No thanks. Others have asked you specific questions. Your responses already had me convinced it was a mass of confusion. Peace.
OT: FYI, JZ says Newsweek article is still a go. (edit: Story now spiked)
- Thread starter MtNittany
- Start date
No thanks. Others have asked you specific questions. Your responses already had me convinced it was a mass of confusion. Peace.
Also, remember that the investigation into Sandusky started in early 2009, but the arrest didn't occur until late 2011. I am sure when Sandusky was arrested, many who first heard the rumors in 2009 mistakenly believed they heard them years earlier.
Probably because he knew the head coach. Also, some high school football coaches may be reluctant to have a college coaching legend serve as an "assistant" because they feel their authority may be undermined.
I highly doubt it was because the coaches at the closer schools heard rumors about him being a sex predator.
Joe definitely did something about it, and did what he should have. ABSOLUTELY. THE ONLY QUESTION IS IF JOE CONVINCED CURLEY NOT TO REPORT BUT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF THIS.
Tim and Gary, as it turns out, did not do enough. THEY CERTAINLY FAILED AT HR101 BY FAILING TO DOCUMENT MM'S REPORT AND WHY THEY RESPONDED AS THEY DID.
Dr. Jack undeniably did not do enough, as it turns out. TSM SOULD NEVER HAVE ALLOWED ANY EMPLOYEES OR VOLUNTEERS TO HAVE ONE ON ONE UNDOCUMENTED CONTACT WITH KIDS.
With 7 or so years of hindsight, I think it seems most likely that Mike McQueary’s memory became much clearer ten years after the fact than he was when reporting to people at the time. I THINK MM STARTED EMBELLISHING HIS STORY IN ORDER TO COVER HIS OWN REAR END FOR NOT DOING MORE.
Either that, or there really was a coverup by a large group of powerful, influential people who all knew about it intuitively since there has not even been one suggestion that it was ever spoken about. IF TRUE, THAT LIST WOULD INCLUDE JM, DRANOV, RAYKOVITZ. PLAYERS, COACHES, ETC. EXTREMELY UNLIKELY.
- Tainted jury pool seems unlikely IMO. I think it's more likely that they accepted a very minimal charge instead of taking even a 25% risk of a much more severe verdict.
- They are also on record saying that MM didn't mention sexual assault.
I don't know how someone can be so well aware of the depth of corruption in the PA legal system, yet still post with all sincerity that people who plead to lesser charges are ipso facto guilty of them. There are literally VOLUMES of research on how this isn't true, lol
Matt Sandusky suggests in his book that the lump payment Jerry got in his retirement was given to TSM to pay to PSU for a piece of land not long after mikes report. You know anything about that? Is Matt just wrong?
Perhaps we mean different things when we say "tainted jury pool." I'm not implying that there was collusion with jurors. What I mean is that a majority of potential jurors had pre-existing opinions (based on false information) on C/S/S that would have made getting a fair trial very, very unlikely.
This is supported by the results of a telephone survey, which can be found on page 229 (Exhibit G-149) of this document: http://www.dauphincounty.org/Courts...and Schultz JT Mot to Quash Present w Exh.pdf
in which 47 to 62% (varies by county) of respondents said that "Even if Penn State officials, like Curley and Schultz, did nothing illegal, they should still be punished."
That's a) super messed up and b) information that screams "take a plea bargain if you are promised no jail time"
Wait. We absolutely have heard from Dranov several times. Most recently, at Spanier's trial he stated that what he was told did not warrant a call to police. The rest of his testimonies at other trials is very similar. Dranov's testimony basically refutes McQuery's. And, we all know the CSS&P's versons of what they heard from McQ are different than what Mike now claims to have said.
Who were the intended targets of the investigation? Aside from Sandusky.
Who is protecting the second mile, and why?
You skipped the question above, "Why is PSU protecting TSM?"
Two questions;
Ditto Zeno's question on why was no one interested in looking seriously at TSM
2nd - why does Dranov's testimony seemingly refuting MM and OAG's version carry little or no weight with anyone.
This is opinion, Spanier. They separated Curley and Schultz in an attempt to divide and conquer Spanier.
Paterno was an unintended consequence that I attribute to Noonan.
