Ziegler Slaten today 4:30 PM ET
- Thread starter JeannieNeedsAShooter
- Start date
I can't recall what Harmon has testified to, if he has a all. Can anyone help me out, please???
I believe the story is bigger than JZ. I believe the story is about injustice and the search for the truth. I don't believe that Joe Paterno has received the credit he deserves for his lifetime of achievement and that he was unfairly disparaged by the Freeh Report. I also don't believe that Jerry Sandusky received a fair trial. The truth will not be known and justice not be served until the Freeh Report is independently examined and an objective review of whether or not Jerry Sandusky received a fair trial is performed.
He testified at the 2013 prelim. IIRC, his testimony concerned the 1998 incident, the fact that he was informing Schultz of the details of the investigation and that he assumed that information was being passed along to Curley and Spanier. As to why the investigation was dropped, that was a decision made by Gricar. Sadly, nobody asked him who was responsible for hiring Seasock.
and we this because?? that's what he says?? That's what GS says?? Who says he want involved??
well wasn't he the Captain of PSU police department?? And if so, why wouldn't somebody ask him about what he knew and when he knew it? they seemed to ask everyone else
Harmon was asked about 2001. His answers all conveniently consisted of "I don't remember"....and that about sums it up for him re: 2001.
He didn't remember Schultz asking him for the 1998 file, he didn't remember if he gave it to him, he didn't remember if a report was made, etc.
Harmon had a bad case of Commonwealth demensia.
thanks, and this is why I think he is the key (along with WC). He has to know more.
Exactly. I dont buy for some second that Harmon wasnt told about 2001.
Freeh actually mentions in a footnote the email Schultz sent to Harmon asking for the 1998 file but didnt include the actual text of that email, he only included the email harmon wrote back stating yes they have the 98 file in their archives. It's reasonable to conclude freeh left out schultz's email bc it mentions the 2001 incident.
I agree with you on WC being key as well. It sure would be nice if PSU waived ACP so we could see exactly what schultz told WC and exactly what WC advised re: 2001 now wouldnt it? It's reasonable to conclude that this hasn't happened yet bc it would kill the current narrative.
I used to think WC was an enemy, but I think he's been stifled.
I think he told Schultz exactly what they would need to hear from McQueary to be required to file a report to CYS/DPW.
funny, again, I must mention it is very telling that C/S/S were not charged with FTR for what they did in 2001. I mention that over and over because it COMPLETELY undercuts the false narrative the losers try to push.
Why wouldn't Schultz mention in his testimony the fact that the PSU police chief knew about 2001? That would get everybody off the hook (except maybe Harmon)? And why doesn't this fact appear in the C/S/S emails? Why debate referring the matter to DPW if it's already been reported to the police? And why didn't Schultz make a note of the fact that he had reported the matter to Harmon? He seems to have made a note of everything else. And did he keep this fact from everybody else? If not, why didn't Paterno, Curley, and Spanier testify to it? And when McQueary, Sr. asked Schultz what the status was, why didn't Schultz say, "We reported it to the cops?"
And why hasn't Schultz's lawyer said, "My client went to the police with McQueary's allegations right after he knew of them."
Has it occurred to you that the email Schultz sent may also contain some highly confidential information unrelated to Sandusky? Schultz may have stuck the request for information concerning 1998 in an email that's mostly about some other topic so as to not arouse suspicion.
To be clear, I'm perfectly willing to believe that Harmon cooperated in the 2001 coverup as he acted highly inappropriately in the '98 investigation, I've just never seen any evidence that he knew.
Last edited:
That doesn't change the fact Ziegler is an opportunist looking to stay relevant. His behavior since joining the free JS movement has been deplorable.
If you really want people to take those issues seriously Ziegler is the last person you want on your side.
Ziegler has uncovered more hidden truths and exposed more myths than anyone else in this fiasco. His delivery sucks, which allows the PC police to cry foul, but he is on it. The PC crowd shouting down the silent majority is about to go down the tubes soon as well.
Hopefully the Freeh documents will released publicly and then we'll know more.
I have no idea...that's why we need the trials to happen. Maybe Schultz didn't recall if Harmon (specifically) was informed one way or the other and didn't want to speculate? Schultz's memory wasn't too great either but that's not surprising since it was an incident from 10 years prior and Baldwin told them not to refresh their memories or review emails/notes. Was Schultz ever asked directly if he specifically told Harmon about 2001? I don't remember.
Maybe he didn't want to unnecessarily throw Harmon under the bus....who the hell knows? Maybe Schultz did make a note in his "secret" file of informing/talking with Harmon re: 2001 and we just haven't seen it yet? Keep in mind all we know about Schultz's notes is what the state/prosecution/freeh wanted us to selectively see...that's it. You can bet you ass there are other notes/emails in the file that are exculpatory.
We do know for a fact that Schultz sent Harmon an email on the morning of Monday 2/12/01. We don't know exactly what it said but we do know that somewhere in the email he asked if Harmon still had the 1998 report (if in this email Schultz didn't mention the 2001 incident why would he be randomly asking to see a 3 year old report that was already closed out?? It makes no sense unless 2001 was mentioned). The better question is why didn't freeh include the text of this email Schultz sent to Harmon, especially if it would help the current narrative?? If it contained other confidential info that had nothing to do with 2001 JS incident freeh could have redacted those parts. But nope, freeh never even showed ANY of that email. That is highly suspicious to me.
If you actually read the emails/notes you'll see the admins didn't debate referring suspected child abuse for DPW to start an investigation, they contemplated informing DPW ONLY IF JS didn't agree that his late night inappropriate showering behavior was wrong/needed to stop. The emails mention they were going to inform TSM with or without JS's cooperation and also loop in DPW if JS didn't agree with their new directives. Apparently JS did agree with their directives so there was no need to bring in DPW as an "independent agency concerned with child welfare". So the admins went on to inform TSM but not DPW. Informing DPW was a completely separate issue from informing CC CYS. If WC looked the statues up correctly he would have told Schlutz that if he wanted to report suspected abuse it needed to be done via phone ASAP (through ChildLine) and in writing to CC CYS within 48 hours.....NOT DPW two weeks later mind you.
Regarding Schultz's follow up convo with JM a few months later, that's pretty much what Schultz did say. He told JM that JS had been looked into but there wasn't anything to sink their teeth into. That could mean a number of things, including "We reported it to the cops" or CC CYS was told but then did nothing, etc... The better question re: JM following up with Schulz (if MM really was certain in 2001 that JS was sodomizing a kid) is why didn't JM ask Schultz why no one from UPPD EVER came to get MM's written statement and why didn't JM make a big stink about the fact a child rapist was still walking around the streets? JM and MM for that matter seemed to have no problems with JS not getting arrested for the next ten years.....so not really sure how you explain that one.
Last edited:
GS did keep notes, and in one of them was a list of things to do including: report to child welfare (something like that). He testified it was reported to same agency as the 98 investigation, and WC says it was reported but cant remember by whom. So I reasonably conclude that Harmon was given the job of reporting it to 'same agency as the 98 investigation', and 1 of 2 things happened, 1) he just didn't do it or 2) he did it and they dropped the ball again and no one will own up to that.
So let me get this straight, there was an e-mail from Schultz to Harmon telling Harmon of what happened but Freeh knowingly ignored this so as to make it looked like G/S hid what was going on.
Okay, next question is, why would Freeh ignore such evidence? Before you say, because he's an evil POS or whatever, let's assume for a minute that he was evil enough to do this. The next question becomes, why would he do it when he knew that the only way he'd get away with it is if he knew that nobody else would ever see these e-mails? At that point, Freeh is not only evil but incredibly stupid.
Okay, next question is, why would Freeh ignore such evidence? Before you say, because he's an evil POS or whatever, let's assume for a minute that he was evil enough to do this. The next question becomes, why would he do it when he knew that the only way he'd get away with it is if he knew that nobody else would ever see these e-mails? At that point, Freeh is not only evil but incredibly stupid.
Yes...in case you haven't noticed that's pretty much Freeh's MO..even going back to his FBI days -- hide/alter evidence so it fits his predetermined outcome.
We already know for a FACT that CSS did NOT hide what was going on, they forwarded their new directives and what MM told them OUTSIDE of PSU to JR at TSM (who was required by LAW/TSM policy to look into any and all incident reports about their employees).
