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
Related Posts:
2,787 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
@Blink. Bernie Cantorna brought the complaint to the Commissioners & the public. Idk if Masorti’s Bar complaint was that or something else. He has so many complaints. S McGraw was/is Shutt’s attorney. He would represent her with Bar Counsel. Masorti to my knowledge is merely a contractor of Shutt who provided the notary in his office to witness the affidavit. Imo he engages in puffery.
Paying tribute to JJinPhila
http://www.centredaily.com/2015/03/11/4645644_attorney-philip-masorti-seeks.html?rh=1
who said “A better solution might be for Masorti not to take any criminal cases in Centre County. He could represent people in other counties. Further, and client should be aware of the situation and can determine if they wish representation by Masorti.”
Not to be presumptuous, but that is precisely what I thought was the logical conclusion of PM’s premise. You said it just right.
One supposes Garrett is better late than never.
“Stacy Parks Miller, in response to Masorti’s request, reportedly told the court…. ”
Note the word “reportedly.” He wasn’t there, tho Clayton seemed to have been prewarned & summoned. So, who “reported” to Garrett? Poor form not to name his source.
——
“Lachman says he denied Masorti’s request after consulting with Centre County President Judge Thomas Kistler and Common Pleas Judge Pamela Ruest. He declined to explain why he denied the request, explaining that judges are not permitted to offer opinions on court proceedings.
“However, Mr. Masorti is still free to petition the Centre County Court of Common Pleas for the recusal of the district attorney’s office,” Lachman says.”
He’s got to ask the entire Office to recuse, which of course is sensible. So presumably the OAG would prosecute his clients?
—
“Masorti declined to comment when contacted by StateCollege.com.”
In a pig’s eye. Because Garrett did not reveal his source for “reportedly.”
http://www.statecollege.com/mobile/news/local-news/attorney-accuses-das-office-of-conflict-of-interest,1463168/
—-
Lachman
http://www.centredaily.com/2013/11/05/3873019/lachman-defeats-bardo-for-state.html
http://voicesweb.org/steve-lachman-run-magisterial-district-judge-8801
I noticed Lachman because he lasted as an appointed civil arbitrator for 15 yrs whereas Sloane lastedlittle time at all before turning to Masorti.
Vt School of law is noted for its Environmental track, which he worked in.
A friend’s kid, who was very LD thruout schooling, made it thru UVt law & now works in a State gov Enviro job.
Lachman’s wife is in Special Ed. I hope Lachman replaces Kistler or Ruest at some point, both of whom he is politic with now as a newbie.
Lachman is a Former public defender & PSU educator seeking to redeem students. With such good judicial news, why would PM rock his client’s boat?
@Rose. I, so far have no evidence that Gricar’s decision not to prosecute in 1998 was related to his disappearance, i.e. caused it.
The case was actually sent to the PSP (not the OAG directly) in November 2013, well before “all hell broke loose” with Kane. It has more to do with not finding anything new and a few other things than a political reason.
If Kane resigns, Wolf will appoint a replacement that has to be confirmed by the Senate for the remainder of the term; there will be no election until 2016. Traditionally, it will be someone who agrees not to run for the position when the term expires, much like Kelly’s appointment.
@Rose, the reference to Masorti was in SPM’s filing with the Supreme Court.
@Blink. “but what do you mean no personal knowledge? He absolutely does-”
Did Masorti observe Miller sign the document?”
No.
It was up to Shutt to phone her complaint in to the Bar.
Joe Blow citizens call Bar counsel to lodge a complaint against their attorneys all the time.
He should have handed Shutt the Bar Counsel office’s phone no. & loaned her his phone & fax machine. He said he was not representing her, McGraw is. To make a report with no personal observation of the incident is unethical imo.
True- but under professional standards and responsibilities under the PA bar once he had knowledge he had an ethical obligation to report it. I would respectfully argue it is the PA Bar’s obligation to investigate the allegation. Is it self serving? Of course- but the report to the bar is proper in PA.
B
It is up to the Court to ensure Masorti’s clients obtain a fair trial.
Masorti has predetermined that Judge Lachman is incapable of that
in this case before any evidence has been litigated.
