Hmm, could you explain in more detail how Schultz “played his part” but Curley went rouge?
I know for a fact that Gary Schultz believes Jerry Sandusky to be completely innocent. I have corresponded with him personally.
Ray Blehar delivers another great blog post about McQueary and Corbett
- Thread starter TenerHallTerror
- Start date
Hmm, could you explain in more detail how Schultz “played his part” but Curley went rouge?
I know for a fact that Gary Schultz believes Jerry Sandusky to be completely innocent. I have corresponded with him personally.
Not sure what you mean by that. All I have to say is since I really started looking into John Zieglers findings in 2016 (after the 1970s allegations emerged and Zig published an excellent refutation of them, I figured I should look into the rest of his work), every new discovery on the case since then only seems to validate his narrative.
Last edited:
Nice work pnny! And, no scatalogical references!
RE,
Geez, where to start.
Read this:
http://notpsu.blogspot.com/2016/11/evidence-supports-oag-decision-on.html
From the bottom up of your post.
Why would you think the OAG was familiar with anyone Jerry was associating with. They weren't investigating Jerry -- they were investigating Spanier. They didn't need a living, breathing Victim to make the case against PSU. As former AG Cohen stated, it wasn't important what McQueary saw. What is important is what he SAID he saw. The only thing that mattered was his report and what got done with it. The rest is history.
You obviously don't understand the concept of what a reliable witness is. AM isn't one. He is of no help for defending PSU...and, as you should have noticed, he was no help in defending Sandusky at his appeal. Geesh.
That is laughable. Essentially you are saying everything he said doesn't have to be accurate because it happened a long time ago. And, I'm sure you hold all the other victims to the same standard? Myers gave six different versions of his contact with Jerry -- 3 were that nothing happened and 4 were the opposite. He said he joined TSM in 7th grade, quit in 6th grade (both lies). And he couldn't come remotely close to drawing the locker room.
At this point there is no need to discuss this further because if you are willing to dismiss the fact that his drawing was completely innaccurate, then you possess overwhelming bias and lack common sense.
To be clear, if you found a $5,000 Rolex watch and posted an ad that you found an expensive watch and the owner needs to provide proof of ownership...and then some jagoff shows up and can't come even close to describing what the watch looks like...then says, "Well, I owned it a long time ago and forgot what it looked like."
Are you going to give him the watch? Of course, not.
And that lessened his credibility.
Moreover, his story provided no basis to believe he was in the locker room the same night McQueary was because he said (to the effect) "I heard a locker door close, a sound I had heard before." Then he said the door closed because McQ was there putting shoes away. The latter is obviously a contrived statement.
So...if he's heard locker door close on multiple occasions, but didn't see McQ, then how did he know he was there on the night McQ was?
Ray has done some excellent analysis in the fiasco. His analysis in concluding that AM is not v2 is not among them as demonstrated in the comments to his blog post. Relying on an inaccurate Lasch locker room diagram and using the 2002 date from the grand jury presentment to impeach AM seems like very shallow impeachment evidence to me. IMO, Ralph Cipriano of bigtrial blog has the best unbiased coverage in the fiasco. I found that his post on AM’s PCRA testimony was spot on.
Harmon testified at Spanier's trial and stuck to the same lies he always told. Gricar closed the case before DPW and the PSU police did -- and did so without reviewing the final police report. Gricar would have never done that. Harmon also testified that he was somewhat uncertain of Jerry's position of Def Coord, even though he knew Jerry quite well as his neighbor and going to the same church. Harmon also said no one told him a thing about the incident in 2001, even though it strains credulity that he'd be asked about the 1998 incident 3 years later and not ask why Schultz was asking about it.
According to one of the defendants, they say how McQueary's civil case went and how much sympathy he received -- and were afraid to be too tough on him.
Interesting that people think the real V2 didn't come forward and get paid. He did and got more money than AM did.
Jerry's medical affliction is an interesting story -- but as is the case with much of the alleged evidence around Jerry's innocence, those records haven't been made public or will turn out not to be as convincing as originally advertised.
What is public, however, is Jerry's interview comments with Mark Pendergast. Jerry told Mark P that he told his attorneys he couldn't have been having sex with boys because he had low T and a low sex drive. Later in the book, Jerry "Honest Abe" Sandusky told Mark P he and Dottie were having sex 2-3 times a week right up to his arrest. Dottie said it was more like 3-4 times a week. Always vaginal intercourse, not oral or anal sex.
