Sent: Thursday, October 3, 2013 10:36 AM
Subject: Invitation to Debate Governance Reform Issues
Subject: Invitation to Debate Governance Reform Issues
Dear Keith:
I very much appreciated the opportunity to address the Board for three minutes at the recent Trustees meeting on September 20. However, I was somewhat surprised you chose to respond to my remarks, which I understand is highly unusual. I did hear some of your comments even though your back was to me, and therefore I asked for another minute to respond to you. Unfortunately I was denied. We clearly have a difference of opinion on the appropriate role of the Board in reforming critical governance issues. As you know there is legislation in Harrisburg in both the House and the Senate that would dramatically change the makeup of the membership as well as how the Board operates.
Therefore I would like to invite you to discuss these important issues in a public forum on campus this fall where the two of us can have a moderated debate on whether the changes you related in your response to me represents real reform, or whether significant new state legislation is needed to affect that change. I am sure we can enlist an agreed-upon a third party organization to sponsor this exchange and establish a fair set of rules of engagement.
Keith - we have known each other for a long time. I respect you very much, but it is clear that we do not agree on some critical matters surrounding transparency and other governance issues. As I said in my comments to the Board this only engenders mistrust.
Please be aware that I am forwarding copies of this email to various members of the media who covered the Board of Trustees Meeting.
I look forward to your response and am confident that we can enlighten students, alumni, faculty and other Penn State constituents who continue to remain interested and invested in the future of our beloved university who choose to attend.
Sincerely,
Bob Jubelirer
I would LOVE to see that!
ReplyDeleteNo way Keith has the balls to accept, he knows he would get destroyed b/c they have nothing to counter with! Would still love to see it though...
ReplyDeleteWhy no article about the affirmation of the conviction of the tickle monster? Does this go to PSU's cupability?
ReplyDeleteMany on this board have expressed their sympathy for Sandusky and proclaimed his innocence.
Westchesterbill, this is an opportunity to expound on the "victim" (your actual word} of this tragedy:
Gerald Arthur Sandusky.
I am also to hear John Ziegler's take on his friend and confidant. No doubt part of a larger conspiracy. add three more judges to the list.
The PSU showers were Jerry's personal sexual playground, second only to his basement .... complaints of a sexual nature of JS and an unknown boy summarily ignored by PSU.
I am surprised there has not been more discussion on this issue, as this is one of the major developments since the actual trial. I believe there would be a lot of handclapping, "I told you so" conversations here if the conviction was overturned.
The rape room part of "Sandusky was using Penn State Showers as rape rooms, Paterno knew, and Paterno did not stop it" was based upon the anal rape charge that was extrapolated from McQueary saying he heard sounds. It was just made up! Then just what is a sexual playground?
DeleteThere are a number of satanic cult and day care center cases that occurred in the 1980s. They, like the Sandusky case here, were based on reliance on unreliable memories and methods of investigation. The Appellate courts got it in New Jersey and North Carolina and struck out in Massachusetts. My sense is a 50/50 split in the Appellate courts.
When Janet Reno was confronted with the analysis of her Dade County, Florida prosecution, she said, in effect, that she could care less about the gross injustice she led. So it is with people in Pennsylvania, they could care less about the injustice to Sandusky. Bear in mind that the fellows getting paid now were silent for a thousand exposure years including years when they matured out of Second Mile. What differentiates their silence from Dr. Spanier's alleged cover up?
I see nobody in Pennsylvania complaining about the lie of having high powered lawyers to help with media as those high powered lawyers take Pennsylvania to the cleaners. Nor is there the necessary outrage by the insanity of the janitor story and the perversion of the anal rape charge. The lack of outrage shows Pennsylvania to be no different from the German population during the Holocaust. In both cases people were harshly sentenced based on nebulous crimes. There was no evidence that Sandusky had lewd intent when he introduced boys into the joy he felt in vigorous exercise. And their was no evidence that the exterminated Jews were plotting against the German State.
JJ,
DeleteI am requesting that you stick to the facts of the case and not your misinformation about the case.
The trial verdicts proved that Sandusky committed more crimes off campus than on it. And now that the janitor crime has been debunked, the numbers are not even close.
