Not that it will help in the end of things, but isn't it true that the defense can re-call witnesses?
Official Graham Spanier trial thread.
- Thread starter BobPSU92
- Start date
from Curley's testimony today:
From a historical standpoint, Curley's testimony -- riddled with contentions that he couldn't recall specifics -- added little to other key questions in the case, like the "after talking it over with Joe (Paterno)" conversation on Feb. 26 that he referenced by email when he proposed keeping the McQueary report in-house.
Asked Wednesday about what Paterno said in that conversation, in which Curley presumably updated the coach on an initial plan that called for notifying child welfare officials, Curley said only: "I don't recall the specific conversation or what his reaction was."
But Curley did take sole ownership of making the suggestion to drop the part of the plan that called for taking McQueary's report to child welfare officials.
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/03/tim_curley_testifies_in_graham.html
From a historical standpoint, Curley's testimony -- riddled with contentions that he couldn't recall specifics -- added little to other key questions in the case, like the "after talking it over with Joe (Paterno)" conversation on Feb. 26 that he referenced by email when he proposed keeping the McQueary report in-house.
Asked Wednesday about what Paterno said in that conversation, in which Curley presumably updated the coach on an initial plan that called for notifying child welfare officials, Curley said only: "I don't recall the specific conversation or what his reaction was."
But Curley did take sole ownership of making the suggestion to drop the part of the plan that called for taking McQueary's report to child welfare officials.
http://www.pennlive.com/news/2017/03/tim_curley_testifies_in_graham.html
So we still can't say that the truth has come out. Maybe it has, but consider that you have Curley, Schultz, and Spanier fighting for their freedom because a corrupt state put them over a barrel and ignored people and organizations actually responsible for these kids. Curley, Schultz, and Spanier, desperate to fight a system working against them, conveniently have a dead guy on whom to shift blame.
Did we get to the truth? I doubt it.
Did we get to the truth? I doubt it.
Years later, Pitt morons are still jerkin' their gerkin over Paterno, along with JockstrapJon. Telling what Paterno caught strap in.
Prosecution probably doesn't care at this point whether they get Spanier. They have Curley/Schultz and get to rehash their narrative.
This pm:
-secret file
-more cover-up/should have done more
-Victim 5, post 2001 assault
-Spanier can't go after the Victim without looking terrible
PSU is to blame will continue to be the conclusion. Spanier can walk. Doesn't matter.
This pm:
-secret file
-more cover-up/should have done more
-Victim 5, post 2001 assault
-Spanier can't go after the Victim without looking terrible
PSU is to blame will continue to be the conclusion. Spanier can walk. Doesn't matter.
I hear you, but that was going to be the case regardless. I was speaking from a personal standpoint. Just not going to stress out over it going forward. Not a thing either you or I can do about it. We have better ways to channel our energy.
Some of the truth appears to be coming out (we'll never get all of it) and I pretty much expect you to kick the can down the road. If you don't like hearing something, you put your fingers in your ear and pout so the only truth you will listen to is your own.
All of this crap going on today and pnnytard still has a chubbie for Pitt and his boyfriends.
No matter what the verdict of this case is, haven't the proceedings completely blown the "Penn St covered up for Sandusky to protect its football program" narrative out of the water? Any somewhat rational person that knows any facts and is following this case at all cannot still stand by that, can they?
I am seriously reconsidering my plan to go to Iowa for the game this year. I'll make no decisions right away--but also see no reason for extra abuse that's likely.
Ironically a lot of the abuse comes because I truly believe we did try to do the right thing as a school and program. Had we been cheaters, no one would have cared that much. Look at Syracuse.
Similar in some ways to Lance Armstrong. Yes he cheated. But had he not destroyed the French record for consecutive Tour wins, nothing would have come of all of what he did because they were all cheating. It was only breaking the French record that got them ticked off.
Yes, Yes I did. Maybe not from Shultz but I certainly did from Curley.
great to see "Toxine" is back twisting Curley's testimony.
I think it is a big deal.
on one hand you would have Admins turn on Spanier all three guilty
or
Spanier innocent TC/GS plead to misdemeanor [nothing] sort of shreds the PSU is guilty narrative
I hope the state doesn't give a hoot.
