requested Subpoenas is not some approach to scare McQueary into settling early. For fear of what else may come out, it might "influence" Mike to settle. Thirty-five subpoenas?
I hope that Tom Corbett, Frank Fina and Joe McGettigan have been slapped with a subpoena and made to answer for their decisions.
Think about it - Corbett and his pornslingers DIDN'T need Mike to properly investigate, charge and prosecute Sandusky. They DIDN'T need "Penn State". They DIDN'T need Cynthia Baldwin and was told that by Bruce Castor way back when.
If the OAG had stayed off campus - and strolled into Second Mile offices and kicked over some filing cabinets asking questions - which was their JOB as the oversight agency - EVERYONE in Public Office would have won.
Corbett gains election points. Frank Fina gains election points. There would have been no anger over slowwalking things. Kathleen Kane doesn't get swept into office. #Porngate and #Hategate never happens. Louis Freeh never happens. The NCAA never happens. Mike's life isn't destroyed. The Paterno Family isn't embroiled in a nasty legal battle. Joe dies in peace. Tim Curley & Gary Schultz achieve their career paths. Dr. Spanier continues on and retires the Elder Statesman. The PSU Community isn't torn in half. Dr. Jack Raykovitz and the leadership at Second Mile are made to account for their failures. Child Protective Services are made to explain why they dealt with a Preferential Child Sexual Offender for so long.
I could go on.
The fact is so much damage has been done to so many over a singular lie manufactured out of Harrisburg. And for what? A trophy pelt which has yet to be nailed up on Tom Corbett's wall.
Remind me to never go on a shooting safari with these people.
Think about it - Corbett and his pornslingers DIDN'T need Mike to properly investigate, charge and prosecute Sandusky. They DIDN'T need "Penn State". They DIDN'T need Cynthia Baldwin and was told that by Bruce Castor way back when.
If the OAG had stayed off campus - and strolled into Second Mile offices and kicked over some filing cabinets asking questions - which was their JOB as the oversight agency - EVERYONE in Public Office would have won.
Corbett gains election points. Frank Fina gains election points. There would have been no anger over slowwalking things. Kathleen Kane doesn't get swept into office. #Porngate and #Hategate never happens. Louis Freeh never happens. The NCAA never happens. Mike's life isn't destroyed. The Paterno Family isn't embroiled in a nasty legal battle. Joe dies in peace. Tim Curley & Gary Schultz achieve their career paths. Dr. Spanier continues on and retires the Elder Statesman. The PSU Community isn't torn in half. Dr. Jack Raykovitz and the leadership at Second Mile are made to account for their failures. Child Protective Services are made to explain why they dealt with a Preferential Child Sexual Offender for so long.
I could go on.
The fact is so much damage has been done to so many over a singular lie manufactured out of Harrisburg. And for what? A trophy pelt which has yet to be nailed up on Tom Corbett's wall.
Remind me to never go on a shooting safari with these people.
All minor gains, it seems, when weighed against Graham Spanier remaining Penn State's President and Joe Paterno riding off into the sunset with his deserved great legacy intact.
My theory....PSU does not settle with MM even though they give $93 million to the victims which has now come out several were obviously not victims but PSU paid them anyway to make them go away. They don't pay MM even though from the information we know, PSU did screw up royally and violated some laws in the way he was terminated. PSU might not think it was worth $4 million, but it was worth something and considering how they were handing out money to anybody that said JS, paying off MM would have been a no brainer.
But why not pay off MM. Because they know it will go to court and as such, it will keep MM quiet for all that time. If they settle with MM, then there is much less reason for C/S/S to be delayed so long and they know MM gets on the stand in that trial. And MM on the stand get crossed by a good defense attorney is going to crack and show that the case that Corbett and Fina put together was based on a lie.
But why not pay off MM. Because they know it will go to court and as such, it will keep MM quiet for all that time. If they settle with MM, then there is much less reason for C/S/S to be delayed so long and they know MM gets on the stand in that trial. And MM on the stand get crossed by a good defense attorney is going to crack and show that the case that Corbett and Fina put together was based on a lie.
The points you raise in the first paragraph are interesting - - - and the incongruency between the handling of the Sandusky Claimants and of MM is certainly cause to raise an eyebrow.
The second paragraph though.........having the MM v PSU lawsuit "hanging out there" does NOT have any impact on the movement in the CSS trials.
Hell - MM HAS provided testimony in the CSS (and other) cases while his suit versus PSU has been ongoing (one of the few folks who has). Penn State settling or not settling w MM has no impact on the timing/movement of the CSS cases.
[FWIW, conversely, it has been the lack of resolution of the CSS cases that has been used as a means to delay the MM v PSU case - - - - up until the very recent ruling by the PSU v MM judge ordering things to "move along" despite CSS's unavailability - which was an interesting ruling]
So what is the reasoning behind not settling with MM? It is not some idealistic reasons by PSU, anybody with half a brain settles with MM at some point in time. The BOT (and whoever else is the one that is still influencing the BOT's decisions) is paying millions of dollars (which is probably where the bill is now after 4+ years of this lawsuit) to keep this alive, why?
If MM wants a nice settlement he needs to depose every single bot member. They'll quickly fold.
That is - I believe - a very good question........especially given the handling of the Sandusky Claimants.......
I think there are a few interesting ponderables there - and I wish I had the answer.
FWIW here's my assessment of the suit from when it was first filed . MMQ will not win on a wrongful termination a la whistleblower because coaches can be terminated any time a new HC is hired.
He has an argument about how the severance pay was delayed/handled that is a common issue with other coaches, some of whom filed a similar complaint in another suit . Some did not, because it did not affect them as profoundly as their names were not paraded through the papers in this saga on a regular basis.
If PSU was playing around with the termination compensation expected under the contracts at the time, (or the procedure regularly used by the University up until the Sandusky case) it's a pretty bad look that they did it to the one who was "the whistleblower" who is the only one who has to self-fund, or has no means due to his lower income accumulation/position as a grad assistant.
I can't wait to see how PSU is going to get around the Freeh Report. In order to win, they have to repudiate it. IMHO they should just settle with MMQ for the severance, but they won't do it because they foolishly have stood on the wrong side and caused delays as a 3rd party of the P et Al v NCAA case for so long where the other similar complaint is.
He has an argument about how the severance pay was delayed/handled that is a common issue with other coaches, some of whom filed a similar complaint in another suit . Some did not, because it did not affect them as profoundly as their names were not paraded through the papers in this saga on a regular basis.
If PSU was playing around with the termination compensation expected under the contracts at the time, (or the procedure regularly used by the University up until the Sandusky case) it's a pretty bad look that they did it to the one who was "the whistleblower" who is the only one who has to self-fund, or has no means due to his lower income accumulation/position as a grad assistant.
I can't wait to see how PSU is going to get around the Freeh Report. In order to win, they have to repudiate it. IMHO they should just settle with MMQ for the severance, but they won't do it because they foolishly have stood on the wrong side and caused delays as a 3rd party of the P et Al v NCAA case for so long where the other similar complaint is.
Last edited:
MM will be living out of his car when he loses his frivolous lawsuit. No chance he wins a dime
I think regardless of a new coach, he has a very strong case. PSU treated him differently than other coaches, suspending him in fact, which sullies his name and greatly affects his ability to find employment. They also docked his pay. All of this while he was testifying against senior management. That's the whole point of the whistleblower law.
Remember...it is what a jury thinks. And if it goes to jury trial, MM is going to look a lot better than the BOT's to a jurist. Remember that this trial has nothing to do with what MM said, etc...this is about the BOT wrongfully terminating MM. This will never goto trial and MM knows that now more than ever as no way the BOT wants to go on the stand and explain things. So why they continue to delay this and not settle is just strange. They could easily settle and as part of the settlement have MM sign a gag order so he cannot talk (besides at a trial) about it. So the only reason for the PSU BOT not to settle is they want to continue to delay the ending of this case because somehow it benefits them.
PSU can present (if they chose) some reasonably strong defenses limiting the amount of ACTUAL DAMAGES to a relatively low number.....how it would end up being ruled on - who knows.
This is where - IMO - the "a new coach would bring in his own staff anyway" types of arguments enter in.
However, some "whistleblower" cases have resulted in PUNITIVE DAMAGE rulings of up to 1,000 times the actual damage amount (I expect most of those types of rulings were significantly lowered on appeal)......and the numbers that tend to not be appealed (or that hold up under appeal), from what I have seen, tend to be more in the 10 times range.
The multiplier seems to hinge on a few key factors:
Just how malicious and intentional were the defendants actions (as opposed to an "honest mistake")
and
Was this a one time deal - - - or a repeated pattern of offenses on the part of the defendant
The more impactful issues in the MM v PSU suit are more of a "defamation" issue (at least in layman's terms). There may be any number of legal reasons that impact just what statutes and terminologies the suit gets filed under.....but that's beyond my level of expertise.
DISCLOSURE: All this coming from a distinctly "non-lawyer" individual
Last edited:
This is one thing I don't get: why did PSU treat McQeary differently when it came to severance than it did the other coaches? Makes no sense.
One term Tommy's Batmobile just couldn't make it over/around that $25,000 speed bump me thinks - that, and his swimming skills were on par with those of former DA (should such skill sets be a necessity).
Because they **** up everything they get close to?
Just a thought
Yeah, made me chuckle. But IIRC the assistants had a documented severance package. Now I understand that, given the circumstances, provision of said package got messed up in some cases. But then they got fixed....in every case but McQueary's. That I don't get.
Don't disagree with anything written here but there is one question I am waiting to hear during the trial...."Mr. McQueary, you say that you witnessed this incident in either 2001 or 2002. Who did you speak to about this other than the Penn State administrators already named in the time between that date and the date you appeared before a grand jury?" I would then either subpoena those people or ask (if the answer is nobody) how I am to believe that this really happened.
You are probably right and his book would be the perfect platform to spread more of his lies and deception to the masses that already believe that an anal rape took place in 2001 and was covered up by our administrators. He sure as hell isn't gonna write a book and recant any of the testimony that he gave at the JS trial. Those horses left the barn 5 years ago and there's no turning back for this fool
To think that ALL OF THE Penn State involvement in this stems from Corbett's desire to get revenge for Spanier speaking up over having his budget cut. It's amazing.
He's getting paid off of a situation where he witnessed a grown 58 year old man showering naked with a child, and did not call the police.
No amount of contrition, excuses, or explanation can change that fact. That's how I see it.
Don't care about "sexual act", don't care about "angle from the shower", don't care about "mirror illusion", don't care about "access to locker room", don't care about "story changed", don't care about "Dr Dranov", don't care about "called his father", don't care about anything at all.
One man witnessed a grown man showering naked with a child and did not do a damn thing to either stop it or call the police. 99.9% of rational, decent human beings on this earth would have at least called the police.
To hell with him.
Simply amazing how anyone within a 10 mile radius or 3 degrees of separation, is now mute for life. Amazing. Everyone cover your ass.
I think this goes long before the Freeh stuff. They suspended him, without pay, under the guise of safety. They didn't try to move him to a secure booth, they didn't distinguish between practices, or game planning, or any other secure task. Meanwhile, he's all about town without even a modicum of protection. On top of that, they penalized him financially by withholding bonuses he was entitled to. All that easily constitutes retaliation. Then, they did the Freeh stuff which left him utterly unemployable.
That puts them between a rock and a hard place, particularly since it seems that McQueary v PSU will go to trial before anything is settled with regard to C/S/S. Guess they'd better hope that Magic Mike doesn't go on a major spending spree (wonder if attorney's contingencies are recoverable on reversal).
Entirely possible that they knew he was lying before the Freeh Report came out. If so, I have to believe his contract contained a "for cause" termination clause which would kick in.
That said, how does anyone in their right mind allow PSU to go through what it did if he or she believes that the star witness is a liar? And then allows Freeh to run amok? I just shudder.
Unholy alliance between Corbett and Surma. All of the obfuscation does not change that.
Mike is unemployable because he's testified that he saw an adult male raping a child and instead of intervening he went home to daddy.
Who would hire that kind of person?
What you're implying goes well beyond breech of fiduciary responsibility; it's criminal. Now if it can only be proven.
Or what if Dan Onorato had something else to do one Saturday afternoon, and wasn't seen on TV as being in Spanier's box?
Similar threads
