maybe someone can find the screen shot of Courtneys billing or testimony but didn't GS call him BEFORE actually meeting with Joe? I think Joe called tim. Told him whats up and asked him to come over then tim called garry and garry called wendy before he even went with tim to meet joe.
Official Graham Spanier trial thread.
- Thread starter BobPSU92
- Start date
No it doesn't. In my business we do transactions that require outside counsel. I'll often call them well in advance to, among other things, put them on notice or allow them to do preliminary research. It can be weeks before the next contact.
Penn StateSo I am confused. Who was on trial again?
While defense may be confident, I am less confident since they didn't at least have the investigator of security clearance testify about what Schultz told him, re: horseplay and wrestling. Up to jury now.
I didn't attend any of this trial but I'm willing to bet, after reading through this thread the past few days, that Wick Sollers can't wait to get into the courtroom.
True, but is Sollers ready to go toe-to-toe with getmyjive??
Since 60% of people think he needs to be punished even if he isn't guilty, I don't think we can go by who is "winning" the case in court. 5 of the jurors probably were going to go "guilty" no matter what happened, that leaves just 4. I guess maybe one could hold out, but I wouldn't be confidant if I were Graham.
Didn't Gary just testify that he didn't meet with Joe (which is different than previous testimony where he said he went to Joe's house). Joe met with Tim on Sunday and Tim talked to Gary and Graham early Monday according to yesterday's testimony, I believe. So then Gary talked to Courtney on Sunday before talking to Tim. Yep, more nonsense.
Just "Googled" this, and I am not sure if it is the exact relevant Statute, but I am sure it is close:
(2) A person commits an offense if the person, in an official capacity, prevents or interferes with the making of a report of suspected child abuse under 23 Pa.C.S. Ch. 63 (relating to child protective services).
After GSchultz went on stage and more-or-less proclaimed (at least enough for a Juror to draw this conclusion) that:
Schultz thought the situation should be reported to DPW, but GSpanier kiboshed the idea by claiming "He handled it".
And Spanier's defense team essentially let those statements move forward unopposed - - -without even challenging Schultz.
If GSpan gets convicted - I'd bet the mortgage money that is one of the key reasons.
Joe did what the rules say to do....pass it along to your superior, a guy in the appropriate position to do something. lest you think he forms a posse, does his own investigation and lyches someone he suspects as being a evildoer
well, there was really no reason to meet with Joe. What did Joe know? He knew MM was upset and needed to talk to someone who had authority in the matter (a retired employee in a sports facility). That was Joe's and MM's boss, Curley, and the guy who had campus police reporting to him. Joe simply passed along that MM needed to talk to someone.
Generally speaking, that would be hearsay (an out of court statement for the truth of the matter asserted) and would be inadmissible.
Prior inconsistent statement if Schultz testified he never called it horseplay.
I agree. I highly doubt he will be found not guilty on the EWOC charge. They'll have to show something to the public. .
just for giggles, I think he will be found innocent of all charges. Not a single person testified that they told Spanier that JS broke a law or was even suspected of breaking a law.
I read on facebook from someone at the trial, that Snedden's info made it into record yesterday, but wasn't mentioned in the closing argument.
I hope you are right. Thing is, people inherently love to get the big guy. In this case, it's Spanier. Add to that, this situation is so toxic that no juror wants to be seen as the ones letting those evil folks from Penn State walk. Justice be damned.
That's good to hear. I believe that means that the jury can take the information into account during deliberations.
I have not followed every minute of this trial, but from what I have read, the Commonwealth has not met its burden of proof on any count. I have faith in the jury system. Based upon my limited knowledge of the facts as presented, I would find Spanier not guilty on all counts. I think the jury will do the same.
This is the bottom line regarding Joe. He had no authority in this except to report. Period. He did that. Any input after that was just that. Tim was his boss, and along with Gary and Graham, had all decision making power and authority. I remind you, Joe was a football coach. No way should he be making any decisions regarding the situation.
If this were any other state than Pa, I'd agree but...
Coming from you, this is good to hear. That said, I don't have the same faith in our system of justice, particularly when it comes to this whole affair.
Are all the GS charges felonies or are there lesser misdemeanor charge(s) that would give Big Ditka a small victory? I just get the sense from everything I have read that The Commonwealth has not won their case but the jury may want to walk away feeling like they have assigned some guilt regardless of the facts.
With seven women on the jury, are you kidding.
Just joking Wendy and Nellie to lighten the tension.
good points...this is, of course, why they brought a victim in to cry in front of the jury....it will get the jury to want to convict someone/anyone...and C&S are standing right in front of them. But, based on the merits of the case, they have no evidence to convict....if convicted, the appeal will be interesting.
My question is, what was he crying about? He was not the victim of any sex act. He took one shower with Jerry. Was he a theater major?
Nothing would surprise me. The jury may have a totally different perspective on this case because the have the benefit of observing the witnesses in person. In that respect, it reminds me of the Kennedy/Nixon debates. Those who watched them live thought Kennedy won. Those who listened on the radio thought Nixon did. Both groups heard the same words, but visuals are a powerful part of decision making.
I believe he was a victim...I guess i could be wrong here, I didn't see the transcript, but read from MSM sources that he testified he was molested by JS the following year.
Similar threads
