Yep. One or the other. CYA mode is quite possible in light of the fact that Dranov still practices medicine in State College.
Dranov on the stand
- Thread starter jerseylion109
- Start date
I believe they were directed not to talk to him, by the people who wrote his check.
About the only thing left for CSS after all this testimony is to figure out how much they plan to sue for in their malicious prosecution lawsuits.
If they can sue for that, it will really blow the doors wide open.
The Clery Act is about reporting crime statistics. Here is what they want included in the "crime" statistics.
It is not necessary for the crime to have been investigated by the police or a
campus security authority, nor must a finding of guilt or responsibility be made to include
the reported crime in your institution’s crime statistics.
Every school in the country would get destroyed if an audit took place. That definition of crime is absolutely ridiculous. It's my understanding that there wasn't much training and without training and a full understanding I would have misinterpreted that definition. The definition means essentially a "rumor" needs to be reported as a crime.
Chapter 4, first page.
https://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/safety/handbook.pdf
Every school in the country would get destroyed if an audit took place. That definition of crime is absolutely ridiculous.
You better believe it and it's every administration's nightmare.
No doubt, wouldn't this testimony in a PA Court of Law make Dr. Dranov (and his testimony) subject to Sandusky's PCRA if they filed an amended PCRA based on this testimony??? As you point out, this testimony which was well known to OAG PROSECUTORS and the freaking SWIGJ which heard Dranov's testimony WHICH WAS THE 3Oth SWIGJ, NOT THE 33rd SWIGJ WHICH PRODUCED THE BULL$HIT PRESENTMENT (a SWIGJ that also never heard from McQueary!!!) which is EXCULPATORY IN NATURE was never provided to the 33rd SWIGJ in any manner??? Huh, how is this even remotely appropriate conduct by the Prosecution - how is it appropriate for them to claim they had DIRECT EVIDENCE in both their bull$hit SWIGJ Presentment - Statement of Lies and their indictments when they CLEARLY knew they absolutely had nothing of the kind and only had extremely weak CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE which the Jury should have been properly told to IGNORE given that assumptions and conclusions could be rendered equally regarding the CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE (i.e., noises and what produced them) that would suggest innocence as much as guilt (i.e., the noises could have been assumed to be produced by horseplay as easily as sexual acts!).
How has the prosecution not been sanctioned for their GROSS MISCONDUCT in regards to how this case was prosecuted, the SWIGJ Presentment "rigged" and produced and the production of "Indictments" which clearly amount to GROSS MALICIOUS PROSECUTION on multiple counts including 100% of the counts on Curley, Schultz and Spanier?!?!
Sometimes the simple answer - the most obvious answer - is the RIGHT ANSWER!!
In 2001 MM did not mention ANY sexual actions concerning Sandusky. What happened is AFTER HE THOUGHT ABOUT IT...he MAY have thought it COULD have been something more than what he witnessed. That is the "best case" for MM being so visibly "upset".
In 2010 when the "Men in Black" first questioned MM, they used "regression therapy" (and the threat of legal action against him if he did not "cooperate" with their story) to have Mike remember what he forgot in 2001 (err 2002 or whatever year they told him) - that what he witnessed was a full Rape of a child and the blood sacrifice of goats and other small animals.
No wonder Paterno had to have MM refresh his memory. The "shower incident" was fundamentally an INSIGNIFICANT EVENT...based upon what was told in 2001!! How would ANYONE remember DETAILS concerning something that was mentally classified as "insignificant". It only became the issue subject to mountains of speculations AFTER the OAG outright lied about MM's testimony and then constructed the absurd and irresponsible case against C/S/S in order to link Paterno and PSU to amanufactured CRIME!!!.
The reason for this entire "sexual" angle was that the OAG needed to sensationalize this historically unimportant event - an event that had no LEGAL or MORAL reason for anything other than "routine" handling.
The media "Story" which TODAY - 5 years later - IS STILL BEING SHOUTED is that there had been "...UNDER Paterno's watchful eye" extensive evidence of the "...rape of children in PSU showers which has occurred for decades..." TOTAL BS!!!!
There can be no other reason for these lies but the obvious....The Story needed to be fabricated so that TSM irregularities could be hidden and the OAG crooks could buy enough time to cover-up the incriminating activities of TSM & corruptions in government that engineered this fiction.
