ADVERTISEMENT

Fina Disciplinary Hearing Today

lubrano

Well-Known Member
Sep 28, 2005
1,094
7,638
1
Began at 10 am.

Amelia Kittredge prosecuting for ODC.

Good opening by Kittredge.

Fina represented by McAndrew and McGettigan.

McAndrew took the same approach as Baldwin’s Counsel in her ODC Hearing last month. The PSU administrators engaged in a concealment.

Lawrence Fox testifying now as expert witness for prosecution.

Ron Castille scheduled to testify as expert for Defense.

BTW, additional hearings scheduled for 7/27 and 7/31.
 
Began at 10 am.

Amelia Kittredge prosecuting for ODC.

Good opening by Kittredge.

Fina represented by McAndrew and McGettigan.

McAndrew took the same approach as Baldwin’s Counsel in her ODC Hearing last month. The PSU administrators engaged in a concealment.

Lawrence Fox testifying now as expert witness for prosecution.

Ron Castille scheduled to testify as expert for Defense.

BTW, additional hearings scheduled for 7/27 and 7/31.

McAndrew??? :eek:
 
Began at 10 am.

Amelia Kittredge prosecuting for ODC.

Good opening by Kittredge.

Fina represented by McAndrew and McGettigan.

McAndrew took the same approach as Baldwin’s Counsel in her ODC Hearing last month. The PSU administrators engaged in a concealment.

Lawrence Fox testifying now as expert witness for prosecution.

Ron Castille scheduled to testify as expert for Defense.

BTW, additional hearings scheduled for 7/27 and 7/31.

Any reason the additional hearings are scheduled for more than a month later?
 
Began at 10 am.

Amelia Kittredge prosecuting for ODC.

Good opening by Kittredge.

Fina represented by McAndrew and McGettigan.

McAndrew took the same approach as Baldwin’s Counsel in her ODC Hearing last month. The PSU administrators engaged in a concealment.

Lawrence Fox testifying now as expert witness for prosecution.

Ron Castille scheduled to testify as expert for Defense.

BTW, additional hearings scheduled for 7/27 and 7/31.
Nothing will happen to these assholes. They are ABOVE the law!
 
Update:

In reading about the Stacy Parks Miller disciplinary hearing, this is what I understand will happen. I assume this applies to Baldwin & Fina. (I put in a call to the D Board Exec Offices for clarification but have not heard back, but will try again with the local D1 office.)

Whatever the hearing panel decides is a recommendation only, made to the full Disciplinary Board. The Full Disciplinary Board reviews the record, and then makes its own recommendation to the Chief Justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

That would be Chief Justice Thomas Saylor. The same guy who empaneled this grand jury task force back in July 2017, that is still meeting last I spoke with an attorney on this task force.

Is this a good thing that Saylor reviews the record on Fina? He certainly abused the grand jury process.

The D Board can accept, reject, increase or decrease the penalities recommended by the hearing panel.

The Chief Justice then passes the recommendations on to the full state Supreme Court, which again, can accept, reject, increase, or decrease the penalties recommended by the Disciplinary Board.

So I am wondering if Fina and/or Baldwin aren't thrown under the bus by the Supreme Court. Which of course, would make everyone's day.
 
Update:

In reading about the Stacy Parks Miller disciplinary hearing, this is what I understand will happen. I assume this applies to Baldwin & Fina. (I put in a call to the D Board Exec Offices for clarification but have not heard back, but will try again with the local D1 office.)

Whatever the hearing panel decides is a recommendation only, made to the full Disciplinary Board. The Full Disciplinary Board reviews the record, and then makes its own recommendation to the Chief Justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

That would be Chief Justice Thomas Saylor. The same guy who empaneled this grand jury task force back in July 2017, that is still meeting last I spoke with an attorney on this task force.

Is this a good thing that Saylor reviews the record on Fina? He certainly abused the grand jury process.

The D Board can accept, reject, increase or decrease the penalities recommended by the hearing panel.

The Chief Justice then passes the recommendations on to the full state Supreme Court, which again, can accept, reject, increase, or decrease the penalties recommended by the Disciplinary Board.

So I am wondering if Fina and/or Baldwin aren't thrown under the bus by the Supreme Court. Which of course, would make everyone's day.

How many Supreme Court Justices were on Fina's porn mailing list?
 
How many Supreme Court Justices were on Fina's porn mailing list?
Sorry....but all this about Fina and "justice being served" by having a Disciplinary Hearing for what he did (along with Baldwin) is just more political HOGWASH!

View these Fina, Baldwin and others under the statutes of proper level of legal impropriety ...
"...the impeding of those who seek justice in a court, or those who have duties or powers of administrative justice, justice therein; including attempting to influence, intimidate or impede any juror, witness or officer in any court regarding the discharge of his duty..."

What is at legal issue here is not some two bit "slap of the wrist" by a professional review board - IT IS FULL BORE OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE (per above) !!!

And you question if the Courts of PA are not corrupted and "controlled" by politics only???
View how the selective application of ANY law is conveniently ignored by the PA Courts when it comes to viewing the actions of those of the OAG (and accomplices) and compare it with the level of imposing minutely possible and distorted legal statutes as a means to "convict" Spainer/ Curley/ Shultz.
 
Well, now this is very interesting.

Fina was in flagrant contact with Greg Paw on Freeh's team. Freeh knew damned well what was going on all along with the grand jury against Spanier because Fina and he were playing footsie.

We knew this, but not to this extent.

 
Well, now this is very interesting.

Fina was in flagrant contact with Greg Paw on Freeh's team. Freeh knew damned well what was going on all along with the grand jury against Spanier because Fina and he were playing footsie.

We knew this, but not to this extent.

You’d sure think some fool in MSM would be all over this. But you’d be the real fool.
 
Well, now this is very interesting.

Fina was in flagrant contact with Greg Paw on Freeh's team. Freeh knew damned well what was going on all along with the grand jury against Spanier because Fina and he were playing footsie.

We knew this, but not to this extent.

Did they not put Kathleen Kane in PRISON for this? Sounds like at the very least they need to add a count to FF's Disciplinary Proceedings.

There ought to be a grand jury, and those who got and saw the emails ought to testify before it.

Remember, Kane indictment for leaking...was leaked.
 
This is a long read, but well worth it. It's one thing to have rumors of GJ leaks, but to have emails of leaks is another. Although, No judge in PA will care any way.
It is flat out evidence of a criminal act by Fina. I would have to research it to know, but it seems that not only is leaking TO the Freeh Group a crime, but repeating the leak to others is a crime, as well. When do we convene a GJ to examine this?
 
It is flat out evidence of a criminal act by Fina. I would have to research it to know, but it seems that not only is leaking TO the Freeh Group a crime, but repeating the leak to others is a crime, as well. When do we convene a GJ to examine this?

I'm sure we will be hearing from the grand grandstander himself, Josh Shapiro, any day now.
 
This passage should raise eyebrows.....

Judge Foradora, however, concluded that Fina wasn't the leaker who was feeding reporter Sara Ganim intel about an impending grand jury presentment because Fina said so.

Say what? Can a judge really be that gullible or is he like almost everyone else and doesn't want to rock the boat? Imagine Foradora as a prosecutor. All a criminal would need to do is deny they did anything wrong and charges would never be filed. Only the truthful would go to jail.

Also, if leaking grand jury information is a crime and Ganim willingly accepted and distributed said information, doesn't that mean she's an accessory?
 
Last edited:
Well, now this is very interesting.

Fina was in flagrant contact with Greg Paw on Freeh's team. Freeh knew damned well what was going on all along with the grand jury against Spanier because Fina and he were playing footsie.

We knew this, but not to this extent.


Why isn't this piece of shit in Prison or dead? Really I'd be ok with either one.
 
This passage should raise eyebrows.....

Judge Foradora, however, concluded that Fina wasn't the leaker who was feeding reporter Sara Ganim intel about an impending grand jury presentment because Fina said so.

Say what? Can a judge really be that gullible of is he like almost everyone else and doesn't want to rock the boat? Imagine Foradora as a prosecutor. All a criminal would need to do is deny they did anything wrong and charges would never be filed. Only the truthful would go to jail.

Also, if leaking grand jury information is a crime and Ganim willingly accepted and distributed said information, doesn't that mean she's an accessory?

Prosecutors are as dirty as the defendants, my experience shows. There is no accountability. If prosecutors withhold evidence, their excuse is "whoops, we are just human" and there are no consequences (perhaps a new trial, but that means if you get caught cheating, its goes back to a level playing field). Judges and prosecutors are, for the most part, besties. And, with unlimited govt resources, they simply steam roll anyone who gets in their way. This is why NFL players kneel....
 
"Two days later, on April 19, 2012, McChesney recorded in her diary that Fina and Greg Paw also discussed that Spanier would be arrested. And that Fina claimed that Jay Paterno, son of the Penn State coach, supposedly told Fina that Joe Paterno knew about a prior 1998 shower incident involving Jerry Sandusky."

