We’re Going to Trial: All Charges Stick in Curley/Schultz/Spanier Preliminary Hearing

Onward State ^ | July 30, 2013 | Kevin Horne

[Uncle Chip]

Curley’s attorney Caroline Roberto had similar sentiments.

“We heard really nothing out of the ordinary from McQueary when he took the witness stand. Except we did hear some embellishment like we always do,” Roberto said during closing statements. “I really don’t know what foundation the prosecution is proceeding on.”

Ultimately, conviction probably rests on whether the prosecution can prove the three former administrators intentionally and knowingly failed to report child sexual abuse, rather than just honest negligence.

As Gary Schultz’s lawyer Tom Farrell put it, “There’s a difference between failing to make a report and interfering to make a report.”

[FlJoePa]

Still won’t go to trial. Not with the mess cynthia baldwin made of this.

I’d love to see MM on the stand though. That could go on for weeks.

[Uncle Chip]

This is the best thing that could happen to Happy Valley.

It will be an opportunity to lay all those cards out on the table -- including the Tom Harmon card, and the Louie Freeh card, and the DPW card, and the TSM card, and to finally tie McQueary down to one [or two] stories.

And this will be great with three defendants each with their own legal team. It will be a real circus.

[canuck_conservative]

Still beating that “Grand Jury is bogus” drum, eh? Louis Freeh was making it all up?

Yes, this trial is a good thing, because it will force all you deniers to finally face the truth.

For those in positions of power, not doing your job is a crime.

[Nifster]

These slimy win at any cost administrators frankly should be taken out behiund the barn and horsewhipped. They failed the very people they should have protected. I have NO sympathy for them

[Uncle Chip]

You’re already 0 for 3 —

[FlJoePa]

Actually no one took a bigger beating in that courtroom the past few days than louis freeh. That is if one paid any attention to what was actually said.

[Lurker]

There is no difference in my eyes. They should all be staked to anthills and covered in honey.

[FlJoePa]

I agree it will shed light, but it’s a still a selfish standpoint. I wouldn’t want to be one of those 3 guys facing jail in a politically charged environment with an out of control OAG’s office.

[vette6387]

“For those in positions of power, not doing your job is a crime.”

Absolutely! These “men” are all enablers by reason of their silence and covering up of Sandusky. And as far as “Joe Pa” is concerned, I hope he’s burning in Hell! These “sports figures” are mostly all a sham. Football has no place in post secondary education, particularly at public universities and colleges. Just a bunch of knuckle draggers taking up space where they have noting to contribute. It ends up being Rah, Rah for the alumni.

[Uncle Chip]

They failed the very people they should have protected.

Are you referring to Dr Raykovitz and the board member at Sandusky's Second Mile charity who were notified of the 2001 incident??? Because once they were notified they were by law required to follow up with the DPW and to date no one knows for sure whether they did or not.

Penn State has the wrong people on trial and they know it.

[FlJoePa]

I see you’ve been closely following this, huh?

[Uncle Chip]

“For those in positions of power, not doing your job is a crime.”

That sounds so righteous, doesn't it, but you won't find that anywhere in the law.

[FlJoePa]

"There is no difference in my eyes. They should all be staked to anthills and covered in honey."

Before or after their trial? Or maybe during?

[justiceseeker93]

Can someone out there state (pardon the pun) precisely on what criminal charges these three PSU former officials were indicted? The author of the posted piece, and a couple of other stories I've seen on the Net today on the same subject, is very much remiss in not explaining this to his readers.

Is failing to report a crime by others to law enforcement a crime in and of itself in PA? If so, what is the legal term for it?

[FlJoePa]

Here's a decent, short video by an ex-PA AG about what hurdles the state is facing. Remember the burden of proof the past 2 days was literally next to zero.

pennlive.com video here

[Uncle Chip]

If you have a short bio on Cynthia Baldwin and what she did in this case that should have her disbarred and sued, please post.

[justiceseeker93]

Thanks for the video. Seems as if that lawyer commenting is supposed to be a neutral party. If he is correct, the failure to report charge and the conspiracy charge have to be thrown out because they are based on an ex post facto statute. That's basic constitutional law, I would think.

[FlJoePa]

January 16th Blehar - Who Knew? Part 2: The Hiring of Cynthia Baldwin

January 18th Blehar - Did Cynthia Baldwin Commit Perjury In Her 2012 Affidavit?

April 25th Blehar - Baldwin Perjury: Never told PSU Officials About Subpoena 1179

Ray is very sharp and doesn't put stuff out there he doesn't fully research. If he says the Feds are coming (which he does), the Feds are coming. Read his stuff - the amount of time he must spend on this is remarkable. Follow him on twitter @rayblehar

[canuck_conservative]

That sounds so righteous, doesn't it, but you won't find that anywhere in the law.

Not in those words, but the concept is there. How about child endangerment, for starters?

Namely -

These three were in the upper positions of power in an educational setting, and had tremendous control and influence over young, impressionable kids. With that comes the tremendous responsibility to care for those in your charge - and those three, um, guys failed to do that.

Got that? They knew things improper were going on, had been going on for years, and they did nothing/next to nothing about it. Children were violated as a result - these turkeys are responsible for their negligence, if they had done or said something, Sandusky could have been stopped.