Official Graham Spanier trial thread.

[Roxine]

BTW - Jim Cavanaugh (sp?) - sorry I missed your call. I was on the phone with Wendy.

Feel free to call back.

Thanks!
Roxine

 

[PSUSignore]

There's very little substance in any discussion here, have fun.

Welcome to BWI. You must be new here.

 

[baconking1]

Welcome to BWI. You must be new here.

Yep, I was hoping to get updates on any news, oh well .

 

[MtNittany]

Welcome to BWI. You must be new here.

Of all the registered BWI accounts, the 412 makes up for about half of them - mostly comprised of 6 sPitt fans wearing Zubas while eating Mom's chipped ham sandwich.

 

[step.eng69]

I survived a heart attack but that doesn't make me a cardiologist.

OK sorry to hear that NC, but that avatar of yours does make you look like a lazy, good for nothing ba$tard

 

[NC2017]

OK, I'll by that NC, but that avatar of yours does make you look like a lazy, good for nothing ba$tard

I call it relaxed muscle

 

[L.T. Young]

If someone tried......REALLY tried....perhaps they could come with trivia that is more irrelevant than yours.

But I doubt it.

Ironic coming from a guy that thinks John Ziegler makes salient points.

 

[baconking1]

So you decided to register today of all days and only want to post on this specific topic. I give you a zero percent chance of you keeping your word and actually leaving. All that time to set up a troll account would have been wasted! Please prove me wrong, and at least wait a few days to register your new troll account so it's not so obvious.

Post, I'd like some information. All I've learned is some poster named didier on a different thread mentioned Spanier requested transcripts of Curley and Schultz's statements.

Soooo, You can back to your crazy now.

 

[Phil's Rug]

Yep, I was hoping to get updates on any news, oh well .

 

[step.eng69]

I call it relaxed muscle

Oh God. LOL...starting to pee

 

[psuro]

Jerry Sandusky convicted on 45 counts. A jury found him guilty and found the victims credible. You're welcome to your opinion, but until Sandusky's verdicts are overturned? They're victims of Jerry Sandusky.

And the counts of the issues on the Penn State campus- he was found not guilty of those, correct?

 

[baconking1]

And the counts of the issues on the Penn State campus- he was found not guilty of those, correct?

He was guilt of 4/5 in regards to the 01 incident .

 

[Player2BNamedL8r]

I am a survivor of childhood sexual abuse and cover up. Except mine occurred in my own family. So the reason I am so in tune with this topic is because when this story broke, it was the first time I spoke out about my abuse. It is very personal to me. It gave me the voice to talk about the sexual abuse I suffered as a child at the hands of my grandfather for the first time in over 30 years.

I hold multiple degrees and while not specifically in psychology, I have studied child sexual abuse because of the abuse I suffered.

I truly am very sorry for what happened to you. Regardless of where our discourse takes us, please know that you have my (and likely others') sincere sympathy.

That said, regardless of what you or others say, nobody here and IMO nobody other than Jerry himself is responsible for what happened in the greater State College area. Were mistakes made? Of course, but unless you're willing to soothsay what lies in the heart of hearts for Misters Curley, Schultz, and Spanier, I find it disingenuous to cast them in the same light as the actual perpetrator. Good people make mistakes (and yes, the stakes are bigger for some than others), but many/most out there (of whom you seem to be one) seem incapable of discriminating between ineptitude and malice. Perhaps because you are a victim you are too close to the emotion of the case? Regardless, the vast majority of us are tired of being linked to Sandusky's heinous acts by mere association to Penn State. We'll do whatever we can to stop his crimes from ever happening again, but WE ARE NOT HIM!!!!

 

[Roxine]

And the counts of the issues on the Penn State campus- he was found not guilty of those, correct?

That is INCORRECT. From the trial - for those victims that were abused on the Penn State Campus he was found guilty of Involuntary Deviate Sexual Intercourse, Indecent Assault, Unlawful Contact with Minor, Corruption of Minors and Endangering a child's welfare. See details below:

— Victim 2: A boy of about 10 that a graduate assistant, Mike McQueary, has said he saw being attacked by Sandusky in the team showers in February 2001. Investigators have not been able to determine the boy's identity. McQueary reported what he saw to head coach Joe Paterno, and Paterno's handling of it contributed to the university's decision to fire him shortly after Sandusky was arrested in November. Sandusky was found guilty of indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare. He was acquitted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse.

— Victim 6: While showering together in May 1998, he testified that Sandusky grabbed him and said, "I'm going to squeeze your guts out" and that the ex-coach said he was the "tickle monster." The boy's mother complained when he came home with wet hair, prompting a police investigation at the time that did not result in charges. The boy was 11. Sandusky was found guilty of unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare. He was acquitted of indecent assault,

— Victim 8: Boy of about 11 to 13, seen in late November 2000 by a university janitor allegedly being subjected to sexual abuse by Sandusky in the team showers. The janitor now has dementia and is not available to testify, but a co-worker testified to what the janitor told him. The boy has not been identified by investigators. Sandusky was convicted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare.

 

[MtNittany]

— Victim 8: Boy of about 11 to 13, seen in late November 2000 by a university janitor allegedly being subjected to sexual abuse by Sandusky in the team showers. The janitor now has dementia and is not available to testify, but a co-worker testified to what the janitor told him. The boy has not been identified by investigators. Sandusky was convicted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare.

Bwuhhaaaahahahahaha. You're actually hanging your bonnet on V8?!

 

[PSU2UNC]

That is INCORRECT. From the trial - for those victims that were abused on the Penn State Campus he was found guilty of Involuntary Deviate Sexual Intercourse, Indecent Assault, Unlawful Contact with Minor, Corruption of Minors and Endangering a child's welfare. See details below:

— Victim 2: A boy of about 10 that a graduate assistant, Mike McQueary, has said he saw being attacked by Sandusky in the team showers in February 2001. Investigators have not been able to determine the boy's identity. McQueary reported what he saw to head coach Joe Paterno, and Paterno's handling of it contributed to the university's decision to fire him shortly after Sandusky was arrested in November. Sandusky was found guilty of indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare. He was acquitted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse.

— Victim 6: While showering together in May 1998, he testified that Sandusky grabbed him and said, "I'm going to squeeze your guts out" and that the ex-coach said he was the "tickle monster." The boy's mother complained when he came home with wet hair, prompting a police investigation at the time that did not result in charges. The boy was 11. Sandusky was found guilty of unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare. He was acquitted of indecent assault,

— Victim 8: Boy of about 11 to 13, seen in late November 2000 by a university janitor allegedly being subjected to sexual abuse by Sandusky in the team showers. The janitor now has dementia and is not available to testify, but a co-worker testified to what the janitor told him. The boy has not been identified by investigators. Sandusky was convicted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare.

Obviously these convictions came about because the witnesses were so compelling, so heartbreaking.

Oh wait: there were no victims identified for Victims 2 and 8. And the only convictions for Victim 6 were for grooming activities (not sex acts).

 

[lyndj]

Yes. And I suggest everyone read it.

So serious question--and I have no dog in this fight--why are you on a PSU message board bickering with PSU fans/alums when it is pretty clear that the majority of posters here (and it's the same ones over and over for years) don't want you here. If you are the victims advocate, you are not impartial to anything involving this scandal, but you're here on a PSU message board wanting people to hear you report on their former president's trial. In what universe does that even makes sense?

If you are truly a victim's advocate, then you shouldn't be on a message board arguing with PSU fans/alums, you should be out there in the field advocating, protesting, getting signatures to change laws and policies. Why are you having a problem digesting that?

