By what logic was PSU or UPPD in a better position to investigate 2001 incident than TSM?

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

PSU had:

• No Victim Identity (other than the information provided by JS - it was a TSM Participant)
• No report of criminality from witness
• Witness had never seen child before and had no idea who it was
• TSM was the licensed, Mandatory Reporter "Safe Hold Care Institution" under whose custody the child was under at the time
• No authority to investigate anything off of PSU's Campus including TSM themselves (e.g., demand personal records of TSM Participants, etc... - in fact, I would imagine it is illegal for TSM to provide Child-Participant Information [family information, etc...] to PSU or UPPD without "show cause"/"NTK").
• No access to TSM files or any idea who the child was (and the child could be a resident of any town, township or borough of any of 8 different counties???)

OTOH, TSM had:

• Custody of the child and Regulatory Responsibility for JS's Activities with the child (including reporting and tracking responsibility for JS's TSM Participant Activities)
• TSM had the records to confirm JS's statements and contact the childs family to investigate
• TSM was the licensed charity and a Mandatory Reporter under CPSL and their DPW Licenses
• TSM and their regulator CYS/DPW (who TSM was a major "agent" for - e.g., subcontractor...biggest in Centre County) were the experts regarding the situation and behavior in question
• PSU reported the Witness' Report to TSM and made them aware that they need to speak with JS and do whatever reporting they are required to make under their licenses and CPSL.

You have to be out of your mind to believe that PSU or UPPD was in any position whatsoever to tell TSM who the child was, where he lived, how to get in touch with his family, etc...-- utterly ludicrous to claim that PSU was in a better position to inform TSM than TSM investigating the incident and doing reporting as required!

 

[StinkStankStunk]

PSU had:

• No Victim Identity (other than the information provided by JS - it was a TSM Participant)
• No report of criminality from witness
• Witness had never seen child before and had no idea who it was
• TSM was the licensed, Mandatory Reporter "Safe Hold Care Institution" under whose custody the child was under at the time
• No authority to investigate anything off of PSU's Campus including TSM themselves (e.g., demand personal records of TSM Participants, etc... - in fact, I would imagine it is illegal for TSM to provide Child-Participant Information [family information, etc...] to PSU or UPPD without "show cause"/"NTK").
• No access to TSM files or any idea who the child was (and the child could be a resident of any town, township or borough of any of 8 different counties???)

OTOH, TSM had:

• Custody of the child and Regulatory Responsibility for JS's Activities with the child (including reporting and tracking responsibility for JS's TSM Participant Activities)
• TSM had the records to confirm JS's statements and contact the childs family to investigate
• TSM was the licensed charity and a Mandatory Reporter under CPSL and their DPW Licenses
• TSM and their regulator CYS/DPW (who TSM was a major "agent" for - e.g., subcontractor...biggest in Centre County) were the experts regarding the situation and behavior in question
• PSU reported the Witness' Report to TSM and made them aware that they need to speak with JS and do whatever reporting they are required to make under their licenses and CPSL.

You have to be out of your mind to believe that PSU or UPPD was in any position whatsoever to tell TSM who the child was, where he lived, how to get in touch with his family, etc...-- utterly ludicrous to claim that PSU was in a better position to inform TSM than TSM investigating the incident and doing reporting as required!

Anything else would be "idiotically ludicrous", if you will

So, of course, we can expect PSUNut to dive right into that pool

 

[PSU_Nut]

PSU had:

• No Victim Identity (other than the information provided by JS - it was a TSM Participant)
• No report of criminality from witness
• Witness had never seen child before and had no idea who it was
• TSM was the licensed, Mandatory Reporter "Safe Hold Care Institution" under whose custody the child was under at the time
• No authority to investigate anything off of PSU's Campus including TSM themselves (e.g., demand personal records of TSM Participants, etc... - in fact, I would imagine it is illegal for TSM to provide Child-Participant Information [family information, etc...] to PSU or UPPD without "show cause"/"NTK").
• No access to TSM files or any idea who the child was (and the child could be a resident of any town, township or borough of any of 8 different counties???)

OTOH, TSM had:

• Custody of the child and Regulatory Responsibility for JS's Activities with the child (including reporting and tracking responsibility for JS's TSM Participant Activities)
• TSM had the records to confirm JS's statements and contact the childs family to investigate
• TSM was the licensed charity and a Mandatory Reporter under CPSL and their DPW Licenses
• TSM and their regulator CYS/DPW (who TSM was a major "agent" for - e.g., subcontractor...biggest in Centre County) were the experts regarding the situation and behavior in question
• PSU reported the Witness' Report to TSM and made them aware that they need to speak with JS and do whatever reporting they are required to make under their licenses and CPSL.

