ADVERTISEMENT

Official Graham Spanier trial thread.

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??


The defense attorney isn't dumb. Trying to shred the witnesses is the same as trying Sandusky all over again. Do that and he loses. His job is to prove no direct line between them and Spanier. He saves his ammunition for Curley and Schultz. Turning what they said to prior witnesses may help.
 
. 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?
The day before I testify before a Zoning-Hearing board, our attorney gives me 30 to 40 questions to answer. Then we have a chat to tweak the answers.

I would believe it's no different in testifying for the prosecution, you agreed to answer the questions in the manner the prosecution wishes. A severe deviance to the anticipated answers will probably land your ass in jail for an extended time.
 
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?

Try this. McQueary tells Curley and Schultz that he saw an act of sexual assault. Curley and Schultz talk among themselves and conclude that they don't believe him. What they tell Spanier and everyone else follows from that.
 
Try this. McQueary tells Curley and Schultz that he saw an act of sexual assault. Curley and Schultz talk among themselves and conclude that they don't believe him. What they tell Spanier and everyone else follows from that.

Could also be true. Since his own dad didn't believe him and didn't deem calling police an important thing to do.
 
Another update from facebook:

"Court recessed for evening. In a nutshell: prosecution is relitigating Sandusky, and nothing they present has anything to do with Graham. In my opinion, today they failed to establish any single connection to him, his involvement or knowledge. Hoping for a good day tomorrow!"

"Some prosecution witnesses sounded more like defense witnesses: Dranov, Scheffler, Raykovitz."

I'd be careful. They relitigate JS make everyone feel bad then spring Schultz saying he told Graham on them. case closed
 
Will the gerbil also land in jail for an extended time?
If the guards wave an orifice check on entry, I suppose I can smuggle the little guy in.

I should give him a name, seeing I made a mistake on this board bringing him into the picture and may have to deal with assertions of foul play ln the future.

I guess it could be double jeopardy for an attacker in the shower, first me, then surprise, my little friend.....this is sick, going to bed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nittany Ziggy
Try this. McQueary tells Curley and Schultz that he saw an act of sexual assault. Curley and Schultz talk among themselves and conclude that they don't believe him. What they tell Spanier and everyone else follows from that.
You're close, except that MM continues to use "weasel phrases" when asked what he told PSU Admins.

I actually think that in the elapsed time between when MM got "cross examined by Dranov" and shortly thereafter went to JoePa, he had a few days to "think through" what he actually saw.

His "real version" to Old Main will never be known. The only remaining question is whether it was/is sufficient to potentially send people to prison, other than Jerry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: step.eng69
Given everything we know to be fact, it's the most plausible scenario.


And to make matters worse, Curley/Schultz (forgive me, I have trouble following the players without a scorecard) tell Mike and his dad that they're pretty much going to do nothing and what reaction do they get? "Oh. okay." Curley/Schultz could have read that as confirmation of their conclusion.

I dunno, just spitballing here.
 
[
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???

Raykovitz has also previously been reported as challenging Curley when Tim met with him. According to Gil Spencer

"Are you trying to tell me that you think Jerry Sandusky is a pedophile?" Raykovitz asked Curley. Because, if that's what he was trying to tell him, Raykovitz suggested, Tim Curley had lost his mind.

That statement seems inconsistent with Raylovitz's testimony today.
 
A pretty good afternoon.

The state unknowingly destroyed Freeh's "they knew about 1998 and followed it closely" bullshit story.
The state unknowingly shot holes thru Freeh's "coach is anxious to know" bullshit email - that was in the email thread with Harmon & Schultz discussing DPW and where DPW is with regards to the minor in 1998. Coach is Jerry.

I don't think the state made any strong or compelling arguments that Spanier is/was culpable, guilty, negligent or otherwise responsible for EWOC. Spanier was so much on the outer periphery and far removed from any information gathering and any decision-making here.

That much was clear from today.
 
A pretty good afternoon.

The state unknowingly destroyed Freeh's "they knew about 1998 and followed it closely" bullshit story.
The state unknowingly shot holes thru Freeh's "coach is anxious to know" bullshit email - that was in the email thread with Harmon & Schultz discussing DPW and where DPW is with regards to the minor in 1998. Coach is Jerry.

I don't think the state made any strong or compelling arguments that Spanier is/was culpable, guilty, negligent or otherwise responsible for EWOC. Spanier was so much on the outer periphery and far removed from any information gathering and any decision-making here.