Has Jay ever talked about this? I'd be interested in hearing his perspective--assuming Fina's telling the truth. I know, I know, that may be a stretch, but it would be important to hear Jay's side or for Jay to refute this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95
"Two days later, on April 19, 2012, McChesney recorded in her diary that Fina and Greg Paw also discussed that Spanier would be arrested. And that Fina claimed that Jay Paterno, son of the Penn State coach, supposedly told Fina that Joe Paterno knew about a prior 1998 shower incident involving Jerry Sandusky."

Has Jay ever talked about this? I'd be interested in hearing his perspective--assuming Fina's telling the truth. I know, I know, that may be a stretch, but it would be important to hear Jay's side or for Jay to refute this.

Given what Joe was put through, which obviously continued past his death and into 2012, would one expect Jay to have been in contact with fina over anything?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95 and BBrown
Given what Joe was put through, which obviously continued past his death and into 2012, would one expect Jay to have been in contact with fina over anything?

It's out there, and while Jay has no obligation to respond, I think we'd all want to hear him either refute it, or place it in context.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95
It's out there, and while Jay has no obligation to respond, I think we'd all want to hear him either refute it, or place it in context.

Absolutely. In the absence of that, I just don't see it as obvious that Jay would have been in contact with fina.

I consider it more likely that Scott Paterno would tweet something about it, but I would of course rather hear from Jay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95
Absolutely. In the absence of that, I just don't see it as obvious that Jay would have been in contact with fina.

I consider it more likely that Scott Paterno would tweet something about it, but I would of course rather hear from Jay.

Jay has been firm in insisting that Joe did not know about 1998. He has said as much during his promotional tour for his book.
 
It's out there, and while Jay has no obligation to respond, I think we'd all want to hear him either refute it, or place it in context.

If its out there its complete bull shit. That would make zero sense, not to mention it would have been shouted by the rooftops by all the Old Guard BOT's and Fina and Corbutt, Emmert, Delaney, and....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 91Joe95
Just read the article.

THIS IS A CLUSTERFK!

Fina was playing with a stacked deck and Freeh wasn't investigating. He was parroting Fina's corrupt case.

And now we know how to win a Pulitzer - eat up some crumbs from the other corrupt individuals, Fina and his merry band of liars.
just to affirm Lundy's post...it is pretty clear that Freeh and Fina were sharing information that they should not have been. The article has this email:

The night before former Penn State University President Graham Spanier was going to be arrested, Spanier didn't know about it, and neither did his lawyers.

But Gregory Paw, a senior investigator for the Louis Freeh Group did, thanks to a tip from then Deputy Attorney General Frank Fina.

On Oct. 31, 2012, Paw sent an email to the Freeh Group, which had conducted a separate $8.3 million investigation of the Penn State scandal.
The subject of Paw's email: "CLOSE HOLD -- Important."

"PLEASE HOLD VERY CLOSE," Paw wrote his colleagues at the Freeh Group. "[Deputy Attorney General Frank] Fina called tonight to tell me that Spanier is to be arrested tomorrow, and [former Penn State Athletic Director Tim] Curley and [former Penn State Vice President for business and finance Gary] Schultz re-arrested, on charges of obstruction of justice and related charges . . . Spanier does not know this information yet, and his lawyers will be advised about an hour before the charges are announced tomorrow."
 
just to affirm Lundy's post...it is pretty clear that Freeh and Fina were sharing information that they should not have been. The article has this email:

The night before former Penn State University President Graham Spanier was going to be arrested, Spanier didn't know about it, and neither did his lawyers.

But Gregory Paw, a senior investigator for the Louis Freeh Group did, thanks to a tip from then Deputy Attorney General Frank Fina.

On Oct. 31, 2012, Paw sent an email to the Freeh Group, which had conducted a separate $8.3 million investigation of the Penn State scandal.
The subject of Paw's email: "CLOSE HOLD -- Important."

"PLEASE HOLD VERY CLOSE," Paw wrote his colleagues at the Freeh Group. "[Deputy Attorney General Frank] Fina called tonight to tell me that Spanier is to be arrested tomorrow, and [former Penn State Athletic Director Tim] Curley and [former Penn State Vice President for business and finance Gary] Schultz re-arrested, on charges of obstruction of justice and related charges . . . Spanier does not know this information yet, and his lawyers will be advised about an hour before the charges are announced tomorrow."
Question would be why does the OAG need to share this info with Freeh's team in October 2012?
 
  • Like
Reactions: wensilver
It is flat out evidence of a criminal act by Fina. I would have to research it to know, but it seems that not only is leaking TO the Freeh Group a crime, but repeating the leak to others is a crime, as well. When do we convene a GJ to examine this?
From a cursory look I was thinking the Statute of Limitations may save Frankie since the length on most offenses in PA looks to be 2 to 5 years. Then I saw that the time for official misconduct is 8 years, so I still hold out some hope that he'll get his just reward.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT