Spanier has a book coming out in 09/22

roswelllion

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 18, 2003
9,917
8,914
1
Didn't prosecute CSS.

None of what she said was used against CSS as those charges were thrown out.

No, but the idea that Freeh wrote his report directed by the OAG is silly conspiracy. Plus Freeh said he would work with LE when he first started. A big nothing burger.

Whataboutism

See above

Irrelevant to CSS or Joe

CSS had good attorneys. The FBI was not involved. Baldwin and Fina did not prosecute, testify in court or have any charges related to them not dropped. What is your point?

Maybe we should just accept that they are guilty and move on? Learn from it.
First thing you should improve is your reading comprehension. I said I wasn't interested in rehashing verdicts. My point is our system is screwed up in a big big way. I'd like you to look those lady gymnasts in the eye and tell them their case is whataboutism you big brave internet champion for the FBI.
However since you insist on rehashing verdicts. Curley and Schultz plead to a harmless misdemeanor and that fatso Ditka pulled a switcheroo. Their record is cleaner than someone with a DUI. Spanier got convicted of something that wasn't even a crime when it occurred. Yep a true credit to the American jurisprudence system.
 

WHCANole

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2002
1,477
324
1
I knew Joe and Tim well enough to laugh at any suggestion they would ever put children at risk.
Sometimes we don't know people as well as we think.
Once again.....Fat Tom, Slimy Surma (you didn't make my nephew a star), Paul Shuey (my boy was on the bench), porngate Fap Fino......or JVP and Tim.......LOL
$$$$$ money makes people do strange things....especially if you're a lawyer with no character or a poor kid in Lock Haven.
Whose settlement did you share?
Didn't share any. Do you think Sandusky is innocent?
 
  • Like
Reactions: roswelllion

WHCANole

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2002
1,477
324
1
Against a lot of odds?
Pillars of the Community are hard to convict
You are so sad....why its enough to make a janitor cry....
When you float a false GJP
Wasn't false
.....hide a crucial witness in a cabin
Who neither side would call as a witness
and PSP lie under oath (just to name a few)....
the odds are skewed.
Not against a beloved figure such as Jerry
 

WHCANole

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2002
1,477
324
1
First thing you should improve is your reading comprehension. I said I wasn't interested in rehashing verdicts.
Good cause you would lose that one.
My point is our system is screwed up in a big big way.
Opinion
I'd like you to look those lady gymnasts in the eye and tell them their case is whataboutism you big brave internet champion for the FBI.
I think you might need some reading comprehension lessons. FBI wasn't involved in the PSU scandal. What happened at other schools doesn't lessen the crimes of CSS and Joe.
However since you insist on rehashing verdicts. Curley and Schultz plead to a harmless misdemeanor and that fatso Ditka pulled a switcheroo.
No, they told the prosecutors one thing behind closed doors and the jury something else in court in front of their supporters. So, they got jail time along with Spanier. Justice. BTW, comparing EWOC with DUI is pretty sick. Do you hate kids?
Their record is cleaner than someone with a DUI.
Not by a damn sight.
Spanier got convicted of something that wasn't even a crime when it occurred.
Supreme Court of US disagreed.
Yep a true credit to the American jurisprudence system.
Got a better system?
 

roswelllion

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 18, 2003
9,917
8,914
1
Good cause you would lose that one.

Opinion

I think you might need some reading comprehension lessons. FBI wasn't involved in the PSU scandal. What happened at other schools doesn't lessen the crimes of CSS and Joe.

No, they told the prosecutors one thing behind closed doors and the jury something else in court in front of their supporters. So, they got jail time along with Spanier. Justice. BTW, comparing EWOC with DUI is pretty sick. Do you hate kids?

Not by a damn sight.

Supreme Court of US disagreed.

Got a better system?
Last post to you.
I went back and reread my pots in this thread. My comments have almost exclusively been about the criminal justice system and in particular INVESTIGATORY agencies. Obli discussed the over zealous prosecutors and under served public defenders. I and others mentioned high profile screw ups by the FBI. You then hijacked the thread and made it all about the The Second Mile fiasco verdicts.
So here we go
1. Our system is screwed up in a big way. [opinion] of course it is just like it is my opinion you are a troll and and a blowhard However within the thread has been numerous examples [Nassar, poor folks, Sussman, Whitmer FBI] to show why I feel this way.
2.Lady gymnasts- You say FBI wasn't involved in PSU. That makes my point. I wasn't talking about PSU except tangentially. I was talking about how bad our Fedral Bureau of wait a minute ... INVESTIGATIONS is.
3 CS/TC /Fat Ditka -opinion
4 EWOC/DUI - research 1st degree misdemanor
5 Supreme Court - If the law ever changes and makes being a blow hard illegal can the charge you for beeing so now.
6 Better system - talk about whataboutism? however look at Denmark, Sweden, Israel, UK maybe.

