Ziegler claims to have tapes of Shubin manipulating accuser testimony

[NittPicker]

To be clear, I think that recovered memories learned in repressed memory therapy are totally unreliable. The methods have been thoroughly debunked. I think it is imperative that Judge Cleland allows evidence of repressed/recovered memories to come into Sandusky's PCRA hearings including an in-camera review of therapy notes from therapist who saw accusers and used repressed/recovered memory techniques in their sessions with them.

Years ago a female acquaintance of mine was having some personal issues. Her relationship with her family had become strained which was odd since they had always been close. It may have been due in part to the fact she and her husband were unsuccessfully trying to start a family of their own. It reached the point where my acquaintance began seeing a counselor to help right her ship. At the beginning the counselor asked if there had ever been any sexual abuse in the past. My acquaintance said there had never been any such thing. Over the next couple sessions the counselor kept it up and asked if there was anyone in the past who "could" have abused her. Again the answer was no. The counselor eventually flat out told my acquaintance her problems were likely due to sexual abuse which she could no longer remember, again asking her who "could" have abused her. My acquaintance then mentioned the name of a close male family friend even though she had no recollection of the man mistreating her in any way. The counselor then tried to convince my acquaintance that her problems all stemmed from abuse at the hands of the old family friend. Fortunately my acquaintance never confronted the friend and came to realize the counselor was trying to convince her of something which never happened.

Given the above example, it's easy to see how a therapist could potentially persuade someone of something which wasn't true. Some therapists believe most personal problems stem from long forgotten abuse which of course is ridiculous. Sigmund Freud convinced a generation of psychiatrists that behavior was the result of being traumatized in certain stages of development. According to Freud, an obsessive person was stuck in the anal stage due to bad toilet training. Freud's work has been largely discredited but to this day an obsessive person in still often said to be anal retentive.

As was Freud, repressed memory therapy will be viewed as voodoo science. There is simply too much potential bias which can be introduced by the therapist. This is proven by my acquaintance whose counselor had already drawn a conclusion and was trying to lead my acquaintance into believing it.

 

[marshall23]

Why is it that those who should know the most about the compliant offender pedophile......are the most ignorant? We are expected to believe that victims of child abuse lie, repeatedly change their stories, need controversial forms of therapy, should be encouraged to make their testimony more damning by LE, until viola, we have the truth! Ok, I'll go along. But on the other hand, the nice guy offender should have been snagged by university administrators & coaches when CYS, DPW, the largest charity for children in the state, run by child care experts didn't see anything, apparently.
From my perspective, those most responsible for this tragedy and The Commonwealth's abysmal record of protecting children are 1. Its own agencies that failed the boys JS abused and continues to fail daily. 2. The OAG who never properly performed required oversight on TSM (see Tom Corbett),3. "Child Advocates"....they might as well be jugglers, acrobats or perhaps better yet magicians (now you see them, now you don't). You see them on payday and you don't when meaningful reform is needed.
People just don't want to be confused with the facts. In 1998 a potential victim's mother REPORTED an incident involving her son and JS. I said REPORTED. LE and Commonwealth Agencies investigated and DID NOT prosecute JS. In 2001, JS WAS REPORTED TO JACK RAYKOVITZ, a child care expert.
Those who are "experts" and point to PSU as enablers are simply stated FRAUDS.








'

'

 

[pandaczar12]

Years ago a female acquaintance of mine was having some personal issues. Her relationship with her family had become strained which was odd since they had always been close. It may have been due in part to the fact she and her husband were unsuccessfully trying to start a family of their own. It reached the point where my acquaintance began seeing a counselor to help right her ship. At the beginning the counselor asked if there had ever been any sexual abuse in the past. My acquaintance said there had never been any such thing. Over the next couple sessions the counselor kept it up and asked if there was anyone in the past who "could" have abused her. Again the answer was no. The counselor eventually flat out told my acquaintance her problems were likely due to sexual abuse which she could no longer remember, again asking her who "could" have abused her. My acquaintance then mentioned the name of a close male family friend even though she had no recollection of the man mistreating her in any way. The counselor then tried to convince my acquaintance that her problems all stemmed from abuse at the hands of the old family friend. Fortunately my acquaintance never confronted the friend and came to realize the counselor was trying to convince her of something which never happened.

