BOMBSHELL: Exculpatory Evidence Removed From Schultz File

[Connorpozlee]

almost but not quite

I explained this several years ago somewhat differently but here goes

IF what MM saw was a crime - then It is absolutely 100% on HIM to report it - do not go home and talk to daddy - do not pass go!!

if it was something other than that - then getting it to JR should have been fine

the only reason (or reasons) it wasn’t was because there were petty personal and political axes to grind

I don’t think that’s different than what I said. What McQueary saw is not the issue. What McQueary said to those that he told is the issue. If he saw Sandusky tying his shoes in the locker room and told them he he saw Sandusky raping a boy in the shower then they should have reported it. If he saw a boy being raped in the shower and told them he saw Sandusky and a boy in the shower together and it was weird then telling TSM may have been an appropriate option.
Of course, if what McQueary saw was worthy of making a report to the police or protective services then he should have done it himself.
Edit: What McQueary actually chose to do with what he saw does not change what those that heard the information from him should have done with it.

 

[Art]

Art, you are usually right about things but you are off in this one. Seems to be because of your feelings about Spanier.

you have to put yourself in the “Social Services Child Welfare” world at that time

So let me try and clarify again

1-if MM saw what he thinks he said he thought he saw - then right to police for HIM. No daddie or Doc or Joe or TC GS or GS

2- if he saw something less then getting it to TSM was the correct thing to do. It doesn’t matter what their “resources” were - they were REQUIRED to take action. Just to make a point for everyone who is listening out there in BWI-land, it also doesn’t matter WHAT was reported - could have reported that someone stubbed a toe and that would have required action to be taken (to be crystal clear - that is NOT an exaggeration)

There realty is no in between here, EXCEPT when you have personal and political jealousies and opportunities for scores to settle - then you get this cluster...

We're not talking about the world of child welfare or Mike McQueary here, we're talking about Graham Spanier and his responsibility to protect PSU. He failed miserably on a number of counts, my animus toward him notwithstanding, with tragic consequences. And there certainly was an alternative.

 

[YYZ86]

Sorry, no.TSM was in no position, did not have the resources to conduct an investigation. It had no legal standing to do so. At best Raykovitz was a conduit, in this case a conduit who chose to do nothing. That the authorities chose not to prosecute TSM has nothing to do with whether Spanier adequately discharged his responsibility to PSU, which he did not.

You are so off base on TSM's responsibilities that I don't know what to say.

 

[Art]

I don’t think that’s different than what I said. What McQueary saw is not the issue. What McQueary said to those that he told is the issue. If he saw Sandusky tying his shoes in the locker room and told them he he saw Sandusky raping a boy in the shower then they should have reported it. If he saw a boy being raped in the shower and told them he saw Sandusky and a boy in the shower together and it was weird then telling TSM may have been an appropriate option.
Of course, if what McQueary saw was worthy of making a report to the police or protective services then he should have done it himself.

Certainly agree that McQueary had the responsibility to report this to the authorities. But that didn't happen. Instead, it wound up in Graham Spanier's lap. His reaction should have been "why am I dealing with this and how do I get rid of it so that it doesn't come back to bite my ass off?" Passing the buck to Jack Raykovitz obviously wasn't the answer.

 

[Art]

You are so off base on TSM's responsibilities that I don't know what to say.

Fine, so show me the law that fully protects someone from criminal prosecution by reporting suspected child abuse to an organization like TSM.

 

[colt21]

We're not talking about the world of child welfare or Mike McQueary here, we're talking about Graham Spanier and his responsibility to protect PSU. He failed miserably on a number of counts, my animus toward him notwithstanding, with tragic consequences. And there certainly was an alternative.

Ok I’

Certainly agree that McQueary had the responsibility to report this to the authorities. But that didn't happen. Instead, it wound up in Graham Spanier's lap. His reaction should have been "why am I dealing with this and how do I get rid of it so that it doesn't come back to bite my ass off?" Passing the buck to Jack Raykovitz obviously wasn't the answer.

but he wasn’t “passing the buck” by giving it to JR - they were putting the buck right where it should have been - in the hands of a clear mandated reporter who was required by law to act AND who was in charge of the charity that JS worked for!

 

[kentuckycb]

Sorry, no.TSM was in no position, did not have the resources to conduct an investigation. It had no legal standing to do so. At best Raykovitz was a conduit, in this case a conduit who chose to do nothing. That the authorities chose not to prosecute TSM has nothing to do with whether Spanier adequately discharged his responsibility to PSU, which he did not.

If TSM did not have legal standing to conduct an investigation (an assertion which can be argued reasonably either way), then how do you square that assertion with Spanier's conviction being overturned? The federal court quite literally concluded that Spanier did not have a legal requirement to report the McQueary incident. The law did not apply to him at the time.

And if TSM did not have the resources to conduct an investigation (an assertion that I doubt), then it should not have been in the business of caring for children in the manner that it did.

 

[YYZ86]

Ok I’


but he wasn’t “passing the buck” by giving it to JR - they were putting the buck right where it should have been - in the hands of a clear mandated reporter who was required by law to act AND who was in charge of the charity that JS worked for!

I'm done. I have stayed away from these threads for awhile. The idea of "passing the buck" does not apply here by law. I am out.

 

[Art]

Ok I’


but he wasn’t “passing the buck” by giving it to JR - they were putting the buck right where it should have been - in the hands of a clear mandated reporter who was required by law to act AND who was in charge of the charity that JS worked for!

Right, he put it in hands of someone who depended on Jerry's rainmaking ability for his livelihood. Rely on someone else to make a decision that safeguards the interest of PSU. Great decision-making right there.

 

[colt21]

If TSM did not have legal standing to conduct an investigation (an assertion which can be argued reasonably either way), then how do you square that assertion with Spanier's conviction being overturned? The federal court quite literally concluded that Spanier did not have a legal requirement to report the McQueary incident. The law did not apply to him at the time.

he was not a mandated reporter at that time

further, although he would technically be a “mandated reporter” now, this exact same situation would NOT have even made it to him today

finally, in today’s world, MM would be in so much trouble (including possible jail time) if he handled this the same way as he did then

I think that is quite telling - the fact that after the so called experts had all the benefit of hindsight to re-write the laws, that the $7m dollar man could be in jail and those that did go to jail would NOT have even been in the mix today - I gues I’m the only one that finds that odd

 

[Grant Green]

it worked out wrong for all the wrong reasons - not because it was the wrong thing to do

If you're trying to minimize risk to the university and have two options - tell a third party and hope he reports it, or report it directly to authorities, do you really think the first one is the best option? Why is it better than the second option?
Most of the time, things work out wrong when you chose the wrong option.

 

[kentuckycb]

he was not a mandated reporter at that time

further, although he would technically be a “mandated reporter” now, this exact same situation would NOT have even made it to him today

finally, in today’s world, MM would be in so much trouble (including possible jail time) if he handled this the same way as he did then

I think that is quite telling - the fact that after the so called experts had all the benefit of hindsight to re-write the laws, that the $7m dollar man could be in jail and those that did go to jail would NOT have even been in the mix today - I gues I’m the only one that finds that odd

Agreed, so I don't understand how anyone (like the OP) could be questioning Spanier's (or GS and TC) actions at this point, especially while at the same time defending the inaction of TSM.

 

[Art]

he was not a mandated reporter at that time

further, although he would technically be a “mandated reporter” now, this exact same situation would NOT have even made it to him today

finally, in today’s world, MM would be in so much trouble (including possible jail time) if he handled this the same way as he did then

I think that is quite telling - the fact that after the so called experts had all the benefit of hindsight to re-write the laws, that the $7m dollar man could be in jail and those that did go to jail would NOT have even been in the mix today - I gues I’m the only one that finds that odd

So not being a mandated reporter prevented Spanier from filing a report? Forget the legal niceties. Spanier had a problem. What course of action would have best protected PSU? He chose wrong.

 

[Art]

Agreed, so I don't understand how anyone (like the OP) could be questioning Spanier's (or GS and TC) actions at this point, especially while at the same time defending the inaction of TSM.

Who is defending TSM? And what responsibility did TSM have to PSU?

 

[kentuckycb]

Right, he put it in hands of someone who depended on Jerry's rainmaking ability for his livelihood. Rely on someone else to make a decision that safeguards the interest of PSU. Great decision-making right there.

So he should lose his freedom for a time and have his reputation ruined because he (maybe) made an error in judgment?

 

[colt21]

If you're trying to minimize risk to the university and have two options - tell a third party and hope he reports it, or report it directly to authorities, do you really think the first one is the best option? Why is it better than the second option?
Most of the time, things work out wrong when you chose the wrong option.

I wish I was on my laptop so I can type so much more but I’ll just say this - in my world “hoping” that TSM does something wouldn’t be an option - it would be the only course of action to take

 

[colt21]

So not being a mandated reporter prevented Spanier from filing a report? Forget the legal niceties. Spanier had a problem. What course of action would have best protected PSU? He chose wrong.

I’m sorry but I’ll politely disagree and leave it at that

 

[MtNittany]

All this hand wringing and back and forth is based on MM telling TC and GS what exactly? Yeah...

 

[kentuckycb]

Who is defending TSM? And what responsibility did TSM have to PSU?

You clearly did...you wrote that TSM did not have the resources or legal responsibility to investigate the issue? How are those assertions not defenses? It's not about TSM's responsibility to PSU, it's about TSM's responsibility to the (potential) TSM child, and Jerry for that matter (he worked for TSM). The mere fact that a report came in about Jerry should have triggered an investigation to ensure that Jerry's ability to spend time with children as a part of TSM was not compromised.

 

[colt21]

Agreed, so I don't understand how anyone (like the OP) could be questioning Spanier's (or GS and TC) actions at this point, especially while at the same time defending the inaction of TSM.

no matter what anyone thinks that conundrum should never happen - never.

but folks are letting their feelings get in the way - however those feelings don’t align with the rules in place at that time (nor now for that matter) - but those same feelings hold people back from “emptying themselves” so they could learn something along the way

 

[Art]

So he should lose his freedom for a time and have his reputation ruined because he (maybe) made an error in judgment?

Jail time, probably not, but that's because I think that what McQuaery communicated up the line was vague. But regardless of what he communicated, it put PSU in harm's way and his "error in judgement" assessing that threat severely damaged PSU's reputation and finances. And for that, his reputation is justifiably ruined.

 

[kentuckycb]

Jail time, probably not, but that's because I think that what McQuaery communicated up the line was vague. But regardless of what he communicated, it put PSU in harm's way and his "error in judgement" assessing that threat severely damaged PSU's reputation and finances. And for that, his reputation is justifiably ruined.

OK, fair enough. I think that you're being far too hard on Spanier given the entire context of the situation, but I can understand why someone would feel that way.

 

[Art]

You clearly did...you wrote that TSM did not have the resources or legal responsibility to investigate the issue? How are those assertions not defenses? It's not about TSM's responsibility to PSU, it's about TSM's responsibility to the (potential) TSM child, and Jerry for that matter (he worked for TSM). The mere fact that a report came in about Jerry should have triggered an investigation to ensure that Jerry's ability to spend time with children as a part of TSM was not compromised.

Let me make this simple for you. My contention is that Spanier did not adequately take steps to protect PSU. If you believe that reporting the 2001 incident to TSM was sufficient, then be happy with it.

 

[flash86]

We're not talking about the world of child welfare or Mike McQueary here, we're talking about Graham Spanier and his responsibility to protect PSU. He failed miserably on a number of counts, my animus toward him notwithstanding, with tragic consequences. And there certainly was an alternative.

Who provided Spanier with the legal advice on this?

 

[Art]

OK, fair enough. I think that you're being far too hard on Spanier given the entire context of the situation, but I can understand why someone would feel that way.

Again, context. Spanier was the president of a major educational institution. He had a duty to protect it. He didn't. He made the wrong decision and he had an alternative that any reasonable person could have made.

 

[kentuckycb]

Let me make this simple for you. My contention is that Spanier did not adequately take steps to protect PSU. If you believe that reporting the 2001 incident to TSM was sufficient, then be happy with it.

Yup, that's fair. I don't agree, but I don't think that your opinion is unfair.

 

[Art]

Who provided Spanier with the legal advice on this?

Don't know, but unless he was given compelling legal advice not to report Sandusky to the authorities, he has no excuse.

 

[PSU_Chicago]

We're not talking about the world of child welfare or Mike McQueary here, we're talking about Graham Spanier and his responsibility to protect PSU. He failed miserably on a number of counts, my animus toward him notwithstanding, with tragic consequences. And there certainly was an alternative.

Agree. Graham 100% failed in his handling of this.

 

[indynittany]

Too much to ask of him to let his fingers do the walking to the police and CYS, too?....

For horseplay? They never even mention the boy with Sandusky in either Schultz's notes or their email exchange. Their only concern was preventing a future he said/he said scenario.

Specifically, it's obvious by Spanier's email that none of them were concerned that abuse had occurred:

"....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....."

IF/THEN. For PSU to be vulnerable, a subsequent event would have needed to occur. Without the IF, there is no Then!

If what had been reported to them had warranted a call to the police, their concern would have been more immediate, wouldn't it? The boy would have been the subject of their emails, not the "appropriate future us of the University facility" by a suspected pedophile! If they had any concern at all, wouldn't the logical move have been to throw Jerry under the bus to protect the university?

In '98, there might not have been enough to criminally charge Jerry, but there was certainly enough to sue the crap out of him/TSM/PSU in civil court. Enough to make PSU settle in a heartbeat. The steps they took in 2001 were intended to prevent such an occurrence in the future. But why weren't they concerned about that in the present? Why weren't they concerned that the boy/his family might go to the authorities?

I'll say it again. Had the OAG not fabricated the anal intercourse nonsense, there is no PSU scandal. At worst, they would have been guilty of being fooled by a serial predator....just like CYS, adoption services, Gricar, etc... The minute it was learned that Tim reported the matter to Jack Raykovitz, PSU should have been in the clear.

Did the OAG make that up because they weren't about to try Jerry for just being creepy? They had Aaron Fisher and he wasn't very credible. These were political animals, so losing was not an option. Or did the OAG make it up because it was necessary to implicate PSU as the epicenter of Jerry's sick world instead of TSM? How much of this was Corbett trying to destroy Spanier? Paterno?

 

[kentuckycb]

Again, context. Spanier was the president of a major educational institution. He had a duty to protect it. He didn't. He made the wrong decision and he had an alternative that any reasonable person could have made.

I agree with the premise that Spanier's duty was to PSU. I choose to believe that Spanier felt that he was doing right to PSU by not potentially blowing up what he justifiably believed was an innocuous misunderstanding. Though, I also believe that reasonable minds can disagree on that point.

 

[flash86]

Don't know, but unless he was given compelling legal advice not to report Sandusky to the authorities, he has no excuse.

My take - not necessarily worth much, but including here to lead to my final point
1) If MMQ say child rape, he should have reported it.
2) IF MMQ told his father and a physician, the doc should have reported it.
3) Joe did what he was supposed to have done - endorsed as the NCAA standard after they vilified him (totally unappreciated in the US).
4) After PSU notified TSM, they should have reported and investigated.

I think - don't know - these are the legal issues.

5) Art put it this way: '[Spanier's] reaction should have been "why am I dealing with this and how do I get rid of it so that it doesn't come back to bite my ass off?' My thought is similar: "This sounds like an ugly thing; lawyers are the people who we take ugly things to to sort out." I truly would like to know more about the role of legal advice within PSU on this. It may have been stated before, but some details have faded over the past 8 years for me.

 

[indynittany]

Don't know, but unless he was given compelling legal advice not to report Sandusky to the authorities, he has no excuse.

Your hindsight is showing!

Not to mention, your judgement is completely jaded because you were falsely led to believe MM witnessed and reported anal rape.

If Spanier thought Jerry may or may not have inappropriately touched a boy, turning the matter over to the man responsible for both Jerry and the boy makes perfect sense. PSU had no authority over Jerry. However, it did have say over how the university's facilities were to be used. Taking away Jerry's guest privileges was a prudent response.

 

[step.eng69]

All this hand wringing and back and forth is based on MM telling TC and GS what exactly? Yeah...

That's the $12 million mystery, let's not exclude what the pecker head told JoePa.

 

[The Song Remains the Same]

That's the $12 million mystery, let's not exclude what the pecker head told JoePa.

Is pecker another word for red?

 

[LaJolla Lion]

I know you and Art think you have something here but you are seriously understating (or just not understanding) the point that reporting to JR should have been enough.

I know he is not the sexy name but he was the correct person to report something like this to. Further, the fact that he was a witness “against” GS is absolutely ludicrous to anyone who understands (truly understands) how these things work.

the only reason this came back to PSU is because people WANTED it to - period!

Believe it or not they could have done both. Spanier’s job was to protect the school and while it’s not always fair, those at the top have a much higher level of accountability. The whole thing was a witch hunt no doubt, but his own notes highlight the risk of not reporting it. He absolutely knew it could bite them in the arse.

 

[Kiber]

FWIW - My take.

After the 1-millionth JS related thread which reached at least 5 pages:

1. Everyone on this board is hoping for the 'magic bullet' which exonerates JoePa & Penn State

2. Unfortunately, since 2011/12 every time we've been led down the path of the "magic bullet", or the "bombshell evidence", or the "mystery witness" or "this guys going to be on the BOT and he'll shake things up".... it's amounted in nothing... zip, zilch

3. Each and every thread turns into all of us regurgitating the same info. that we all sort of/kind of agree on.

4. Unless there truly is a real "magic bullet" that without a doubt, under no circumstances, without question... exonerates JoePa/PSU, no one in the main stream media is going to pick up on it. At this point, I think you'd literally have to find video tape from 2001 of Paterno bursting into the SC Police dept, wearing a white hat, demanding JS be investigated... for any of the main stream media outlets to give it any attention. And unless the main stream media outlets report it, then 99.9999999999% of the general public will go about their days believing that Paterno/Penn State enabled a pedo and were just as guilty as JS himself.

5. Until #4 above happens, then we are all just wasting our time on another JS thread. It's tempting. We all really want to see Joepa/Penn State cleared and their names restored. But once the public (and now the media) has their minds made up on a subject, it's nearly impossible to change the narrative.

 

[ouirpsu]

FWIW - My take.

After the 1-millionth JS related thread which reached at least 5 pages:

1. Everyone on this board is hoping for the 'magic bullet' which exonerates JoePa & Penn State

2. Unfortunately, since 2011/12 every time we've been lead down the path of the "magic bullet", or the "bombshell evidence", or the "mystery witness".... it's amounted in nothing... zip, zilch

3. Each and every thread turns into all of us regurgitating the same info. that we all sort of/kind of agree on.

4. Unless there truly is a real "magic bullet" that without a doubt, under no circumstances, without question... exonerates JoePa/PSU, no one in the main stream media is going to pick up on it. At this point, I think you'd literally have to find video tape from 2001 of Paterno bursting into the SC Police dept, wearing a white hat, demanding JS be investigated... for any of the main stream media outlets to give it any attention. And unless the main stream media outlets report it, then 99.9999999999% of the general public will go about their days believing that Paterno/Penn State enabled a pedo and were just as guilty as JS himself.

5. Until #4 above happens, then we are all just wasting out time on another JS thread. It's tempting. We all really want to see Joepa/Penn State cleared and their names restored. But once the public (and now the media) has their minds made up on a subject, it's nearly impossible to change the narrative.

That's about as good a summation as I've seen. The only thing I'd change is to switch JoePa/PSU to PSU/JoPa since this whole cluster f is bigger than Joe.

 

[marshall23]

FWIW - My take.

After the 1-millionth JS related thread which reached at least 5 pages:

1. Everyone on this board is hoping for the 'magic bullet' which exonerates JoePa & Penn State

2. Unfortunately, since 2011/12 every time we've been lead down the path of the "magic bullet", or the "bombshell evidence", or the "mystery witness".... it's amounted in nothing... zip, zilch

3. Each and every thread turns into all of us regurgitating the same info. that we all sort of/kind of agree on.

4. Unless there truly is a real "magic bullet" that without a doubt, under no circumstances, without question... exonerates JoePa/PSU, no one in the main stream media is going to pick up on it. At this point, I think you'd literally have to find video tape from 2001 of Paterno bursting into the SC Police dept, wearing a white hat, demanding JS be investigated... for any of the main stream media outlets to give it any attention. And unless the main stream media outlets report it, then 99.9999999999% of the general public will go about their days believing that Paterno/Penn State enabled a pedo and were just as guilty as JS himself.

5. Until #4 above happens, then we are all just wasting out time on another JS thread. It's tempting. We all really want to see Joepa/Penn State cleared and their names restored. But once the public (and now the media) has their minds made up on a subject, it's nearly impossible to change the narrative.

There is a great deal of truth in what you say. However, for myself, I'm thankful for Ray and others who have spent countless hours to uncover the truth. I recall speed reading thru the Freeh Report and being confused that I couldn't seem to find documentation to justify the things that Louis the Liar said in his press conference. Like virtually everyone here, I certainly hope that someday the smoking gun will be waived under the collective noses of everyone....so that no one can deny that Joe was framed....stabbed in the back....whatever you want to call it.
However, in the meantime, I'm comfortable with the evidence I have seen and what I know is all that matters to me.
There are people here who would have waived the white flag when The Liar spoke. Like some who liked your post.

 

[pandaczar12]

Edit: What McQueary actually chose to do with what he saw does not change what those that heard the information from him should have done with it.

I agree 100%. And what the PSU admins did with the watered down hearsay doesn't change what MM, his dad, Dranov, Jack Raykovitz, and TSM should have done with it.

Fine, so show me the law that fully protects someone from criminal prosecution by reporting suspected child abuse to an organization like TSM.

Where your disconnect is that it wasn't "suspected child abuse". If they suspected child abuse, you are 100% correct, but clearly they did not.

If you're trying to minimize risk to the university and have two options - tell a third party and hope he reports it, or report it directly to authorities, do you really think the first one is the best option? Why is it better than the second option?

Are you talking about MM or PSU? [That's a rhetorical question]

 

[jerot]

I agree 100%. And what the PSU admins did with the watered down hearsay doesn't change what MM, his dad, Dranov, Jack Raykovitz, and TSM should have done with it.



Where your disconnect is that it wasn't "suspected child abuse". If they suspected child abuse, you are 100% correct, but clearly they did not.



Are you talking about MM or PSU? [That's a rhetorical question]

McQ saw nothing but city lights.
Before he opened the door to the locker room, McQueary heard slapping sounds. He thought they sounded sexual. As McQueary later put it when describing the scene, “Visualizations come to your head.” By the time he got to his locker at the near end of the wall, it had quieted down. Curious, he looked obliquely into the shower room through a mirror across the room and caught a glimpse of a boy in the shower. Then an arm reached out and pulled the boy back. Horrified, he assumed that he had just overheard the sounds of child sexual abuse. After closing his locker, he saw Jerry Sandusky walk out of the shower. Was his former coach a pedophile?

McQueary quickly left the building and called his father, John McQueary, and told him his suspicions. His father advised him to come right over to talk about it. Then John McQueary called his employer and friend, Dr. Jonathan Dranov, a nephrologist, asking him to come over and help them sort out Mike’s disturbing experience.

Dranov attempted, using the diagnostic and interviewing skills that he used with patients, to get a clear description of the scene that had so upset his friend’s son. Dranov was unable to get Mike McQueary to put into words anything sexual he had seen, in spite of asking several times, “But what did you see?” McQueary explained that he had seen a boy in the shower, and that an arm had then reached out to pull him back. Dranov asked if the boy had looked scared or upset. No. Did Mike actually see any sexual act? No. McQueary kept returning to the “sexual” sounds.

Upon the advice of his father and Dr. Dranov, Mike McQueary took his concerns to legendary head coach Joe Paterno at his home the next day. Apparently because McQueary did not actually witness anything sexual, they did not suggest he contact the police, nor did they feel called upon to do so.

This was the only initiative McQueary ever took connected with the shower incident. Paterno subsequently told his immediate supervisor, Athletic Director Tim Curley, about it, who told Vice President Gary Schultz and university President Graham Spanier. Curley and Schultz met with McQueary to hear what he had seen and heard. From that conversation, they concluded that Sandusky had been “horsing around” with a kid and that, while it was not sexual abuse, it wasn’t a good idea, particularly because they remembered that a parent had complained back in 1998 about Sandusky showering with her child (details on that incident shortly).

So Curley told Sandusky that as a result of someone (he didn’t name McQueary) complaining about the shower incident, he should stop working out with Second Mile kids on campus, and there the matter was left, case closed.