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
SPM just filed suit against the county for releasing private information: http://www.statecollege.com/news/local-news/stacy-parks-miller-sues-centre-county-government,1463304/#comments
It mirrors the judges’ suit.
If there is any merit to the Judge’s suits- and I have not read them as they were intentionally filed so that they would NOT be subject to public disclosure- this looks copycat to the chief LE officer in the county. Bad move, imo.
B
she is establishing that under the statute phone nos. are private, and while phone records are financial & can be released, the numbers listed on them should have been redacted. Otherwise DAs in every PA County wiukd be crippled. This looks like it is a mfged case cause for that Harrisburg attorney who is Gen Counsel of a lobbyist org and appears to be a personal or political friend of Glantz. No BoC mtg the 24th, so no video of Dersham pouting and Exarchos whining “the citizens” are being sued. All Glantz had to do was write a County policy, get it adopted, & put it on the website like Bulter, Montgomery, & others and include phone nos. in the list of exceptions like the statute does to make the suits moot. I’m starting to wonder which of his relatives she prosecuted or refused to hire.
I find it unimaginable any County soliciter would direct local LE to get a warrant for all of a DA’s electronics based solely on the statement of a (probably) fired secretary without corroboration.
Rose- it is my understanding that Ruest’s JA claims she did not sign the bond order- so my guess is that was corroboration.
B
Parks Millers’ complaint also notes that the Right to Know law clearly prohibits the release of “all or part of a person’s… cellular or personal telephone number. Parks Miller claims she should have been notified when a Right to Know request was filed that involved her or members of her office. Because the county did not notify her, she says she was deprived of her chance to object to the requests.
“Parks Miller also says the county government wasn’t the proper authority to handle the requests to begin with. Each government office has a designated Right to Know officer, and Parks Miller says she’s the designated officer for the DA’s office. Parks Miller says she should’ve been forwarded any requests about her office, and that the county purposefully and maliciously chose to keep those requests away from her.
“The county officials are sworn to uphold the law, and their violation of it is intolerable,” her civil complaint reads.
Parks Miller asks for the court to force the county to return all records collected from her and to destroy any copies; to force the county to forward all future Right to Know requests involving the DA’s office to her; and to force the county to pay for attorney’s fees and compensatory damages.”
url above.
PA case law (I think in Feb 2015) found teachers should have been notified & given a right to object before their addresses were released. She’s correct on the RTK officers as to DA & Court office business, but other matters, ie employee info, revert to the County. They were quite foolish to include defendant private attorneys as that brought the aclu in. Glantz needs to recuse advising the BoC due to hus business partnership with Cantorna.
Craig Staudenmaier, whose counsel Glantz said he’d received regarding these prior disclosures, was not retained after all.
http://www.statecollege.com/mobile/news/local-news/order-limiting-right-to-know-requests-temporarily-lifted-aclu-joins-lawsuit-between-judges-county-government,1463303/
“Walczak says Grine “has a good point by saying [his] phone number shouldn’t be released publicly” – but questions whether the phone number was ever distributed to the public. Walczak also says it’s “unusual” for a judge to file a lawsuit that he claims raises first amendment concerns.”
Gillette-Walker’s phone records were released to the Shubin-McGraw law firm, “the public” for the purpose of innuendo which caused actual professional harm to her personally in the conduct of her duties. McGraw presented them to a Judge in another County to attack her arraignment of an alleged felon and attempt to throw out charges.
I don’t recall posting the Supreme Court Decision everyone is seemingly interpreting differently, lol.
https://www.dced.state.pa.us/public/oor/CellPhoneRecords.pdf
It seems to me I would need to review the original RTK requests and the response that the judge’s are suing over, but if the agency is paying for their cell phones, that is not personal information and I am not sure the release to an attorney who is using it as an exhibit constitutes release to the public.
I think it is fair to say that the RTK where it is limited to financial records for judges does not intend to make their work cell detail public within the framework of the law- HOWEVER, their public emails are so for me this is a contradiction.
B
@Blink, depending on what the county released, the county does not have a right to release certain information like cell phone NUMBERS. I have not seen the filing, but I looked at the RTK Law. There are some things that could prove problematic to the county.
Part of it under Section 708 (bottom of page 12), but there are other sections as well: https://www.dced.state.pa.us/public/oor/pa_righttoknowlaw.pdf
I just posted the supreme court ruling referenced in the RTK law- but here it is again:
https://www.dced.state.pa.us/public/oor/CellPhoneRecords.pdf
There are some discrepancies and contradictions on that view- me thinks there will be a revision to the rtk law in PA
B
Boyde retired in March 2010. It is common practice for a govt retiree to go to another govt agency, say a college, for 5 years after which he earns a 2nd separate govt pension. I know a principal on a 3rd state in school districts for his 3rd gov’t pension after five years. So that is what Boyde was doing in WV, but in early Jan 2012 he left the nineteen months he’d put in to unretire in CC because his “old bosses” asked him.
“They want me to put the team back together,” Boyde said.
http://articles.herald-mail.com/2011-12-08/news/30493156_1_commissioners-president-patsy-noland-tim-boyde-jefferson-county
And who was that old boss with such personal appeal to Boyde? In short, Exarchos.
Boyde had retired when a Dem, Eich, was BoC Chair.
He returned the red hot minute Exarchos was reelected, reconstituting the 2004-07 “team” of Exarchos-Dershem. The election results tipped the BoC back to Republican control.
http://www.theprogressnews.com/default.asp?read=29495
http://www.journal-news.net/page/content.detail/id/572125/Boyde—It-s-been-a-fun-ride-.html?nav=5011
What matters this year? The “team” of Exarchos-Dersham is up for reelection.
The Court-related antics are highly partisan, though they say the dynamic duo says they consulted Kistler about everything.
Wondering what CDT commenter Donna Burns had against SPM, I found “Marlatt is in the Centre County Correctional Facility without bail, charged in the stabbing death of Struble, 20, at the home of Donna Burns, at 831 Henszey St., Lemont. Burns lived there with her daughter, Melinda Burns, her juvenile son, as well as Struble and his girlfriend, according to the affidavit of probable cause.” She was angry among the family & friends of the murdered man who were angry that SPM did not prosecute Exarchos’ son. http://www.lockhaven.com/page/content.detail/id/536563/Call-made-for-commissioners-son-to-be-charged-in-stabbing.html?nav=5015 Her home was called “a flop house.”
Exachos’ family also lives in Lemont, so maybe Burns knew a good deal about the younger Exarchos’ drug history.
Glantz’ advisor pafoic Gen Counsel’s org
http://pafoic.org/forums/topic/centre-county-judge-orders-change-handling-right-to-know-requests-about-court/#post-7271
Looks like pafoic is now directed by a former Corbett appointee who was in need of a job, and it has always been driven by the interests of media corporations with a pisition antithetical to govt employees’ privacy rights.
http://panewsmedia.org/docs/default-source/temporary-documents/pa-foic-press-release.pdf?sfvrsn=2
@Blink: In Tribune-Review vs. Bodack, the case you cited, it involved redacted telephone numbers. In this case, SPM, at least, is claiming that they did NOT redact any numbers. If they want to know how much she spent on phone usage, that is one thing. If they want to identify the callers or recipients, that is another matter.
Looking at that case, if the county did not redact them, they could be in big trouble.
JJ- If you read the entire opinion, it cites the evolution of individual redaction and gets into incoming calls v outgoing as well. It does specify that the person making the request has to be making a proper request as a public document and then the burden shifts to whoever is objecting and on what grounds they believe they are afforded the exception.
It DOES NOT require that the objector identify each piece of information individually, However it looks to me like that is just being left to the appeals process if one wanted to appeal the decision they get from their request. I agree that it is possible that the Boc released things inappropriately but as Gillette Walker is maintaining she was harmed and subject to remedy- she can’t make that claim if the release showed some sort of impropriety to her bench. I am not saying it did- but in essence she is in retrospect.
Personally- I think agency supplied phones used in the course of one’s duties of a publicly elected official should be subject to RTK requests in their entirety, not just for financial reasons and the “for what use” should be adjusted. There should be no assumption of privacy . Nobody is using the word ex parte communication between the court and Ada’s or the DA because there is no content to the records, just the detail of calls/texts and numbers but that is the intimation, imo.
B
I was referring to the procedural due process read into the statute on behalf of govt employee teachers in a Feb 2015 Commonwealth Ct decision (an intermediate appellate court)
http://www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/pennsylvania/mc-pa-public-records-home-addresses-20150217-story.html
wrt the 2008 case, I don’t think a holding wrt county phone records of county council members has the same posture as those of a DA or judge (each of which agencies have their own RTK Officer). Imo the County “team” players (Boyde’s word) deliberately flaunted the limited procedural due process the 2009 Statute does prescribe.
You know the nastiness personally directed at SPM, often by people with a criminal background, on Masorti’s CrisisinourCourthouse FB site (and remember Masorti’s domain name site was registered by a man who was one of Shutt’s few twitter followers) should be admissible in the SPM lawsuit as objective evidence of the County “team” & a few criminal attorney’s political campaign against her effectiveness in office.
I have never seen anything like it and I am still unsure I understand the causation here. I know what we have uncovered but you know what I mean? It’s like this scrum just keeps moving up and down the field adding players here and there.
B
All 3 BoC seats are up.
Pipes has to not publically stumble.
Higgins is a formidable candidate.
Dershem has the NRA, gun lovers vote.
the County will be left with Exarchos or Dershem or both.
Recently, Mark Higgins was a community leader in the public school campaign to roll back Corbett’s 24% cut to public schools’ budgets. He’s a teachers’ unions natural choice. Also big on small business, economic development, & work force. Pipes needs to more this time than look like a well-groomed Republican.
http://www.statecollege.com/mobile/news/local-news/bellefonte-rally-unites-supporters-for-public-schools-corbett-plan-decried,731449/
“Personally- I think agency supplied phones used in the course of one’s duties of a publicly elected official should be subject to RTK requests in their entirety, not just for financial reasons and the “for what use” should be adjusted.”
I daresay a majority of the US Supreme Court justices, and State & Federal legislators in all 50 States, would disagree with you. I can just hear Scalia & Thomas now. Probably the only thing the Supremes woukd agree in in the civil liberties area. They would not want their govt issued cell billing records made publically accessible absent probable cause & a warrant.
Oh no doubt- and that would likely include the States where Supremes are appointed and not elected. That said- that is why I felt the “for what use” is more inline with transparency but without threat to security. And I would limit it to sitting judges while in court or on court related matters that were pending.
Apparently I would have the support of the defense counsel community, lol
B
@Blink, I am not a conspiracy theory fan, but all seems to link back to Masorti.
I don’t remember everyone going blotto when Amendola got some ridiculous carte blanche expungement orders signed to include the press accounts. Now that was brazen.
Outside of Sloan and his prosecution out of Masorti’s office- is there any scuttlebutt of any sort of romantic underpinnings between any parties?
B
@Blink. I believe it goes back to Boyde’s January 2012 press statement (that he had given up only 3 more years to earning govt pension 2, and given up drawing his wellearned CC govt pension) because his old “bosses” had asked him to re-create their old “team.” Imo that team led by Glantz as strategist, and Glantz made ample use of business partner Cantorna & that DA-fired Mecca, Masorti. Masorti’s goes back to hus jailing by Lunsford, & I see him as a mere opportunist. According to SPM’s suit there are John Does 1-5 opportunists once the first RTK role modeling was done by Cantorna in the Jolene case.
What does “the team” want to discredit SPM and CC judges for? It is election year for Dershem & Exarchos. SPM had at least 2 matters to discredit them with: Prison Board violations of the Sunshine Act and potential criminal activity at the prison (per SPM). And if you look at Glantz’s conflicts of interests representing developers in zoning & development projects while simultaneously being at the Planning Board mtg as County Soliciter, he has a big stake in dislodging an activist DA too.
Btw this “team” was in place in 2004-7, the relevant Gricar period. If he discovered County corruption, it was on the Exarchos-Dersham-Biyde watch. SPM would not disclose the names of the case review panel, even to the BoC, then sent it up to OAG. The 3 may be very worried about the Gricar case. They have set about smearing the professional reputations of several DAs and several Judges for a reason.
I hear you, but SPM did not send the Gricar case anywhere, the PA State Police took over jurisdiction- and they continue to today.
B
only a piece below of a long article.
http://www.statecollege.com/mobile/news/centre-county-gazette/da-judge-under-investigation,1462523/
Cantorna was the first to obtain phone records on Lunsford, SPM, & 2 ADAs Boob & Foster, and to use them to try to remove the Judge & overturn a conviction.
per Glantz below, Cantorna’s RTK product was the basis for Lunsford’s change in status and a judicial board complaint & bar complaints.
“The Judicial Conduct Board’s chief counsel, Robert Graci, said he could neither confirm nor deny that a complaint against Lunsford has been made, nor that he is being investigated.
Although all information about investigations are confidential until completed and recommendations are made, Glantz said he believes that investigation is related to hundreds of text and media messages that Lunsford sent and received from Parks Miller and assistant district attorneys Nathan Boob and Lindsay Foster.
Cantorna filed a motion to recuse Lunsford from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania vs. Jalene McClure case on Oct. 13, 2014. In the court documents, it states that Lunsford appeared to be personal friends “outside the bounds of a professional courthouse relationship” with Parks Miller and Boob.
Exhibits in the court documents that allude to the alleged personal friendship include a photo posted on social media by Parks Miller of Lunsford and Boob and the mention of other photos that have since been removed from social media.
Later motions and phone records requested by Cantorna show that Lunsford sent and received hundreds of text and media messages between the time the trial’s jury selection started on Aug. 4, 2014, and Oct. 10, 2014, with Parks Miller, Boob and Foster, according to court papers.
“This texting issue is disturbing to me as an attorney because the whole premise of the court system is supposed to be fair and everyone is supposed to be on an equal playing field,” Glantz said. “And that may not necessarily always be true, but it’s to at least appear that way.”
In a post-sentencing motion filed by Cantorna on Dec. 31, 2014, both Lunsford and Parks Miller denied that any text or media messages were sent between the two offices and denied that the judge and anyone in the district attorney’s office were carrying on personal friendships.
“We have disclosed all of my text records and all of my email records,” Lunsford said Nov. 21. “I welcome the impartial review of those records.”
Included in the motion to recuse Lunsford from the McClure case was testimony by trial attorney Maren Lynn Chaloupka. According to an affidavit included as evidence in the motion, Chaloupka attended the first day of the McClure trial and noted “the atmosphere during the trial was chaotic.”
According to the document, Chaloupka said she noted that Parks Miller entered the courtroom while Cantorna was delivering his opening statement and made 13 objections despite Boob giving the opening statement for the prosecution. Chaloupka also said that Boob examined and cross-examined witnesses, but Parks Miller would make the objections while Cantorna examined and cross-examined witnesses.”
One guess who coached his business partner Cantorna in the gambit.
I don’t think the seasoned DA co-litigating and bearing the objections role is unusual in a felony child abuse case.
If Glantz wanted a no texting rule during Court rule, he should ask Kistler to issue that fiat. Easily solved.
——
Relevant NJ case http://www.app.com/story/news/crime/jersey-mayhem/2014/12/24/cellphone-warrant/20863533/
It is unusual Rose. I have never been in court or worked a case where the 2nd chair walks in in the middle, who did not deliver the opening statement, and object as such over her subordinate ( in this case) . In general it is the whoever is running direct and cross for the duration of the witness, cross and even rebutt ( if there is one).
I have only ever seen pre trial motions or “housekeeping” wrt special permissions for different counsel giving opening/close and Judges requiring only one chair making non speaking objections. Many times it is granted but is definitely not the norm.
B
here’s hoping Castor cross applies this ruling & reasoning
http://www.schneiderfreibergerlaw.com/blog/tag/state-v-lunsford/
Jan decision in NJ
Hard to believe criminal felons have more Constitutional privacy rights
wrt phone records than DAs and Judges
I don’t think so- this has to do with end running a probable cause warrant- the GJ does not have that power of an arrestee. Public Service is public service in my view and am not a fan of giving power without oversight and the ability to go unchecked. Again- I just do not see this melee in PA- it is unique to this situation based on my experience- judges mainly have the ole signs about cell phones or tablets must be turned off, and usually when the bailiff calls all rise he warns about use. I have seen Judges throw attorneys out in the middle of arguments whose phone rings OR vibrates.
B
@Blink, I went “blotto,” as did a few others.
It has been my experience that if one of the office holders is female, there will be “scuttlebutt,” and there is a 90% chance there will be with a male office holder. SPM is no exception.
@Rose, I contacted Boyde regarding some Gricar documents, and got the information quickly. I’m not seeing him as part of a coverup of Gricar.
You know, as a female professional I thought that after I posited the question- prolly not one of my more intelligent queries- thanks for the response.
In the interest of disclosure I requested Gricar cell data from SPM before the case was transferred to PA state police and received no response.
B
I hope these 2 suits go thru the deposition stage
Of interest are conversations between Cantorna & Glantz
prior to Cantorna’s first filing with Boyde wrt RTK release of
phone records of govt employees being construed as financial records.
And Conversations between Glantz & Boyde when submitted first.
And conversations between Exarchos and Boyde. And between Kistler and anyone
on the release of RTK phone records, including Lunsford’s.
I will find it unforgiveable if Castor does not take this to trial, because this is a group of actors
which will continue to bully their way thru the criminal Courts unless stopped by a finding of law
& fact. Also SPM’s suit is the best vehicle to make public shady dealings by the Commissioners.
And those Exec Sessions to discuss legal matters? It’ll all be made public during depos.
Boob handled the case in chief–the DA’s affirmative case.
She handled all defense witnesses.
She did not walk in in the middle. She walked in when
Defense’ opening began. Her co-litigation task was defense’
defense.
With respect to your greater experience in Courts & in PA Courts,
Who is this lone lady affidavit about her Courtroom impressions anyway?’
Sounds Shutt-like to me, but worse. No corroboration by any other witness.
Again, Cantorna did not object to the objections.
And he did not use that court record to appeal the conviction.
If her co-litigation or objections
were out of line or unworthy, he would have done so,
not played a bias card.
He began a political campaign wrt sentencing.
@JJinPhila. wrt Boyde, no. But he called himself part of a “team” his former “bosses”
called him back to reconstitute. He sees them as bosses (his word), himself as a team player.
I believe he relied on legal advice transmitted by Glantz.
Despite repeated calls for the redacted record to be released publicly, it has not, despite the fact that we know there was a call. Odd, isn’t it? (It isn’t that odd, actually.)
In contrast, I requested financial disclosure statements from Gricar and received them promptly.
@Blink, interestingly, Sloane handled the penalty phase of some of Gricar’s cases, especially death penalty cases. Both Boob and SPM are long term trial attorneys. Off the top of my head, Boob had been there since 2000, so it would be inexperience.
Here are two possibilities:
A. The objections were very technical, and SPM wanted to handle them.
B. SPM thought it would rattle Cantori, or the the witnesses.
C. They were effectively playing good cop/bad cop.
That is common JJ- what is not is courtroom decorum in a guilt phase jury trial not establishing who is handling what with the Judge upfront. Can you imagine multiple attorneys on the same team objecting using different basis in front of a jury as an example. It is designed to maintain continuity for jurors. Not every judge runs their criminal court that way- but they have in all of my personal experience. If you or anyone else is interested in learning about such rules/standards with a practical example- I recommend if it is available reviewing the State of Utah v Martin MacNeill. I realize I have very limited time to watch trial these days- but I did watch that gavel to gavel and it is the best lawyering ( both sides) and courtroom rulings and control I have seen in a high profile criminal trial.
B
@Blink. perhaps this is a BoC/Glantz motivating factor given the Sunshine law issue, the prison issue, & development (Glantz), & gas/shale fracking interests(Exarchos)
http://m.collegian.psu.edu/news/crime_courts/article_0f3a9318-d26b-11e4-878b-733efab9e95f.html?mode=jqm
“The District Attorney accuses Glantz and Boyde of going through confidential e-mails regarding ongoing criminal investigations, “perhaps…to see if they, themselves, might be targets of criminal investigation,” according to the document”
I suspect Glantz & 2 BoCs may be, and Boyde was snookered.
It’s just unreal- the whole business, imo. What a fat waste of tax dollars and compromise to the criminal process.
B
wrt “Can you imagine multiple attorneys on the same team objecting using different basis in front of a jury as an example”
That did not happen.
2 attorneys co-litigating
(think Scott & Michelle Kerin US Attorneys
Karin Immergut & Steven Peifer US Attorneys
Kent Robinson & Claire Fay US Attorneys
all head or high USA Supervisors in Oregon
co-litigating, tho spouses, in Federal Court.
Boob handled the affirmative case.
SPM handled the defense witnesses & defense attorney.
and imo Bernie needed an iron DA fist. He is pretty grandiose imo
Remember after firing Steve & Sean, the DA had a housefull
of mostly new hire first time grad attorneys in Fall 2014.
I have witnessed a male (white from a rural county in PA) US Attorney object during defense’s child abuse defense case, standing beside the affirmative trier, a US Attorney black female, who was on every case I knew about lazy laggard & incompetent (but due to race differential and her married status, no sexual innuendos were out there for her supervisor’s help on objections); & her marriage to a police officer helped her.
You got it JJinPhila.
“B. SPM thought it would rattle Cantori, or the the witnesses.
C. They were effectively playing good cop/bad cop”
Add impress the jury.
Re SPM’s on the dot arrival at “her job” ( defense opening statement).
In my one Court experience (a similar child abuse local court) all
3 US Attorneys arrived late on roller skates.
The black female was always laggard, bustling in after Court convened.
One white male attorney’s train from WVa was always snowed in or late
& he was always disappeared. And the white male head of the Office
was always weary covering for their sorry professional selves.
A County office like Centre Cty, where there are no controls on what
comes in the front door & over half the attorneys are new grads,
Cantorna was blessed the ADA/DA didn’t ask for a continuance.
That would make me nuts Rose. I have never worked in a Federal setting although I have attended trial in them- I do find the system is different than circuit/superior/district State courts and it is full-on adversarial. Really not a lot of litigating, much more continuances to reach stipulations, etc.
B
.
@Rose, they ARE his bosses. They handle employees of the county in general.
one Pennsylvania County Corbett-tied culture of corruption
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10741290
http://www.yardbird.com/midnight_ride_downing_complaint_text.html
My question was, after Arnold left and then Sloane left, who tried the felony child abuse cases? The CC website says Boob, who tried the affirmative case against McClure, while SPM handled the Defense case, is singled out for drug cases. On the eve of McClure’s trial, Sept 2014, there were 2 new atty hires; in March 2014, 1 also new; and Nov 2013, another new hire. It seemed to me McGraw must have been the office child abuse litigator prior to his departure to work for Cantorna, and more likely than not Boob was trying McClure outside of his normal caseload.
—-
Cantorna’s mcclure case into which he introduced phone records and leveled accusations against Lunsford & SPM:
http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/local/pa-suburbs/74688-day-care-worker-sentenced-to-10-to-20-years-
mcClure was actually charged in Sept 2012 while McGraw was still in the DA Office:
http://www.wearecentralpa.com/story/woman-charged-with-assault-after-shaking-baby/d/story/F2widjlnikKef9fKtSF92g
At that time McGraw was litigating CC’s child abuse cases. In Jan 2013 he tried the Sherwood case.
McGraw left the DA in April 2013 while the McClure case was under investigation & went to work for her attorney, Cantorna, for 6 months
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/sean-mcgraw/74/7b/7b8
Yes, I see why SPM would handle challenging the Defense’ case in a co-prosecution division of labor.
It seems to me she has not yet released all the dirty linen on McGraw/Cantorna & what case McGraw worked on for Cantorna in Apr-Sept 2013 is relevant if he’d been assigned McClure while with the DA. I bet she doesn’t want McClure to have grounds related to her own Counsel to overturn the conviction.
http://www.statecollege.com/mobile/news/local-news/order-restricting-right-to-know-requests-lifted,1463317/
Is Castor kidding with that argument? Her phone is paid for by funds confiscated by criminals so the county has no right to consider it open to the public as a financial record? Now that is FOS.
B
@JJinPhila. I meant nothing other than Boyde obeyed the directives of his bosses and complied with the legal direction of Glantz. In addition to supervision, they have a longstanding friendly relationship based on Boyde’s gratitude that the 2 originally promoted him to Administrator about 2004 (one of his comments when he retired expressed that beholden gratitude).
Here is a media story Blink which was displayed on Masorti’s CIOC site
http://paunionreform.org/Centre_County.php
Whoever was the info source, it is written ass backwards wrt facts.
What is interesting us the very end, a RTK filed 3-24 downloadable to dropbix (which works).
This RTK lists all persons (who knows where info came from) previously filing these text & email requests
on the judges, miller, etc. Way out of control. and crazies targeting them.
Sweet Pete that is um, well, interesting. Lol at “that think they are the general assembly”
B
btw CIOC is proudly displaying the demented
ramblings of the PFUR website owner & writer
in TWO separate entries. The DA & Judges are gonna
need US Marshalls in town for protection before it’s over.
Did I mention Dershem is prominent in the local NRA
& to its right gun community?
So I have looked up the names listed in the PFUR RTK request publicized by Masorti’s COIC as having made the previous RTK requests listed in the two suits.
Here are the results from the internet of the names alleged by PFUR:
Andrew Shubin
- Sean McGraw
- The law office of Andrew Shubin
- Justin McShane – water boy for nra & gun freedom. some focus on controversy re state regulatory statute & resisting local county enforcement
- Timothy Barrouk – member if mcshane’s firm. dui defense type.
- Shawn Dorward – also with mcshane firm. another dui defender
- T.C. Tanski – another dui atty in mcshane shop. (how many drinks are arrested in Harrisburg anyway?)
- Katherine Kennedy – dang, anither dui attorney in mcshane shop
- Richard Roberts – another dui rep in mcshane shop
- John Arose – ditto
- Michael Giaramita – mcshane shop BUT he’s the gun man who worked to stop local gun ordinances from being enforced
- The McShane Firm LLC – speaks for itself.
maybe the Oiffice above the local gunslingers saloon.
the gun stuff is right up Dershem’s alley
McShane may as well own the Harrisburg bars & make $ at each end of the human wrecks’ doings
LOL LOL
B
Here’s where Jonathan Grine & Lunsford got on the bad side of the freedom loving gun defense attorneys:
http://www.handgunlaw.us/documents/agopinions/PASuperiorCtPAResidentsMustHavePAPermit.pdf
Now have to have a PA conceal carry permit. out of state won’t do.
@Blink. phones were purchased with proceeds from drug confiscations & are the property of the DA Office not tge County.
The DA is the RTK Officer for the DA Office (as is typical).
All requests for DA Office RTK info must be made to the DA as RTK Officer.
Set up that way by State statute so DA can screen for criminal case involvement.
Her only flaw is not complying with having that procedures on the DA website. But apparently the County Admin controls the website.
No different from anywhere else. Same with Shrunk, Portland, & he gave out Zero.
SPM had not only the right but the responsibility to review the request(s). Imo she would have complied with tge law and provided the financial record (cell bill) all numbers redacted.
The DA is a public agency. Criminal forfeitures are not earmarks- they go to several areas within that agency and others. In my view- Cantor opened up a door to a public request ( because his statements reflect financial payout) additionally to the DA. I wonder if maybe that was the point.
B
@Blink. One Kantor is way enough. wrt
“Cantor opened up a door to a public request ( because his statements reflect financial payout) additionally to the DA. I wonder if maybe that was the point. B”
I agree . And the 3/24 RTK by the COIC darling PFUR is the
player rebounding on the Court. .
But I think these McShane wuss types are making the judges’
and DA’s cases for them.
lol C A S T O R
B
@Blink, they were asking prior to any questions about the bail order and before Castor was hired.
The statute does separate out the District attorney for a separate RTK officer.
Aware, and that was Castor’s quote after the fact. I agree that a DA should have a separate RTK officer- but it certainly should not be the actual DA- that’s a conflict. I do agree the DA should be able to respond accordingly.
B
“it certainly should not be the actual DA- that’s a conflict.” You should tell that to State Sen Piloggi (sp?) & his Chief of Staff who drafted the 09 legislation & is now fighting to head the Exec Branch implementation agency. Supposedly they are tweaking. And maybe you feel the same way about requests to the Court, say if Lunsford was Sr Pres judge? If you change it for Centre County, has to be changed fir all otgers, say the righteous & well-organized Butker & Monthomery. Write your kegislator with a proposed scheme.
@JJinPhila. Yes, Cantorna was asking before the Shutt affidavit–and lost wrt any impact on the McClure case he brought phone records into as an Exhibit. The published phone nos Exhibit with unredacted phone numbers was doubtless the Stricken Exhibit Lunsford felt should not be on the open public record. Shutt was Cantorna’s follow-up routine at the Jan BoC mtg. Cantorna’s RTK product had succeeded in sidelining Lunsford, why not the DA? .He did succeed in getting his rugby attorney friend big billable hours anyway. Were the requests of the tribe of McShane, or McGraw filed after the BoC mtg where Cantorna waved 2 accusations (Shutt and the phone bills)? Now that I focus, I see Cantorna–Glantz, officemate & partner in one business, was this trains public engineer beginning last Aug-Sept. Given Glantz’ 1990s performance concerns mentioned by one BoC in a public mtg, and history repping developers (one govt Planning Board pdf I re-looked for today was now 404broken link), I would not be surprised if SPM was investigating him.
Dem Eich, BoC Chair, btw was the Court Administrator prior to Boyde.
Sadly (imo), Exarchos unseated him in the election 3 years ago. In that campaign’s literature, Exarchos’ big platform was the “rural gasification” of the County. Which fits right in with generating business for his private work.
BTW Blink, you’ll have to fix that DA RTK control of his own caseload with every County in the land, & start with Multnomah.
Bernie is a man for creative arguments.
His interp of his pepping tom client’s job is to march around apt parking lots staring at the bldgs in case a suicidal jumper suddenly appears.
“Defense attorney Bernard Cantorna argued that his client was doing his job, patrolling the parking garage to prevent possible suicide jumpers”
http://www.centredaily.com/2014/04/16/4138484/alleged-peeper-bound-over-for.html
—–
One County’s DA controls RTK product not merely for his office but the entire County in another State, & no one objects. http://blog.oregonlive.com/myoregon/2010/03/da_mike_schrunk_neuters_public.html
J kistler will end up with a vote of no confidence by his Bench colleagues imo wrt his administrative position.
http://www.centredaily.com/2015/03/25/4670687/judge-kistler-rescinds-order-regarding.html
If someone with a grudge, or who was fired, or who lost at trial, sought revenge on & stalked a judge or ada, a couple months of unredacted phone records would inform where the target dines out, gets carryout, regularly shops, visits, and so on.
CIOC scrapes the bottom of the barrel in media oromo today of a 32 min video of Campbell of PDUR lecturing on RTK law and the SPM suit. Let’s hope Campbell speaks more lucidly than he writes.
One hopes it is the twitter follower of Shutt that set up this domain name that also set up the FB of the same name promoting Campbell’s version of the RTK law, & not a licensed attorney as Admin. If it is an attorney who owns & supervises the Admin of this FB page, I foresee a bar complaint over the Campbell educational video on the Law. I hope screen shots have been taken of every CIOC entry as evidence along with evidence of its sister site’s domain registration & connections. Helps prove the criminal attorney-Shutt conspiracy aspect.