Prosecutors Object to Ex-Penn State Administrators Request for Pre-Trial Appeal

[LaJolla Lion]

I knew I should have invested in Vaseline back in November 2011.

Ear plugs is more your style.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

I did not say it was nothing at all.

What it clearly wasn't was a situation that the recipients of Mike's tale(s) thought was necessary to elevate to law enforcement or CYS/DPW. It was a "situation" of some sort. That is why all referred it along. That it why it did not die. That is why there was never any cover-up. That is why everyone treated it like a 'sensitive" HR-type issue as opposed to a defacto child sexual assault.

Three different sets of people. Three different conversations. Three different times. Three different places. Only one follow-on reaction. What was the constant in all of that? The guy who delivered the message.

Only one of two things is possible:
1. Either mike told different stories to different people at different time; or,
2. Mike told the same story to different people at different times.

Which are these are you suggesting is truth?

Mike said he watered it down for Joe so he did in fact tell different things depending upon the audience. The other 3 have yet to have their say or evidence against them shown. You make all the conclusions you want, but I can wait. You think you have this nailed down, don't let me stop you.

 

[Chris92]

Still nothing on those "relationships" I supposedly have.





No, because those records are normally secret.

I can demonstrate, however that findings are civil, not criminal: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/pa-supreme-court/1451396.html. You will note that the appeal was from Commonwealth Court, which only handles civil cases.

I cannot find anything where a prosecution was based on a finding. It does not appear to play into a criminal case one way or the other. I did find that a DA is a mandatory reporter. http://www.pcar.org/laws-policy/mandated-reporting

Again, in this case, Gricar made his decision not to prosecute prior to Lauro reaching a decision.

In my experience, lawyers are wrong at least 50% of the time. It is the nature of the system.

Didn't the CPSL report in '98 require DPW/CYS to notifiy JS that he was subject to an investigation? Who dropped the ball on that and not notifying TSM?

 

[Stufftodo]

Didn't the CPSL report in '98 require DPW/CYS to notifiy JS that he was subject to an investigation? Who dropped the ball on that and not notifying TSM?

Well, he wasn't notified until the interview.

 

[roswelllion]

Yet none thought it was nothing at all and felt compelled to push it along. Very odd if it was nothing at all? That is odd, nothing at all, but yet they had to tell Joe and he had to tell TC and so on. So your conclusion maybe is clear to you but very odd to some others. I'd like to hear what they say before I make any assumption.

You are right.
Everyone thought it needed to be passed on.
Nobody thought it needed to be reported to the police.
It seems to me in this scenario TC did the right thing. Told JR [JS's employer and the guy responsible for the kids] and banned him from facilities with kids

Where many disagree is knowledge of 1998.
.To some 2001 should have been the straw the broke the camel's back and became a clear case for contacting police.
. For others [myself included] 98 was an example of here we go again. We have a legend in helping troubled youth, one of a 1,000 points of light, a ton of adopted kids, an organization that should have been vetted on a regular basis, and a case that sounds very similar to one from 3 years before that was investigated by DPW and CYS and the police with nothing being done. Again with that knowledge TC what in my mind makes complete sense.
[add ti that no victim and legal council apparently not telling them to do anymore.]

 

[L.T. Young]

The 'option' to involve DPW remained on the table, but was always contingent upon what Jerry would do, not what he had done. The only change proposed by Curley was to include Sandusky among those to be informed.

You are intentionally misinterpreting the emails. Why? What's your agenda here?

Except it's not interpretation. They had a plan that included going to DPW.

That plan was changed based on Jerry's acceptance and full cooperation. If he didn't they would "have to go to the two groups".

You guys have created your own little reality.

 

[indynittany]

Except it's not interpretation. They had a plan that included going to DPW.

That plan was changed based on Jerry's acceptance and full cooperation. If he didn't they would "have to go to the two groups".

You guys have created your own little reality.

The same plan that included talking to Jerry about the appropriate use of the facilities in the future?