 

[Roxine]

That is INCORRECT. From the trial - for those victims that were abused on the Penn State Campus he was found guilty of Involuntary Deviate Sexual Intercourse, Indecent Assault, Unlawful Contact with Minor, Corruption of Minors and Endangering a child's welfare. See details below:

— Victim 2: A boy of about 10 that a graduate assistant, Mike McQueary, has said he saw being attacked by Sandusky in the team showers in February 2001. Investigators have not been able to determine the boy's identity. McQueary reported what he saw to head coach Joe Paterno, and Paterno's handling of it contributed to the university's decision to fire him shortly after Sandusky was arrested in November. Sandusky was found guilty of indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare. He was acquitted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse.

— Victim 6: While showering together in May 1998, he testified that Sandusky grabbed him and said, "I'm going to squeeze your guts out" and that the ex-coach said he was the "tickle monster." The boy's mother complained when he came home with wet hair, prompting a police investigation at the time that did not result in charges. The boy was 11. Sandusky was found guilty of unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare. He was acquitted of indecent assault,

— Victim 8: Boy of about 11 to 13, seen in late November 2000 by a university janitor allegedly being subjected to sexual abuse by Sandusky in the team showers. The janitor now has dementia and is not available to testify, but a co-worker testified to what the janitor told him. The boy has not been identified by investigators. Sandusky was convicted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare.

Sorry - forgot to add Victims 3 and 4:

— Victim 3: Sandusky was accused of hugging him in the shower and fondling him between July 1999 and December 2001, at Sandusky's home and in team showers. The boy was 12-14. Sandusky was found guilty of indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare.

— Victim 4: Prosecutors said more than 50 incidents occurred between 1996 and 2000, at the Sandusky home, hotels and university facilities while the boy was 12-17. He also traveled with the Sandusky family to bowl games in Texas and Florida. Sandusky was convicted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare.

And this isn't my reporting - it's from Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/22/breakdown-sandusky-verdicts-by-victim.html

 

[Zenophile]

I've done some due diligence on the poster in question. By all appearances @Roxine is a legitimate account that is being used by the person she's claiming to be. I'm going to adopt a "wait and see" approach to her presence here to see if she's truly open to the facts of this case, and I would encourage others to consider doing likewise.

I am a survivor of childhood sexual abuse and cover up. Except mine occurred in my own family. So the reason I am so in tune with this topic is because when this story broke, it was the first time I spoke out about my abuse. It is very personal to me. It gave me the voice to talk about the sexual abuse I suffered as a child at the hands of my grandfather for the first time in over 30 years.

I hold multiple degrees and while not specifically in psychology, I have studied child sexual abuse because of the abuse I suffered.

 

[Roxine]

Obviously these convictions came about because the witnesses were so compelling, so heartbreaking.

Oh wait: there were no victims identified for Victims 2 and 8. And the only convictions for Victim 6 were for grooming activities (not sex acts).

Amended my response - forgot about Victims 3 and 4 - who did testify at trial.

See, this is why education is so desperately needed. Child sexual abuse isn't just about penetration, physical acts, or "sex acts" as you term them. Child sexual abuse can be contact or no contact:

Touching and Non-Touching Behaviors
If you are not exactly sure what sexual abuse is, you’re not alone. All sexual touching between an adult and a child is sexual abuse. Sexual touching between children can also be sexual abuse when there is a significant age difference (often defined as 5 or more years) between the children or if the children are very different developmentally or size-wise.

Sexual abuse does not have to involve penetration, force, pain, or even touching. If an adult engages in any sexual behavior (looking, showing, or touching) with a child to meet the adult’s interest or sexual needs, it is sexual abuse. This includes the manufacture, distribution and viewing of child pornography.

 

[kgilbert78]

I survived a heart attack but that doesn't make me a cardiologist.

But did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night?? That would do it....

 

[kentuckycb]

Amended my response - forgot about Victims 3 and 4 - who did testify at trial.