Given the above example, it's easy to see how a therapist could potentially persuade someone of something which wasn't true. Some therapists believe most personal problems stem from long forgotten abuse which of course is ridiculous. Sigmund Freud convinced a generation of psychiatrists that behavior was the result of being traumatized in certain stages of development. According to Freud, an obsessive person was stuck in the anal stage due to bad toilet training. Freud's work has been largely discredited but to this day an obsessive person in still often said to be anal retentive.

As was Freud, repressed memory therapy will be viewed as voodoo science. There is simply too much potential bias which can be introduced by the therapist. This is proven by my acquaintance whose counselor had already drawn a conclusion and was trying to lead my acquaintance into believing it.

JS was at the very least a very weird guy. If you are being told he did all these awful things to other people, and you remember that he once took a shower with you or touched your leg... it seems like it would be easy to extrapolate that to abuse, especially if you have a therapist and lawyer pushing you in that direction. The millions of dollars at stake of course could have also been a factor.

I've always been a pretty firm believer in JS being guilty, but this stuff really makes you think.

 

[creamery freak]

interesting list don't you think? Wasnt Alycia A. Chambers part of the 98 investigation? maybe I am wrong about that.

I remember that her name was in the Freeh report that was part of the 98 investigation and was uncovered by Ray Blehar. If I remember correctly she interviewed 2 of Sandusky's shower victims and it verified that Sandusky was a pedophile. This was reported to the TSM and they sent in another Child Psychologist, John Seasock, to interview the same kids and his evidence claimed that Jerry was ok, with no pedophile tendencies. So who was right? Another strike on TSM!

 

[sarasotan]

Seasock was not a psychologist. The big question is WHO overrode Chambers, who had the proper training, whereas Seasock did not.

 

[Kiber]

I could be wrong on this. But the tapes would not be allowed in a court of law, because both parties did not agree to, nor have knowledge of a conversation being taped. BUT, there would be minimal consequences of the tapes "somehow" found their way into the hands of every TV station, radio station and "60 Minutes" type of show. Shubin might have grounds for a lawsuit, but my guess would be that IF those tapes were released, he'd be pretty busy trying to defend his own actions and not have time to put together a lawsuit vs. Ziegler.

..... IF Ziegler had the tapes, what is he waiting for? Maybe for Sue to pass away so that she dies never having seen her husband's name & honor restored???

 

[sluggo72]

Seasock was not a psychologist. The big question is WHO overrode Chambers, who had the proper training, whereas Seasock did not.

with as much pub as JS has gotten, I think there is something to the fact that these 2 work together in the same office. I don't know what that is, but I think it is something. it is almost like 2 layers at the same firm working different angles to the same case.

 

[francofan]

Not an expert on the JS legal stuff but I believe the drift of Chambers report was that no abuse occurred but JS was definitely "grooming" the kids for future abuse.

I don't believe that Chambers was that conclusive. I think that Chambers reported that JS was possibly grooming kids for further abuse.

 

[marshall23]

I could be wrong on this. But the tapes would not be allowed in a court of law, because both parties did not agree to, nor have knowledge of a conversation being taped. BUT, there would be minimal consequences of the tapes "somehow" found their way into the hands of every TV station, radio station and "60 Minutes" type of show. Shubin might have grounds for a lawsuit, but my guess would be that IF those tapes were released, he'd be pretty busy trying to defend his own actions and not have time to put together a lawsuit vs. Ziegler.

..... IF Ziegler had the tapes, what is he waiting for? Maybe for Sue to pass away so that she dies never having seen her husband's name & honor restored???

I am anxious to hear/ see what ever evidence may exist like these tapes. There are a # of potential reasons to wait for the right moment. Perhaps a judge who is about to decide on a Sandusky Appeal might be influenced by the thought that evidence may exist of his innocence?

 

[Trimester]

I do believe the tapes exist. Personally, I hope John releases them.

So Anthony, can you share what it is that makes you believe these tapes exist?
Have you seen them/heard them? Is it faith in JZ, some corroborating evidence, reading tea leaves, or a guess?

If you can, an explanation would save this thread a lot of useless hand wringing and histrionics.

Thanks in advance.

 

[sluggo72]

I don't believe that Chambers was that conclusive. I think that Chambers reported that JS was possibly grooming kids for further abuse.

although this does not address that issue, I still find this interesting RE: 1998 investigation http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/crime/article24720370.html

 

[JoeDidntKnow]

No, he was just referring to certain people.

Why not just call them out instead of using a broad brush?

 

[JoeDidntKnow]

Why yes! She was unmasked after an LTE she wrote. Be sure to read the whole thing if you are so inclined. It's a tweet series due to 140 char limit.

View embedded media

Brave men??? Oh, please spare us the melodrama Cynthia. There was no rape - ever. Stop making crap up to support your agenda

 

[sarasotan]

A refresher on Seasock and Chambers. And McNab. And Amendola.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/crime/article24726928.html

 

[manatree]

why is it illegal? CBS, ABC today show etc, all go 'undercover' to report stuff, why cant JZ? I saw Today show going something about weddings and how if its a wedding, the photographer, cater, etc will all charge more for a 'wedding' than a birthday party etc. They didn't agree to be taped or anything, so why cant JZ do this?? He's a news guy.

Don't ask me, ask the people claiming that's the reason he won't release the tapes.

 

[StinkStankStunk]

why is it illegal? CBS, ABC today show etc, all go 'undercover' to report stuff, why cant JZ? I saw Today show going something about weddings and how if its a wedding, the photographer, cater, etc will all charge more for a 'wedding' than a birthday party etc. They didn't agree to be taped or anything, so why cant JZ do this?? He's a news guy.

Entirely different "expectations of privacy"....for one

FWIW - If I had such information - verifiable - - - - - you could comfortably bet the mortgage money that such info would be "out". No question about it.

But, that doesn't mean everyone would do the same.

 

[bdgan]

A refresher on Seasock and Chambers. And McNab. And Amendola.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/crime/article24726928.html

Read her statement:

After the interview with the boy, she consulted with colleagues, who all agreed Sandusky was showing signs of a “likely pedophile’s pattern of building trust and gradual introduction of physical touch.”

Building trust isn't a crime. Introduction of physical touch (arms, legs, etc.) isn't a crime. It's fair to question if Seasock should have recognized a questionable pattern but nobody would have had enough to prosecute. The best he could have done would have been to tell his colleagues to keep an eye out for this guy.

This is one reason why I believe C/S/S. I think JS stepped over the line and MM was suspicious just like Chambers. But he didn't actually witness sexual assault so he was cautious with his allegations.

 

[Royal_Coaster]

Regarding, Cynthia McNab, how much of "Jake Corman's money" do you think her agency received? If you think about it, it's in her best interest to find as many victims as possible. For every victim who must be believed, there are hundreds of hours of therapy that must be billed to somebody. You don't think she loves children that much that she does it for free, do you?

 

[Royal_Coaster]

I guess I have to spell this out. Without enough public backing putting this tape out isn't worth the inevitable lawsuit that will come his way. Because Zig wasn't doing the recording himself I doubt he's subject to much criminal penalties outside maybe conspiracy to commit a crime if it were proven he suggested the taping. However the fake victim who's in his 50s could possibly spend much of the rest of his life in prison especially if he has any type of criminal record. But Zig would be subject to a lawsuit. That costs money to defend & as we've seen before he can wave evidence on national TV & still get totally ignored so what reason would he take such a risk for? If y'all think it's so easy maybe Zig can send you a copy & you can put it out & face a lawsuit from Shubin. I bet alot of you would say hell yeah right up until it was time to put it out & face the possible consequences of a life of permanent debt & maybe some jail time.

Then why mention it on a radio broadcast if it's legally risky? And again, Ziegler says nothing about not releasing any info because of legal issues, or concern for his "fake victim." He says he won't release anything until someone ponies up money in an amount he deems sufficient. Now could that just be bluster because he knows it's very unlikely someone will do that? Of course.

On the other hand, Mr. Lubrano (or at least the person using his name here) seems to think the information is authentic. Mr. Lubrano is very interested in clearing Paterno's and Penn States names. Mr. Lubrano has more many than everyone who posted in this thread combined. The answer is clear, let Mr. Lubrano put up the money for the tapes, and Ziegler can hand them over. Everybody's happy, right?

 

[bdgan]

Entirely different "expectations of privacy"....for one

FWIW - If I had such information - verifiable - - - - - you could comfortably bet the mortgage money that such info would be "out". No question about it.

But, that doesn't mean everyone would do the same.

What information do you think Ziggy has? There's no doubt in my mind that Shubin was trolling for victims and that his questions were asked in a way that would encourage certain types of responses. Of course that doesn't make them illegal. I doubt that Ziggy has proof that Shubin doctored testimony or we would have known that by now. It's probably one of those fine line kind of things.

I'm sure that a lot of ambulance chasing attorneys do the same thing. Most are probably skilled at pushing things to the limit without crossing the line that could get them disbarred.

 

[StinkStankStunk]

What information do you think Ziggy has? There's no doubt in my mind that Shubin was trolling for victims and that his questions were asked in a way that would encourage certain types of responses. Of course that doesn't make them illegal. I doubt that Ziggy has proof that Shubin doctored testimony or we would have known that by now. It's probably one of those fine line kind of things.

I'm sure that a lot of ambulance chasing attorneys do the same thing. Most are probably skilled at pushing things to the limit without crossing the line that could get them disbarred.

I know this thread bounces around to 100,000 places.......but the issue at hand in that particular post didn't have anything to do with "What information do you think Ziggy has?"

It was a discussion wrt why the acquisition of this info (as described by Ziggy) would fall under different parameters than "publically disclosing the pricing practices discussion one had with a wedding planner" - or some such thing.

 

[StinkStankStunk]

Regarding, Cynthia McNab, how much of "Jake Corman's money" do you think her agency received? If you think about it, it's in her best interest to find as many victims as possible. For every victim who must be believed, there are hundreds of hours of therapy that must be billed to somebody. You don't think she loves children that much that she does it for free, do you?

Of course

While I would hate to place them at the "top of the mountain" - - - - with regard to "scoundrel-ism" in this whole fiasco:

All these ass-holes in the "victim industry":

1 - Do a hell of a lot more harm than good
2 - Are a hell of a lot more driven by the $$$$ (and the PR machine that drives the $$$$) than they are with actually working to remedy the issues they are supposed to address.

And, while I am sure there are "good guys" - - - hell, I KNOW there are "good guys", I've met some of them - - - from what we have seen, the ass-holes far outnumber the good guys when it comes to the leadership of these organizations.

 

[L.T. Young]

Everyone flipping out about RMT needs to pump the brakes.

Sandusky is alleging that RMT was used. It still has to be proven.

 

[StinkStankStunk]

Everyone flipping out about RMT needs to pump the brakes.

Sandusky is alleging that RMT was used. It still has to be proven.

Your brake pumping seems to only work on one direction

Funny, that

 

[biacto]

Brakes aren't the only thing the "lt" is pumping. That's PL schtick that RMT wasn't used.

 

[Adlee73]

Then why mention it on a radio broadcast if it's legally risky? And again, Ziegler says nothing about not releasing any info because of legal issues, or concern for his "fake victim." He says he won't release anything until someone ponies up money in an amount he deems sufficient. Now could that just be bluster because he knows it's very unlikely someone will do that? Of course.

On the other hand, Mr. Lubrano (or at least the person using his name here) seems to think the information is authentic. Mr. Lubrano is very interested in clearing Paterno's and Penn States names. Mr. Lubrano has more many than everyone who posted in this thread combined. The answer is clear, let Mr. Lubrano put up the money for the tapes, and Ziegler can hand them over. Everybody's happy, right?

