Is Schultz "the cops"?

I had no idea who you were until 2 weeks ago. To think that anyone, including people who were here, have actually expended conscious thought on this subject is pretty ambitious.

Just because it’s what you guys told yourselves for years afterwards doesn’t make it true

more accurately reflects what we all do. we construct realities and then respond to them as if they had some privileged, a priori ontological status.

Narratives aren’t true or false and it makes no sense to speak of them in those terms unless you are a character in a Platonic dialogue. Instead, they are more or less plausible. Moreover, narrative structure is the fundamental means by which a human makes sense of his/her world. Your narrative has thus far provided nothing which would grant it favored status.

Alternatively, you could head to the cave and look for some ideal forms if absolute truth is your bag.

Dear idiot
You don’t need to know what went on in the apartment to know that breaking into it was a crime in and of itself. This is inherently obvious to anybody who’s not a blithering superhomer.

This was your response to one of my posts in the run up to your eventual ban. I was there, I know what happened. Also, given your post, I think it’s fair that you got reinstated with everybody else. But you weren’t banned over one insult to Mike.

Why do you keep pushing your …. web… site…… or whatever…. that …. is…..?

And why do seemingly intelligent people continue to have this conversation with you?

You sure dont know what the Hell you’re talking about M1EK.

And if they don’t locate victim #2 I don’t think Sandusky gets prosecuted on that count either.

How can you conclude anything?

How is a story that Joe followed up repeatedly but was lied to by Curley and Schultz, that they lied to him that there was an investigation and ultimately no charges were pursued, unlikely? If Joe trusted Curley and Schultz, and as I said below, perceived Schultz to be police (which as I point out below is more important to the story rather than what Schultz’s actual responsibilities, what’s important is what Joe perceived them to be) in my eyes if that’s the scenario I can’t put any real blame on Joe for that, he followed up to the best of his ability but was hampered by those he trusted. With what we know about Joe, from the last 60 years, that’s the sort of story that is likely and with the facts we do know, entirely plausible.

but yeah right on in reality

That is literally the first time I have heard that version of events.

Most of the people who didn’t know PSU very well but followed football a lot assumed that Paterno still ran the program but didn’t do much gameday coaching anymore.

This view is surprisingly accurate. It’s difficult to trust anybody’s credibility who asserts otherwise.

But again, that’s in 2011. In 2002? Paterno was involved – and everybody knew it. He was still screaming at people on the sideline and changing plays whenever he felt like it.

“made up” = “lies”. Got it? Calling somebody a liar is not civil.

I’m judging likelihood of various hypotheses, from credible to very unlikely. The “making up” is really limited to y’allinzer’s side – asserting that Joe MUST have done something more than is in the report, well, just because of who we all thought he was.

Into one about ‘civility’

Many people have defended Paterno only reporting to Schultz as the obviously correct course of action. If that course of action was only accepted at PSU, it would be a much harder thing to defend, and nobody has actually tried that particular angle, instead insisting that it’s how anybody would have handled it anywhere.

I don’t believe you.

If JoePA was told within that 6 months that the police did look into this and stated there was nothing they found, that there was no evidence of any wrongdoings. There really is nothing else that could be done.

Now, we know now (10 years later) that there seems to be more to this story. But at the time, if this is what JoePa was told by the powers that be, then that is all. There is nothing more that could have been done

Is there really no case without the kid though?

Statewide municipal police jurisdiction – 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8953