Specific to campus - 10 (after removing the 5 false crimes for V8)
Off campus - 24
Both on and off - 6 (Victim 4's coached testimony)
I, for one, believe Sandusky is guilty of child sexual abuse based on the laws and on consultation with experts. However, at least one of these experts believes the truth did not come out at the trial and that the prosecutors elicited false testimony from the victims.
JJ,
DeleteIn regards to the appellate court's decision to not grant a retrial for Sandusky, I actually agree to their reasoning for the most part. This is mostly because Sandusky's lawyers were going for a hail-mary attempt to get the whole trial thrown out which was likely impossible, especially since they attacked the wrong parts. A much more plausible strategy would be to go after the points Ray has been pointing out for a while now, that is the prosecutorial misconduct surrounding the allowance of hearsay testimony re: V8 and inappropriate coaching of V4. If these specific charges were to be challenged I think Sandusky's chances of winning would be quite high. The result would not be releasing Sandusky (and quite frankly I don't think he should be) but a lessening of his sentence (not likely to have much significant impact). The benefit of this is that Sandusky would still be locked up for the crimes he was duly convicted (assuming no evidence of further misconduct arises) and rightful vindication for those he was not duly convicted. We should all strive for the truth because if we allow a little prosecutorial-piling on here, what is there to stop the justice system from allowing misconduct in a case where the defendant is entirely innocent? It is fundamental in this nation that all people are entitled to a fair trial and no matter how guilty or innocent Sandusky is, he did not receive that basic right. And that should be a scary proposition for all of us.
Ray,
I've got to commend you for your work. While I may not 100% agree with you all the time (or JZ for that matter) you have brought to light many points that are worth public discussion. I look forward to one day when TSM and PA are held to account for failing the children. If one good thing comes from all of this I hope it is true, meaningful reform of CYS, DPW, etc.
Actually, if there is a "sexual playground" in this story at all, it's the one that never got to be built. I'm referring to the Seconf Mile pedophile pleasure dome that Bob Poole tried to build for Jerry that would have been paid for in large part by $3,000,000 worth of PA taxpayer money courtesy of Tom Corbett. Had Corbett and Poole had their way and had gotten it done it in time, Jerry would have had his own showers to abuse children in and it would have been much less likely he'd have ever been caught. JJ, if you were at all serious about your business you'd be demanding more articles on the sexual playground Crobett and Poole tried to build for Jerry so he could abuse his victims in private.
DeleteAlchemist and MHentz, thank you for the facts and insider info you provide here! What an education this entire thing has become.
DeleteAlright, some crimes were committed in PSU showers, most elswhere. I said this in my original post, his basement was his favorite place. Where he would put children to bed, then bring down their dinner. He would then lay on the bed with the chlds, blow on his stomach. All part of his alternative teaching methods.
ReplyDeleteThe sexual playground was the PSU showers because that is where he committed crimes.That should answer your question.
"There are a number of satanic cult and day care center cases that occurred in the 1980s. They, like the Sandusky case here, were based on reliance on unreliable memories and methods of investigation."
Meh. You make these comparisons to witch trials, etc. You have victims here who testified. If it were 1 or 2, it might be different. All of them lying. They convinced a jury and an appellate court that he committed crimes. And, in a sexual assault case, what more evidence do you need? On top of it all, there are corroborative witnesses. MM. In the Aaron Fisher incident, people have seen and corroborated stories of JS' control of the child. Walking in on him in a room, rolling around with his eyes closed, stating nonsense about wrestling moves. JS's chases, where he would follow AF home because AF was no longer providing sex. It goes on and on.
"The lack of outrage shows Pennsylvania to be no different from the German population during the Holocaust. In both cases people were harshly sentenced based on nebulous crimes. There was no evidence that Sandusky had lewd intent when he introduced boys into the joy he felt in vigorous exercise."
Vigorous exercise.
to the rest of the board, people such as WBL will serve to harm, if not doom, your cause. He comes off as what he is ... an extremist, whose denials of proven charges of crimes being committed by the tickle monster .... this will only make people hardened to their position, as these people have forever blurred the line of JS and JP as PSU representatives, giving the impression that all of you defending JP are defeding a pedophile.
