The Lions' Pride

Typical company protocal ... it is the superiors duty ...

The thing that bothers me most about posts much like this is that people seem to forget how sensitive information/accusation like this is.

As all of us have witnessed, this can damage people permanently ... you just don't go screaming through the village. Gain some perspective.

Schultz is screwed based on Harmon's testimony, no?

I think McQ genuinely thought Schultz was the equivalent of the Police. When he relayed his account to Curley and Schultz, he viewed it as telling the Police. However, his testimony is inconsistent otherwise. He saw no actual proof of intercourse. His best glance of JS and the child while engaged was an angled view through the reflection of a mirror from some distance. His closer view was after the pair had separated, and he didn't notice an erection from JS. The child never uttered cries for help nor showed any physical signs of trauma or distress. It's just very unconvincing as far as the law is concerned. Yet, he definitively claimed sexual acts were occurring to Curley/Schultz. Even if they looked into it, McQ's eyewitness testimony wasn't enough to take further action. The only other accounts would've been JS and the child. JS would've explained it away. Has the child ever been identified or given an account? We would all like to think that people would go beyond their normal responsibilities with an accusation like this, but considering MM's story, the defense will be able to rationalize Curley's actions in the eyes of the law. Schultz is a different matter depending on his course of action after hearing the allegations.

McQ's father says Schultz told him in '02 that there had been 'other noise' about Sandusky's improper acts with children (referring to '98 investigation). Schultz said that they've looked into it before but were never able to sink their teeth into it without more substantial evidence.

tdiddy typo there, McQuery was referring to Schultz. "Like talking to the DA". Later on the chief of police sort of cotroborated that. Everyone went to Schultz with Criminal and safety complaints and that they worked closely together. He also said Schultz was kept upto date on 1998 investigations.

Another key thing Red said, Joe.followed up with him a couple of times, and asked him if he was ok with resolution and how he was holding up. He also said his Father and Dr.Dranov followed up with Schultz, in person.

Everyone BUT schultz did the legal and moral right thing - and Schultz was the foley for

It's heresay. They can call Dravanov to the stand and weigh his credibility vs. MM. That's how things are done in court...

McQuery Family - Did everything they were suppose to, thwarted by Schultz who they believe ran campus PD. He certainly talked like it to.

JoePa - Did the right thing in talking to Curley/Schultz and arranging meeting with them and Red. Followed up with McQuery.

Curley - glorified secretary. Why was he charged?

Schultz - thwarted a police investigation of a man he KNEW was investigated before for child molestation. Probably lied about an investigation to all parties

Yeah at this point Curley looks dumb, and Shulz looks guilty.

Final add-on from defense...records of unfounded reports to CYS cannot be held for more than 12 months. Creating possibility that Curley did report, but since accusation was unfounded, it was destroyed.

Recess until 1:45. Judge will then read GA testimony of Curley, Schultz, and Paterno.

Good point on the perjury point, but with failure to report, it was my understanding that Schultz was Curley's superior. And according today's testimony Schultz held a great deal of power with regards to police, and it almost seemed standard PSU policy to report to him criminal and safety matters. It seems like Curley did in fact report - and then just acted as Schultz's mouthpiece. Of course it's the perjury that is a felony. His testimony to the GJ will be interesting.

Finally, it is incredibly hard to read this stuff and try to be objective, because it's always on your head that it's children this stuff is happening to. Well done tdiddy. This is brutal testimony to recap.

MM never used those words.

MM responding to what Dranov did not say yet is heresay. They have to get it from Dranov himself since, he is their witness. MM cannot testify as to what he thinks Dranov thinks he said. He already testified as to what he told his dad (with Dranov present).