In a perfect world that may be the case. In this world, what the prosecution is attempting to do is have the jury look at Spanier and see a grinning Jerry Sandusky. Will it work? It shouldn't, but I wouldn't bet agin' it.
Official Graham Spanier trial thread.
- Thread starter BobPSU92
- Start date
In a perfect world that may be the case. In this world, what the prosecution is attempting to do is have the jury look at Spanier and see a grinning Jerry Sandusky. Will it work? It shouldn't, but I wouldn't bet agin' it.
Bingo. An excuse like that from someone in his position today would never hold up...ever.
I hear ya and agree that TSM should be under more scrutiny but I just can't figure out why curley would tell him we already investigated it when there wasn't one.
Understandable why C & S took a plea. They would have a lot of explaining to do and their words against MM. Wonder if Curley will ever address the "investigation," considering there didn't appear to be much of an investigation.
Their case might have been stronger against C &S than against Spanier, but many of us surmised that. Have to wait to see what C & S have to say, but if there was something damning wouldn't prosecution have mentioned it in their opening remarks?
Something like Curley and Schultz will testify that they told Spanier it was sexual nature rather than leaving it as a shocker.
+10000
The state has a huge conflict of interest in being anywhere near this case.
The state has a setup where CYS county office was sending at risk kids to a pillar of the community offender and the checks and balances in place called for any reports of suspected abuse involving those kids to be sent to the same CYS county office (and also a phone call to childline which would also alert that same county CYS office). What a great system!
what happened in those two weeks between Mike's initial report and C/S speaking with Mike?
Again, that shouldn't matter one iota
Notice I said how the state takes care of "their own".
In THIS CASE, TSM is one of their own
In other cases they could have been the "external party" and been pitted against the state
It's like when everyone was chanting to Spaz I'm Meatballs - "It just doesn't matter! It just doesn't matter!"
This isn't about what happened anymore - it's about what they can make it look like !
TMZ meets the Legal system in the State of Good Ole PA
What investigation and who ran it? Where is the documentation on it? Will TC back up JR's comments? Doubt it, just more mud in the water.
There are other skeletons on that campus that this domer should be concerned about. Trust me.
JR is not coming off as believable here. Swim trunks? Banning JS from PSU is big deal, but doesn't react as such? C'mon, this comes across more as CYA
There was one. An informal admin investigation where they spoke to the witness, consulted outside cousel, and confronted JS. Then passed that info onto TSM who should have done their own damned due diligence.
How f!cking convenient. All of it.
How does it even make sense that Curley felt it necessary to talk to Raykovitz just to say, "It's cool we checked it out. Just you know telling you so you uh, know."?
Raykovitz is a liar. Liars have all the answers. People telling the truth reveal gray areas, stuff that may not always look great.
Besides, treating him like he isn't a child psychologist with an ethical duty and expertise doesn't cut it. Why should he take Curley's word???
I think your first five sentences are spot on. (And, of course, bringing Kline's pony to the show will be the real coup de'grace.)
Other than that - does anything else matter?
Another Facebook update:
"Re Raykovitz, cross exposed that he never asked about the victim, if he was a TSM kid, probed about incident and that Raykov had no connection to Graham. Rayko also volunteered his advice to Jerry to shower with shorts on. Said he didn't think/wasn't told the incident was sexual in nature."
Joe/admins get crucified for not somehow finding out who the TSM kid was, yet director of the charity responsible for him Never even asked JS who he was with.
Are you effing kidding me?!?
How JR escaped this whole ordeal without any charges is beyond me. Media just completely ignores all of this of course.
"Re Raykovitz, cross exposed that he never asked about the victim, if he was a TSM kid, probed about incident and that Raykov had no connection to Graham. Rayko also volunteered his advice to Jerry to shower with shorts on. Said he didn't think/wasn't told the incident was sexual in nature."
Joe/admins get crucified for not somehow finding out who the TSM kid was, yet director of the charity responsible for him Never even asked JS who he was with.
Are you effing kidding me?!?