§ 8953. Statewide municipal police jurisdiction.
(a) General rule.—Any duly employed municipal police
officer who is within this Commonwealth, but beyond the
territorial limits of his primary jurisdiction, shall have the
power and authority to enforce the laws of this Commonwealth or
otherwise perform the functions of that office as if enforcing
those laws or performing those functions within the territorial
limits of his primary jurisdiction in the following cases:
(1) Where the officer is acting pursuant to an order
issued by a court of record or an order issued by a district
magistrate whose magisterial district is located within the
judicial district wherein the officer’s primary jurisdiction
is situated, or where the officer is otherwise acting
pursuant to the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of
Criminal Procedure, except that the service of an arrest or
search warrant shall require the consent of the chief law
enforcement officer, or a person authorized by him to give
consent, of the organized law enforcement agency which
regularly provides primary police services in the
municipality wherein the warrant is to be served.
(2) Where the officer is in hot pursuit of any person
for any offense which was committed, or which he has probable
cause to believe was committed, within his primary
jurisdiction and for which offense the officer continues in
fresh pursuit of the person after the commission of the
offense.
(3) Where the officer has been requested to aid or
assist any local, State or Federal law enforcement officer or
park police officer or otherwise has probable cause to
believe that the other officer is in need of aid or
assistance.
(4) Where the officer has obtained the prior consent of
the chief law enforcement officer, or a person authorized by
him to give consent, of the organized law enforcement agency
which provides primary police services to a political
subdivision which is beyond that officer’s primary
jurisdiction to enter the other jurisdiction for the purpose
of conducting official duties which arise from official
matters within his primary jurisdiction.
(5) Where the officer is on official business and views
an offense, or has probable cause to believe that an offense
has been committed, and makes a reasonable effort to identify
himself as a police officer and which offense is a felony,
misdemeanor, breach of the peace or other act which presents
an immediate clear and present danger to persons or property.
(6) Where the officer views an offense which is a
felony, or has probable cause to believe that an offense
which is a felony has been committed, and makes a reasonable
effort to identify himself as a police officer.
(b) Limitation.—Nothing contained in subsection (a) shall
be deemed to extend or otherwise enlarge a municipal police
officer’s power and authority to arrest any person for an
offense unless specifically authorized by law.
© Relinquishing authority.—Whenever a municipal police
officer exercises any power or authority over any person or
event pursuant to the provisions of subsection (a)(3), (4), (5)
or (6), the officer shall relinquish authority and control over
any such person or event upon the request of the chief law
enforcement officer, or a person authorized by him to make the
request, of the organized law enforcement agency which regularly
provides primary police services in the municipality.
(d) Immunities and benefits preserved.—Any municipal police
officer who exercises any power or authority granted under this
section, and the employing municipality of the police officer,
shall have the same immunities from liability as would be
applicable if the actions were performed within the territorial
boundaries of the officer’s primary jurisdiction and the police
officer shall be entitled to the same benefits of employment as
the officer would possess if acting solely within his primary
jurisdiction. However, when any municipal police officer is
responding to a request for aid or assistance from a State law
enforcement officer pursuant to subsection (a)(3) for purposes
of workers’ compensation and allocation of liability for any
death, injury or damage he may cause in the performance of his
requested duties, he shall be considered to be an employee of
the Commonwealth. All costs incurred by any municipality in the
defense of lawsuits arising from the performance of any
requested duties shall be borne by the Commonwealth. The
Commonwealth shall provide attorneys to defend any lawsuits
arising under this section. For purposes of compensation,
pension or indemnity fund rights and other rights and benefits
to which he may be entitled, the municipal officer shall be
considered to be performing his duties in his normal capacity as
a municipal law enforcement officer. Nothing in this section
shall be construed to restrict the authority of any municipality
to limit the exercise of any power or authority conferred on its
police by this section.
(e) Existing and future municipal police service agreements
preserved.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to
restrict the authority of any municipality to maintain current
or to enter into new cooperative police service agreements with
another municipality or municipalities for purposes including,
but not limited to, describing conditions of mutual aid,
assigning liability and determining appropriate costs of these
cooperative efforts.
(July 1, 1987, P.L.180, No.21, eff. imd.; Dec. 22, 1989,
P.L.730, No.100, eff. 60 days)

What are we going to argue about for the next 1000 hours?

it was for JS, so anything that wasn’t directly important for that case doesn’t go in the GJ indictment

Since they were not int eh room with him when he testified, his statements could then be used against Curley and Schultz, so why would they include that in the GJ report?

It could give the defense time to break down that argument, instead of forcing them to deal with it in teh actual trial.

And as pointed out before, not everything is in the GJ report. It is only used to get a judge to sign off on arresting someone.

to determine someone’s credibility or strength of testimony.

It’s to bring charges against someone. I doubt the Attorney General really gives a shit how anyone “looks” because anyone who has read the presentment isn’t going to sit on the jury anyway.

If he did something more than was included in the presentment, it would be LEFT OUT of the presentment so that Curley and Schultz lawyers wouldn’t have information and time to prepare a defense.