I never doubted the existence of Mr. XXX XXX. I have said his name won't be revealed nor proof published because it's fraud AND violation of PA's 2 party recording law.
But I was wrong. Zig outed him. The dude is going to jail.
OT: FYI, JZ says Newsweek article is still a go. (edit: Story now spiked)
- Thread starter MtNittany
- Start date
I never doubted the existence of Mr. XXX XXX. I have said his name won't be revealed nor proof published because it's fraud AND violation of PA's 2 party recording law.
But I was wrong. Zig outed him. The dude is going to jail.
Of course, Jerry admits showering naked with kids, so they have seen his junk by his own admission.
No where in that story does it say anything was recorded. "Always took care to keep a record of the those sessions" could mean anything. Hilarious this is your takeaway from the article.
I agree, very surprised to hear from Schultz.
Snedden brings up a good point about none of the Vs ever requesting medical records or testing of JS after being subjected to sexual abuse.
They clearly didn’t do the right thing. You can keep pretending it’s everyone else’s fault if you like, but they’re ultimately responsible for how it played out.
They were advised to report it to DPW. They lied about having knowledge of 98. That’s what enabled it all to play out the way it has. That’s the truth.
FTR I’m not blaming “the sex faire”. I’m blaming the politicians that turned it into a major issue at the hearing. It created a politically charged atmosphere.
He was talking to Cipriano and/or Zig, not Newsweek. The article is written as if they were Newsweek. Clearly, they weren't.
But Ganim gets a badge.
Ganim won a Pulitzer Prize for LOCAL (not investigative) about the “Penn State Scandal.” Evidence that has come to light in the subsequent legal proceedings and in media reports reveal that her Pulitzer winning articles contained known falsehoods, omitted critical information, and fabricated other information in order to create the narrative.
Her recent article is more of the same.
She covered scandal over a year and knew that Sandusky was an acquaintance offender who befriended pre-teen boys and groomed them for victimization. As such, she had to also know that her story of Sandusky picking up a 15 year old hitchhiker, plying him with drugs and alcohol, and forcibly raping was not consistent with Sandusky’s modus operandi.
Ganim also had to know her corroborating witness was not a reliable source, as he was featured in the movie Happy Valley conducting a pathetic one-man protest at the Paterno statue and has a well-known history of irrational behavior.
She knew her story was false but she (and now CNN) decided that perpetuating her false narrative of a “Penn State Scandal” and grabbing headlines and TV appearances trumped the truth (and ethical journalism).
After four years, Penn State finally pushed back and issued a statement denouncing the sensational (false) stories that continue to batter our community. That’s not enough.
Ganim won a Pulitzer Prize for LOCAL (not investigative) about the “Penn State Scandal.” Evidence that has come to light in the subsequent legal proceedings and in media reports reveal that her Pulitzer winning articles contained known falsehoods, omitted critical information, and fabricated other information in order to create the narrative.
Her recent article is more of the same.
She covered scandal over a year and knew that Sandusky was an acquaintance offender who befriended pre-teen boys and groomed them for victimization. As such, she had to also know that her story of Sandusky picking up a 15 year old hitchhiker, plying him with drugs and alcohol, and forcibly raping was not consistent with Sandusky’s modus operandi.
Ganim also had to know her corroborating witness was not a reliable source, as he was featured in the movie Happy Valley conducting a pathetic one-man protest at the Paterno statue and has a well-known history of irrational behavior.
She knew her story was false but she (and now CNN) decided that perpetuating her false narrative of a “Penn State Scandal” and grabbing headlines and TV appearances trumped the truth (and ethical journalism).
After four years, Penn State finally pushed back and issued a statement denouncing the sensational (false) stories that continue to batter our community. That’s not enough.
Poorly written, poorly edited article. I’m surprised a piece that unpolished would be published in any magazine.
Yeah - that article jumps all over the place. It follows no linear path at all - people who are already in tune to the story can follow it but nobody else could.
A laser-beam FOCUSED (repeating myself here, but this is what Ziegler has a complete inability to do - FOCUS) article on (1) Eshbach, (2) McQueary, and (3) Corbett would be much better. We don't need an article about repressed memories, or Sandusky's ability to get an erection, or Ira Lubert or Aaron Fisher. Seriously - Sandusky's ability to get an erection???? Yeesh. Who the hell wants to read that?
IF there's truly a story here (I'm not convinced there is one, but I don't rule it out either) - the story is to be found with Eshbach, McQueary and Corbett. Eshbach and Corbett being part of a conspiracy to frame Spanier, and McQueary the tool that those 2 used to get there (and now the guy who is too scared to tell the truth).
