This is not correct. Aaron Fisher had been pushing the OAG to arrest Sandusky for years. The OAG sat on the case.
The OAG needed McQueary so that it could use the Sandusky indictment to go after Penn State.
Lubrano post on Facebook
- Thread starter manofsteel200
- Start date
This is not correct. Aaron Fisher had been pushing the OAG to arrest Sandusky for years. The OAG sat on the case.
The OAG needed McQueary so that it could use the Sandusky indictment to go after Penn State.
good God....sorry...I forgot to type "if" in that sentence...my point remains though...not like you want to discuss that at all since you don't have a leg to stand on.
My very next post responding to you said: We still don't know for sure if CYS was contacted or not....
Apparently you missed that one champ
Here it is one more time just for the record:
Since MM never felt compelled to file a written statement/report to UPPD in 2001 and IF CC CYS was told and determined it to be unfounded due to similarity to '98 incident, there'd be absolutely no record of the 2001 report after it got expunged from CYS (60 days I believe).
Last edited:
Gang of Three FOR THE WIN!
Wait, isn't it the Gang of Four? How many total are in this Gang?
Whatever it is, gotta love your commitment, Tony.
"I think that this is the crux of the situation as far as Paterno and Penn State, the university, is concerned. MM's GJ testimony was key to getting JS to trial for pedophilia. None of the other "victims" would ever have come forward without this crucial piece of evidence for the prosecution....... [Actually, it did NOTHING to further the case against Sandusky. I won't go through it all (again) Chapter-and-Verse, but the MM incident did squadoosh to alter the State's ability to convict Sandusky. Now, did the ability to frame the entire scenario as a "Penn State Football Issue", and all the collateral fallout from that, aid the Prosecution in fulfilling their agenda? THAT is a whole 'nuther kettle of fish.]
None of the other "victims" would ever have come forward without this crucial piece of evidence for the prosecution. PSU (the BOT, at least) too willingly took the blame for what was essentially, one coach's responsibility to report a crime to criminal authorities. Paterno should have advised MM accordingly, instead of merely assuring him that he did the right thing (MM coming to JP to report what he saw). That is probably one of the things JP was thinking when he stated publicly that he wished that he (JP) had done more. Instead of saying, "You did the right thing", I'll handle it (or words to that effect), he should have said, "If you believe you witnessed a crime, go report it to the police - I'll handle the chain of command". Had Paterno done that, and had McQuery followed that advice, heads might still have rolled, but, at the very least, the statue would never have come down." .........[I tried counting the number of assumptions you had to throw in as fact ....in order to reach your "conclusions"....but I lost count after the first couple of dozen, and figured I'd just stop there
]
None of the other "victims" would ever have come forward without this crucial piece of evidence for the prosecution. PSU (the BOT, at least) too willingly took the blame for what was essentially, one coach's responsibility to report a crime to criminal authorities. Paterno should have advised MM accordingly, instead of merely assuring him that he did the right thing (MM coming to JP to report what he saw). That is probably one of the things JP was thinking when he stated publicly that he wished that he (JP) had done more. Instead of saying, "You did the right thing", I'll handle it (or words to that effect), he should have said, "If you believe you witnessed a crime, go report it to the police - I'll handle the chain of command". Had Paterno done that, and had McQuery followed that advice, heads might still have rolled, but, at the very least, the statue would never have come down." .........[I tried counting the number of assumptions you had to throw in as fact ....in order to reach your "conclusions"....but I lost count after the first couple of dozen, and figured I'd just stop there
]
Said another way:
"When you open your mouth and admit guilt you remove all doubt."
What a bunch of tools we had in charge.
Sassano checked into this again after the date change. He was asked about it at the 7/30/2013 preliminary hearing, starting at page 25.
http://www.dauphincounty.org/government/Court-Departments/Curley-Schultz-Spanier/Documents/July 30, 2013 Preliminary Hearing Transcript 2 of 2.PDF
FYI - the Moulton report did not cover any of this part of the investigation. His scope stopped at the initial filing of charges, with a few notes about victims 9 and 10 coming forward.
Thanks Jimmy...that cleared it up.
