Penn State picked Sandusky investigator from Corbett administration’s list

Published May 21, 2015
image.img

Leaders of the Penn State task force that oversaw the university’s Sandusky investigation chose their investigative firm exclusively from a list compiled by the Corbett administration, according to an e-mail released by the education department.

Despite offers of help from numerous law firms, trustees Ken Frazier and Ron Tomalis only considered three former prosecutors that were hand-picked by Corbett’s Office of General Counsel.

At the top of the list was Michael Chertoff, the former Secretary of Homeland Security who now works for the international law firm Covington & Burling. Louis J. Freeh was the administration’s second choice. The third was Kevin O’Connor, a former U.S. Attorney and top Justice Department official who at the time was working for the firm Bracewell & Guliani.

“After internal deliberations, we find [those] individuals highly qualified to handle the representation,” wrote James Schultz, who at the time was second in command of the General Counsel’s office.

The e-mail to Tomalis raises new questions about the independence of Penn State’s internal investigation into allegations that university administrators ignored allegations of child sexual abuse for more than a decade. It was released by the education department after a 14-month public records battle by Penn State alumnus Ryan Bagwell and the Penn State Sunshine Fund.

While records released last year showed Tomalis and Frazier interviewed Chertoff and Freeh for the job, it wasn’t previously known they relied solely on firms that were pre-approved by the Corbett administration.

As Pennsylvania’s attorney general, Corbett oversaw the Sandusky criminal investigation until he became governor in 2011. When a grand jury recommended charges against Sandusky less than a year into his first term, Corbett discussed the investigative firm’s role with then-attorney general Linda Kelly.

Frazier and Tomalis ultimately decided to hire Louis J. Freeh and Freeh, Sporkin & Sullivan, his Delaware-based law firm. Corbett supported hiring either candidate.

The e-mail’s release came after the Commonwealth Court in April said the OOR should consider allowing Tomalis to be deposed. Instead of facing the prospect of depositions and discovery, the education department decided to release the records if Bagwell agreed to discontinue the case.

The Department of Education had argued the e-mail was subject to the attorney-client privilege and didn’t have to be released. Though Tomalis stated under the penalty of perjury that he didn’t waive the privilege, Bagwell presented evidence that Tomalis shared the e-mail with John Surma and Ken Frazier, which resulted in a waiver of privilege.

“The evidence clearly shows that Ron Tomalis committed perjury by stating he didn’t waive the attorney-client privilege,” Bagwell said. “His lie resulted in an unlawful delay of access to an important public record, and wasted the precious resources of the courts, the Department of Education and the Office of Open Records. Because of his misrepresentation, I am considering all available options, both criminal and civil, to hold one of the state’s highest-ranking public officials accountable for his actions.”

  • Dave

    Whiskey tango foxtrot. How deep is this rabbit hole.

  • TonyTruth

    Much ado about nothing. Yawn.

    • Billy Bob Joe

      Tony Truth the idiot is back!! Hi Tony. How is your Moms basement doing? Does she bring you your meals down there? You are one funny person.

      • John J. Hamilton

        This man cowers in his basement and remains anonymous behind a fake hero avatar because he admittedly is afraid of “JoeBots” … what a self centered coward !!

        • TonyTruth

          You are a coward too John with that fake facebook page. ROFL. You still drunk? LOL

          • John J. Hamilton

            Cowards hide behind anonymity … you obviously have seen my FB page open for all to see, or are you lying about that as well ? I have been using this particular avatar since this whole thing w/ Joe started. This picture reminds me of what I think Joe should have told everyone from the beginning of this whole affair which is “Go Fuck Yourselves” … doesn’t it look like he’s saying that ? Funny, I can’t go to or comment on your FB page so when you lose your fear and are able to face the fire as a real person, we’ll have something further to say to each other !! Until then … What Joes Says …

          • TonyTruth

            Back at you and that FB “page” you have up is a scam. There is no information on it other than your phony name and pictures of Paterno. You are a coward hiding behind a fake FB page. You are a coward and an internet tough guy. Pretty funny.

          • John J. Hamilton

            Look … you have my real name … look it up in the phone book … The FB page is my REAL FB page … send me a “Friend” request and you will see … pretty strong statements from a coward who lives in his dead moms basement … I’m giving you every opportunity to prove I stand behind what I post here …. SOOOOO PUT UP OR SHUT UP ?

          • TonyTruth

            I don’t really care to be “friends” with you and the name is fake. I looked it up. You are a liar as well as a coward.

          • John J. Hamilton

            I would be happy to meet you somewhere of your choosing so you could call me those names to my face … or are you the coward I know you to be ?

          • TonyTruth

            Like your fake FB account and your fake name you would not meet anyone anywhere. You are a lying internet coward who talks tough.

          • John J. Hamilton

            Tomorrow at “The Corner” … say 11:00am …be there … I’ll post a reply here around 12:30 am to let everyone know who they are dealing with ?

          • TonyTruth

            Yeah I’ll be there. ROFL.

          • John J. Hamilton

            If your not … everyone will know what a real coward you are ? You do a lot of ROFL … see you tomorrow !!

          • TonyTruth

            Get that homework done tonight! LOL

          • John J. Hamilton

            Sorry so late on the post … take a look over on my “Fake” FB page (your words not mine). Everything I said I backed up … YOU … not so much !! Just goes to show everyone who the COWARD really is ?

          • TonyTruth

            OMG! Did I say earlier you JoeBots are nuts? Wow, are you inbred? LMFAO

          • John J. Hamilton

            Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk … Pussy. Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk … Coward !! All I hear anymore Tony ?

          • TonyTruth

            Drunk again Johnny?

          • John J. Hamilton

            What …. talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk … Pussy. Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk … Coward !! All I hear anymore Tony !! Say again ??

          • Platinum68

            Such a PUSSY.

          • TonyTruth

            Takes one to know one. What is YOUR name? Meet me tomorrow at Johnny’s place pussy.

          • Platinum68

            OK. What time? And what is your name so I can ask for you?

          • TonyTruth

            Tony. What is your name so I can know you are the coward? Lots of people ask for me.

          • Platinum68

            What time, Tony?

          • TonyTruth

            High Noon. But you won’t come.

          • Platinum68

            High noon was 2 and a half hours ago, pussy. I’ll be there at 5PM. See you soon!!

          • TonyTruth

            So will I. What you gonna do tough guy? ROFL

          • Platinum68

            I’m here now, you pathetic Pussy. Where are you???

          • TonyTruth

            You lying imbecile. You were nowhere to be found. Hell, you didn’t even ask for me you lying coward! http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/01/19/05A3C3710000044D-0-Michael_Moore_called_snipers_cowards-m-4_1421693839391.jpg

          • Platinum68

            Guess you didn’t show up, huh?

            It figures ….

          • TonyTruth

            Why would I show up to visit with a drunk? Say, what is YOUR name.

          • Platinum68

            Of course you didn’t. You are a pussy.

          • TonyTruth

            So you like to meet up with drunks? Do you do little kids too?

          • Platinum68

            Huh? Are you a pervert? A lot of pussies like you are …

          • TonyTruth

            You would be the pervert sticking up for pedo enablers and wanting to hang out with drunks. BTW, why would I be afraid to meet either of you? You wouldn’t do anything as you are cowards.

          • Platinum68

            You are afraid because you are a PUSSY. See you soon, Pussy.

          • TonyTruth

            Can’t wait coward!

          • John J. Hamilton

            Really TT Boy … that’s 2 drunks calling you a Pussy and a Coward … have you no dignity or face … I guess not ? I’m done with you too … up off your knees now !!

          • TonyTruth

            ROFL. Get sober you damn drunk! I have too much honor to fight drunks!

          • John J. Hamilton

            Get this … Pussy Boy is talking about honor … guess you’re drunk now too !! ROFL

          • TonyTruth

            Damn, how do you type being so drunk?

