Penn State Sandusky scandal: AD arrested, Paterno, Spanier fired; coverup charged #3

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
LRinCA said:
This article might be of interest as well:


As reporters go over every detail of the Penn State scandal, including employee records, e-mails and personal information, there are some details they will not be able to discover. You can thank recently-ousted school president Graham Spanier for that.

Spanier fought for and won an exemption from Pennsylvania's Right to Know Law that requires state employees and offices to provide all pertinent information to the taxpayers funding it.

Full:
http://www.sbnation.com/ncaa-footba...l-exemption-right-know-law-state-open-records
Click to expand...

It is amazing to me that Penn State willfully fought hard to claim such low moral and ethical ground. Good leaders and great universities should not be in the business of keeping as much information as possible secret and hidden.
 
Gin said:
It is amazing to me that Penn State willfully fought hard to claim such low moral and ethical ground. Good leaders and great universities should not be in the business of keeping as much information as possible secret and hidden.
Click to expand...
4 Billion a year operating budget.
 
Bumping this post.

ynotdivein said:
Stay focused on the issue at hand, and please be civil to and respectful of one another. Lots of better places to direct our anger and frustration than at each other, peeps.

Where this post falls is random, and :tyou:
Click to expand...
 
4 Billion a year operating budget and the Treasurer is arrested for lying to a grand jury and not reporting a child rape.
 
Police have no records McQueary talked to them in 2002 (Deadspin)
---
Both the university police and the State College PD deny having any record that Mike McQueary filed a report with them after stumbling upon Jerry Sandusky allegedly raping an as-yet-unidentified boy in a Penn State campus shower in 2002.
---
The Patriot-News of Harrisburg has also acquired a hand-written statement McQueary gave police as part of the grand jury's investigation, and in it there is no mention that he stopped the assault or spoke with any police officers in the days after he witnessed the alleged rape.

Here's why all this is important: Sandusky's lawyer, Joe Amendola, is now likely to seize on McQueary's seemingly contradictory statements—in his testimony to the grand jury and then in his email to friends—to attack his credibility as a witness.

However, McQueary also never said he filed a report with the police, just that he "did have discussions" with them. The most favorable gloss on that is that McQueary is counting his meeting with Schultz, a week after the incident, as a discussion "with police." The unfavorable gloss is that McQueary is saying one thing in public and another thing in private.
---
Click to expand...
more, including a review of McQueary's statements, at link above
 
Gin said:
It is amazing to me that Penn State willfully fought hard to claim such low moral and ethical ground. Good leaders and great universities should not be in the business of keeping as much information as possible secret and hidden.
Click to expand...
Uh...this was NOT just Penn State that fought for an exemption to this law! ALL OF THE EMPLOYEES AT STATE UNIVERSITIES FOUGHT THIS LAW! The Right to Know Law allowed everyone to see all university employees' compensation. This is why university employees wanted an exemption.

Would you want everyone on Earth to know PRECISELY what your income was AND BE ABLE TO FIND IT ONLINE? How about your benefit package? What about having access to how much you will be paid in your retirement? What about everyone on Earth being able to find what health plan you chose from your university employer? What if you chose the most expensive plan available and this might imply that you had a terminal illness like cancer or AIDS?

Over ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PEOPLE FOUGHT THIS LAW. I was a university employee during this time (not Penn State) and I fought it too. I didn't want to share my compensation package with the entire world. You wouldn't either!
 
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/11/16/exclusive-charitys-donors-kept-in-dark-about-penn-state-sex-abuse-investigation/

While Second Mile kept its donors in the dark, it did take steps as early as 2006 to protect its assets -- though from what, is unclear.

The charity filed two amendments to its articles of incorporation in that year, once in February and another in September, stipulating that its assets should be liquidated, if the need arose, and donated to other existing charities. The revelation comes through a FoxNews.com review of the charity's articles of incorporation, which were obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State.
Click to expand...
 
rosepetal1065 said:
Did anyone hear something weird about the attorney for Sandusky yet? My dh just walked in with a story, but I'm afraid to post it, because I have no proof.
Click to expand...

If you're husband told you that his attorney impregnated a 16 year old and then married her when he was approx. 49 then it's true. Look in the #2 thread for the link.
 
Pensfan said:
Uh...this was NOT just Penn State that fought for an exemption to this law! ALL OF THE EMPLOYEES AT STATE UNIVERSITIES FOUGHT THIS LAW! The Right to Know Law allowed everyone to see all university employees' compensation. This is why university employees wanted an exemption.

Would you want everyone on Earth to know PRECISELY what your income was AND BE ABLE TO FIND IT ONLINE? How about your benefit package? What about having access to how much you will be paid in your retirement? What about everyone on Earth being able to find what health plan you chose from your university employer? What if you chose the most expensive plan available and this might imply that you had a terminal illness like cancer or AIDS?

Over ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PEOPLE FOUGHT THIS LAW. I was a university employee during this time (not Penn State) and I fought it too. I didn't want to share my compensation package with the entire world. You wouldn't either!
Click to expand...

I would. If I was being paid money that the government took by force from the people of the state then I would have no problem letting them know how much money they were paying me. Why shouldn't they have that right?
 
Case Puts Focus on Grand-Jury Quirk

WSJ-



...In the federal system and most states that use the grand-jury system, grand juries typically unveil their criminal allegations against someone in an indictment or a criminal complaint. Such documents are usually tersely worded and can run as few as three or four pages, stating only the most essential factual allegations. They also often use initials or pseudonyms to protect people who aren't criminally charged. But Pennsylvania is one of a handful of states in which...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204517204577042491094936470.html
 
After that ridiculous, arrogant court fight - which must have cost the college a fortune in legal fees that could have been better spent in classrooms - it's surprising what the state Legislature did the next year when it passed a new and supposedly improved state Right to Know law.

It exempted Penn State and the other three "state-related" universities from many of the provisions in the law.

According to a recent New York Times story, those schools "are required only to issue annual reports by May 30 and make public the salaries of their officers and directors and 25 highest-paid employees."

That means citizen watchdogs wanting to look into the Sandusky scandal can't get access to emails.

They can't request phone records.

There could be a wealth of information in PSU files pertinent to these appalling cases that the school is simply not required to divulge to citizens.

Why? Officials at "state related" schools (Pitt, Temple, Lincoln, PSU) argued that such disclosures would put them at a competitive disadvantage against private universities as they compete for funding.

The result is that PSU has a loophole that state agencies and other state schools don't enjoy.

It's time to close that loophole.

If Penn State is going to take some $272 million from taxpayers this year, if its employees are covered under the State Employees' Retirement System, then citizens should have the same open records request rights as they would at any other state agency.

Release of such information could shed more light on how this horrific situation came to pass or was allowed to continue. It might help us understand who knew what and when - and why so little, it seems, was done early, when the first allegations came to light.

It could also lead to valuable lessons in how to prevent and thwart such situations in the future. http://www.ydr.com/psu/ci_19337132
 
Dr.Fessel said:
I would. If I was being paid money that the government took by force from the people of the state then I would have no problem letting them know how much money they were paying me. Why shouldn't they have that right?
Click to expand...


The Pennsylvania Constitution, like the U.S. Constitution, protects a citizen’s right to some privacy from the government. The human right to privacy also has precedent in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.


USA Bill of Rights (and 14th Amendment) Provisions Relating to the Right of Privacy
Amendment I
(Privacy of Beliefs)
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment III
(Privacy of the Home)
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV
(Privacy of the Person and their Possessions)
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment IX
(More General Protection for Privacy?)
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Liberty Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

No State shall... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, 
without due process of law.
 
LRinCA said:
I guess this was a conflict of interest.





Ex-District Attorney referred Sandusky case due to wife’s family tie

STATE COLLEGE, Pa. — A former Pennsylvania county prosecutor said Wednesday that he referred an allegation that former Penn State assistant coach Jerry Sandusky had sexually abused a child to state prosecutors because his wife’s brother was Sandusky’s adopted son.
Former Centre County District Attorney Michael Madeira told The Associated Press that he cited the possible conflict of interest in passing the 2009 report to the state attorney general’s office, which at the time was headed by now-Gov. Tom Corbett.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/jerry-sandusky-is-he-a-christian-61960/



BBM
Click to expand...

If his wife's brother was Sandusky's adopted child, wouldn't that make her Sandusky's adopted daughter. Or were the two siblings seperated and adopted by different parents.
 
Now Dr. Drew is going to "spin" that Spanier fought for the exemption from the Right to Know Law. He will conveniently forget to mention that ALL state universities in PA fought for this exemption. He will forget to mention that their employees didn't want all their compensation posted on the internet.
 
LRinCA said:
Mike McQueary attended Jerry Sandusky fundraiser one year after making sexual assault allegations

by Sara Ganim*

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/mcqueary_attended_sandusky_fun.html



*She's been interviewed several times on CNN
Click to expand...

As I read the article, it lists folks who will be participating. It doesn't actually say for certain who was there. But, regardless, why in the world would McQueary even accept an invitation to attend??? Why would he offer and plan to attend any event with Sandusky? How could any person set aside the experience of witnessing a rape of a child and allow themselves to (apparently comfortably) socialize with the alleged rapist????

Please don't tell me this the price one pays if they want to move up in the football program. Keep in mind this event was in 2003...not all that long after the sexual assault. I am stunned.
 
Steely Dan said:
If you're husband told you that his attorney impregnated a 16 year old and then married her when he was approx. 49 then it's true. Look in the #2 thread for the link.
Click to expand...

UGH...that's what he said.
 
He (McQ) also played in a charity gold tourney with Sandusky too. It was in a previous article way back there <----------------------I remember commenting on it.

That boggles the mind - HOW does one "socialize" with someone they have previously caught doing such a heinous act?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 171 more.
Total: 3,323 (members: 172, guests: 3,151)

Online statistics

Members online
172
Guests online
3,151
Total visitors
3,323
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
604,379
Messages
18,171,239
Members
232,471
Latest member
Smash5070
Back
Top