Absolutely. I wanna hear those tapes as much as everyone here does. Heck, why isn't Scott Paterno buying the tapes? He could use the evidence more than anyone. I think John knows if the public got behind him on this & raised a big stink over it the AG is less likely to pursue charges on the fake victim. These are publicly elected officials after all. But Zig is convinced the general public is so brainwashed about this case that they'd just ignore it & probably be outraged he made a mockery of the "real" victims. Quite frankly I think he's right about that. I sent Zig some wiretapping cases in PA that found loopholes in the law so maybe if we're really lucky Zig can find a loophole. The reason he announced it on his show & in other interviews is he's seeking that public backing as protection from the backlash. So far it doesn't seem to be enough.

 

[Nellie R]

Thanks for the pointer Nellie. Very interesting LTE by Dr. Macnab.

If Macnab was a party to the absurd but very damaging allegations against Paterno and Sandusky that dates back to the seventies, I believe she will regret ever having written that LTE. Based on her letter, I believe she actually thinks that what she uncovered in her repressed memory sessions might actually be true. I think she may also have convinced her clients that there may be some factual basis for their recovered memories.

It is my understanding that Michael Gillum helped Aaron Fisher to recover some of his memories of his abuse. Based on what I observed when Gillum testfied at the PCRA evidentiary hearing and what he has written, I think Gillum actually believes what he recovered in Fisher's repressed memory sessions is factual.

To be clear, I think that recovered memories learned in repressed memory therapy are totally unreliable. The methods have been thoroughly debunked. I think it is imperative that Judge Cleland allows evidence of repressed/recovered memories to come into Sandusky's PCRA hearings including an in-camera review of therapy notes from therapist who saw accusers and used repressed/recovered memory techniques in their sessions with them.

Unfortunately you took what points I was trying to make with this tweet series, and veered it off into another direction entirely, which means you didn't click on the little timestamp icon and read side-by side with the LTE to understand the point.

I'm afraid I don't appreciate that too much , you have an issue about this therapy, which I have no idea if practiced in this particular practice or not. Someone local could make an appointment and find out, I suppose. I have no evidence of that whatsoever.

The whole point of the tweet series on May 16th of this year was to show:

1. Cynthia gave a different location as the origin of her LTE when her work location is on campus and advertises for local business.

2. Her work location advertises it is "Steps away" from the campus, yet she can't
a. attend a public board meeting steps away to find out what happened in it that Friday, May 9th ?

b. If her appointment schedule was booked, she couldn't go ahead and make an appointment with Dr. Barron to ask him what occurred and what his statements meant?

c. Watch the replay of the meeting before writing it? I'm almost positive the public video was made available of the Board meeting between May 9th and the date this was submitted/published as an LTE.

3. Alycia Chambers also works in that practice and I myself have never seen any testimony by Alycia to explain what she did in 1998 when her report went unheeded by DPW in the '98 incident investigation and a "no indication" was reached. IIRC the V in question was her client, or she was consulted somehow by them, as we do know she stated in her report that a group of colleagues reviewed her report first before she submitted it to Childline.

4. Other inconsistencies in the LTE , lack of logic, and rash statements that jump to wild conclusions, from A to C with nothing to back them up, demonstrating to me that I would never trust this person in a counseling capacity for myself or any other family member.

 

[MoonOverMyHammy]

Not sure how legit these tapes are, but McNab and Shubin seem shady as hell

 

[Royal_Coaster]

Interesting parallel between Paterno and Alycia Chambers.

Joe was supposed to hunt tirelessly to find out the identity of the boy in the shower with Sandusky in 2/2001. Alycia knew all the details about Victim 6, because he was a client of hers.

Joe was hammered for not following up with the police or calling the authorities. Alycia didn't follow up on her report when no charges were brought against Sandusky in 1998. No proof that she contacted Jerry Lauro, Ray Gricar, etc. even to question why her report was blithely dismissed.

Joe was castigated for putting other youth in danger. Has the same happened to Alycia Chambers? Where's the outrage that a trained child psychologist did not do more?

 

[francofan]

Unfortunately you took what points I was trying to make with this tweet series, and veered it off into another direction entirely, which means you didn't click on the little timestamp icon and read side-by side with the LTE to understand the point.

Why do you think it is unfortunate that I took your post in a different direction than you intended? I asked if anyone had any information on Dr. Macnab and you replied with Dr. Macnab's LTE to the CDT in May and the series of tweets that you made in response and I appreciated your response. I have been told by what I consider a reliable source (not JZ) that Shubin referred clients who have made accusations of CSA to Dr. Macnab to help recover memories of that abuse and I wanted to learn about her.

I like all the work you have done in support of exposing the truth of the matters in this entire fiasco and the way you engage clueless members of the media and others who have bought into the false narratives in the saga. I think it is especially valuable coming from someone who does not have ties to Penn State. I believe that we share some common goals such as learning the truth of what actually happened, exposing the Freeh Report for the farce that it is, and exonerating Joe Paterno, Graham Spanier, Tim Curley, and Gary Schultz.

I also realize that we have some different objectives and opinions and I am ok with with that. My current objectives include demonstrating that Sandusky's trial was inherently unfair and that recovered memories of CSA gained from repressed memory therapy are totally unreliable.

 

[Nellie R]

Why do you think it is unfortunate that I took your post in a different direction than you intended? I asked if anyone had any information on Dr. Macnab and you replied with Dr. Macnab's LTE to the CDT in May and the series of tweets that you made in response and I appreciated your response. I have been told by what I consider a reliable source (not JZ) that Shubin referred clients who have made accusations of CSA to Dr. Macnab to help recover memories of that abuse and I wanted to learn about her.

I like all the work you have done in support of exposing the truth of the matters in this entire fiasco and the way you engage clueless members of the media and others who have bought into the false narratives in the saga. I think it is especially valuable coming from someone who does not have ties to Penn State. I believe that we share some common goals such as learning the truth of what actually happened, exposing the Freeh Report for the farce that it is, and exonerating Joe Paterno, Graham Spanier, Tim Curley, and Gary Schultz.

I also realize that we have some different objectives and opinions and I am ok with with that. My current objectives include demonstrating that Sandusky's trial was inherently unfair and that recovered memories of CSA gained from repressed memory therapy are totally unreliable.

We just have a different emphasis is all. I felt your post distracted from the intention of my post. When someone can prove Cynthia Macnab's practice used this particular technique and used it in a detrimental way then it's valid to link the two ideas. No biggie, I wanted to clarify my position and purpose from yours. Unlike some, we can agree to disagree without it getting nasty, so that's a plus!

 

[L.T. Young]

Your brake pumping seems to only work on one direction

Funny, that

You're right, we should all accept whatever Ziegler says and the defense argues as established fact.

That way if the appeal fails we can be outraged and keep hope alive.

 

[StinkStankStunk]

You're right, we should all accept whatever Ziegler says and the defense argues as established fact.

That way if the appeal fails we can be outraged and keep hope alive.

Or.........

We should just accept that you are a blithering, conflicted moron......making false premise, non-sequitur "arguments" as your own form of euphoric mental masturbation


Yea......I think I'm gonna' go with that.

 

[MtNittany]

You're right, we should all accept whatever Ziegler says and the defense argues as established fact.

That way if the appeal fails we can be outraged and keep hope alive.

I want to reply but first I must consult Cindy McNab...

OK....It's odd. The more money I fed her, the more she told me what I wanted to hear? Funny how that works huh? Oh...she also mentioned you. Be careful out there!

 

[Chris92]

I want to reply but first I must consult Cindy McNab...

OK....It's odd. The more money I fed her, the more she told me what I wanted to hear? Funny how that works huh? Oh...she also mentioned you. Be careful out there!

And don't forget, those therapy bills go right to Old Main.

 

[MtNittany]

And don't forget, those therapy bills go right to Old Main.

Pfffttt...just a few drops in the Rainy Day Fund bucket.

 

[L.T. Young]

I want to reply but first I must consult Cindy McNab...

OK....It's odd. The more money I fed her, the more she told me what I wanted to hear? Funny how that works huh? Oh...she also mentioned you. Be careful out there!

Thanks for proving my point.

There's no factual evidence that RMT techniques were used at this point, but you've already decided it was.


If it turns out that's what took place I'll be the first to say those verdicts should be thrown out and retried.

Right now it's just a legal argument.