Nittany Nightmare Continues Past Sandusky: Former President Spanier Charged- NEW Charges for Curley and Schultz Filed

Happy Valley- PA On the heels of convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky’s transfer to his new home,  what most predicted would follow- has.




Former Penn State President Graham Spanier,  fired by the Penn State Board of Trust the same day as legendary late-Nittany Lions Coach Joe Paterno, is facing serious charges today filed by Sandusky’s prosecutors.

Spanier is facing counts of obstruction of justice,  perjury, conspiracy, endangering the welfare of children and failure to report allegations of child abuse.

Tim Curley and Gary Schultz,  who were facing perjury and charges based on “non-reporting”,  are now facing all five similar charges as Spanier-  additional filings occurred simultaneously.

Linda L. Kelly stated the men “used their positions to conceal and cover up for years the activities of a known child predator,” on Thursday following the announcement.


Please check back to www.blinkoncrime for this developing story.



Related Posts:


  1. J. J. in Phila (the real one) says:

    Judges’ suit unsealed:,1463354/

    (No, it does NOT include the filing.)

  2. Rose says:

    CDT rewrote its article very significantly changing the content, with the effect of zeroing out your (& everyone else’s) comments.

    March 26 version by Unknown author

    Looks like Kistler (who had declined to comment on March 25) changed his mind & sent a comment, & Castor & SPM’s comments were deleted.
    March 25 version by C Over:

  3. Rose says:

    “Both judges filed motions to unseal the documents after the Centre County Commissioners openly discussed the lawsuits at a public meeting.

    “In an effort to protect Plaintiff from further disclosure of [their] private information and further violation of [their] right to privacy, Plaintiff requested that the Court seal Plaintiff’s complaint,” the motions to unseal read. “… Because the County has not respected the fact that the case was filed under seal…the public has recieved incomplete information about the nature of the case.”

  4. Rose says:

    the BoC cancelled this week’s mtg as they went off on a local BoC junket

  5. Rose says:

    reading on, Campbell of PFUR listed a number of members of the McShane firm in his 3/24 RTK request as having previously so filed. Even SPM in her suit styled them John Does 1-5. So if the suit was still sealed on 3/24, Campbell could only have gotten Grine’s sealed suit content, or who had filed with CC previously, from Boyde or his staff, a Commissioner, or a member of the McShane firm who wanted the publicity. Someone needs to find out who gave sealed records to PFUR & prosecute. Wait, that would be the DA.

  6. Rose says:

    “”The fact that a government employee’s cellular telephone is provided by the government and that government business may be discussed over a personal telephone does not make that telephone any less ‘personal’ within the meaning of the Right-to-Know Law,” Grine’s complaint reads.

    ….is right imo. Because it is govt issued, all content is open to scrutiny by the issuing govt agency–
    but phone numbers are not to the public. If the PA Statute permitted that (and it doesn’t–this is one financial record–phone nos.– that must be redacted), an appeal to the Supremes would fix the statute. Grine’s is a very Republican position & correct re the Statute.

  7. Rose says:

    an oddity

    a general google search of Jonathan Grine threw this up on p 1.
    “Jonathan Grine – Centre County PA Judge on Vimeo
    Mobile-friendly – Mar 18, 2015 – Jonathan Grine, candidate for judge in Centre County Pennsylvania on a supposed desire to have a …”

    Watching the vimeo, at first I thot it was by his Wife 1 or associates; but, then it appeared from the wife 2 elaborate picture album to have been constructed by say an ex-bf & rejected suitor competitor or former coworker/employer.
    But, the music sounded familiar as tho in other CC-associated videos. So I went to PFUR Simon Campbell’s video feed, and this very Grine video was prominently & recently published, 5-6 videos ago. Seems a joint antiGrine campaign between Simon & others promoted by jealously. But I still don’t know where with Sandusky, BoT truthers, & CC polarization where I heard that music attached to a hatchet job before.

  8. Rose says:

    It seems to me 3 criminal defense shops are attacking the heart of the criminal justice process in CC by levying false allegations based on private information about 6 govt employees made public (against the RTK statute) during the course of criminal trials, levying charges on a personal basis, against 3 judges & 3 DAs. All 6 cannot be acting “with bias.” These 3 ceiminal defense shops have been aided & assisted with statutoriky private information provided at the direction of the Town Soliciter who is also the Happy Settlement for-profit private business partner of one of them.

