hey dukie, thanks for checking in. So is Mike off the hook for testifying now?
Breaking from Pennlive Curley and Shultz plead guilty.
- Thread starter OXLion
- Start date
1. Tim's own words in his email talk about knowing about the first time JS was investigated. Not a guess, not confusing, it's his own words on the subject. If you want to ignore it, fine...ignore it. It wouldn't surprise me if a few here will try and spin that some other way still to this day. In fact it's par for the course for a few.
2. Lash out on me all you need to...you posted that crap and it was crap. I love how people who just joined in the last year of this site know everything about everyone....f--king joke.
Lundy I could not answer that. As far as I know he is ready to be called during the trial.
So you are disagreeing with me that your three "friends" have only joined in the last year?? Not sure if you know this but there is any easy way to find out when a poster joined.
My 3 friends....LOL. You mean anyone not thinking like you do? I have no idea about you guys and your Audibles/Penn Live BS. In fact I have no GD clue WTF you are either, but carry on 8286. Make your assumptions...they seem to be really accurate.
My 3 friends....LOL. You mean anyone not thinking like you do? I have no idea about you guys and your Audibles/Penn Live BS. In fact I have no GD clue WTF you are either, but carry on 8286. Make your assumptions...they seem to be really accurate.
How many assumptions have you made that were accurate? Um, I trying to think of one. No, can't think of any.
My 3 friends....LOL. You mean anyone not thinking like you do? I have no idea about you guys and your Audibles/Penn Live BS. In fact I have no GD clue WTF you are either, but carry on 8286. Make your assumptions...they seem to be really accurate.
You give as good as you get. Really gone way off the deep end here, maybe step away from the keyboard for awhile?
I completely agree with this. I find it more plausible that they'll take responsibility for their actions rather than flip on Spanier. I wouldn't be surprised if they say they made a mistake in not getting DPW involved,or putting a plan in place to prohibit Sandusky's use of the Lasch building. Especially since Schultz had knowledge of the '98 incident. I don't think they had criminal intentions at all. It's easier for them now to admit to mistakes with just a misdemeanor charge than it was with felony charges hanging over their heads.
I would quote your great assumptions, but then again...I never really even noticed your handle before. I wonder why that is, maybe because you really don't say much of substance or nobody really gives a f--k about anything you say.....yet you seem to know all about me. I'm flattered...and thanks for noticing.
I would quote your great assumptions, but then again...I never really even noticed your handle before. I wonder why that is, maybe because you really don't say much of substance or nobody really gives a f--k about anything you say.....yet you seem to know all about me. I'm flattered...and thanks for noticing.
For a guy that doesn't really give a f--k about what I say you sure do reply to a lot of my posts. Hmm . . .
Of course I do...not worried about it either. Why do so many people here want everyone not thinking like them to shut up or feel the need to cry foul. Sorry....I'm not buying the Big 3 are victims anymore. I thought they may have been and to a certain extent all of those caught up in Jerry's BS are...but they made some piss poor decisions and then apparently weren't exactly honest about it. It's fine to say that about MM for anyone here, but god forbid you say it about them when it's looking like more and more each day that could be the case. It's almost like you're dealing with children here finding out Santa isn't real. Do me a favor, don't worry about me as I don't worry about you.
Maybe. Maybe not. Like the informed perspective.
Curley also had knowledge of 1998, per his own written words in 2001. The only one of the three who has a plausible claim to being left out of the loop in 1998 is Spanier - and that's if you believe him when he said that he never saw or read the emails that he was CC'ed on, and if you believe that the President wouldn't have been informed - even in broad terms - that a very visible university employee was under criminal investigation for potential child abuse on university property.
Says the guy who keeps quoting me. Good call.
I've gotten under you skin. LaJolla. It was pretty easy, though, You're very sensitive, which makes you an easy target.
Hey it's an anonymous board so it allows even simpletons like you to become "experts" on this case.
I think this is very close to what will happen at trial w/ C & S. It's naive of anyone to think that after all this time Spanier and his legal team do not know exactly what C & S will say (if anything), regardless of plea deals.
Curley had knowledge of what specifically about 1998? Do we know those facts for sure? Did he know anything beyond calling it simply an "incident" in one email?
It's not what you're saying, it's the way you've chosen to go about it. It's like you put personal faith in CSS and this plea let you down, and you're lashing out. I mean, whatever.
BTW, a good bit of the MM conversation started because his towny minions come over here and project onto us "BWI Lala landers" like they have any room to talk at all. Curley and Schultz pleading down to a misdemeanor doesn't absolve Mike McQuery of his eternal cowardice.
Ok Alden...I think some are pretty upset by the plea and it is showing for sure. No worries there.
I get it...you need to lash out as everything you thought was right is wrong. Instead of admitting it, you dig in deeper...it's what stupid people do. You're an amatuer at this...I've seem much dumber do much better than you. Cheers and keep trying.
Ummm, yeah no...you kind of lost credibility when you put on your pretend cape superhero. Mistakes were made and you get upset with MM...low hanging fruit in this case, but you're on to something.