WBC, you sound like the spokesman from NAMBLA. I didn't say anything about a rape room. I said the PSU showers, where most people admit that crimes took place.
Legally speaking, the PSU shower incidents (V2, V5, and V6) were determined as sex crimes NOT because of what transpired on those specific occasions, but because the jury considered them to be "course of conduct." They were improperly labeled as "specific incidents." If the jury was deciding on the evidence provided for those incidents alone, the verdicts would have been NOT GUILTY. How would the jury have ascertained sexual intent in the case of Victim 6, who denied there was any sexual intent? They didn't believe Victim 5's story of inappropriate touching. And it's hard to say whether they actually believed McQueary or if they were just along for the ride.
DeleteAs the experts point out, these victims will both exaggerate and downplay what happened to them. The sum of the testimony needs to be weighed to determine where the truth lies. A legitimate investigation would have done that, but the Commonwealth failed to legitimately investigate Sandusky using qualified people.
Kane's investigation will hopefully get to the bottom of this mess and separate fact from fiction.
"There was no evidence that Sandusky had lewd intent when he introduced boys into the joy he felt in vigorous exercise"
ReplyDeleteThis is worth posting again. The joy of vigorous exercise. Again, these outlandish statements are often imputed to JP supporters, rightfully or wrongfully.
I believe that the people defending JP/PSU should, as clearly as possible, disavow these ideas. If you don't, or if you parse out words in explaining his innocence, you will continued to be viewed by the public (perhaps incorrectly) as extremists with an agenda to exonerate JS, ultimately causing you to lose credibility.
Imputed by whom? Oh, you and some other trolls who populate the comment sections.
DeleteW'Bill is rather well known in the comment sections, but I don't think anyone confuses his views with mine.
I've always said that Sandusky was guilty and he should have been discovered and charged in 1998. That is the reason for my insistence that people focus on the state's failures.
I agree with you, however, that the "introduction to vigorous exercise" comment severely downplays what was going on when Sandusky was playing Polish soccer and wrestling around with these minors. Those activities were all about touching and gratification, even as benign as those activities seem to some people.
Some pedophiles never advance beyond that stage with their victims.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRay, you always want to say Sandusky is guilty and yet you continue to produce quotes like this:
ReplyDelete"Perhaps if you can identify a legimate rape victim, I could show concern. There aren't any." - Ray Blehar - 10/5/2013
I certainly can't speak for Ray, but I believe you are taking his words out of context. I believe what he means by there are no "legitimate rape victims" refers to proven incidents on the PSU campus only, for which there are none. Not victim claims in general occurring all over PA and as claimed by some victims, in a plane and in other states. So I ask you Judas Shuttlesworth, with child abuse occurring in an interstate manor by Sandusky and his "colleagues", why does the Governor of PA not request an FBI investigation of the Second Mile organization? Also, why did the governor of PA allow Sandusky's child rape organization, Second Mile, to flee the state with its records? Because the records would implicate the Governor himself in essentially granting Sandusky immunity from prosecution, for whatever filthy reason, for over a decade.
DeleteThen don't speak for him. He's a big boy.
DeleteRay,
ReplyDeleteWhat university procedure did Joe follow that kept him from going to the police?
What government procedure did Attorney General Tom Corbett follow that kept him from arresting Sandusky for a decade? The general public doesn't even know that Corbett was Att.Gen. for 3 terms beginning in 1995! He had formal Sandusky complaints rolling into his office throughout those 3 terms! Yet Corbett attempts to dupe the public by stating his first awareness of Sandusky was in 2009? Sandusky had not been a football coach, nor even worked for Paterno for 14 years! So the fixation on football and coaches is a Corbett-initiated paid-for Freeh "report" that is fraudulent! The Freeh report is an illegal, and fraudulent document that was manufactured at the request of Tom Corbett to save his rotten, dirty hide from going to prison.
DeleteInteresting that John Ziegler and this website have not mentioned the appeals court opinion. JZ posted updates on paternoframed about JS's opinions of PSU's settlement (the whole letter), but nary a mention of the JS decision.
DeleteRay, I'm curious, do you speak to Curley or Schultz, or their people? I would be interested in knowing what their mindset is now. Any regret, at all, for how they handled things back in 2001?