  9. J. J. in Phila (the real one) says:

    That video is bizarre. They don’t like his wife.

  10. Rose says:

    Grine’s wife? Or someone liked her too much & just won’t let her go.
    Too many personal pics of her in a well-perused digital album, probably
    taken before her Grine marriage, imo. from a stalker seeking to discredit them both.

  11. Rose says:

    I see COIC has added some posting guideline & disclaimer.
    Here is the latest output from the social system of players being drawn to each other in imo 1 or more Borderline’s scrum.
    the pipeline from PFUR’s attorney to Grine, Gillette & SPM diverts & streams into this swamp.
    Being recently victorious against teacher union interests in securing the right to publish teachers’ home addresses has gone to PFUR’s head imo.

  12. Rose says:

    direct link to horses’s mouth, or swine’s snout:
    in the letter recipients’ shoes, I’d ignore & let the potential litigant
    assume anything she pleases on Monday at 5.
    Nothing will stop these creators of chaos except settled Court orders.

  13. Rose says:

    i didn’t read most, but Emergency Injunctions were ordered last March 16 for Grine & Gillette (latter’s signed by esteemed ret’d Judge Chas Brown, iirc). High hurdle jumped. Extraordinary the BoC went into this & made accusations against the judges & allegations about the suits in a sealed case in open public session that week.

  14. Rose says:

    PFUR link above. under DA doc 3, the Complaint. See paragr 51-52. You are right about Boyde’s efficiency, JJinPhila. He & Glantz obtained the cell records they did not have from a 3rd party, the phone co; created a spreadsheet; sifted thru the nos. to find the ones of interest; & printed only those. the RTK product was thus doctored to look like a screwed no of calls went to 1 judge from the DA, or 3 attorneys from the judge. Boyde & Glantz effectively worked as Cantorna’s “paralegal.”
    SPM missed 1 thing: Cantorna & Glantz are actual business partners in Happy Valley Settlements. I hope the man who should have stayed retired rolls over promptly on the others. I suspect the motivation of Glantz (& maybe his son) in Cantorna’s McClure is not the wife, who perhaps Glantz referred to Cantorna, but what may be a Bellefonte HVAC company-owning husband who may very well have worked on development projects with 1 or both Glantz’s historically.

  15. Rose says:

    screwed above should be skewed

  16. Rose says:

    Tanski p 19. of McShane firm.
    cited in Grine & DA suits (& probably did a Lunsford)
    does post sentencing appellate criminal cases.
    one guess as to which recent CC case sentencing
    a trial attorney like Cantorna passed on to him.

    the child abuse case with the 10 year sentence?

  17. Rose says:

    Tanski’s specialty, apparently, is creative writing–per his feature piece.

  18. Rose says:

    yes, 10-20 yr sentence. She’s lucky it’s that lite.

  19. Rose says:

    One reason imo SPM’s complaint wrote extensively about that case & conviction.
    Her suit is as much about making it stick, imo, as the RTKL. .

  20. Rose says:

    I thot btw mcclure had an hvac co, but it seems he is or was a sheet metal worker at psu.

  21. Rose says:

    unimpeachable Sr former Pres Judge Charles Brown signed those emergency injunctions ex parte btw.

  22. Rose says:

    Glantz said in a BoC mtg he’d relied on the counsel of Craig Staudenmaier GC for pafoic ( )
    in making RTK decisions wrt the private criminal defense bar’s requests about CC judges & DAs,& Glantz further said the County might retain him in those suits. (They did not.) Note on the pafoic website the State College man & his 1st Amendment Ctr. I expecg to see his name in CDT soon. Glantz has politicized the interests of CC elected officials.

    While Craig did not come in himself, he apparently linked a Coalition member with the personal interests of Glantz & his associates, PFUR, to whose Brit, Campbell, these 3 CC suits are now a personal Crusade. A link to CrisisinourCourthouse FB page is now prominently displayed on PFUR’s home page. And so the original 2 criminal defense attorneys (now 4 firms) scrum continues to grow. Delete one letter from scrum, & what do you have?
    It is disheartening to remember the press conf video at the last BoC meeting.
    All those young male voices saying things like “I don’t know what an injunction is,” asking the Comms to explain the difference between a law suit & an injunction, literally. (Duh, you file a suit to get an injunction.) You’d think they’d call a PSU law prof before the press conf & enlighten themselves. Apparently not a single reporter understands what a very high hurdle an ex parte emergency injunction was, how rare. And rather than defense attorneys rushing to the Courthouse to lift it, it still stands.