This IS the Political Scandal of the Century!!!!
Well, I'm not a lawyer so I don't know what the threshold is for suing a prosecutor.
That said, considering the changing of dates to get around statute of limitations issues, the charging people for events in 2001 by using a law that didn't even exist until years later, the use of Baldwin to end run the Constitutional protections for people, the ignoring of the Dranov testimony, and the way AG Kelly put their mug shots up on a poster next to Sandusky at a televised press conference comparing their guilt to JS- I'm sure they have asked their lawyers about suing for malicious prosecution.
Whether there's any legal standing to that accusation- I don't know.
Dranov is talking out of both sides of his mouth. On one side, he testified that MM kept referencing "sexual sounds" which combined with the fact that a man and a boy were in a shower alone, should have triggered the need to report the incident. One the other side, he is saying that he didn't feel it warranted a phone call to authorities. Seems to me that he is trying to toe the line to protect himself. He is trying to justify not fulfilling his duty as a mandatory reporter.
Physicians didn't even know they were mandated reporters back in 2001. I sure didn't.
Yep. I know it's preaching to the choir but...........it's worth repeating what happened with Freeh (for any lurkers).
- He was not allowed to question MM, police chief Harmon, or any PSU folks that the OAG did not want him talking to.
- He did not interview Curley and Schultz since they had charges pending.
- Paterno offered to talk to Freeh but (IIRC) Freeh lied and said Paterno refused to talk to him. Instead he made a snide comment on how Paterno would talk to reporters but not him, which was proven false.
- Freeh then refused to interview Spanier until very late in the process just before publication. That interview likely happened after the report had already been written given the timing.
- Freeh did not speak to Dranov, MM Sr, or anyone at the Second Mile since he claimed those outside of PSU were, in effect, not his concern.
Complete bull$hit - Sandusky was a foster-parent to double digit TSM kids and "legal custody" over many of these kids (I believe he may have had foster-parenting privileges in regards to AM who he did tons of things for as teenager including him to use cars, etc...). There is no way PSU employees would have any idea which TSM children JS had "legal custody" over via either State-Regulated Adoption or Foster-Parenting programs. AM was with Sandusky out of town at a TSM Presentation/Event supposedly all-day earlier on 2/9/2001 and went over to Lasch for a "Friends Fitness Program" workout upon their return that Friday evening! You're full of $hit that anyone would automatically assume that Sandusky had no business being there with a child given the number of TSM children that the Sandusky had LEGAL CUSTODY over and took to Lasch to use the facilities. Complete bull$hit that anyone familiar the number of children JS had LEGAL CUSTODY over, all of them being TSM participants as well, (and MM unquestionably was familiar that JS had tons of legally adopted and foster children) would automatically think something nefarious just because JS was at the facility, at night, with children!
That's complete bull$hit when JS had LEGAL CUSTODY RIGHTS over double-digit TSM participants via STATE-REGULATED ADOPTION AND FOSTER-PARENTING PROGRAMS!
Right. The report was written without speaking with any of the meaningful players in this particular situation except for one at a time that it was likely too late to impact the report. Based on that alone- beyond some of the ridiculous leaps of reasoning the report takes- the report is useless.
Last edited:
Joshua fought the battle of Jericho,
and the walls came tumbling down.
and the walls came tumbling down.
I'll tell you how....you are NOT living in America anymore...Your expectations are just going to have to be set a little lower now.
Based on the past 5+ years....do you honestly expect protection under REAL law, not an orchestrated lynching by the media....AND do you expect Constitutional rights and honest judicial processes, not just public conviction by un-vetted accusation statements obtained from "victims" after they obtained "strong guidance" by perjury-laced "Special Grand Jury investigators"...AND then, did you think that if you did everything that is LEGALLY REQUIRED that would confirm that you did the "right thing"...actually Per Frank Noonan now you needed to "do more" than the minimum...you must go "beyond the legal minimum, and do what I say is "morality right" . Get Real....Remember this lower standard is all possible only in Corbettvania!!!!
Last edited:
Not Dranov related, but Joyner is a real ass. PSU placed McQueary on leave for his own safety, but then didn't give him bowl bonuses because he didn't coach in the bowl. Seems like MM might have a case after all.
Joyner, submitted the names of coaches to receive the bowl game bonus and McQueary was not among them. On questioning from Conrad, Doncsecz said due to McQueary’s status he would not have coached in practices or the bowl game.
Joyner, submitted the names of coaches to receive the bowl game bonus and McQueary was not among them. On questioning from Conrad, Doncsecz said due to McQueary’s status he would not have coached in practices or the bowl game.
I get where you are coming from, but I wonder if hindsight is not in play here too. Was that your training back in 2001? Things have changed a lot. Showering with kids being one of those. There was a time when that wasn't considered odd, among members of the same sex.
Get Real....Remember this lower standard is all possible only in Corbettvania!!!!
Do you think it's possible? Nah.
My point was - maybe I wasn't clear:
That is - - If Sassano's "introduction" to MM begins in 2010 (on or about) - which I think is correct.....then Sassano's appraisal of MM's "consistency" from 2010 to date, is completely and utterly immaterial wrt the issues at hand in this case (which far pre-date 2010).
[FWIW - I share Sassano's opinion wrt 2010 (ish) - to date - While ANYONE could go in and pick apart "this word or that word", and make a case for "Four different stories" (or whatever the current "narrative" is........
The truth is that the gist of MM's testimonies since the legal proceedings have begun have been essentially consistent - with regard to all the key and significant points. (and certainly within the bounds of what one would expect - when you are asked to recall 10 year old information numerous times, by numerous folks, in numerous venues)]
Sooner or later this trial has to (one would hope) get into something meaningful (and not old re-hash, largely immaterial stuff).
We have - I think - 2 weeks blocked out on the court calendar for the trial.......
I'm thinking (and maybe hoping), its gonna' take a bit longer than that.
So far - from what we've seen in the reports anyway - the "trial" is sounding and looking a lot like "Page 53" of the "Penn State Scandal" thread on the TOS (the one that used to be populated by GTASCA, CDW, IronDoc and the rest of the circle-jerking gang.).......ie a lot of "old news" being beaten to death for the 117th time - - - with no relevant issues actually being discussed.
Any competent HR department would have handed him his head for that. They work really hard to give no hint of any bias, especially in a case like this.
I always suspected two of my favorite posters (in all seriousness) were the same person. Now they are conversing. This thread just took on new significance.
Looks like he is trying to help out his neighbors son...while being careful not to expose himself...
kgilbert78, fair question.
Physical abuse while I taught in Lorain, OH was higher in our awareness training. "Things to be on the lookout for" and "suspicious activities and responses" were the basics. Sexual abuse, not so much. That was up to 1993.
After moving to Archbold, OH similar training, and too be honest, probably less than in Lorain (but, that's a whole other thread).
In 1994 football season at our high school, some coaches did shower at the same time as the high school players. Might be splitting hairs, but HS kids are 15-18 years old, and not 10-year olds.
That said, I see where you're coming from and agree with your post - 2001 and now are much different.
OL
Physical abuse while I taught in Lorain, OH was higher in our awareness training. "Things to be on the lookout for" and "suspicious activities and responses" were the basics. Sexual abuse, not so much. That was up to 1993.
After moving to Archbold, OH similar training, and too be honest, probably less than in Lorain (but, that's a whole other thread).
In 1994 football season at our high school, some coaches did shower at the same time as the high school players. Might be splitting hairs, but HS kids are 15-18 years old, and not 10-year olds.
That said, I see where you're coming from and agree with your post - 2001 and now are much different.
OL
Excuse me??? Dranov's testimony at the very least is EXCULPATORY evidence relative to MM's "claims" of what he told people! IOW, the PROSECUTORS and their INVESTIGATORS new damn well that they did not have a SHRED OF "DIRECT EVIDENCE", as defined by THE LAW AND JUDICIARY, so the OAG Prosecutors and their investigators then went about "rigging" and INTENTIONALLY FALSE SWIGJ PRESENTMENT - STATEMENT OF LIES AND INDICTMENTS that FALSELY, and intentionally so, claimed the STATE HAD DIRECT EVIDENCE OF PERTAINING TO NUMEROUS INDICTMENTS including 100% of the indictments and charges against Curley, Schultz and Spanier!!! You really think it is LEGAL for the prosecutors to IGNORE CLEAR EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE and then set about RIGGING a 33rd SWIGJ Presentment by not providing the 33rd SWIGJ with EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE AND WITNESSES that testified to the 30th SWIGJ??? Wow! You really have no f'ing clue about "Constitutionally Guaranteed Due Process Rights" - both Pennsylvania and Federal Constitutions! I am amazed that you self-proclaim yourself the arbiter on this stuff, and bloviate about it, and you have no f'ing clue what you're talking about........NOT sadly based on your prior history in this regard!!!
Wrong, the Clery Act is only about reporting QUALIFYING REPORTS OF CRIMINALLY VIOLENT INCIDENTS (i.e., they don't have to be adjudicated criminally violent - only reported as such). If the 2001 Event was not "reported" by MM as a "Qualifying Event" (which Dr. Dranov himself, a TRAINED MANDATORY REPORTER, states was not when he spoke with MM), then it DID NOT NEED TO BE REPORTED UNDER THE CLERY ACT!!!!
Another thing that always puzzled me about MM is why he played in a TSM golf tournament that same year, after his report, if he was so upset!
You wanna' go back and re-read the post you are responding to? Maybe?
That's complete BULL$HIT!!! Dranov has never said that he himself came to the same CONCLUSIONS and ASSUMPTIONS regarding the "noises" that MM drew and told him about. Dr. Dranov saying that MM drew the conclusion that the CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE regarding "the noises he heard" has NO BEARING WHATSOEVER on what Dr. Dranov BELIEVED was causing the noises or what they proved, if anything whatsoever. Dr. Dranov clearly reached the conclusion that "the noises" were IRRELEVANT without any kind of VISUAL EYEWITNESS CONFIRMATION - a PERFECTLY REASONABLE CONCLUSION and one that would be shared by a criminal court regarding such CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE that is completely UNSUPPORTED by DIRECT EVIDENCE of any kind!!!
Utter nonsense and bull$hit that MM made any kind of statement that he WITNESSED a sexual assault based upon what Dr. Dranov has clearly stated REPEATEDLY at this point and was 100% CONSISTENT with his RECOMMENDATION TO MM AT THE END OF THE CONVERSATION - report it via your workplace HR Protocol as "Suspicious Activity In The Workplace"; the Police DO NOT NEED TO BE CALLED BASED ON WHAT YOU'VE REPORTED TO ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You wanna' go back and re-read the post you are responding to? Maybe?
First take your own presecription and then you go back and read it sport - I don't need to....Sassano knowingly participated in a RIGGED INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION including framing INNOCENT PEOPLE while protecting potentially guilty people (Jack Raykovitz and all the powerful Board Members at TSM!!!).....and you're defending him and his disgraceful immoral behavior!!! That's "the facts" jack!
So John Sr and Dranov think this is so serious, must report to JVP instead of police. So serious, they wait months to address it directly themselves with Schultz. And it comes up during a meeting to work out an agreement between their medical practice and Penn State.
There is so much testimony that is so illogical it becomes logical.
No $hit, Dr. Dranov's testimony is clearly EXCULPATORY relative to tons of the State's Indictments including 100% of the Indictments brought against Curley, Schultz and Spanier. Not only that, but it's EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE which was delivered to the 30th SWIGJ which the OAG Prosecutors (and their investigator witnesses) INTENTIONALLY HID FROM THE 33rd SWIGJ which produced the SWIGJ Presentment recommending the indictments!!! (SWIGJ's are not permitted to generate INDICTMENTS without a SUPPORTING PRESENTMENT!!!). The level of Prosecutorial Misconduct this reveals (on top of all the other Prosecutorial Misconduct already revealed!!!) is absolutely astonishing in its ABJECT DISRESPECT for the Pennsylvania and Federal Constitutions and the GUARANTEED due-process rights of all citizens those documents INDEMNIFY!
Well I have known that I have been a mandatory reporter since the late 80's. It can be a difficult position to be in, because once you report someone, life can be hell for the individual(s) being reported. So you better make sure you are absolutely sure of your evidence because this can really impact someone's life in a negative way if you are wrong.
If Dranov didn't know he was a mandatory reporter, then that says something about him as a physician. However, if one is not in a field of medicine that does not regularly work with children, then one may not realize it. IIRC, Dranov is a nephrologist so he may have little or no contact with children depending upon his practice patient mix.
