McQueray Hearing Cancelled.
- Thread starter pnnylion
- Start date
Never under investigation? Have you read nothing in this thread?
It was Facebook, not twitter. And maybe I am misunderstanding you, but did you just call Victim One's Mother an "absolute kook"??? Why? Because the Victim and his mother blame someone other than your clients? Isn't that EXTREMELY insensitive??????
Where can they get help if they can't get it from the trained professionals??? They don't want their children protected by a bunch of jocks that administer and coach sports programs. They want it from trained state agencies and trained child psychologists like Sandusky's boss, Raykovitz!!!
Where did I say Boni didn't have authority to represent her? Didn't they teach you to read in that law school you got your online degree at? She testified in court she hired him to protect her from the Press. She testified that she DIDN'T retain him to represent her in a Civil Lawsuit, but that she does think she signed "some form of fee arrangement" with him.
She's not legally trained. As you may be insinuating, she was an easy target and tool the State was able to use to get Boni to get her name on a Contingency Agreement.
I will say that the guy sounds like someone that was getting paid underneath the table by the State to basically just get her signature so as to have his suitcase filled with money. The guy sounded like a complete ding dong. That janitor in the nursing home probably has more knowledge of this case than he seemed to have when I heard him on the radio.
Whatever the case, this lady wants help to go after the guilty parties, but yet trained people like you are for some reason afraid to help her and her son. You call them "absolute kooks". Well, if they are "absolute kooks", as you say, why were they allowed to just extort 2 or 3 million dollars from Penn State???
That's EXACTLY what Corbett spokesperson Kevin Harley told the press in September 2012.
- TSM CEO Jack Raykovitz. Knew of 2001, likely 1998. Served as Matt Sandusky's personal counselor. Aaron Failed to institute state-mandated safety plans during JS investigations. Fisher's mom blames Raykovitz.
- TSM COO Katherine Genovese. Said TSM told Jerry to "back off certain kids" in the past (several sources confirmed to Ganim).
- TSM GC Wendell Courtney: Knew of 2001, possibly 1998. Whatever anyone at PSU "knew," Wendell Courtney almost certainly "knew."
- TSM BOD Bruce Heim: "For five years, I worked out at the football facility, several times a week, and saw Jerry showering with children." Heim also knew of the 2001 incident and told Raykovitz to keep that info from the full TSM BOD.
Meanwhile, as Tom Corbett refused to issue a search warrant vs TSM, we saw three years worth of TSM records conveniently go "missing," yet you keep going back to Joe Paterno? Your lack of intellectual curiosity is confounding. Not that it means anything, but may I ask if you've ever participated in any TSM events?
What about Lynne "one tough cookie" Abraham's investigation that was discussed at length in this thread?
She never did an investigation either. She said the investigation never happened b/c TSM dissolved..the dissolution of TSM apparently came at her recommendation to TSM BOT (FYI Woodle is the person to stepped in as CEO once JR resigned and rode off into the sunset):
You skipped the part in Posnanski's book where Paterno said he would've gone to the police if he believed McQueary's report concerned anal rape. If he would report one sexual crime of abusing a minor, why not another? Not his job to parse the penal code.
- TSM CEO Jack Raykovitz. Knew of 2001, likely 1998. Served as Matt Sandusky's personal counselor. Aaron Failed to institute state-mandated safety plans during JS investigations. Fisher's mom blames Raykovitz.
- TSM COO Katherine Genovese. Said TSM told Jerry to "back off certain kids" in the past (several sources confirmed to Ganim).
- TSM GC Wendell Courtney: Knew of 2001, possibly 1998. Whatever anyone at PSU "knew," Wendell Courtney almost certainly "knew."
- TSM BOD Bruce Heim: "For five years, I worked out at the football facility, several times a week, and saw Jerry showering with children." Heim also knew of the 2001 incident and told Raykovitz to keep that info from the full TSM BOD.
Meanwhile, as Tom Corbett refused to issue a search warrant vs TSM, we saw three years worth of TSM records conveniently go "missing," yet you keep going back to Joe Paterno? Your lack of intellectual curiosity is confounding. Not that it means anything, but may I ask if you've ever participated in any TSM events?
That was a stupid thing for you to cite to.
Courtney didn't become TSM's lawyer until 2008, when the state had already started its investigation. Anyway, his knowledge of what happened at PSU was protected by the A/C privilege, unlike Paterno's. Paterno said nothing even though he was a board member of TSM (owed a fiduciary duty). Fact is, Courtney shouldn't have become TSM's lawyer since he couldn't share certain information with them.
Heim-every member of the football staff, including Jay Paterno saw Jerry showering with kids. Does that make them all culpable? I'm fine with you saying yes.
As for Genovese, you're going to need to do better than anonymous sources. Anonymous sources can say anything. Just go over to the Pitt Board and see what the anonymous sources say about Paterno over there. And why, after 31/2 years have these anonymous sources not come forward?
Last edited:
She's a kook because she's not sure if Boni is her lawyer or not her lawyer. She's not sure what Boni's representing her for or not representing her for. She's not sure if Boni made a claim on her behalf or not on her behalf. She's not sure if the claim was settled. She's not sure who the claim was against. She's not sure if she or her son got any money. She's not sure if Boni took a fee.
I've represented hundreds of regular people on contingency fee contracts. They have no problems understanding what's going on.
As for insensitive, I just call 'em like I see them.
I'm not sure what you think you have to contribute to this discussion if you know so little about this case that you don't even know that investigation never happened.
Look. I know you're not as dense as you sound. No one can be as stupid as you make yourself seem and still be able to bathe and feed themselves. Either you have to use a bib when you eat, and wear a diaper between trips to the toilet, or you must know everyone on this Board has you nailed by now.
You know exactly what I'm talking about. If you really cared about abused children, you would call Dawn up and offer to represent her against CMHS. I'm starting to think you agree with Zig in that Victim One and his Mom are full of crap.
By the way, I read that you thought the missing Second Mile documents were an "urban myth". Here is an excerpt from Aaron's book. The quoted portion is from Mike Gillum, Aaron's child psychologist who was fired by the County when he tried to bring too much heat against the High School.
[The attorney general’s office finally subpoenaed records from the Second Mile . They wanted the box that contained everyone whose last name began with the letter S. Jonelle called to say the Second Mile’s personnel records beginning with S were lost. Oddly enough, it was the only box that was missing. It’s impossible to express how furious I was when I heard that. It’s equally as impossible to convey how maddening that was for Dawn and Aaron. We all felt the Second Mile didn’t “lose” it. In my opinion, they conveniently ditched it. And if that was so, then this was a pure case of obstruction of justice. Jonelle’s response was more than disappointing. “I know. It’s unfair,” she said. “But if we don’t have that record, then we don’t have it.”]
I doubt that you've had hundreds of regular people as your clients. Hell, you've been here all day. If you were so successful being a lawyer for those hundreds of clients, you'd be way to busy to be here.
But then again, we know why you're here.
You know exactly what I'm talking about. If you really cared about abused children, you would call Dawn up and offer to represent her against CMHS. I'm starting to think you agree with Zig in that Victim One and his Mom are full of crap.
No, I'm more interested in representing her against this guy Boni. According to this infallible board he settled her case for $2-3 million but she's not aware that she received anything.
That's a seven-figure claim right there. I'm good friends with a prominent PA personal injury lawyer. He could get me admitted pro hac vice and we'd split whatever fees are earned.
And I already said I thought her son had a genuine claim, so don't go lumping me in with one of your Joebot nutballs.
No, I'm more interested in representing her against this guy Boni. According to this infallible board he settled her case for $2-3 million but she's not aware that she received anything.
That's a seven-figure claim right there. I'm good friends with a prominent PA personal injury lawyer. He could get me admitted pro hac vice and we'd split whatever fees are earned.
And I already said I thought her son had a genuine claim, so don't go lumping me in with one of your Joebot nutballs.
"That investigation never happened."
I'm guessing that's Aoshiro speak for "It didn't come out the way I wanted."
No,it means "that investigation never happened."
http://mobile.philly.com/news/politics/?wss=/philly/news/politics&id=285574381&
HAAAA!!! No. We all know that she's well aware they received money from Penn State. There was a Facebook picture of her son's girlfriend in a Nashville hotel throwing a bunch of it around.
