<p>^^ It should also be grounds for criminal charges. Why hasn’t Spanier been arrested?</p>
<p>“Tim Curley and Gary Schultz operate at the highest levels of honesty, integrity and compassion. I am confident the record will show that these charges are groundless and that they conducted themselves professionally and appropriately.”</p>
<p>In his statement Spanier expressed no concern for the victims. He conveyed no shock or regret that some of the alleged molestations occurred on his campus. There was no horror over the nature of the crimes. No apology for not doing more. No explanation for why he didn’t ask more questions, which may have led to someone demanding that they find the abused boy so at the very, very least they could ensure his safety and offer him the counseling he no doubt needed</p>
<p>This says it all about Spanier in my opinion</p>
<p>"^^ It should also be grounds for criminal charges. Why hasn’t Spanier been arrested? "</p>
<p>There is no star witness like McQueary to make a case against him. You can’t make a case without solid collaborations from Schultz and Curley. Who do they call to show that he neglected his duty to report? Maybe later on if they can proof their case against Schultz and Curley which will not be easy in itself. His actions suggest that he knew something but that might not be enough to go to trial.</p>
<p>
Schultzs retirement from PSU - close to a 500K cash payout plus 330k/year. Outrageous!!
[Jerry</a> Sandusky and Gary Schultz continue to receive generous Penn State pensions | PennLive.com](<a href=“http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/jerry_sandusky_continues_to_re.html]Jerry”>Jerry Sandusky and Gary Schultz continue to receive generous Penn State pensions - pennlive.com)</p>
<p>^and the victims are accused of doing this for the money!?</p>
<p>So are you folks stating that the Grand Jury, whose job it is to bring charges after their investigation, was wrong in not charging Spanier? </p>
<p>Schultz had already retired from Penn State prior to the release of the grand jury report. He came back as a favor to the college as it was looking for a suitable replacement.</p>
<p>In order to really understand this case as it unfolds it is extremely important to create a timeline with each individual. What did you know, WHEN did you know it and what did you do. I believe the WHEN is the most important fact to learn before feeling confident in trashing someones character.</p>
<p>judging by your post 3819, apparently your post 3817 was sarcasm, and I missed that. My apologies. Sometimes sarcasm is difficult to pick up from the printed word.</p>
<p>As for post 3822, I have no desire to defend Spanier, but if a person denies all charges, then it stands to reason that might include molestation; and if(theoretically) no molestation occurred then there are no victims. A person can’t say “I’m sorry for the victims” if he is denying that there were crimes committed.</p>
<p>
Schultz retired in 2009, giving him 7 years to connect the 1998 and 2002 showering incidents.</p>
<p>Who should we feel sorry for the guy whose character is being trashed or the 10 y/o boys molested repeated by a 50 y/o man. My sympathy is for the victims.</p>
<p>Sax, I am not following. If you have a main point on the WHEN, please spell it out because I am kind of slow and not getting it.</p>
<p>I was disgusted, revolted and angry after reading the grand jury report. I had no idea how heinous Sanduskys acts were.
My emotions were more muted when I had not read the report and only knew in general that Sandusky had been charged. </p>
<p>I do not know when anyone else actually read the grand jury report. I believe it makes a difference in what people said immediately after the arrest.</p>
<p>The board of PSU states they were shocked at the allegations after Sandusky was arrested the first time on Nov 5th 2011 even though the report was leaked 7 months before. This makes me want to know exactly when they were aware of and had read the report. It sure sounds like they hadnt seen it until the 5th of November. It sounds like it was a surprise to them.</p>
<p>When did Spanier read the report? If Spanier is telling the truth and was told only of inappropriate behavior (not sexual) by men he knew, respected, and trusted for many many years I can understand his statement of support for them AT THE TIME. He made his first statement sometime around noon on Nov 5. I can understand his banning Sandusky from bringing kids on campus and nothing more. He believed he had done enough. Had he read the report yet? Would he change his public statement if he had?</p>
<p>How about Paterno. He made a statement that “in hindsite he wished he had done more”? Was this because he did not know about the statements in the grand jury report? Had he not read it yet? Was he under the belief that he really did do enough?</p>
<p>The grand jury report that we all read and the grand jury transcripts apparently contain different statements. The report we read did not mention Dranov’s confllicting testimony about the shower incident. </p>
<p>It’s easy to just say “THEY ALL KNEW” but I’m not sold on exactly what they knew and when… and it makes a difference in their immediate reactions on the 5th and 6th</p>
<p>Even the lawyers for Curley and Schwartz were making statements before they had an opportunity to read the transcripts.</p>
<p>I want to wait until I get all the facts on who knew what and when.</p>
<p>Im sure this has been linked already with some of this info:</p>
<p>[Another</a> version of Mike McQueary’s story about Jerry Sandusky surfaces | PennLive.com](<a href=“http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/12/another_version_of_mike_mcquea.html]Another”>Another version of Mike McQueary's story about Jerry Sandusky surfaces - pennlive.com)</p>
<p>I look forward to finding the truth. Whatever it may be. However nothing will bring back the reputations of these men… IF… it is found they were actually telling the truth.</p>
<p>Tututaxi. Never, never has anyone, including me, stated they do not feel horrible for the victims. It does not have to be either/ or.</p>
<p>Schultz was receiving his retirement benefits prior to Sanduskys arrest. He has not been found guilty yet of any crime. Wait and see. If he is guilty maybe they can then rip him of his retirement then.</p>
<p>Since that “report” about Dranov, McQueary again testified under oath about what he saw, and what he told Curley and Schultz. His father also testified. As far as I know, Dranov did not. </p>
<p>So that “report” could be true, but as of now there is nothing I have seen to think it is anything more than the accused going after McQueary’s credibility. And to be honest, that whole, “I asked him 3 times if he saw anything sexual, and 3 times he said no” sounds too convenient for the accused perjurers.</p>
<p>Again, this can be true, by as far as I know Dranov did not testify at the perjury hearing. Why not?</p>
<p>Was the defense able to call witnesses at the perjury hearing? The prosecution is not going to put on a witness that contradicts its case.</p>
<p>and that is the same reason that you did not read about Dranov’s statement in the published grand jury report.It hurts their case. It is supposedly in the testimoney but not part of their report in order to indict.</p>
<p>Please note that Dranov never made such statements officially. It was coming from an unknown source or a secret source. Dranov himself has never acknowledged such information in court or even unofficial statement in public. And McQueary father was there when McQueary talked to Dranov, and so far John McQueary confirms under oath what Mike McQueary said.</p>
<p>So, the Dranov statement is “he said, he said”, I take it.</p>
<p>Well so far it is more like, two people swears in court against from an unknown source he said.</p>
<p>
We will probably never know exactly what happened. We will hear two different versions of events, each hotly contested by the other side, and then the jury will decide. And note that juries don’t decide “truth”; they decide whether or not the prosection has proved its case.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And if it’s found they were not telling the truth, and that they could have acted years earlier and didn’t, then nothing will bring back the lost childhoods of Sandusky’s victims.</p>
<p>Sax I respect your view, and of course the administration deserves to be heard and those accused deserve to have their day in court. This is a board where people are airing their perceptions and opinions. We are not influencing the outcome of any court situation nor trying to harm anyone. </p>
<p>I maintain that for a university president to not see it as his responsibility to ASK questions and gather clear coherent information about what occurred then he did not do his job. To claim he was only told, x,y or z, particularly something like an unclear word like horseplay and then state that’s all he was told is ludicrous. It was his responsibility to launch a full investigation to uncover what people knew and what occurred. If McQueary was unclear, used vague terms, they all needed to clarify, and ask those horrific questions, as uncomfortable as that may have been for all involved.</p>
<p>Maybe we are all influenced differently, but I agree with LasMa, I don’t have that much empathy for Spanier, Curley and Schultz at this time. My heart breaks for these boys whose childhoods were stolen. I realize one can have concern for all, but the overwhelming information points to people not caring enough to do what was right to protect children.</p>
<p>myturnnow: you say people airing their perceptions and opinions are not trying to harm anyone. </p>
<p>But this is exactly what happened to Spanier and Paterno. People yelling and screaming for their heads before they had an opportunity to defend themselves.The media rushing to judgement and swarming the town writing down every sound bite they could elicit from every Tom Dick and Harry.</p>
<p>Paterno and Spanier both spoke at first and were immediately shouted down and crucified. </p>
<p>This is just not right. I have taught my children this is just not right. We live in a world where information is available immediately. For Petes sake, on the east coast, peoples “tweets” on the unusual earthquake in Washington DC got to Phila. before they felt the earthquake. No one is given the time to really get the whole story before they start choosing up sides.</p>
<p>And the media! They are no longer happy to report the news. They are in the middle of directing it. </p>
<p>We need to be acutely aware of this phenomenon and as a country take steps to make sure people are given the opportunity to tell their side of the story.</p>