I suppose if I was looking for credibility approval from you then I'd care but I'm not. You prefer to give MM a pass and I don't, simple as that. Mistakes were made by a lot of people but MM doesn't get excluded from that, whether he's low-hanging fruit or otherwise. But you're certainly entitled to feel however you want.
Do you deliberately think of ways to be dense?
The program described in the article describes the exact methods used by Sandusky to get his victims. One on one physical fitness programming, that includes a workout, followed by what, perhaps a shower? What does it matter what year the program started? The point is TSM suggested a program that included an older mentor engaging in one-on-one physical training with at risk boys aged 11-17. The state thought it was a great idea to the point they offered grants to organizations willing to implement it.
Even after Sandusky's arrest and trial, people still don't think there might be an issue with adults and kids engaged in private, one-on-one contact?
Logic and thinking are not your strong suits. What does your degree from PSU allow you to do-- other than write by-laws for senior citizen groups?
I haven't excluded MM from any mistakes. I think everyone including MM wishes he picked up the phone and dialed 911 right away I imagine. Just a guess there, but I would have to think that crossed his mind at some point if not every day. Either way...that milk is spilt. We can't clean it up and that is on him. Yeah...he may have won his case, but like many others...Jerry turned his life upside down. The amount of lives and people one man screwed up is incredible.
A program that:
1. Involved both sexes.
2. Was not created in 1998, and possibly not in 2001.
3. There is no evidence that Sandusky ever in this program.
I've never done bylaws for a senior citizens group, but I'd be happy to.
My degree did qualify to understand a calendar. Do you have a degree?
I'd love to find out for sure, to be honest with you. We know he was aware in some form of 1998 in 2001, contrary to his 2011 testimony. As far as the 1998 emails go, we know at the very least that Curley was aware that DPW and the university police were involved in the investigation and a child psychologist had interviewed the two boys. Curley repeatedly asked Schultz for status updates into the investigation starting on 5/13/98 and for several weeks after (including mentioning that "Coach" was anxious to know where the investigation stood), and Schultz ended up telling Curley that a meeting was held with Jerry, that authorities concluded no criminal behavior occurred and the investigation was closed. Spanier was copied on all of those emails, but there's obviously no way to tell whether or not he actually read them. Spanier didn't respond to any emails in 1998.
Spanier is also involved in a 5/16/98 email with a subject line of "Joe Paterno" from Curley to Schultz, with Spanier copied. Curley wrote "I have touched base with the coach. Keep us posted. Thanks." Schultz responded (again with Spanier copied) "Will do. Since we talked tonight I learned that the Public Welfare people will interview the individual Thursday."
Well, bless your heart! The "expert" who's lecturing us all on the law doesn't understand what the words "at once" and "please wait a while and try again" mean.
Did you fill your blow up doll with nitrous again?
Ah, give him a break. He's a geezer from Florida. It's either post nonsense here or go outside and yell at clouds.
Raffy takes HIS thoughts/opinions/biases and tries (miserably) to inject them into the narrative as fact.
What about 1998? That there was an investigation of Sandusky? I don't think anyone is arguing there wasn't. What people are questioning is the claim that Curley and Schultz were aware that Sandusky was a pedophile based on that investigation, and therefore should have treated the 2001 incident as sexual abuse. So even though the DA refused to prosecute, and DPW termed the accusations unfounded, PSU administrators were supposed to treat Sandusky as a known pedophile.
I asked for documentation stating that PSU definitely knew in 1998 that Sandusky was a pedophile. All that is apparently out there is a copy of a facebook private message between Steve Sloane and stufft claiming so. Anything else have been allegations that PSU leaned on Gricar (a claim even Freeh did not support) not to prosecute because...? Of course, this becomes even more "true" since C/S accepted a plea deal, even though no details have been released on that, other than elvis/irondoc's claims about quotes and documents that nobody else has seen or can find.
So it's very possible that Curley didn't know the nature of the investigation?
MM's life was turned upside down due to his failure to act. What makes you think MM wishes he'd picked up the phone that night to dial 911? Because last I heard, he won millions of dollars from PSU and will silently slink away into the abyss.
Yeah, I do have a degree. One more challenging than yours, I'm certain. Unfortunately, I can't claim to have been on the school board of one of the smallest, shittiest districts in the state and helped run that into the ground. I'd tell all the old ladies not to trust you since you'd probably screw that up, not to mention run squealing to the AG that they haven't reported all the bingo money they take in.
On to the other point. I'm not aware of any private organization (Scouts, YMCA/YWCA, JCC) other than TSM who after 2011 still advocate one-on-one private meetings between adults and children. I know that even district, diocesan, and regional band and choral concerts have changed their policies about putting up participants with host families. Instead kids are lodged in hotels. I was informed about this by my neighbor whose son was in district orchestra-- and she told me it was "because of Sandusky" (thanks, BOT).
Yet, 5 years after the grand jury presentment, PCCD and other state organizations are still providing funding for this type of program, even though it offers the same MO Jerry used to get access to kids. More chances for pillar of community abusers to sign up. And instead of getting this, you're going to huff and puff about your knowledge of a calendar. Asswipe.
