sounds like he may have set a record
http://deadspin.com/former-penn-sta...source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
http://deadspin.com/former-penn-sta...source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
Curley and the 5th Amendment
- Thread starter King Of All Message Boards
- Start date
Any lawyer would recommend you do the same thing regardless. Anything he says can be used against him in his pending criminal case. It why any lawyer would advise against speaking to the media. Why would you jeopardize your trial to help Penn State in a civil suit?
Stop it! Stop defending these a holes! Deal with it and move on.....it is the only way to sanity!
Innocent people rush to justice!
Innocent people rush to justice!
100% correct. Curley doesn't owe people any answers (ratking17 included). Taking the 5th is of course his right as a United States citizen.
Whoa. They owe people answers. But Curley taking the 5th to Schiano and Bradley with their deny, deny, deny and then deny defense is the only things they can do.
They are all guilty. The whole organization is guilty. I know that. You know that. Without any doubt. No matter what you may say, you know they are all guilty.
You guys (Penn State) failed more times than PSU from Alabama's 1 yard line from reporting Sandusky to the proper authorities. How many chances someone at Penn State have to stop this guy? How many times?
My god, disgusting.
No matter what though....you know. You all know the real truth.
They had 6 times to stop the guy according to the report from yesterday
I am not defending him I am just saying there is a logical reason why he would say that. While clearly an incompetent administrator and clearly mishandled the report I will let him have his day in court before I judge him fully. We have never heard his side and I strongly feel any one accused should have a chance to tell their side of the story.
He will have to answer those questions in his own trial. That is the proper venue for him to speak. Not litigation between an insurance company and penn state.
True. He can no longer "after talking it over with joe".
Ha ha ha - his side of the story?
How are going to get it when he pleads the 5th and won't talk?
You Pedophile enablers and defenders are priceless. You could stand in the room with Paturdo and watch Jerry do his thing and deny it happened.
The bottomline is the whole country knows what mess and disgrace Ped State Football was under Paturdo
These guys will probably walk on 'technicalities" - not because they were innocent of supporting child abuse.
Maybe you can get a job polishing the statue?
I don't know that for sure. To be honest with you my belief lies between the Joe Bots and the Penn State lynch mob.
1. I believe Joe knew something occurred in that shower that McQuery walked in on. I believe he thought he could trust the administration to handle it properly. I also think he felt it was appropriate to give Sandusky a chance to explain what happened. He clearly could have and should have done more. I also think he wasn't mentally completely right. His press conferences at the time were painful to watch as he stumbled through them. He was a figure head and was non involved when the cameras weren't on.
2. The university is liable for what happened to those young men. Basic safeguards and common sense was not practiced. The access that was granted to Sandusky prior to 2001 opened them up to liability. I understand why they trusted them but you can't operate a large university on trust. You have to follow best practices.
3. The other three stooges (Curly, Spanier and Shultz) are complete morons. While I don't believe they actively covered it up their complete disregard of basic procedures is astounding. I believe that they didn't want to believe what they were hearing but they failed to separate themselves from the situation and think like an administrator and not as a colleague. There is no excuse that a formal and well documented report should have been made. I will wait for the court to decide if their incompetance was criminal but i do believe it was civilly negligent.
So basically I don't think it was as open as people here make it out to be or that they did everything right like the Joe Bots claim.
He will talk in the proper venue at his trial. I have never denied that it happened and I hope the statue never returns.
Curley (along with spanier and shultz) will continue to fight for delays until they are dead!
None of them want to see the inside of a courtroom.
But I do feel one of them will turn states evidence and sing. I guess the cult will call him a lair
then too!
None of them want to see the inside of a courtroom.
But I do feel one of them will turn states evidence and sing. I guess the cult will call him a lair
then too!
On Number 3. Bull. Maybe they were morons, but this also happened under Joe's watch as AD, Tarman's watch and under other President and officials with the unsealed documents.
I think Schultz's now infamous email of "opening Pandora's box" most certainly is referring to these past times where someone reported something and no one did anything.
Again, you guys know this. No sane, logical and rational man can't put these dots together. And you can say "as a Pitt fan" and I will say that is irrelevant. I am a Catholic and I certainly believe the Catholic Church (which by the way was more open than Penn State University in all of this which should send chills down your spine). You all know the truth, you just choose to not want to believe. Just be honest with yourself. Doesn't matter who my college football allegiances are with, this way transcends that. But that is the problem with Penn State fans. It is and always is about football and Paterno. The Shangri-La that you were always fed was a complete sham. I know it is disappointing, disheartening, like finding out Santa Claus comes down your chimney takes a big dump in your fireplace and steals your gifts, but it is what it is.
This is not a PSU vs Pitt thing. This an obvious 30 year continual cover-up of a serial pedophile.......with ONE constant. Joseph V. Paterno. Spin that however you want. But he was the constant. Not the Three Stooges.
Do you realize you aren't compelled to testify at your own criminal trial?
They knew he was going to dummy up but it is also is a good way to win a civil action. If you can't get anything out of the main actors that were making decisions, you put the claimant in a very difficult position. The only way PSU can defend itself would be to release some information that shows definitive proof that nobody knew anything (hint: they can't) or you have to prove that somehow, they did let the insurance company know or that it should have been obvious to the insurance company that there was an issue (short of proving they had explicit coverage for such things).
Keep in mind, these were just depositions. Not exactly sworn testimony. Mostly fishing expeditions.
Number one rule of defending yourself in any and all legal matters is to say little or nothing until your lawyer tells you to. Just common sense.
Keep in mind, these were just depositions. Not exactly sworn testimony. Mostly fishing expeditions.
Number one rule of defending yourself in any and all legal matters is to say little or nothing until your lawyer tells you to. Just common sense.
Keep in mind that PSU is walking a tightrope between this case and the Paterno case. While PSU is claiming they knew nothing now, they could easily turn around later and show evidence to Sue, Jay, and the Meatball that the old man was the ring leader and ran the place with an iron fist.
To clarify --- and I should have said this initially --- Curley does not owe people answers in this particular setting.
Of course when you take the 5th on every answer you could be made to look like a fool.
Example: Did you have information that Jerry Sandusky molested a young boy in the shower in the Lasch building?
Answer: I decline to answer on the grounds I may incriminate myself.
My understanding is that there must be a reasonable possibility that the question asked can actually result in self-incrimination. Asking to state your name for the court, you could not plead the fifth.
In this case, anyone compelled to testify who then plead the fifth would be incredibly damning for PSU, because they can only invoke that right because something criminal happened. For example, Bradley would be compelled to describe any discussions or actions relevant to the civil trial, except in an instance where such discussion or action could be used against himself in a criminal trial.
I think it's just the safest play here. I do think that if you plead the fifth during discovery in a civil action, he may not be able to testify later. No jeopardy for him there.