Why the hell do you think freeh/OG BOT/NCAA/OAG/PA Dept. Edu, etc. have been fighting tooth and nail to prevent the release of emails and unredacted freeh report source docs??? They aren't doing this just for the fun of it. In fact, if those emails/docs support the current narrative they should be happy to let people have access to them. They know that as soon as this happens the false narrative they've been tirelessly working to promote/protect is going to come crashing down.
and somebody in the state of Pa higher than JVP (despite the fact he ran the state) will have to answer for it!! What a can of worms this will open. Get you popcorn ready!
If the jury found the accusers credible, the defense would be in big trouble. The art of cross examination is to elicit information without getting the jury upset. The idea is to get the witnesses talking and have them state inconsistencies that can be referred to later. IMO, there were a fair amount of inconsistencies in the accuser stories that the defense was not able to take advantage of.
If it's that simple then they're incredibly stupid but I doubt it's that simple because I doubt they or anyone is that stupid. Schultz is coming up for trial and I don't know how the legalities work but I assume if he sent such an e-mail to Harmon then it would simply be a matter of bringing it out in court and the whole thing would be over.
Any why would all the entities you mention want to do this anyway? What would they care if Schultz turned the case over to Harmon from the beginning? Do they have some vested interest in Schultz being the bad guy instead of Harmon? Why not just, you know, follow the trail wherever it take you?
Any why would all the entities you mention want to do this anyway? What would they care if Schultz turned the case over to Harmon from the beginning? Do they have some vested interest in Schultz being the bad guy instead of Harmon? Why not just, you know, follow the trail wherever it take you?
There aren't even trials dates set yet for CSS (almost 4 YEARS later...)so I'm not sure what you're talking about regarding an upcoming trial for Schlutz. There are oral arguments scheduled in early August for CSS but that's regarding ACP and Baldwin.
We don't know for sure why these entities are doing this. Hence our pursuit of the truth. It's isn't hard to think of a few reasons though...namely the state didn't want it's horrid and incompetent CYS/DPW system on display to the entire world (however this has already started happening thanks to the Tutko case) and there's also the fact that tons of Centre County businessmen, judges, and political big wigs (see Corbett, Tom) had ties to JS/TSM and TSM's BOT and they didn't want the embarrassment of TSM getting thoroughly looked into and them being liable for financial settlements. Then there's the petty vendetta's between Corbett/Spanier and Surma/Paterno that also probably played a role in this entire mess.
The state didn't want to admit that Harmon was told about the '01 incident b/c that wouldn't fit into their false narrative that CSS were running a nefarious coverup. Admitting the chief of police was told about 01 kinda blows the cover up narrative out of the water. Also with CSS being charged the state effectively silenced them in speaking out against MM's 2010 version of events (a rape in the psu showers) which was KEY to the state's entire case against JS which kept the spotlight on PSU's supposed cover up vs. the state's failures to properly monitor and restrict JS's access to kids after 1998/2001.
If they were legit why did Fina tell the judge they had no intentions of trying the CSS cases?
If you guys are legit, why do you keep posting this statement out of context in order to mislead people? In the context it was given, it was clearly meant as "we are not trying CSS here right now; we are trying Sandusky; so let's keep this on track to the Sandusky trial".
In the Petition for Post Conviction Relief, Al Lindsay makes a strong case that D. The Unavailability of CSS due to the Commonwealth's Disingenuous Charges Against them Violated Sandusky's Right to Present Witnesses and Compulsory Process (paragraphs 205-218 on pages 45-49).
In paragraph 206 on page 46:
"THE COURT: If they're acquitted, then potentially it creates a problem, depending on how I rule
So the question in my mind is not the admission of the statement. It is what restriction, if any, should be placed on the Commonwealth?
Another concern that I have is there's some fundamental due process issues, and I'm not suggesting that the Commonwealth has in any way improperly. But one could easily see how the Commonwealth could hamstring the defense by issuing target letters or indictments directed toward defense witnesses. Therefore, you know, effectively quieting a witness who has no choice but to exert a Fifth Amendment privilege. I'm not suggesting that was done, but I'm trying to figure out how to sort through that problem."
The cases against CS&S and against JS are inherently related. The unavailability of CS&S as witnesses did hamstring the JS defense.
They have to be important inconsistencies or you just look desperate.
You can't honestly believe everyone except Sandusky is lying?
I don't believe all of the accusers are being entirely factual in their accounts. In particular, I think it is more likely that not that AM (v2) and Matt Sandusky were telling the truth in their defense of JS after he was arrested than their accounts after Joe Paterno was fired and they hired a lawyer. I believe the potential of getting a multi million dollar settlement may have been too difficult to resist.
I think it is entirely possible that AF was not molested by JS. It took over 4 months from when AF's mother first called CMHS to express her concern until when AF first made his allegations that he had been sexually molested. He was only able to make these allegations after he received Repressed Memory Therapy and with his psychologist Mike Gillum present. Add to this, there are a number of people from Lock Haven who know AF well that have spoken on record that AF's behavior has not consistent with being a CSA survivor and they don't believe he is being truthful in his allegations. At a minimum, I believe AF's allegations are very suspicious.
If AF's allegations don't pass muster, then all of the other allegations become questionable. JS did not receive a fair trial and deserve hearings into whether or not a new trial is warranted.
The PC police?
"I've never said the victims were lying, that would be ridiculous"
"I couldn't care less about that (Sandusky's guilt) at this point. He had his day in court"
Those are from JZ in March of 2013. A year later Sandusky is his sole focus.
He's a pathetic little man that got pushed out and changed up to stay relevant. All he does now is attack victims.
So you do think they're all lying. Everyone just decided a saintly old man had to go down for some unknown reason.
It just so happens that this saintly old man made a habit of showering alone with kids even after he knew it was wrong.
That doesn't make any sense at all. You want him to be innocent so you'll believe whatever fits that agenda.
I want the truth to be known. I want the Freeh Report to be independently reviewed. I also want hearings into whether or not a new trial for Jerry Sandusky is warranted. I am willing to let the chips fall where they may fall.
Don't forget one of the other biggest issues raised in the PCR petition was the prejudicing of the jury pool via 2 separate illegal leaks of GJ info before the trial of JS (and by extension CSS): the first being the illegal leak of GJ testimony to Sarah Ganim in March 2011 and the 2nd the "accidental" posting of the GJP. In their response to the PCR filing how exactly is the state going to argue the jury wasn't prejudiced by these leaks?? The GJ secrecy rules exist for a reason...and that reason is if they are broken it can taint juries and ruin prosecutions b/c mistrials will be called. Whoopsies!!
It's pretty hard to say the jury pool in Centre County (and most of the country for that matter) wasn't prejudiced by these 2 illegal leaks. Yet the state of PA seems to have no curiosity whatsoever about how these leaks happened and who was responsible for them (unless your name is Kathleen Kane, then the state wants to know all about those leaks... of course). WTF??
JS may very well be a monster but re: whether or not he had a fair trial just ask yourself if you'd be ok with the state illegally leaking GJ info to the press TWICE before you even had your day in court. Would you feel the jury was prejudiced against you or not??
I know I would.
No, not an unknown reason. How about covering up for financial malfeasance by TSM (and their political benefactors, etc.) and OG BOT at PSU?
JS had his proclivities and was getting some heat so maybe the big wigs decided to get all the attention on JS and some PSU admins/football coach so no one would dig into the affairs of TSM/OG BOT? JS had put himself in enough odd situations (see 1998 and 2001 shower incidents) that he couldn't explain himself out of and CSS were thrown in the mix to give the cover up narrative some legs.
Masser himself said in his depo the reason the PSU BOT did the freeh report/CD was so no OTHER INVESTIGATIONS (by the NCAA and whoever else) would need to take place. How convenient....I guess it has worked so far....TSM big wigs rode off into the sunset without so much as an inquiry from anyone in PA LE (except the feds who are now looking into them and PSU).
The Freeh report is a different animal. As jacked up as it is, it didn't put Jerry in jail. Someone just doesn't want to let his 3 minutes go. He knows a small amount of PSU folks who would buy his BS with no new real facts. He wants everyone to believe that every victim made everything up or was forced/coached to lie. JZ has a little groupie section that need to realize JS is actually a molestor.