You have to be out of your mind to believe that PSU or UPPD was in any position whatsoever to tell TSM who the child was, where he lived, how to get in touch with his family, etc...-- utterly ludicrous to claim that PSU was in a better position to inform TSM than TSM investigating the incident and doing reporting as required!

TSM and Penn State are not in the business of investigating alleged crimes. UPPD however is trained to investigate these type of cases. They are responsible to gather any information Penn State, TSM or any others have. It called an police investigation. You don't have Walmart investigate a murder at their store because they have all the customer and employee records. You allow the police to investigate and the other agencies cooperate and give over the information these. Agency are not suppose to investigate internally. They are to report it to the proper agencies to investigate.

Perhaps if given the opportunity to investigate the UPPD would have been able to provide the answers many want. They have the power to subpoena, execute search warrants to gather all relavent information which TSM and PSU doesn't.

 

[Legion of Lions]

PSU had:

• No Victim Identity (other than the information provided by JS - it was a TSM Participant)
• No report of criminality from witness
• Witness had never seen child before and had no idea who it was
• TSM was the licensed, Mandatory Reporter "Safe Hold Care Institution" under whose custody the child was under at the time
• No authority to investigate anything off of PSU's Campus including TSM themselves (e.g., demand personal records of TSM Participants, etc... - in fact, I would imagine it is illegal for TSM to provide Child-Participant Information [family information, etc...] to PSU or UPPD without "show cause"/"NTK").
• No access to TSM files or any idea who the child was (and the child could be a resident of any town, township or borough of any of 8 different counties???)

OTOH, TSM had:

• Custody of the child and Regulatory Responsibility for JS's Activities with the child (including reporting and tracking responsibility for JS's TSM Participant Activities)
• TSM had the records to confirm JS's statements and contact the childs family to investigate
• TSM was the licensed charity and a Mandatory Reporter under CPSL and their DPW Licenses
• TSM and their regulator CYS/DPW (who TSM was a major "agent" for - e.g., subcontractor...biggest in Centre County) were the experts regarding the situation and behavior in question
• PSU reported the Witness' Report to TSM and made them aware that they need to speak with JS and do whatever reporting they are required to make under their licenses and CPSL.

You have to be out of your mind to believe that PSU or UPPD was in any position whatsoever to tell TSM who the child was, where he lived, how to get in touch with his family, etc...-- utterly ludicrous to claim that PSU was in a better position to inform TSM than TSM investigating the incident and doing reporting as required!

Great Summary of core issues...You think the media (after 5 years) has not noticed most of this?? That is why I have always said this is a Harrisburg "engineered" story to cover-up "something else" with what has always been an absurd and factually void fantasy.

Time for us all to realize, there are some serious crimes being hidden here.... and Penn State University, its coaches and teams are not part of these crimes being hidden. However, some of our politically connected Executive BOT members....that's another story again.

Can you spell criminal collusion???

 

[StinkStankStunk]

TSM and Penn State are not in the business of investigating alleged crimes. UPPD however is trained to investigate these type of cases. They are responsible to gather any information Penn State, TSM or any others have. It called an police investigation. You don't have Walmart investigate a murder at their store because they have all the customer and employee records. You allow the police to investigate and the other agencies cooperate and give over the information these. Agency are not suppose to investigate internally. They are to report it to the proper agencies to investigate.

Perhaps if given the opportunity to investigate the UPPD would have been able to provide the answers many want. They have the power to subpoena, execute search warrants to gather all relavent information which TSM and PSU doesn't.

Yes, perfectly congruent analogy


Brilliant!!!!!

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

TSM and Penn State are not in the business of investigating alleged crimes. UPPD however is trained to investigate these type of cases. They are responsible to gather any information Penn State, TSM or any others have. It called an police investigation. You don't have Walmart investigate a murder at their store because they have all the customer and employee records. You allow the police to investigate and the other agencies cooperate and give over the information these. Agency are not suppose to investigate internally. They are to report it to the proper agencies to investigate.

Perhaps if given the opportunity to investigate the UPPD would have been able to provide the answers many want. They have the power to subpoena, execute search warrants to gather all relavent information which TSM and PSU doesn't.

You're absolutely incorrect - UPPD has no authority to investigate anything at TSM without making an arrest and a formal charge to investigate via Centre County DA. TSM on the other hand is mandated to INVESTIGATE SUCH REPORTS by their own Operational Policies & Procedures, by CPSL (TSM is a MANDATORY REPORTER under CPSL) and via their licenses with DPW/CYS -- in other words, TSM, AT A MINIMUM, was required to file a Child Hotline Report with DPW/CYS, but their own Operational Policies & Procedures said they would additionally conduct an "Internal Investigation" of any such "Incidence Report". By what warped logic do you believe UPPD had any ability to identify, verify and contact a child that could live in any town, township or borough of the surrounding 8 counties when they have absolutely no idea, nor does the PSU witness, of who the child is and Sandusky says it was a TSM Participant and therefore a TSM concern???? The PSU witness never even made an accusation of criminality nimrod - good luck taking that one to the Centre County DA asking for an arrest, criminal investigation and prosecution??? LMFAO.