Schultz's notes:
-unless he “confesses” to having a problem, TMC will indicate we need to have DPW review the matter as an independent agency concerned with child welfare

Curley's email:
...I would plan to tell him we are aware of the first situation. I would indicate that we feel there is a problem and we want to assist the individual to get professional help. Also, we feel a responsibility at some point soon to inform his organization and maybe the other one about the situation. If he is cooperative, we would work with him to handle informing the organization. If not, we do not have a choice and will inform the two groups...."

Curley understood that they would have to cover their butts if Jerry and TSM refused to honor their directive. And the idea of getting him professional help only makes sense if they're talking about boundary issues, not CSA.

Spanier's email:
...The only downside for us is if our message is not “heard” and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it. But that can be assessed down the road. The approach you outline is humane and a reasonable way to proceed.

Schultz's email:
....We can play it by ear to decide about the other organization.....

Each reference above to informing DPW was based on what Jerry would do, not what he had already done. The plan you're talking about also included talking to Sandusky about the appropriate use of the university's facilities. Why in god's name would they be considering the appropriate use of the facilities by a man they suspected to be a pedophile?

On 2/25/01, Schultz wrote the following note:
3) Tell Chair* of Board of Second Mile
2) Report to Dept. of Welfare
1) Tell J.S. to avoid bringing children alone into Lasch Bldg.d
* Who is chair??

Schultz isn't even saying that Jerry should never bring kids to the facilities, but that he should avoid bringing them. More importantly, he doesn't want Jerry to be alone with them when he does to avoid a he said/he said situation. This is about prevention!

Schultz's email:
Tim, I’m assuming you’ve got the ball to 1) talk with the subject ASAP regarding the future appropriate use of the University facility; 2) contacting the chair of the charitable organization; 3) contacting the Dept. of Welfare

Do you really think that they were concerned that Jerry had sexually abused a boy, or that through his inappropriate behavior, he was exposing himself and the university to a potential civil suit should one of these kid's mothers come looking for a payday down the road?

Do you honestly think Curley would have brought up getting Jerry professional help if he had already abused a boy....the horse would have been out of the barn at that point, wouldn't it?..., or if they thought he had boundary issues?

Do you honestly think the "only downside" Spanier could foresee was some future incident that would leave them vulnerable, if he believed that Alan Meyers had been abused that night? Or would the prospect of him or his family going to the authorities have been the more immediate and more serious "downside" on his mind?

The bottom line is that the written evidence from 2001 indicates that they did not behave as though an act of CSA had been reported to them. It shows that their intent was not to conceal, but clearly to prevent. And, with Alan Meyer's written statement indicating that MM lied and nothing inappropriate happened, these charges should have been thrown out years ago. These guys did nothing wrong!

 

[aalion]

The same plan that included talking to Jerry about the appropriate use of the facilities in the future?

Schultz's notes:
-unless he “confesses” to having a problem, TMC will indicate we need to have DPW review the matter as an independent agency concerned with child welfare

Curley's email:
...I would plan to tell him we are aware of the first situation. I would indicate that we feel there is a problem and we want to assist the individual to get professional help. Also, we feel a responsibility at some point soon to inform his organization and maybe the other one about the situation. If he is cooperative, we would work with him to handle informing the organization. If not, we do not have a choice and will inform the two groups...."

Curley understood that they would have to cover their butts if Jerry and TSM refused to honor their directive. And the idea of getting him professional help only makes sense if they're talking about boundary issues, not CSA.

Spanier's email:
...The only downside for us is if our message is not “heard” and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it. But that can be assessed down the road. The approach you outline is humane and a reasonable way to proceed.

Schultz's email:
....We can play it by ear to decide about the other organization.....

Each reference above to informing DPW was based on what Jerry would do, not what he had already done. The plan you're talking about also included talking to Sandusky about the appropriate use of the university's facilities. Why in god's name would they be considering the appropriate use of the facilities by a man they suspected to be a pedophile?