          • TonyTruth

            Not afraid of a dope like you. Internet hero!

          • Platinum68

            You didn’t show up, Pussy!!

          • TonyTruth

            I was there coward. But you were afraid to come meet me. I understand why tho. Besides, what could you do? Talk me to death? ROFL

          • Platinum68

            Of course a pussy like you would also be a liar. Stop wasting my time, you shill-boy pussy.

          • TonyTruth

            Show up then sissy boy. Hell, you wasted my afternoon showing up and you not there to show me how tough you are. Liar and sissy. I feel sorry for your mom. I bet you’re queer too.

          • Platinum68

            Stop fantasizing!!

            You are a pathetic pussy. This is the second time you chickened out. I don’t blame you, though. You are probably a fat, pock-marked loser. You’d be on your ass in a quarter of a second … or on your knees begging not to be hit. Enjoy your pathetic shill-boy life, you pussy.

          • TonyTruth

            ROFL, I think you have delusions of toughness when you are probably gay and long for a real man. But you are afraid of a real man so you didn’t show. What a sad neckbeard you are. I do enjoy life but people who worshiped in the house of paterno are now having to face the truth that he was a pedo helper ant that destroys their sad lives. You would not do anything as you would end up in the local ER. Tell me your name tough boy. You won’t because you are a sick helpless coward. Pussy.

          • Platinum68

            You’d know my face and my fist if you only had any balls. You don’t; you have a vagina. Because you are a bitch. I non know that you won’t show no matter what you type here. Carry on, pussy. I’m done w you.

          • TonyTruth

            You would never come near me as your ass would be in a sling. That’s why you won’t give your name you skulking slimy faggot. You are a low grade coward who hides on the internet. What a loser. It’s not too late. Give me your address and name and I will give you a shot at me. You’ll do nothing of course but will you risk it? Show me that YOU have balls pussy. Put it out there.

          • John J. Hamilton

            Hear … Hear !!!

          • TonyTruth

            You wouldn’t even attempt to dance with me you coward. Tell me your name pussy.

          • John J. Hamilton

            Funny … I could read that ? I guess when “Pussy Boy the Coward” talks to others I don’t just hear Pussy and Coward coming from him ? Up off your knees now TT Boy !!

          • TonyTruth

            Are you looking in the mirror when you say the words pussy and coward? Because that is you!

          • John J. Hamilton

            Oh … I just posted something on my FB page to show you I am for real. Don’t wait … go check it out wussy boy !!

          • TonyTruth

            Oh I know you are real. You are a “real” coward hiding behind a handle and a fake FB page. Also, you must be about 15 years old with your stupid insults.

            Post your name address and pictures of yourself you coward.

          • John J. Hamilton

            My pictures, and address are on my FB page … send me a FB request and I’ll give you my phone #. Or. again, are you the coward I know you to be ?

          • TonyTruth

            There are no pictures of you on there and no adress either. Plus there is no John J. Hamilton in either State College or Tyrone WTF. The facebook page is fake, Post your name address and phone plus pictures of YOU or STFU.

          • Platinum68

            Yep. He’s a coward.

          • TonyTruth
          • John J. Hamilton

            A shill for “The Berne” … that says a lot !!

          • Platinum68

            You first, tough guy!!

          • TonyTruth

            After you moron.

          • Platinum68

            What’s your real name, tough guy?

          • TonyTruth

            Asks the “tough guy” with an anonymous handle. ROFL

          • Platinum68

            // YAWN //

            Shill on, Shill-Boy

          • TonyTruth

            Must suck to be a pedo enabler. Oh, is that a pun?

          • Platinum68

            ZZZZZ …. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz … … ZZZ … …

          • TonyTruth

            ROFL

      • TonyTruth

        My mom is long gone. How is your god? Oh yeah he’s dead too.

      • Michael Corleone

        It’s true, tony truth is an idiot!

        • TonyTruth

          And you are a moron.

          • Michael Corleone

            Said the Idiot…lol

          • TonyTruth

            to the moron…ROFL

  • Bills

    Double yawn….OMG!!!, there was a list of suggested investigators compiled by professionals to guide the amateurs at Penn State…BFD!

    • ayojayjo

      It was compiled by Corbett’s administration. Do you know the history of Corbett and Sandusky, especially while Corbett was Attorney General?

      • TonyTruth

        Yeah, he put Sandusky in prison and his sucessor will put Curley, Schultz and Spanier in as well.

        • Tim Berton

          Corbett didn’t convict Sandusky, That was Linda Kelly, Corbett’s hand-picked successor as Attorney General.

          • TonyTruth

            Right and Corbett built the case to put him away.

          • Tim Berton

            That’s not even true. The Sandusky case was built mostly after Corbett left to become governor. It was Corbett’s temporary replacement, William Ryan, who ramped up manpower for the Sandusky case. The case languished under Corbett with 1 or 2 investigators.

            If Corbett hadn’t passed over William Ryan as his permanent replacement, maybe things would have gone differently.

          • TonyTruth

            What ramped up the investigation was the discovery of McQueary and his story and that was under Corbett. Then Corbett had third party corroboration. Even though many JoeBots act like Sandicksy was a nobody before the scandal he was in fact a very popular and powerful person in his own right. Corbett knew he would have to have lots of proof to take him down and Aaron Fisher wasn’t enough. Once McQueary was discovered (much to the chagrin of PSU) then others felt they could come out and testify against ole Jere. No, the case against Sandusky was done mostly by Corbett. He deserves the credit for it too.

          • Tim Berton

            The ramp up didn’t occur until after Corbett left office. McQueary was a chance discovery that fell into their laps in Nov. 2010.

            Moulton got it right that Corbett’s investigation had “inexplicable delays.”

            Corbett could have had multiple victims and McQueary as a witness within days of taking the case in 2009 if his investigators had only phoned Sandusky’s old boss, Paterno.

            Paterno would have told them about McQueary and the 2001 shower incident. He could have also told them about the involvement of Curley and Schultz, who knew about the 1998 investigation.

            Corbett oversaw a terribly inept investigation that was grossly undermanned. They failed to use surveillance on Sandusky yet he was still abusing two boys according to their testimony. They didn’t get a search warrant for Sandusky’s home, which was the crime scene. They didn’t talk to his employer (Second Mile) and ex-employer (Paterno).

          • TonyTruth

            No you are wrong on the dates in question. McQueary got the ball rolling in 2010. Why would Corbett call Paterno? Anyway, you guys always say that Joe never thought what McQueary told him was sexual or criminal. What could Paterno say? Why didn’t Paterno go to him? What BS.

            Trying these types of cases against pillars of the community are very difficult and can take years. The kids won’t testify in many cases and with a guy like Sandusky you have to get it right the first time.

            The Moulton report was politically motivated by Kane who herself may soon face indictment.

            Nevertheless, it was Corbett who built the case and his hand picked successor who finished it. Sorry, but Corbett got Sandusky.

          • Tim Berton

            It’s just basic, good police work to talk to a suspect’s boss. All the police would have had to do in 2009 was ask Paterno if he ever heard of Sandusky acting inappropriately around children. Paterno would have answered that Mike McQueary reported such an incident about 10 years ago, and he reported it to Curley and Schultz.

            The Moulton report was very kind to Corbett. “Inexplicable delays” is very mild for near total incompetence and allowing Sandusky to continue to sexually abuse two boys after Corbett took the case. Moulton could have reamed Corbett’s office for sending porn emails on work computers but he avoided that issue completely.

          • TonyTruth

            If you read about the interaction between PSU and the OAG you will find that they wer enot very forthcoming. Fina and McGettigan talked about that on 60 minutes and why I told you earlier the real coverup was later when the OAG started asking PSU questions. That is why the three are indicted now.

            The Moulton Report debunked the main thing the JoeBots were interested in (and elected Kane for) in that there was no political motives behind the time it took to catch Sandusky. However, PSU did delay and deny and did not produce documents that would have got Sandusky (Schultz’s secret file) even when they knew that Sandusky was under investigation.

          • Tim Berton

            Court testimony by prosecution witnesses was that the PSU computer forensic expert gave the 2001 emails to Baldwin about April 2011 and the OAG got them months before Sandusky’s arrest.

            Maybe the OAG prosecutors were too busy with their porn emails to actually read the PSU emails and discover the shower incident was in 2001. Or maybe they deliberately kept the 2002 date since 2001 put it beyond the statue of limitations for failure to report charges.

            Schultz testified to the grand jury about the Sandusky file with Cynthia Baldwin right next to him. He didn’t keep it a secret. He wasn’t working at Penn State at that time.

            The person responsible for satisfying the subpoenas was Cynthia Baldwin, yet she never bothered to search Schultz’s old office for the file. It was apparently there the whole time. When a secretary later stole the file and gave it to Schultz, he turned it over to the OAG.

            The OAG threatened Baldwin with obstruction charges in Dec. 2011. She announced her retirement the next month.

          • TonyTruth

            Freeh found the emails and even the Paterno Report acknowledges that. Schultz kept the files locked up in his office and did not give them up when Baldwin asked for whatever he had as she received subpeonas. Baldwin was responsible to gather the documents but when other hid them and Spanier was orchestrating the coverup she couldn’t get that done and is why she is now a witness against CSS which they are desperately trying to stop.

            You sure seem hung up on porn emails which no one important in the Sandusky case was disciplined for. The shower incident was kept secret by CSS, Paterno and PSU and it was thru a chat room discussion that the OAG found McQueary. PSU whom Sara Ganim referred to as “the Kremlin” hid and buried information that could have stopped Sandusky in 2001 and maybe even in 1998. That is why they have had to pay millions to victims and will pay 60 million to other child sexual abuse help organizations.

            You are reading too much Blehar and Ziegler.

          • Tim Berton

            You have a lot of facts wrong.

            The Spanier preliminary hearing proved that Freeh did not find the emails. Penn State computer forensics expert, John Corro, testified that he turned the emails over to Baldwin in April 2011 so the OAG received them about 6 months before Freeh was even hired.

            You are wrong that “Schultz kept the files locked up in his office and did not give them up when Baldwin asked.” Schultz retired in 2009 so had no access to his old office. He testified to the grand jury, with Baldwin sitting next to him, that he had notes on Sandusky but thought they might have been destroyed when he retired.

            All Baldwin would have had to do was to phone Schultz’s replacement and ask his office staff to look for documents on Sandusky. The file was apparently there the whole time. Baldwin just made no effort to look for it even though that was her job as legal counsel.

            How did Spanier obstruct, particularly when he didn’t even know Schultz kept a Sandusky file?

            Randy Feathers lost his lucrative state job because of the porn emails. He played a major role in the Sandusky case. Kane fired at least 4 OAG employees and disciplined 27 others because of porn emails but the identities of those disciplined remain confidential.

            Kane is blocked by court action from releasing any porn emails sent or received by Frank Fina, but it is rumored he was involved. Fina also was a key figure in the Sandusky case.

            PSU paid millions to victims to stop them from exposing all the dirty dealings by Freeh and the Trustees. Everything done by CSS had already been exposed by the OAG.

            It makes zero sense to blame Paterno and PSU for 1998. The police, DA, CYS and DPW were in charge then and cleared Sandusky. CYS and DPW took no precautions in 1998 to protect boys from Sandusky.

          • TonyTruth

            Again, you are channeling Blehar and Ziegler/Bagwell. Schultz knew the files were kept locked in his office as did his secretary who lied to Freeh’s group initially. She then got a call from Schultz who told her to bring them to him but she made a copy. Schultz said told the GJ the documents were destroyed (a lie) so Baldwin who had already sent Schultz a notice to produce would not know to look further. You omit that Schultz had come back from retirement and was there as VP when the scandal broke. Baldwin’s job is not to go thru every office in PSU to look for documents. She is to notify those involved to produce them and it is then on them to produce such under penalty of law if they don’t. She is just there to coordinate. So, you are wrong about that too.

            The porn emails is just a sideshow and irrelevent to the guilt of JoePa and PSU. A red herring.

            PSU paid millions to the victims to make amends for their failing to notitify police in 2001 of Sandusky’s crimes which the Paterno group knew of and didn’t stop. The victims knew nothing about Freeh or the BOT so that is nonsensical to link them together.

            We don’t know what else the OAG has on CSS either and won’t till trial. I look forward to Baldwin’s testimony. CSS does not.

            Sandusky was not cleared in 1998. He just wasn’t prosecuted and PSU knew that he had been taking showers with boys naked while touching them. PSU also had a report from Alicia Chambers that said Sandusky was a likely pedophile and still CSS (Joe approved as well) gave Sandusky Emeritas status and allowed him to continue to shower with children in their facilities. Therefore they have blame there as well. Schultz’s notes confirm they knew they had a kid abuse problem with Sandusky.

          • Platinum68

            You mean when Fina went on 60 Minutes and violated the Rules of Ethics?

          • TonyTruth

            How so?

          • Platinum68

            Watch it yourself, Shill-Boy.

          • TonyTruth

            I have but enlighten me Perry Mason or should I call you pedo-boy?

          • Platinum68

            ZZZZZ …. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz … … ZZZ … …ZZZZZ …. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz … … ZZZ … …

          • TonyTruth

            While Joe slept the boys suffered.

          • Platinum68

            While Fina viewed and distributed racist e-mails, that monster raped children.

          • TonyTruth

            Hmmm, racy emails and raping children you equate? You must be one sick puppy, like your god Joppa.

          • Platinum68

            Fina also sent e-mails suggesting that women in the workplace needed to perform oral sex on their male bosses to advance their careers. All the while – Sandusky was raping children. Shame on Frankie!!

          • TonyTruth

            Yeah like the two (racy emails and child rape) are the same. NOT! What a loser you are. Sick too.

        • Platinum68

          Superior Court just threw out most of the charges and called Frank Fina’s conduct “highly improper.”

          LOL … Just the truth.

          • TonyTruth

            We’ll see. Some charges stuck but since the current OAG is under indictment I don’t expect a trial soon.

          • Platinum68

            Oh right … because those things are totally related. NOT!!

          • TonyTruth

            Yeah they are. Your butt buddies Spanier and crew will need soap on a rope soon!

          • Platinum68

            ZZZZZ …. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz … … ZZZ … …ZZZZZ …. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz … … ZZZ … …ZZZZZ …. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz … … ZZZ … …

          • TonyTruth

            Wake up JayPa!

          • Platinum68

            Im awake now, Shill-Boy.

          • TonyTruth

            Why did you ever think you could get another job coaching Jay? You are a nepotistic disaster!

    • Tim Berton

      Why did Corbett recommend those 3? Friends? Fellow Republicans?

      None of them seemed to have any experience investigating child abuse cases.

      • TonyTruth

        Competence? This wasn’t a child abuse case. It was an institutional coverup.

        • Tim Berton

          We know from Freeh’s tenure as FBI director that he wasn’t competent.

          It was a child abuse case and required specific expertise to understand. That’s why the FBI had child sex abuse experts, such as Ken Lanning and Jim Clemente.

          • TonyTruth

            He was quite a bit more competent than Clemente who is a self proclaimed expert who is trying to make a name for himself and praised Freeh for the investigation before he was given wads of money by the Paternos.

          • Tim Berton

            Clemente is not a “self-proclaimed expert.” He was recruited by the FBI to work on child sex crimes after he helped bring his own molester to justice. He has made a name for himself already in the FBI. He’s now an expert witness and a writer/producer/technical consultant on TV crimes shows, such as “Criminal Minds” and “Secrets and Lies.”

