If DPW was more interested, they knew where the Childline report came from and who to follow up with.
Seven Years Ago Today
- Thread starter francofan
- Start date
Probably true but any pertinent information shouldn’t have been withheld from them in the first place.
We will see. It seems that the fat lady that you are envisioning is Karen Peetz. This story is a long way from over imho.
Nice video of Al Lindsay in the CDT story of the Pa. supreme court decision denying to hear Sandusky's appeal of the Superior Court PCRA decision.
https://www.centredaily.com/news/nation-world/article233075952.html
https://www.centredaily.com/news/nation-world/article233075952.html
It's over everywhere but this board.
Who knows, maybe Dennis's next well reasoned post will change everything.
In other Sandusky news his change.org petition approaches 170 signees. (Although some are duplicates like Mark Pendergast, who signed twice)
Because people who think "it's over" won't stop posting about it. Kinda ironic.
For the record, I strongly believe that the earth is round... yet I don't feel compelled to seek out flat earthers and make sure they know they are wrong. I'm just saying.
For the record, I strongly believe that the earth is round... yet I don't feel compelled to seek out flat earthers and make sure they know they are wrong. I'm just saying.
Yet, you do feel a need to read and post in a thread about it.
And I’m not knocking you. I get it. It’s hard to avoid.
Apples and oranges, to me this topic is no different than any other on this board that I read and sometimes decide to respond to. I often read just complete garbage on topics like this and just let it go, I don’t have the weird compulsion that many have with this topic. I have zero investment in the guilt or innocence of an ex-psu employee. A few posters seem to only be on this board for this very topic.
Secondly, I approach this topic with an open mind, I have no side. Like most things in life, the truth likely lies somewhere in the middle. It’s impossible for anyone to be certain of what transpired... the trial was highly flawed, so are victims. Jerry had some highly questionable behavior. A whole lot of people in power seem to want to “move on”. Anyone who is absolutely convinced of anything in this case is either a fool or has an agenda. I’m not here to convince anyone of anything, generally I just point out logical fallacies or other BS. Most importantly, I’ve never said “it’s over” and then kept posting about it.
This topic is a long way from over. Imo, there will be a number of developments over the next year. I believe people will be discussing it 50 years from now.
I think they’ll probably add his likeness to Mt. Rushmore!
Heck they’ve nearly done it for Rubin “Hurricane” Carter, and there is much more evidence that Carter is guilty than there is that Sandusky is guilty.
Talk about moving goalposts.
Has someone close to you claimed they were a victim of CSA, and you pshawwed the claim because the accused was a good dude? And now you feel a bit guilty, but can't quite admit it? I know that's Dennis's mindblock. Is it yours as well?
Just examine the 3 cases.
As a 15-year-old, Aaron Fisher initially said that Jerry Sandusky had hugged him to crack his back, with their clothes on. Over the next three years, with the urging of psychotherapist Mike Gillum, Fisher eventually came to “remember” multiple instances of oral sex. Gillum apparently believed that memories too painful to recall lie buried in the unconscious, causing mental illness of all kinds—among them, anxiety, depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and alcoholism. “They (abuse victims) just want to numb themselves and push away the unpleasant memories,” Gillum wrote in the book, Silent No More. He sought to “peel back the layers of the onion” of the brain to get to abuse memories. Nor did Aaron Fisher have to tell him anything. Gillum would guess what happened and Fisher only had to nod his head or say Yes. “I was very blunt with him when I asked questions but gave him the ability to answer with a yes or a no, that relieved him of a lot of burden,” Gillum wrote. In the same book, Aaron Fisher recalled: “Mike just kept saying that Jerry was the exact profile of a predator. When it finally sank in, I felt angry.”
Fisher explained that “I was good at pushing it (memories of abuse) all away . . . Once the weekends [with Jerry] were over, I managed to lock it all deep inside my mind somehow. That was how I dealt with it until next time. Mike has explained a lot to me since this all happened. He said that what I was doing is called compartmentalizing. . . . I was in such denial about everything.” Without the three years of therapy with Mike Gillum, it is unlikely that Aaron Fisher would ever have accused Jerry Sandusky of sexual abuse, and the case would never have gone forward.