Shutt’s failure to directly send her affidavit to Bar counsel herself underminds others’ secondary reports to Bar Counsel. She didn’t even need a writing to prompt BC to investigate. She only had to pick up the phone.
This way, of course, garners her maximum publicity among defense attorneys for her new ShuttServices business.
It also protects her from civil retribution as the one who filed the complaint-
B
@Rose, there is no requirement that prosecution and defense attorneys get along outside of court, or respect each other’s professionalism.
Respect each other’s professionalism and that of the courts- yes, there is.
(5) A lawyer’s conduct should conform to the requirements of the law, both in professional service to clients and in the lawyer’s business and personal affairs. A lawyer should use the law’s procedures only for legitimate purposes and not to harass or intimidate others. A lawyer should demonstrate respect for the legal system and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers and public officials. While it is a lawyer’s duty, when necessary, to challenge the rectitude of official action, it is also a lawyer’s duty to uphold legal process.
Link to the fully PA monty
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/204/chapter81/chap81toc.html
B
Here’s how I evaluate Shutt, Blink:
1) long term 1st employer, on separation became Co-plaintiff against the Corp stating she was owed overtime on the grounds she had no managerial duties. Her Linkin is packed with managerial duties.
2) one of her web sites promises she will be posting sameples of her legal work. Even uf waivers are in hand from her contract attorney & his client, imo unethical.
3) more likely than not terminated by her 1st para employer, her accused, thus hardly impartial. Worked for third employer only 9 months.
4) launched a private contractor para business in dire need of startup publicity among her target clients, the County criminal defense bar.
5) sought out the County attorney with the greatest personal animus to her accused to write the affidavit. Sought out the 3rd in line attorney with personal animus, McGraw, to repr her. (I put Sloan in line as #2 greatest animus, but he’s disbarred.) She didn’t go to McQuaide Blasko, Ruest’s old roost, as I would have done were my claim able to withstand scrutiny.
6) more likely than not has huge student debt to online for profit enterprises under attack by the DOJ.
There are more, but the above are enough to render her Bar Counself’s least credible witness. Probably why she did not file a report to that Office herself directly.
Well in my view there is no way anyone can post their work product- I can’t even do that outside of a pre-approved abstract and honestly I wouldn’t have it any other way. I know you view Shutt as the opportunist in all this- and she very well may be. You know what this reminds me of? It reminds me of those Ukranian wooden hand-painted doll things that opened at the waist and then there was another doll but smaller- I don’t know what they are called. But when I was a kid I had one I cherished- it was actually the story of Little Red Riding Hood and I always thought it odd that the wolf was the smallest “doll” inside the others, lol.
That said- my opinion on this is that if and I agree that is a big IF- Parks Miller falsified a court document and forged the Judge’s signature ( who btw could clear this up quickly by a simple- I signed it or “nice to have known you Ms. Miller”) she should be held accountable as any other public official. I don’t want to see a woman of power brought down the rungs in an environment that is predominantly male either-
B
Actually, I don’t see Shutt as the opportunist. c
I see 4 attorneys (Glantz, Masorti, Cantorna, McGraw)
as opportunists (on Shutt’s back).
(Glantz comes in via Cantorna as well as the prison board, sunshine act issues.)
I see Shutt as none too bright & very needy, imo.
@Blink & JJinPhila. wrt ” J. J. in Phila (the real one) says:
March 13, 2015 at 11:15 am @Rose, there is no requirement that prosecution
and defense attorneys get along outside of court, or respect each other’s
professionalism.”
Which is why Lachman ruled as he did. Up to him to manage a fair trial.
Every practicing attorney, on a personal level, knows the peer County jackasses.
Professional treatment of jackasses (say those regularly appearing in Court
with a sweet stench) merely means decorum as to public demeanor and public comments.
One holds private opinions about every peer as to competence & character.
btw Imo Kane will lose on the spec prosecutor thing, though there is no statute or law authorizing.
The SC rejection of SPM’ quo warranto was a hint.
The Court is pragmatic & will not throw out the GJ’s work imo.
@Rose, in that case, a judge ruled that there could be one (which may not be enough). In SPM’s case, the cart was put a few miles before the horse.
SPM asked for emergency relief, but the declined on that. They didn’t rule on the merits.