But if you want to go after Boni for signing away her rights to go after the Second Mile, or for refusing to go after CMHS, be my guest. She did testify under oath that she didn't hire him to handle their Civil Suit. And she does think CMHS is liable and that Jack Raykovitz knew what was going on. So go for it tiger!!! : ^ )
Here's the spin - he didn't witness "a convicted serial pedofile" do anything. He witnessed a former coach (pillar of community) in a shower with a kid that made him uncomfortable. Hindsight is 20/20 as we all know. Have you read the Clemente report? Doesn't his article make sense versus a massive coverup? especially a coverup that no one was in on because testimony is obvious there was not a grand "plan".
As frustrating as it can be at times.....there really is a silver lining to all the ridiculous, inane gyrations being performed by the likes of CDW and CR.
Nothing we see on these message boards is more indicative of the sinking ship that the BOT scoundrels are currently going down on. When even the most stubborn sycophants are reduced to pure BS spin, you know their idols are feeling the same claustrophobia of the truth.
Who knows where this entire saga will end......but some things we have always known:
The scoundrels have broken every rule in the book.....they have stacked one unethical, immoral act upon another.....they have sold their (seldom-used) souls to the Devil to try to cover up some awful horrible malfeasance.
Will the truth ever come out? Who knows....but every element of the truth that is revealed is a step in the right direction. Clearly, the scoundrels are desperate.
We may never get there, but their desperation means we are at least getting closer and closer to the truth.
Nothing we see on these message boards is more indicative of the sinking ship that the BOT scoundrels are currently going down on. When even the most stubborn sycophants are reduced to pure BS spin, you know their idols are feeling the same claustrophobia of the truth.
Who knows where this entire saga will end......but some things we have always known:
The scoundrels have broken every rule in the book.....they have stacked one unethical, immoral act upon another.....they have sold their (seldom-used) souls to the Devil to try to cover up some awful horrible malfeasance.
Will the truth ever come out? Who knows....but every element of the truth that is revealed is a step in the right direction. Clearly, the scoundrels are desperate.
We may never get there, but their desperation means we are at least getting closer and closer to the truth.
For WC to "make sure" something was filed and make the claim he thougt something was filed means he had to at least have seen something to confirm it was reported. And he can't remember who or what he saw that confirmed it was reported ????
There were people at Penn State who knew that Sandusky was a probable pedophile prior to 2001. Dr. Chambers had written a report in '98 tagging him as a probable pedophile and this was in PSU's records and known to at least several powerful people at Penn State.
So, no, this isn't a case of hindsight.
Now, there's no evidence that McQueary knew that Sandusky was a probable pedophile. So, if you believe that McQueary "saw nothing" and is just making this up, you have to believe that for no particular reason, he decided to accuse Sandusky of being a pedophile and then 10 years later it turns out that . . . Sandusky's a pedophile! What a coincidence! What are the odds?
Finally, in a reflective moment, you might want to ask yourself, What possible reason would McQueary have for falsely accusing Sandusky of molesting a child? McQueary's a lowly GA and he would falsely accuse the second most revered man at Penn State of a heinous act? That can't be anything but bad for him.
Oh, and the Clemente Report makes no sense, other than as a money grab.
Oh really? And who might those PSU people be exactly? If you're referring to C/S I guess you forgot that Harmon told Schultz nothing criminal happened re: 1998? Outside of Harmon, who exactly at PSU had intimate details of the UPPD report? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Baldwin or other PSU BOT members knew more about 1998 than C/S.
If any entity should have known that JS was a "probable pedo" (whatever the hell that means) it was the state child care experts who Chambers sent her report to DIRECTLY (Chambers made a call to Childline after interviewing V6 and she also attached her analysis to Schreffler's police report on 5/8 that Lauro/Miller were privy to....JS's case wasn't closed until early June).
CC CYS/DPW DIDN'T even indicate JS in 1998. According to TSM, CC CYS/DPW never informed them of the 1998 investigation (I have a hard time believing that since CYS/DPW were required to inform TSM by law). CYS had ZERO problems with his unfettered access to kids after 1998. So again, please tell us what some college admins were supposed to think after LE/CYS/DPW tell them 1998 was no big deal, no charges filed, nothing criminal was established, etc.??
No one is saying MM falsely accused JS of molesting a child in 2001, he accused him of taking an inappropriate shower that made him uncomfortable. It's not until 2010 that MM started claiming (and playing revisionist history) to LE investigators that in 2001 he was certain he saw JS sodomizing a kid and reported it as such.
