Spanier Avoids Jailtime?

[Legion of Lions]

I think they may be able to appeal here because the court didn't really have jurisdiction - I believe they plead guilty under the 2007 law, which the judge said did not apply.

It is the prime duty of the presiding judge to advise what laws apply to the issues which have created legal actions against the defendent. This is a stated and inherent SWORN duty of the presiding judge!

How does a judge then allow the accused to plead "GUILTY" to a 2007 law that never covered a 2001 event?? Explain that to me. By "convicting" anyone under those conditions it is the JUDGE - whose sworn duty is to uphold the constitution and the laws WHICH APPLY - who is guilty of SERIOUS CRIMINAL ACTIVITY and should be prosecuted!
REMEMBER...no one is above the law!! The judges only defense in this case is he is ignorant of the law ---- something his position does not permit!

How do you look at it any other way!

 

[indynittany]

If that's the case, they should and would have documented MM's report for the record.

MM's report was nothing and evidence suggests it came 6 weeks after the fact.

In the emails and notes from that time, the boy in the shower was not discussed or even alluded to. There was no concern that he was harmed. There was no concern that he might go to the authorities on his own.

They got crucified for not seeking him out, when in fact, the only reason to do so would have been to secure his silence as part of some attempt to conceal what had happened. If they thought he might have been abused, going to the proper authorities would have been the only option, if protecting PSU was the objective.

After Spanier praised Curley for his willingness to have such an uncomfortable meeting with Sandusky, he said in his 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....." Breaking that down, Spanier was saying that should a subsequent incident occur, it would look bad if it became known that this incident was not reported. However, because that was the "only" trigger, he must not have been concerned at all that this boy had been abused. Otherwise, the elephant in the room would have been the risk that this boy could go to the authorities, as happened in 1998. That potential "downside" would have been immediate, ongoing and serious as hell, yet it was not even on Spanier's radar.

This was a manufactured incident. Jonelle Eshbach's email exchange with MM proves that.

 

[IANit]

Documenting reports like this is HR 101. It doesn't matter that they didn't expect things to come back and bite them. Most companies with 70 employees and a $15m budget have procedures on how to handle this kind of thing. PSU has 90,000 students and a $6.5b budget.

How long do most companies keep such documentation and what would that be filed under? I don't think they saw CSA indicated at the time. Jerry had been seen with kids in the shower before and been cleared.

 

[Chris92]

How long do most companies keep such documentation and what would that be filed under? I don't think they saw CSA indicated at the time. Jerry had been seen with kids in the shower before and been cleared.

In the business world it gets documented, but in academia that might not be the norm. Art mentioned that in a previous post and despite Nassar and the tOSU doctor being reported multiple times, there's no documentation there either.

 

[IANit]

MM's report was nothing and evidence suggests it came 6 weeks after the fact.

Where do you get 6 weeks from? I thought the shower incident happened on a Friday and Mike when to Joe on Saturday morning and he relayed it to Tim and Gary and they met with Mike soon thereafter.

 

[Chris92]

Where do you get 6 weeks from? I thought the shower incident happened on a Friday and Mike when to Joe on Saturday morning and he relayed it to Tim and Gary and they met with Mike soon thereafter.

That's what we thought, but read this piece by JZ:
http://www.framingpaterno.com/new-p...ruary-9th-2001-was-real-date-mcqueary-episode

 

[Art]

In the business world it gets documented, but in academia that might not be the norm. Art mentioned that in a previous post and despite Nassar and the tOSU doctor being reported multiple times, there's no documentation there either.

Even then it's iffy. Business/functional units have standards and guidelines regarding documentation. Organizations train for exceptions that arise in the normal course.This situation was handled on an ad hoc basis for which there were no standards. People draw from experience. Unless someone ha done CYA documentation in the past, it's not a given that they'll suddenly realize that it's mandatory for the case at hand.