Have a good day
 
  • Like
Reactions: AvgUser

Cletus11

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2003
11,871
8,310
1
I am actually confused about who this person is. Obviously a troll, but a troll that has done some small level of research. It appears that in every thread over the past decade whenever this topic comes up, there is always a poster that just goes crazy in blaming everything on PSU and JoePa and refuses to acknowledge facts and twists things to fit their agenda. I cannot figure out why anybody would take that amount of time to troll like that on this topic.
 

WHCANole

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2002
1,477
324
1
Last post to you.
That's fine but it won't change the facts.
I went back and reread my pots in this thread. My comments have almost exclusively been about the criminal justice system and in particular INVESTIGATORY agencies. Obli discussed the over zealous prosecutors and under served public defenders. I and others mentioned high profile screw ups by the FBI.
I acknowldege that no institution or system is perfect. You are not perfect either.
You then hijacked the thread and made it all about the The Second Mile fiasco verdicts.
Which is what this thread is about
So here we go
1. Our system is screwed up in a big way. [opinion] of course it is just like it is my opinion you are a troll and and a blowhard However within the thread has been numerous examples [Nassar, poor folks, Sussman, Whitmer FBI] to show why I feel this way.
Off topic. How does it relate to the PSU scandal?
2.Lady gymnasts- You say FBI wasn't involved in PSU. That makes my point. I wasn't talking about PSU except tangentially. I was talking about how bad our Fedral Bureau of wait a minute ... INVESTIGATIONS is.
Off topic
3 CS/TC /Fat Ditka -opinion
As is yours
4 EWOC/DUI - research 1st degree misdemanor
So DUI is nothing? Interesting. EWOC most people would think that to be pretty bad. BTW, using the misdemeanor for fat cats like CSS who WENT TO JAIL, really doesn't make them look better.
5 Supreme Court - If the law ever changes and makes being a blow hard illegal can the charge you for beeing so now.
It's the law of the land
6 Better system - talk about whataboutism? however look at Denmark, Sweden, Israel, UK maybe.
Their systems aren't one lick better and subject to the same things you complain about in ours.
Have a good day
You as well.
 

WHCANole

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2002
1,477
324
1
I am actually confused about who this person is. Obviously a troll, but a troll that has done some small level of research. It appears that in every thread over the past decade whenever this topic comes up, there is always a poster that just goes crazy in blaming everything on PSU and JoePa and refuses to acknowledge facts and twists things to fit their agenda. I cannot figure out why anybody would take that amount of time to troll like that on this topic.
Why do all you guys need to know who it is who refutes you? So you can harass them? This is a sign of a cult. Like Scientology.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

marshall23

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2013
17,781
27,650
1
I am actually confused about who this person is. Obviousl but a troll that has done some small level of research. It appears that in every thread over the past decade whenever this topic comes up, there is always a poster that just goes crazy in blaming everything on PSU and JoePa and refuses to acknowledge facts and twists things to fit their agenda. I cannot figure out why anybody would take that amount of time to troll like that on this topic.
Understand that the Sandusky Scandal infused tens of millions of dollars into the Centre County Area.
Attorneys, auto dealerships, financial advisors and real estate agents made windfall profits.
In addition, millions in "fine" money went to a variety of "agencies"
There are others who want all the focus to remain on JS for a variety of reasons.
Perhaps they fear a new trial might expose their criminabehavior.l
 
  • Like
Reactions: francofan

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
24,518
28,797
1
Sandusky's Trial was a sham.
Spanier's jury foreman expressed his regret for the verdict.
Tim and Gary beat every serious charge. I'll stop posting if you can find another instance in Pa. history where anyone did jail time on the count they agreed to plead to. LOL LOL LOL
Fantasyland, He was as guilty as sin, and if we're talking the other two trials, MM was believed in both of those. Only here do people entertain such silliness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WHCANole

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
24,518
28,797
1
Sandusky's Trial was a sham.
Spanier's jury foreman expressed his regret for the verdict.
Tim and Gary beat every serious charge. I'll stop posting if you can find another instance in Pa. history where anyone did jail time on the count they agreed to plead to. LOL LOL LOL
Plea deals often involve jail time. SMH
 