See, this is why education is so desperately needed. Child sexual abuse isn't just about penetration, physical acts, or "sex acts" as you term them. Child sexual abuse can be contact or no contact:

Touching and Non-Touching Behaviors
If you are not exactly sure what sexual abuse is, you’re not alone. All sexual touching between an adult and a child is sexual abuse. Sexual touching between children can also be sexual abuse when there is a significant age difference (often defined as 5 or more years) between the children or if the children are very different developmentally or size-wise.

Sexual abuse does not have to involve penetration, force, pain, or even touching. If an adult engages in any sexual behavior (looking, showing, or touching) with a child to meet the adult’s interest or sexual needs, it is sexual abuse. This includes the manufacture, distribution and viewing of child pornography.

Education is desperately needed...not discriminatory blaming of honest people for political gain.

 

[Zenophile]

Amended my response - forgot about Victims 3 and 4 - who did testify at trial.

See, this is why education is so desperately needed. Child sexual abuse isn't just about penetration, physical acts, or "sex acts" as you term them. Child sexual abuse can be contact or no contact:

Touching and Non-Touching Behaviors
If you are not exactly sure what sexual abuse is, you’re not alone. All sexual touching between an adult and a child is sexual abuse. Sexual touching between children can also be sexual abuse when there is a significant age difference (often defined as 5 or more years) between the children or if the children are very different developmentally or size-wise.

Sexual abuse does not have to involve penetration, force, pain, or even touching. If an adult engages in any sexual behavior (looking, showing, or touching) with a child to meet the adult’s interest or sexual needs, it is sexual abuse. This includes the manufacture, distribution and viewing of child pornography.

With due respect, your knowledge of the facts of this case would improve infinitely by having a conversation with @wensilver.

 

[Roxine]

So serious question--and I have no dog in this fight--why are you on a PSU message board bickering with PSU fans/alums when it is pretty clear that the majority of posters here (and it's the same ones over and over for years) don't want you here. If you are the victims advocate, you are not impartial to anything involving this scandal, but you're here on a PSU message board wanting people to hear you report on their former president's trial. In what universe does that even makes sense?

If you are truly a victim's advocate, then you shouldn't be on a message board arguing with PSU fans/alums, you should be out there in the field advocating, protesting, getting signatures to change laws and policies. Why are you having a problem digesting that?

You advocate your way and I will advocate mine. I am in a thread about Graham Spanier's trial updates. I will actually be at Graham Spanier's trial later this week. I know people who are there today. I am posting updates as I receive them.

The thread devolved into attack Roxine because, quite frankly, it is easier to call me names than to face the fact the 2 of 3 administrators have pleaded guilty to endangering a child, and former President Spanier is, in my opinion, going to plead guilty as well or will be found guilty.

 

[Roxine]

With due respect, your knowledge of the facts of this case would improve infinitely by having a conversation with @wensilver.

Just talked to her today.
Thanks!

 

[PSU2UNC]

Amended my response - forgot about Victims 3 and 4 - who did testify at trial.

See, this is why education is so desperately needed. Child sexual abuse isn't just about penetration, physical acts, or "sex acts" as you term them. Child sexual abuse can be contact or no contact:

Touching and Non-Touching Behaviors
If you are not exactly sure what sexual abuse is, you’re not alone. All sexual touching between an adult and a child is sexual abuse. Sexual touching between children can also be sexual abuse when there is a significant age difference (often defined as 5 or more years) between the children or if the children are very different developmentally or size-wise.

Sexual abuse does not have to involve penetration, force, pain, or even touching. If an adult engages in any sexual behavior (looking, showing, or touching) with a child to meet the adult’s interest or sexual needs, it is sexual abuse. This includes the manufacture, distribution and viewing of child pornography.

If you can't appreciate that there is a HUGE difference (to the child, to the public, to the courts) between forced sodomy and touching a kid on the knee, then you are beyond clueless.

