So we're back to square one - you think you have proven the janitor didn't work at PSU when the victim's assault supposedly happened, and that this proves that the assault didn't happen at all, but nobody other than the fever swamp thinks you have proven anything relevant by this. I'm significantly unimpressed.
Erickson's Notebook Reveals Deceptions, Possible Crimes
- Thread starter rmb297
- Start date
Again, I don't care whether you are unimpressed or not. It's clear you have your mind made up about this case.
What difference does it make even if he was working at PSU at the time. The Janitor Mr. Calhoun himself repeatedly stated in his interviews with the OAG that JS was NOT the guy he saw that night....so.....there's that.....but I'm sure you will ignore that little nugget as well.
The question we are all left with trying to answer after reading Calhoun's interview is, if it wasn't JS then who the HELL was it and why was no report ever made by the janitorial staff (if no JS then no supposed fear of big bad JoePa taking their jobs away)???
I don't agree with everything that Ray posts, but seriously, you are the last person in the world who should be complaining about how someone's bias is affecting how they view the evidence.
I have not seen the interview transcript. If you have it, please post.
On a related note, still no explanation why the second janitor, Witherite, never made it to the trial to back up Petrosky's story. And that the Judge admitted Petrosky's hearsay statement because the Commonwealth argued it was supported by Witherite.
Page 85 of the PCRA filing (link):
From tape recorded interview with Calhoun and Trooper Yakicic on May 15, 2011 re: 1998 incident
Q: Do you remember if that was Coach Sandusky you saw?
A: No, I don't believe it was
Q: You don't?
A: No, I don't believe it was. I don't think it was Sandusky that was the person....it wasn't...it wasn't him. Sandusky never did anything, anything at all that I can see that he was...but uh...it was uh....
Full transcript of interview is available in the Appendix P. 639 but I don't have access to it since you have to pay to get on the site and view the pages. However I do know that some people (I think John Yonchuk) did pay the money to get access to the appendix files.
I would really like to know what Calhoun said after "it was uh..."
Has anyone retrieved the full PCRA appendices? Elsewhere in this thread it's claimed there is a lot of new information in them. I wouldn't mind seeing that 411.
I've seen all the files (courtesy of John Yonchuk) and the transcript of the janitor interview is not included. I was wondering if WeR0206 got the information from another source.
In my opinion, the new material is more incriminating than it is exculpatory. mber of years.
Hmm...well...according to page 85 on the PCRA filing the full interview is listed on page 639 of the appendix. Nevertheless, if authentic the interview is VERY exculpatory towards JS re: V8 and destroys the false narrative that 1998 wasn't reported due to fear of retaliation from the football program. If it wasn't JS then why would they fear the football program retaliating??
The other stuff in the appendix may not be exculpatory but this Calhoun interview is a rather significant revelation/piece of evidence IMO against the false narrative of a corrupt/all powerful football first culture at PSU that supposedly permeated all the way down to the janitors. It may also explain why Whitherite (sp?) never actually showed up in court to back up Petroski's hearsay...he knew it was B.S.
Just another piece of evidence that show's freeh's bullshit narrative was a fantasy supported by absolutely nothing.
Page 693 is just a placeholder page in the exhibits....not even the snippet of the quote from page 85 is on it.
Without seeing the full interview transcript, it is difficult to know if it is exculpatory. For example, in the next set of sentences Calhoun could have stated he saw a vampire bite a werewolf -- for all we know.
There is an email in the Mouton Report (from Sassano) that stated Calhoun had dementia at the time of the interview and then asks if they should invite JS's attorney to sit in on a video session with Calhoun -- after Sandusky is charged.
Quite honestly, my take is that Calhoun had dementia at the time of the interview and that the cops were trying to coax the information out of him. I talked to Calhoun's son in April 2013. He confirmed that his father was indeed suffering from Alzheimer's at that time.
I agree the whole incident is BS. Will provide more supporting evidence in the near future.