            Clemente explained that he hadn’t read the Freeh Report until the Paternos asked him to review it. When he finally read it, he realized that Freeh got it all wrong.

          • TonyTruth

            Clemente is a bought and paid for hack. Funny how he would publicly praise a report he allegedly didn’t read and then after being paid lots of money say the opposite. Hmmm.

          • Tim Berton

            In what publication did Clemente praise the Freeh Report?

          • TonyTruth

            Through an organization called Stop It Now. He sent messages to Freeh praising him for being a “tipping point” in changing the way organizations and leaders deal with red flags involving possible child molestation.

          • Tim Berton

            A search for Jim Clemente at the Stop It Now website produces no results.

          • TonyTruth

            Keep looking. Clemente acknowledges it.

          • Tim Berton

            I looked where you said and couldn’t find it. It doesn’t matter because Clemente changed his mind after reading the Freeh Report. Clemente explained in his report that he respected Freeh and assumed he did a good job until he read the report and discovered Freeh did a horrible job.

          • TonyTruth

            Clemente changed his mind when he got a wad of cash and went Kardasian. BTW, he praises Freeh as FBI Director even after he got the cash.

          • Tim Berton

            So Clemente praising Freeh indicates his opinion wasn’t bought, just that he was very disappointed that a man he admired and thought was competent did a horrible job on the Freeh Report.

          • TonyTruth

            No it shows that Freeh was not previously incompetent as you JoeBots claim. It shows that money can turn you on someone you respect.

          • Tim Berton

            Clemente was being loyal to his former boss and believed he was an competent investigator. When he read the Freeh Report, he discovered Freeh was not competent.

            Read up on Freeh to see what a disaster he was as FBI director. The FBI crime was falsifying evidence. The FBI wrongly blamed Richard Jewell for the Olympic Park bombing while the real bomber continued on his bombing spree. Other failures during Freeh’s tenure were the Ruby Ridge investigation, Waco investigation, TWA Flight 800 investigation, spying by FBI agent Robert Hanssen during all of Freeh’s directorship, etc.

          • TonyTruth

            But all those things you mention (most of them false or out of context) were known by Clemente before he got the Paterno money and yet he still praised Freeh. BTW Ruby Ridge and Waco were not “investigations” but incidents precipitated by the BATFE that were contolled by Janet Reno once they went sideways, while Robert Hanssen spied during multiple directors and Freeh was the one who caught him. BTW you can point out lots of failed and screwed up investigations with any FBI director. I doubt you could handle such a large responsiblity and Freeh was lauded by many (like Clemente) for his work there.

          • Tim Berton

            They were not false or taken out of context. Ruby Ridge and Waco were investigations by the FBI of botched operations involving the FBI.

            Ruby Ridge was an joint operation with the FBI that ended with snipers killing a woman holding an infant and her 14 year old son. The son was shot in the back. Talk about child abuse. The FBI investigation was considered by many as a coverup of a botched operation.

            Waco was initially an ATF operation that resulted in four ATF agents killed. The FBI then laid siege to the complex and eventually a fire killed most of the cultists, many of them children. The FBI then investigated what went wrong. Again the FBI covered up.

          • TonyTruth

            Yep they were false. Waco and Ruby Ridge were both started by the BATFE and controlled by Janet Reno. The kid that was shot had a weapon and had earlier killed a Deputy Marshal in Ruby Ridge and at Waco the cult had also killed several BAFTE agents.

            The FBI investigations showed that the BATFE had erred in continuing the Waco raid when they knew that their operation was compromised by Koresh’s dad. Ruby Ridge was an entrapment by the BATFE to try and make Randy Weaver a snitch.

            You are wrong about the FBI’s blame in Waco, Ruby Ridge and Jewell which we have previously discussed.

            All of this spin because of the worship of a dead football coach who fudged his pants and shuld have retired years before.

            You have no proof that the FBI covered up anything but then you read Blehar and Ziggy so I should not be surprised.

          • Tim Berton

            Freeh’s record at the FBI was terrible and that was known well before the Sandusky scandal.

            I am not wrong about the FBI failures in Waco, Ruby Ridge and with Richard Jewell. It is a fact that the FBI could not keep it secret that they considered Richard Jewell a suspect, which compromised their investigation and ruined Jewell reputation and life.

            Yet, Freeh managed to keep it secret that he nearly died in his Sept. 2014 car accident. Amazingly, that was kept secret over 6 months!

          • TonyTruth

            Apparently not so to your champion Clemente who praised Freeh’s tenure in the FBI.

            You are wrong about Waco, Ruby Ridge and Jewell. The BAFTE and Atlanta Police screwed up those ops and the FBI had to come in after federal agents were killed (Waco and Ruby Ridge) and clean it up. We have discussed Jewell and the FBI is not to blame for anything related to him The media and his former boss (not for reporting him to the police but for public statements made later) are and were sued by Jewell (who lost against the newspaper).

            As a matter of fact, the police in general often release person(s) of interest if queried by the press. They are under no legal obligation to keep it secret who they are investigating but they often try to. The FBI did as well but the Atlanta Police caused Jewell’s name to be released by confirming to a reporter he was under investigation. FBI had no blame.

            Why does it matter about Freeh’s health after a car wreck?

          • Tim Berton

            You seem ignorant of these events The FBI covered up when they investigated them. An FBI sniper shot Mrs. Weaver while she was holding an infant.

            The reporter even blamed the FBI for the Jewell leak.

            Jewell finding out he was a suspect caused him to lawyer-up and refuse to say anything more. That was not what the FBI wanted, and it hurt their investigation.

            Keeping the severity of Freeh’s car accident a secret for over 6 months indicates that law enforcement can keep secrets when they want to, if it’s for a former head of the FBI. There was no excuse for the Richard Jewell leak.

          • TonyTruth

            You are the ignorant one on these events but that is because your read commentary from conspiracy buffs like Belhar.

            Nothing was covered up by the FBI involving Ruby Ridge. Mrs. Weaver was shot accidentally while here armed son was being engaged.

            The reporter said she released the info on Jewell when the Atlanta Police confirmed it.

            The Hospital kept the injuries secret. It’s called HIPAA. Law Enforcement was not involved in his medical condition. Jewell was leaked by the Atlanta Police over whom Freeh had no control.

            No offense but you are really clueless about these facts.

          • John J. Hamilton

            Pussy, pussy, pussy, pussy … coward, coward, pussy, pussy, pussy, coward, coward, pussy …Pussy, pussy, pussy, pussy … coward, coward, pussy, pussy, pussy, coward, coward, pussy … Hear ya loud and clear Tony … so glad you haven’t gotten lost in your moms basement !!!

          • TonyTruth

            Johnny’s drunk again!

          • John J. Hamilton

            And you’re high on TW@T juice … coward, coward, coward, pussy … pussy , pussy …

          • TonyTruth
          • Platinum68

            Yep. He did the same thing to me. Said he was gonna be some place and then didn’t show. I was all ready to “meet” him too!!

          • John J. Hamilton

            He always accuses me of being drunk … even if I was, which I am not, but even if I was … I could quit tomorrow and be sober the rest of my days !! Not so with Tony … as long as he lives he will ALWAYS be a Coward and a Pussy !!! Fear does strange things to the weak … Ain’t that right pussy boy ?

          • Platinum68

            Yep. He is probably on his knees somewhere right now …

          • TonyTruth

            I wish you would quit drinking. Cause if that’s you on that facebook pic then I would whip that azz clear to Canada. But I don’t fight drunks.

          • John J. Hamilton

            You had your chance Pussy Boy … coward, coward, pussy, coward … name the time and place … I’ll stop drinking just for you ? Pussy, pussy, coward, pussy pussy … you see once a coward always a pussy … so I have nothing to fear from you … coward, pussy, pussy, pussy, coward … Like I’ve said before… pussy, coward, pussy, pussy, coward, pussy, FEAR does odd things to basement dwellers … time and place !! Coward, coward, coward, coward … up off your knees now !!