Those three - only those three.
Oh, there is a story there, but Ziegler/Cipriano didn’t tell it well — and the editing, yikes. And by pros at Newsweek yet??? Do I have that right??? I can’t believe that story, written as is, is a go for any magazine.
I will say, I’ve read a lot of articles by Ziegler over the years, and his stuff consistently cries out for an editor.
I will say, I’ve read a lot of articles by Ziegler over the years, and his stuff consistently cries out for an editor.
Schultz actually corresponds with Ziegler quite regularly. I think he is still on house arrest, but he says he looks forward to when he could have the chance to tell the full story
Not sure what you do in a public shower, but there is a difference between "seeing" and "closely examining".
Well, you are clearly wrong.
It's clear that Eshbach bungled the situation.
During the trial of former Penn State University (PSU) President Graham Spanier, prosecution witness Mike McQueary let it slip that former Senior Deputy Attorney General Jonelle Eshbach told him they were going to arrest some people and the Office of Attorney General (OAG) was going to leak it out.
While that is likely the most famous leak in the Jerry Sandusky case, there were other leaks and it appears that Eshbach was behind at least one of them. Moreover, when she wasn't leaking, she was apparently engaging in obstructing the investigation (and arrest) of a serial child molester and assisting in the railroading of the PSU 3.
Eshbach was assigned to the Sandusky case on March 19, 2009 by then Chief Deputy Attorney General Frank Fina. While Eshbach was officially in charge of the investigation, the buck didn't really doesn't stop with her because Fina was supervising the case. Fina was the head of the OAG's Criminal Law Division.
And of course, at the top of the OAG food chain during the investigation was former governor "One Term Tom" Corbett.
As reported by here and here by notpsu.blogspot.com, some very significant -- and potentially exculpatory -- evidence was suppressed from this case. In addition, the Moulton Report (page 158) revealed that the dates of discovery of other evidence, such as the PSU emails, were clearly falsified.
The Moulton Report and other individuals involved in the Sandusky matter put forth considerable evidence of Eshbach's involvement in obstructing the administration of justice and in violating grand jury secrecy in the Sandusky and PSU 3 cases.
Let me simplify the "Penn State Scandal" for everyone.
After 7 years...we can now tell the difference between a "Professional Hit Job" and one that was just a "Perfect Storm of events".
The 100% certified PROOF of this is...the public (this board included) continues to debate details surrounding a "Story" which was constructed in 2011. This machined reality of a LEAST PROBABLE EVENT SCENERIO was built to support an attack on Penn State officials as a "weapon of public deception" to cover-up for PA government "Bad Deeds".
This "Professional Hit Job" (PHJ) has "magically" taken the public's eye off of the REALITY of this story and caused it to focus 110% on a "Story" of its own imagination. The "Story" was a carefully engineered summary which was based on the State of PA's ability to hide facts through the Grand Jury "secrecy" process. It, by itself, is an illegal use of the State's power and resources.
SO....After 7 years 99% of our review and comments continue to remain focused on the elements of the "Story" which now contains so much mis-information in it that you might even be able to successfully link Penn State with the Kennedy Assassination. IT, AS A "STORY", IS AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN GARBAGE. It is an improbable tale which is not supported by anything remotely congruent (and believable) when taking a rational full view (innocent until proven guilty) of the historical values of the PSU people involved.
THINK A SECOND....what this PHJ has accomplished is summed up in this one sentence...."The public now believes that a person who for 61+ years handled himself was a fraud and therefore a criminal....and that a POLITICIAN - AG/Governor - who had a KNOWN motive and opportunity to abuse the powers of the State of PA - has spoken the TRUTH to the public!!! THINK ABOUT THIS FOR A MINUTE!!! This is a politician who is KNOWN to have taken 3+ years to charge Sandusky and took $650K in "donations" from TSM - an organization that had primary responsibility for ALL actions of Sandusky and YET NO ONE LEGALLY HAS SAID ONE WORD ABOUT THIS RELATIONSHIP!!! What the public believes from the "Story" is PSU has 100% of the responsibilities for protecting PA kids - NO ONE ELSE INVOLVED HAS ANY RESPONSIBILITY. This is legally and logically TOTALLY ABSURD!!
In fact, the ultimate proof of a PA cover-up is this FAC T......the State of PA allowed TSM to destroy IMMEDIATELY all of its records (effectively burning down the real crime scene!).
You can not achieve "justice" here when all you do is re-hash debates based on the "Tainted information" which effectively has been made public by the OAG/Freeh deception. THEY BOTH ARE CRIMINAL ACCOMPLICES!!!