From what I understand from the new Defense team, you are basically agreeing with them.
Amendola never bothered to question any of the Victims before going to trial, and went into every Cross stone cold except for prior transcribed testimony. When he was given inconsistent testimony, for the most part, he allowed it to slide unchallenged.
Each one of the 8 Victims that testified had changed their testimonies from their GJ testimonies or from their police statements. Some in dramatic fashion. Usually after signing their financial agreements with their attorneys.
The fact that Amendola never filed a Motion to seek a Hearing on "Repressed and Manufactured Memory and the Effect of Suggestive Questioning" is what the new Defense team is talking about.
Amendola already had proof of "Suggestive Questioning" with the Victim 4 tape. And Victims 1,3,4, and 7 all alluded to the "many years of burying this" or "through counseling" type phrases to explain their inconsistent testimony. Had Amendola merely taken the time to question them prior to trial, he would have been given more of a heads up. Fisher admits in his book that his "memory developed" as his therapist asked him "suggestive questions". Something like that could have come out in a pre-trial interview.
If there would have been a Hearing, an expert psychologist could have been brought in to counter the dramatic changes in statements and testimonies. I was given some VERY strong arguments that could have been used with an expert psychologist present. The fact Amendola never took these steps, especially after the Victim 4 tape was available, is beyond comprehension.
Of course we could go from here and use the evidence dump excuse, the Defense Team's half hearted Move to withdraw after the repeated denials of Continuance, etc , but then we are getting into entirely different areas and would be here all night. This case was such a fuster cluck from all 3 sides (Judicial, Prosecution, and Defense) that you may never see anything like it in our lifetimes.
Agreed....we definitely need to see the full transcript....also, not sure if you accidentally transposed the numbers when you were typing but the actual page number referenced for the full transcript was P. 639 of the appendix not P. 693.
Ray/Buffalo do you (or anyone else) have a link to the appendix? I'd like to read through it myself, even if I have to pay for it but can't find it via google. Thanks.
I don't care. This is irrelevant to your claims about things that "show" or "prove" that the emails were fraudulent. Freeh is under no obligation to meet your standards in his report. If these emails are used in court, your argument may hold some merit, IF this is all they've got.
WOW!!!! All I gotta say is WOW!!!
BuffaloLion,
I certainly agree that Amendola's waiver of the preliminary hearing was a major error, as it would have provided an opportunity to bring out inconsistencies in testimony compared to the grand jury -- and then the trial.
Victims 5, 6, and 7 did not change their abuse stories dramatically between GJ and Trial. V6's was exactly the same. V5 didn't change the abuse part, only the date and location. V7 changed his story slightly, but the worst of the verdicts was attempted indecent assault.
Vs 1 and 4 were different than the GJ presentment, but was that a factor of their doing or just another case of the OAG downplaying the all of the other crimes except V2 and V8 in the presentment? Food for thought.
My belief/opinion, is that the trial was more about convicting PSU in the court of public opinion (and poisoning future juries or hoping for a "flip" by Tim or Gary) than it was about convicting Jerry. Agree that the newspapers already did the latter. Also, my opinion is that the judge, prosecution, and defense all protected Second Mile.
It's actually in Volume 2 of the Appendix, page 639. And you are right. It merely states:
Audio Tape Recording 5/5/2011 @ 42:20-44:15 To be submitted at PCRA Hearing
However, the first roughly 42 minutes of the tape, Calhoun gives a very detailed, graphic account of the incident that the Prosecution used at trial. If Calhoun was lucid enough to describe the incident in detail for the first roughly 42 minutes of the tape, why was he all of a sudden too demented to identify Sandusky when given the advantage of that leading question??
Well, Buffalo, that is an interesting statement. If it took him 42 minutes to describe the incident in detail, then why is the defense only offering less than TWO minutes of audio??
Let's see the entire transcript of the audio and we can decide how compelling Calhoun was and/or IF he was lucid.
Here's the link to the pay site.