They have to get a conviction on GSpan
If they don't, even the most conflicted aspects of the media (TheInky etc) won't be able to peddle their storyline with any success
That said - no way to say how the Jury might go
People are not rational about CSA.
But you raise a good point. Motive. I've watched enough Colombo episodes to know that motive is always important. What was the motive for all of this??
Most folks will, sadly, assume the given motive: football. Because that's the way it works everywhere else.
I don't know. If they manage to come back with not guilty on Spanier, then they've kicked it down at least a level, possibly more depending on what Schultz says. It can end up being all Curley/Paterno, when anyone who knows PSU knows that's not how things work.
Nah, they've done enough damage already to PSU that the Inky won't care. Outside of the PSU community, most folks already believe them.
Edit: This quote seems apropos:
"When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."--The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
Last edited:
IF GSpan does indeed "walk" (and that ain't a given yet) .......coupled with the "jaywalking" misdemeanors that attach ZERO liability to the University........
How long until the Trustees (and us) demand that Lubert return the $100,000,000 that he stole?
How long until "we" hold ALL those Trustees accountable - the ones who said "this is in the best interests of the University......"?
Not exactly. Lance was able to get a fed investigation stopped, hurt and threatened many friends. Furthermore, the French didn't bring him down. The US government did.
TC pled guilty and just testified that he should have done more. I guess you would just ignore that and get pissed when anyone brought it up?
You might as well throw a rock at a tank.
So Tim says he should have done more. Assuming that is a hindsight response. TC is still claiming that Mike never said anything sexual.
Like......almost everything about this whole fiasco, this is another incomprehensible aspect. If MM did indeed make it clear that there was some abuse going, why contact courtney with the watered down version?
The US government didn't get into it until 2010. Most of the accusations before that came from French sources. Armstrong was no saint, of course. I had a lot of cycling friends who were crushed when the truth came out.
Odd thing is he threatened to sue anyone and actually did sue people who accused him of it. He was on Stern 2-3 weeks ago and it was a pretty interesting conversation.
In the alternative, if all three are convicted will any of the trustees demand that the University be repaid the $10,000,000+ they paid in legal expenses and attorney fees to defend three guilty men for five years?
Are you serious? Lance Armstrong destroyed lives to protect his secret.
He's a horrible person that attacked anyone who told the truth about his cheating.
Tim saying this as a reason for his guilty plea is so disingenuous. So, we're to believe he just had this "Come to Jesus" moment two weeks ago? If he truly felt that, why not cut a deal years ago and be done with it? Amazing the things people throw against the wall.
Later, Spanier's lawyer Sam Silver also drew out this interesting post-plea defense from Curley of the Penn Staters' actions in 2001:
"In 2001, you thought the actions taken (regarding Sandusky) were appropriate?"
"Yes sir," Curley replied.
"You believed that the three of you were doing the right thing?"
"Yes sir."
Graham Spanier's child endangerment trial started Tuesday, March 21
"Did you believe you were taking steps that would result in the endangerment of children?" Silver continued.
"No sir," Curley concluded. "We did what we thought was appropriate, and we took action."
In fact, the action -- because it did not include alerting police or child welfare officials to McQueary's report -- became a major missed opportunity for law enforcement that permitted Sandusky to find at least three more victims.
"In 2001, you thought the actions taken (regarding Sandusky) were appropriate?"
"Yes sir," Curley replied.
"You believed that the three of you were doing the right thing?"
"Yes sir."
Graham Spanier's child endangerment trial started Tuesday, March 21
"Did you believe you were taking steps that would result in the endangerment of children?" Silver continued.
"No sir," Curley concluded. "We did what we thought was appropriate, and we took action."
In fact, the action -- because it did not include alerting police or child welfare officials to McQueary's report -- became a major missed opportunity for law enforcement that permitted Sandusky to find at least three more victims.
Yes, but the head if the International Cycling community protected Lance. It was all over and done until 3 things took place. Floyd Landis was not put on the team, the fed investigation by Novitzky was stopped, the USADA picked it up, and got everyone on record. Or you could say simply, the incident in the hospital room in Indiana ultimately brought him down.
Silver is about to show if he is any kind of defense lawyer at all. There are holes all over this case. He just needs to pick them apart.
Similar threads