  • Like
Reactions: WHCANole

DandyDonII

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2002
7,290
6,379
1
I don't know whether you are a prosecutor or not but they obtained convictions and got jail time for those they prosecuted. 100% of all those they charged. In Sandusky's case against a lot of odds. I'd take it.
I definitely am, but if you charge someone with attempted murder that carries a usual prison sentence of 7 years, but instead get a conviction for a misdemeanor battery with a few months of jail, it is not a win for a prosecutor.
It is amazing how often prosecutors step on their own dicks when it comes to high publicity cases, and it happens for a variety of reasons, the chief one being, they treat the case differently than they would if the defendant wasn't high profile.
 

WHCANole

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2002
1,477
324
1
Sandusky's Trial was a sham.
Appeals courts disagree. How was it a sham?
Spanier's jury foreman expressed his regret for the verdict.
But admitted that they covered up to protect their image. "They did that," Black said of Spanier, Curley and Schultz. "They were more interested in protecting the brand than in protecting the children."
Tim and Gary beat every serious charge. I'll stop posting if you can find another instance in Pa. history where anyone did jail time on the count they agreed to plead to. LOL LOL LOL
They got jail time for lying after they got their deal and told much to the OAG then reneged on the stand. The judge commented on that.
 

WHCANole

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2002
1,477
324
1
I definitely am, but if you charge someone with attempted murder that carries a usual prison sentence of 7 years, but instead get a conviction for a misdemeanor battery with a few months of jail, it is not a win for a prosecutor.
It is amazing how often prosecutors step on their own dicks when it comes to high publicity cases, and it happens for a variety of reasons, the chief one being, they treat the case differently than they would if the defendant wasn't high profile.
I think it was quite hard to get any conviction on CSS. PSU is very popular in PA and I would think the jury would be a tough sell. Plus the laws were written as such that charging CSS for covering up to protect PSU's image is not exactly a statute. I think the OAG did quite well to get any jail time for the fat cats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

WHCANole

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2002
1,477
324
1
Understand that the Sandusky Scandal infused tens of millions of dollars into the Centre County Area.
Attorneys, auto dealerships, financial advisors and real estate agents made windfall profits.
In addition, millions in "fine" money went to a variety of "agencies"
There are others who want all the focus to remain on JS for a variety of reasons.
Perhaps they fear a new trial might expose their criminabehavior.l
Conspiracy?
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
24,518
28,797
1
I think it was quite hard to get any conviction on CSS. PSU is very popular in PA and I would think the jury would be a tough sell. Plus the laws were written as such that charging CSS for covering up to protect PSU's image is not exactly a statute. I think the OAG did quite well to get any jail time for the fat cats.
I care about one thing , did they have an idea what Jerry was doing and did they fail to report. Yes to that in 98 and later. Whether they committed a crime is why the legal battle occurred.
Jerry was found guilty on 45/48 counts, Mike won the whistleblower lawsuit, and then we had the verdicts for the three.
That answered my question even though I knew the answer before that .
 

marshall23

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2013
17,781
27,650
1
Fantasyland, He was as guilty as sin, and if we're talking the other two trials, MM was believed in both of those. Only here do people entertain such silliness.
Fantasyland, He was as guilty as sin, and if we're talking the other two trials, MM was believed in both of those. Only here do people entertain such silliness.

Why would he lie about that?
If you don't know, you must be his father.
 

marshall23

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2013
17,781
27,650
1
I care about one thing , did they have an idea what Jerry was doing and did they fail to report. Yes to that in 98 and later. Whether they committed a crime is why the legal battle occurred.
Jerry was found guilty on 45/48 counts, Mike won the whistleblower lawsuit, and then we had the verdicts for the three.
That answered my question even though I knew the answer before that .
Tim reported to Raykovitz. Who did Dr.Dranov and Dad report to?
None of them had anything substantial to report unless Mike can see around corners.
 
  • Like
Reactions: francofan

marshall23

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2013
17,781
27,650
1
I care about one thing , did they have an idea what Jerry was doing and did they fail to report. Yes to that in 98 and later. Whether they committed a crime is why the legal battle occurred.
Jerry was found guilty on 45/48 counts, Mike won the whistleblower lawsuit, and then we had the verdicts for the three.
That answered my question even though I knew the answer before that .
"they" had nothing to do with 98. How dense are you?
 

