ADVERTISEMENT

Question for our lawyers....

W

wbrpanther

All P I T T !
Gold Member
Jul 5, 2001
49,384
28,784
113
With Larry and Curly getting their plea deals, what is the possibility that Spanier's lawyers now work a deal for him, meaning nobody testifies and this whole sordid affair passes into history without the victims and the public getting closure. Would the prosecution even consider this after investing over 5 years on this case?

Wouldn't this thing getting totally swept under the rug be just what the doctors ordered for the Nits? They could pass into history with the same old Deny, Deny, Deny.
 
wbrpanther said:
With Larry and Curly getting their plea deals, what is the possibility that Spanier's lawyers now work a deal for him, meaning nobody testifies and this whole sordid affair passes into history without the victims and the public getting closure. Would the prosecution even consider this after investing over 5 years on this case?

Wouldn't this thing getting totally swept under the rug be just what the doctors ordered for the Nits? They could pass into history with the same old Deny, Deny, Deny.
Click to expand...

They didn't get a plea deal.

If I'm Spainer, I'm crapping my pants.
 
Key is how will the two who plead out testify against Spanier? I suspect the quality of any testimony they give against Spanier will be a factor in their ultimate sentencing hearing.
If I'm DA, no way am I making deal with Spanier. I think McQuery alone will be a great witness for the prosecution (I base that on the outcome of his civil suit where the jury found him sympathetic and credible).
 
SVPanther said:
That is the proverbial definition of a plea deal.
Click to expand...
Actually they would have to testify in exchange for lighter sentences. I don't think that happened here. They copped a plea to avoid trial. But that is all semantics.

What I want to know is will the prosecution allow Spanier to cop a plea so the testimony all goes away?
 
wbrpanther said:
Actually they would have to testify in exchange for lighter sentences. I don't think that happened here. They copped a plea to avoid trial. But that is all semantics.

What I want to know is will the prosecution allow Spanier to cop a plea so the testimony all goes away?
Click to expand...

That's what I'm wondering too.
 
Just read another article that mentioned the dismissed conspiracy charge. Didn't see that in the first couple I read.

I hope Spainer isn't given a deal, I really want to see this in court.
 
Darth_VadEER said:
I just didn't know about the conspiracy charge. Is that the charge they re-introduced last week?
Click to expand...
Seriously dude. Are you a lawyer. It's a yes or no question. If you don't feel comfortable answering it, that's ok. I was just curious. Carry on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jtommyj
Let it play out in the Courts and Spanier was not Indicted until the Freeh Report found the evidence and had to correct even the wrong years of the Sandusky Grand Jury Presentment that was leaked illegally.

Spanier is looking at a Darker Corner now. Rattle Snakes backed into corner with no place to run anymore or delay, have 3 choices:

1. A Lone Rattlesnake keep Striking like Spanier did filing a Civil Lawsuit against Freeh to Poison the Jury Pool and no one knows if that Poison is working, they have to decide soon. Keep Hissing as a warning or a while more as time to defend run out.

2. A Lone Rattlesnake will continue to strike until they run out of venom and no longer dangerous and accept the fate of a bigger ending should a conviction happen. Cut out the Hissing and accept a Sack Bag for a while and end of a career.

3. A Lone Rattlesnake out of choices and delays can't continue to strike when they hit a boot and then hard long arm of Law Dog Rod comes down on their Head and they get captured and fate awaits them in a Plea Deal one day before Trial, or after PAOAG puts on their Case with Schultz & Curry testimony, or take the risk a 12 Person Jury may allow him to escape. But if convicted the Sack Bag will be a SCI Home for while not an Ankle Bracelet.

Spanier's Lawyers paid for by Penn State have done a brilliant job in delaying, pontificating another narrative joined by Paterno's Civil Lawsuits Lawyers & Jim Clemente (Gone Silent By The Way & Sued For $750 Million Recently) trying to Poison the Jury Pool, as well as reduced and succeeded in having charges dismissed, but can fight on and on from a Short Trial to Vindication by Not Guilty to Convictions to endless Appeals.