On 2/25/01, Schultz wrote the following note:
3) Tell Chair* of Board of Second Mile
2) Report to Dept. of Welfare
1) Tell J.S. to avoid bringing children alone into Lasch Bldg.d
* Who is chair??

Schultz isn't even saying that Jerry should never bring kids to the facilities, but that he should avoid bringing them. More importantly, he doesn't want Jerry to be alone with them when he does to avoid a he said/he said situation. This is about prevention!

Schultz's email:
Tim, I’m assuming you’ve got the ball to 1) talk with the subject ASAP regarding the future appropriate use of the University facility; 2) contacting the chair of the charitable organization; 3) contacting the Dept. of Welfare

Do you really think that they were concerned that Jerry had sexually abused a boy, or that through his inappropriate behavior, he was exposing himself and the university to a potential civil suit should one of these kid's mothers come looking for a payday down the road?

Do you honestly think Curley would have brought up getting Jerry professional help if he had already abused a boy....the horse would have been out of the barn at that point, wouldn't it?..., or if they thought he had boundary issues?

Do you honestly think the "only downside" Spanier could foresee was some future incident that would leave them vulnerable, if he believed that Alan Meyers had been abused that night? Or would the prospect of him or his family going to the authorities have been the more immediate and more serious "downside" on his mind?

The bottom line is that the written evidence from 2001 indicates that they did not behave as though an act of CSA had been reported to them. It shows that their intent was not to conceal, but clearly to prevent. And, with Alan Meyer's written statement indicating that MM lied and nothing inappropriate happened, these charges should have been thrown out years ago. These guys did nothing wrong!

And here we go for the 50th time... never contradicted.... every single action by everyone involved - MM. Mr. M, Dr D, C/S/S, JVP, Reyk, ALL OF THEM acted 100% consistent with "Jerry has boundary issues" and 100% inconsistent with "Jerry is evil but we have to conver it up". All of them.... inside and outside PSU... acted consistently. There is NO EVIDENCE, NO LOGIC, that contradicts. Hell, the simple question is this - if JVP "knew", and JVP was "the most powerful guy in the state", what POSSIBLE reason would he have to keep Jerry around? Why let him be near the team, near campus in the community? WHY?

 

[Stufftodo]

And here we go for the 50th time... never contradicted.... every single action by everyone involved - MM. Mr. M, Dr D, C/S/S, JVP, Reyk, ALL OF THEM acted 100% consistent with "Jerry has boundary issues" and 100% inconsistent with "Jerry is evil but we have to conver it up". All of them.... inside and outside PSU... acted consistently. There is NO EVIDENCE, NO LOGIC, that contradicts. Hell, the simple question is this - if JVP "knew", and JVP was "the most powerful guy in the state", what POSSIBLE reason would he have to keep Jerry around? Why let him be near the team, near campus in the community? WHY?

At the time they acted, they had no idea that anyone had ever suggested "boundary issues." The McQuearys and Dranov were not aware of the 1998 incident, and of Lauro's theory from that year. None of them would have the expertise to identify it.

Unless CSS, Raykovitz ,and/or Paterno, were aware of Lauro's 1998 conclusion, whey could not have known about boundary issues.

In other words, there is "NO EVIDENCE, NO LOGIC" that they thought this was a boundary issue. It presupposes knowledge that some of them could not have possessed.

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

And here we go for the 50th time... never contradicted.... every single action by everyone involved - MM. Mr. M, Dr D, C/S/S, JVP, Reyk, ALL OF THEM acted 100% consistent with "Jerry has boundary issues" and 100% inconsistent with "Jerry is evil but we have to conver it up". All of them.... inside and outside PSU... acted consistently. There is NO EVIDENCE, NO LOGIC, that contradicts. Hell, the simple question is this - if JVP "knew", and JVP was "the most powerful guy in the state", what POSSIBLE reason would he have to keep Jerry around? Why let him be near the team, near campus in the community? WHY?

