For those who want to know what happened at the Spanier Trial

[Corabi94]

Spanier, Schultz, and Curley heroes? While I might have questions regarding their culpability, they will never qualify as heroes, in a world with or without Sandusky.

Exactly. That guy is so delusional he should just stop posting.

 

[lyndj]

Complete made-up bull$hit as per usual for a Corrupt GOP bootlicker. TSM provided PSU with a fully-indemnified use contract and TSM was responsible for their participants, not PSU - you are utterly full of $hit.

hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!! GOP bootlicker??? clearly you don't know what you are talking about. And YES, on your campus, you find out who it is!!!! Period. They didn't, they were wrong. The End.

 

[lyndj]

He didn't have to be proven innocent. He had to be proven guilty.

Um, my response is to LaJolla's post about him being found innocent in "98.

 

[lyndj]

Complete made-up bull$hit as per usual for a Corrupt GOP bootlicker. TSM provided PSU with a fully-indemnified use contract and TSM was responsible for their participants, not PSU - you are utterly full of $hit.

Bwhaha!! Sorry, I just couldn't help it. LOL

 

[pandaczar12]

Start at Page 105 "New Matter" - includes excerpts from the transcript of Spanier's March Trial and eventual conviction - specifically related to the testimony of Curley and Schultz.

(Will have to suffice until the full transcripts are released at the Dauphin County website)

http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SPANIER VS FREEH ANSWER OF DEFENDANT.pdf

We already know what happened at his trial, he was found NOT GUILTY of all felonies, and according to the lead juror, mistakenly convicted of one misdemeanor. Soon that lowly misdemeanor will be overturned on appeal... then what will you do?

 

[Art]

hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!! GOP bootlicker??? clearly you don't know what you are talking about. And YES, on your campus, you find out who it is!!!! Period. They didn't, they were wrong. The End.

Uh, uh. From McQueary's testimony, the only thing one can put stock in is that he saw Jerry naked in the shower with a kid at night when no one else was around. Creepy? Yes. Criminal? I've yet to read a statute that defines it as such, but I'm willing to be educated..

So what is Spanier to do, because it's his call? In his shoes, I don't want a creep like the grinning goon on my campus, so he's banned. Then I turn it over to CYS and TSM and it's their problem.

On the other hand, if I can conclude from McQueary's account that JerBear was cornholing the kid and/or grabbing his junk, then I order my police to arrest him. Don't need to identify the kid to do that.

 

[ga.lion]

Thanks

Start at Page 105 "New Matter" - includes excerpts from the transcript of Spanier's March Trial and eventual conviction - specifically related to the testimony of Curley and Schultz.

(Will have to suffice until the full transcripts are released at the Dauphin County website)

http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SPANIER VS FREEH ANSWER OF DEFENDANT.pdf

Thanks. In my opinion

Start at Page 105 "New Matter" - includes excerpts from the transcript of Spanier's March Trial and eventual conviction - specifically related to the testimony of Curley and Schultz.

(Will have to suffice until the full transcripts are released at the Dauphin County website)

http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SPANIER VS FREEH ANSWER OF DEFENDANT.pdf

In my opinion a jury over trying to be politically correct. Not out of control like the fools who gave McQueery a big pay day but a crowd figuring someone should be found guilty of something.