Is there an explanation for Spanier’s “top secret” clearance to an unknown federal agency????????
The latest buzz is Spanier "says" he's got a new govt job----at the super-secret govt agency---NSA.
Oh yeah, sure--like they need a "human sexualty" expert in the federal govt to hold wife-swapping orgies to enhance US ntl security.
=============================================
The majority of attention given to the Freeh Report has centered on figuring out Joe Paterno's role in allowing Jerry Sandusky to go unstopped. But the most actively nefarious character—--other than Sandusky himself—--is onetime PS prez Graham Spanier. Experts had already suggested that Spanier's actions could be brought before a grand jury.
Here are ten of the more reprehensible plot points from the Freeh Report, many of which support the notion that he could face criminal charges:
<><> Testifying to the 2001 grand jury he was unaware of the 1998 investigation against Sandusky, even though emails from 1998 show him discussing the investigation with athletic director Tim Curley and university vice president Gary Schultz.
<><> Repeating this claim to the Special Investigative Counsel, and stating he "never heard a report from anyone" that Sandusky was abusing children.
<><> Failing to notify the Board of Trustees that an investigation of a prominent assistant football coach was underway, withholding this information from them even while the board was considering (and approving) a favorable land deal between the university and Sandusky's Second Mile charity.
<><>Approving and pushing for Sandusky's emeritus rank—and the facility access privileges that came along with it— despite Sandusky not qualifying for it by the established academic rules.
<><>Declaring Curley's plan to suggest Sandusky stop hanging around children, without actual sanctions, to be "a humane approach" rather than contacting outside authorities to investigate suspected abuse.
<><>Telling the Special Investigative Counsel his first knowledge of the 1998 incident came at the April 2011 grand jury appearance, when notes from his Attorney General interview a month prior reveal he was questioned about it then.
<><> Approving an unprecedented $168,000 lump-sum retirement payment to Sandusky in 1999.
<><> Showing no interest in identifying the child involved in the 2001 incident or ascertaining whether or not a crime had occurred.
<><> Opposing any and all independent investigations into Sandusky's behavior.
<><> Modifying the November 2011 Board of Trustees statement without their knowledge or approval, asserting that Curley and Schultz requested administrative leave rather than that the board had actually decided to place them on leave.