JVP was quite clearly not even the most powerful person at University Park as evidenced by the fact that he was vehemently and dead-set against Sandusky or his personal charity being granted access to the Athletic Facilities, especially the Football Facilities, but Sandusky was still granted access to both (in fact his "Emeritus" lifetime office was put in the Football Facilities AGAINST JVP's expressed wishes). Sandusky's exception to receive an "Emeritus Honor" which he did not qualify for was signed by none other than Fraudney Erickson - go figure! Laughable to claim, and talk about, all this power Joe had when Sandusky (and his personal charity) was given lifetime access to the Football Facility AGAINST JVP's EXPRESSED DESIRES!

 

[indynittany]

At the time they acted, they had no idea that anyone had ever suggested "boundary issues." The McQuearys and Dranov were not aware of the 1998 incident, and of Lauro's theory from that year. None of them would have the expertise to identify it.

Unless CSS, Raykovitz ,and/or Paterno, were aware of Lauro's 1998 conclusion, whey could not have known about boundary issues.

In other words, there is "NO EVIDENCE, NO LOGIC" that they thought this was a boundary issue. It presupposes knowledge that some of them could not have possessed.

On the contrary, they knew Jerry for years, even decades. Seeing him display overt affection towards kids was common. His work was praised nationally. They also knew of Jerry's antics in the locker room while a coach. He liked to horse around. There was no logical reason to believe it was anything other than boundary issues.

It may have taken an expert in the field to have recognized grooming behavior (if that's what it was), but it certainly didn't take a professional to identify inappropriate behavior.

Everybody did what they should have done with one exception....Jack Raykovitz. Interesting that he's never even been charged and none of the victims could sue TSM if they wanted to keep their PSU hush money.

Also interesting that Tom Corbett took over $650,000 in campaign contributions from moneyed people and entities with close ties to TSM between 2003 and his becoming governor and that the OAG had oversight over charitable entities like TSM.

 

[Stufftodo]

On the contrary, they knew Jerry for years, even decades. Seeing him display overt affection towards kids was common. His work was praised nationally. They also knew of Jerry's antics in the locker room while a coach. He liked to horse around. There was no logical reason to believe it was anything other than boundary issues.

None of those things transtates into "boundary issues." BTW, would you care define what "boundary issues" are, from a psychological standpoint?

Also interesting that Tom Corbett took over $650,000 in campaign contributions from moneyed people and entities with close ties to TSM between 2003 and his becoming governor and that the OAG had oversight over charitable entities like TSM.

This wasn't in 2003; it was 2001. Both this incident and the 1998 incident occurred at times when Corbett was out of office.

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

On the contrary, they knew Jerry for years, even decades. Seeing him display overt affection towards kids was common. His work was praised nationally. They also knew of Jerry's antics in the locker room while a coach. He liked to horse around. There was no logical reason to believe it was anything other than boundary issues.

It may have taken an expert in the field to have recognized grooming behavior (if that's what it was), but it certainly didn't take a professional to identify inappropriate behavior.

Everybody did what they should have done with one exception....Jack Raykovitz. Interesting that he's never even been charged and none of the victims could sue TSM if they wanted to keep their PSU hush money.

Also interesting that Tom Corbett took over $650,000 in campaign contributions from moneyed people and entities with close ties to TSM between 2003 and his becoming governor and that the OAG had oversight over charitable entities like TSM.

Also interesting that Robert Poole, a close friend of Sandusky's and Chairman of the Board of The Second Mile, was also a big-wig within the Centre County Republican Party and held a Fund-Raiser for Corbett at his personal residence in 2009 (he was also active in campaigning for and helping Corbett's Deputy AG, Mike Madeira, get elected as Centre County DA on the Republican Ticket in 2005).

