Some questions for lawyers about Spanier defense

[Keyser Soze 16801]

The trial left me with a lot of questions. As a layperson, I would love to hear from the lawyers on here about any or all of these issues:

Why leave ‘arrows in your quiver’ by not mounting a defense? Isn’t it likely that jurors will be put off by this and/or view it as arrogance?

As part of mounting a defense, why not put GS on the stand? Juries clearly hold it against defendants when they do not testify. Ditka vs. Spanier would be an epic mismatch in his favor. GS’s own abuse as a child would seemingly help jurors believe that he would not turn a blind eye.

Why not try to influence the potential jury pool by publicizing (directly or via leak) that a plea deal was offered 7 (!) times?

Why not request a bench trial given that judges will (theoretically) apply the law whereas juries are swayed by emotion?

Why not undermine Mike M’s credibility by asking about his gambling on games and sending dick pics to women who were not his wife? Seems like the whole case falls apart if his character is revealed.

 

[PSU Soupy]

Not a lawyer but Spanier and his lawyers could very easily have attacked the testimony/reputation of Jack R. , Mike M, Dr. D.,

With a very weak case, not sure I would have recommended that Spanier testify himself and open himself up to cross examination, but calling Jack, Mike and the Dr. to the table in retrospect probably would have helped.

Some are saying with the polluted jury pool, would it have mattered??

 

[wensilver]

Why not request a bench trial given that judges will (theoretically) apply the law whereas juries are swayed by emotion?

That's a good question. Was there a choice, or do certain parameters have to be met? It was very clear from listening to Boccabella read down all the elements of the charge the jury must find for in order to get a Guilty on each charge. As he read it, I'm saying to myself " No, No, Doesn't apply, No..Nope...."

I too would like to read a summary of the case strategy. We know the jury pool was impossibly poisoned, and I do wonder if Louis Freeh offered that as a service to the client. Way too much of his rant has been the talking points in the PennLive/PennLIE comment section. As the paper of record for Dauphin County - it's pretty obvious that's what was going on.

However, the team of Schulte and Ditka was so embarrassing to watch. If this was the best the state had to offer up in talent ......jeesh.

 

[crazytoadie]

The trial left me with a lot of questions. As a layperson, I would love to hear from the lawyers on here about any or all of these issues:

Not a lawyer, just as disclaimer....

Why leave ‘arrows in your quiver’ by not mounting a defense? Isn’t it likely that jurors will be put off by this and/or view it as arrogance?

As part of mounting a defense, why not put GS on the stand? Juries clearly hold it against defendants when they do not testify. Ditka vs. Spanier would be an epic mismatch in his favor. GS’s own abuse as a child would seemingly help jurors believe that he would not turn a blind eye.

Because that gives Ditka a huge opportunity to twist his testimony during closing arguments.

Why not try to influence the potential jury pool by publicizing (directly or via leak) that a plea deal was offered 7 (!) times?

That shows no innocence, just that he is unwilling to concede or negotiate. Many criminals don't accept pleas and sometimes non-criminals do accept pleas.

Why not request a bench trial given that judges will (theoretically) apply the law whereas juries are swayed by emotion?

If Bocabella doesn't dismiss the EWOC on statute of limitations a few weeks prior, what would make Spanier's legal team have any confidence his impartiality? Like it or not, judges are more cozy with cops, politicians, and the like. Porngate illustrated this incestous network.

Why not undermine Mike M’s credibility by asking about his gambling on games and sending dick pics to women who were not his wife? Seems like the whole case falls apart if his character is revealed.

Probably because that doesn't contradict his testimony. While embarrassing, the OAG would have immediately objected and won that. Smearing someone else doesn't move the ball forward and loses points as it looks like blame shifting.
.

 

[DarkCock]

Not a lawyer but Spanier and his lawyers could very easily have attacked the testimony/reputation of Jack R. , Mike M, Dr. D.,

With a very weak case, not sure I would have recommended that Spanier testify himself and open himself up to cross examination, but calling Jack, Mike and the Dr. to the table in retrospect probably would have helped.

Some are saying with the polluted jury pool, would it have mattered??

Why would attacking the testimony of any of those witnesses help Spanier? He never spoke to them. The witness he needed to challenge were Curley and Schultz. They had already plead guilty to EWOC. Spanier needed to get on the stand and say Curley gave him the same BS story he gave Raykovitz (there was an investigation and nothing inappropriate happened). That was the only defense, IMO, that had any chance of swaying a jury. His lawyers apparently felt the same way.

 

[GTACSA]

That's a good question. Was there a choice, or do certain parameters have to be met? It was very clear from listening to Boccabella read down all the elements of the charge the jury must find for in order to get a Guilty on each charge. As he read it, I'm saying to myself " No, No, Doesn't apply, No..Nope...."

I too would like to read a summary of the case strategy. We know the jury pool was impossibly poisoned, and I do wonder if Louis Freeh offered that as a service to the client. Way too much of his rant has been the talking points in the PennLive/PennLIE comment section. As the paper of record for Dauphin County - it's pretty obvious that's what was going on.

However, the team of Schulte and Ditka was so embarrassing to watch. If this was the best the state had to offer up in talent ......jeesh.

If the jury pool was impossibly poisoned, how was Spanier found not guilty on 2 counts?

 

[Nitt1300]

A win on appeal is a win- and now it will be one charge to be reviewed by the appellate court

 

[Omar81]

If the jury pool was impossibly poisoned, how was Spanier found not guilty on 2 counts?

Because there absolutely was no basis on which to convict him of ANYTHING, and even this idiotic jury could see that. Being impossibly poisoned, however, they engaged in mental gymnastics/backflips in order to find him guilty of SOMETHING, evidence be damned. Seriously, some of you revel in being contrarians and pretend that somehow makes you "objective."

 

[ga.lion]

If the jury pool was impossibly poisoned, how was Spanier found not guilty on 2 counts?

Try this. In my opinion case not proven for any counts. But since poisoned they felt the need to punish so they found him guilty of a lesser misdemeanor charge. Or 3 PSU executives discuss this. 2 plead guilty so Graham must be too.

 

[bjf1991]

However, the team of Schulte and Ditka was so embarrassing to watch. If this was the best the state had to offer up in talent ......jeesh.

Undeniably true

Also undeniably true, Spanier's braintrust lost to them.
Lost to them even though the AG had a case that was less meaty than tofu.

And - - - - they lost because they - the GSpanier team) did (didn't do) basic, simple stuff that a half nitwit knew would likely seal their fate, and could see it coming down the track from miles away.


All of them, both sides, a bunch a F-ing assholes
(And I'd bet the "hourly rate" for Silver's outfit is 10X the rate that Ditka pulls down)

 

[mn78psu83]

How many "real" attorneys answered here?

 

[LundyPSU]

The trial left me with a lot of questions. As a layperson, I would love to hear from the lawyers on here about any or all of these issues:

Why leave ‘arrows in your quiver’ by not mounting a defense? Isn’t it likely that jurors will be put off by this and/or view it as arrogance?

As part of mounting a defense, why not put GS on the stand? Juries clearly hold it against defendants when they do not testify. Ditka vs. Spanier would be an epic mismatch in his favor. GS’s own abuse as a child would seemingly help jurors believe that he would not turn a blind eye.

Why not try to influence the potential jury pool by publicizing (directly or via leak) that a plea deal was offered 7 (!) times?

Why not request a bench trial given that judges will (theoretically) apply the law whereas juries are swayed by emotion?

Why not undermine Mike M’s credibility by asking about his gambling on games and sending dick pics to women who were not his wife? Seems like the whole case falls apart if his character is revealed.

Doubtful much of that would be allowed. The issue here is that DPW was on the table and then it was taken off. No matter what Mike originally reported, there is evidence of a DPW plan and attorney advice to report it.

 

[Keyser Soze 16801]

That's a good question. Was there a choice, or do certain parameters have to be met?

In PA a defendant can request a bench trial but the prosecutor has to agree in order for it to happen

 

[Keyser Soze 16801]

How many "real" attorneys answered here?

Zero

 

[AWS1022]

Just the JoeBots

Ah, the a$$hole posts again.

 

[sluggo72]

Doubtful much of that would be allowed. The issue here is that DPW was on the table and then it was taken off. No matter what Mike originally reported, there is evidence of a DPW plan and attorney advice to report it.

Do you think perhaps somebody did report it, or directed it to be reported, but now years later have been 'talked' out of reporting it?? It's been so long and memories seem vague. Iirc Schultz thought it was reported but couldn't say by whom. Then later he says he guesses it didn't happen. Could he have been convience bY all the noise and just said well I guess we didn't ?

 

[wensilver]

Do you think perhaps somebody did report it, or directed it to be reported, but now years later have been 'talked' out of reporting it?? It's been so long and memories seem vague. Iirc Schultz thought it was reported but couldn't say by whom. Then later he says he guesses it didn't happen. Could he have been convience bY all the noise and just said well I guess we didn't ?

Jack Raykovitz clearly said on the stand that Second Mile was the proper reporting agency for Tim Curley to speak with.

Jack Raykovitz failed to probe further about a naked encounter with his charity Chairman and a Second Mile teen in a Penn State shower.

Jack had care & control of that Second Mile teen and chose to keep that all in-house and go no further.

Just.Wear.Swim.Trunks.

That was Jack's "plan".

 

[wensilver]

If the jury pool was impossibly poisoned, how was Spanier found not guilty on 2 counts?

Hi - Fook Off.

 

[marshall23]

If the jury pool was impossibly poisoned, how was Spanier found not guilty on 2 counts?

If there is or ever was a victim #2 and "only God knows." Spanier was trusted to supervise and protect him? That is quite a stretch. Despite almost 6 years of nothing but negative press and media, including leaks that rival Niagra Falls.........all from the time honored OAG political prosecution playbook.....we have convictions on 3 misdemeanors. The fact that the jury didn't laugh out loud and return a Not Guilty on all counts in 5 minutes is evidence of type of business done in The Corrupt Commonwealth Courts. The Commonwealth put JACK RAYKOVITZ on the stand as a prosecution witness. Are you fn kidding me? Perhaps the jury was intimidated by "Hurricane" Ditka as well?Jack Raykovitz and his (unknown to many) wife Kitty, had a legal duty to protect the children under their care and supervision. How'd that work out? So when they received another complaint about their cash cow....they sprang into action since (we've had to tell him to back off certain kids before) oops.....instead they handed him the keys to the fitness center at a local hotel. No action plan to protect their kids, EVER.
This is not and never should have been a PSU problem. They simply reported to TSM that JS would no longer be able to bring "clients" of TSM to Lasch. Raykovitz had a duty to take action at that point. Perhaps end the old one on ones with Jerry and his chosen young friends. Do you think JR didn't know who Jerry was palling around with? Right.
TSM and by extension its former CEO, his wife wife and Board of Directors are very lucky that they are a protected species in Pa. I'm not sure why. One must admit that it is pretty strange when you add that to how the OGBOT jumped to cover for TSM with all the settlements.
Think about all the tasks Spanier, Curley and Schultz had on their plates with the positions they held. Jack Raykovitz had one job.....to look after the kids in his organization.

 

[wensilver]

I can only remark that unless you were actually in that courtroom- where you could observe the jury - you could hear testimony for yourself - you could hear the closing arguments - you could watch the attorneys at work - you heard and saw it for yourself, then you are stuck relying on the media and accounts from others in that room.

I found it immensely helpful, fascinating and it just reconfirmed my existing thoughts on the OAG & the major players involved here.

There's a lot to be said for actually seeing it all go down in real time and then forming an opinion for yourself.

 

[marshall23]

I can only remark that unless you were actually in that courtroom- where you could observe the jury - you could hear testimony for yourself - you could hear the closing arguments - you could watch the attorneys at work - you heard and saw it for yourself, then you are stuck relying on the media and accounts from others in that room.

I found it immensely helpful, fascinating and it just reconfirmed my existing thoughts on the OAG & the major players involved here.

There's a lot to be said for actually seeing it all go down in real time and then forming an opinion for yourself.

I know there are many purely evil people in the world. Why are so many of them employed as prosecutors by The Commonwealth OAG?

 

[Keyser Soze 16801]

I can only remark that unless you were actually in that courtroom- where you could observe the jury - you could hear testimony for yourself - you could hear the closing arguments - you could watch the attorneys at work - you heard and saw it for yourself, then you are stuck relying on the media and accounts from others in that room.

I found it immensely helpful, fascinating and it just reconfirmed my existing thoughts on the OAG & the major players involved here.

There's a lot to be said for actually seeing it all go down in real time and then forming an opinion for yourself.

You were there and I respect your intellect. Did you think the defense was making a mistake by not calling any witnesses?

 

[GTACSA]

Hi - Fook Off.

A typical response from someone with no answer.

Have a blessed Sunday.

 

[bjf1991]

I can only remark that unless you were actually in that courtroom- where you could observe the jury - you could hear testimony for yourself - you could hear the closing arguments - you could watch the attorneys at work - you heard and saw it for yourself, then you are stuck relying on the media and accounts from others in that room.

I found it immensely helpful, fascinating and it just reconfirmed my existing thoughts on the OAG & the major players involved here.

There's a lot to be said for actually seeing it all go down in real time and then forming an opinion for yourself.

Undoubtably true!

 

[wensilver]

I know there are many purely evil people in the world. Why are so many of them employed as prosecutors by The Commonwealth OAG?

I've had plenty of attorneys tell me the AG's office is a joke and it's where you go when you can't make it at a DA's office.

For what I saw this past week - that was the case.

 

[wensilver]

You were there and I respect your intellect. Did you think the defense was making a mistake by not calling any witnesses?

No. The state didn't prove their case. Ditka had nothing.

She was really ugly towards Spanier in her closing arguments - it was embarrassing and to me - I thought improper.

THAT MAN ALLOWED AN ANIMAL TO RUN WILD! THAT MAN ALLOWED CHILDREN TO BE HORRIBLY ABUSED - HE HAD NO CONCERN FOR THE CHILDREN!

Too much TV drama crap & I thought to myself - "Oh girlfriend, you are full on".

The judge clearly told the jury Spanier was innocent & the state had the burden to prove otherwise.

I think to have Ditka engage in more theatrics, the huffiness, the disdain, the Z-snapping, the charm bracelet jangling with the wagging finger and have her spit vitriol at Dr. Spanier in front of a jury like that - would not have been prudent. As much as we all would have liked to see otherwise and have some of these folks on the stand giving it back to the AG with both barrels.

 

[rudedude]

Here is your answer right here. Extremely convenient how close to Spanier's trial Curley & Schultz's plea deals came through for a nice week of news coverage prior to jury selection:

Anchoring or focalism is a cognitive biasthat describes the common human tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information offered (the "anchor") when making decisions. During decision making, anchoring occurs when individuals use an initial piece of information to make subsequent judgments.

 

[bjf1991]

Here is your answer right here. Extremely convenient how close to Spanier's trial Curley & Schultz's plea deals came through for a nice week of news coverage prior to jury selection:

Anchoring or focalism is a cognitive biasthat describes the common human tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information offered (the "anchor") when making decisions. During decision making, anchoring occurs when individuals use an initial piece of information to make subsequent judgments.

Curley and - especially - Schultz sure gave Spanier a dry hump

Whatever their testimony might - or might not - have said, the fact that they "pled guilty" was like spotting the OAG two touchdowns in their contest against Spanier.

 

[kgilbert78]

A win on appeal is a win- and now it will be one charge to be reviewed by the appellate court

Not in the public eye.

 

[wensilver]

the common human tendency to rely too heavily on the first piece of information offered (the "anchor") when making decisions.

Not unlike Mike hearing sounds in the locker room and immediate think sex was going on in the shower and he made decisions based on that.

Off Topic - but speaks to the heart of this shitstorm. Why would Mike immediately think of sex in the shower in a men's football locker room? Was it common to meet up with women in this area and fool around? If so, this needs some probing and is very concerning.

Everyone at the trial described Jerry as always goofing around with Second Mile teens, boisterous and fatherly. Why wasn't the "anchoring" thought of Mike's be that of Jerry goofing around with a Second Mile kid - why was it "sex" first and not horseplay/ roughhousing/ farting around - albeit at a time of day that was inappropriate. I can see him asking himself what the f*ck is Jerry doing here with a kid at this time of night?

(beating a dead horse here)

 

[artsandletters]

A typical response from someone with no answer.

Have a blessed Sunday.

Go to hell with your pathetic blessed Sunday remark, you ignorant lowlife.

 

[Keyser Soze 16801]

No. The state didn't prove their case. Ditka had nothing..

But you are an intelligent, thoughtful person. One courtroom observer claimed the jury looked like they were straight outta Wal-Mart. IMO Spanier's crew needed to work harder to overcome the emotionalism.

 

[GTACSA]

Go to hell with your pathetic blessed Sunday remark, you ignorant lowlife.

Would you care to answer the question I posed to Wensilver or are you limited by anger issues to only throw insults?

 

[artsandletters]

But you are an intelligent, thoughtful person. One courtroom observer claimed the jury looked like they were straight outta Wal-Mart. IMO Spanier's crew needed to work harder to overcome the emotionalism.

We've all been to Walmart.

You'd expect there to be two or three or more jurors able to process all the information, understand the underlying emotions, and guide the outcome. If not, Spanier's people did a lousy job selecting the jury.

 

[artsandletters]

Would you care to answer the question I posed to Wensilver or are you limited by anger issues to only throw insults?

I'm limited now to responding to that single remark of yours. If I cared to respond to your question I would have. Christ, you're thick. And that blessed Sunday remark of yours was extremely insulting to Wendy and identified you as a complete ass.

 

[wensilver]

But you are an intelligent, thoughtful person. One courtroom observer claimed the jury looked like they were straight outta Wal-Mart. IMO Spanier's crew needed to work harder to overcome the emotionalism.

Well - a few were straight out of WalMart - if you looked at them. Only one was a college grad, we figured it was the late 20 - something gal with the nice hair cut. The older man on the far lower left was asleep. I was watching the women's reactions to Ditka's theatrics. The ladies in the front had a sour look on their face. I could not see the jurors in the back row all that well. I was interested in the testimony and trying to write down the relevant information - so it's hard to stare at the jury for any responses as well.

I have no idea how jury selection was done - these lawyers obviously have experience. I don't know if they have a team member watch the jury the entire time and tailor their line of questioning as a result.

I can tell you that Spanier's team was polished, professional, prepared and well - spoken - which showed the judge their respect for the process. Their document boxes were clean - made of white corrugate, neatly lined up and stored off to the side. Their exhibits were easily put up on the screen. There was no fumbling.

The Commonwealth - ill fitting clothes, not as polished, not as prepared and actually embarrassing to listen to. They wheeled in beat up document boxes - one prominently displayed on their table sported duct tape. Ditka knocking over the projection screen while flailing her arm out in an accusatory tone was a nice touch. It was the JV Team.

 

[bjf1991]

[QUOTE="wensilver, post: 2721594, member: 9524". It was the JV Team.[/QUOTE]


And.......... they beat the Ivy Leaguers

Three bright, extremely well-educated Defendants

An absolute ZERO of a case for the prosecution.

Three teams of Blue Blood, highly-comped defense Attorneys.

And two of 'em pled out, and the third got tagged with a conviction.

And you could see it coming from a mile (or 90 miles ) away.

Alas

 

[WeR0206]

Well - a few were straight out of WalMart - if you looked at them. Only one was a college grad, we figured it was the late 20 - something gal with the nice hair cut. The older man on the far lower left was asleep. I was watching the women's reactions to Ditka's theatrics. The ladies in the front had a sour look on their face. I could not see the jurors in the back row all that well. I was interested in the testimony and trying to write down the relevant information - so it's hard to stare at the jury for any responses as well.

I have no idea how jury selection was done - these lawyers obviously have experience. I don't know if they have a team member watch the jury the entire time and tailor their line of questioning as a result.

I can tell you that Spanier's team was polished, professional, prepared and well - spoken - which showed the judge their respect for the process. Their document boxes were clean - made of white corrugate, neatly lined up and stored off to the side. Their exhibits were easily put up on the screen. There was no fumbling.

The Commonwealth - ill fitting clothes, not as polished, not as prepared and actually embarrassing to listen to. They wheeled in beat up document boxes - one prominently displayed on their table sported duct tape. Ditka knocking over the projection screen while flailing her arm out in an accusatory tone was a nice touch. It was the JV Team.

Facepalm. It's frightening folks like this are prosecutors for a state gov. Its like handing a machine gun to a gorilla or whatever the expression is. Yikes.

 

[marshall23]

Facepalm. It's frightening folks like this are prosecutors for a state gov. Its like handing a machine gun to a gorilla or whatever the expression is. Yikes.

I've often wondered why a veteran attorney with skills would be a prosecutor. I always thought that an assistant DA was a low step on the ladder for experience. I didn't have to go to law school to make 100k. I'd wager that there is a great deal more money to be made in private practice, if you have talent.

 

[wensilver]

And.......... they beat the Ivy Leaguers

Three bright, extremely well-educated Defendants

An absolute ZERO of a case for the prosecution.

Three teams of Blue Blood, highly-comped defense Attorneys.

And two of 'em pled out, and the third got tagged with a conviction.

And you could see it coming from a mile (or 90 miles ) away.

Alas

If you were there - you'd have seen it differently.

The appeal will go forward and WE ARE THEN DONE with these toddlers with loaded handguns in the Office of Attorney General.