117 page document. I have no idea but the size of it tells me that it may be a ruse to try and wear Spanier and his team out.
Looks like PSU counter sued Spanier yesterday
- Thread starter Obliviax
- Start date
Most of their strategies don't seem to work, eh?
Spanier and his legal will respond with a giant "F*CK YOU".
If your guess is correct, PSU's lawyers/administrators are rather naive.
Well they have been wrong at every turn...what could possibly go wrong here.
Isn't the university paying the lawyer's fees for SS&C? If the university is, Spanky & gang don't need to default.
Well, Tom, their handling of the Sandusky victim settlements, the University's reimbursement claim against its insurer, and the McQueary case do not exactly inspire confidence.
Last edited:
It was as if the university was throwing money at anyone who came forward with a claim that Sandusky so much as looked at them funny. Then they refused to give McQueary $4 million now they're on the way to paying triple that. Now they're fighting Spanier tooth and nail. If there's a wrong decision to be made somewhere, the university administration will step up and do it.
Dunham the Dunce. Living, breathing proof that occasionally a moron can slip through Princeton and Yale Law,
I thought the same but in one of Spaniers arguments I could have sworn he said psu has refused to pay his legal bills at least to the extent he was promised in his contract
I believe (not 100% certain) that PSU is paying for Spanier's defense against the charges brought by the OAG. They are not paying for his legal fees for his suit against Freeh, and they are not paying his legal fees in his suite against PSU.
In general, I agree that PSU has not shown a lot of wise judgment in their handling of legal matters since Nov. 2011. With regards to McQueary, I'm pretty sure that it was PSU's insurance company that called the shots, so I would separate that situation when condemning PSU's administration, general counsel, and outside counsel.
there is a trend here. anybody that challenges the narrative that it was C/S/S/Paterno who covered up the JS scandal is sued or has charges brought against them.
What's their end game with that strategy? It's a loser's proposition.
Thought - OG BOT knows the OAG is dropping charges soon so they keep Spainer quiet.
That has to be one of the funniest (without intending to be) things ever posted on the board.
Kind of ironic that PSU is blaming SPanier for lack of fiduciary duty.
I think the reason Penn State wants a jury trial is that they saw the award the jury gave Mike McQueary and realize how polluted the jury pool is. Their rationale is that if they get a jury similar to what McQueary had there is no way they rule in favor of Spanier. I suspect they hope this case get adjudicated before the criminal case. I still believe the criminal case against Spanier, Curley, and Schultz will result in exoneration for all 3.
Speaking of CSS, is there ANYTHING happening there, at all? What's the record for the longest criminal indictment before an actual trial?
I wish I was as comfortable about that possibility as you are. I hope you are right but juries have a way of surprising everyone.
Lawsuit's are about leverage. Spanier has nothing to lose so he has no reason to settle. PSU counter sues, then Spanier has something to lose. Common tactic.
This could backfire on PSU. I think, and it's just my opinion, that most folks are just so angry at the irresponsible decision-making by Old Main, the fact that they've let the PSU community burn - haven't stood up for the community. I wonder if this was simple backlash against the corporate suits up on campus. Hit 'em in the checkbook.
Uncle Fester, Fraudney & Miss Daisy share in a lot of the blame for destroying Mike's life and career aspirations, along with Linda Kelly, Frank Fina, Jonelle Eshbach & Tony Sassano. That was not on Joe, Tim, Gary or Graham.
I just don't know anymore. Logic and linear reasoning went out the window years ago in all this. So who knows.
After seeing what happened in McQueary's whistleblower lawsuit, I wouldn't be surprised if a jury found Spanier, Curley, and Schultz all guilty. That being said, there is zero evidence of a cover-up and tons of evidence that McQueary did not witness anything sexual in 2001 and did not report anything sexual in 2001. In addition, it seems like Spanier, Curley, and Schultz all have competent lawyers. I believe all 3 will be exonerated, hopefully sooner rather than later. It would be nice if the case was resolved in 2017, but it is far from clear that it will be.
Will these people never cease embarrassing themselves and Penn State?
http://www.post-gazette.com/news/st...mer-university-president/stories/201612210119
http://www.post-gazette.com/news/st...mer-university-president/stories/201612210119
Reading the counter claims in this document, it seems to me that all the allegations included would just as easily pertain to the actions or non-actions taken by Rodney Erickson and the 2011 BOT.
That would make sense. I am sure that Spanier's contract calls for some kind of morals clause. Looks to me like they are claming Spanier
I am not sure I can agree. First, MM's suit was a civil suit whereas CS&S are criminal (for now). I got the impression the MM suit was more focused on what happened after 2011, what PSU did or didn't do. CS&S will be only about what happened in 2001. So we'll see.
What I don't get re: what PSU just filed and claimed: why is it on Spanier to provide briefings to PSU re: the JS investigation when all he knew is what he testified to in the GJ re: what C/S said to him in passing 10 years prior. Wasn't it Baldwin's job to keep the BOT apprised of what was going on with the investigation, etc.? If not then what the hell is a general council supposed to do? Spanier wasn't a lawyer and he shouldn't have been giving ANY legal briefings to the BOT IMO.
Plus we know from meeting minutes that Spanier/Baldwin DID meet with and brief the bot I think in may of 2011 so it's beyond me how they could claim they were left in the dark. That fact alone should get PSU's counter suit tossed immediately.
They are just going to continue to pound home the message to the masses that CSS and Paterno were guilty, period. And nobody else.
That's the key point. Nobody else.
That's the key point. Nobody else.
This strategy may have worked for 5 years, but it can't last forever. The dam is going to break, hopefully sooner rather than later.
LOL. Have they gotten anything right? I mean anything?
I believe there is testimony indicating Spanier cut her short during her update and dismissed her from the room, not sure why she didn't have free reign to update them as she saw fit.
Wasn't it Baldwin who was telling people that the Sandusky investigation was a "fishing expedition"?
When the folks who built the dam continue to work - unfettered and unopposed - to strengthen the dam...........the chances of the dam breaking become smaller and smaller every day.
Unless and until there is SOMEONE.....ANYONE.....who will actually at least TRY to counter their efforts - - - - and chip away at the integrity of the dam - - - - its a pretty dismal outlook.
@lubrano is willing to try to counter the BOT's effort
Here is his statement:
"Penn State's decision to countersue former president Graham Spanier is nothing more than a desperate act that is totally without merit. Not surprisingly, the full board was not consulted prior to the university undertaking this vindictive, mean-spirited action just before the holidays.
I am deeply saddened that Penn State would treat one of its greatest presidents with such disdain, apparently based on Louis Freeh's fact-free report (that attempted to determine the university's role in and responsibility for the Sandusky child sex abuse scandal).
This exercise will prove to be another waste of scarce university resources and a breach of our fiduciary duties,"
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2016/12/penn_state_trustee_anthony_lub.html