  23. J. J. in Phila (the real one) says:

    I don’t know if this is posted, but that group posted the filings:

    You might to check them out before they realize their mistake.

    In summary, they are generally these points:

    1. The BoC released cell phone numbers.

    2. Both the DA’s Office and the judiciary handle their own RTK requests.

    DJ Gillette-Walker also claimed that she pays her own bill.

    If accurate, IMO, the commissioners are in big trouble.

    I believe Rose posted them previously but I could not locate the suits on the prior link, thanks.

    Not sure if you have read McShane’s piece from yesterday- but yowza.

  24. J. J. in Phila (the real one) says:

    I have been responding. I’m not a lawyer, but it probably is not a good idea to claim that you’ve seen the exhibits and then admit that they violated the statute. ;)

    The comments are interesting. :)

    I am very proud of Rose for not reminding everyone that those of her colleagues that could not pass the bar in other jurisdictions took it in PA. ( lol, did I get that right Rose?)

  25. J. J. in Phila (the real one) says:

    Rose’s stock just quadrupled in my estimation. :)

    Lol she gets that a lot.

  26. Rose says:

    You got that right. I keep saying that. But that was in the 80s, so probably Cynthia B’s, & Castille’s, & Glantz’ era.
    I wouldn’t make inferences about anyone who grew up in & was educated in PA. I’d look for refugees from more rigorous States like NY VA or Calif. …but maybe these days they move from NJ to OR to take the Bar like Kantor.. Who knows? (Be careful or I’ll go off on a certain Van S commentator again.)

  27. Rose says:

    the link to suits (under ea person’s name) now featuring CrisisinourCourthouse FB link.

    responses were filed last week; looking foward to seeing them.
    Interestingly the CIOC and PFUR facebook pages look very similar. Maybe FB only gives one limited choices and Phillip & Simon both like gray. Or maybe an IT social media promotion business comparable to Rob Hampton, CIOC’s domain registrar, handles both.

  28. Rose says:

    I read it, thanks for link, Blink.
    First he is untruthful with the facts.
    Second, it’s laughable to claim a Bar complaint would involve “…to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel for what is clearly protected political speech.” A Bar complaint should read: as part of litigation strategy on behalf of a for-profit client, X Y & Z attorneys knowingly filed with the Centre County Administrator a RTK request where the info sought required a doctored record not regularly maintained by the County when 1) the Statute clearly specified different agency RTK Officers and 2) prohibited providing the public requested material, phone nos. requested. Said litigation use was a Motion to overturn a criminal judgement and sentence at both the local and appellate level.

    JJinPhila, you always get to the heart of a pithy response–the can’t keep ir use wrongfully received communications.

    Ellen’s way off the mark on substance, which is disheartening, as she’s a para with a reputable firm & has portrayed her pov as being that of info from her supervising attorney iirc.
    Personally, I think sealing the record protected defendants’ reputations more than plaintiffs’.
    I didn’t notice defendants filing motions to unseal, nor rushing to the Courthouse to lift the exparte Emergency Injunction, which imo was rightfully granted as more RTK requests were pending. Instead the BoCs & others postponed the Prelim Injunction hearing a week so they wouldn’t miss their local junket getaway.
    1st Amendment is a great protection for untruthful or inflammatory speech.

    I think Kistler is responsible for a lot of this muddle; he could have nipped it in the bud
    with his political friends.
    Which says a lot about Corman.

  29. Rose says:

    Altho, if you go to law school Blink, I’d ride the zip train to NY or DC.
    & study during the commute. In my opinion
    content & process is the difference between
    a Neiman’s & a dime store dress.

    165 is going to have to be good enough for me I think- we’ll see

  30. Rose says:

    from an Ellen comment on the CDT Ltr to Ed, link was B-provided above:
    ” The information requested was simply any contact between the judge and prosecutor…”
    The Q is did Ellen or her Supv/Employer get this from a horses’s mouth (requestor or Cty Admin employee, or BiC or Glantz, or did she fabricate it as her inference ftom news articles?. If the former, if she is correct as to request parameters, why did the County Admin & Glantz seize only on ordering phone records from the phone co & editing them if the request was not specific as to phone records only?

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment