BOMBSHELL: Exculpatory Evidence Removed From Schultz File
- Thread starter mathprof
- Start date
The Honorable Judge Freeh will be coming back to campus soon to fulfill his contract and answer any and all questions.
Freeh did exactly as he was told and got 8 million for his opinion. We should be eternally grateful to Tom Corbett and John Surma. 2 slimy sacks of shit.The Honorable Judge Freeh will be coming back to campus soon to fulfill his contract and answer any and all questions.
Gee Wally, what does that big word exculpatory mean? Well, Beav, it means that something, you know, like maybe an article in a newspaper or somewhere, shows that someone is not guilty of something they were supposed to do. Wow, Wally, you sure do know a lot. I can't wait to grow up like you. Thanks, Beav. Just keep working at it.
Have any of you guys actually read the diary? The Triponey stuff is pure gold. In case you had the urge to add her to your Christmas card list, you won't leave disappointed.
Yeah, the woman who stood up to Joe Paterno. Even McCheshney knew she was a schizo........
Except that the subject under discussion is whether PSU reported the incident and evidence thereof. If Schultz, Curley, and Spanier, whose job was to cover PSU's ass, had done that, we wouldn't be having this discussion and the damage to PSU would have been avoided.
Look at the situation.
Jerry and Dottie made 11 or so calls to AM between September 2011, when PennLive wrote that the investigation was wrapping up and the release of the charges.
When the presentment came out, Amendola called AM and asked him to come in and make a statement that he was the kid in the shower and that nothing happened.
Amendola's investigator has AM read the presentment, then give a contrived statement that contained no information that placed him in the shower on the night in question. AM was certain it was March 2, 2002 -- which would be hard to confuse with X-mas break (Dec 29th). Agree?
Jerry also had AM sign his name to an op ed he didn't write.
See a pattern here? Good ol' AM will say anything. That's why neither the Commonwealth or defense could trust him as a witness. (And it was a waste of time for Jerry to pull him into the PCRA hearing on a fool's errand of trying to prove what was in McGettigan's brain).
Unfortunately, AM got a DUI and got hooked up with Shubin good ol' AM changed his story.
What were Jerry's options after AM flipped?
Jerry couldn't go out and say it was some other kid.
Last edited:
The March 2 date was not AM's date, it was Mike McQueary's and the OAG's date for the grand jury presentment. AM was just reacting to the gjp and he was confident that he was the boy in the shower that night because Sandusky told him in 2001 that Penn State had gotten a report of the shower incident and were investigating it and might be calling him (incidentally they never did call him). He did have a long term (10+ year) friendly relationship with the Sandusky family before he flipped. He asked Jerry to stand with him at senior night for his last high school football game. He lived for a short period of time with the Sandusky family. He invited Jerry and Dottie to his wedding.
AM is the only person who has made a credible claim to be v2. If it were somebody else, the OAG would have identified them and/or the "real v2" would surely have stepped forward to claim 3+ million dollars that Penn State would have be willing to pay him. It is simply not realistic that the most famous CSA victim in the world remains unknown.
Gary Schultz knows that AM is v2. This will become evident when Gary's interview with John Ziegler is released and it will eventually be released.
Mark Pendergrast knows that AM is v2, as do John Snedden, Malcolm Gladwell, Professor Frederick Crews, Dr. Carol Tavris, Joseph Stains, and many others.
Ralph Cipriano knows that AM is v2 as well as shown in his story of AM's PCRA testimony where he said he couldn't recall 34 times. I was at that PCRA hearing and it was clear that AM conviently got amnesia to protect his settlement money and that the OAG also knew before trial that he made the only credible claim of being v2.
http://www.bigtrial.net/2017/09/boy-in-shower-says-he-cant-remember-34.html
One of the tips I got was from an anonymous source who claimed a family member worked for CYS. Tipster stated that family member feared being fired for coming forward about the document. Tipster also said members of BOT knew the document existed. Diary seems to be proving him right.
CYS is not the play here. Search warrant for PSU or OAG is.
I'll keep my fingers crossed. On what basis can you (or anyone else) get a search warrant?
Good luck.
The damage to PSU had nothing to do with their reporting or not. The damage to PSU came about as a result of the OAG fabricating the anal intercourse accusation and the perception that MM reported as much.
2/29/12 entry on page 24 even mentions "Blue White illustrated blog: chain around JS activity@ 2010."
See Bushy was right, they're watching us.
See Bushy was right, they're watching us.
The reason no one believed him was because the OAG convinced the public that MM witnessed and reported anal rape, and C/S/S turned a blind eye to it.