Jerry and Dottie have made other equally contradictory statements regarding sexual function/dysfunction.
So, even if Jerry had E.D. or some other affliction, that wouldn't preclude him from performing the good ol' raspberry on the stomach and lower blow on a boy. Also, he could obviously still receive oral sex.
I think the A9 was overly cautious about its report. There seems to be no legal barrier for them to publlicly refute the Freeh Report findings using the source material, as long as they didn't reveal the sources. They likely could have gotten around that by using footnotes or end notes that referenced, for example, Freeh Source #XXX and the date of the document. And just did that over and over again.
While some folks would have poo-pood that approach, the A-9 could have done it that way and said they were working to secure the release of the sources and would back up every thing in their report eventually.
Your point was refuted by the jury. There were 3 acquittals.
The most interesting of them is the indecent assault acquittal regarding Victim 5. Apparently, the jury was looking at the pattern of JS's abuse and realized that he never groped a kid the first time they showered together. Give the jury credit for that.
They also acquitted on ISDI in the V2 case because McQ said he couldn't see penetration. Correct.
And they also acquitted for indecent assault of V6 because he said Jerry didn't grope him. Correct.
Judge Cleland is really at fault for the convictions on the janitor incident. He allowed that other shower incidents could be used to corroborate that Petrosky saw what he saw. That was wrong.
It was my understanding that Schultz's was much more contrite and almost admitted guilt for all of them and was what Ditka was looking for. I also thought Tim did not play his role very well and that pissed Ditka off. I clearly wasn't there and have no first hand knowledge but did think i read stuff to that effect.
Ray,
I don't want to argue but I do have a few comments on this. You do seem to over rely on this guy drawing or not drawing the locker room. If he was 10 years old and was in the locker room with JS for whatever reason is it fair to expect him to remember 10 years later what it looked like? Also I know the BoT gave money away like it wasn't their's [oh that's right it's not] but they did refuse to pay some folks didn't they. This would have been easy to refuse without looking like they were fighting against victims. Just say what you just did plus "the OAG investigated this person and decided he wasn't V2 therefore we won't pay. Really???
I'd love to administer some truth serum to Harmon and Courtney.
Not MM!
Ray, with millions of dollars seemingly vanishing into thin air and awards and cars rumored, in you opinion, how and why did Raykovitz and co. skate?
Thanks Ray,
In reverse order. If your A9 suspicions are correct what a load of horsesxxt. Their lack of any response is really what "broke the camel's back" for me ever respecting PSU again. [I'll still love Franklin, football, bball and wrestling, but as a university forget it.
JS sexual desire or lack thereof. Agreed you can't have it both ways.
MM testimony. I can understand picking on MM runs the risk just as challenging a victim of alienating the jury but it seems at some point a good lawyer would say what do we have to lose. It seems obvious from what i have read and heard a good defense attorney should have been able to rip him apart just based on everything we have talked about on this board.
V2. was paid and even more. Obviously, as some other vic so why did the university pay AM. If v2 is known to some insiders what is his version of the night in question. The reason i ask for his version of events is not to dispute abuse but there are lots of questions regarding MM's that mnight that make me suspicious of that evening. Positioning of JS and a 10 year old, no distress on the kids face when MM saw them etc.
Do V2 and AM know each other or doesn't V2 care AM is postering as V2/
Cleland was obviously asleep as usual.
Or maybe it was Eschbach
In a second email sent that same day, McQueary complained to Eshbach about "being misrepresented" in the media. And then McQueary tried to straighten out a couple of misconceptions, writing that he never went to Coach Joe Paterno's house with his father, and that he had never seen Sandusky with a child at a Penn State football practice.
"I know that a lot of this stuff is incorrect and it is hard not to respond," Eshbach emailed McQueary. "But you can't."
That email exchange, divulged in a couple of posts by Penn State blogger Ray Blehar, have people in Penn State Nation talking about prosecutorial misconduct. Naturally, the A.G.'s office has nothing to say about it, as an office spokesperson declined comment today.
The 2011 grand jury report said that back when he visited the Penn State showers in 2001, Mike McQueary heard "rhythmic, slapping sounds." Then, he peered into the showers and "saw a naked boy, Victim No. 2, whose age he estimated to be ten years old, with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Jerry Sandusky."
But McQueary wrote Eshbach, while copying Agent Anthony Sassano, "I feel my words are slightly twisted and not totally portrayed correctly in the presentment."
"I cannot say 1000 percent sure that it was sodomy. I did not see insertion," McQueary wrote. "It was a sexual act and or way over the line in my opinion whatever it was."
McQueary also complained about the media attention he was getting.
"National media, and public opinion has totally, in every single way, ruined me," McQueary wrote. "For what?"
Later that same day, McQueary wrote a second email to Eshbach and Sassano.
"Also," McQueary wrote, "I never went to Coach Paterno's house with my father . . . It was me and only me . . . he was out of town the night before . . . never ever have I seen JS [Jerry Sandusky] with a child at one of our practices . . . "
The reference about his father not accompanying him to a meeting with Joe Paterno was probably McQueary's attempt to correct a mistake in a Nov. 5, 2011 Sara Ganim story about the grand jury presentment that ran in the Harrisburg Patriot News.
In her story, Ganim wrote that according to the indictment, "On March 1, 2002, the night before Spring Break, a Penn State graduate assistant walked into the Penn State football locker room around 9:30 p.m. and witnessed Sandusky having sex with about 10 years old . . . The next morning, the witness and his father told head football coach Joe Paterno, who immediately told athletic director Tim Curley."
Then, McQueary returned to the subject of the bad publicity he was getting over the grand jury report.
Don’t know how seriously you take stuff from John Ziegler, but John has stated that Harmon’s daughter has told him that her father believes Sandusky to be innocent.
Is this a new revelation? Ray knows who victim 2 is and he is one of the payees? Why keep it quiet then? I’m just looking for clarification. First I’ve heard this.
Roswell,
Did you read the blog I posted?
Absolutely nothing in his 11/9/11 statement put him inside the Staff Locker Room on February 9, 2001. NOTHING. Aside from that, there were the lies and contradictions.
The drawing was the icing on the cake. BTW, other victims/claimants correctly drew the showers or gave descriptions of Sandusky's house 10 years after being there. That's kind of important.
The defense attorneys for Curley and Schultz also stated AM wasn't the shower victim. Farrell went as far as to call him a "charlatan." And, Farrell is right.
Those who believe AM is V2 are in agreement with Andrew Shubin and the other bloodsucking attorneys from Philly who represented him. Great company to be sure.
Perhaps you aren't aware of this, but the names of sex abuse victims aren't publicly released without their consent. Seems like a lot of people ignore that rule.
I don't.
And I've known who V2 was for many years.
All one needs to refute MM is a knowledge of the layout of the locker room and and absence of an official Commonwealth of Pennsylvania step stool in the shower that night.
Hmm, one of the claimants who did get paid was Frankie Probst, whom Ray once claimed may be V2 in a now-deleted Twitter post, but unless John Ziegler and Ralph Cipriano are lying, Probst did not claim to be victim 2. Probst did end up getting paid more than Allan Myers.
There a few things worth noting about Probst. First, after the arrest, he went on TV and denied being by molested by Sandusky.
https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/1...tate-coach-jerry-sandusky-touched-leg-in-car/
Second, he waited until 2016 to claim to be a victim, when he was 29 and almost at the statute of limitations for such claims. Also, he would be taken to court by a bank to collect a debt a few months later, revealing financial problems that would certainly be a motivation for him to flip.
Finally, Probst was almost the exact same age as Myers, but unlike the shorter Myers, Probst was a tall kid who would grow to 6-3. It’s very unlikely McQueary would mistake an almost 14 year old Frankie Probst for a 10 year old. Also, Probst claimed the abuse continued until his senior year of high school despite the fact that he was a star tight end who would go on to play football in college.
Not exactly.
Without Pennlive the Ganim story would have been forgotten.
Add HBO movie consultant to CNN correspondent and Pulitzer Prize-winner Sara Ganim's already impressive resume.
The former PennLive and Patriot-News reporter who broke the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse scandal wide open at the tender age of 23has a key role both behind the scenes and on-screen (in the form of actress Riley Keough) in HBO's new movie on the 2011 Penn State scandal entitled, "Paterno."
On one hand, the film, chronicles Paterno's Shakespearian downfall, including his unceremonious firing as head football coach just days after the Sandusky scandal expoded.
But the other half of the film is a journalism story, with Ganim at center stage.
The now-CNN correspondent in Washington, D.C., was a paid consultant on director Barry Levinson's production. After turning down many other Sandusky-related projects, Ganim said yes to Levinson and HBO because she believed they would be true to the "essence" of the story.
For Ganim that story has always began and ended with Sandusky's young, innocent victims.
"It is easy for people to forget about the victims," Ganim said in an interview with PennLive. "The story is only important because of them. I think HBO recognized that. There is no story without the victims. This wasn't just about the community or the football team. This was about victims, first and foremost."
Exactly. The latter part of your statement has never been addressed, by anyone.
Assuming the "real" v2 is among those who took a check from PSU could be short sighted. Suppose he was paid by another source?
What's the difference between cow shit and Ganim? Cow shit can be useful as fertilizer.
The University hardly refused any claims. I heard there were 2 or 3 refusals. One was from a prison inmate who had no connection to Sandusky or 2nd Mile. The others also didn't meet the laugh test.
As for the rest, the insurance investigator confirmed that they were hardly vetted at all. As long as the claimant could show a connection to Sandusky & TSM, they got paid.
If you were diligent about reading court filings and other documentation, it was not hard to figure out who the real V2 was....once you figured out it wasn't AM.
As for MM's version; he couldn't see the kid inside the shower and that's why he told police he couldn't make an I.D. He couldn't see the kid and the kid couldn't see him.
I won't say one way or the other if they know each other.
Just as a point of clarification/correction. Probst is pictured with Sandusky circa 2000 in the book Touched (and on my recent blog) He's not very tall in those pictures...barely to Sandusky's shoulder (if that) on the one on the right.
As I've said, McQ couldn't see into the shower. I doubt anything he says about the kid's age or height.
In Joe Posnanski's book on page 276-277 MM is adamant he didn't see anything sexual. And this is coming from Dranov and that report is coming from the night of the event.
Dranov asked MM three times if he was sure there wasn't anything sexual and MM said yes. All three (MM, Daddy, and Dranov) agreed there was nothing to go to the authorities with.
This is the account that holds the most credibility, before MM was manipulated to lie.
Additionally, how does a tall man like JS sodomize a boy in a shower without the assistance of a stool or without holding him up. Further, my cousin is a doctor and he indicated this would obviously be a painful experience for a youngster and would damage his rectum.
I know this is a terrible thing to even discuss but the physics don't add up.
Sara is pretty impressive -
"Some people closed their doors in my face, and others definitely did not tell me the truth," she says. "But many were relieved—they were done keeping the story bottled up inside." What she uncovered was staggering: She identified two alleged victims and learned that Sandusky was under investigation by a grand jury for sexual abuse. (In Pennsylvania such proceedings are held in secret.) Ganim kept digging and, by this time last year, had enough evidence to write the first story exposing the grand jury hearing, as well as accusations that the former coach had molested at least one boy in the university's locker room.
Some readers savaged the paper for printing "gossip." But other media and sports reporters ignored the news, even as Ganim continued to report the story. "It felt like we were living in the Twilight Zone," says The Patriot-News' editor, David Newhouse. Adds Ganim, "Particularly with the local papers, I thought [that] was pretty irresponsible." It took a full seven months—after Sandusky was arrested and publicly charged with the sexual abuse of eight boys he met through his charity, The Second Mile—for national news media to pounce. The horrifying charges included repeated oral sex and sodomy; one victim testified that he screamed in vain from the Sandusky family basement, knowing the coach's wife was upstairs. (As Glamour went to press, Sandusky faced 52 criminal counts from incidents with 10 boys; he maintains his innocence.)
"Sara had so many sources," says Newhouse, "that we were able to report things other people weren't getting"—including the first interviews with mothers of the victims. Indeed, ESPN later said, "With the biggest staff of sports journalists in the world, ESPN should have been leading the charge to ask tough questions and shed light on this scandal. Instead, it was the tiny Patriot-News in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, out in front of the journalism pack." The Baltimore Sun compared Ganim to famed Watergate reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, saying she "showed pure courage." CNN simply hired her as a contributor.
I'm certain that CNN is surprised by her abilities.
Everything there came from the 1998 police report. Wow. What digging!!
Sure. The OAG staff (Frank, Jonelle, Nils, etc), the Centre Co DA, SP Miller, and sleazeball lawyer Andrew Shubin.
Just like Woodward & Bernstein, she got her story from leaks.
I'll close this conversation by stating that knowing the identity of Victim 2 does not help PSU's case in the least. The only thing that will help to restore PSU's and Paterno's reputation is the exposure of (suppressed) exculpatory information that proves PSU made a report to the police and to Centre County CYS.
I read your post
months ago if that is what you mean.
I don't doubt that V2 isn't AM. I really have no idea. I still think asking a 10 year old to recreate a drawing 10 years later is a bit too much for me. I would rely on all the other lies and contradictions.
What about the 2nd part of my question. This sounds like a slam dunk for PSU to say we aren't paying you as V2 for these reasons. Your comment on Shubin highlights much of my frustration and this isn't directed at you but at this whole case in question. This is an observation and NOT an attempt to suggest AM is vic 2.
. Ganin, McQueary, and the OAG get the dates wrong and no one cares, AM gets a date wrong and that is evidence he didn't know anything.
. Shubin is a bloodsucker as it relates to AM and a fabricated story, but didn't he represent a lot of these vics? Why should we believe some of his clients but not others.
.McQueary looks around corners in a 3 second glance and no one cares, but others lack of recollection is proof of something.
How many other non vics did PSU pay? Is that a non story.
@rmb297
I understand that JS's PA Superior Court hearing is this Wednesday in front of a 3-judge panel.
Are you or anyone planning to attend? @wensilver ? @lubrano ?
OT:
For anyone interested, I saw Tim Curley very recently. He looks and sounds really good, his health is very good right now. His community service time has ended, but even so he continues to work at the place where he served this service time, and works at another charitable organization as well. Pretty telling about the type of person he is and always has been.
I never get into it with him over JS's guilt or innocence, or any other details about the whole saga. (Another mutual friend who joins us at our occasional lunches gets into the JS debate with me, whether I want to or not! And I never want to!)
I understand that JS's PA Superior Court hearing is this Wednesday in front of a 3-judge panel.
Are you or anyone planning to attend? @wensilver ? @lubrano ?
OT:
For anyone interested, I saw Tim Curley very recently. He looks and sounds really good, his health is very good right now. His community service time has ended, but even so he continues to work at the place where he served this service time, and works at another charitable organization as well. Pretty telling about the type of person he is and always has been.
I never get into it with him over JS's guilt or innocence, or any other details about the whole saga. (Another mutual friend who joins us at our occasional lunches gets into the JS debate with me, whether I want to or not! And I never want to!)
I thought that as well but Ray did say "the real V2 came forward" which to me means he got paid by PSU not someone else.
Roswell,
The PSU BOT didn't care if AM was V2 or if he was the man in the moon. Heck, if AM told them he called Joe Paterno directly after the shower incident, they would have given him 5 times more money. It was rather obvious after Ganim's story featuring Bernie McCue as the corroborating witness, that the PSU BOT was accepting any and all allegations against JVP -- no matter how preposterous they were.
You shouldn't believe all of Shubin's clients. I don't. He represented the guy who was corroborated by McCue.
AM getting the date wrong was the least of his credibility problems. I just pointed that out as a problem for those individuals who continue to stand by him as a credible, reliable witness -- which he proved he isn't.
Mike's one or two second glances should have been torn to shreds by defense attorneys. For example, how did Mike observe "slow and subtle movement" of Sandusky's waist in a 1-2 second glance....through a mirror, no less. That part of his story was clearly an embellishment. In 1-2 seconds, he's going to be able to tell that there is an adult and a child in the shower and how they are positioned, but not much more than that. And another great question is why didn't any of the defense attorneys run a test to see if the mirror would have been fogged over???
The failures of the defense attorneys in the C/S/S cases were monumental.
I won't be attending. Haven't spoke to Anthony or Wendy.
I saw Tim at the Special Olympics fundraiser on B-W weekend. He did look good an was also in good spirits.
Similar threads
