IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DAUPHIN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

CRIMINAL DIVISION
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
v. No. CP-22-CR-5164-2011
GARY C. SCHULTZ,
Defendant.
BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SEVERANCE
AND NOW, comes the defendant, Gary C. Schultz, by and through his
attorney, Thomas ,J. Farrell, Esquire, and the law firm of Farrell & Reisinger, LLC,
and files this Brief in Support of his Motion for Severance and states the following in
support:
Background
Defendant Gary Schultz is charged in a two-count criminal information with,
at Count One, Perjury in violation of 18 Pa.C.S.A § 4902(a), a felony of the
third-degree, and at Count Two, Persons Required To Report Suspected Child Abuse,
in violation of 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 6319, a summary offense. His case has been
consolidated with that of Timothy Curley, who faces the same charges.
On January 12, 2011, Messrs. Schultz and Curley testified separately before
the Grand Jury regarding their knowledge about allegations of child sexual abuse by
one Jerry Sandusky. During his testimony, Mr. Curley several times implicated Mr.
Schultz by name and title, and Schultz likewise named Curley. A copy of Mr.
' ~ - : 4 _, '
Curley's Grand Jury Testimony is attached as Exhibit A, and a copy of Mr. Schultz'
testimony is attached as Exhibit B. They also gave statements during
pre-testimony interviews that day, which are attached as Exhibits C and D.
Under the Confrontation Clause, Mr. Curley's testimony, should he choose not
to testify, is inadmissible against Mr. Schultz. The prejudice stemming from its
admission, even if redacted, cannot be prevented by a limiting instruction. The
only way to guarantee Mr. Schultz's Sixth Amendment Confrontation rights is to
sever this trial and try each defendant separately.
In addition, the perjury counts against Curley and Schultz do not arise from
the same acts or transactions, as the joinder rules of Rule 582 require. There is no
conspiracy charge and no evidence of any collusion. To the contrary, the particulars
of each one's allegedly false statement differ considerably. This misjoinder also
warrants severance.
Argument
I. The Defendants' Grand Jury Testimony And Statements
Implicating Each Other Are So Worded And So
Interlocked That Any Redaction Will Fail The
Constitutional Test Of Preserving Narrative Integrity And
Yet In No Way Referring To The Other Defendant;
Therefore, The Confrontation Clause Requires That The
Defendants' Trials Be Severed.
A. Standards For Severance.
Severance of codefendants is permissible, "if it appears that any party may be
prejudiced by ... defendants being tried together." Pa. R. Crim. P. 583. The
decision to sever a trial of co-defendants is within the sound discretion of the trial
2
court. Commonwealth u. Morales, 508 Pa. 51, 61, 494 A.2d 367, 372 (1985). The
critical question is whether a defendant will be prejudiced by a joint trial.
Commonwealth v. Chestnut, 511 Pa. 169, 175, 512 A.2d 603, 605 (1986).
The admission of a non-testifYing codefendant's confession at a joint trial
presents a particular problem, because a defendant's right to confront a witness
against him under the Sixth Amendment is violated by introducing a non-testifYing
codefendant's confession which implicates the defendant as a participant in the crime.
See Bruton u. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 131 (1968). In Bruton, the Supreme Court
held that introduction of such evidence violates a defendants' Sixth Amendment
confrontation rights even if the court instructs the jury that it may only consider the
statement against the non-testifYing codefendant. Bruton, :391 U.S. at 125. Where
the co-defendant's statements implicate the defendant, "the risk that the jury will not,
or cannot, follow instructions is so great, and the consequences of failure so vital to
the defendant," that only severance will avoid a Confrontation Clause violation. I d.
at 135.
In light of Bruton, introduction of Mr. Curley's grand jury testimony and
statements would violate Mr. Schultz' Confrontation Clause rights should Mr. Curley
choose not to testifY. Accordingly, this Court should sever the trials.
B. The Standard For Permissible Redaction is a Strict
One.
This result should stand even if Mr. Curley's grand jury testimony were to be
redacted to substitute a neutral phrase or pronoun in order to disguise Mr. Schultz'
3
identity from the jury. Any such redaction under the facts of this case would
inevitably run afoul of Bruton and its progeny because (i) it would result in the kind of
obvious inference precluded by Gray v. Maryland, 523 U.S. 185 (1998), and
Richardson v. Marsh, 481 U.S. 200 (1987), and (ii) it is not only impractical, but
potentially as harmful as expressly naming Mr. Schultz.
