Agree. And no one has to answer as to why the charges were dropped.
Perjury charge against Curley was dropped
- Thread starter Western PA
- Start date
need pennlive, CDT, state-college.com all to start to cover this and write an article on it....time to email them until it happens
Exactly.
There's no way in hell the state can prove FTR/EWOC since MM testified no one told him to keep quiet and Curleys report to JR at TSM should have caused a report to CYS to be made. The state would have to argue their action of reporting to madatory reporter TSM prevented a report from being made...uhhh good luck with that. Also it doesn't matter what Curelys untrained opinion was, JR was required to look into any and all incidents. We also still don't know for sure that the admins didn't directly inform Harmon and CCCYS themselves. If CCCYS was informed by PSU and screened the complaint due to it's similarity to 98 or determined it to be unfounded there'd be no record so impossible to prove a report wasn't made.
And that is all besides the fact the state still needs to get around the statute of limitations and ex post facto issues, which are flagrant violations of the constitution.
Sincerely disappointed that we have not heard from the folks who assured us "everyone" knew JS was molesting kids. Waite till the trial. It won't be pretty.......blah blah blah. They must be in a talking points conference call.
I knew those BOT bots would disappear the days these charges got dropped.
you really hit on one of the weaknesses of the state's charges: that is, Raykovitz was never charged. with anything
there's just no logical way Curley can be charged with FTR and endangerment if JR was NOT.
good luck trying to explain that one in court.
couldnt they say that curley and Shultz told something different to Raykovitz then what they were told by Mike?
Wensilver, I'm only sorry that I can't give you a thousand likes for your post rather than only one.
Yup. Same thing with Dr. D and JM. How'd they also not get charged? The state/MM wants us to believe it's bc MM was so upset he was never, at any point in time, able to articulate what he saw that night to them yet somehow spilled his guts to fuys he hardly knew in TC and Schultz. Yeah right.
CSS/JR all testified to the same thing re: 01- an inappropriate shower that made a PSU GA uncomfortable. Id love to hear the state's explanation for why they threw the book at some college admins and let JR ride off into the sunset.
Only thing I can think of is the state claiming TC sanitized the story before talking to JR as part of the "cover up". Well if he did that then why tell JR anything at all especially when TC had no control over what JR would do with that info? Also it doesn't matter what TC's untrained opinion was. JR was required to look into any and all incidents and certainly one involving one of his employees and an inappropriate late night 1:1 shower with a kid.
Is there any organization or group in the history of the world more deserving of the title,"Ship of Fools" than the OGBOT of PSU?
Though I could not caution all, I still might warn a few:
Don't lend your hand to raise no flag atop no ship of fools.
the far-fetched theory is that Curley toned down the incident so much that informing Raykovitz of the incident, and banning Sandusky from campus with Second Mile kids, was the PERFECT deception to make a mandatory reporter and trained child psychologist shrug his shoulders and think about swimming trunks.
So once again, the case against PSU comes down to 2 unknown, unidentified victims, a "witness" with dementia and a witness so certain he saw something way over the line that he left the scene and waited to report to his supervisor the next day.
This case against PSU is as authentic as the step stool in the Lasch Shower room.
This case against PSU is as authentic as the step stool in the Lasch Shower room.
Could you imagine the wrath if Joe's response to MM was to suggest JS wear swim trunks then send him home and take no further action (exactly what JR did with TC on his doorstep complaining about JS)?
JR should have been the one getting crucified by the media for failing to protect the kids JS was hanging around with instead of Joe but no one has ever heard of him so the media wasn't interested. All the mouth breathers gobbling up the current narrative couldn't care less about JR's failures either...smh
Watching the a-holes at PennLive twist themselves into knots over this is quite amusing.
failures of a state run charity to protect the kids under their care . . . not as juicy a story as the lie the media floated for ratings
No, he's still REQUIRED to investigate the incident by CPSL and Childcare Licenses especially given the fact that the incident was serious enough that it resulted in TSM's privileges at PSU being revoked (and TSM has issued a Press Release saying that they were only told of the witness being upset by what they saw and thought Sandusky's conduct was highly inappropriate at best.....not the serious charges of the SWIGJ.... - well, nobody is saying they were told the serious allegations of the SWIGJ including Dr. Dranov, JVP, JM, TC, GS! and MM HIMSELF! But TSM being told. What TSM was told required them to look into the incident and conduct their own investigation by their own policies, their Childcare LicensesPA and CPS as "Mandated Reporters" - none of which applied to MM, JVP, TC or GS.).
Good thought, but it will do absolutely no good. Why do you think they chose to ignore this in the first place? The media is as corrupt as our BOT, the PA judicial system, and anyone else you might want to name.
That's exactly what the OAG is claiming, but anyone with a functioning brain can see that's a completely ridiculous argument.
So there really isn't much left. I am fairly certain these last charges will get dropped as well, but just as a group hoping to find out the truth would we be able to learn anything from these last charges and charges with literally no merit going to trial? Or is our only hope the Paterno and or Spanier lawsuit. I have always wanted to hear some of these guys explain things under oath which not surprisingly seems less and less likely..
Yes agree-he has no choice and no option to self-determine what he thinks the severity may or may not be
Judge Freeh conducted an official investigation" as if he's part of some governmental entity.
This whole "Judge" honorific has chapped my chicklets since the beginning. It's a bullshit honorific. He's not acting in the capacity of a Judge, he's a retired judge in his own mercenary law firm. Calling him "Judge" has one purpose only, which is to lend undeserved credibility to his lies. If he's on the golf course or at a cocktail party and people call him "judge" out of repsect, that's one thing. That's not his function anymore. As a so-called "investigator" nobody needs to be kissing his ass calling him "Judge" but that's what they all do, especially our illustrious distrustees. If Freeh wants to conduct private hit-job investigations in his retirement, he's not "Judge" anything, certainly not in front of a jury, sanctioning body or court. It's ridiculous. But then, what else would one expect in this.
This whole "Judge" honorific has chapped my chicklets since the beginning. It's a bullshit honorific. He's not acting in the capacity of a Judge, he's a retired judge in his own mercenary law firm. Calling him "Judge" has one purpose only, which is to lend undeserved credibility to his lies. If he's on the golf course or at a cocktail party and people call him "judge" out of repsect, that's one thing. That's not his function anymore. As a so-called "investigator" nobody needs to be kissing his ass calling him "Judge" but that's what they all do, especially our illustrious distrustees. If Freeh wants to conduct private hit-job investigations in his retirement, he's not "Judge" anything, certainly not in front of a jury, sanctioning body or court. It's ridiculous. But then, what else would one expect in this.
I see three articles. All lead with headline Penn State Cover-up... or Conspirators... or Judge Moves to Schedule Trial...
Subtle issue I guess to the press that Curley perjury charge was dropped.
And OAG will hold a press conference with C/S/S head shots on easels announcing their complete and total exonerations. Noonan will be on stage as well to provide comic relief, in lieu of a formal clown act.Thanks. And I'm sure this will make front-page headlines when it happens.
Last edited:
Maybe the OAG will bring in Popeye Doyle and file charges against them for "Picking Their Feet in Poughkeepsie?"
Sure they could.....but unless they have evidence to prove such - how in the hell do you take it inside a courtroom?
They - the Fina Boys - NEVER presented one iota of such evidence. NONE.
This is a topic deserving of MUCH more detailed discussion....but the bottom line is that the Fina Boys F-ed over more people than Wilt Chamberlin.
Of anyone in this entire fiasco, no one - - - not even Sandusky - - - has been more clearly shown to be deserving of wearing the orange jumpsuits than the Fina Boys.
Wouldn't it be nice if those two mugs somehow found their way onto a couple of mug shot photos at a press conference.
Sure they could.....but unless they have evidence to prove such - how in the hell do you take it inside a courtroom?
They - the Fina Boys - NEVER presented one iota of such evidence. NONE.
This is a topic deserving of MUCH more detailed discussion....but the bottom line is that the Fina Boys F-ed over more people than Wilt Chamberlin.
Of anyone in this entire fiasco, no one - - - not even Sandusky - - - has been more clearly shown to be deserving of wearing the orange jumpsuits than the Fina Boys.
Wouldn't it be nice if those two mugs somehow found their way onto a couple of mug shot photos at a press conference.
Awesome! So multiply the #100 in Wilt's sign by 200 and that equals the # of sexual conquests Wilt claimed, 20,000.
This is great news in many ways but sad in others. It is now just about certain all of the charges will be dropped. This will never see the inside of a court room as many have predicted which is what is sad. They will not have a chance to clear their names unless they sue for malicious prosecution which I damn well hope they do. To quote a former Treasury scretary (I beleive it was Ray Donovan) "Where do I go the get my good name back again?"
Corbutt- You are a son of a B. Noonan, Kelly, Harman and the OGBoT may all of you answer to God once you die and be cast into the appropriate place Next to JS.
Corbutt- You are a son of a B. Noonan, Kelly, Harman and the OGBoT may all of you answer to God once you die and be cast into the appropriate place Next to JS.
FWIW I did file a Complaint to the D Board on Fina back in January.
On April 15th I spoke with an Amy Kittredge in the Trooper office (she handles District 1 & 2 files) and she says my complaint is still in the system because the underlying criminal case was still open. Now with this perjury charge dropped, I will assume the Commonwealth has no case. I sent Ms. Kittredge another email on the status of my complaint.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pcl81z9vn0q0eos/Complaint-to-D-Board-re-Frank-Fina.pdf?dl=0
On April 15th I spoke with an Amy Kittredge in the Trooper office (she handles District 1 & 2 files) and she says my complaint is still in the system because the underlying criminal case was still open. Now with this perjury charge dropped, I will assume the Commonwealth has no case. I sent Ms. Kittredge another email on the status of my complaint.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/pcl81z9vn0q0eos/Complaint-to-D-Board-re-Frank-Fina.pdf?dl=0
Which makes absolutely no sense. We have these 4 guys allegedly covering up for Sandusky, and the best way to do that is to go to Raykovitz and tell him a story about something else happening other than what actually did? Is that how you run a cover-up? I admit I don't have much experience running cover-ups, but I think the best way to do that would have been to tell Raykovitz nothing.
I mean, don't even call him up every day and say "Hey Jack, uh this is Tim. Just calling to tell you that nothing happened between Jerry Sandusky and any kids today. OK, talk to you later."
It is still not clear whether the child endangerment charges are misdemeanor or felony. The state can determine the level based on intent. If it's deemed intentional, not accidental, it's a felony. Originally these were felony charges. If that still holds these are still very serious.
Serious charges for effect approaching five years ago with nothing to back them up.
Based on what? A law written 6 years later in 2007, which by the way they still met the reporting requirements?
So malicious prosecution evidence:
1. Knowingly false Grand Jury Presentment
2. Leaking of secret Grand Jury Presentment
3. The press conference with the photos along with Sandusky
4. Noonan statement that Joe should have done more from a position of authority
5. Feudale stating this will never go to trial
6. The indictment of Spanier to get the others to talk
7. No testimony by the 3 at Sandusky's- part of the motive
8. The TSM going Scott free.
9. 4.5 years to keep testimony away from the JS attempt for retrial.
10. They have to present their evidence sooner as to why they were indicted- I suspect they have nothing or at least nothing that wasn't dispelled very early on.
11. Keeping the BoT out of the spot light and the connections to TSM
12. Keeping Corbutt out of the spot light and his connections to TSM
13. Possible coercion of MM with photos etc. to massage his testimony
And there is more....Just the ramblings of an armchair attorney.
Similar threads