When I read past page 25 it was also quite interesting. Farrell was questioning Sassano about how CYS operates....he got him to admit that there are times when CYS gets an incident reported to them, they do their own due diligence and if need be, they will loop in local LE and there are times when CYS would find something unfounded and not even get to the point of getting LE involved.
Sassano was initially trying to suggest that since there was no UPPD report re: 2001 then it proved that CC CYS wasn't contacted, which isn't necessarily true. There are times when CYS is contacted and they never get to the point of looping in local LE.
Last edited:
Shoot the messenger, huh? Interesting that no one has directly responded to my "Tell me . . . " challenge.
Anyone who questions what has become the politically correct narrative around here is, ipso facto, a lackey of the BoT. Got it.
I don't know any member of the BoT, past or present. I have never communicated with a member of Penn State's BoT, unless, perhaps, Anthony Lubrano responded to one of my posts. I know that must boggle your mind.
Here is what that testimony established. If CYS receives a report of suspected child abuse of a non sexual (ie criminal nature) it conducts an investigation on its own and if it makes a finding of unfounded, there is no record of the initial report.
If CYS receives a report of suspected child sexual abuse, it notifies the DA's office and the police department with jurisdiction which then conducts an investigation. If the investigation results in an unfounded finding the CYS would have no record of the initial report. However the police department would have the report and there was no such report for the 2001 incident with the Campus Police. ( Note the 1998 report was maintained in the files)
LOL....you are claiming that this drivel you posted....
"Tell me how defying the NCAA in the summer of 2012 would have convinced non-Penn Staters that Penn State didn't prioritize football above all else."
Hasn't been "responded" to?
Really?
LMAO....stop digging EC
No one knows whether it was "sexual" abuse or not until CYS looks at it though and makes a determination if it's sexual then they loop in LE/DA ......and what you said above is assuming CYS is following the rule book to the letter at all times, which we know for a fact that they DON'T (see Tutko case and CCCYS failing to inform TSM about the 1998 incident and result of their investigation and failing to place a protection plan around JS while he was being looked into---oopsies!!)
So, if CC CYS was told about a late night inappropriate shower that made a PSU GA uncomfortable (but didn't allege sexual abuse) it wouldn't be automatically reported to the UPPD/DA because it wasn't suspected child sexual abuse...only suspected abuse...and if CC CYS determined it to be unfounded there would be no police record and no record at CYS after 60 days.
My point remains....
Also, all of the above is moot b/c according to the law in 2001 CSS could have done absolutely NOTHING with MM's report and not broken any laws....even though we know for a fact they did quite a bit with MM's report --> confront JS, revoke guest privileges, inform TSM about incident and new directives.
LMAO....
Classic!!! Absolutely freaking classic!!!
A true Gold Medal quality Strawman there, Pivot-Boy!!
I never said it would have....learn how to read.
I love how in my entire response to him..that's what he focused on...something I never even contented.
Get bak to Penn Live you idiot. What don't you understand?
Paterno didn't have to call the police, imbecile. He saw nothing firsthand.
What an idiot.
Or is it Pittiot?
You are correct in what you say Sassano's testimony established. This was based on Sassano's testimony about the protocol for these types of investigations. See page 28 and 29 where he testifies about the protocol:
http://www.dauphincounty.org/govern...013 Preliminary Hearing Transcript 2 of 2.PDF
Curley, Schultz, and Spanier all made discovery requests for a copy of this protocol. Spanier's request was made 4/9/2014 and is contained in this filing - see item 14 on page 11:
http://www.dauphincounty.org/govern...ier's Motion to Compel Pretrial Discovery.pdf
The OAG's office responded on 6/17/2014 that the state is unaware of the existence of any Centre County protocol and that there is no statewide "protocol". See Exhibit F, page 28 of the same filing.
Who made that 1998 report? Oops.
Who was the only one who could make a police report for 2001? Oops.
If CYS was contacted, and they have no record, you have no confirmation the incident was not reported. Oops.
Defending the honor of Joe Paterno and PSU against baseless accusations was the right thing to do. The trustees' every act since day one has been to deflect attention away from their cowardice in the face of adversity at the expense of Penn State's reputation and the good name of Joe Paterno.
Shame on them and shame on you for continuing to act as their tool!
You're missing the point. MM never witnessed a crime, nor did he report that he had.
John Lithgow makes a better looking woman than that skank.I can't wait to hear how many individuals of the 430 Freeh actually used in the report. My guess is 5 with 80% being Vicky Tripony (80/20 rule). Objectivity at its finest.... Queue up the theme song to The Munsters.....
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=john+lithgow+in+the+world+according+to+garp.&view=detailv2&&id=B1DD989A668B5BD2EE659DBC33B566B191D4028A&selectedIndex=0&ccid=z3S5pZ+T&simid=608032409226118874&thid=OIP.Mcf74b9a59f93479a15b6388837cb92b2o0&ajaxhist=0
I swear as God as my judge that I was thinking the very same thing. In fact, there was a moment there where I went and checked to see if that picture was a gag. Unbelievable.
First novel I ever read for enjoyment.... The World According to Garp by John Irving.
Why would Joe ever ask that if MM stated things in a manner to Joe that didn't indicate a crime? Joe isn't going to ask if a crime was committed when he gets an innocuous report of horsing around, or something along those lines.
What MM said to Joe, C/S/S is the #1 most important matter in this entire case as it pertains to PSU's culpability or lack thereof. MM's 2001 actions, and the actions of all those involved, line up perfectly if you assume MM didn't report sexual abuse and instead said something along the lines of horseplay. If MM witnessed a rape as he asserts in 2011, nobody's actions make sense, not even his own. This is all a case of he said she said, only the problem is everyone is trying to recall specifics from conversations that happened 10 years earlier. Unsurprisingly, they can't recall every detail perfectly.
MM may have created this entire mess by overstating what he saw 10 years after the fact, putting the entire university in hot water, when in 2001 none of this was viewed as such a serious matter and for a very good reason.
Did MM do that? I don't know, but it sure seems plausible based on everyone's actions. And that seems more plausible to me than everyone else (MM's dad, Dranov, Joe, C/S/S) dropping the ball if given a definitive report of sexual abuse, especially when you consider the outstanding reputation of most of the men involved.
If MM did strengthen his story, did he do it intentionally? Possibly, if he felt that JS was a threat to children for some reason he may have innocently thought that strengthening his report in 2011 would put a monster behind bars, without considering the collateral damage to everyone else involved. It's also possible he didn't remember the events in 2001 very clearly. I would estimate that an event of this magnitude would be quite clear in his memory, however.
The exact nature of MM's report is the epicenter of this entire scandal (as it pertains to PSU), and it's something we'll likely never get 100% clarity on given the amount of time that has passed.
1. The key piece of evidence that led to finding most of the victims was the 1998 police report. It was used to find Victim #6. Victim #6's mother & sister then identified Victims 5 and 7. Victim 7 then identified Victim 4. Effectively, the 1998 police report identified four of the original SIX known victims.
2. It depends on what MM saw in 2001. If he didn't actually see anything (likely), then he should have called ChildLine. If he actually saw a naked Sandusky hugging a naked boy from behind, then he could have called either the police or child line.
3. The full quote is, "with the benefit of hindsight, I wish I had done more." In other words, had he known Sandusky was a child molester he would have done more.
4. The statue didn't come down because of what Joe did. It came down because of what our BOT and Erickson did.
Raykovitz as I understand it was a contractor to CYS. What type of contractor was he? Was he a contractor because he was the head of TSM or was he hired personally to work with individual troubled kids?
The reason I ask is that if Curley told Raykovitz about JS and Raykovitz was a CYS contractor, therefore didn't Curley inform CYS by telling Raykovitz?
The reason I ask is that if Curley told Raykovitz about JS and Raykovitz was a CYS contractor, therefore didn't Curley inform CYS by telling Raykovitz?
Mr. Semantics is back at it again.
So the OP should have left it at "they dismissed it" and left out unfounded. But if they dismissed it (i.e., didn't act on it), surely they believed the investigation would have been unfounded.
Moreover, if CC CYS received a report from PSU that had no idea who the victim was....and that they knew as similar incident was deemed unfounded...and that they didn't have an upset family or parent breathing down their necks to look into it....then its completely reasonable to believe that they got a report in 2001 and didn't investigate it.
Jack was a very good child psychologist according to a friend who took her kids to see him. He was part of a child development practice, but it is worth looking into if he had a contract with the county through his practice, through TSM, or only did county certain cases/referrals -- like kids claiming to be abused by Jerry Sandusky.
Yeah words do mean something and that poster later posted that he had left out a word. He realized what he had originally posted did not state what he wanted to state.
As to the bigger point, you know that MM's report was never forwarded to CYS because MM didn't see anything.
Right?
Now that the alum trustees have access to unredacted freeh files hopefully we'll see what the email said from Schultz to Harmon the morning of Mon 2/12/01. We know it exists because Freeh refrenced it in a footnote but didn't include the text....gee... I wonder why?
I think Harmon was told about the inappropriate shower and was told to tell CC CYS (bc of Schultz 's consult with Courtney) ....Harmon then either didnt do that or did and CC CYS dismissed it--never bothered to contact UPPD bc UPPD chief was the person that told them about it. There was never a UPPD report bc MM never felt strongly enough about what he thought was happening to file a written statement.
Harmon needs to be thoroughly deposed. Him Balwdin MM Raykovitz heim Frazier fina tomalis freeh then save surma and corbett for last. I could go on and on. No wonder discovery is taking so long for all the lawsuits..
I think Harmon was told about the inappropriate shower and was told to tell CC CYS (bc of Schultz 's consult with Courtney) ....Harmon then either didnt do that or did and CC CYS dismissed it--never bothered to contact UPPD bc UPPD chief was the person that told them about it. There was never a UPPD report bc MM never felt strongly enough about what he thought was happening to file a written statement.
Harmon needs to be thoroughly deposed. Him Balwdin MM Raykovitz heim Frazier fina tomalis freeh then save surma and corbett for last. I could go on and on. No wonder discovery is taking so long for all the lawsuits..
Last edited:
Harmon has enjoyed the guard all shield of The Commonwealth. His story about his conversation with Shultz (does that report from 98 still exist) is a knee slapper. I'll bet he develops a case of Commonwealth Dementia.
Even after Nov. 2011, Corbett was telling people in press conferences what a great organization the 2nd Mile was.
And the press just gobbled it up, no questions asked. I even remember someone asking Corbett point blank about TSM and he said they weren't even under investigation....I was like WTF....and the media guy just stood there and never asked why eff not?? That should have been ground zero for ANY investigation.
As we know, TSM benefactors were contributors to his campaign. Perhaps out of "gratitude" for his "oversight" of the charity during his AG days. Spanier was viewed as the "enemy."
Schultz testified that he believed the 2001 report was provided to local child welfare. He was charged with perjury for saying that (but I don't know how you charge perjury based on a belief).
The Freeh Report also contains an excerpt from an email from Wendell Courtney stating he believed that someone from PSU contacted Centre County CYS.
The timeline also appears to indicate that the original plan for Schultz and Curley interview McQueary on February 16th was delayed. It is quite possible that Harmon instructed Schultz not to do the interview because he had reported it to CYS.
Let's just say there is MORE evidence that a report was made to CYS than there is that one wasn't.
This is all on notpsu.blogspot.com
GT,
The child protective system hardly functions perfectly -- in fact, it's a mess.
The Tutko case revealed that CYS didn't notify the DA and police when they get sex abuse reports.
Dauphin CYS received a report by the Steele Elelmentary School that one of the Tutko children was inappropriately touched. CYS had no records of that incident. Dauphin CYS also failed to respond to other abuse reports, as well.
Here is an excerpt from John Yonchuk's blog.
In the Tutko case there are any number of issues you could point to that would constitute a five-alarm fire for child services.
You could start with an accusation of potential child sexual abuse found on page 10 of report 3 shown here. Remember in the Sandusky case we were told that a lack of a report to law enforcement/child welfare in 2001 is the cause of continued abuse. This item plainly shows that a report is no guarantee of action. Strangely enough no one is sure what happened to this report, as the grand jury investigation states that “supporting documents….were never filed and cannot be located”.
bwifan
Well-Known Member
It's obvious to me the CR666 not being around he is both the handles of evan ceg and gtsaca.... yeesh they are a special kind of stupid aren't they... it's comical coming here at the end of the day and reading their garbage. They are very bad at trolling I hope as I really hope they are not this dense... leave it up to the board to decide.
They'll cure cancer before they cure stupid.