@Blink. If, and again a big if, SPM signed it, it would meet the statutory definition of forgery. There has to be an intent to defraud or injure, and there wasn’t in this case. It would be like painting a portrait, signing it “Leonardo” and hanging it on my wall. Someone might think it was a da Vinci, but I’m not trying to convince anyone it is real.
The falsifying a public document is the problem, if she signed it and then directed Shutt to file it.
A local attorney wrote a balanced blog on it: http://jpmiller.net/what-could-happen/
Balanced?
Respectfully- where is he sourcing Ruest’s denial she signed it? I have only ever seen her decline comment. Furthermore, how does one fake a bail modification to appear that bail was posted? I presume if someone was interested in that information they would know how to read a docket and do a VINE check?
B
wherein to survive summary judgment, Shutt claims she had no managerial duties and rather did cleaning & manual labor:
http://www.law360.com/articles/569712/dick-s-assistant-managers-win-conditional-cert-in-ot-suit
Rose- I have no way to include the docket as it is DB proprietary but within her deposition she as well as her manager confirmed she held a management position. No idea past that what is relevant however.
B
@Blink, it is in SPM’s filing, among other places. In order to fake a prisoner getting bail, it would be necessary to show he was out of the system.
Yes, thus my point-
But the finer point was that the blog you referenced alleges many things- the biggest of which (imo) is that Judge Ruest denied signing the petition into an order. That’s huge. Don’t you agree that stating as a fact that Judge Ruest did not execute that modification means someone else did?
B
Thank you Blink. Yes, it is verified & agreed to by all parties that she & her coplaintiffs were entitled to the Asst Store Manager job description. The controversy is nature of the the work tasks of ASMs. If managerial, summary judgement, no overtime merited. If Entirely nonmanagerial (cleaning & manual labor as stated by coplaintiffs), survive (temporarily) summary judgment and look to reaping back overtime. Shutt had to plead NO managerial duties for the class to be conditionally certified. Per her own Linkedin, that posture is untruthful.
We agree Ms. Shutt’s linkedin is, um, in need of an update or a janitor. She is going to face credibility deficits- for sure.
B
@Blink. If, and again a big if, SPM signed it, it would meet the statutory definition of forgery. There has to be an intent to defraud or injure, and there wasn’t in this case. ”
JJin Phila inadvertantly left out the big word NOT between would & meet.
I agree with him.
Judges sign en masse Court orders placed before them in groups all the time
trusting their clerks or DAs. (Kind of like Meisenheimer & his misplaced trust)
I put little credance in Ruest’s hindsight.
I thought the public info was not a fake that bail was posted, but a fake that bail was possible.
Lastly, we don’t know the extent of a need felt by SPM, the OAG & SP, to mislead the prothonotary,
the judiciary, or others, given many people occupy the same positions as when Gricar strode the earth.
@JJinPhila. I missed the Court jacket said he had made bail & was out of the system.
is this an inference made from the fact he was housed in another prison?
No you didn’t. The docket reflects the modification order to 10% (over cash) only.
B
It seems to me the “fake” modification order then was not to delude anyone as to his whereabouts but only served as a little reward for his cooperating testimony whether or not he could actually make bail. If a Judge did not sign it then, forgery question aside, it was a fraud on the Court. It seems to me the testimony of his then attorney will be critical.
Agreed. But in my view, Shutt’s representation of alleged emails and iirc, pulling dockets or orders from within from the prothonotary will leave a paper trail.
B
@Rose, I left out the “Not.”
@Blink, the guy was Ruest’s law cleark and he is basing that on his familiarity with her signature.
I hear you JJ- but I am sure you know the difference between someone writing.. Ruest says.. and not sourcing the comment, unless he intends to be held to that as a direct quote although he did not frame it that way. That would never pass my editing staff on a potentially criminal matter and it should not. Did he disclose the relationship with Ruest in that piece? I don’t recall that in the caveat?
B
Yes he disclosed the relationship in his footnote.
I recall in one of the warrants (or some proceeding)
it was documented by le she said it was not her signature.
I have never seen that she stated it was not her signature so thank you. And missed the footnote but I admit I did not get past his representation of her statement.
Seems like this can only go one way, no?
B
even if grand jury recommends a charge, and it may, I don’t see how on Shutt’s word alone
any jury would convict. Shutt is not a credible witness, and I expect there would be
plenty of testimony about her job performance, counseling about same, and separation.
I don’t think even Masorti would have filed the complaint if it rested on Shutt’s word alone- and I don’t think there would now be a dual jurisdictional investigation between Bellfonte and the AG if it were only her word. In forensic computer analysis- we typically need the emails from the sender and the sendee from the hard drive- or the unallocated sections if deleted.
Me thinks if this rested on the word of a disgruntled contractor it never had legs. Me also thinks if it had no corroboration Shutt would have been charged with filing a false report already. It is going into the 3rd month.
B
pulling dockets, and delivering signed orders to the
prothonotary was Shutt’s job. imo is not corroborating of
her story re who signed the doc.
It is if she pulled only docs with the Judge’s signature as an example.
B
Blink, she likely had an office littered with files with Ruest’s signature.
@Blink. I’ve realized you are harkening back to Shutt’s claim SPM advised her by email to go get copies of prior Ruest bail reduction orders to copy her writing style.
I saw that as SPM tearing out her hair saying god save me from this ninny typist who claims to be an AA, likely responding to Shutt having replied to SPM’s emailed request for a bail reduction order for Albro in which Shutt said, “I don’t know how to type a bail reduction order, is there a form?” (on her posted Masorti office work, she produces forms.) So, SPM told her how to find an example.
Blink, judges don’t have a bail reduction order writing style. It’s one way Shutt’s story makes no sense. Imo Motions to reduce bail, order attached, are typically submitted to the Judge by Defense counsel, not the DA. And certainly don’t originate being typed by a judge’s clerk much less a judge. Otherwise Shutt probably would have a sample order in her computer. I would’ve told her likely by email or text to go look at Court jackets til you find one, then copy it. But I would’ve been frustrated she didn’t act independently to find a sample order.
I would love to know who SPM was doing a favor for in interviewing a totally inexperienced (as a secretary-typist of any kind) online recent para grad with 3 infant-toddlers at home. Had to be a judge or someone high up in govt or a key figure at the Courthouse, say prothonotary or Court Admin. Hiring her as a DA’s para was always a recipe for disaster imo.
I agree with that in terms of her having direct interface with the DA- but it is my presumption there are several para’s that support that “office” generally. Conversely- maybe SPM chose Shutt for that endeavor because of her lack of experience? I could be way off but SPM does NOT strike me as a career risk taker over something like this nor does she strike me as the trusting kind.
Then there is the secondary issue of her using her staff to campaign- I presume that most of the folks in that office with direct contact will have to or have had to testify before the gj.
B
I am sure there are emails.
Like
–type a bail reduction order for R Abro. Bring it to me.
–there are no sample BROs. Where do I find one?.
–this is Ruest’s case. Go look in his Court jacket for one filed by his attorney.
Make it x$. Bring it to me.
tome passes.
–Have you taken that newly signed BRO on Abro to the Protho yet?
Hand deliver. Tell her to rush. (implied, he’s being released.)
Proves nothing about who signed it.
Only proves who typed & filed it.
(One does wonder if SPM by that
time suspected MS had loose lips,
or criminal associates,
not to explain the plan for Abro’s new confinement to her.)
It was assigned to Lunsford so I wonder if this has anything to do with the allegations made about his removing stricken material where he was asked to recuse? Like for example does communication exist between he and SPM on the matter?
B
What Glantz achieved, in egging on the BoC to hire a private
prosecutor, was forcing this matter to an immediate State grand
jury where ham sandwiches are often indicted. Otherwise the OAG may
never have taken it there. It is the grand jury investigation that has
stretched this out. Someone will be charged with perjury as an outcome.
In that climate- with the standing AG already facing indictment for perjury if some baffoon is dumb enough to lie on the stand they should get what they deserve.
B
The BoCs, & Bernie, Glantz & Masorti
have no firsthand knowledge of the signature or its filing,
therefore we do not know the scope of the GJ nor its targets.
It will be most interesting if Lunsford testified, & if his, Boob, Lindsay,
& Judge Gillette have had their own electronic communications subpoenaed like SPM’.
