Spanier files emergency motion to intervene in the McQueary lawsuit
- Thread starter LundyPSU
- Start date
I'm not attacking Mike. I want them all to look us in the eye and tell us what happened. If CSS are guilty, so be it. If Joe screwed up, so be it. If Mike was less than clear in what information he relayed to people, so be it. But let's find out the truth so we can finally put this behind us, or else it will fester for another generation.
I have said this before, but the problem is that I am not sure how many will recognize (or acknowledge) the truth if it ever comes out.....
Agreed. The "rest of the story" will only be heard by a few of us who have followed since "day one." The Commonwealth OAG knew what they were doing. Mike and or CSS are collateral damage. I think it is completely possible that all four acted in good faith at the time and under the circumstances as they knew them.
In theory, I agree with you. At the same time, juries have been known to convict innocent people. Curley, Schultz, and Spanier are facing felony charges that could result in jail sentences. I don't begrudge them one iota from trying to keep Cynthia Baldwin's testimony out of the public domain. Who knows what deals she has made with authorities to save her own skin. At the same time, it is long past time to put the false narrative of Penn State administrators protecting a pedophile to bed.
I agree with this, however the problem is that when MM FINALLY spoke to LE about the 2001 incident in 2010, he played revisionist history (the reason why he did this is still unknown--maybe the OAG threatened to expose his selfie pics thus ruining his career/marriage or maybe they told him they needed him to alter his story to help put a monster away...who knows) by claiming he was CERTAIN in 2001 that JS was abusing/molesting a kid and reported it as such, thus throwing CSSP under the bus. The reason I feel strongly that this is what happened is my examination of the testimony, specifically the 12/16/11 prelim as well as everyone's contemporaneous actions in 2001.
In 2001, MM NEVER made a written statement to UPPD. If he was certain a kid was being molested/abused how exactly did he expect a criminal investigation to get started without ever performing this key step? If for some reason the UPPD route made him afraid for his job why not at least make an anonymous call to Childline? But nope, neither of those 2 things ever happened.
Also when TC called MM a few weeks later to follow up with PSU's action plan MM testified that he never expressed dissatisfaction, never said the police needed to be called, and never said MORE needed to be done. MM also testified that he would call the police for a burglary but NOT call police based on what he saw that night. Umm...how does that make any sense when you consider MM's 2010 statement to OAG/PSP where he said he was certain sodomy was occurring between JS and a boy??? It doesn't add up folks!!
What I laid out above simply doesn't jive with MM being certain in 2001 a kid was getting abused. What the above tells me is that in 2001 MM was upset/weirded out by the late night inappropriate shower/horsing around but wasn't CERTAIN about anything. That's the only reason I can think of for why MM wouldn't at least make a written statement to UPPD or call to ChildLine. It would also explain why MM continued to participate in events with JS such as the golf tourney and Easter Seals flag football, etc..
How is it possible that Baldwin, Fina and Feudale all missed the same day at law school when they covered.............right to council! Then Judge Hoover is served a softball with Baldwin's "I represent Penn State, solely" and it takes 2 years to...............get it wrong.
At least the criminal trial lawyers cared enough about justice to chime in. How about the disciplinary board taking a look at this mess.........because it stinks.
All the records and transcripts in regard to this case should be released. The sealing of documents in this case are not being done to protect witnesses, but rather .........mischief.
At least the criminal trial lawyers cared enough about justice to chime in. How about the disciplinary board taking a look at this mess.........because it stinks.
All the records and transcripts in regard to this case should be released. The sealing of documents in this case are not being done to protect witnesses, but rather .........mischief.
Good question and one that will be ruled on again. If Baldwin acted solely on behalf of PSU, I guess PSU can waive privilege. These are the same people who claim Freeh's work was attorney-client privilege.
Off the record, I think it's likely that Mike did waver somewhat on his reporting of the events. But he's not the ultimate villain here. I think he was used. Nothing makes sense otherwise.
agreed on this. I believe Mike was a pawn in a bigger game and got in over his head quickly. I try to cut him some slack despite his personal failings.
I agree as well, however when MM allowed the OAG to convince him to play revsionist history in 2010 he would certainly know that it would royally screw over other people, namely any person that MM spoke to in 2001 re: the shower incident--Joe/C/S. He completely screwed them and ruined their lives.
Judge grants stay......Baldwin's testimony will be limited.
Are we finally getting a bit of common sense and proper legal rulings accomplished? This should not have taken this long, unless something is terribly wrong with the PA judicial system.
Baldwin can be deposed but cannot testify or disclose anything in regard to her communications with Spanier, Schultz or Curley.
Has anybody actually witnessed CR being shocked? Besides his shock therapy, I mean?
Agree but that cuts both ways.
What if "the truth which comes out" is not the truth many on this board believe to be true. There still won't be any closure since they will not accept the established facts. Classic example is the Free Jerry crew.
I think very few people think JS is completely innocent.On the other hand,
it is possible to believe that JS was railroaded and that at least some of the victims were cultivated by ambulance chasing lawyers and coached by investigators. I think there is a distinction.
Closure will be an individual decision. I reached it when I read the Freeh Report. It became apparent at that point, that the dog and pony show was warranted to divert attention from the lack of evidence to substantiate the "reasonable conclusions."
I think some have difficulty separating Penn State and Jerry. Considering Jerry was found not guilty on 2001 shower incident, it is really irrelevant to Jerry, but pertinent to CSS and therefore PSU and football. Jerry has been found guilty, so let's leave that aside even though there are obvious issues there. The question that remains is what was Penn State's involvement? OAG and Freeh have already presented their cases in public. MM testimony is central to CSS, considering all charges hinge on the 2001 incident and what MM told them. Considering MM story has evolved over time and CSS testimonies contradict MM later versions, it is likely that we will still have versions of the truth, but the court of law will decide guilt, if it ever goes to trial, so some versions of truth will carry more weight than others. I am doubtful that this case goes to trial. Then the question becomes will CSS talk publicly or slink away? Schultz is suing Baldwin, so if he doesn't drop that, he won't be slinking away and Spanier is suing PSU and Freeh, so only a settlement will quiet him. By the way, I expect that PSU will settle with MM and Spanier, and perhaps even with Schultz if he doesn't drop it (he might if he is found not guilty, charges are dropped, or Baldwin doesn't testify), leaving only a trial and Paterno lawsuit to get at the truth. And I'm not so certain that the Paterno case will ever make it to trial either, though I doubt that they will settle.
Oh and then there is the Fed investigations of the Second Mile, which I'm not sure anyone even knows if they are ongoing or not.
Oh and then there is the Fed investigations of the Second Mile, which I'm not sure anyone even knows if they are ongoing or not.
You are full of shit. There are maybe 3.2 total people in the Free Jerry crew. But nice try in deflection, stooge.
Pretty soon, you'll need to work Saturdays at Home Depot, since your stooge job will be gone. Just another over-educated graduate of a shitty law school who can't get a decent job in their chosen profession because of their own inherent mediocrity.
Seriously, some reporter needs to wake up and start to hammer this issue. It's amazing how this is allowed to continue and no one in the press blinks an eye.
I know! This is an insanely big story that is ripe for the picking and not one media person wants anything to do with it...not asking one question....wtf?!? Along with the judicial sytem the media in PA is a disgrace.
What about ghost employee ron tomalis (who pulled in over $100K of tax payer money per year)? The media started scratching the surface then completely dropped it. Didn't they want to know what the hell he was doing all the time and what his role was with freeh, psu og bot, and ncaa?? What about Jack Raykovitz ans TSM? All we get is crickets. Smh.
Last edited:
What also bothers me (other than the media) is that there apparently is no serious legal board or committee in PA to evaluate lawyer behavior. This is literally a case of lawyers and a judge blatantly ignoring 3 individuals constitutional rights and the legal community in PA couldn't care less.
Agree. Both sides are anchored in their views. Plus, there has been so much BS, who knows what the truth actually is.
Actually:
Brace yourself for this - if you are not aware - their is a Judicial Evaluation Commission as part of the Pennsylvania Bar Association.
Guess who swings his influence as a member of that commission?
Go on now.....just take a wild guess.
KEITH ECKEL
Guess who else is on that commission?
ERNEST (spouse of Kay) SALVINO
NEITHER of whom is even a member of the PA BAR.......NEITHER of whom (TTBOMK) is even a lawyer.
Good ol' Keith had himself placed on that commission just back in 2014.
Eckel already used his influence to knock Covey with a RARE "Not Recommended" rating in her campaign for PA Supreme Court.......of course, Keith claims he "recused" himself from those deliberations
You think any other Judges want to get knocked by the JEC? I don't think so.
You couldn't make this shit up.
Actually:
Brace yourself for this - if you are not aware - their is a Judicial Evaluation Commission as part of the Pennsylvania Bar Association.
Guess who swings his influence as a member of that commission?
Go on now.....just take a wild guess.
KEITH ECKEL
Guess who else is on that commission?
ERNEST (spouse of Kay) SALVINO
NEITHER of whom is even a member of the PA BAR.......NEITHER of whom (TTBOMK) is even a lawyer.
Good ol' Keith had himself placed on that commission just back in 2014.
Eckel already used his influence to knock Covey with a RARE "Not Recommended" rating in her campaign for PA Supreme Court.......of course, Keith claims he "recused" himself from those deliberations
You think any other Judges want to get knocked by the JEC? I don't think so.
You couldn't make this shit up.
The PA Bar association still has to intervene. I know expecting integrity from lawyers is a complete lost cause but this is just ridiculous- and that's accepting what Baldwin and company say as the truth. This isn't a 'he said/ she said' issue. Baldwin and company hang themselves in these transcripts.
Cruising Route 66
Well-Known Member
Two reasons:
1) IMO, Hoover's decisions were well thought out and articulated in convincing fashion. In his memorandum opinion he seems to have considered all the relevant facts and supported his decisions by referencing a fair number of legal precedents and tests that the commonwealth uses in making certain decisions. Here is a link to the memorandum opinion and order. It's slightly more than 50 pages but well worth the read for gaining insight why Hoover decided as he did, Note: There appears to be several erroneous dates contained in the document but they don't come into play with the issues being decided. http://onwardstate.com/2015/01/14/j...roperly-in-defense-of-curley-spanier-schultz/
2) Judicial politics. Judges normally don't like to overturn other judge's decisions and make them look bad unless there is some glaring mistake and I don't see that here. Further, this is being decided by a court that Judge Baldwin herself sat on.
BTW - Congratulations!!! That last post may have been your career best. INCREDIBLE....and 100% pure sycophantic bullshit.
Fan - f'n - tastic!!!!
Last edited:
The real problem with the Free Jerry Crew is that their misinformation campaign has been very successful.
Jerry was found guilty of 4 of 5 counts relating to the 2001 shower incident.
Problem with that -
For the record, I do not believe Sandusky is innocent and I'm not really shedding a tear that he's in jail, but do question the nature of his crimes. If any one of these incidents were tried individually by itself then it's unlikely the actual evidence holds up, particularly as it relates to incidents on PSU's campus (which comes down to the janitor incident and MM incident). With the janitor incident, facts have proven it to be a total farce. The only eye witness was asked three times by investigators if Sandusky was the man he saw in the shower and three times he said "no". They then decides he's unfit to testify, yet Sandusky was convicted of these charges too - w/out a witness or victim. There is zero chance this incident is even brought to trial by itself.
The MM incident is similar in that there is no victim (the one person that has come forward claiming to be that victim refuses to testify b/c he discounts the prosecution account), and Sandusky is convicted on lesser charges based on what MM hears, not what he sees (the jury acquits the notion that MM witnessed rape, which btw was the dam breaking on PSU).....and I might add what MM hears these three slapping sounds through a closed locker room door, from a shower around a corner and over running water for a total of about 3 seconds. Again, if this incident considered by itself - with the victim contradicting the star witness and the nature of the "proof" being what the witness hears for a few seconds as opposed to actually seeing - how on earth does that provide anything useful to determining what happened or the actual nature of a crime?
A lot about Sandusky's trial should bother people. Michael Jackson was charged with 9 counts related to child abuse. His trial took place a year after he was arraigned and lasted 6 months. Sandusky was charged with 40+ counts and was given 5 months to prepare (less when you account for discovery) and his trial lasted a couple of weeks. You had detectives on tape lying to get a suspected victim to change their testimony from nothing happened to they were abused. This is w/out even diving into Ganim's role in this and how she was acting to flush out victims.
So yeah, Sandusky may indeed be a sicko that deserves to spend the rest of his life in prison, but the notion that the trial actually involved getting to the real truth about all of the details and nature of his crimes absurd.
Not much in details, but this new story on StateCollege.com:
"Three former Penn State administrators have won their bid to keep certain testimony out of the courtroom in Mike McQueary's whistleblower lawsuit against the university. [...] Through a judge's order signed the next day, that request has been granted. Baldwin will not be permitted to testify about her communications with the trio of former administrators, not will she be allowed to speak about their grand jury testimonies in the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal."
http://www.statecollege.com/news/lo...-limit-testimony-in-mcqueary-lawsuit,1464795/
"Three former Penn State administrators have won their bid to keep certain testimony out of the courtroom in Mike McQueary's whistleblower lawsuit against the university. [...] Through a judge's order signed the next day, that request has been granted. Baldwin will not be permitted to testify about her communications with the trio of former administrators, not will she be allowed to speak about their grand jury testimonies in the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal."
http://www.statecollege.com/news/lo...-limit-testimony-in-mcqueary-lawsuit,1464795/
Who knows how this will all play out......and TTBOMK just about everything is this case is being maintained under a seal of confidentiality:
But, the order from the Judge seems to be VERY limited.....ie, Miss Daisy CAN be deposed on anything/everything EXCEPT conversations with CSS directly related to their Grand Jury appearance. If so, just about anything MM's lawyer would want to discuss - can be asked.
I would think, given that very limited exclusion, that the MM legal team would be very pleased with this ruling. I can't imagine that any of the GJ stuff would be of interest to them anyway.....and the "important stuff" wrt that suit comes post-GJ (or - possibly, depending on the nature of discovery - to the period well BEFORE the GJ).
Similar threads