Interesting that The Second Mile was never investigated in 2009 despite DPW/CYS pointing their finger squarely at the charity (and its founder & most powerful listed "Control Person" in regulatory docs) in regards to V1's "Indicated CSA Complaint" as the modus apperandi for accessing and abusing children via sponsored charitable programs both at the charity and within the Public School System in Clinton County. All of this information being placed in the hands of AG Corbett in the first days of March 2009 by DPW/CYS is CONFIRMED by the AG's very own SWIGJ Application in regards to V1's Indicated CSA Complaint dated 5/1/2009 signed by Corbett himself (and the SWIGJ Powers being asked for two months after the fact were redundant given the AG's granted State Powers & Authority over charities - especially when the AG has probable cause to suspect criminal fraud at the charity, let alone suspicion of "social mission fraud" to the tune of the charity being founded to create a "victim farm" for the sexual rape and predation by the founder, and most powerful listed "Control Person" of the charity - and possibly affiliated pedophile friends of the founder...).

Not only did AG Corbett sit on it for two months while thousands of kids were in grave danger, but inexplicably he did not assign his "Child Predator Special Investigative Task Force" to the investigation upon receiving an INDICATED REPORT OF CSA FROM DPW/CYS THAT LISTED THE SECOND MILE AS THE VEHICLE FOR ACCESSING KIDS AT PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND THE CHARITY ITSELF VIA ITS SPONSORED AND STATE-REGISTERED, AND APPROVED, PROGRAMS!!! Think about that for a moment - the AG who has 100% auspice over charities did NOTHING while thousands of kids were at risk to sexual predation DESPITE BEING GIVEN A FORMAL INDICATED REPORT OF CSA BY DPW/CYS WHICH CLEARLY POINTED THE FINGER AT THE SECOND MILE AS A CORRUPT AND FRAUDULENT CHARITY FORMED FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEXUALLY PREDATING ON CHILDREN!!!!

 

[Royal_Coaster]

JJ, do you and your friends like Sam Cooke music? I hear it's pretty popular out in Lemont. Anyway, this pretty much describes your behavior here. You'll be on this forum "twistin' the night away."

 

[Stufftodo]

Also interesting that Robert Poole, a close friend of Sandusky's and Chairman of the Board of The Second Mile, was also a big-wig within the Centre County Republican Party and held a Fund-Raiser for Corbett at his personal residence in 2009 (he was also active in campaigning for and helping Corbett's Deputy AG, Mike Madeira, get elected as Centre County DA on the Republican Ticket in 2005).

Those fundraisers are quite common.

Interesting that The Second Mile was never investigated in 2009 despite DPW/CYS pointing their finger squarely at the charity (and its founder & most powerful listed "Control Person" in regulatory docs) in regards to V1's "Indicated CSA Complaint" as the modus apperandi for accessing and abusing children via sponsored charitable programs both at the charity and within the Public School System in Clinton County. !

The investigation of TSM was stopped by Kane, after she became AG. Remember, she had the case for just under 4 years.

JJ, do you and your friends like Sam Cooke music? I hear it's pretty popular out in Lemont. Anyway, this pretty much describes your behavior here. You'll be on this forum "twistin' the night away."

View embedded media

I assume you are referring to me, since you assume I am JJ.

Please cite the "relationships" that I supposedly have. You know, ties to the Board, OAG, something that somebody would want to ask in cross examination.

No, I'm not a fan of Sam Cooke.

 

[LaJolla Lion]

You are right.
Everyone thought it needed to be passed on.
Nobody thought it needed to be reported to the police.
It seems to me in this scenario TC did the right thing. Told JR [JS's employer and the guy responsible for the kids] and banned him from facilities with kids

Where many disagree is knowledge of 1998.
.To some 2001 should have been the straw the broke the camel's back and became a clear case for contacting police.
. For others [myself included] 98 was an example of here we go again. We have a legend in helping troubled youth, one of a 1,000 points of light, a ton of adopted kids, an organization that should have been vetted on a regular basis, and a case that sounds very similar to one from 3 years before that was investigated by DPW and CYS and the police with nothing being done. Again with that knowledge TC what in my mind makes complete sense.
[add ti that no victim and legal council apparently not telling them to do anymore.]

I'm not blaming TC or anyone as I haven't heard their side of the story...let alone the prosecutions evidence on them. I honestly think the witch hunt was trying to take down anyone associated with PSU like it was their fault this monster was walking around. I have no real idea on what they really knew about 98 as you only heard one side of that story or if they could even wrap their heads around what Jerry was doing. These weren't evil men trying to hide something IMO, but that was the narrative that was pushed forward by the media, Freeh, and the OG BoT. I think there is a lot more gray than black and white and why I responded as someone was saying you can only have two conclusions. I have a hard time thinking they really thought Jerry was molesting kids and on such a massive scale.

Like you said, he was known for his work with kids and they weren't looking at him like he was a known pedophile at the time. Everyone judged them after the damn broke, but it's hard for me to say exactly what their thought process was at the time...I can only guess. Others want to make it out as if they did know more and simply didn't do enough, but until that is proven in a court system (or not possibly)...I have a hard time stating they understood everything involved. I could be dead wrong and maybe the state proves that point. TSM was never even looked into and that to me still sticks out as very odd as that was where Jerry hand picked these kids. From that perspective I would like to see the information finally come forward.

 

[Royal_Coaster]

Those fundraisers are quite common.



The investigation of TSM was stopped by Kane, after she became AG. Remember, she had the case for just under 4 years.



I assume you are referring to me, since you assume I am JJ.

Please cite the "relationships" that I supposedly have. You know, ties to the Board, OAG, something that somebody would want to ask in cross examination.

No, I'm not a fan of Sam Cooke.

Oh I don't assume, I know.
Too bad about Sam Cooke. How do you feel about Tommy Lee Jones?

 

[Stufftodo]

JJ, do you and your friends like Sam Cooke music? I hear it's pretty popular out in Lemont. Anyway, this pretty much describes your behavior here. You'll be on this forum "twistin' the night away."

View embedded media

I assume you are referring to me.

First, please cite where DPW's "Judicial Authority," is establiced.

No, I'm not a fan of Sam

Oh I don't assume, I know.
Too bad about Sam Cooke. How do you feel about Tommy Lee Jones?

You make a lot of assumptions. I would be keeping a list which ones were correct or incorrect.

I liked him in Men in Black.

 

[dshumbero]

I assume you are referring to me.

First, please cite where DPW's "Judicial Authority," is establiced.

No, I'm not a fan of Sam



You make a lot of assumptions. I would be keeping a list which ones were correct or incorrect.

I liked him in Men in Black.

How is Marty since his outing this A.M.?

I urge everyone to contact the Shaler School Board to straighten this Pitt jackass up. Let him do his job instead of obsessing about the Paternos and Penn State while the turd is supposed to be working.

 

[Stufftodo]

How is Marty since his outing this A.M.?

I urge everyone to contact the Shaler School Board to straighten this Pitt jackass up. Let him do his job instead of obsessing about the Paternos and Penn State while the turd is supposed to be working.

Who is "Marty?" You have accused just about everyone of being everyone else.

 

[aalion]

On the contrary, they knew Jerry for years, even decades. Seeing him display overt affection towards kids was common. His work was praised nationally. They also knew of Jerry's antics in the locker room while a coach. He liked to horse around. There was no logical reason to believe it was anything other than boundary issues.

It may have taken an expert in the field to have recognized grooming behavior (if that's what it was), but it certainly didn't take a professional to identify inappropriate behavior.

Everybody did what they should have done with one exception....Jack Raykovitz. Interesting that he's never even been charged and none of the victims could sue TSM if they wanted to keep their PSU hush money.

Also interesting that Tom Corbett took over $650,000 in campaign contributions from moneyed people and entities with close ties to TSM between 2003 and his becoming governor and that the OAG had oversight over charitable entities like TSM.

Exactly Indy... thank you.

 

[ChiTownLion]

Looks like game on.

 

[ChiTownLion]

 

[interrobang]

The AG is using the "Baldwin plan" again. Let the Superior court do the work that they should be doing.