Allan Myers (“Victim 2”) was the teenager in the shower in February 2001, when Mike McQueary heard slapping sounds that he interpreted as sexual. In fact, they were the sounds of Myers and Sandusky slap boxing or snapping towels at one another. McQueary did not see Sandusky and the boy together in the shower – he only caught a glimpse of the boy in a mirror. He changed his memory nearly ten years later when the police told him that Sandusky was a serial molester. McQueary, like many people, did not require therapy to distort his memory. Influenced by current attitudes, he came to envision that he had witnessed something he had not actually seen. This is one of the well-known hazards of eyewitness testimony, as experimental psychologist Elizabeth Loftus and others have demonstrated.
We do not know whether Allan Myers was ever in therapy to help retrieve abuse memories. He received several million dollars as one of the alleged Sandusky victims, but he did not testify at the trial, and he has never actually accused Sandusky of molesting him in any kind of detail. Initially, he provided a very strong defense of Sandusky, saying that he had never abused him, before becoming a client of civil attorney Andrew Shubin, who sent most of his Sandusky clients to therapy, quite likely to help retrieve repressed abuse memories. As reporter Sara Ganim wrote in November 2011, Shubin “teamed up with psychologists, social workers and a national child sex abuse organization so that these people [alleged victims] can seek mental help along with possible legal recourse.”
Jason Simcisko (“Victim 3”) told the police that nothing inappropriate had happened with Jerry Sandusky, when he was first interviewed. When the policemen asked if Sandusky had helped him rinse off in the shower, perhaps lifting him up to the showerhead, Simcisko replied, according to the police report: “There might have been something like that. I don’t exactly remember, but it sounds familiar.” This was the beginning of the process of manipulating his memory. At the end of the interview, the police report noted that Simcisko “agreed to call if he recalled anything further.”
By the time of the trial. Simcisko had remembered Sandusky touching his penis numerous times.He explained why he hadn’t revealed this earlier:“Everything that’s coming out now is because I thought about it more. I tried to block this out of my brain for years.”We don’t know for sure whether Simcisko was in psychotherapy or not, but Andrew Shubin was his lawyer.
This is much bigger than Jerry Sandusky. He could be guilty as sin and people will still be talking about this in 50 years.
There are other threads for talking about Joe (who did right) and the admins (who at the least, should have taken notes), and all the other aspects.
It's wise to separate Jerry from the rest of it.
We've been going down that road for seven years. Something's missing.
I don't believe Joe is collateral damage here or simply part of a personal vendetta. The OAG, IMO, was compelled to deflect attention away from TSM. The way PSU was dragged into this was deliberate.
So the question remains, What was so big that it was worth destroying Paterno's legacy and the reputation of the football program and worth paying out > $200,000,000? As far as I'm concerned, it could be as simple as the BOT got conned by Corbett and Surma and thought it was cutting its losses. Or as bizarre as protecting the $6 billion Hershey Foundation and the OAG from a major scandal. I don't know. But a new trial for Jerry, who clearly deserves one, could shine some light on the larger issues.
Or, possibly, Jerry Sandusky is a pedopbile..
Just a few pertinent facts.
In a criminal manner, such as the Jerry Sandusky pedophilia investigation, the NCAA lacked legal standing. But the NCAA justified its intervention in the case by finding that a lack of institutional control on the part of Penn State enabled the Jerry Sandusky sex scandal.
In their synopsis of evidence, the trustees relied on internal Freeh Group emails that showed that while Freeh was finishing up his investigation of Penn State, he was angling for his group to become the "go to investigators" for the NCAA.
On July 7, 2012, a week before the release of the Freeh Report on Penn State, Omar McNeill, a senior investigator for Freeh, wrote to Freeh and a partner of Freeh's. "This has opened up an opportunity to have the dialogue with [NCAA President Mark] Emmert about possibly being the go to internal investigator for the NCAA," McNeill wrote. "It appears we have Emmert's attention now."
In response, Freeh wrote back, "Let's try to meet with him and make a deal -- a very good cost contract to be the NCAA's 'go to investigators' -- we can even craft a big discounted rate given the unique importance of such a client. Most likely he will agree to a meeting -- if he does not ask for one first."