Because it is the texting between Lunsford & some combo of those 5 that the Bernie &
Phil & Sean shows have filed Motions about on the record.
http://newslanc.com/2015/03/12/the-moral-and-ethical-decline-of-the-philadelphia-inquirer-part-2/
Keisling Part 3 on Kane coming
Jacquiss has nothing on The Phila Inquirer, lol. In fairness- Dwyer was convicted in a court of law so I am not sure how he is the best comparative to Kane. O/T: weird observation. I happened to be home from school at both the attempted assassination of Reagan and Dwyer’s suicide. I saw both of them live. I did not realize I watched so much political coverage at such a young age.
B
In reply Blink to allegations made by Bernie & his business partner Glantz thru their mouthpiece Garrett about stricken material not in file, that was Cantorna’s sore (yet justifiable) loss & stiff sentence of McClure.
http://www.statecollege.com/mobile/news/local-news/concerns-raised-over-reports-of-centre-county-judge-removing-documents-from-public-files,1462492/
I am glad you had me review Glantz’ interview which formed the basis of Garrett’s article.
With hindsight, I realize important points.
1) Lunsford himself took the initiative Dec 9 to write a letter to the Prothonotary asking how to handle the stricken material. Rather than reply to the Judge directly, Protho apparently contacted County Soliciter Glantz, business partner of the litigant in question, to report the Judge was not appropriately preserving records.
Two days later Glantz replied on Protho’s behalf, “it stays in the record.” By that time Lunsford had apparently
returned the docs. Whether or not each page was an original is debatable.
2) what is remarkable to me is the elected Prothonotary took it upon herself to write the County Solicitor whose job it is to represent the County, and who lacks criminal litigation experience, and who has no administrative line of oversight or authority over the Court system. If the Prothonotary, after several terms in office, did not know the proper authority to guide Lunsford, in response to his written inquiry, she should properly have referred his question to the Court Administrator, or to the Senior Administrative Judge. not to Bernie’s business partner, which was like picking up the phone to Garrett herself.
It would be extremely prudent to be able to read the actual letter- I don’t feel like I have proper context, ya know?
B
Yes, but reference to it is couched in an article when Glantz, adverse to Lunsford, appears the only info source. Another failing of Garrett he does not name or attribute sources.
—–
Recent order by another PA Judge regulating devices in her Courtroom.
http://www.dauphincounty.org/government/Court-Departments/Offices-and-Departments/Court-of-Common-Pleas/Documents/Turgeon/Possession-Use-of-Electronic-Devices.pdf
3.c. permits texting, taking notes, & research.
The comment under Garrett’s article (url above) lady’s grandson says Lunsford was always texting in Court, hiw does anyone know he was texting as opposed to taking notes of things tgat occur to him (check out x case, or buy dog food) or doing research on the fly? Often on long drives I accuse the dau next to me of texting like a13 yo when in fact often she’s not texting at all. Cantorna’s filing said actually few texts were with Miller compared to her ADAs.
I have a vague impression Dwyer’s accuser later recanted & the FBI later found exculpatory evidence.
Whatever, the same Judge denied an appeal by his wife on his behalf. Muur shoukd not gave had the power to
block the conviction appeal. Keisling present Muir as gaving prejudged Dwyer, determined to make him an example.
Reminescent of Judge Campbell who “cried out.”.
Centre County Slowdown
Despite minutes for Feb 24 & March 3 being approved,
they are not posted. Neither is the Agenda for the upcoming BoC mtg.
http://centrecountypa.gov/agendacenter
On the campaign, SPM was unopposed in both the primary and general elections. She did virtually no campaigning.
That blog indicated the “campaign” involved using a notary that was an employee to notarize her petitions.
Personally, I’m looking forward to more of your gems, JJin Phila.
I would not underestimate in the malignant Centre Ct environment the possibility of MS going to work for the DA for a reason, aided by say Mr or Ms X to get the job, and leaving voluntarily (say not asked to) when a mission accomplished was found. (the forgery but more importantly the campaign work).
There is more than one way to win.
(Blink imo hers was a devoted DA position in her self-presentation, not a generalist. That is, the DA was ber direct supervisor.)
JJinPhila, I think you will find anything in campaign season will do, even being asked to stamp a thank you note.
My suggestion is it is the campaign accusation that will have legs.
like a scorpion.
As long as the employee does it on their own time, there is no theft of service. A thank you note could easily be related to official duties.
Part of the problem for making anything out of it is that it has to hit $50.00 to be anything other than a summary offense.
I never previously paid attention to Spanier v Freeh.
http://co.centre.pa.us/centreco/media/upload/SPANIER%20VS%20FREEH%20MOTION%20FOR%20ADMISSION%20PRO%20HAC%20VICE%20ANDREW%20PHILLIPS.pdf
Is Yurichak, Spanier’s local counsel, related to state senator john yurichak who keeps futiley proposing psu board reforms?
Imo a defamation cause of action is dead in the water.
A PSU Pres is by definition a public figure imo.
These law firms must be eating Spanier’s
money as publicity hounds, or just dislike Freeh.
http://www.centredaily.com/2015/03/16/4655189/kistler-orders-change-in-handling.html
Kistler starts to play like an administrator.
This will hopefully also affect the Prothon Immert to Glantz complaint pipeline, rather than go to her own seasoned Court administrator.
This btw was published very quickly on CIOC who has an inside news track.
That suggests many commenters on CDT will have a
history of criminal court involvement with axes to grind.
As he is a Friend of Glantz & the BoC, I thought Kistler’s Order suspicicious.
Seems functionally the Order was designed to render a suit by 2 judges against the BoCs moot, & will.
http://www.statecollege.com/mobile/news/local-news/county-commissioners-reportedly-sued-by-two-centre-county-judges,1463214/
I am not grasping the issue Rose- what I think I am seeing is that Kistler was moving toward transparency and 2 judges feel their “intel” if on limits in “right to know”- these people are elected officials- there is no such thing as private while doing their jobs. And why the DA need to release such information- She has no authority over them and would likely be a conflict.
B
Nice to see the BoC put this in writing (url above).
““What makes this very disconcerting for me is that all of the actions this office has taken in regards to Right to Know requests were done in consultation with Judge Kistler,” said commissioner Chris Exarchos. “It’s not like we were just releasing information all willy-nilly, so to see this lawsuit come out of the blue when we’d been in contact with Kistler seems very disingenuous.”
BoC Minutes & Agendas finally up to date.
Last 2 sets of posted minutes show minimal routine activitues (laying low?)
Agenda failed to include suit discusstion.
JJinPhila. the only way to keep up with local reporters’ publications is to read Masorti’s FB blog.
http://www.centredaily.com/2015/03/17/4655954/two-judges-file-suit-against-centre.html
http://www.wearecentralpa.com/story/d/story/lawsuits-filed-against-centre-county-commissioners/27866/Q1bbakeBrEuLAvtcRG_4tw
Who are/is the Borderline(s) in this schrum?
Rose- I have to admit that is above my paygrade. WTF?
B
Glantz statement on Right To Know re phone records of judges & DA does not focus on the texts as to financial records (therefore releaseable) but as to their volume & time of day. As Cantorna’s business partner, to whom he released records, imo Glantz should have recused himself & is in legal jeopardy should the judges push for more than injunctive relief (say damages).
http://www.wearecentralpa.com/story/d/story/district-attorney-wants-secret-cell-phones/24548/EBb1I6R8OEyscM1VjnBmnw
And obviously Exarchos citing contemporary conversations between Glantz & Kistler re past records releases means Kistler will be subpoenaed as a witness, so he too should recuse from RTK releases.
I don’t see where Glantz’ expert the County is retaining & relying on
does any municipal law or government representation.
Maybe the BoC wants to do a railroad job.
http://www.nssh.com/attorneys/craig-staudenmaier/
Strikes me as a political crony: “Craig also serves as General Counsel to the Pennsylvania Freedom of Information Coalition.” Imo a highly politicized Corman/Corbett group probablyseeking to achieve in Centre County what they coukd not achieve for Corman’s former staffer–records control/power. See Point 3.
http://www.pabusinesscouncil.org/pbc/pegALERT_1-30-15.pdf
I think Corman of Bellefonte is behind all the political activities of Kistler, Exarchos, Dershem trio, with Glantz & Hovde as syncophants.
Several members of the Centre County judiciary are suing the Commissioners.
Yurichak is a partner in a local firm Goodall and Yurichak. Goodall is the Gricar family lawyer.