          • TonyTruth
          • John J. Hamilton

            coward, coward, pussy, coward, pussy, coward, pussy, pussy, coward, pussy, Pussy, pussy, pussy, pussy … coward, coward, pussy, pussy, pussy, coward, coward, pussy …Pussy, pussy, pussy, pussy … coward, coward, pussy, pussy, pussy, coward, coward, pussy … Sorry TT Boy … this is all I hear from your posts ?

          • TonyTruth
          • John J. Hamilton

            Coward, coward, pussy, coward, pussy, coward, pussy, pussy, coward, pussy, pussy, pussy, pussy, pussy … coward, coward, pussy, pussy, pussy, coward, coward, pussy …Pussy, pussy, pussy, pussy … coward, coward, pussy, pussy, pussy, coward, coward, pussy … Sorry TT Boy … you can get up off your knees now !!

          • John J. Hamilton

            Can somebody help me out … I think Tony the Pussy Boy is trying to say he is some kind of “Internet Tough Guy” but all I get anymore from his posts are the words Pussy & Coward … which when he failed to meet me he CONFIRMED that he was ? Anybody … Anybody ?

          • John J. Hamilton

            In another post I think he said he was afraid of getting killed or something about getting his ass kicked ? But like I noted all that comes through is the CONFIRMATION that he is a Pussy and a Coward ? Anybody … Anybody ?

          • TonyTruth

            Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

          • John J. Hamilton

            Nite, Nite Pussy Boy !!

          • TonyTruth

            You’re a liar. You want no part of me.

          • TonyTruth
  • rhino2

    If the haters are trolling the comments, you know you are onto something.

    • TonyTruth

      Right that’s it!

  • Lion_in_the_Midwest

    Great job Ryan. We all knew it was predetermine who was going to ‘investigate’. Over 3 years ago, ‘Penn State’ decided to have an investigation. It determined the scope of the investigation, formalized a budget for the investigation, submit bids for the investigation, got bids returned for the investigation, analyzed the bids for the investigation and selected Louie Freeh all in 4 days. Nothing to see here….Move along, Move along.

  • Paternowasframedbycorbett

    WE NEED TO START A GRAND JURY TO INVESTIGATE TOM CORBETT’S ROLE IN SANDUSKY SCANDAL>
    DID TOM CORBETT APPOINT PHONY MEMBERS TO PSU BOT THEN PAY THEM WITH TAXPAYER MONEY FOR THEIR VOTE TO FIRE AND FRAME PATERNO? THE ANSWER IS> YES.
    DID CORBETT OR ANY OF HIS FRIENDS LIKE LOUIS FREEH AND JOHN SURMA MAKE MONEY BY CREATING THE FALSE NARRATIVE THAT PSU covered up for a ASSISTANT SPORTS COACH THAT RETIRED IN 1998? THE ANSWER IS> YES
    DID THE BOT CAUSE THE SUBSEQUENT 50 MILLION DOLLAR INCREASE IN TUITION ? THE ANSWER IS >YES AND THEY SHOULD BE HELD FINACIALLY RESPONSIBLE AND PAY BACK THE SCHOOL THE MONEY THEY SO WILLINGLY GAVEAWAY.
    IS IT POSSIBLE SO CALLED VICTIM #1 ARRON FISCHER, WHO Sandusky claims STARTED IT ALL WAS INFLUENCED BY HIS MOM who told him to lie for $ and was then in turn used by Corbett> the answer is YES
    DOES EVERYBODY KNOW ARRON FISCHER’S DAD WAS CONVICTED OF 300 COUNTS OF CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT AND THAT ARRON FISCHER LIED IN COURT ABOUT WHEN HIS BED WETTING STARTED?
    THIS ENTIRE NARRATIVE STINKS>NOTHING ABOUT THE CHARGES OR THE CRIMES MAKES ANY SENSE, IF YOU OFFER GROWN MEN 2 MILLION DOLLARS TO READ A STATEMENT IN COURT. PLENTY OF GROWN MEN WILL READ THE STATEMENT FOR THE 2 MILLION DOLLARS.
    ALL I WANT IS A INVESTIGATION INTO EXACTLY WHAT TOM CORBETTS ROLE WAS, AND HOW THE INVESTIGATION WAS CONDUCTED THOSE 3 YEARS? DID CORBETT CALL THE PSU NARCOTICS OFFICE WEEKLY AND PRESSURE OFFICERS TO FIND ANYTHING THEY COULD TO TIE SANDUSKY TO FOOTBALL?
    AND WHY DID CORBETTS AG OFFICE ILLEGALLY LEAK A GRAND JURY REPORT TO ESPN ON THE BIGGEST NCAA FOOTBALL DAY IN YEARS WHEN #1 ALABAMA PLAYED #2 LSU> GEE YOU THINK IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT CORBETT TIED HIS FALSE NARRATIVE TO FOOTBALL?
    WHEN ARE WE GOING TO INVESTIGATE HOW THE PHONY GRAND JURY REPORT WAS DISTRIBUTED? OR WHICH INSIDER HAD ALTERIOR MOTIVES LIKE VENGENCE AND MONETARY GAIN.. THIS CASE IS FAR FROM OVER, SEEING ARRON FISHER ROLLING IN CASH WITH HIS GIRLFRIEND LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK MADE ME THINK GEE DID HE MAKE IT UP FOR MONEY?

    • TonyTruth

      Since you put it in all caps that makes it true? ROFL Blaming the victims too? You are proving what Freeh found. Penn Staters love football and their god coach more than human decency.

  • Tim Berton

    I wish Tomalis would be charged with perjury but I doubt he will.

    The Attorney General could have charged other people with perjury in
    the Sandusky scandal, including Dr. Dranov, who also contradicted Mike
    McQueary, Cynthia Baldwin, who told very different stories to Freeh and
    the grand jury, and state police officer, Joseph Leiter, who denied
    leading victims under oath but was caught on audio tape doing exactly
    that.

    I think AG Kelly charged Curley and Schultz initially just to remove them as defense witnesses for Sandusky.

    • TonyTruth

      Do you think Sandusky is innocent?

      • Tim Berton

        I don’t know but I think Sandusky did not get a fair trial for the many reasons specified in his recent appeal.

        I think there was lots of reasonable doubt for the charges relating to the two unidentified victims. I have never heard of another case where a man was convicted of sexually abusing an unidentified child.

        • TonyTruth

          That’s sort of the last stage of JoeBotness. The belief that if Sandusky is innocent then the whole thing clears up for PSU. Of course that is not the case and the many kids who testified and many others who could have but did not confirm this and show Sandusky is guilty. Curley and Schultz would never have testified for Jerry.

          As to victim 2, it’s simple, the jury believed McQueary as they will with CSS when they go to trial. I think one will turn on the others when trial is imminent.

          However, to really be a JoeBot you almost have to believe all these kids are lying. That is what makes this case so interesting and so devastatingly sad as well. A whole community so in love with a school and it’s football image they would sacrifice children to it. What’s a child compared to victory?

          • Tim Berton

            Curley and Schultz would almost certainly have testified at the Sandusky trial if they hadn’t been charged. Sandusky’s lawyers tried to get special permission to use their grand jury testimony at trial.

            If CSS goes to trial, I think the defense will depose the man who self-identified as victim 2 and call him to testify. It will not look good for prosecutors if victim 2 testifies that he talked to them before the Sandusky trial, and they lied in court saying victim 2 remained unidentified.

            No, you don’t have to believe the kids were lying, just that Mike McQueary is not telling the truth.

            McQueary’s testimony contradicts his actions in 2001 to 2010. He testified he thought a boy was raped a few feet from him but offered no help to the boy, said nothing to the boy and Sandusky and just left the boy alone with Sandusky. He never called the police, and after 2001, attended Second Mile events where Sandusky was present.

          • TonyTruth

            Sandusky’s lawyers were not prohibited from using CSS as defense witnesses regradless of their being charged. No one could stop that.

            I doubt CSS will call this fellow because he said Sandusky abused him and that night as well and collected money for it.

            McQueary has no reason to lie. Joe believed him and corroborated his testimony. However, if Sandusky is innocent then it all goes away which of course it won’t. JoeBots scapegoat McQueary because he is low on the totempole and not a part of their image worship.

            Actually, Clemente who you JoeBots often hang your hats on describes why McQueary was in shock and ran when he saw a pillar of the PSU community abusing a boy. Had it been some guy off the street it would have been much different. And no his testimony squares up exactly with what he did. He went to Joe for top cover and let Joe who was powerful and could avoid reprisal from the admin handle it. Not saying that was very brave but I understand that McQUeary wanted a job and so let Joe do it. Joe whiffed.

            It was established at trial that McQueary did not go to Second Mile events after 2001. He was printed on invite lists but didn’t come. Joe did though. Joe gave money to Second Mile too and was on their board at one time.

          • Tim Berton

            Curley and Schultz would not have testified because they were under indictment.

            I think the defense will depose victim 2 because they want to see what he has to say. You don’t know if he claimed abuse the night McQueary saw him because he never testified about it. He did deny abuse to Sandusky’s investigator. Victim 2 apparently did not corroborate McQueary’s story or the prosecution would have called him. That’s reasonable doubt.

            McQueary is not necessarily lying. He just may be misremembering or was led by police. He couldn’t remember the year and month of the shower incident despite it occurring two days after his dream job opened up when Asst. Coach Kenny Jackson abruptly resigned. He couldn’t remember who else he told but remembers he told several others, maybe even his girlfriend. It took him over a year after he first talked to police to remember the locker door slam.

            McQueary is a biased witness against CSS because he claims in his lawsuit they defamed or lied to him and stands to make money if they are convicted.

            No one ever corroborated McQueary’s story of seeing Sandusky bear hugging a boy from behind, slamming a locker door and then seeing them standing apart in the shower. Dr. Dranov testified McQueary told him a very different story.

            McQueary went to his father first and it was his father and Dr. Dranov who urged him to contact Paterno. None of them contacted the police the night of the incident, which makes no sense if Mike believed he witnessed a sexual assault.

            It was not established that McQueary did not attend Second Mile events after 2001 other than McQueary denying it.

          • TonyTruth

            Being under indictment does not prohibit you from testifying in another trial. Happens all the time. Sandusky’s lawyers did not call them because they would have been no help to Sandusky.

            Victim 2 initially said Sandusky did not abuse him (this is very common in CSA cases) but later said he did to PSU lawyers and then they paid him. He said that in a sworn statement to them. I doubt he will change his story. The Prosecution did not call him because at that time there was doubt that he was Victim 2 and actually there is still doubt about that today. He was abused by Sandicksy but it is not sure he was Vic 2.

            You said McQueary was lying. Lots of folk including Paterno could not remember the exact date at first. This is normal and not really an issue.

            McQueary went to his father first because he knew Sandusky was powerful and he wanted a job at PSU. He knew if he took on a beloved pillar of the community alone he would be squashed and so his Dad recommended he go to Paterno for top cover. Dranov said at Sandusky’s trial that all McQueary told him was about the noises and was too upset to say more. Dranov didn’t push him and told him to go to Joe. Mike did and told Joe more than he told Dranov. There is no contradiction between what MM told Dranov or Joe. If there had been then Sandicksy would have gotten off on all charges against Victim 2 at trial. He didn’t and the jury saw no contradiction. Read the testimony of Dranov. Only JoeBots think there is a contradiction.

            There is no proof that McQueary attended Second Mile events after 2001. That has already been addressed.

          • Tim Berton

            If subpoenaed for the Sandusky trial Curley and Schultz would have refused to answer citing their 5th amendment rights. Give an example of people under indictment testifying in another case against their self interest.

            We don’t know what victim 2 said to Penn State lawyers about the 2001 shower incident because that settlement was confidential. He may have denied any abuse that night.

            I didn’t say McQueary had to be lying. I said he may have misremembered and/or the police led him and planted false memories. The human memory is far from perfect and very easy to manipulate, especially for old memories. McQueary did not have perfect recall. He got known facts wrong, and his story keeps changing every time he tells it.

            According to him, McQueary was in a panic so it is doubtful he was thinking about his job prospects when he reported to his father. He testified he may have phoned his girlfriend on the way over to his father’s house so she may be the first one he told details to.

            There is a huge contradiction between Dranov and McQueary. Dranov testified Mike told him he saw a boy peer around the shower wall, an arm pull the boy back and then he saw Sandusky exit the shower a bit later.

            McQueary’s testimony was very different – he saw Sandusky bear hugging the boy from behind, slammed a locker door and then saw them standing apart in the shower.

            A newspaper at the time reported McQueary was slated to appear at a Second Mile event after 2001. Once they get a trial date, I expect CSS investigators will look for some better proof that McQueary did attend Second Mile events after 2001. If he did, there are likely photos, records and witnesses.

            Sandusky’s guilt is a very different question than whether CSS are guilty.

            Other important McQueary issues are his dishonesty in gambling on football games he played in and his claim that he was a victim of child sexual abuse. The Sandusky jury was not told either of those.

            Perhaps it was actually McQueary who was sexually abused in a shower. That would explain McQueary’s panic in 2001 and his automatically assuming sex was occurring when he heard two or three slapping sounds through the locker room door.

          • TonyTruth

            5th Amendment would not be necessary for them to take to defend Sandusky. They would face no jeopardy there. This happens often in organized crime cases where gang members turn on each other while under indictment.

            As I said before, nobody is sure who victim 2 is.

            Actually long term memory is often more accurate and older people can often remember details in stunning clarity. McQueary’s story has been remarkably consistent thru three judiciary tribunals.

            McQueary knew who Sandusky was and how powerful he was as well. He was in shock, but that was because of who it was and the stature Sandicksy had in the PSU community. McQueary’s actions are perfectly consistent with the graveness of what he saw. Not just the molestation but WHO was doing it. As I said before, had it been some stranger off the street he would have probably called the cops right then. Because of the power culture and who it was he saw he didn’t. Instead he sought top cover from Joe. Joe whiffed.

            There has been no evidence to date that McQueary attended any Second Mile Events after 2001. I doubt they will come up. Sandicksy’s lawyers would have brought that up at his trial.

            If Sandusky is innocent then PSU is off the hook. He isn’t.

            McQueary’s alleged gambling does not mean he did not tell the truth regarding Sandicksy. They are mutually exclusive.

            You are speculating about the shower incident. Joe Paterno believed McQueary, the GJ believed him, Sandusky’s jurors believed him, and the Judge in the prelim hearing believed him.

            JoeBots do not but only because it incriminates their scared school. That is why McQueary is the scapegoat for the JoeBots. He brought down PSU and Joe by reporting Sandusky. I think many of you wished he had remained totally silent. So does Sandusky.

          • Tim Berton

            A defendant would be foolish to testify at another trial without immunity because anything they said could be used against them. In your example of gang members testifying against each other, they would get immunity for that testimony because they would be prosecution witnesses. That wasn’t the case for Curley and Schultz so not a relevant example.

            McQueary’s testimony has not been consistent. He didn’t remember the locker door slam and third glance until the Curley-Schultz preliminary hearing. That was after widespread media criticism that he did nothing to stop the attack. It took him over a year since first talking to police to remember the locker door slam and third glance.

            The man who later settled with Penn State claimed in a lawsuit he was victim 2 so if he isn’t then that is fraud. The CSS defense would be negligent not to depose him at least.

            Human memory is very poor, old or new. Eyewitness testimony is one of the major causes of wrongful convictions.