It is truly a gamble right now for Spanier and he can go either way, anybody caught wearing this apparatus below can't be embarrassed:
Graham_spanier_deacons_of_dixieland_washboard.JPG

6a0120a6dde087970b017c33009e27970b-pi

images

spanier1.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jtommyj and 9nationalchampionships
Even if the cases went to trial, I'd be surprised if any of the men testified in their own trial. Criminal defendants rarely testify in their own defense and you can't use that fact to disparage them. They don't testify due to obvious fact risks and because it opens them up to character evidence that's not admissible against them as defendants, but is admissible against them as witnesses.
 
Cavalier Panther said:
Even if the cases went to trial, I'd be surprised if any of the men testified in their own trial. Criminal defendants rarely testify in their own defense and you can't use that fact to disparage them. They don't testify due to obvious fact risks and because it opens them up to character evidence that's not admissible against them as defendants, but is admissible against them as witnesses.
Click to expand...
The discussion is about them giving a statement with admittance of guilt or testifying in a Spanier trial.
 
They plead to a misdemeanor. That one charge has light sentencing that routinely gets reduced to a probationary period...which is what I expect.
With the other charges dropped, they are free to testify without fears of self incrimination.
This places Spanier in a bind. OJ didn't testify in his criminal trial because all that was left was circumstantial evidence. No need to rebut anything with the high "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard.
Spanier can take the 5th and that can't be used to create any presumption, but Curly and Schultz will testify.
So if they testify to a fact adverse to Spanier, then Spanier is left with uncontroverted testimony. The 5th Amendment is a distinction with little difference at that point.
He remains silent and there is only one story for the jury to hear. His attorney will have to attack their veracity. Hard to effectively pull off when your own client has his mouth shut.
I don't know Spanier but this is a tough call for him. Curly and Schultz were the perfect pidgeons. They have dirt (Schultz had the dreaded handwritten Pandora's Box memo he inexplicably kept) on their hands, but everyone wants to take down Spanier.
Spanier testifies and he comes across as a fool at the highest level of academia. It didn't work in Nuremberg.
He doesn't testify and he is at the mercy of Curly and Schultz.
If Spanier dumps on Paterno by calling him a liar, he won't have to worry about Joe taking the stand. His one advantage is that questions posed to Paterno at the grand jury level patronized Paterno and were neither probing nor exact. In short, much was averted.
If Spanier can fill in the blanks, he might muddy the water sufficiently to create a reasonable doubt.
But the risk is that he doesn't... he has lost the two comrades of Curly and Schultz.
Now, everyone is his enemy.
Look for trial to start and Spanier to cut a deal during trial.
It will be a bitter tonic.
He should have checked his hubris a long time ago. It would have saved some kids and himself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jpripper88, pittdan77 and Jtommyj
spanier is backed into a corner with very little maneuverability. I guess what I want more than anything
is for the ncaa to reopen the case. This situation isn't just a lack of institutional control, it is an
outright obstruction of instructional control to protect the football program from humiliation.
spanier, paterno,curly and shultz conspired to hid a child rapist to protect their precious football
program.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saboteur, PantherDave724 and Piranha
Man I had no idea we had this many lawyers here. That's awesome !!
Forget Edgar Snyder, I'm coming to the Lair if I need legal advice!!

Thanks guys.

And just for the record I'm no lawyer but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

It was a plea deal.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Saboteur and PantherDave724
Jtommyj said:
Man I had no idea we had this many lawyers here. That's awesome !!
Forget Edgar Snyder, I'm coming to the Lair if I need legal advice!!

Thanks guys.

And just for the record I'm no lawyer but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

It was a plea deal.
Click to expand...

I actually am in a Holiday Express right now. Ask me anything LOL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pittdan77 and Jtommyj
I think Curly and Schultz followed a pretty normal arc for appeals given all of the opportunity. I don't blame them. The longer you put these things off, sometimes you come out for the better.

The fun part is, the counts they pled to are directly linked to the McQueary incident. Pretty sure if they needed those two to flip, that will be the center of the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jpripper88
To the lawyers with apologies if i missed this.

Does the dropping of the conspiracy charges for Schultz and Curley also mean that they can't go after Spanier for conspiracy as well? If those 2 are not in the conspiracy is there still a conspiracy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

CrazyPaco

Some positives?

Replies
23
Views
2K
Football Board
Cap pitt
Cap pitt
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back