Why would McQueary accuse Sandusky of "inappropriate showering"? What good would that do him? Why would he want to get sideways with Sandusky, who could help him in his coaching career? He would only report something if it was very serious.
The rest of your post is pure gibberish. You really lost me at "probable pedo" (whatever that means)." That proved you're truly an absurd person with zero sympathy for the kids who got molested.
Hey, and next time more bold face and all caps. You're not screaming loud enough.
Perhaps to get JS to stop showering with kids alone late at night? That it was inappropriate and MM felt it was over the line and somebody should be told about it? Do you consider a late night inappropriate 1:1 shower/horsing around between JS and a boy to NOT be serious?? You seem to be the person who has zero sympathy for kids....trying your hardest to perpetuate the false narrative that "evil" PSU football enabled JS and not the fact that JS groomed a community and the people who were in charge of his access to kids lauded and applauded him for decades lavishing him with praise and awards all the while sending more kids to his victim farm charity. Perpetuation of this false narrative only puts more kids in harms way...smh...
Nothing you say will change the FACT that LE/CYS/DPW/TSM knew far more than PSU admins ever did about JS and the details of any investigations into his contact with kids. PSU admins had zero control over JS's access to kids and the aforementioned group had direct control over it. Yet you want to keep focusing on C/S/S/P all while claiming to be on the side of the kids?? Everyone can see right through your bull crap.
All of the people you mentioned above got their info re: 1998 from Harmon or someone Harmon spoke to. Harmon said nothing criminal happened (then promptly put the file under "admin" so no one could stumble upon it)....so....try again......
Well, since you're asking for speculation, I'll speculate on a possible reason. Paterno didn't really like Sandusky. There is documentary evidence that Paterno didn't want Sandusky bringing kids into Lasch building. Maybe Paterno's feelings were generally known, and McQueary was trying to curry favor with Paterno by giving him ammunition to get Sandusky out of Lasch. Now I have no way of knowing if this correct or not, but let's not pretend that there aren't reasons for McQueary to report that he saw Sandusky behaving inappropriately that fall far short of seeing Sandusky molesting a child. If McQueary really did see Sanduky molesting a child, there is really no excuse for his failure to intervene and for Dranov advising him to wait until morning to tell Paterno. Now THAT makes zero sense.
They knew no such thing. The responsible authorities determined that Sandusky was not a pedophile. In other words, they could not "know" that Sandusky was a "probable pedophile" when they had explicitly been told the opposite by people who were supposed to have to expertise to make such a determination.
You put down a very-well respected FBI profiler! Based on what? Your extensive history as a solicitor? That no one knows anything about!
The only people who 'knew' Sandusky was a pedophile back then were those members of the BOT and their cronies who used Jerry to 'groom' their boys for them! Were you one of those people, CDW (I only ask since you seem to know so much about this)?
I keep reading this -- I keep googling it -- but I cannot find words from any vetted source that say C&S were told that experts had determined Jerry Sandusky was not a pedophile. Can someone put up a link to support this?
Thanks in advance.
Well, to be fair, we don't know exactly what they were told. It will probably come up during the trial. But we do know that it is absolutely impossible that they were told that Sandusky was a "probable pedophile" because that is not was determined.
We know for a fact that DPW/CC CYS did not "indicate" JS after 1998. If so he would have lost his clearance to work with kids.
We know for a fact that CC DA Ray Gricar didn't press criminal charges against JS.
There's also an email from Harmon to Schultz in 1998 saying the matter was closed, nothing criminal happened. Or something along those lines.
So you not only have LE telling the PSU admins that nothing criminal happened, you have the CYS/DPW child care professionals saying that there wasn't even cause to revoke JS's access to kids.
Conformation of the above is easily found via a few google searches.
After 1998, the state experts had zero problems with JS's unfettered 1:1 access to kids. If they did, he would have been indicated.
Last edited:
Does anyone have an idea of when C/S/S will actually stand trial? This has to be some sort of record for delaying a trial...what, 3 plus years now? How long can they delay it? Another 3 years?
Good to see you back. This has been discussed/debated for a long time. One one side you have the BOT sycophants that blame the delays on the defense. The other side believes it's because the prosecution has no case, or more, that it is being delayed due to an ongoing Fed investigation. I tend to agree with the latter, but who really knows. In any case, this sort of delay is beyond ridiculous.
You
You're a supercilious, lying twit. McQueary, by your addled account, was a coward.
I don't think you could be dumb enough to believe the nonsense you post, so evidently you're an unscrupulous miscreant.
You're a supercilious, lying twit. McQueary, by your addled account, was a coward.
I don't think you could be dumb enough to believe the nonsense you post, so evidently you're an unscrupulous miscreant.
I was actually hoping I would see something new because I've seen all this stuff before. Nowhere does it state or even suggest the falsely assertive statement, "Experts said that Jerry Sandusky is not a pedophile."
What does emerge is a familiar refrain known to all investigators: "there's smoke all over this guy, but we can't find the fire." Jerry was wearing all kinds of smoke, but indictments require fire. In a single episode of CSA, fire needs a complaining child or a series of repetitive acts or further investigation is futile. When no criminal act can be proved, the literal and legal interpretation can only be that no criminal act occurred.
But the smoke remains in everyone's eyes and nostrils a very long time, manifesting itself in things like Harmon's notes, Chambers' damning report suggesting pedophile behavior, and Schultz's special JS file. Gary Schultz is an uncommonly smart man. He didn't keep a separate file on JS because he's a fool who thought Jerry was an innocent man.
Last edited:
So now you're asking us to prove a negative? That they were told that JS was not something? Oh brother......JS was a pillar of the community at the time, no one was just assuming he was a pedo until told otherwise. It's the other way around. JS groomed people to assume he would be the kind of guy who would never hurt a child.
I'd say that CYS/DPW failing to not even indicate JS after 1998 (which has a much lower standard than the DA criminally charging someone-the DA would have to prove there was sexual intent behind the showering behavior/bear hugs) thus continuing to allow JS 1:1 access to kids suggested a lot to anyone that was privy to the 1998 investigation. The state's own child care experts gave JS's naked bear hug from behind showering behavior their good housekeeping stamp of approval. I'm sure that made quite the impression to the people who were viewing CC CYS/DPW as the "experts" in the situation.
You're claim about all of this smoke around JS doesn't make any sense. If LE/CYS thought JS was a likely pedo but they didn't have enough evidence to criminally charge him, there's no way in hell they'd still allow him to have clearance to work with kids. DPW could have indicated him thus severing his childline clearnance
That is absolutely false. John Seasock was sure that Sandusky was NOT a pedophile, and he was the "expert" the authorities (DPW) brought in. There is absolutely NO QUESTION that Seasock determined that Sandusky was NOT a "probable pedophile." The only question is exactly what was relayed to Schultz and/or Curley. But in any case, there is absolutely NO WAY that they were told that Sandusky was a "probable pedophile" as asserted by CDW or that they were even given that impression.
Seasock report
In 1998, when Jerry Lauro (the lead state investigator) and Ron Schreffler talked to Sandusky in the locker room, Lauro did most of the talking, and told Sandusky he had seen far worse than what Victim 6's mother claimed Sandusky had done with her kid.
According to Sandusky, they told him not to shower with Victim 6 anymore, but never told him he couldn't shower with other boys. When he asked if he could take Victim 6 to football games or other functions, they said no problem. If they ever suspected Sandusky of any type of pedophilia in 1998, they wouldn't have let him anywhere near the kid. Sandusky said Lauro made it sound like the Victim 6 incident wasn't any big deal at all.
Lauro then gave Sandusky a personal phone call either later that evening, or the next day assuring him that all the charges were unfounded and that his record would be cleared. Then he sent Sandusky a personal letter stating the same thing.
Lauro felt so sure Sandusky was clean, he never even bothered to tell the Second Mile of the investigation so they could keep Sandusky under supervision, something Lauro was mandated to do under a 1994 Pennsylvania child welfare law.
With Lauro, the State's lead investigator, leading the charge to clear Sandusky, and Gricar dropping the charges, to most normal people, this would insinuate that Sandusky was given a clean bill of health. To two untrained people like Curley and Schultz, this would have indicated to them that Sandusky never did anything wrong, at least from a law enforcement perspective.
Here's the link to Sandusky's interview where he describes the 1998 locker room meeting, the phone call, and the letter. Start from the beginning, because he morphs into it within the first two or three minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9ytgza2mDw
Here's the Patriot News article that describes Lauro closing the case, reporting the charges as unfounded, and not following 1994 Child Welfare Reporting procedure.
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/07/sandusky_second_mile_dpw.html
Similar threads