I cant say for certain who is protecting TSM. Logic tells me local money, incestuous relationships amongst local money, TSM, PSU power and PA Govt power. That is all strictly my opinion.
People believed MM's version, Dranovs version wasnt as dramatic and didnt help the prosecution. Once that was cast in stone nothing else really seemed to matter. Don't confuse me with part of the prosecution, I'm not. The above was apparent just from watching.
Put the corruption aside. What would you do if you were in your 70s and your choices were to accept a slap on the wrist or go to trial where there is a 25% chance that an overly sympathetic jury would find you guilty and put you in jail for 10 years?
That's my #1 issue in this whole saga. C,S,P JM & D all say that MM gave them a soft report. Yet somehow we're supposed to believe that only C&S are lying.
Wasn't a condition of the payouts that TSM would be held harmless?
FINALLY....somebody get it!!! This is what the REAL Penn State Scandal is about...or more accurately...THE STATE OF PA SCANDAL.
It doesn't matter WHAT Sandusky did or did not do...it matters NOTHING what C/S/S and Paterno did or should have done - ITS ABOUT CRIMINAL CORRUPTION.
The criminal corruption is just this...How easy it is in PA to abuse political office influences and officials to reward/protect the "privileged" .....and the Hell with right & wrong, the Law and who is damaged by the public misinformation that a corrupt government creates!
There is NO JUSTICE or TRUTH when in PA the courts all laws are applied when it is convenient - when "suspicious legal interpretations and processes" go unchallanged - when some people are required to strictly adhere to the law while others designated by the State of PA are permitted to "skate". WHAT COUNTRY ARE WE IN.....????
Don't give me BS that this is because "Sandusky is guilty as sin" and that is why all these abnormal things had to happen. Something MUCH DARKER than Sandusky's crimes are involved here and THIS IS WHAT NEEDS TO BE EXPOSED.
I am amazed that we have more than 28 pages of debating "Rumors, could-have-beens, should-have-beens" and other details about Sandusky and Paterno, etc. But these are all "Bright shiny objects"...diversions from the real problem. THE THEFT of $250M by way of a PA court process and suspicious court actions....all FOR WHAT REASON???
Forget the Paterno, C/S/S, Sandusky and every other person the press has promoted misinformation about!
Start by answering this....
- How did TSM get to have the ability to destroy all its records with the full knowledge of the OAG?
- How did Tommy Corbett get to target Penn State and Paterno for Criminal Cover-up when his own investigator Fran Fina stated publicly that no evidence supported these allegation (only allegations that MORALLY more needed to be done...show me anywhere where a high standard of MORAL action is required or expected in ANY US LAW)???
- Based upon Fina's statements, didn't One-term Tommy have a MORAL responsibility to have another "Gala" Presser and use the power of his public office to publicly "protect" the reputation of PSU and PA citizens from this false accusation?? Check his oath of office...he had both the MORAL AND LEGAL responsibility - especially when you consider at least $60M were STOLEN from PSU based on this claim of criminality by the NCAA/B1G.
- Why did our own BOT's actions cost PSU $250M (payments and expenses) by OVERPAYING everyone - regardless of SOL, strength of accuser legal or rationality - AND YET - make sure everyone who settled COULD NOT SUE TSM as part of the PSU settlement.
- 20 more "suspicious" actions are involved here - all involving PA Government, Freeh, NCAA, B1G and the courts and lawyers involved
When you answer these...then this discussion can start to have some value. We need to start to reestablishing a court system in PA that works for JUSTICE....not some unseen group of "privileged, political elites" playing in their corrupt sandbox of the State of PA.
Why is it wrong to think that someone could be punished even if they did nothing illegal?
It happens every day in corporate America. Show up late, get fired. Miss a deadline, get fired. OR suspended.
Fail to document an important meeting/decision that ends up costing the organization $250 million dollars - gonna get fired, anywhere.
That's what the surveyed people meant, and there isn't anything wrong with thinking that.
Were those opinions based on information other than what has been publicly disclosed?
Are you aware of any evidence tampering by Freeh or the prosecution?
Exactly.
One important aspect of the job when you are at the level of C/S/S --- assess the risk and reward associated with various decisions. In general, you want to minimize potential risk and maximize potential reward.