That much was clear from today.
Thanks Wendy, made me feel a little more optimistic this evening.

Well, it's bedtime for this bonzo
 
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?
I'm afraid I had an issue with Charlie Tuna pretending Raykovitz was not a child psychologist with a higher duty of responsibility under the law, and then stating that the SOL has run out for TSM officials, but not PSU officials?

Not so. If the commonwealth and Boccabella is allowed to rule 2007 law can be applied retroactively to 2001 for PSU admins, then Dr. Jack and Bruce Heim et al can be charged with the same charges.


 
Funneling can mean directing something from a large area into a small area. So, when we know that the state/CYS was taking large groups of at risk kids and directing them to TSM, they were literally funneling kids into TSM/JS foster home.

Any more brain busters?
"literally" means actually putting something through a real funnel, stupid.
 
A pretty good afternoon.

The state unknowingly destroyed Freeh's "they knew about 1998 and followed it closely" bullshit story.
The state unknowingly shot holes thru Freeh's "coach is anxious to know" bullshit email - that was in the email thread with Harmon & Schultz discussing DPW and where DPW is with regards to the minor in 1998. Coach is Jerry.

I don't think the state made any strong or compelling arguments that Spanier is/was culpable, guilty, negligent or otherwise responsible for EWOC. Spanier was so much on the outer periphery and far removed from any information gathering and any decision-making here.

That much was clear from today.
You almost get the feeling the Commonwealth is trying to lose this case and just make it all go away so no one ever goes anywhere near a Second Mile investigation, smh.

According to Matt Maisel, the Commonwealth thinks they have a new "Star Witness" that will demonstrate Graham Spanier "allowed Sandusky to continue bringing youth to the football facilities" after 2001.

Another crock and a half that should easily be negated since Baldwin already testified they would have had no legal means to break his retirement contract, whether anyone knew about it or not.

If it happened, Spanier wasn't standing there at the door inviting Sandusky in, he used his key that Rodney Erickson signed off on and made sure no one was around.
 
Last edited:
Raykovitz testified today that when curley told him about the 2001 incident he also said they had already investigated it and that nothing came of it.

So I guess that is how TSM is getting out of any scrutiny......

People keep saying that TSM should have investigated this but now it is on the record that Curley told TSM it already had been.
More BS. Raykovitz as a Child Psychologist knows what type of investigation is required, what he is required to do, and that Curley and Schultz are not DPW or CYS.

Dr. Jack claiming an "investigation" was done is just more poppycock being thrown against the wall.

Since no one has explained to the jurors what his legal requirements actually were, they will probably buy it.
 
Last edited:
Do you have a recap of Courtney's testimony? I am curious about what he had to say.
Ditka did not question him, Schulte did.

Feb 11 Sunday - Gary called Wendell and wanted his advice. There was a report made by an unnamed grad student who was in Lasch and saw Jerry in the shower and it made the grad student uncomfortable. Engaging in horseplay. Wendell said specifically "horseplay".

Wendell understood it was after hours in Lasch, as the building closes at 5 pm. He did not recall the date of the incident but it would have been very recent.
  • Was there anything sexual in nature and Gary said NO.
  • It was unclear if it was a direct report to Gary or a secondhand report.
  • Asked about the nature of the horseplay - it involved sliding around in the shower area - showers running & sliding on the floor.
Gary did not mention were the police or CPS were called. Gary needed Wendell's advice first as legal counsel.
He did some legal research on CPSL - what was required on reporting, confidentiality, etc. He wanted to review it intensely before he got back to Gary.
Gary did not mention any other instances involving Jerry.
Wendell decided that a report to DPW should be made so that agency could conduct an investigation. He called Gary back and that PSU should report to DPW.
Gary did not think child abuse took place, but if he reported it to DPW it would have concerned suspected or possible child abuse. Wendell felt his advice was followed.

He knew Jerry as someone who goofed around with Second Mile kids all the time in public. He was affectionate, a fatherly figure for these young boys. What if it's not something completely proper? He concluded that it should be reported and let DPW do their thing. He thought it was a no brainer to report it. - there's no harm, it's confidential and it's the smart and prudent thing to do.

Defense asks questions : Wendell advised Gary to report to DPW. Appropriate, smart and prudent. It was not a mandated reporting situation. He never spoke to Tim or Graham on the matter. He only advised Gary.

It was a telephone conversation only with Gary. He and Gary are close friends and he is friendly with Graham.