Sometimes, redactions will avoid the Bruton problem, but the test is a strict
one. In Richardson, the Supreme Court concluded that "the Confrontation Clause is
not violated by the admission of a non-testifYing codefendant's confession with a
proper limiting instruction when ... the confession is redacted to eliminate not only
the defendant's name, but any reference to his or her existence." Richardson,
481 U.S. at 211 (emphasis added). In R1:chardson the "confession was redacted to
omit all reference to [the defendant]- indeed, to omit all indication that anyone other
than Martin and Williams [the codefendants] participated in the crime." Richardson,
481 U.S. at 203 (emphasis in the original). The Court took no position regarding
whether some other indicator, such as a blank or neutral pronoun in place of a
defendant's name would violate Bruton. Id. at 211 n. 5.
The Supreme Court addressed redaction again in Gray L". Maryland, and ruled
that if the fact of redaction is evident, Bruton is violated. In Gray, the Court held
that "redactions that replace a proper name with an obvious blank, the word 'delete,' a
symbol, or similarly notifYing the jury that a name has been deleted are similar
enough to Bruton's unredacted confessions at to warrant the same legal results."
4

Gray, 523 U.S. at 195. Although the Court recognized that Richardson appeared to
"place outside Bruton's rule those statements that incriminate inferentially, Gray,
523 U.S. at 195, it made clear that it was "the !lind of inference, not the simple fact of,
inference" that mattered in assessing a redaction's propriety. ld. at 196 (emphasis
added). "[l]nference pure and simple cannot make the critical difference, for if it did,
then Richardson would also place outside Bruton's scope confessions that use
shortened f1rst names, nicknames, descriptions as unique as the 'red-haired, bearded,
one-eyed man-with-a-limp."' Id. at 195. Thus, after Richardson and Gray, a
non-testif'ying codefendant's redacted statement will violate the Confrontation Clause
where the inferences drawn "obviously refer directly to someone, often obviously the
defendant, and which involve inferences that a jury ordinarily could make
immediately, even were the confession the very first item introduced at trial." ld. at
196. As the Court concluded, if a confession as redacted, "refers directly to the
'existence' ofthe nonconfessing defendant," the Confrontation Clause is violated.
Gray, 523 U.S. at 192.
Our Supreme Court interprets Bruton, Richardson and Gray to permit
redactions only if the "confession can be edited so that it retains its narrative integrity
and yet in no way refers to defendant ... . "Commonwealth u. Johnson, 47 4 Pa. 410,
413, 378 A.2d 859, 860 (Pa. 1977). As in Richardson, the redaction at issue in
Johnson completely eliminated any reference to the defendant's existence. See
,Johnson, :378 A.2d at 860 (confession made it seem that the non-testif'ying
5
codefendant went upstairs alone, when in fact she had gone upstairs with the
defendant). The trial court even eliminated the use of the pronoun "we" to avoid any
possibility of incriminating the defendant. I d.
Since Johnson, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has continued to examine
Braton redactions on a case by case basis, approving those that, as Johnson,
Richardson and Gray demand, preserve narrative integrity and eliminate reference
to the defendant, either directly or inferentially. See, e.g. Commonwealth v. Tral'ers,
564 Pa. 363, 768 A.2d 845, 845-46 (Pa. 2001),(the use of"the other man" in that case
did not violate the defendant's confrontation clause rights because there was no
"obvious indication of a deletion or an alieration that was the functional equivalent of
naming him )the defendant)."); Commonwealth!". Rivera, 565 Pa. 289, 300, 773 A.2d
131, 138 (Pa. 2001) (redaction eliminating name of defendant and suggestion of
alteration constitutionally permissible)
1
In Commonwealth v. Overby, 570 Pa. 328, 809 A.2d 295 (2002), a case decided
one year after Travers, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court struck down a redaction,
holding that "the trial court erred in admitting the statement of Appellant's
co-defendant in the manner in which it was redacted ... ,"where the defendant's
name was replaced with an "X," Overby, 809 A.2d at 297. Although the Court
recognized that a redaction and a limiting instruction may be sufficient, Overby, 809
A.2d at 303 (emphasis added), such measures are insufficient where the conclusion
1
Travers and R;vera did not involve the particular problem of"intcrlocking confessions," which, as discussed below,
the Pennsylvania and United States Supreme Courts have recognized presents a "peculiar" issue. See Commonwealth
v. Chestnut. 511 Pa. 169, 512 A.2d 603, 605 (Pa. 19R6).