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-y3uBMIEVq...600/Screen+Shot+2018-06-30+at+11.52.52+AM.png
A spokesman for Freeh did not respond to a request for comment.
At yesterday's board meeting, Pope said the "NCAA knew that their own rules prevented them from punishing Penn State," but that the "NCAA decided to punish Penn State anyway in order to enhance its own reputation." She added that documents made public to date show that the "NCAA was closely involved with the Freeh investigation."
"We believed it was important to understand the degree of cooperation between the Freeh investigation and the NCAA."
At yesterday's press conference, Pope also raised the issue of a separate but concurrent federal investigation conducted on the Penn State campus in 2012 by Special Agent John Snedden. The federal investigation, made public last year, but completely ignored by the mainstream media, reached the opposite conclusion that Freeh and the attorney general did, that there was no official cover up at Penn State.
Pope stated she wanted to know more about the discrepancies between the parallel investigations that led to polar opposite conclusions.
Back in 2012, Snedden, a former NCIS special agent working as a special agent for the Federal Investigative Services [FIS], was assigned to determine whether Spanier deserved to have a high-level national security clearance renewed. During his investigation, Snedden placed Spanier under oath and questioned him for eight hours. Snedden also interviewed many other witnesses on the Penn State campus, including Cynthia Baldwin, who told him that Spanier was a "man of integrity."
About six months after Baldwin told Snedden this, she flipped, and appeared in a secret grand jury proceeding to not only testify against Spanier, but also against former Penn State Athletic Director Tim Curley, and former Penn State Vice President Gary Schultz.
Baldwin, who had previously represented Spanier, Curley and Schultz before the grand jury, testified last month before the disciplinary board of the state Supreme Court, where she has been brought up on misconduct charges for allegedly violating the attorney-client privilege.
After his investigation, Special Agent Snedden concluded in a 110-page report that Spanier had done nothing wrong, and that there was no coverup at Penn State.
That's because, according to Snedden, Mike McQueary, the alleged whistleblower in the case, was an unreliable witness who told many different conflicting stories about an alleged incident in the Penn State showers where McQueary saw Jerry Sandusky with a naked 10-year-old boy. "Which story do you believe?" Snedden told Big Trial last year.
In his grand jury testimony, McQueary said his observations of Sandusky were based on one or two "glances" in the shower that lasted only "one or two seconds," glances relating to an incident at least eight years previous. But in the hands of the attorney general's fiction writers, those glances of "one or two seconds" became an anal rape of a child, as conclusively witnessed by McQueary.
That, my friends, is what we call prosecutorial misconduct of the intentional kind, the kind that springs convicted murderers out of a Death Row jail cell. And it's a scandal that for six years, the attorney general's office has refused to address, a scandal that the mainstream media has failed to hold the AG accountable for.
On March 1, 2002, according to the 2011 grand jury presentment, [McQueary] walked into the locker room in the Lasch Building at State College and heard “rhythmic, slapping sounds.” Glancing into a mirror, he “looked into the shower . . . [and] saw a naked boy, Victim No. 2, whose age he estimated to be 10 years old, with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Jerry Sandusky.”
"The graduate assistant went to his office and called his father, reporting to him what he had seen. The graduate assistant and his father decided that the graduate assistant had to promptly reportwhat he had seen to Coach Joe Paterno . . . The next morning, a Saturday, the graduate assistant telephoned Paterno and went to Paterno's home, where he reported what he had seen."
But the alleged victim of the shower rape has never came forward, despite an avalanche of publicity, and, according to the prosecutors, his identity was known "only to God." But McQueary knew the prosecutors weren't telling the truth. Days, after the presentment, McQueary wrote in an email to the attorney general's office that they had "slightly twisted his words" and,"I cannot say 1000 percent sure that it was sodomy. I did not see insertion."
On top of that, all the witnesses that the grand jury presentment claimed that McQueary had reported to them "what he had seen," the alleged anal rape of a 10-year-old boy [plus another witness cited by McQueary, a doctor who was a longtime family friend] have all repeatedly denied in court that McQueary ever told them that he witnessed an anal rape.