            You don’t know why McQueary was in shock. You’re just speculating. McQueary’s gambling and his own child abuse are relevant areas that McQueary should be questioned about at trial. Concealing his gambling is relevant to his credibility on other matters. The jury should consider it.

            The jurors could have believed Dr. Dranov’s version of events and still convicted. All the jurors needed was Sandusky and a boy alone in a shower to convict because they 8 other victims testifying about what Sandusky did to them when they were alone. The jury did not find Sandusky guilty on the most serious charge for 2001 so they had some reasonable doubt about McQueary’s testimony.

            McQueary did tremendous damage to other boys and Penn State by not immediately calling the police in 2001. He did one of the following:

            1. Told vague stories in 2001 and didn’t reveal the full truth until 2010 and later.

            2. Told the truth in 2001 but then embellished the story in 2010 after being led by police.

          • TonyTruth

            Not really. CSS were not parties to the crimes Sandusky was accused of. So, there was no need for immunity. Plus they could take the 5th at any time while testifying. BTW show proof that Amendola was going to call those guys as witnesses. Schultz barely knew Sandusky and Spanier claimed he never met Sandusky. More speculation without support.

            Those are minor details that do not change the substantive testimony. All but JoeBots is legal proceedings have believed McQueary.

            Not necessarily a fraud since Sandusky may have abused him in the showers on another time. He used the showers (eg 1998) to groom his victims. What is not known is whether he was the Victim there the might of 2001. Like I said, I doubt he will be deposed and I doubt CSS attorney’s will call him.

            Sometimes memory is poor and sometimes it isn’t. Really doesn’t matter. Joe corroborated McQueary and admitted twice that he was told it was sexual.

            Your expert Clemente explains why he was in shock and it wasn’t because of his alleged gambling. Maybe you should reread the report you champion better? As I said the alleged gambling and prior abuse will not convince a jury McQueary is lying as they are unrelated. But you are speculating.

            No they could not have convicted based on Dranov’s testimony as it was hearsay. Now, they did not convict on the most serious charge as they later explained because MM did not see penetration which is an element of the crime. They beleived that MM saw molestation and convicted accordingly.

            Joe did the same damage by not reporting to police either and he was the more powerful one to do it.

          • Tim Berton

            In the Sandusky trial transcript, the defense asked the judge for permission to use Curley and Schultz’s grand jury testimony since they wouldn’t testify. The judge even pondered for the record if the prosecution had charged them to remove them as defense witnesses.

            The reason to call Curley and Schultz is obvious. They contradicted Mike McQueary, as did Dranov. Three against one is more than reasonable doubt that McQueary was not credible.

            In his lawsuit, a victim claimed to be victim 2. It was in the newspapers. Penn State settled with him so he never testified.

            The gambling has nothing to do with why McQueary was in shock. Gambling goes to his credibility and ethics. McQueary had no problem deceiving Paterno and his team when he gambled on games he played in. He risked NCAA sanctions and a huge scandal for Paterno if caught.

            You’re wrong because they did convict on hearsay evidence alone for the unidentified 2000 janitor victim.

            Paterno was not told of a crime. Even if he was told of a crime, he followed the law in 2001 in reporting to his superiors. It was up to the eyewitness to either tell a clear story or report it himself. Mike McQueary did neither.

          • TonyTruth

            Dranov did not contradict McQueary but Curley and Schultz had already tried to but the GJ didn’t find them credible. So, the GJ didn’t find them credible but Amendola is now going to call them as witnesses? Not likely. Plus Amendola could have called them anyway and compelled them to repeat what they already had said under oath. He didn’t because their stories were not believable.

            He may have claimed it but that doesn’t mean he was victim 2. He didn’t testify because they weren’t sure he was and either side could have easily disputed it.

            They did not convict Sandicksy for any victim based on the janitors testimony. They allowed it to show that Sandusky was a pedophile. No victim was ever named.

            Paterno was told of sexual molestation and said so under oath. He did CYA by telling Curley and that is why he was not charged.

            The grief Paterno gets now is from outside the legal realm in the world of human decency. Yes, he skated legally but not morally. McQueary told a clear enough story to Paterno and while McQueary may have been a coward to not go alone to the cops, JoePa morally fails as someone who knew kids were abused, had the power to stop it without suffering reprisal but passed the buck and walked while kids paid.

            You see, the scorn Paterno gets has little to do with his legal duties and everything to do with his moral duties. This has been true from November 2011. This for a man who sanctimoniously preached such moral duties for years.

            So, Joe doesn’t get arrested but his legacy will always be about his knowing that a kid being harmed and not doing enough to stop it.

            But you know that and are only arguing the legal side because it gives you the better argument you think. Morally, you have no leg to stand on and neither does Joe.

          • Tim Berton

            Dr. Dranov certainly contradicted Mike McQueary. Dranov testified that Mike said he saw a boy peer around the shower wall, an arm pull the boy back and then Sandusky exit the shower a bit later.

            McQueary testified he saw Sandusky bear hugging the boy from behind, slammed a locker door and then saw them standing apart in the shower.

            There are numerous major differences between those two stories.

            If the man who claimed in a court document he was victim 2 was lying, then Penn State might get their $3 million back for fraud. It also bolsters Sandusky’s defense that the victims were lying to get a big payout.

            Paterno never testified he was told it was sexual molestation. He said Sandusky fooled us all after Sandusky was arrested.

            No one corroborated McQueary’s testimony as detailed above. McQueary claims he told others about the shower incident but conveniently forgot their names, None of his unknown friends/family have come forward to corroborate Mike’s testimony.

            The jury certainly did convict Sandusky for molesting the unidentified boy from 2000 based just on the hearsay testimony of one janitor. Check the trial transcript or news reports.

            Paterno trusted McQueary to tell the full truth to Curley and Schultz, who would then deal with it appropriately. President Spanier, PSU lawyer Courtney and three Second Mile officials, including a PhD child psychologist also played a role.

            In hindsight, they all failed, just like the police, DA, CYS and DPW failed in 1998 after Sandusky admitted to bear hugging boys in the showers. But sure, blame it all on the old, dead guy who can’t fight back. That’s the moral thing to do.

          • TonyTruth

            If Dranov contradicted McQueary why was Sandusky convicted on four out of five counts for victim two? I guess the jury doesn’t share the JoeBot idea that his story has changed.

            As you have said before, you don’t know what this guy claims as the documents are sealed. Really didn’t matter to PSU whether he was actually Victim 2 or not. He was abused by Sandusky and on PSU campus (as was another victim 6 months after victim 2) and that was really all that mattered to them.

            Joe Paterno corroborated McQueary’s story that something sexual happened in the shower between Sandusky and a child and that was the most important part of Joe having a duty to make sure the right people were told. Not his phony bosses. The other stuff about slamming locker doors and mirrors didn’t matter much to the jury and they convicted properly. JoeBots parse words and hang on to phrases when Joe himself said he was told that McQueary saw a boy being molested by Sandusky.

            Paterno washed his hands of the incident as he said to Sassano; “I had other things to do” and walked away from it without making sure it was reported to the proper authorities. Instead, Joe kept it “in house” and as a result Sandusky raped for 10 more years. An old dead guy who can’t fight back who died having millions of dollars, buildings named after him and who preached always to do the most and best you could not the least should still receive honors? Right. Paterno like many of his fans was a sanctimonious hypocrite who stayed too long and kids paid for his indifference. Balme all of society for Sandusky (whihc is really blaming no one) but the great football coach gets a pass because his fans worship him. Over the safety of kids. Yeah that’s success with honor.

          • Tim Berton

            As I said before Dranov’s testimony alone would have been enough for conviction because it put Sandusky showering with and touching a boy.

            Dranov’s testimony is much more important in the CSS case, which mainly concerns what McQueary told the 5 men in 2001. According to Dranov, there was nothing close to a sex act, just Sandusky pulling the boy back when he leaned around the shower wall.

