blatantly naive. the lack of documentation is shocking and incompetent. The lack of documentation is so bad it suggests something nefarious (cover up).
BOMBSHELL: Exculpatory Evidence Removed From Schultz File
- Thread starter mathprof
- Start date
I think that diary can be dismissed as crap. For example, from page 11:
1. Info from Atty Mustakoff, info re: estranged wife of former player Kenny Jackson who wanted coach job that McQueary got. Jay Pat told him things were in turmoil and that mcquery had to get the job bc MM saw JS in shower; Jackson told some 2nd mile people re this; mustakoff to approach Gantner about coming clean.
We know this is complete crap. Mike McQ didn't get a job that Kenny Jackson wanted. Kenny Jackson left the position that Mike eventually got. Looks like a lot of misinformation in that diary.
1. Info from Atty Mustakoff, info re: estranged wife of former player Kenny Jackson who wanted coach job that McQueary got. Jay Pat told him things were in turmoil and that mcquery had to get the job bc MM saw JS in shower; Jackson told some 2nd mile people re this; mustakoff to approach Gantner about coming clean.
We know this is complete crap. Mike McQ didn't get a job that Kenny Jackson wanted. Kenny Jackson left the position that Mike eventually got. Looks like a lot of misinformation in that diary.
Again, imo, character and intent are very important here, and negate any naivety that someone may have who does not know any of them. None of the 3 people are incompetent, nor had/have any remotely nefarious intentions regarding anything. Once someone gets to know any of these men, they would know immediately these are good people who, given hindsight, made mistakes with whatever McQ told them. And we know that McQ's words to them did not match what was in the GJ presentment that lit this dumpster fire.
Editing per @JmmyW post below - taking out what is not accurate. Thx, Jimmy. Original text can be seen in posts below in response to this one.
Last edited:
Bob, I agree with your first paragraph. But I want to caution you about your second paragraph. Yes, you're correct the diary has an entry about not finding a smoking gun. However, there is a later entry about finding a smoking gun, which references the 2001 Schultz emails. Basically - watch the dates.
Here the relevant entries from the diary, and a blurb from Freeh's press conference:
(3/7/12) 2. No smoking gun to indicate coverup
Enough into details & haven't found that, but still could find something
[7/12/12, Freeh press conference: Freeh says they found critical written correspondence on 3/20/12 (i.e., the 1998 & 2001 Schultz emails)]
(3/21/12) Omar told tomalis & Frazier re emails, supports that Spanier new @ 98 incident; ack. Someone should got to authorities; that they should get professional help for JS & thought more than horseplay
(3/21/12) Conf Call: Omar talked to Frazier, emails re 20001 smoking gun & Ap call; Frazier thinks board members mh leaked info re payout - does Frank Gee [Guadagnino] know about email - OMAR to find out - but Fina didn't
(3/21/12) talked to Fina re email discover and sent a c to him of 2001 emails, will be a problem for AG [my comment - the problem is the statue of limitations on the charges against Curley and Schultz]
Enough into details & haven't found that, but still could find something
[7/12/12, Freeh press conference: Freeh says they found critical written correspondence on 3/20/12 (i.e., the 1998 & 2001 Schultz emails)]
(3/21/12) Omar told tomalis & Frazier re emails, supports that Spanier new @ 98 incident; ack. Someone should got to authorities; that they should get professional help for JS & thought more than horseplay
(3/21/12) Conf Call: Omar talked to Frazier, emails re 20001 smoking gun & Ap call; Frazier thinks board members mh leaked info re payout - does Frank Gee [Guadagnino] know about email - OMAR to find out - but Fina didn't
(3/21/12) talked to Fina re email discover and sent a c to him of 2001 emails, will be a problem for AG [my comment - the problem is the statue of limitations on the charges against Curley and Schultz]
This isn't merely a matter of C/S/S being erroneously charged with crimes they didn't commit. This is a case of them being set up. From Cynthia Baldwin's bait and switch at the grand jury, to Jonelle Eshbach's anal intercourse fabrication, to pretending the shower incident was 2002 so it would fall within the ten year statute of limitations, to Freeh. It goes on and on.
That's why I'm frustrated by people wasting time talking about whether an incident that didn't need to be reported was reported or not. Who gives a rat's ass? I want to see Tom Corbett, et al, make the perp walk!
Ok, that stuff about the timeline might be true. I honestly don't know.
But do you think there is any chance in the world that Jay Paterno told Kenny Jackson that they had to give the job to Mike instead of him because Mike saw Jerry in the shower? That just reeks of them searching for a storyline...
Considering MM, his Dad or Dr. D never reported (even anonymously) I'm sure everyone was worried about Big Red.
What I'm saying, and have been saying for years, is that an honest and literal interpretation of all the notes and emails exonerates all of them, regardless of Jerry's guilt or innocence.
It's time to move on to the elephant in the room, which is the corruption, collusion and malfeasance exhibited by the BOT, the OAG and the NCAA.
The answer to this is obvious to both of you. The email clearly hurt his cause. But the reason it hurt his cause is because of the interpretation that Freeh and the media ran with. Not because it was the most likely or logical interpretation. But because it was the most salacious.