FrancoFan already responded to most of this, but one thing I must add is why does it matter whether or not Allan actually typed the letter to the editor? You are acting like Jerry held a gun to his head and made him sign. The truth is Allan wanted to help, Jerry gave him Gary Grey’s number, Allan was a poor writer so he told Gary the information and Gary typed the letter, then Allan signed it. What’s indisputable is that by signing the letter and mailing it to the OAG and several newspapers, Allen agreed 100% with the letters contents and was very passionate about sharing that information.
Sure but the posters question was why didn't GS say he reported something. All I said was he did in fact say that but he wasn't believed. I didn't speculate why they didn't believe him. I would offer that another reason GS wasn't believed is he had no copies of notes suggesting he did in fact contact CYS. It now sounds like like maybe there was some record, that is why this is a big deal if true.
That diary entry about an exculpatory email needs some context. Here are the 5/1/12 diary entries right before and after it:
All of those diary entries are based on information from Fina, and relate to the physical Schultz file that was given to the AG in late April 2012 (two copies - one from Schultz, one from Belcher)
Take a close look at the full diary entry referring to the exculpatory 2.26 email:
It seems as though this exculpatory email was "on top" of the stack of document Schultz (i.e., "he") turned over to the AG.
There was exactly one 2/26/2001 email listed in the Freeh Report (Exhibit 5F). That same email (presumably in hard copy form) was provided by Schultz in his 10/31/2012 omnibus motion, at p.48:
https://web.archive.org/web/2013060...Schultz Omnibus Pre-Trial Motion 10-31-12.pdf
The question now is, why would that email be viewed as exculpatory? It's exculpatory only with respect to Schultz insofar as he is telling Curley he's got the ball to, among other things, report to DPW. (Recall, at the time, Schultz was only charged with perjury and failure to report.)
That email's exculpatory nature might carry weight if that were the only email. But it doesn't carry enough weight when considering subsequent emails that made clear the agreement that reporting to DPW was conditional.
Per Fina 5.1.12
Spanier brings everyone in on Saturday, Coble brings Becleher in as replacements, there was a Sandusky file - told her it was sacrosanct and secret; Gets a call on her way to work on Monday from Schultz- have to surrender keys, she's emotional - she may have been sleeping w Shuclttz -
Sees Horvath folder & one for GCS - She thought GCS file might be needed so she decides to bring it to him; thought about the Sandusky file, drawer with lock on it, hadn't seen file before, didn't look at papers but looked through and picked up 20 most incriminating papers & she drives to Schultz' house, she puts 20 in another folder, he takes documents, says thanks; CBaldwin tells her not to get rid of anything; she is now is in contact with Schultz - now she wants immunity - she was interviewed by McCall and Baldwin - separately
Schultz may have presented the papers to get immunity - (Fina got papers from two different sources)
She made a copy for herself before giving to Schultz
Stories are being put together to match each other
Exculpatory 2.26 email is on the top & they came in the same order where he says he thinks they contacted cps
Notes in Schultz hand 98 & 2001, minute details, profound control over 98 investigations - inappropriate at least at most criminal conduct
2001 handwritten note Mon 2.12 mtg with TMC reviewed 98 incident; tmc to confront JS, other consulted with Jo Pa extensively;
Knew about 98 details & psych reports;
Spanier brings everyone in on Saturday, Coble brings Becleher in as replacements, there was a Sandusky file - told her it was sacrosanct and secret; Gets a call on her way to work on Monday from Schultz- have to surrender keys, she's emotional - she may have been sleeping w Shuclttz -
Sees Horvath folder & one for GCS - She thought GCS file might be needed so she decides to bring it to him; thought about the Sandusky file, drawer with lock on it, hadn't seen file before, didn't look at papers but looked through and picked up 20 most incriminating papers & she drives to Schultz' house, she puts 20 in another folder, he takes documents, says thanks; CBaldwin tells her not to get rid of anything; she is now is in contact with Schultz - now she wants immunity - she was interviewed by McCall and Baldwin - separately
Schultz may have presented the papers to get immunity - (Fina got papers from two different sources)
She made a copy for herself before giving to Schultz
Stories are being put together to match each other
Exculpatory 2.26 email is on the top & they came in the same order where he says he thinks they contacted cps
Notes in Schultz hand 98 & 2001, minute details, profound control over 98 investigations - inappropriate at least at most criminal conduct
2001 handwritten note Mon 2.12 mtg with TMC reviewed 98 incident; tmc to confront JS, other consulted with Jo Pa extensively;
Knew about 98 details & psych reports;
All of those diary entries are based on information from Fina, and relate to the physical Schultz file that was given to the AG in late April 2012 (two copies - one from Schultz, one from Belcher)
Take a close look at the full diary entry referring to the exculpatory 2.26 email:
Exculpatory 2.26 email is on the top & they came in the same order where he says he thinks they contacted cps
It seems as though this exculpatory email was "on top" of the stack of document Schultz (i.e., "he") turned over to the AG.
There was exactly one 2/26/2001 email listed in the Freeh Report (Exhibit 5F). That same email (presumably in hard copy form) was provided by Schultz in his 10/31/2012 omnibus motion, at p.48:
https://web.archive.org/web/2013060...Schultz Omnibus Pre-Trial Motion 10-31-12.pdf
The question now is, why would that email be viewed as exculpatory? It's exculpatory only with respect to Schultz insofar as he is telling Curley he's got the ball to, among other things, report to DPW. (Recall, at the time, Schultz was only charged with perjury and failure to report.)
That email's exculpatory nature might carry weight if that were the only email. But it doesn't carry enough weight when considering subsequent emails that made clear the agreement that reporting to DPW was conditional.
Ray,
Hate going down this rabbit hole again but I will. I think you have done great stuff here and I tend to side with you on most issues. I have no idea on AM being V2 but in the absence of other info I tend to think he is
. no other V2 has ever appeared
. surely if the OAG knew the dates they could have met with JR and narrowed the list to a reasonable number of kids and found out.
. AM only flipped after hooking up with Shubin. hmmm?
.MM said he saw the kid right. Did he ever ID anybody? Pictures etc.
. PSU paid [of course] as if he were the Vic correct?
However my biggest beef with your analysis on V2 is AM's inability to draw the locker room. Really? A 14 year old goes into the locker once and is either abused or is involved in horseplay. 10 years later we should expect him to draw the locker room? No way. Especially a kid who can't seem to remember anything.
It was ten years later...there is a reason for statute of limitations. Frankly, nobody could remember jack squat. The investigation took TWO YEARS to ID the year the shower incident took place. If that doesn't tell you all of this "evidence" is suspect (at least), you'll never get it.
If context really mattered, you would consider why Schultz and the others were discussing Jerry's "future appropriate use of the University facility".
You would also consider Schultz's notes from 02/25/01, where he writes, "Tell JS to avoid bringing children alone into Lasch."
Is it reasonable to assert that Gary Schultz's response, after being told that a young boy had been anally raped in his facilities, was to focus on the circumstances under which the alleged rapist might use the facilities going forward?
"Avoid"? Are you effing kidding me? "Avoid"?
IMO, the key word in Schultz's note is "alone". That suggests his concern was not that Jerry was diddling boys in the PSU shower. It suggests his concern was that Jerry was putting himself in a he said/he said situation, which put the university at risk in the event of a lawsuit.
I would also add, regarding context, that there is not a single reference to the boy with Sandusky in the shower, in all the notes and emails from that time. Not one reference! Shouldn't he have been the elephant in the room?
Although I was hopeful I suspect jimmy nailed it. The referenced email is not particularly relevant given subsequent emails.
Do not forget the governor .... Corbett was dirt from his first day in politics
You don't get it. C/S/S would not have been convicted in the court of public opinion had the OAG not fabricated the notion that MM witnessed anal rape and reported as much.
I think that the lasting damage to PSU came from the Freeh Report and its direct accusations against Paterno, PSU Football, and the community (and the related fallout from the NCAA sanctions). If PSU had worked to keep the report restricted to the criminal charges involving Curley and Shultz (i.e. the administration), the damage would have been far less in the long run. PSU allowed (and I believe instructed) Freeh to speculate about Paterno and the football program, which made the story 1000x more salacious than it should have been.
Clearly the BoT was afraid of something. What? Who knows...potential criminal liability for themselves, wrongful termination lawsuit from Paterno, skeletons in their own closets, etc.
That question is the one that I would like answered in my lifetime. There was very little reason to drag Paterno and the football program into this whole thing if the OAG did not feel that Paterno's actions (or lack thereof) rose to the level of criminal liability.
So if PSU reports the incident to CYS and the police (and revokes The Grinning Baboon's campus privileges; just thought I'd throw that in for good measure), what does the OAG concoct and what are the charges against The Three Stooges?
Hell, Sandusky may not have been convicted (or even brought to trial) without that, either.
What a stupid thread. Bombshell. Enough already. I don’t see it on any site other than “truth”.
Don’t see the email either. Stop with the nonsense. Court of opinion with people is that paterno and psu covered it up. Period!
Don’t see the email either. Stop with the nonsense. Court of opinion with people is that paterno and psu covered it up. Period!
Latest posts
-
FB Recruiting Levenson's Takeaways: Star power on display at Rivals Camp Series in Dallas- Latest: Marshall Levenson
-
-
-