6
that the substitution refers to the defendant "was the kind of inference that a jury
could reasonably make immediately." !d. at 305.
Similarly. in Commonwealth u. Markman, 591 Pa. 249, 916 A.2d 586 (2007),
the Court again struck down a non-testifYing codefendant's redacted confession as
violative of the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights. In Markman, the
non-testifYing codefendant's tape recorded confession was played to the jury and
references to the defendant were introduced by a voice-over stating "the other
person." The judge also told the jury that the tape had been altered. Markman,
916 A.2d at 600. In concluding that this redaction violated the defendant's Sixth
Amendment rights, the court stated: "the redactions by their nature alerted the
jury to the fact of alteration and did "not likely fool anyone" as to whose name had
been removed," especially because "there were only two defendants in the
courtroom." Markman, 916 A.2d at 602. Accordingly, the Court concluded that the
redactions at issue violated the Unites States Supreme Court's dictates as
announced in Gray. ld. In other words, these redactions, like those in Gray, were
improper because the kind of inference pointed jury's attention directly to the
defendant. ld. at 605 n. 13; see also Commonwealth v. Miles, 545 Pa. 500, 512, 681
A.2d 1295, 1300-1301 (1996) (use of nickname is a violation of the Bruton rule).
C. When Confessions Interlock, a Jury is More Likely
to Ignore Cautionary Instructions.
In Cruz v. New Yorl<, 481 U.S. 186 (1987), the Supreme Court applied Bruton's
7
principles to interlocking confessions of non-testifYing codefendants.
2
Prior to Cruz,
a plurality on the Supreme Court had held that no Bruton violation occurred when
interlocking confessions were introduced at trial with a proper limiting instruction,
because the introduction of a defendant's own incriminating confession minimized the
"powerfully devastating" effect of the codefendant's statement. See Parker v.
Randolph, 442 U.S. 62 (1979). In Cruz, however, the Court decided that, contrary to
the plurality's views in Parlwr, Bruton's protections extend to the interlocking
confessions of codefendants at a joint trial, because permitting a jury to hear and
compare a co-defendant's confession along with the defendant's would diminish the
likelihood that the jury would obey any limiting instruction. "It seems ... illogical,
and therefore contrary to common sense and good judgment, to believe that
codefendant confessions are less likely to be taken into account by the jury the more
they are corroborated by the defendant's own admission; or that they are less likely to
be harmful when they confirm the validity of the defendant's alleged confession." Id.
at 193.
As Justice Scalia made clear, "interlocking'' bears a direct relationship to
devastation: "the greater the interlock, the greater the potential harm." Cruz, 481
U.S. at 192. Thus, Cruz recognizes that in assessing the harm from a co-defendant's
confession, the Court may consider the strength of the inference a jury is likely to
draw by comparing it to the defendant's confession.
2
An interlocking confession is where each defendants' account of events substantially corroborates each other's'.
See, e.g., Wharton, 530 Pa. 127,607 A.2d, 710,716 (Pa. 1992). Cruz was decided the same day as Richardson v.
Marsh. 481 U.S. 200 ( 1987).
8
.
D. Here, Redaction Will Not Preserve Narrative
Integrity and Will Not Eliminate Any Inference that
the Person Redacted is Mr. Schultz.
Mr. Curley implicated Mr. Schultz several times in his grand jury testimony
and interview. Should Mr. Curley choose not to testif'y, as is his constitutional right,
Mr. Schultz would be deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to confront Mr. Curley,
a witness squarely against him in this instance. The harm to Mr. Schultz is
unavoidable, especially when only he and Mr. Curley are being tried.
In pertinent part, the relevant passages from each one's grand jury testimony
implicating the other state as follows:
Curley Testimony
Q Please tell us how that information
came to your attention the best that
you can recall and what you did as a
result of it.