He never asked Graham and does not recall asking Gary about did they report. Wendell as General Counsel may have been given a heads up on 1998 - but was not privy to what went on. 1998 did not come to mind.
He's positive he asked Gary about sexual activity. But Gary would not have needed his advice - Gary would have just called the police. Wendell would have made sure that police would have been called if there was any sexual nature involved. He was not told that.

"Slipping around in the shower" that was what Wendell envisioned. No "slapping sounds" No "sexual nature". It was horseplay in the shower that made the grad assistant uncomfortable.

He had one conversation with Tim if Jerry could be kept out of designated buildings. Jerry was not employed, so therefore he could not have access to buildings that only employees could have access to.
 
Last edited:
Wendy I find it interesting that so much advice given and accepted with out Gary and Tim talking to mine yet.

Thank you for the recaps of today, much appreciated.
 
"literally" means actually putting something through a real funnel, stupid.

"Funnel" can either be used as a noun or a verb.

You're talking about funnel the noun, I'm talking about funnel the verb, stupid. Or do you not know the difference between the two?

Verb.
  1. guide or channel (something) through or as if through a funnel.
    "some $12.8 billion was funneled through the Marshall Plan"

Of all the things in this thread this is what you want to focus on?? Eff off.
 
Wenslvr...thoughts on Raykovitz being summoned by Prosecution ? Can this get any crazier...?

Ditka questioned him. PhD in psychology. He gave a rundown on what Second Mile programming was. Jerry was the Founder, Chairman and Fundraiser for TSM. He became a paid consultant when he retired from Penn State. Jerry would address large programs/functions, be a master of ceremony, he'd raise money, and give out awards. He was not counseling kids or providing therapy.
Tim Curley left a voicemail for Jack to meet, Jack was on vacation. They met in Jack's office when he got back - 3rd week in March 2001.

Someone felt uncomfortable seeing Jerry in the shower with a young man. It had been investigated and nothing happened. Tim did not refer to sex or "skin on skin" or "slapping sounds". Tim had met with Jery and told Jerry was NOT to bring kids on to campus anymore. There was no indication that this was a Second Mile child. Jack met with Jerry shortly after and wanted to make sure Jerry knew there were NOT to be any kids on campus. Jerry was confused about not bringing any kids on campus - Jerry thought it was just Lasch. He said "not even Rec Hall?" Jack said "Yes - NO kids on campus" - Maybe you need to revisit that with Curley.

Jack's advice was to wear swim trunks next time he showered with a youth.

(Ditka stresses here that it was a prepubescent boy - not a teen.)

Katherine Genovese brought CMHS to his attention in 2008. Friends program was a modification of Big Brothers using college kids - they'd do picnics, stadium parties, etc.

(Ditka goes on to explain in front of the jury how CMHS properly reported to TSM in 2008 and that STOPPED Jerry. Meaning PSU failed to properly report 2001 causing more boys to be abused. She was tossing blame back onto "PSU" in front of the jury at this point)

Defense asks questions : Jack escalated Tim's complaint to Poole and Heim. Jack did not ask Tim about what the conduct was. He did not probe further. He did not find out if it was a Second Mile child. Second Mile provided services to children that were at risk of sexual abuse. TSM has reported child abuse in the past to authorities. Going to TSM was certainly an appropriate place to report this? Jack answered YES.

Could Jack have conflated 1998 and 2001? No inappropriate behavior happened. You did infer from Tim's report that it was sexual or that anybody need to report it under the laws of the Commonwealth. <--- Not sure what I meant here.

Jack has had no contact with Graham Spanier.

Jerry was a paid consultant to TSM in 2001.
 
Wendy I find it interesting that so much advice given and accepted with out Gary and Tim talking to min(k)e yet.

This is one of the many things I don't like about you McQueary's..... your entire "entourage" sees things only through myopic "pro-Mike" glasses.

It's evident that none of you have ever worked in well-functioning organization/company. If so, you would conceptually grasp that the first and natural thing any Senior Executive Administrator would do when presented with such information (from Joe Paterno) is to phone "counsel" for advice on how to proceed.

Yet you think that the PSU Administration should have called Mike first?

Oy Vey.
 
I have no problem with them getting advice right away. Seems they put a plan in place regardless of the witness said... no follow up with Courtney after meeting with witness, no official paper trail of steps taken. You don't find that odd?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pnnnnnnnnylion


giphy.gif


Let's review what happens to those who leak...
 
Last edited:
Defense asks questions : Jack escalated Tim's complaint to Poole and Heim. Jack did not ask Tim about what the conduct was. He did not probe further. He did not find out if it was a Second Mile child. Second Mile provided services to children that were at risk of sexual abuse. TSM has reported child abuse in the past to authorities. Going to TSM was certainly an appropriate place to report this? Jack answered YES.
Maybe Raykovitz could explain why he ran his conversation with Curley by Poole and Heim. If he really believed nothing happened why would he bother?? But since he did run it by Poole and Heim and they also chose to do nothing, does that mean they are part of the alleged conspiracy as well?? The different standards being applied to different people is maddening.
 
Ditka goes on to explain in front of the jury how CMHS properly reported to TSM in 2008 and that STOPPED Jerry.
CMHS called Aaron Fisher a liar when he reported Jerry's abuse. When his mom threatened to call CYS, CMHS beat her to it and called them first to discredit Aaron's story.

words...
cannot...
describe...

BvMLcv_IIAAwHPQ.jpg
 
Last edited:
I'm afraid I had an issue with Charlie Tuna pretending Raykovitz was not a child psychologist with a higher duty of responsibility under the law, and then stating that the SOL has run out for TSM officials, but not PSU officials?

Not so. If the commonwealth and Boccabella is allowed to rule 2007 law can be applied retroactively to 2001 for PSU admins, then Dr. Jack and Bruce Heim et al can be charged with the same charges.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bob78
Maybe Raykovitz could explain why he ran his conversation with Curley by Poole and Heim. If he really believed nothing happened why would he bother?? But since he did run it by Poole and Heim and they also chose to do nothing, does that mean they are part of the alleged conspiracy as well?? The different standards being applied to different people is maddening.
It really is.

I say that as someone who thinks C/S/S haven't been truthful.

At a bare minimum the same standard should be applied to everyone across the board.

The way this has been handled is exactly why Sandusky wasn't stopped in 2001. Placing status above obligations, moral or otherwise, is what the entire case revolves around.
 
CMHS called Aaron Fisher a liar when he reported Jerry's abuse. When his mom threatened to call CYS, CMHS beat her to it and called them first to discredit Aaron's story.

words...
cannot...
describe...

BvMLcv_IIAAwHPQ.jpg

PAOAG full of gaslighting revisionist history scum bags. They act like CMHS, TMS,CC CYS, etc. all did everything by the book re: JS...everyone but the evil psu admins did as they were supposed to. What a crock.
 
A pretty good afternoon.

The state unknowingly destroyed Freeh's "they knew about 1998 and followed it closely" bullshit story.
The state unknowingly shot holes thru Freeh's "coach is anxious to know" bullshit email - that was in the email thread with Harmon & Schultz discussing DPW and where DPW is with regards to the minor in 1998. Coach is Jerry.

If "Coach" is Jerry then he knew he was under investigation at the time. According to Ziegler he says he didn't know an investigation was going on.

Do you recall how this was established? Harmon in the PMA deposition from 2014/15 stated he was pretty certain "coach" was Joe. Did he change his mind?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pnnnnnnnnylion
I have no problem with them getting advice right away. Seems they put a plan in place regardless of the witness said... no follow up with Courtney after meeting with witness, no official paper trail of steps taken. You don't find that odd?

What are you implying exactly? Hasn't Mike repeatedly said he thinks C/S/S are good men?

And can you answer a question? Where did Courtney come with the "sliding in the shower" description? Seems awfully specific for Schultz to fabricate.
 
Since Pennlive and the media shills have swallowed Jack Raykovitz testifying against Graham Spanier.....what next? I'll bet The Commonwealth could produce Jerry Sandusky to nail GS and the media would dutifully report it and not bat an eye.
 
CMHS called Aaron Fisher a liar when he reported Jerry's abuse. When his mom threatened to call CYS, CMHS beat her to it and called them first to discredit Aaron's story.

words...
cannot...
describe...

BvMLcv_IIAAwHPQ.jpg



Well - the Commonwealth feels it has to give the impression to the Jury that PENN STATE FAILED TO STOP JERRY.

Problem is, Graham Spanier is on trial here, not Penn State. So yesterday - the Commonwealth did not IMO provide compelling testimony to the jury that Graham Spanier failed. IMO Commonwealth prosecutor Schulte actually did more legwork for the defense. I thought to myself - this is the state's A Team?

Schreffler told Jerry to knock if off with the showers with kids in 1998.

Jack Raykovitz told Jerry to wear swim trunks next time he showers with kids in 2001.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT