Any updates from Spanier on the stand?

[raleighnclion]

Your assumption is wrong. Dukie is brave enough to come on here and provide his insights. He doesn't troll or act inappropriately so as far as I'm concerned, he is welcomed.

You really think it is "brave"? And it has nothing at all to do with what he says, the fact that we know who he is and what family he is in means he should not be posting on a public message board.

 

[artsandletters]

You really think it is "brave"? And it has nothing at all to do with what he says, the fact that we know who he is and what family he is in means he should not be posting on a public message board.

Dukie didn't call the cops either. Nobody called the cops yet every Tom, Dick and Mary nationwide says they would've called the cops. I guess the cops were 'under seal' at that time.

 

[The Song Remains the Same]

Dukie didn't call the cops either. Nobody called the cops yet every Tom, Dick and Mary nationwide says they would've called the cops. I guess the cops were 'under seal' at that time.

Sheesh, don't you remember? We discussed this ad nauseam the other day. The cops were off duty. It was a Friday night.

 

[canuckhal]

You really think it is "brave"? And it has nothing at all to do with what he says, the fact that we know who he is and what family he is in means he should not be posting on a public message board.

For some of the reasons you've mentioned, yes I would use the word "brave." Considering some of the grief others have given him and he has never taken the bait. Why shouldn't he able to post? Who else should be censored because of whom they are or what family they were born into? And who gives you the right to be the judge? That is McAndrew's job. If you don't want to read his posts, put him on ignore, but I'll defend his right to be on here.

 

[Aoshiro]

For some of the reasons you've mentioned, yes I would use the word "brave." Considering some of the grief others have given him and he has never taken the bait. Why shouldn't he able to post? Who else should be censored because of whom they are or what family they were born into? And who gives you the right to be the judge? That is McAndrew's job. If you don't want to read his posts, put him on ignore, but I'll defend his right to be on here.

Well, I would guess that his brother's lawyer has asked him not to post. If not either a) his brother's lawyer is an idiot or b) he is here to spread disinformation.

 

[mn78psu83]

Well, I would guess that his brother's lawyer has asked him not to post. If not either a) his brother's lawyer is an idiot or b) he is here to spread disinformation.

Seems like a compulsion.

 

[LundyPSU]

Lundy is not an oag disciple.

I think he simply try's to look at all aspects of the cases.

thanks dukie

 

[Nellie R]

So far Spanier has testified that A. He didn't read the emails from Schultz concerning the 1998 Sandusky molestation investigation; B. He never knew about 1998 (even though in court filings Schultz has contended that he believes Spanier did know) C. Didn't know that Schultz had consulted an attorney about the 2001 incident; D. Apparently didn't think it strange that the COO and the AD of Penn State should drag him out of a meeting to tell him about "horseplay in the shower" E. Then engaged in a series of meetings and emails concerning horseplay in the shower F. Didn't know what Curley meant by "the first situation" and didn't bother to find out G. Didn't know what Curley meant by Sandusky's "problem" and didn't bother to find out H. Didn't know what Curley meant by "the other organization" and didn't bother to find out.

He probably would've been better off saying he didn't read Curley's email but since he responded to it, he didn't have a choice.

I don't know what his explanation is for "The only downside for us is if the message isn't 'heard' and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it."

I have a question for you, and sort of an assignment. Assuming it is correct that you live in Houston:

1. Why do you spend your time obsessing over PSU personnel who IMHO did the correct thing with the individual levels of info they received (Reported it to the Second Mile) in one incident out of a great many more that clearly did NOT involve PSU ... when THIS is what you should be doing:

2. Assignment: Provide your research into what almost happened right in your own back yard and not too far away from mine and other Texans (and PA persons concerned about the welfare of children who post here) regarding the 04/2012 Second Mile (epicenter of this saga) to Arrow Ministries transfer BEFORE the trial. Question: Did you contact any child authorities in the area or even the TX AG to alert them that a court in PA was going to allow this to occur? Without any visible references in the case to such a notification being offered as a courtesy to another state? Did you read the Dissolution case in the Orphan's court? Did you perform your own investigation of whether this Arrow entity incorporated in Houston was legit? Any Forms 990 analysis? You know, try to follow the money? Did you notice Arrow's Board rubber-stamped, asked no questions and held no meetings, even tho the Sandusky case was national news and it was well-known it was his charity? Did you check Arrow's website? Did you notice that within a year the entire Board had turned over save two and a lot of information was scrubbed, including the part where they had operated a "ranch" or some type of halfway house near you for young trafficking victims from another country? Did it not raise a huge red flag when the "Friend Fitness" and other faulty Second Mile programs were going to be transferred as is? Another red flag when it was later reported in PA they had "now become accredited" ? Any concerns about fostering operations in California and Maryland as well as Texas and Pennsylvania? Ever wonder why later on it was suddenly announced this would all be staying in PA and not going to any other state?

Or have you always been focused on the "shiny objects" the media dangles?

Thanks for your time.