AvgUser

Well-Known Member
Jul 12, 2016
2,092
3,572
1
I definitely am, but if you charge someone with attempted murder that carries a usual prison sentence of 7 years, but instead get a conviction for a misdemeanor battery with a few months of jail, it is not a win for a prosecutor.
It is amazing how often prosecutors step on their own dicks when it comes to high publicity cases, and it happens for a variety of reasons, the chief one being, they treat the case differently than they would if the defendant wasn't high profile.
Laura Ditka had a dick?
 

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
61,977
38,962
1
I care about one thing , did they have an idea what Jerry was doing and did they fail to report. Yes to that in 98 and later. Whether they committed a crime is why the legal battle occurred.
Jerry was found guilty on 45/48 counts, Mike won the whistleblower lawsuit, and then we had the verdicts for the three.
That answered my question even though I knew the answer before that .
I think the administrators did an unacceptably poor job documenting MM's report and the rational for their response.

That said I disagree that they knew that JS committed sexual assault in 98 or 01. Complaints were dropped against JS in 98 and NONE of the 5 people MM talked to said that he mentioned sexual assault. Also, ZERO players or coaches said that they saw JS involved in such activity.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
24,518
28,797
1
I think the administrators did an unacceptably poor job documenting MM's report and the rational for their response.

That said I disagree that they knew that JS committed sexual assault in 98 or 01. Complaints were dropped against JS in 98 and NONE of the 5 people MM talked to said that he mentioned sexual assault. Also, ZERO players or coaches said that they saw JS involved in such activity.
Knew? There was no way for them to know exactly, however they did not report the incident in 2001 mainly because they rigged 1998. The Seasock report was the reason they dropped it. They had no way to know exactly what Jerry but they had two credible reports as of 2001.
In the case of CSA you seldom have an eye witness, it's extremely rare. So when Mike came forward they really need to get it down on paper, call the local or state police and immediately report it to CYS. When you look into these cases this is the playbook everyone uses when they don't want to report it. They complain confusion or say someone else handled that part I think.
Investigators on these cases know the drill and the failed game plans. The more you document, the more vulnerable you are if you don't report it. Shoddy paperwork is the planned out.
 

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
61,977
38,962
1
So when Mike came forward they really need to get it down on paper, call the local or state police and immediately report it to CYS. report it.
Agree that standard procedure is to clearly document whistleblower complaints and they failed miserably.

I don't agree that MM told them about sexual assault. It makes ZERO sense that Dad, Dranov, Joe, Curley, and Shultz would all say that MM didn't say that.

Also, if they really thought JS committed sexual assault they would have immediately eliminated all access to PSU facilities and they would have instructed people to keep quiet. Reasonable people wouldn't risk it happening again.

My guess is that they were reluctant to ruin JS's life with a false accusation.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
24,518
28,797
1
Agree that standard procedure is to clearly document whistleblower complaints and they failed miserably.

I don't agree that MM told them about sexual assault. It makes ZERO sense that Dad, Dranov, Joe, Curley, and Shultz would all say that MM didn't say that.

Also, if they really thought JS committed sexual assault they would have immediately eliminated all access to PSU facilities and they would have instructed people to keep quiet. Reasonable people wouldn't risk it happening again.

My guess is that they were reluctant to ruin JS's life with a false accusation.
That's a very self serving guess for those fellows. Saying Mike was upset is not the same as saying he didn't mention sexual assault. Mike did not clarify it wasn't sexual assault but some other thing. He didn't specifically say it was sexual to them. That's different.
Joe mentioned of a sexual nature and the other two are liars. What they did is the basic cover up in these cases. It's how it always happens. Either way, it's done now. Spanier says he has a book coming out. My friend talks about writing one.
But the narrative is set, certain PSU fans will believe what they believe and others will think the opposite. The grand jury information is sealed and the reports various people had have been destroyed or were supposed to be destroyed. So if you want clarification or exoneration neither will ever come enough to satisfy anyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WHCANole

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
61,977
38,962
1
That's a very self serving guess for those fellows. Saying Mike was upset is not the same as saying he didn't mention sexual assault. Mike did not clarify it wasn't sexual assault but some other thing. He didn't specifically say it was sexual to them. That's different.
Joe mentioned of a sexual nature and the other two are liars. What they did is the basic cover up in these cases.
Then why did Dad & Dranov say the same thing? Why did they allow Jerry to continue coming on campus?
 
  • Like
Reactions: francofan