ADVERTISEMENT

Spanier Jail Sentence Upheld

Elwood Blues

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2002
2,010
1,235
1
Judge Boccabella has ruled that Dr. Spanier must report to Centre County prison on July 9, to serve a 2 month sentence.


Of course, our spotlight-seeking AG Shapiro took this opportunity to put out a statement on the subject.

 
scroll down to the letter thread for more conversation on the topic.
 
For many years I never thought I'd write this sentence but some time in late 2011, I realized the best thing I ever did was move out of PA to Ohio. Words cannot accurately capture how greatly that saddens me.

Unfortunately I feel the same when I made the move to Florida 7 years ago. PA has become a mess in so many ways, it makes me sad when I go back to visit...
 
Last edited:
I have a question for legal scholars:

What is the rationale for having the same judge that presided over a trial/sentencing hear the appeals?

Wouldn't everyone benefit from a second set of eyes on something?

Is this the case in all states? Or is this unique to PA?

The likelihood of a judge admitting he (or she) was wrong seems extremely small, even in cases where they are clearly wrong.
 
I've lived in a number of other states- all of them are preferable to PA
For many years I never thought I'd write this sentence but some time in late 2011, I realized the best thing I ever did was move out of PA to Ohio. Words cannot accurately capture how greatly that saddens me.

Unfortunately I feel the same when I made the move to Florida 7 years ago. PA has become a mess in so many ways, it makes me sad when I go back to visit...

Agree.

Pennsylvania -- a good state to be from
 
Judge Boccabella has ruled that Dr. Spanier must report to Centre County prison on July 9, to serve a 2 month sentence.


Of course, our spotlight-seeking AG Shapiro took this opportunity to put out a statement on the subject.

Beyond silly. We live in a damn police state. Half of the country behind bars.
 
I have a question for legal scholars:

What is the rationale for having the same judge that presided over a trial/sentencing hear the appeals?

Wouldn't everyone benefit from a second set of eyes on something?

Is this the case in all states? Or is this unique to PA?

The likelihood of a judge admitting he (or she) was wrong seems extremely small, even in cases where they are clearly wrong.
Haven’t followed this closely lately but the trial judge hears the initial post-trial motions which generally claim the Judge made prejudicial errors during the trial and request him to grant a new trial. Not unexpectedly, these motions are rarely granted. The defendant then has a right to appeal to the Superior and possibly Supreme Court (a discretionary appeal) and make the same arguments. In this case, an appellate court would have upheld Spanier’s conviction and the case was sent back to Boccabella for sentencing.
I recall Spanier filed an action in federal court which claimed his due process rights were violated because Boccabella charged the jury on a statute which was passed AFTER his alleged criminal conduct. A District Magistrate granted that motion (properly IMO). I recall Shapiro appealed that ruling and I lost track of what happened after that (I thought he was granted a new trial in state court and of course grandstanding Shapiro said they would te-try him—you know it was his “duty” to protect minors even though the AGs office which oversees DPW, the real culprit here never was investigated by his office). If my recollection is correct, I don’t recall a second trial before Boccabella.
I have practiced law for 40 years and as others have pointed out, the treatment of Spanier and others is one of the worst legal travesties I have seen.
if, as many expect, Shapiro runs for governor, I hope he loses in a landslide.
 
for a misdemeanor though, for a first time offender who is like 75. This is the same level of public intoxication and trespass, of which ALL of us did by flooding the field after the Ohio state win.
Shows what political motivation does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mn78psu83
Haven’t followed this closely lately but the trial judge hears the initial post-trial motions which generally claim the Judge made prejudicial errors during the trial and request him to grant a new trial. Not unexpectedly, these motions are rarely granted. The defendant then has a right to appeal to the Superior and possibly Supreme Court (a discretionary appeal) and make the same arguments. In this case, an appellate court would have upheld Spanier’s conviction and the case was sent back to Boccabella for sentencing.
I recall Spanier filed an action in federal court which claimed his due process rights were violated because Boccabella charged the jury on a statute which was passed AFTER his alleged criminal conduct. A District Magistrate granted that motion (properly IMO). I recall Shapiro appealed that ruling and I lost track of what happened after that (I thought he was granted a new trial in state court and of course grandstanding Shapiro said they would te-try him—you know it was his “duty” to protect minors even though the AGs office which oversees DPW, the real culprit here never was investigated by his office). If my recollection is correct, I don’t recall a second trial before Boccabella.
I have practiced law for 40 years and as others have pointed out, the treatment of Spanier and others is one of the worst legal travesties I have seen.
if, as many expect, Shapiro runs for governor, I hope he loses in a landslide.
You're close. The federal district magistrate threw out the judgment of sentence, which would have necessitated a new trial. Shapiro said that he would retry the case, but appealed the district magistrate's decision to the Third Circuit, who in December reversed the magistrate's decision, which essentially reinstated the original judgment of sentence that was affirmed by the Superior Court years ago. So because the judgment of sentence was vacated and then the vacation was reversed, it went back to the trial court for a new sentencing hearing...but at the end of the day, the original judgment of sentence was determined to be valid by the Third Circuit, so the trial court just reimposed the original sentence. It was possible for the trial court to impose a different sentence than the one it did years ago (and covid and Spanier's condition each would have been potential grounds for doing so, as neither of those factors existed at the original sentencing) but the trial court didn't do so.

To UNC's underlying question, the trial court today wasn't really "presiding over the appeal" per se because this isn't an appeal - Spanier lost his appeal in December when the Third Circuit reversed the magistrate judge's vacation of Spanier's conviction. This was just the trial court re-sentencing Spanier after he already lost the appeal and the original conviction was re-imposed.
 
Ol’ Josh ought to do a little fundraiser for the kids - seeing how he his priorities are so straight like few others. Maybe a boxing match against an alum with another POV.
 
How's this then: The United States incarceration numbers more than the rest of the World combined. That better?
As written, your sentence (bolded above) is unintelligible because you didn’t clarify if the USA’s incarcerations are based on (a) total number of people in jail relative to other countries or (b) a per capita level of comparative incarceration.

While I’m challenging your logic, do you have access to reliable incarceration statistics for other countries, especially those controlled by various despots, that would serve a defendable basis for you original claim?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CentrevilleLion
Shapiro running around like a kid on Christmas because he put a dying man in prison for a crime likely no one has ever gone to prison before
Jack Raykovic said if Graham Spanier would have only put out a memo to Jerry S to wear swim trunks while in a shower on PSU property with a minor, he could have avoided prison. What is the wrong people are sent to prison for $200, Alex.
 
For many years I never thought I'd write this sentence but some time in late 2011, I realized the best thing I ever did was move out of PA to Ohio. Words cannot accurately capture how greatly that saddens me.
I think the wrong jobs left the state, the wrong ones remained....wonder if it's coincidence that democracy and degradation share the same first 2 letters.
 
I think the wrong jobs left the state, the wrong ones remained....wonder if it's coincidence that democracy and degradation share the same first 2 letters.
it comes down to choices. PA is, unfortunately, not ideally located (referring to weather). But leadership in politics has been horrible, simply horrible. And that includes gubernatorial administrations led by left and right. One would hope the courts could bend the corruption but in PA, they are part of it. Taxation, corruption, weather....you name it. Ohio has been blessed with some good gov's. While they share the same weather or similar, far better managed and far less corrupt.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GoGoBanana
it comes down to choices. PA is, unfortunately, not ideally located (referring to weather). But leadership in politics has been horrible, simply horrible. And that includes gubernatorial administrations led by left and right. One would hope the courts could bend the corruption but in PA, they are part of it. Taxation, corruption, weather....you name it. Ohio has been blessed with some good gov's. While they share the same weather or similar, far better managed and far less corrupt.
 
You're close. The federal district magistrate threw out the judgment of sentence, which would have necessitated a new trial. Shapiro said that he would retry the case, but appealed the district magistrate's decision to the Third Circuit, who in December reversed the magistrate's decision, which essentially reinstated the original judgment of sentence that was affirmed by the Superior Court years ago. So because the judgment of sentence was vacated and then the vacation was reversed, it went back to the trial court for a new sentencing hearing...but at the end of the day, the original judgment of sentence was determined to be valid by the Third Circuit, so the trial court just reimposed the original sentence. It was possible for the trial court to impose a different sentence than the one it did years ago (and covid and Spanier's condition each would have been potential grounds for doing so, as neither of those factors existed at the original sentencing) but the trial court didn't do so.

To UNC's underlying question, the trial court today wasn't really "presiding over the appeal" per se because this isn't an appeal - Spanier lost his appeal in December when the Third Circuit reversed the magistrate judge's vacation of Spanier's conviction. This was just the trial court re-sentencing Spanier after he already lost the appeal and the original conviction was re-imposed.
Now do that blindfolded 😏
 
  • Like
Reactions: step.eng69
It looks like Erickson is walking in with him along with his lawyers, from the online photo's.
 
Last edited:
If I were Spanier....I might flee the country. I guess it depends a little bit on how bad the cancer is, is he on chemo, etc...but just get in a car and drive down to Central America or something and live out your remaining days on the beach somewhere.
 
Shapiro running around like a kid on Christmas because he put a dying man in prison for a crime likely no one has ever gone to prison before
Spanky Shapiro is a guy who when in elementary school the best part of his lunches were stolen and the rest guys pissed on. The fact that anyone would support him is proof that we are doomed.
 
If I were Spanier....I might flee the country. I guess it depends a little bit on how bad the cancer is, is he on chemo, etc...but just get in a car and drive down to Central America or something and live out your remaining days on the beach somewhere.

I'd go in and immediately go on a hunger strike. They'd break before I would.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT