FTR Charges Against PSU 3 Dropped, But Sham Case Rolls On (Feb 1, 2017)

 

Wednesday, February 1

FTR Charges Against PSU 3 Dropped, But Sham Case Rolls On

Judge Boccabella’s ruling is part of the Commonwealth’s continued effort to deflect attention away from problems in PA’s child protection system

By

Ray Blehar

In a two page ruling that was lacking much in the way of rationales, Senior Judge John Boccabella dismissed the Failure To Report (FTR) charges against former Penn State University (PSU) officials Graham Spanier, Timothy Curley, and Gary Schultz while (literally) inexplicably carrying over the charges of Endangering the Welfare of Children (EWOC) and Conspiracy over for court.

This case dragged on for five years under a number of false arguments that PSU officials had failed to report Jerry Sandusky to the authorities after a report of inappropriate behavior in 2001. 

FALSE ARGUMENTS

The statute in effect at the time was very clear that PSU officials were not among the enumerated mandatory reporters.  Section 6303 of the statute clearly stated that PSU officials were not “school employees” because of the administrative nature of their jobs and the fact that they did not come in contact with children.  Regardless, the Commonwealth argued that PSU was a school and the head of the school was required to report the incident – but inexplicably charged the Athletic Director and the VP for Finance and Business with not reporting -- while not charging then PSU President Graham Spanier (in 2011).  

Finally, the prosecutors knowingly lied about the date of the incident – moving it ahead one year -- in order to make a very tortured argument that it was covered under the revised 2007 statute. 

Judge Boccabella didn’t buy the tortured argument that attempted to extend the statute of limitations to 2011 and dismissed the FTR charges.

However, Boccabella inexplicably ruled that even though PSU officials could not be tried for FTR, they could be tried for EWOC.   In order to successfully prosecute EWOC, the Commonwealth must prove a three-pronged criteria:

1.     PSU officials were supervising the children or providing supervision of the person providing care of the child and knowingly endangered the welfare of the children.

2.     PSU officials were covered under number 1 (above) and interfered with the report of child abuse.

3.     PSU officials were persons other than a parent or guardian of the child.

Criterion 1 has already been undermined by a ruling from the State Education Retirement System (SERS) that concluded Sandusky was retired from PSU in 1998.

As such, PSU officials had no supervisory over Sandusky in 2001.

Nevertheless, in the SERS case and in the criminal case, the Commonwealth argued that Sandusky’s retirement perquisites (email account, access to campus, an office, complimentary football tickets, etc.) were proof that he was a PSU employee and under administrative control of PSU.   

Utter nonsense.

There are only two things for sure in this world – death and taxes.  It would appear that Sandusky’s tax returns from 2001 and forward would close the door on this ridiculous argument (if logic and the law ever actually becomes part of this case).

CORRUPTION CONTINUES

But today’s ruling was further evidence that the corrupt system in PA is alive and well.   In order for “bad news” to have the least impact, it is often released on a Friday night of a Holiday weekend so that few will notice.

It was no coincidence that this ruling was released on major college football’s national letter of intent day.    ESPN and the rest of the college football isn’t paying attention to the legal realm today.

The Sandusky scandal never would have become a sports story if not for the unholy alliance between the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General, the Harrisburg Patriot News, and a small group of PSU trustees. 

Turning the Sandusky scandal into a PSU sports scandal grabbed national headlines and deflected the blame away from those who were truly responsible for identifying the signs of child sexual victimization and taking the necessary steps to prevent Sandusky’s access to children.

Those who have studied the evidence in this case know that the case has been built on a series of lies, various forms of tampering, and evidentiary omissions that continue to persist.  In short, it is an extreme case of prosecutorial misconduct that has been coined “Duke Lacrosse on Steroids.”

It is highly unlikely that new Pennsylvania Attorney General (AG) Josh Shapiro has any inkling about what really transpired in the investigation and court proceedings and only knows what he’s read in the biased news accounts – or has been told by the holdovers from the former Corbett/Ryan/Kelly regime.

Shapiro received praise by the media for his edict to have AG office employees sign a code of conduct.  Unfortunately for Shapiro and the Commonwealth, some of the individuals who signed that oath are corrupt, unethical, and seemingly have no qualms about endangering the welfare of ALL of Pennsylvania’s children.

These prosecutors ignored and twisted the law on many occasions – Shapiro’s new code of conduct isn’t going to stop their misconduct.  

The bottom line here is that if the truth about the Sandusky investigation got out, it would likely be cause of immediate appeals in the Bonusgate and Computergate cases.

These were cases built on trumped up, phony evidence used to obtain plea deals.

In the case of the PSU 3, those plea deal tactics didn’t work and now the Commonwealth’s case is left hanging by a shred – enough to keep the deflection and child endangerment going for the next few years (if this case goes the way of the Monsignor Lynn case).

WHAT'S NEXT?

When Shapiro was sworn in he stated:

"And, I won't be afraid to stand up to anyone--whether it's the President of the United 

States, a multi-national corporation, or someone on the street corner."

Will Shapiro let Pennsylvania’s state of lawlessness and blame-shifting that has been coming from his office -- and their media accomplices -- to continue?

Or will Josh Shapiro have the courage to stop this sham case, quit reading media coverage about the Sandusky case, and look at the evidence of who really failed to protect the children?