If the OAG is charging someone with a crime (failure to report) they indeed are required to prove (beyond a reasonable doubt) that a crime was committed. This generally applies everywhere, with the exception of The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.....
Josh Shapiro seeks the death penalty for Graham Spanier
- Thread starter francofan
- Start date
OAG maintains that it checked records, nothing was found. Schultz comes up with a weak counter. Schultz, of the three, should have done a better job documenting what took place.
Kinda like being charged with failure to file a tax return and not being able to provide any evidence that you did. You're toast.
I don't give a shit if they say they checked records . Surely you don't buy that.....any report of horse play would have been removed many years prior....no record would exist. No, because you are required to keep tax records. There was no law that Schultz needed to keep a record of his meeting with MM or a record of any report that might have been made to child services. We also don't know what might have been in Gary's records because both Baldwin and the OAG had access to them. For all we know, Harmon may have been entrusted with making a phone call. He had a pretty good case of Commonwealth Dementia and he was treated with kid gloves for playing along.
This is ridiculous to even discuss.....you had 3 administrators essentially destroyed for endangering the welfare of a child.....a child that has never been identified.....has this ever happened anywhere else ever? Convicted under a statue that didn't exist when the alleged incident occurred.....and you are arguing it should have been better documented? OKIE DOKEY....I'm done here.
What MM testified to and what he actually told them are miles apart. Logic would say that he told all involved at the time e same thing. He had no other incentive back then. His incentives changed 11 years later. Use common sense.
For someone who did such a thorough job keeping records, Schultz offered a pretty lame account of it in his own defense.
Spanier and Schultz failed in their responsibilities to protect the University. That wasn't criminal, they shouldn't have gone to jail for it. But there's no excuse for their negligence. Being a "good man" is no substitute for being competent.
The Board of Trustees failed in their responsibilities to protect the University.
I don't disagree. Problem is that when it came down to cases, C/S/S couldn't prove that he told them something different and when he lied in his testimony, the juries believed him. Their negligence left them and PSU defenseless.
Whoop-de-fvcking-do. By the time the BoT got involved, the die was cast. With nothing to contradict Magic Mike's testimony it was his account versus that of Curley, Schultz, and Spanier. They believed him
The BOT didn't have to join the Corbett Army, sign the consent decree or give money away to unvetted claimants to the tune of a couple hundred million.
They also didn't have to commission the Freeh Report, which was their worst offense. But once the cases hit the courts, PSU's reputation was in the garbage heap. Might (note I said "might" not "would") have turned out better had Spanier and Schultz (i'm leaving Curley out because it wasn't his purview) done more work in 2001.
I don't know if you kept up with all of this. But, the McChesney diary has this nugget:
"Exculpatory 2.26 email is on the top & they came in the same order where he says they contacted cps"
Details from Blehar
So Blehar can produce a copy of said e-mail so that everyone can see its contents? I didn't think so. Contact McChesney to get her to expand on the note? Nah, why spoil a good story.
Thanks for digging this up, I knew there was some information that a report had been made.
Then Schultz needed a better attorney because his didn't motion for dismissal on the grounds that the state didn't meet its burden.
Doesn't matter, a competent attorney makes them anyway. If improperly denied it becomes a basis for appeal.
"It wouldn't have mattered," the universal excuse for someone not to do their job.
Just now seeing this. This Shapiro character needs to be disbarred. It is in no one's best interest for prosecutors to go this over the top in an obvious attempt to make a name for himself. The danger here is that today it is Spanier. Is it you tomorrow? We have to have professionals with some sense of applying power appropriately. This guy undermines faith in our legal system.
That phrase about not doing their job applies to Shapiro. The other day you said that his job was to make sure someone convicted served jail time. I replied that Shapiro’s job was to make himself familiar with the case, review the appeal and make sure that justice was served. He failed in his duty/job. You didn’t reply, I suspect because you know he failed in his job. You seem to dislike Spanier so much that it clouds your judgement and are happy with the result. Carry on.
As a registered "I", I've not voted more often than I have voted, but I can't wait to vote against Shapiro.
It's one thing when the justice system steamrolls minorities but, doing it to a good white man makes it a tragedy.
Well, the BOT certainly didn’t do their job. Once the media descended and the BOT crapped their collective pants and threw Paterno under the bus, their only course was to justify their cowardice by hiring the corrupt Louis Freeh to do a hit job on everyone involved.…thus “justifying” their horrendous early actions.
Curley, Schultz and Spanier certainly made a mistake by not properly documenting what they thought was a non event…but powerful members of the BOT were purposefully destructive to the university and were never held accountable.
Please. This has nothing to do with race. If anything, a miscarriage of justice of this proportion in a high profile case gives cover to prosecutors to steamroll minorities to another level if they want. Either the justice system is applied in a proportional manner to the crime and record or it is a vigilante system. Shapiro is making it a vigilante system and anyone that doesn't recognize the danger of that is disregarding history.
No they didn't, but that excuses Schultz and Spanier from not doing theirs in some quarters.
I'm sure I have. But generally not when insulting the professional capability of a well respected university administrator.
He's not. The job of the OAG is not "get convictions at any cost." (which is what they did here). In fact, the job of the OAG is not even "get convictions." The job is "pursue justice." That was not done here, even any way.
No, Wyoming is right - your hatred for a man has blinded you to the principles involved.
While I think we would all agree that a defense lawyer's job is to do everything possible to acquit his client, the prosecutor's job is to seek justice.
In this case, those involved in the judicial system did not seek justice, they sought to grandstand.
A Federal Appeals court happens to agree with the way he's doing his job.
I've said any number times that I don't believe Spanier should go to jail for his mistake, but just to piss you off even more, I'm going to stand up and applaud when he does. Happy now, shithead?
That makes no sense. You will stand and applaud that which you don't believe is right? For spite? For some other reason? Right is right. Wrong is wrong.
Where have those gone that stand for that which they believe is right?
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
FB Recruiting Running Recruit Visitors List (2025 Spring Edition)- Latest: NittanyNation51
-
FB Recruiting Commit Fit: How the top 2025 DBs fit with their future programs
- Latest: NittanyNation51