 

[PSU65]

PSU is a thing, not a person. So by definition PSU played no role in this scandal. Some ex-admins of PSU MAY have played a minor contributing role, that is yet to be seen. One person and one person alone is responsible for Sandusky's actions, and that is Sandusky. EVERY victim was possible because of TSM, most were possible because of the failures of state professionals at CPW/CYS. I've got extensive experience in causal analysis. If the ex-admins at PSU played a contributing part in enabling abuse, it's so minor it's not worth mentioning... unless you want to exercise a grudge against PSU. Unfortunately that ignores the real problems and only enables future abuse.

Really like your post. Tried different arguments with morons I encountered but yours is the best.

 

[Zenophile]

Just talked to her today.
Thanks!

Think of knowledge like your favorite dessert. There's always room for more of it.

 

[wensilver]

so what's happening with jury selection - anyone know?

 

[Roxine]

Judge Boccabella handed out questionnaires to all prospective jurors.

They have filled them out and the attorneys are reviewed no to make strikes. Live questioning to begin shortly.

 

[lyndj]

You advocate your way and I will advocate mine. I am in a thread about Graham Spanier's trial updates. I will actually be at Graham Spanier's trial later this week. I know people who are there today. I am posting updates as I receive them.

The thread devolved into attack Roxine because, quite frankly, it is easier to call me names than to face the fact the 2 of 3 administrators have pleaded guilty to endangering a child, and former President Spanier is, in my opinion, going to plead guilty as well or will be found guilty.

But you're still missing the point Roxine. You knew before you posted today that 99% of the posters in this thread had zero interest in what you had to say based on previous threads you've been involved in. Your discussion of these administrators has not been impartial from the very beginning, even I know that and I haven't followed as closely as others have. Why do you INSIST on reporting HERE. You can't tweet about the trial so YOUR followers can get the udpates you so desperately seem to want to give? Because from what I've read on this board, most posters, regardless of their position on the administrators and PSU's culpability, object to YOU. Still don't get it?

 

[MtNittany]

so what's happening with jury selection - anyone know?

The chosen jurors are known only to God at this point.

 

[kentuckycb]

You advocate your way and I will advocate mine. I am in a thread about Graham Spanier's trial updates. I will actually be at Graham Spanier's trial later this week. I know people who are there today. I am posting updates as I receive them.

The thread devolved into attack Roxine because, quite frankly, it is easier to call me names than to face the fact the 2 of 3 administrators have pleaded guilty to endangering a child, and former President Spanier is, in my opinion, going to plead guilty as well or will be found guilty.

Forcing these men (or anyone who cares for children) into pleading guilty for an honest mistake doesn't help your cause. Until the child abuse crusaders understand that concept, the movement won't make an iota of difference.

 

[Roxine]

But you're still missing the point Roxine. You knew before you posted today that 99% of the posters in this thread had zero interest in what you had to say based on previous threads you've been involved in. Your discussion of these administrators has not been impartial from the very beginning, even I know that and I haven't followed as closely as others have. Why do you INSIST on reporting HERE. You can't tweet about the trial so YOUR followers can get the udpates you so desperately seem to want to give? Because from what I've read on this board, most posters, regardless of their position on the administrators and PSU's culpability, object to YOU. Still don't get it?

Appreciate your opinion and advice. As I've said before - I've posted here about 160 times in 4 years.

Public message board. If you don't like what I post - don't read it.

Thanks
Roxine

 

[njlion73]

https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/DocketSheets/CPReport.ashx?docketNumber=CP-22-CR-0003615-2013

Update to the Docket - Spanier has requested the transcripts from Schultz and Curley's plea agreement.

If he receives them, do not be surprised if he tries to broker a plea deal as well.

It would be legal malpractice for his attorney's to not request the transcripts.

 

[Zenophile]

Appreciate your opinion and advice. As I've said before - I've posted here about 160 times in 4 years.