"I've never had a rape case successfully prosecuted based only on sounds, and without credible victims and witnesses," Snedden told Big Trial. As for the Freeh Report, Snedden described it as "an embarrassment to law enforcement."
Sorry
The reason that Sandusky has been unable AT EVERY TURN to obtain basic, unbiased legal processes and decisions is because "...But a new trial for Jerry, who clearly deserves one, could shne some light on the larger issues....
The Corrupt members of PA government can not afford to allow any possibility of a retrial. Why??? Because today too many "suspicious" features of this Crime (by the State of PA and its Officials" can be proved in a court of law.
I can assure you members of the OGBOT are criminally involved here - in addition to NCAA officials, Freeh and key media members. They all benefit from maintaining the "Story" which on facts alone is exposed as a State sponsored form of legal terrorism.
Sometimes you need to call a conspiracy for what it is" ...A CONSPIRACY..." This is a conspiracy of Convenience where each "partner" who participated in this State manufactured crime and "Story" involving PSU obtained clear and certifiable benefits from the Conspiracy. This includes a portion of the $100M+ dollars PSU paid out to bogus claims!!!!
but the real motive for all of this has been exposed YEARS ago ....it is that the State of PA and specifically Tom Corbett had been using charities as money laundering and campaign generating engines FOR YEARS. Thank God, you start to mention the other PA criminal activities ..." Or as bizarre as protecting the $6 billion Hershey Foundation and the OAG from a major scandal. I don't know. Please add to that the "Kids-for-Cash" scandal which used the same corruption as what was used in 2011 for the "Penn State Scandal". Great example of the methods used to generate MILLIONS for corrupt officials.
The reason that Sandusky has been unable AT EVERY TURN to obtain basic, unbiased legal processes and decisions is because "...But a new trial for Jerry, who clearly deserves one, could shne some light on the larger issues....
The Corrupt members of PA government can not afford to allow any possibility of a retrial. Why??? Because today too many "suspicious" features of this Crime (by the State of PA and its Officials" can be proved in a court of law.
I can assure you members of the OGBOT are criminally involved here - in addition to NCAA officials, Freeh and key media members. They all benefit from maintaining the "Story" which on facts alone is exposed as a State sponsored form of legal terrorism.
Sometimes you need to call a conspiracy for what it is" ...A CONSPIRACY..." This is a conspiracy of Convenience where each "partner" who participated in this State manufactured crime and "Story" involving PSU obtained clear and certifiable benefits from the Conspiracy. This includes a portion of the $100M+ dollars PSU paid out to bogus claims!!!!
What the heck are you taking about moron!
Much of what I’ve been hearing and reading has applauded Corbett for his ballsy move. Some ascribe a political motive, as Corbett looks forward to being re-elected — or not. A few have been absolutely contemptible, as usual, citing “the victimmmmmmmmmmmms”, despicably used by all parties and their observers to justify whatever they think they want to justify: pro, con, or in-between.
The worst I’ve seen was written by Penn State hater Christine Brennan of USA TODAY Sports. She asserts that Corbett should have let sleeping dogs lie. She asks, “Has no one in Pennsylvania learned anything over the past 14 months, since the news of the Sandusky horrors broke?”
Sensationalist trash! Citing Corbett and other state leaders’ “stunning obsession with Penn State football”, Brennan declared it non-coincidental that the suit was filed on January 2, because Corbett didn’t want to detract from the team’s momentum. Do whut, Juanita? The team hasn’t played since November, thanks to the NCAA sanctions.
Brennan poses some legitimate criticisms regarding the sloth with which Corbett and his prosecutorial team approached the Sandusky matter while it was under investigation. The new Pennsylvania Attorney General made a campaign pledge to investigate the investigators. She takes office on January 15. Stay tuned for more Pennsylvania politics at its finest.
So, what is Corbett aiming to accomplish? Is he out to save Penn State’s ass? His own? The collective ass of the people of Pennsylvania?
His own, no doubt. After all, he did a 180 degree turn from his original position on the matter. Last summer, Corbett in his role as trustee accepted the sanctions and embraced them as part of the university’s healing effort. That was a popular sentiment at the time, but sentiments change. Now that emotions have abated while logic and reason are on the rise, it doesn’t seem like such a good position for the Gov to stand behind anymore.
Regardless of his motivation, however, it is long since time that someone damned the torpedoes and went for it. This turkey has believed all along that the NCAA overstepped its bounds big time — because it could. Someone — namely Corbett — finally has come forward with the brass balls necessary to contest the self-perceived absolute, godlike authority of the NCAA over colleges and universities. Hallelujah!
There will always be snotty reprisals from two-bit hacks like Brennan, who take cheap shots to try to make a name for themselves. **** ’em! They have no dog in the fight and furthermore, they always can pull the cowardly ploy of hiding behind “the victimmmmmmmmmms”.
If it were just yellow journalists who were throwing up the smokescreen, we could ignore it and move on. However, we can’t ignore it when the NCAA does it, which is exactly where the NCAA response went. Shame on them, once again!
In a statement issued after Corbett’s announcement, Donald M. Remy, NCAA executive vice president and general counsel, said the governor was belatedly interceding in a matter that was well on its way to being resolved.
“We are disappointed by the governor’s action today,” Remy said. “Not only does this forthcoming lawsuit appear to be without merit, it is an affront to all of the victims in this tragedy — lives that were destroyed by the criminal actions of Jerry Sandusky. While the innocence that was stolen can never be restored, Penn State has accepted the consequences for its role and the role of its employees and is moving forward. Today’s announcement by the governor is a setback to the university’s efforts.”
Maybe so. But there was no reason to drag PSU down as a consequence. Not after it was learned that Tim Curley spoke about Jerry to Jack Raykovitz.
Dumbest take ever.... how is it possible to look worse than "enabled child rape to protect the football program"?
Anyone who has looked at the facts know the above quote is not true. What possible downside is there for Penn Staters to continue to fight to clear our name?
You can believe JS is innocent or guilty. But there is no evidence, none, that PSU enabled him, protected him, or covered up for him. And there cannot possibly be any downside to continuing to try to expose the truth about the entire situation.
OGBOT smears JVP, GS,GS, and TC.. spends millions to cover their own asses and pay Freeh to convince the world PSU has a protect child rape culture.... and Pinky Lee is worried this thread "makes us look bad."
Way it went down -
Authorities have said that after deciding to not report the abuse, Curley, Schultz and Spanier instead banned Sandusky from bringing children to campus showers.
Penn State officials talked to Sandusky about it, and Curley talked to Raykovitz.
According to the grand jury presentment, Curley told Raykovitz only that someone had witnessed something inappropriate, it was investigated and the result was to tell Sandusky not to shower on campus with kids.
Raykovitz in turn told a few members of his staff and the board's executive members what Curley had told him.
Bruce Heim was one of them.
"It goes right to the heart of what Tim Curley said to the grand jury, and that is that Tim Curley told him that he didn't want Jerry Sandusky on campus anymore in the showers, because we were in a day and age where that was inappropriate," Heim said.
Heim asked Raykovitz if anything inappropriate happened between the boy and Sandusky, and Raykovitz answered, "No."
That's what Raykovitz believed, based on what Curley had told him.
"They looked into it," Raykovitz told Heim, according to Heim's memory. "And nothing inappropriate happened."
Raykovitz then asked Heim -- a local real estate investor and someone who isn't shy about his loyalty to Penn State, the Paterno family and many of the key players in this scandal -- if he should relay this to the full board.
"And I said no," Heim said.
"For five years, I worked out at the football facility, several times a week, and saw Jerry showering with children," he said. "I said I don't think it's relevant. It happens every day at the YMCA. I remember the conversation specifically because it seemed like a nonstarter because of what Penn State said went on."
On that advice, Raykovitz didn't tell the board. He did have a talk with Sandusky, and told him to be more careful.
Sources say Raykovitz told Sandusky that as silly as it might sound, maybe he should wear swim trunks if he's showering with kids after a workout.
"Jack told me he had a few conversations with Jerry, that this isn't the 1960s, you can't do these things and not expect consequences and people to question motives," Marshall recalled.
But Sandusky was stubborn, she said. He often fought with Genoveseabout programming, and -- before the accusations -- he had free reign to spend time alone with kids.
In fact, many of the victims who testified at his June trial said Sandusky used The Second Mile to continue having contact with them and even to divert others from talking to their parents. Victim 4 produced "contracts" Sandusky wrote under Second Mile letterhead that forced the youth to spend time with his molester.
During the months of uncertainty, when everyone knew Sandusky was under investigation but few were in the loop about how severe the accusations had become, sources say that Raykovitz was convinced that prosecutors had built a case around one boy's shaky claims and a group of grown men who testified they had showered naked with Sandusky.
That, of course, wasn't the case.
Great post. Seriously, I can't understand why some people have such a problem with the bolded part.
You are absolutely correct that there is no evidence that PSU's leadership team (Spanier, Curley, Schultz, and Paterno) conspired or covered-up to protect the acts of a pedophile. The only information to make that suggestion was misrepresented emails and suborned perjury of Cynthia Baldwin and Mike McQueary orchestrated by the likes of Louis Freeh and Frank Fina that is simply not credible.
The Freeh Report is a farce. Frank Fina's misconduct has resulted in a ethics violation that will hopefully soon be adjudicated in Fina losing his license to practice law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for a year and a day.
Fina just couldn't grasp what was happening.
After deliberately conning the gullible judge back in October 2012, Fina then "proceeded to question [Baldwin] extensively about the very subjects he represented to Judge [Barry] Feudale he would avoid," the disciplinary board concluded. "These actions are reprehensible" and "inexcusable," the disciplinary board wrote.
In addition, the board found that Fina's alleged defense of his behavior before the board was "without substance." What Fina did, the disciplinary board said, was to tear down all the safeguards built into the criminal justice system by turning defense attorney Baldwin "into a witness for the prosecution against her clients."
He did it by threatening Baldwin with indictment. And when confronted with his deliberate misconduct, Fina arrogantly showed no remorse.
"As a prosecutor [Fina] served as a 'minister of justice,' whose 'duty to seek justice' trumps his role as an advocate to win cases," the disciplinary board wrote in a document signed by James C. Haggerty, the board's vice-chair. The disciplinary board cited case law that said that "lawyers who commit misconduct while in a public position bring disrepute upon the bar . . . [Fina] betrayed the faith and trust of the public by engaging in misconduct in his official capacity."
Fina, according to the disciplinary board, brought "dishonor to the professions and to our democratic institutions . . . [Fina's] actions dishonor the profession and his office."
Fina's "misrepresentations to Judge Feudale as to the scope of his inquiry of Ms. Baldwin's testimony are deeply disturbing and a significant aggravating factor," the board wrote. "There are innumerable portions of [Fina's] examination of Ms. Baldwin that sought detailed attorney-client communications. [Fina's] actions can be seen as nothing but intentional and calculated."
Intentional and calculated. That certainly summed up Fina's behavior as the disciplinary board's counsel dubbed him an "overzealous prosecutor." A crusader who thought he was above the law.
The disciplinary board also took Fina to task for his smug attitude when he was brought before the board on charges that he had violated the state ethics code for lawyers. As a witness to the proceedings, I can tell you that Fina and his lawyers richly deserved the dressing down they got because they spent most of their time attacking the disciplinary board's counsel for supposedly "smearing" Fina's good name and noble work as a prosecutor.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-IlwxYOQf6...1600/Screen+Shot+2019-06-07+at+7.22.21+AM.png
Fina was represented before the disciplinary by former deputy attorney general Joseph "Hollywood Joe" McGettigan, Fina's fellow prosecutor during the Penn State case. Between lawyer and client, it was a double display of how to be an obnoxious and overzealous prosecutor.
In his defense of Fina, McGettigan appeared drunk with the same obnoxious arrogance, the same holier-than-thou attitude and the same set of blinders as his client.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Football Adisa Isaac finds perfect landing spot in Baltimore- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley
-
-
-
FB Recruiting 2025 LB target scheduled for Penn State OV in June
- Latest: Dylan Callaghan-Croley