            Paterno did not corroborate anything about McQueary’s story of seeing Sandusky bear hugging a boy from behind in the showers, slamming a locker door and then seeing them standing apart.

            Schultz’s defense believes Paterno actually said “Was it a sexual nature?” and the prosecutor who read Paterno’s testimony into the court record misread it. Months ago, Schultz’s defense made a motion to obtain the audio tape of Paterno’s testimony. If the prosecution has nothing to hide, then they should be glad to provide that.

          • TonyTruth

            As I said before. Dranov’s testimony was hearsay and not enough to convict. It took McQueary’s testimony to convict and although Amendola tried to use Dranov’s testimony to contradict McQueary’s he was unsuccessful. Dranov’s testimony was not dispositive and was really not important either at the GJ or the trial. Mike told him very little of substance and since Mike was upset Dranov did not push him but sent him to Paterno.

            Paterno corroborated that it was sexual (not horseplay that the Paterno three claim) and that he believed what McQueary told him.

            The audiotape I believe has been provided and the transcript of Joe’s testimony is published. Paterno did not ask a question but stated it clearly and was just as clear later on in his interview with Anthony Sassano of CYS in 2011.

            I think with Baldwin’s testimony Schultz will turn on Spanier. We’ll see. However Joe’s statements that MM told him he saw a sexual act is a firm matter of record.

          • Tim Berton

            You’re simply wrong that hearsay testimony was not enough to convict because the janitor’s hearsay testimony was enough to convict for the unidentified 2000 victim.

            Dranov’s testimony will be far more important at the CSS trial where the key issue is what McQueary reported in 2001. Dranov’s version backs Curley and Schultz’s testimony and contradicts McQueary’s version.

            The audio tape of Paterno’s grand jury testimony has not been made public so it remains an open question. Paterno’s testimony was read into the court record by a prosecutor at the Curley-Schultz preliminary hearing. The prosecutor could have misread it.

            What is very suspicious is the prosecutor’s followup question to Paterno’s statement “It was a sexual nature. I’m not sure exactly what it was.”

            The prosecutor asked “Did Mike McQueary tell you where he had seen this inappropriate conduct take place?” rather than saying sexual conduct.

            Baldwin’s testimony is just hearsay so is weak. She also lacks credibility because the OAG threatened to charge her with obstruction so she is probably testifying to save herself from charges. Baldwin also gave contradictory statements, under oath, about the Trustees meeting. She gave a sworn statement to Freeh and grand jury testimony.

            Baldwin has no firsthand knowledge of what McQueary told Curley and Schultz in 2001.

          • TonyTruth

            Sorry, but McQueary didn’t tell Dranov enough and it was hearsay and would not have been allowed without McQueary’s testimony.

            Dranov’s version does not back CSS who said it was horseplay. There is no contradiction and Amendola tried to show it at trial and failed.

            The transcript is public and if the audio tape said otherwise it would be out. Just wishful thinking.

            Right, Joe said it was sexual but he didn’t know the clinical terms to use to describe it. Remember, Joe was not prompted but offered up that Sandicksy was fondling a boy and the prosecutor asked him to clarify and Joe said he was told it was sexual.

            Baldwin’s testimony is not weak and if it was then CSS would not be fighting so hard to quash it. She will offer evidence of coverup because of her private conversations with Spanier and Schultz. She was threatened with prosecution and probably got immunity to testify. Not unusual. She was probably invovled but folks are often convicted by their incidental co-conspirators.

            The GJ believed the MM version of what he told CS and probably will again.

          • Tim Berton

            You’re wrong that McQueary didn’t tell Dr. Dranov enough. Hearsay testimony of the janitor was enough to convict in the 2000 incident with an unknown victim.

            If McQueary had not survived until 2010, Dr. Dranov could have been a hearsay witness for an unknown victim, same as the janitor.

            Dr. Dranov certainly does back the CSS version of horseplay. He testified about a boy peering around the shower wall and an adult arm pulling the boy back. That’s horseplay.

            The transcript is of the prosecutor reading Paterno’s grand jury testimony into the court record. There are three chances for an error there.

            1. Creating of the grand jury transcript
            2, The prosecutor’s reading of the grand jury transcript 3. Creating the preliminary hearing transcript.

            It’s a simple matter to release the audio recording to settle the matter.

            Paterno never said he was told it was sexual. He may have simply assumed that in hindsight. He had no memory of what Sandusky and the boy were doing in the shower in 2001 because he was told specifics.

            Badwin’s testimony is weak hearsay. It is all the weaker because she is probably only testifying to avoid obstruction charges herself.

            Nowhere in her grand jury testimony does Baldwin say she was ordered by Spanier to obstruct so there goes your “co-conspirator” speculation.

            More than likely she was just in over her head. She didn’t have the qualifications or experience for the job. She just got it because of her insider status as a former Trustee.

          • TonyTruth

            Dranov would not have been allowed to testify without McQueary and the reason Dranov was questioned was an attempt by Amendola to discredit McQueary which failed.

            Dranov said in his testimony that he really couldn’t tell what happened only that MM was upset. I don’t think MM would be that upset over “horseplay” which is a silly defense. In the janitor’s case it was different as he was told in graphic detail what happened plus Petrosky (the janitor who testified) was there and saw the boy and Jerry leave the shower holding hands. No comparison to what Dranov was told. As I said before, Dranov’s testimony is not dispositive. Only JoeBots hang on to it.

            The audio tape is wishful thinking. Sassano interview corroborates what Joe told GJ.

            Joe did tell the GJ and Sassano what he was told by MM was that the encounter in the shower was sexual. His memory was fine and he was not told graphic details but he knew that it was sexual and wrong and certainly not horseplay. No need to report horseplay.

            What Baldwin testified to was that that Spanier lied to the GJ and to her. That testimony will now be allowed.

            She was a former PA Supreme Court Justice and a prosecutor before that. Don’t think she was over her head. But her testimony will probably sink your boys CSS.

          • Platinum68

            Turns out she sunk Frank Fina … you, your boss or your boy — which one?

          • TonyTruth

            I think she may be the one who is sunk. This porn stuff will go nowhere but leaking GJ testimony will. She is indicted. Fina is not.

          • Platinum68

            Wait … Kane was indicted?!? LOL.

            GET A CLUE, Shill-Boy. It’s a circular firing squad and your boy, Fina, walked into it (like an idiot).

          • TonyTruth

            Yes she was you stupid dope. And she will be out of office soon. Fina will be fine. She is an indicted liar. Fina has no charges against him. Even her own hubby ditched her. What a mess you boobs have up there.

          • Platinum68

            ZZZZZ …. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz … … ZZZ … …ZZZZZ …. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz … … ZZZ … …ZZZZZ …. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz … … ZZZ … …ZZZZZ …. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz … … ZZZ … …ZZZZZ …. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz … … ZZZ … …

          • TonyTruth

            That’s what JoePa was doing while Sandusky raped boys.

          • Platinum68

            Here’s what Frank Fina was doing while Sandusky raped boys:

            https://www.flickr.com/photos/zadock1/3580634808

          • TonyTruth
          • TonyTruth
          • John J. Hamilton

            Guess you screwed the pooch on that prediction … pussy, pussy, pussy, coward, pussy , coward, coward, pussy, pussy, pussy, coward, coward is all I hear after that ?

          • TonyTruth
          • Platinum68

            Umm … How do you know what the GJ believed???

            Hmmmmmm.

          • TonyTruth

            Based on their indictment of CSS

          • John J. Hamilton

            Apparently McQueerguy is as big a coward as you are Pussy Boy … still waiting on that time and place …

          • TonyTruth

            Johnny’s drunk again!

        • Platinum68

          Stop it. He is a predator. He belongs where he is.

          But he should have been there earlier. Fina and Corbett shit the bed. And then they pulled their usual nonsense on the administrators.

          • TonyTruth

            ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