 

[bdgan]

Except this didn't happen "these days"

I've always defended the administration (and even JS) over the subject of males in the same communal shower. That might not have seemed out of line to Joe, Curley, Shultz, etc. That said, sexual harrassment training was occurring at even mid sized companies before 2001. PSU has nearly 100,000 students and a $6.5 billion budget. I can't believe that there were no policies or that the policies didn't require documentation.

I defend C&S because I don't think MM was clear about sexual assault. I think they failed to appreciate the severity of what MM was "alleging". But there is no way I think they did a good job administratively. That part was a failure.

 

[marshall23]

In my post I said they should have reported it and documented it. If he had reported it, or had somebody else report it, he should have had it documented. There was no documentation of it being reported that I can recall.

I don't know what may have been in any files GS had. He retired etc. I do know that OAG got their hands on them and......they wouldn't with hold exculpatory evidence would they? It comes down to who do you trust? I'm with the PSU 3, anyone is free to tie their quest for truth and justice to Fina, Feathers,Eshbach, Kelly and Corbett. By the way.....if not "reporting" was a crime for PSU 3 how is it not a crime for Dad, Dr.D and Uncle Jack? Shapiro says no one is above the law.....what happened to "equal justice under the law?" Oh, I guess that's just something the Supreme Court throws around. It wouldn't apply to the Commonwealth.

 

[Art]

I've always defended the administration (and even JS) over the subject of males in the same communal shower. That might not have seemed out of line to Joe, Curley, Shultz, etc. That said, sexual harrassment training was occurring at even mid sized companies before 2001. PSU has nearly 100,000 students and a $6.5 billion budget. I can't believe that there were no policies or that the policies didn't require documentation.

I defend C&S because I don't think MM was clear about sexual assault. I think they failed to appreciate the severity of what MM was "alleging". But there is no way I think they did a good job administratively. That part was a failure.

What exactly was Magic Mike "alleging?" If Curley and Schuiltz were to have made the leap from showering with a kid to the possibility of buggering the kid, then documentation would have been inadequate; they should have called the police.

In their position, I would have called the police anyway just to get it off my desk. But that's me and I could see how someone else would make a different judgement call.

 

[marshall23]

Where do you get 6 weeks from? I thought the shower incident happened on a Friday and Mike when to Joe on Saturday morning and he relayed it to Tim and Gary and they met with Mike soon thereafter.

You are way behind.

 

[bdgan]

By the way.....if not "reporting" was a crime for PSU 3 how is it not a crime for Dad, Dr.D and Uncle Jack?

^^^ This ^^^

They would have you believe that although Dad, Dranov, Joe, Curley, Shultz, and Raykovitz all testified that they weren't told about sexual assault, this is what really happened:

• MM didn't tell his dad about sexual assault
• MM didn't tell Dranov about sexual assault
• MM made it clear that Joe understood it was sexual assault
• MM DID tell Curley about sexual assault
• MM DID tell Shultz about sexual assault
• Curley did NOT tell Raykovitz about sexual assault

It's astounding to me that this seems to be the public narrative.

 

[bdgan]

In their position, I would have called the police anyway just to get it off my desk. But that's me and I could see how someone else would make a different judgement call.

I think that's easy to say. If they thought it was just horsing around I can see their reluctance to report their long time acquaintance to CPS. But you just have to document MM's report, follow up, and document your conclusions and reasons for your response.

 

[marshall23]

^^^ This ^^^

They would have you believe that although Dad, Dranov, Joe, Curley, Shultz, and Raykovitz all testified that they weren't told about sexual assault, this is what really happened:

• MM didn't tell his dad about sexual assault
• MM didn't tell Dranov about sexual assault
• MM made it clear that Joe understood it was sexual assault
• MM DID tell Curley about sexual assault
• MM DID tell Shultz about sexual assault
• Curley did NOT tell Raykovitz about sexual assault

It's astounding to me that this seems to be the public narrative.

The reason no one reported is simple. Mike didn't see anything. Look at the layout of the locker room. Can you imagine writing a report that says" witness heard slapping sounds and assumed they were sexual." LOL

 

[bdgan]

The reason no one reported is simple. Mike didn't see anything. Look at the layout of the locker room. Can you imagine writing a report that says" witness heard slapping sounds and assumed they were sexual." LOL

I don't think he witnessed sexual assault nor do I think the told C&S about sexual assault. I do think he saw/heard/experienced something that troubled him. Why else would he have made a report to C&S?

 

[marshall23]

How?

Did you forget,"Tom didn't want to."

 

[Connorpozlee]

I don't know what may have been in any files GS had. He retired etc. I do know that OAG got their hands on them and......they wouldn't with hold exculpatory evidence would they? It comes down to who do you trust? I'm with the PSU 3, anyone is free to tie their quest for truth and justice to Fina, Feathers,Eshbach, Kelly and Corbett. By the way.....if not "reporting" was a crime for PSU 3 how is it not a crime for Dad, Dr.D and Uncle Jack? Shapiro says no one is above the law.....what happened to "equal justice under the law?" Oh, I guess that's just something the Supreme Court throws around. It wouldn't apply to the Commonwealth.

I don’t know if you’re trying to argue with me, but I agree with a lot of what you said.

 

[marshall23]

I don't think he witnessed sexual assault nor do I think the told C&S about sexual assault. I do think he saw/heard/experienced something that troubled him. Why else would he have made a report to C&S?

It troubled him so much, that he waited weeks to tell Joe. Just a coincidence that a job was opening. MM had no way of knowing what JVP would do with the report. According to Sue....MM was in and out pretty quickly. JVP sent the issue to Tim. MM met with TC and GS. I never read anywhere that MM asked to meet to GS and TC. MM never questioned why more was not done. My guess its because he had nothing to be concerned about. Until someone sent an immaculate email .......the day after fat boy became governor. Another coincidence. Could an ex cop have been helping a relative of an ex cop? God only knows!

 

[marshall23]

I recently logged a call to CPS and cou


I don’t know if you’re trying to argue with me, but I agree with a lot of what you said.

Not picking an argument with anyone. Just sharing how I feel. When Shapiro used Raykovitz as a witness against PSU Adm., that should have proven to all that this was a complete hoax. Yes, a political prosecution.

 

[marshall23]

It is the prime duty of the presiding judge to advise what laws apply to the issues which have created legal actions against the defendent. This is a stated and inherent SWORN duty of the presiding judge!

How does a judge then allow the accused to plead "GUILTY" to a 2007 law that never covered a 2001 event?? Explain that to me. By "convicting" anyone under those conditions it is the JUDGE - whose sworn duty is to uphold the constitution and the laws WHICH APPLY - who is guilty of SERIOUS CRIMINAL ACTIVITY and should be prosecuted!
REMEMBER...no one is above the law!! The judges only defense in this case is he is ignorant of the law ---- something his position does not permit!

How do you look at it any other way!

One of the reasons Spanky Shapiro is so pissed he got bitch slapped by the feds.

 

[Nittany Ziggy]

What about the general perception of the mental/emotional makeup of one Mike M? You have to factor this into everyone’s actions after hearing from him. This guy has performed some completely moronic acts throughout his life and I’m sure it influenced the reaction by some that he told his “story” to. MM is one twisted fuc# in my view.
Here is the footage of him at the GMan before going to put his shoes in his fuc#ing locker all the way across campus!

 

[Chris92]

Not picking an argument with anyone. Just sharing how I feel. When Shapiro used Raykovitz as a witness against PSU Adm., that should have proven to all that his was a complete hoax. Yes, a political prosecution.

The reporting chain stopped at TSM because Jack wasn't going to risk putting an end to his six figure PT as needed side job.

 

[marshall23]

The reporting chain stopped at TSM because Jack wasn't going to risk putting an end to his six figure PT as needed side job.

or his wife............

 

[Art]

I think that's easy to say. If they thought it was just horsing around I can see their reluctance to report their long time acquaintance to CPS. But you just have to document MM's report, follow up, and document your conclusions and reasons for your response.

Without knowing the content or character of the conversations it's impossible to say that they should have been documented. Looking at it from another perspective, a prosecuting attorney might pointedly ask why someone went to the trouble of generating a document if it was nothing more than innocent horsing around.

 

[B_Levinson]

Shapiro is driving hard to the hoop for the 2022 gubernatorial race. He'll make whatever decision makes him look good. He inherited the Sandusky related charges and would have taken heat had he failed to pursue them regardless if he thought they were warranted. Now the feds have given him an out if he chooses to take it.

We need to expose Shapiro as an opportunist similar to the prosecutors in the Amirault and Grant Snowden cases, one who advances his political ambitions under color of protecting children, to ensure he is never elected to any position of responsibility. He is also on record as depicting the Catholic Church--not just abusive priests, but the whole organization--as "their" and "them" (as in "Notre Dame is important to them, child abuse isn't" to paraphrase his tweet on the matter). We can compare this to 19th century cartoonist Thomas Nast's The American River Ganges which portrayed crocodiles with bishop miters for heads menacing American schoolchildren.

 

[sluggo72]

What about the general perception of the mental/emotional makeup of one Mike M? You have to factor this into everyone’s actions after hearing from him. This guy has performed some completely moronic acts throughout his life and I’m sure it influenced the reaction by some that he told his “story” to. MM is one twisted fuc# in my view.
Here is the footage of him at the GMan before going to put his shoes in his fuc#ing locker all the way across campus!

When was this taken? Tia just asking

 

[bdgan]

Without knowing the content or character of the conversations it's impossible to say that they should have been documented. Looking at it from another perspective, a prosecuting attorney might pointedly ask why someone went to the trouble of generating a document if it was nothing more than innocent horsing around.

I disagree. Assume a woman goes to HR or calls an anonymous hotline to claim that a fellow employee assaulted her. Then HR asks a few people in the company including the accused and concludes that there was no such assault. Should they dispose of the written records?

To me it's not different than quality records. A customer complains, a corrective action request is prepared, the issue is investigated, and the conclusion is that the complain was without merit. Do you dispose of those records? I don't think so.

 

[Connorpozlee]

Without knowing the content or character of the conversations it's impossible to say that they should have been documented. Looking at it from another perspective, a prosecuting attorney might pointedly ask why someone went to the trouble of generating a document if it was nothing more than innocent horsing around.

We do know that the content of the conversation with McQueary was enough for them to go to legal counsel to discuss the matter. I would think that any time you go to legal with an issue, you would document the situation. Their decision to to speak with Courtney eliminates the idea to me that McQueary said nothing of any consequence to them.

Edit: I honestly have no idea how frequently these guys would take issues to the legal counsel. It’s possible that they do so daily and this was just another one of those instances.
Anybody have any idea?

 

[The Song Remains the Same]

The reason no one reported is simple. Mike didn't see anything. Look at the layout of the locker room. Can you imagine writing a report that says" witness heard slapping sounds and assumed they were sexual." LOL

Iirc, he heard slapping sounds for a few seconds as he was coming through the doors. MM must be extremely perceptive, or is it perverted?

 

[interrobang]

I don't think he witnessed sexual assault nor do I think the told C&S about sexual assault. I do think he saw/heard/experienced something that troubled him. Why else would he have made a report to C&S?

Why else would he have called his dad as his first response, and why would his dad say it wasn't worth calling authorities about?

 

[The Song Remains the Same]

Not picking an argument with anyone. Just sharing how I feel. When Shapiro used Raykovitz as a witness against PSU Adm., that should have proven to all that this was a complete hoax. Yes, a political prosecution.

Yep, absolutely. The opera was over when The Fat Lady (RIP) got Raykovitz to sing his inane, illogical tune. The fix was complete.