How JR escaped this whole ordeal without any charges is beyond me. Media just completely ignores all of this of course.
bwifan
Well-Known Member
I think it's very true what you say... when someone's rear end is on the line you have to wonder what they will do to protect it. If the former as you say happens they sink Spanier and make themselves out to be nothing but liars BUT most likely have some deal cut with prosecutors or the later happens and Spanier is in the clear. My question for the law folks here is would the state talk to what C/S are willing to testify to and their answers before going to bat for them with the judge regarding sentencing? In other words C/S couldn't pull a fast one to get themselves a minor penalty and then testify to the 2nd possible outcome listed above and basically put Spanier in the clear?
Since Raykovitz testified Curley told him it was investigated, it's a certainty Curley will be asked to explain which puts him in a tough sport. He can either say he never told Raykovitz that or he he can say it actually was investigated. He'll then need to explain how. In short, he'll either be calling Raykovitz a liar or confirming an investigation really took place. Neither is great for the prosecution.
Towny is here is acting rather rational, but it must be a bad day for the prosecution if Stuff and Elvis have left the building. I suppose they won't be back unless C&S have some shocking testimony against Spanier.
that would be a better defense then what spanier provided today. sounds like spanier has already conceded and they are going the tried and true sandusky and kane method of ineffective council appeals
Do you have a recap of Courtney's testimony? I am curious about what he had to say.
Yep
Oddly enough, the BEST write up of the scenario that I have seen - - - came from nine other than Charlie Tuna
How ironic is that?
It's not a mountain I'd care to try climbing. But the real fireworks don't begin until Curley and Schultz testify.
So far the defense has played its hand as well as could be expected. They've established that none of the witnesses spoke directly to Spanier. And they are set up to portray Curley and Schultz telling different stories to other people than that which they (might testify they) told Spanier. Is that enough?
Another possible curve (mountain climbing, poker,,and baseball in three short paragraphs): is there written correspondence among C/S/S? If so, ballgame.
Unfortunately Charlie doesn't seem to have any interest in why JR didnt inform the community in late 2008 that JS had been indicated and place a protection plan in place (another legal requirement TSM failed).
From Ray Blehar:
Trial Highlight: Wendell Courtney confirmed he was not told of any sexual act in 2001 nor did he believe one occurred. 1/2
2/2 Courtney said if the incident was sexual in nature, he had no doubt that Gary Schultz would have called the police.
Trial Highlight: Wendell Courtney confirmed he was not told of any sexual act in 2001 nor did he believe one occurred. 1/2
2/2 Courtney said if the incident was sexual in nature, he had no doubt that Gary Schultz would have called the police.
So Curley tells Raykovitz that Sandusky is no longer permitted to have Second mile kids on campus, and his reaction to that is to tell Sandusky to wear swim trunks next time? Unbelievable! Why didn't Raykovitz inform the kids of the Second Mile they were no longer permitted on campus? Can you imagine the uproar if someone from PSU told Sandusky to wear swim trunks next time? But the head of the Second Mile says it and total silence.
Really I can't understand the lack of questions?
Mr R - were you of the opinion that Mr Curley was trained to investigate something like this.
Mr R- did Mr Curley explain or did you ask what sort of follow up was done
Mr R. - aren't you required to investigate every report?.
You said he told you nothing came of it and yet you reported it to your board. Is that standard protocol. Your wife has been quoted as saying "we have had to tell jerry to back off kids before". Was this before or after this episode?
You said you were told nothing came of it yet you followed up with Mr Sandusky. Why would you do that? You have been quoted as saying "if you are trying to tell me Jerry is a pedophile I am telling you you're crazy".
Does that sound like a comment from someone who investigated and found nothing.
In summary Mr R you said you didn't investigate because Mr Curley told you he had and found nothing inappropriate and yet
you reported it your board
you met with Mr Sandusky
your wife had made previous comments "warning" about Jerry
you informed Mr Curley that his inference if he was making one about JS was all wrong
and finally regardless of what report you received you are legally obligated to investigate because YOU SIR are the trained professional not a college athletic director.
Is that an accurate summary sir
why don't they do that??
If there were, you'd think Spanier would know it and behave accordingly. It is what it's gonna be.
So if you believe the narrative, MM told C/S/S explicitly that abuse happened, yet C/S/S gave watered down versions to TSM and Courtney.
This makes sense how?
This makes sense how?
To answer your last question, I am now of the opinion that he was OK with the plan because he was angling for a job and didn't want to rock the boat and jeapordize his shot at a paid staff position.
Similar threads
