Clearly it isn't. But let the spin cycle begin.
Official Graham Spanier trial thread.
- Thread starter BobPSU92
- Start date
Clearly it isn't. But let the spin cycle begin.
I totally agree with this however, I think the point is this......If Dr. Jack does his Legally Obligated duty Soapy is probably stopped here, no matter what Tim or anyone else says or does. Therefore, we are not here now!
Apparently GSch said "my coffee is getting cold "....... and, rather than having someone refresh his mug, they decided to "call it a trial"
Holy Moley - that didn't take long
Maybe Tim felt this way all along. Just like Joe did. In hindsight, they wish they had done more. There were much more serious charges against Tim. It is completely understandable why he has not spoken or taken a plea agreement until now.
Throw that in with Curley saying he should have done more and you have a very powerful case against Spanier. BOOM. Or not...
McQueary told the exact same story he has told every time he has testified.
So instead of a smoking gun we have a (non)-smoking coffee???
Apparently, Schultz testified right after the "John Doe" witness described being sexually assaulted by Jerry in Penn State showers. That was reported as emotionally charged. Until we see the transcript we will not know his exact words, but Schultz' testimony was to the effect that "it was a mistake. We should have reported the showering activity." Schultz - again second hand sources - sincerely expressed remorse. It's all about the jury.
you might be right, but is that the story he told JVP that Saturday AM? I don't think so. I think whoever came up with the term 'earwitness' for MM, said it best.
And not only that but PSU police were told by Seasock that JS' was showing normal coach behavior, nothing to see here. If the admins did know any details of 98, that's what they would know.
The state gave their good housekeeping stamp of approval to JS' 1:1 inappropriate showering activity. What are some PSU admins supposed to think when almost an identical situation happened again a few years later?
So did the trial end or did the prosecution rest? Are Spanier's attorneys going to mount a defense?
1) Question: was JS warned not to shower with kids in 1998 after the investigation?
2) In 2001, he was still showering with kids. I'm saying I'd somewhat connect the damn dots, which apparently Schultz did because he reached out to Courtney for advise. I never once accused any of them of a cover up nor do I believe they did. I merely said it would have been more prudent to heed the general counsel's advice instead of go the route they did. They did not err on the side that protected the school, the kid or themselves for that matter.
You are arguing with me when I'm kinda in agreement with you. I said the error was in not going to DPW. That is all.
how is John Doe testimony relevant to GS? Did John Doe speak to GS/TC/GS/JVP or MM? Just wondering .
Hey, use the recess time to solicit money from soon to be flush with cash McQueary, you know, the tall redhead. I'm sure Tree Climber coffers are a bit empty and need replenishment.
And he has since said that wasn't an accurate description of what he said he saw.
Evidence that Spanier's inaction resulted in subsequent harm by Sandusky.....
Isn't there a McAndrew rule about responding to your own original post?Kinda like talking to yourself?
I've been told talking to yourself is fine, it's only worrisome when you begin to receive answers
You and JockstrapJon.
What did Paterno catch you doing?
Digits in the showers?
You moron.
Damn, apparently the defense didn't cross examine the "John Doe victim". Missed opportunity there. It is well known that he changed the date of his "abuse" to be after the McQueary incident to ensure a payout. And not by a little bit either. By a few years.
Again, stated motive and real motive on the part of the prosecution.
The stated motive is what they are trying to prove.
The real motive is to inflame the jury so they win.
Just because the stated motive is true/valid (it is what the prosecution should be trying to prove, in any case) doesn't mean the latter motive isn't.
I think that is purposeful by the defense
Except that the the things with which Spanier is charged are criminal whether something took place in the aftermath or not.
So explain to me again how the reporting to DPW and the investigating by DPW - how that stopped Jerry from abusing boys in 1998.
Cause I'm not clear how that same logic would again work for 2001. The duo of Lauro & Seasock could simply just roll into town again and just done another whitewash job.
Jerry continued his abuse after Aaron Fisher reported in 2008.
So unless the guy is locked up - he was still abusing. He simply changed his territory.
The actions of Seasock & Lauro needs to be addressed.
And he still abused Matt. Anyone at CYS gonna address that little problem?
Cause I'm not clear how that same logic would again work for 2001. The duo of Lauro & Seasock could simply just roll into town again and just done another whitewash job.
Jerry continued his abuse after Aaron Fisher reported in 2008.
So unless the guy is locked up - he was still abusing. He simply changed his territory.
The actions of Seasock & Lauro needs to be addressed.
And he still abused Matt. Anyone at CYS gonna address that little problem?
Last edited:
Basically you can't read very well. That is not it all what I was saying.
Poor attempt to change the subject too.
Similar threads