You will have to go to http://webia.co.centre.pa.us/login.asp and set up an account.
Then log in.
Then:
1.) Go to "Prothonotary"
2.) Where it says "Last or Business", type in "Sandusky"
3.) Under where it says "Litigant", look for D Sandusky, Gerald A.
4.) Look for Dct # 11-2421 Invol. Deviate Sexual Inter. 12-13-2011 and click
5.) Look for 4/2/2015 Appendix, Volume (1) for Petition for Post Conviction Relief
6.) Click "View Image"
7.) Repeat for all 3 Volumes.
8.) There should be an index around page 3 of each Volume.
Hope this helps.
Can you post that on your blog site or on your Sandusky reports site or are you disallowed from doing that?
The blog software doesn't permit loading documents unless they are linked to a web site.
Sandusky reports was shut down in 2014....couldn't keep it current.
I agree with you that it is truly incredible how much the Second Mile is being protected at all costs in this extortion racket.
When you hear things like Victim One's Mother say they were "told by the Commissioners" that they were only permitted to sue Penn State, even though they blamed The Second Mile, CMHS, and Tom Corbett, it really makes you ask the question "OK, what the heck is going on here???" Especially after she says her whole Family are Penn State fans and Joe shouldn't have been punished.
She says neither her or Aaron blame Penn State and that neither her or Aaron ever went to any Penn State hearings. She even says she didn't ask for Penn State's money. They just gave it to her. Yet she went to Board Meetings at CMHS complaining..... Nothing. The Pennsylvania Department of Education........ Nothing. She specifically blames Raykovitz and says he knew what was going on........ Nothing. Claims Corbett stonewalled the case for 2 or 3 years....... Nothing. Loves Penn State and Joe Paterno....... here's 2 or 3 million dollars for your affection.
I could go over each Victim with you, and almost to a man (except the cases still pending), none blame Penn State or Joe. In fact, some don't even blame Sandusky now that the trial is over and they got their money. If something doesn't smell rotten in Denmark here, I don't know what does.
Although the extortion and slime in this case has spread like a cancer, and there are a TON of bad guys, I think you can blame one man as the nucleus for making it a Penn State issue and a Penn State issue only. And as a result, allowed this to explode out of control. That's one Tommy Corbett.
He was specifically targeting Spanier, Penn State, and the Penn State higher education lobby in Harrisburg. All things grew out from that.
There's no need to guess.
We know that PSU has them in their original form for the following reasons:
1. PSU was given a preservation notice for all of their digital files when they were subpoenaed by the AG.
2. PSU's IT employee John Corro testified that he pulled all of the email information for Spanier, Curley, and Schultz and provided them to Baldwin on 3 USB drives.
3. These were indeed digital files because the emails in the Freeh Report have a 4 hour time difference than those included as evidence exhibits by the OAG.
If I were as big of an a-hole as you are, I'd say that your credibility was shot over not knowing any of those points, especially point 3 and that you can't put those kind of blunders "back in the bottle."
But I won't.
Please feel free to continue making your case.
Last edited:
Didnt Corro testify that he found no emails from Curley and Spanier? The only emails, he found were from Schultz's archived files?
No, he found emails for all three. See pages 89-91.
http://www.dauphincounty.org/govern...013 Preliminary Hearing Transcript 2 of 2.PDF
I think the ones the most people talk about that Freeh used were hard copy and had been saved in paper format since the email system had been changed out in 2004. Those were the ones in his files in his office. I am not sure those exist anymore in digital form.
It is amazing how dumbass continues to assert that he knows so much when he clearly knows so little. What a tool.
Ray, I'm actually not arguing with you, but my understanding is that the emails that Corro obtained in July 2011 were what was currently on the system while the "incriminating" emails (which were wholly attributible to Schultz) were found in the archives of a previous system. There was nothing incriminating on the current system.
And I find Simons amusing (as always). It's his view that the Cabal forged the emails but were so incompetent as to fail to put anything actually incriminating in them. Magical!
CD,
Not arguing...just setting the record straight.
There is no record of Corro obtaining emails in July 2011. Corro obtained the emails of McQueary, Spanier, Curley, and Schultz in March or April 2011 -- according to his testimony. He was also asked to obtain emails of Paterno, but of course, there were none. At the preliminary hearing in July 2013, Corro was asked if he had any difficulty in obtaining Schultz's records, which were archived. Corro stated that Schultz had an administrator transfer his files from the previous system/network to the new system/network in 2004. Although Schultz was retired at the time of the search, his archive was accessible on the new system.
Corro then testified that the next round of email requests came in November 2011. These requests were for a wider range of employees (e.g., the entire football staff, adminstrators, etc). Corro also testified that he received other requests in December, January, and February. I suspect, but cannot confirm, that the increase in requests for information may have been a result of the hiring of Freeh and his "cooperation" with the AG's investigation.
Also, I addressed Jeffrey's comment earlier. "Incriminating" is in the eye of the beholder. Louis Freeh and many others considered the phrase, "after talking it over with Joe" as an incriminating statement.
They were in digital form....
The emails in the Freeh Report (from 2001) have a 4 hour time difference than the same 2001 emails used as evidence exhibits by the OAG.
You're right. It was March-April 2011 that the first set of emails were recovered, not July.
But the point stands. The incriminating emails were found much later, on an archived system.
If you read Roberto's questioning carefully she's trying to make the point that the search that found nothing in March-April 2011 was engineered by Cynthia Baldwin. Roberto isn't saying that there wasn't a coverup-she's saying that there was a coverup and that Baldwin did it.
While I think it is entirely possible that Baldwin participated in a coverup, I doubt that she was the mastermind.
CD,
There was not an "archived system." Rather his emails were in an archived Outlook folder on the existing system.
Today, I can pull up my archive Outlook folder and pull emails dating back to 2004. All the PSU IT people did in March/April 2011 was go to Schultz archived Outlook folder on the existing system.
Corro testified he found a VERY LARGE volume of information in Schultz's email files in March/April 2011, which would be consistent with him requesting that important police and financially related emails (and other records) be transferred to the new system.
Roberto and Farrell's questioning of Corro was to confirm that the subpoenaed information was found in March/April 2011 and that neither Curley nor Schultz obstructed the investigation. Both attorneys asked Corro if Curley and/or Schultz discussed the searches or had any communication with him during the time he did the searches. Corro answered negatively.
I can see how this might be consistent with placing the blame on Baldwin for the delay in turning over the emails, but the fact remains that the police got the emails in July 2011 -- not March 2012, as alleged by AG Linda Kelly.
***Also, note that Corro and the AG's expert Cook attempted to rebuild the email server from the Athletic Department in an effort to obtain emails prior to 2004 (that were not transferred by Curley). They were unsuccessful in that attempt. The point being that the "archived system" you believe to exist didn't exist. Spanier also did not move old information to the new system, thus all his information was 2004 and later. The result was only the stuff that Schultz transferred was useful as evidence in the investigation.
Last edited:
But those time stamps would show up if you printed those emails. Didn't the Paterno report indicate that those Freeh emails were obtained in hard copy?
Maybe I wasn't being clear. The emails in the Freeh Report had time date stamps on EST (HH:MM). The same emails, when printed on the OAG system, have the times converted to GMT (HH:MM:SS), thus they are printed from digital files.
What the Paterno report said about the emails has no bearing on the fact that they are digital files.
Last edited:
Seriously, the remaining arguments have absolutely nothing to do with the supposed proof that the emails were fraudulent or altered. What about this is so hard to get?
Maybe one of your IT expert friends could teach you how to set up web hosting where you could host the file yourself. Or Google Docs, or one of a million other options. Let me know if you need a pointer.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
FB Recruiting Update on top target set to announce soon (5:30)
- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley
-