 

[PSU_Nut]

You're absolutely incorrect - UPPD has no authority to investigate anything at TSM without making an arrest and a formal charge to investigate via Centre County DA. TSM on the other hand is mandated to INVESTIGATE SUCH REPORTS by their own Operational Policies & Procedures, by CPSL (TSM is a MANDATORY REPORTER under CPSL) and via their licenses with DPW/CYS -- in other words, TSM, AT A MINIMUM, was required to file a Child Hotline Report with DPW/CYS, but their own Operational Policies & Procedures said they would additionally conduct an "Internal Investigation" of any such "Incidence Report". By what warped logic do you believe UPPD had any ability to identify, verify and contact a child that could live in any town, township or borough of the surrounding 8 counties when they have absolutely no idea, nor does the PSU witness, of who the child is and Sandusky says it was a TSM Participant and therefore a TSM concern???? The PSU witness never even made an accusation of criminality nimrod - good luck taking that one to the Centre County DA asking for an arrest, criminal investigation and prosecution??? LMFAO.

Since when can police only investigate a crime after arrest? UPPD has the full authority to conduct a criminal investigation just like any other municipal police force. That include asking TSM for records, questioning Sandusky and if needed obtain a search warrant for any records or information they believe that they could be hiding.

So according to you if someone is robbed on campus and they don't make an arrest the UPPD can not do any investigation? They have to wait for the DA to make a formal charge?

In reality Section 2416.1 of the Administrative Code of 1929 (Act 57 of 1997) and Section 2416.1 Campus Police Powers and Duties gives them full power to investigate criminal activity just like State College police or any other municipal police force. They basically have full police powers. They are not security guards or public safety guards.

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/US/PDF/1929/0/0175..PDF

 

[StinkStankStunk]

Since when can police only investigate a crime after arrest? UPPD has the full authority to conduct a criminal investigation just like any other municipal police force. That include asking TSM for records, questioning Sandusky and if needed obtain a search warrant for any records or information they believe that they could be hiding.

So according to you if someone is robbed on campus and they don't make an arrest the UPPD can not do any investigation? They have to wait for the DA to make a formal charge?

In reality Section 2416.1 of the Administrative Code of 1929 (Act 57 of 1997) and Section 2416.1 Campus Police Powers and Duties gives them full power to investigate criminal activity just like State College police or any other municipal police force. They basically have full police powers. They are not security guards or public safety guards.

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/US/PDF/1929/0/0175..PDF

Good ol' PSUNut.....doubling down on "stupid" again

 

[Franklin_Restores_TheTradition]

Since when can police only investigate a crime after arrest? UPPD has the full authority to conduct a criminal investigation just like any other municipal police force. That include asking TSM for records, questioning Sandusky and if needed obtain a search warrant for any records or information they believe that they could be hiding.

So according to you if someone is robbed on campus and they don't make an arrest the UPPD can not do any investigation? They have to wait for the DA to make a formal charge?

In reality Section 2416.1 of the Administrative Code of 1929 (Act 57 of 1997) and Section 2416.1 Campus Police Powers and Duties gives them full power to investigate criminal activity just like State College police or any other municipal police force. They basically have full police powers. They are not security guards or public safety guards.

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/US/PDF/1929/0/0175..PDF

Too funny, Mike McQueary never filed a "criminal complaint" first of all. Secondly, the UPPD have no authority to investigate, issue subpoenas, etc.... in State College without first clearing everything through the Centre County DA doodles. So the UPPD is going to go to the Centre County DA (Gricar at the time) and tell them they have no Criminal Complaint, no eyewitness to any crime, no idea who the child was other than that they were a TSM participant, who Sandusky was fully authorized to bring on campus, etc....

BTW dip$hit, if a third-party goes to the UPPD and says they "think" they might have seen a robbery but they're not sure and the potential perp was a PSU professor, but they have no idea who the alleged victim was and no such victim made a report to UPPD.....according to you, the UPPD is going to go arrest the professor??? They might go question the professor (just as PSU questioned Sandusky), but what other "investigation" are they going to do if the professor says - oh that was my friend visiting from Clinton County, we were just horsing around and he's back in Clinton County....and the Police have no actual crime complaint with any actual evidence????