Also...you can not dismiss the fact that Tom Corbett had CLOSE ties to EVERY ONE of the key players here - Freeh, Noonan, Baldwin and numerous OGBOT members. This is not just "Luck"...this is conspiracy! (sorry Ziegler - you are wrong!)
We need to focus on the "abnormalities" of the trials, the legal interpolations, the "convenient" public media coverage & leaks which have been used to support the OAG-Freeh "Story" (and now..the movie PATERNO) and start to tie all of these very unusual events together. These abnormalities will expose that....the "Story" is just that...A STORY - A FICTION built on lies and (at best) partial truths!
Finally....look at the "motives" which are involved here....PSU - "To protect the IMAGE of PSU FOOTBALL" ....POLITICIAN TOMMY CORBETT & the OAG - "..(1) to hide illegal TSM activities involving irregularities in the state of PA protection agencies (which opens up the potential for personal $$ gain through associated criminal activities) (2) destroy PSU's public image and to (3) prove who REALLY is the most powerful man in PA (by destroying a dying man's personal and professional legacy)!
I can assure you this ...You won't reach the truth or re-establish JUSTICE in PA Courts by focusing on public details involving this professionally engineered (and managed) "Story"!!!!!
A decade later there wasn't a request because at 12 years of age they weren't savvy enough to put the nail in the coffin for their master plan and save off Jerry's DNA. Even an dopey defense attorney wouldn't try to go that angle a decade later with abuse that happened when the victims were still children.
Don't forget the obvious -
- Harmon was neighbors with Sandusky and attended the same church.
- Harmon didn't make an entry in the crime log for the 1998 incident.
- On June 1, Sandusky was interviewed at 11:00AM by Detective Schreffler and Jerry Lauro (DPW).
- On June 1, at 1:10 PM, Chief Tom Harmon e-mailed Gary Schultz to inform him there would be no charges.
- Harmon said he never discussed the case with Ray Gricar.
- Schreffler said Gricar told Harmon to close the case.
Thanks for the synopsis.
I wonder if the story centered on JVP, and how he was railroaded, rather than on JS's supposed innocence, if a mainstream media org. would pick it up and run with it. My guess is that it is only the JS angle that made Newsweek get cold feet, not the JVP angle.
I know that is not JZ's focus, as he ties JS's innocence to JVP being cleared, but that is not how most others would view it. Taking it in steps.... the JVP story first, which is compelling on its own, and then floating the JS angle, may have kept the story alive. The media loves to expose failures, and looking at it solely thru the JVP lens brings to bear the failures of TSM, CYS, the PA OAG, Ganim, the OGBOT, Harmon as Chief of Police for UP, Corbett, local SC business people such as Poole, etc. etc.
That, countering the HBO crap that will be accepted as a documentary by the public at large, may have been the way to get his story out there and to get the public to start looking at it differently.
Just a thought. Too late now? Will any mainstream outlet pick up on this and investigate on its own, based only on this release by JZ? I doubt it, but interested in what others who are closer to the story think.
Schultz has had plenty of time to tell the full story
Not much, if anything, for those of us who have followed along, but plenty new to the public at large who know only headlines and info via ESPN and now HBO.
I don't think there will ever be some huge revelation that people are expecting. Were these guy railroaded, yes. Could they have done more to protect the school and themselves from this, yes.
Continuing our debates based upon evidence provided to the public by the OAG "Story". Use tthe "Story" - a fabrication of lies and partial truths - to prove the "Story" - IGNORE EVERYTHING ELSE. The "Story" says that PSU needed to report to DWP...WHY???? Because OAG changed the 10 year old event to match its illegal needs!
If there was no LEGALLY compelling report from MM and MM was the only witness and MM took only 3 minutes to talk to Paterno then what make you so sure that the DWP report was required??? BECAUSE the OAG "Story" says so!!!! Come on.....
If you presume that MM's testimony was what was in the OAG GJP document - YES....PSU needed to report that kind of event.... (but - without a name to corroborate MM's testimony????) - that was not the case!
AT VERY BEST....MM's recount of what he saw was CONJECTURE - a level of certainty which is NOT legally acceptable for reporting a crime with NO Victim's name.
Keep pushing the "Story" and ignore everything else...GET YOUR MONIES WORTH - someone in Harrisburg spent taxpayers $$$ for this fictitious construction!!
I think the only revelation that could make a difference is confirmation that Schultz and Harmon discussed the 2001 incident, DPW was called, or confirmation that the McQueary incident was in December 2000 and they knew it at the time.
Which is why Ganim stands out so clearly.
Though her official title is crime reporter, Ganim's work might be better described as investigative. She has said that she wakes up at 3 a.m. or 4 a.m. most mornings and starts working.
“I have a police scanner on my nightstand,” she writes on her personal site. “I fall to sleep and wake up to the morning news. I work 60-hour weeks digging and investigating, chatting up sources, and peeling back layers until I find amazing stories.”
Ganim regularly incorporates multimedia and social media into her reporting, she says, “because newspaper reporting isn’t just about ink and paper anymore.”
The night Paterno was fired, Ganim captured scenes and interviews on her cell phone and emailed them directly to the newsroom. “The copy desk watched them and translated quotes,” she told WOUB. “If I had gone with a notebook and pen, we would have never made deadline by the time I got them.”
Several news organizations have recognized Ganim's watchdog reporting (and so did Glamour magazine). The Baltimore Sun said it's "every bit comparable to the guts and drive of The Washington Post in breaking the Watergate scandal." Jason Fry and Kelly McBride, who serve as ESPN's ombuds through the Poynter Review Project, wrote: “With the biggest staff of sports journalists in the world, ESPN should have been leading the charge to ask tough questions and shed light on this scandal. Instead, it was the tiny Patriot-News in Harrisburg, Pa., out in front of the journalism pack.”
Ganim is likely to continue following this story closely, especially with the start of Sandusky’s trial in early June.
"We're not even trying to predict where this ends or where this goes," Ganim said in a talk at Ohio University on Sunday. "I think the facts will continue to come out. I think this is something Penn State is going to have to deal with for a long time, and they just need to handle it correctly."
Just think if they had actually documented things like most people do with any HR type of reports. Ooooooooops.
I have to believe that Schultz had more documentation than what we have seen.
This comment suggests that you have no idea how the legal system works. No attorney in his right mind will let a client spout off while he has charges pending, and no person will risk pissing off the court during their probation.
"Could have done more...."
vs
"Illegal or immoral actions"
are two very, very different things. You certainly seem (based on previous comments) to feel that their failings went way beyond "could have done more." If you really feel that this is the case, why do you spend so much time arguing this point?
Can you point that out to me where I go way beyond that? When you start to try and mute others for saying the same things over and over again including yourself, maybe I'll consider your point.
My thought is that the general public would be exposed to news that they had not seen before, would cause some people to re-think their assumptions, such as:
Escbach's testimony about making up "anal rape" - the single most inflammatory phrase used in this entire saga.
The possibility that the date of McQ's witnessing whatever he witnessed is actually a month and a half prior to him going to JVP with the info.
The coercion of a couple of victim witnesses.
The lack of vetting of claims, and treating them as nuisance claims.
TSM being informed, and Jack's testimony that he was a proper reporting authority.
The personal aspects of Surma's and Corbett's actions.
Miss Cynthia.
And on and on.
I'm not suggesting that the Middle School teacher in Frozen Peas, Iowa, or the truck driver in Tumbleweed, Texas, or the HR guy from Harrisburg, PA who have never changed their minds about anything they've come to believe will change their minds. I'm suggesting that open-minded people, who absorb news and information from various sources, will be open to re-thinking what they thought.
As I've said countless times, I am most pissed about what has happened to JVP in all this (and I'm plenty pissed about numerous things, as many of us are). I believe the world of college football and college sports in general, and in some ways beyond even those boundaries, are being cheated out of his true legacy - one of Success with Honor in all areas of life. The way he is perceived by the uninformed public now goes a long way to silencing even his most staunchly supportive ex-players from publicly speaking about him. This HBO movie will drive in another nail or three, as the 3 people referenced above will view it as a documentary.
There is so much to tell about JVP and his true legacy. Some films have touched on it, but a comprehensive one done by a major film company would be worth telling for generations, if only on campus at a JVP wing of the Sports Museum. PSU could be marketing the concept and showing how Franklin has taken the concept and built on it in his own way.
We are missing out because of BS. I'd like to see a couple of steps taken to try to right that ship beyond where we've been so far. So kudos to JZ for his attempt, despite me disagreeing with his focus and his tone most of the time. I'd like to see what would happen if just the JVP angle were told... would that bring out more investigations from the media, and maybe even add pressure to the PA state gov't to re-look at some things? Would it create some pressure to allow access to the Freeh docs, whether that would go anywhere or not?
I think there are posters here who know more than they've let on. Maybe somehow telling the JVP angle would give them more courage to spill what they know. I don't know. It's worth a shot, imo.
Just my thoughts. Sorry you asked?
Similar threads