Public message board. If you don't like what I post - don't read it.

Thanks
Roxine

Agree with everything stated. If I may presume to interpret for the original poster, I think the question was, "why choose to post here?"

 

[lyndj]

That is INCORRECT. From the trial - for those victims that were abused on the Penn State Campus he was found guilty of Involuntary Deviate Sexual Intercourse, Indecent Assault, Unlawful Contact with Minor, Corruption of Minors and Endangering a child's welfare. See details below:

— Victim 2: A boy of about 10 that a graduate assistant, Mike McQueary, has said he saw being attacked by Sandusky in the team showers in February 2001. Investigators have not been able to determine the boy's identity. McQueary reported what he saw to head coach Joe Paterno, and Paterno's handling of it contributed to the university's decision to fire him shortly after Sandusky was arrested in November. Sandusky was found guilty of indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare. He was acquitted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse.

— Victim 6: While showering together in May 1998, he testified that Sandusky grabbed him and said, "I'm going to squeeze your guts out" and that the ex-coach said he was the "tickle monster." The boy's mother complained when he came home with wet hair, prompting a police investigation at the time that did not result in charges. The boy was 11. Sandusky was found guilty of unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare. He was acquitted of indecent assault,

— Victim 8: Boy of about 11 to 13, seen in late November 2000 by a university janitor allegedly being subjected to sexual abuse by Sandusky in the team showers. The janitor now has dementia and is not available to testify, but a co-worker testified to what the janitor told him. The boy has not been identified by investigators. Sandusky was convicted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare.

I came to this thread to see what was happening with the trial not for you to ambush the thread with your long posts rehashing the Sandusky trial. We're waiting for what emerges OUT OF THIS TRIAL not out of Roxine's posts so I and I'm sure many others here would appreciate it if you just STOP.

 

[Roxine]

Forcing these men (or anyone who cares for children) into pleading guilty for an honest mistake doesn't help your cause. Until the child abuse crusaders understand that concept, the movement won't make an iota of difference.

You know who it helps? The young men who testified. Those who failed them have taken responsibility (pleaded guilty) or have/will be found guilty. That's part of their justice.

 

[WDLion]

That is INCORRECT. From the trial - for those victims that were abused on the Penn State Campus he was found guilty of Involuntary Deviate Sexual Intercourse, Indecent Assault, Unlawful Contact with Minor, Corruption of Minors and Endangering a child's welfare. See details below:

— Victim 2: A boy of about 10 that a graduate assistant, Mike McQueary, has said he saw being attacked by Sandusky in the team showers in February 2001. Investigators have not been able to determine the boy's identity. McQueary reported what he saw to head coach Joe Paterno, and Paterno's handling of it contributed to the university's decision to fire him shortly after Sandusky was arrested in November. Sandusky was found guilty of indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare. He was acquitted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse.

— Victim 6: While showering together in May 1998, he testified that Sandusky grabbed him and said, "I'm going to squeeze your guts out" and that the ex-coach said he was the "tickle monster." The boy's mother complained when he came home with wet hair, prompting a police investigation at the time that did not result in charges. The boy was 11. Sandusky was found guilty of unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare. He was acquitted of indecent assault,

— Victim 8: Boy of about 11 to 13, seen in late November 2000 by a university janitor allegedly being subjected to sexual abuse by Sandusky in the team showers. The janitor now has dementia and is not available to testify, but a co-worker testified to what the janitor told him. The boy has not been identified by investigators. Sandusky was convicted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child's welfare.

Victim 2 was the only one reported to PSU official. The others are irrelevant in this trial.

 

[Roxine]

I came to this thread to see what was happening with the trial not for you to ambush the thread with your long posts rehashing the Sandusky trial. We're waiting for what emerges OUT OF THIS TRIAL not out of Roxine's posts so I and I'm sure many others here would appreciate it if you just STOP.

I was responding to a direct question.