Exactly. Confirmation bias. Louis Freeh stated he would work to produce the "desired results." There was never an independent investigation. If certain BOT members didn't fear their culpability, there would never have been a Freeh Investigation or Report.
I agree and would simply add that when the emails were leaked, it was announced by the leakers that they would be "damaging to Paterno". Nobody actually parsed them. Nobody read them in the context of C/S's grand jury testimonies. The presumption of innocence had already left the building.
Do people really think that it was an accident that the Freeh report was released to the press 15 minutes before Louis' PC? Or that the timing of the Freeh report, the removal of JVP's statue and the NCAA consent decree were random events? This diary, which I have not read, reportedly provides evidence that the NCAA and OAG were to receive advanced copies of the Freeh report back in April of 2012.
C/S plead guilty to one misdemeanor, which did not even apply to them. Six years after the fact, it was obvious they could not receive a fair trial. The Freeh report was used as a de facto GJ presentment to justify the charges against Spanier.
There is so much smoke here!
It doesn’t look like Freeh’s people spoke to Kenny...just his (ex?) wife. If they were divorced in 2012 when she was interviewed that introduces all kinds of problems.
You can steer a report if you select who you do and don't speak to and are careful with questions you do and don't ask.
Louis Freeh is a much better driver than he is an "investigator."
Obviously. That’s the whole point. The idea that even obvious points can’t just be agreed to without the same rhetoric is ridiculous.
Last edited:
Evidence points to "we are vulnerable for not reporting..." being inserted into the email. Also, proof that Freeh excluded part of an email that didn't support his assessment.
Read more:
http://notpsu.blogspot.com/2020/01/diary-entries-point-to-2001-email-fraud.html
In the PSU v. PMA case, PSU attorneys presented an email purportedly from the Schultz file that was not part of the Schultz file in the criminal case. To be clear, filings made by the Commonwealth and the defense in the Schultz case did not contain that email.
Also, only a few people have knowledge into the contents of the original Schultz file that was obtained from his office in January 2011. Cynthia Baldwin handled all evidence flowing from PSU. It is clear that Fina had the Schultz file when he questioned Paterno, Curley, and Schultz on January 11, 2011. Baldwin lied on numerous occasions at her grand jury appearance when questioned about when and how evidence was obtained.
Age is not a determining factor for grooming. Physical, mental, and emotional maturity is.
Making the argument that because someone is heterosexual as an adult that they wouldn't comply with sex acts with someone of the same sense while in puberty or in their adolescent years is another demonstration of how little you know about the subject.
I grew up in Central PA too and lived in a very rural, impoverished area (Juniata County). Perry County, next door, was the incest capital of PA. Sex between adults and children was common. I knew a few boys who were sexually assaulted by men. They weren't gay, they were impressional young kids at the time. They went on to lead normal productive lives as heterosexuals. My co-worker at DNI also fit that description.
The entry is entirely inaccurate. Kenny was leaving the job for a position with the Steelers and created the job vacancy. Mike didn't get the job. Kenny Carter got it.
When Carter left, Mike got his job (in 2004).
Yes. Baldwin, Fina, Frazier, Tomalis, and Freeh were all in on the cover up.
Kinda figured this when Mr. Potato Head slipped up weeks before the "independent investigation" results were released to the BOT. LOL
This is a stretch.
As I said before you generally don't document things that aren't a big deal. At the time, this was obviously not seen as a big deal by anyone involved (including MM, JM and JD). That is totally in line with absence of documentation.
Exactly. It is errors like this that make the diary very hard to read. This is so easily shown to be wrong, how much of what she wrote is actually believable, or as I noted before, how much of it is her own mental ramblings/theories or mental ramblings of her colleagues, vs what are facts.
I think the diary is useful at a macroscale to show:
a) how clueless the Freeh team was about almost everything surrounding this investigation.
b) how their outcome was predetermined and the tried the hardest to make Paterno as culpable as possible (even if it meant "bending" the truth).
Probably because Omar never reached his potential as a player. Sour grapes?
Please let me know when you find a guy who has coached for any period of time and doesn't have some ex players who hate his guts.
It if you’re going to be fair, you don’t generally seek the advice of legal counsel if you don’t see something as a big deal.
Easy worked as a Director of Personnel in football in 2011 and then left in January 2012. Not clear whether whatever problem he had with Ganter stems from that time or from when he was a player in 1998-2002.
Last edited:
Uh, no. It doesn't matter what you think, that's horrendous risk management. You know how to handle it and make sure your covering your bases, lowering your risk.
I disagree. I worked as an administrator in public schools. The superintendents consult district counsel several times a week.
First, didn't mean to imply they were guilty just that the optics looked bad. Second, I am in complete disagreement with your comment. If a person reports to me that they think an adult put a kid in danger I'd have a 3" three ring binder filled up; at least.
Disagree. Administrators should not be allowed to pick and choose which whistleblower complaints to document.
I don't believe that C & S conspired to cover things up but I definitely believe they failed miserably as administrators. You document what was reported and also document your response. Period!
Just think how different things would have turned out if this was done. There would be no dispute about what what MM told them (horseplay vs sexual assault).
Latest posts
-
-
FB Recruiting Levenson's Takeaways: Star power on display at Rivals Camp Series in Dallas- Latest: Marshall Levenson
-
-
-