These guys put Penn State at a tremendous risk (and that's not just 20-20 hindsight speaking) with their course of action as regards Sandusky. I'm honestly not sure what the reward was. There was a "reward" for Sandusky (no investigating his claims), but what on Earth was the reward for Penn State?
Everything any of us have to say on this matter is 20-20 hindsight.
But sure, you’re the exception.
I have an exercise for you. It's late February 2001 and you are Graham Spanier. You are considering as to whether to go forward with your plan as regards Sandusky.
Please list out 3 possible "rewards" as regards this plan. I'll be honest - I can't think of ANY rewards. I've already filled in some of the risks.
The template for you to fill in is below:
REWARDS:
1.
2.
3.
RISKS:
1. Sandusky actually is guilty, and he'll continue to victimize others in the future.
2. Financial exposure to Penn State - given this claim was made on PSU property.
3. People may come after me should Sandusky do anything else - after all, I was made aware of this current situation.
You’re seriously unhinged.
You admit they were advised to report it to DPW. It doesn’t matter if it was an obligation or CYA. They reached out for a reason, but you keep pretending it wasn’t a monumental failure. They even acknowledged it left them vulnerable.
They didn’t misstate anything, they lied. Snedden wasn’t called as a defense because Spanier lied to him about it and Schultz confirmed he personally told Spanier.
On what planet do you live that you actually believe they didn’t discuss 98 in 2001 or remember it in 2011? That’s a complete logic fail.
It’s amazing the lengths you guys go to in order to undermine victims and witnesses, but C/S/S obvious lies must be defended.
I don’t think you quite understand the concept of hindsight.
I'll make it easier for you.
Don't come up with 3 rewards - come up with ONE reward (reward for Penn State) in the plan that C/S/S came up with.
If you're defending C/S/S - this should be an easy exercise.
The back of Sylvia Kurtz' own book describes Sandusky's victims as "10 prepubescent boys". She may want to check on the ages on the boys who alleged sexual acts with Sandusky before I take her seriously on anything.
You have to understand some here think they are defense attorneys presenting a case and it sounds great if there is nobody there to refute the BS. There is no trial anymore. 2 pleaded out and GS's trial is over with. Jerry is in prison for life and that isn't changing. No credible news outlet is running with JZ's one sided version of events for a reason. I get the want to know why or how...and even more so with the BoT at the time, but the other stuff isn't changing.
One thing I learned from being a member on the Lions Den Board back in the day was never trust people with cryptic posts claiming insider knowledge. I spent 2012 believing that Wick Sollers had evidence that would expose Graham Spanier as the real bad guy.
Those opinions are based on my experiences over the last 20 years, most of it being public knowledge, some of it being my own.
Evidence Tampering? I cant make that claim. Freeh wrote his opinion and the world ate it up.
There is nothing inherently wrong with thinking that. However, if you are a juror and you go into a trial with that mindset (i.e. I want to punish the defendants irrespective of whether they broke any laws) that's a problem.
At a bare minimum, this explains why innocent men would agree to plead guilty to one misdemeanor in exchange for no jail time.
We've been through this before. There is no doubt that C&S handled this poorly. It's also likely that Courtney was in cya mode.
The real question is did MM tell C&S about sexual assault and did C&S conspire with S&P to cover it up in order to protect football? Did the 4 of them knowingly allow JS to abuse children for over a decade. I've read no such evidence.
I read as Scott thinks the fake accuser is fake & committed fraud against the therapist and/or PSU.
There are enough details out for people involved to know who it is.
200 visits or something?
I pity this guy in prison when his cellmate Bubba asks what he's in for. (Committing fraud to try to save a molester).
I also wonder if Zig is culpable for aiding and abetting.
but you also believe Shubin should walk free, right?
if the fake accuser is a fraud, then by definition so are Shubin and the therapist.
Okay, then why didn’t
Frank Fina get fired, porn
Jonelle get fired, lying about what Mike reported
Baldwin, for numerous things among them, how she handled the C/C/S grand jury testimony and the data from the subpoena of computer records?
Understanding the definition of hindsight is even easier.
You have listed no possible rewards for Penn State. I agree, their plan had no obvious possible rewards for Penn State.
I think we both agree, then: C/S/S embarked on a plan in February 2001 that entailed possible risks, but brought no possible rewards, to Penn State.
Similar threads