 

[marshall23]

Yep, absolutely. The opera was over when The Fat Lady (RIP) got Raykovitz to sing his inane, illogical tune. The fix was complete.

You know.....I don't know where I heard it and I've seen nothing since to substantiate it.....but I heard Ditka did not want any part of this case. She certainly put on an Academy Award worthy performance, huffing, puffing and kicking over the projector screen.

 

[Chris92]

We do know that the content of the conversation with McQueary was enough for them to go to legal counsel to discuss the matter.

They had already consulted with Courtney before talking with MM.

 

[Connorpozlee]

They had already consulted with Courtney before talking with MM.

Ahhhhhh..... didn’t know that. Or at least, didn’t remember that.

 

[marshall23]

We do know that the content of the conversation with McQueary was enough for them to go to legal counsel to discuss the matter. I would think that any time you go to legal with an issue, you would document the situation. Their decision to to speak with Courtney eliminates the idea to me that McQueary said nothing of any consequence to them.

Edit: I honestly have no idea how frequently these guys would take issues to the legal counsel. It’s possible that they do so daily and this was just another one of those instances.
Anybody have any idea?

I worked for more superintendents than I care to count in my 37 years in public education.....I've got almost 10 in now as the administrator of a 17 school athletic conference (so that's an additional 17). I have never heard of any administrator who consults counsel and then does not take the advice requested.Remember you are billed for every consult....meaning there is some record of your interaction. There is no way in hell that Gary didn't follow the instructions that Courtney gave him. If there was ever any intention of "winging it," or being secretive, he never would have called Wendell.

 

[didier]

I've always defended the administration (and even JS) over the subject of males in the same communal shower. .

Communal showers between adult males is one thing...and even that can incite trouble ala what was going on at Ohio State in Larkin Hall.

But a shower between an adult and a child is another. It may not qualify as “illegal” but it’s not normal behavior and should raise a red flag.

And it’s always been weird. Stories that 40 years ago my coach showered with his players all the time doesn’t make it normal. It likely just means that coach was a pederast.

 

[RussianEagle]

I don't think he witnessed sexual assault nor do I think the told C&S about sexual assault. I do think he saw/heard/experienced something that troubled him. Why else would he have made a report to C&S?

He did not choose to make a report to Curley and Schultz. He made a report to Paterno (in an attempt to get face time with the coach after the WR coach job opened). Paterno then forwarded his report to Curley and Schultz. I think the evidence indicates the by the time McQueary met with Curley and Schultz, Kenny Cater has already been hired and McQueary likely wanted to “abort the mission”. Wouldn’t surprise me if McQueary went out of his way to tell Curley and Schultz that what he saw was no big deal, so he could just end it.

 

[RussianEagle]

We do know that the content of the conversation with McQueary was enough for them to go to legal counsel to discuss the matter. I would think that any time you go to legal with an issue, you would document the situation. Their decision to to speak with Courtney eliminates the idea to me that McQueary said nothing of any consequence to them.

Edit: I honestly have no idea how frequently these guys would take issues to the legal counsel. It’s possible that they do so daily and this was just another one of those instances.
Anybody have any idea?

Schultz sought legal counsel after he heard the report from Paterno but BEFORE he talked with McQueary. The fact that Curley and Schultz viewed the issue as more of a problem before speaking with McQueary but less of a problem afterward should be very revealing.

 

[interrobang]

Not picking an argument with anyone. Just sharing how I feel. When Shapiro used Raykovitz as a witness against PSU Adm., that should have proven to all that this was a complete hoax. Yes, a political prosecution.

I mean, Raykovitz's testimony, in any trial not in PA, would have actually helped the defense

 

[Chris92]

made a report to Paterno (in an attempt to get face time with the coach after the WR coach job opened).

More importantly, Kenny Carter was coaching at Pitt at the time. It's entirely possible MM knew or suspected JVP was interviewing Carter for the WR job that very day since he was going to be in town for the Dapper Dan anyway.