A My recollection- and I don't know if
it was 2002, but my recollection was
that Coach Paterno called myself,
Gary Schultz, who is the senior
vice president, and said he needed
to meet with us, that he wanted to
report something to us. So we went
over, the two of us together, met with
him, and he - do you want me to-
* * *
9
Schultz Testimony
Q Do you recall being called and
requested to attend a meeting with
Coach Paterno report an unusual
incident''
A I do recall such a meeting. . . I
believe the meeting occurred in my
off1ce. It included the athletic
director, Tim Curley, and Coach
Paterno. Coach Paterno wanted the
meeting .... I believe the impression I
got was it was inappropriate and he
wanted to bring that to Tim Curley
and my attention.
(GJ Tr. At 4-5)
A Okay. So he was uncomfortable with
that and at that point he felt it was
something he should report to Coach
Paterno. Coach Paterno relayed
that information to Gary and I. We
then took that information and met
with Mike McQueary. who was the
football coach, and met with Mike, got
the information from Mike about the
activity, what he saw. And then
from there, Gary and I reported that
information to the president of the
university, Dr. Graham Spanier. (GJ
Tr. at 4-5)
Q Did you discuss this matter with Tim
Schultz, the senior vice president
for the university, at the time that
it was reported?
A Gary Schultz.
Q I'm sorry.
A Yes. Gary Schultz is the
senior vice president. Gary was
the other individual that was with me
when Coach Paterno initially
reported it to us.
Q Did you have discussions with him
about how this would be handled or
did you make these recommendations
yourself? (GJ Tr. at 11)
A I don't recall the specifics on what
conversation I had with Gary. I do
know that I was the one that came
forward to say I think that this is the
appropriate action, that we need to
report it to the Second Mile, and that
I wanted to meet with ,Jerry. (G,J Tr.
Q Did you consult with Tim Curley as
to what would be done as a result of
this 2002 report?
A I believe Tim and I had- yes, we had
a conversation at that time. (GJ Tr.
At 10-11)
10
at 12)
Q Other than yourself and Senior Vice
President Schultz and President
Graham Spanier and Mike
McQueary, do you know of anyone
else who had know ledge of the 2002
incident?
A Just Coach Paterno and Jack
Raykovitz, the person I went to at the
Second Mile, (GJ Tr, at 20)
11
Q Did Tim Curley report back to you
about his contact with Jerry
Sandusky regarding the incident in
2002?
A I can't say for sure. I had the
impression that Tim did follow
through and make sure Jerry
understood that he was no longer
permitted to hring Second Mile
children into the football facility. (GJ
Tr. At 14).
Q Do you remember what day ofthe
week Coach Paterno contacted you?
A I believe it was Sunday.
Q And you met with him and with Gary
Schultz when?
A That day. (GJ Tr. at 26)
* * *
Q Did your meeting with Coach Paterno
and Gary Schultz take place on
Sunday as well or was that during the
week?
A No. When he contacted us, he said
come over to the house. He didn't
tell us what it was.
Q So the two of you went to Coach
Paterno's house?
A Yes (GJ Tr. at 27)
Q Was Gary Schultz also present for
that meeting with McQueary?
A It's my recollection. (GJ Tr. at 27)
12
Q You indicated that you consulted with
Tim Curley. Did you agree with his
recommendation as to how this should
be handled?
A I don't know if it was a
recommendation but, yes, we reached
agreement. (GJ Tr. At 16-17).
Q Did the president of the university
express concern about this incident at
the· time it was reported to him?
A Very similar to mine and Tim's, yes.
We took it seriously.
Q Did President Spanier appear to
approve of the way in which you and
Athletic Director Curley handled this?
A Yes. Again, my recollection was that
there was agreement. (GJ Tr. At 17).
Q Nobody, not you, nor Curley, nor
anybody else went back to McQueary and
asked for specifics or at the time asked
for specifics?
A No. Again, I recalled that we asked
this agency to do the investigation and
I would let them follow up. (GJ Tr. At
25-26).
A I don't recall that we talked about it
being turned over to the police.
Q That was never part ofthe
discussions between you and Curley or
you and Spanier or you and anybody
else?
A No. (GJ Tr. At 27).
Curley and Schultz told similar stories to the deputies and agents when
interviewed prior to their testimony. A copy of Mr. Curley's interview dated
January 12, 2011, is attached as Exhibit C. Mr. Schultz was interviewed
separately that same day (although represented by the same attorney, Cynthia
Baldwin). (Exhibit D). In relevant part, the interviews state:
13
. '
Curley Interview
Curley related Paterno requested a
meeting with him and Gary Schultz to
discuss the incident.
Curley related he and Schultz met with
Mike McQueary and discussed what
McQueary witnessed. Curley related
that McQueary informed them that he
observed Sandusky horsing around in
the shower with a young boy.
Curley related he and Schultz met with
Spanier a short time later to discuss the
incident. Curley came up with the
recommendation plan to address the
issue and Spanier approved it.
Curley related he did not report it to he
[sic] police department because he
informed Spanier. Curley related that
he advised Paterno, Schultz, Spanier
and McQueary of the recommendation
plan and action.
Schultz Interview
SCHULTZ related he remembered that
he was contacted by TIM CURLEY the
Athletic Director back in 2002 and
informed of an incident involving
SANDUSKY. . . . SCHULTZ related a
meeting was arranged and he, CURLEY,
MCQUEARY and PATERNO met and
discussed the incident. SCHULTZ
related he did not remember all of the
details however there was not any
mention of any sexual acts.
SCHULTZ related he later met with
CURLEY and SPANIER and discussed
the incident. SCHULTZ related CURLEY
came up with a recommendation to
address the issue. SCHULTZ related the
recommendation was for CURLEY to
meet with SANDUSKY and inform him
that he was no longer allowed to bring
Second Mile kids on Penn State campus
facilities.
SCHULTZ related that the President of
the University Graham SPANIER would
have been notified of the outcome by
CURLEY.
SCHULTZ related he later met with
CURLEY and advised MCQUEARY of
how the incident was handled.
14
The Bruton problem in this case cannot be redacted away. For example, Mr.
Curley's testimony at page 4, lines 17-23 cannot be meaningfully redacted by the use
of even a neutral pronoun. To suggest that a redaction to the effect "but my
recollection was that Coach Paterno called myself and [another person], and said he
needed to meet with us, that he wanted to report something to us. So we went over,
the two of us together, met with him," does not point to Gary Schultz, the only other
individual charged with Mr. Curley and seated next to him at trial, is pure fiction. A
jury would hold no doubt as to the identity of the "other person."
Again, page 5 lines 16 through 19 presents the same problem: re-writing to
state, "Coach Paterno relayed that information to [another person] and I for, in the
alternative, to us]" again leaves no question to whom McQueary's information was
reported, especially when, a sentence later, Mr. Curley continues: "And then from
there, [another person] and I reported that information to the president of the
university, Graham Spanier." Curley GJ Transcript, at 5. Given the way Mr.
Curley's testimony reads, it will be obvious to the jury that Mr. Curley does not
naturally use such forced phrases, like "another person" or the "other guy," when a
proper name is called for. For example, he repeatedly refers to "Coach Paterno,"
"Mike McQueary," and "Graham" or "President Spanier." The use of any artificial
referent will make it appear as if Mr. Curley is intentionally trying to cover for Mr.
Schultz by refusing to name him. (Why else would he name others, but not the guy
sitting at the next table?)
15
More problematically, Mr. Curley's testimony at pages 11-12, lines 18 through
9, is impossible to redact. If done, it would potentially read:
Q Did you discuss this matter with [another person/administrator] for the
university, at the time it was reported?
A [correcting other person's/administrator's name]
Q I'm sorry
A Yes, he is an administrator. [He] was the other individual that was
with me when Coach Paterno initially reported it to us.
*
*
*
Q I don't recall the specifics on what conversations I had with [the other
person/administrator]. Curley Grand Jury Transcript, at 12.
Similarly with the testimony on page 20, lines 1 through 4, any redaction
would be obvious to the jury that Mr. Schultz' name had been removed. Redacted, it
would read: "Other than myself and [another person/administrator] and President
Graham Spanier and Mike McQueary, do you know of anyone else who had
know ledge of the 2002 incident?" In fact, the whole point of the question is to
implicate Mr. Schultz with Mr. Curley. At page 27, lines 21-22, the redacted
testimony would state: "Was [another person/ administrator] also present for that
meeting with McQueary?"
These or any similar redactions will not fool the jury or make it more likely
that it will abide by a limiting instruction. To the contrary, the stilted, awkward
language introduced by a redaction points the finger even more directly at Mr.
Schultz and would leave the jury again to wonder why Mr. Curley refuses to refer to
16
him by name, title, or any other typical form of address. Overby, 809 A.2d at 305;
Markman, 916 A.2d at 602
These examples make it clear that in this case, any attempt to redact Gary
Schultz's name from these portions of Mr. Curley's grand jury testimony pushes well
beyond the permissible limits of Bruton and its progeny and asks the jury to ignore
"inferences that a jury ordinarily could make immediately." Gray, 523 U.S. at 196.
The redactions will not meet the requirement that they not be obvious; their implied
reference to Mr. Schultz will shine through.
E. The Often Interlocking Nature Of Mr. Schultz' And
Mr. Curley's Statements Aggravates The Problem.
What is more, the interlocking nature of Mr. Curley's and Mr. Schultz's grand
jury testimony leaves no doubt that redaction is impossible. Any substitution, even
using a neutral pronoun or phrase, will still focus the jury's attention on Mr. Schultz.
For example, regarding the initial meeting with Coach Paterno, Mr. Schultz testified
as follows:
Q Do you recall being called and requested to attend a
meeting with Coach Paterno report an unusual incident?
A I do recall such a meeting.
Q Would you please tell the Grand Jurors what you
remember ....
A Yes. I believe the meeting occurred in my office. It
included the athletic director, Tim Curley, and Coach Paterno. Coach
Paterno wanted the meeting. Schultz GJ Transcript, at 4-5.
17
Mr. Schultz's testimony mirrors Mr. Curley's: "My recollection- and I don't
know if it was 2002, but my recollection was that Coach Paterno called myself, Gary
Schultz, who is the senior vice president, and said he needed to meet with us, that
he wanted to report something to us." Curley Grand Jury Transcript, at 4. It
defies reason and common sense to believe that a jury would not read these
statements as one. Moreover, to lead the jury to believe that each defendant referred
to the other defendant as "the other person" while specifically naming Coach Paterno
potentially attributes a sinister motive to them, suggesting an attempt to hide each
other's identity. This at a minimum would be prejudicial.
Similarly, Mr. Schultz testified:
Q Did you consult with Tim Curley as to what would be done
as a result ofthis 2002 report?
A I believe Tim and I had- yes, we had a conversation at that
time. Schultz Grand Jury Transcript, at 10-11.
And again:
Q You indicated that you consulted with Tim Curley. Did
you agree with his recommendation as to how this should be handled?
A I don't know if it was a recommendation but, yes, we
reached agreement. Schultz Grand Jury Transcript, at 16-17.
This testimony is virtually identical to Mr. Curley's. He stated:
A Yes. Gary Schultz is the senior vice president. Gary was the
other individual that was with me when Coach Paterno initially reported it
to us.
Q Did you have discussions with him about how this would be
handled or did you make these recommendations yourself?
18
A I don't recall the specifics on what conversation I had with Gary.
I do know that I was the one that came forward to say I think that this is
the appropriate action, that we need to report it to the Second Mile, and
that I wanted to meet with Jerry. Curley Grand Jury transcript, at 11-12.
Regardless of how redacted, Bruton would be violated because the implication from
the interlocking confessions is obvious.
Moreover, unlike many cases involving Bruton redactions, there is no
conspiracy charge in this case. See, e.g., Commonwealth u. Travers, 564 Pa. 362, 768
A.2d 845 (2001); Commonwealth v. Overby, 570 Pa. 328, 809 A.2d 295 (2002).
Therefore, any Tim Curley statement that he acted with "another person," whether
identified as Mr. Schultz or by a neutral pronoun or the phrase "another person," is
irrelevant to the case against either Mr. Schultz or Mr. Curley. Since such
statements lack a relevant purpose, the jury likely would consider them for the
improper one of implicating the other defendant.
Redactions would not work for yet another reason: redaction of Mr. Schultz'
statements, as Curley would demand, would impede Mr. Schultz' right to present a
defense. If the prosecution offers his grand jury testimony and his interview with Mr.
Curley's name redacted, we would insist on eliciting the identity ofthe "other person."
We need to clarifY to the jury that neither Mr. Schultz nor someone under whom he
had control was in charge of meeting with Mr. Sandusky and reporting this incident
to outside authorities such as the Second Mile. This would support the argument
that Mr. Schultz' testimony that the incident was reported to a child protection
agency resulted from hazy memory about a matter in which others had more
19
involvement, rather than intent. In order to meet the prosecution's allegation
outlined in the purported Bill of Particulars and Complaint that Mr. Schultz did not
take the allegation "seriously," we need to emphasize that it was the head of the
Athletic Department, not some unidentified and perhaps low-ranking "other person,"
who took charge of meeting with Sandusky and notifYing President Spanier of the
outcome; thus indeed, Mr. Schultz did take the incident "seriously," as he indeed
testified. See Exhibit B, Schultz GJ Tr. at 17, line 19.
II. The Defendants' Trials Should Be Severed Because the
Perjury Counts Against Each Do Not Arise And Are
Misjoined.
Rule GSZ (A)(Z) pro\·ides, ''Defendants charp:ed in separate indictments or
informations may be tried together if they are alleg·ed to have participated in the
same act or transaction or ln the san1e series of acts or transactions constituting an
oflensc or offenses'' \Vhen the charge ag·ainst each defendant arises from
participation in different acts or transactions. their trials should not be joined, and
the Court should sever the joined char·ges. Conw1onwea./th ,._ 4r, I Pa. 1G2,
-Hi•l, :30:3 A.2d !l2·J, 9ZG (1973)(dcfcndant misjoincd and charges should have been
severed where his trial for one robbery committed with co-defendants was joined
with a Recond robbery charge from the same day in which the co-defendants
participated, but the defendant had no involvement).
Here, the defendants are not charged, in the jury-triable count, with
participating in each other's perjury offense at all. The offense is perjmy, not
20
conspiracy to commit or suborn perjury or to obstrud justice. Each testified alone,
und the evidence- the substance of their testimony- indicates that there was no
coordination. no conspiracy, no common scheme. See Jackson, supra (severance
required where "there was no proof offered that the crimes in question were the
product of a common scheme or of a continuing conspiracy between appellant and his
co-defendants."). For example. Schultz testified that McQueary's allegation was
sexual in nature (Schultz Grand ,Jury Transcript. at 0); Cudey says no (Curley
Grand ,Jury Transcript, at 21). Curley says that 1\JcQucary described seeing
Sandusky and the boy as reflected in a mirror (Curley Grand ,Jury Transcript, at G);
Schultz recalls nothing of that. Schultz believes that the meeting with Paterno was
in his office (Schultz Grand ,Jmy Transcript, at 5); Curley, at Paterno's home (Curley
Grand ,Jury Transcript. at 27). (:\nd Paterno believed that it was a phone call. and
only with Curley, Paterno Grand .Jury Transcript. at 7:2-5. The relevant portion of
Joe Paterno's Grand ,Jur:.· Transcript is attached as Exhibit E.) Schultz had a
recollection that the 2001 incident was reported to a child protective agency (Schultz
Grand ,Jury Transcript. at 11-12. 1·1-16, 22): Curley did not. Schultz recalls the 1998
allegation against Sandusky (Schultz Grand .Jury Transcript, at 12-1 :l, 15, 18-20;
Curley docs not (Curley Grand ,Jury Transcript, at U-1 ;)).
Thus, this case differs ti·om those perjmy ca.'t'S in which the appellate courts
discussed and approved joint trials of two perjury defendants. In each case, the
court relied on evidence that the perjury was part of a conspiracy. See
21
Commonwealth v., Katsafanas, :318 Pa. Super. 14:3. 1 ii8. 4G4 A.2d 1270, 1278
(198:l)(the Pennsylvania State Lottery winning number conspiracy); Corrwlonuwdth
c. Weitlwmp, 255 Pa. Super. :JOG, 32:3.386 A.2d 10H, 1023 (Hl78)(while no
conspiracy charged. the evidence showed that one existed: defendants lied about the
existence of a conspiracy ((Jr one defendant. a tow truck operator, to hribe policp
officers to refer towing business to him: co-defendant was a police officer who
delivPred the operator's bribes to other officers). No such evidence exists here.
In each of those cases. the courts also cited to the usc of thr: same evidence to
prove the falsity of each defendant's statements. Here. in contrast. the
Commonwealth's bill of particulars demonstnttcs little overlap in the allegedly false'
portions of each defendant's testimony. Again, a table best illustrates it:
Schultz Pnrticulars Cudev Particulars
• The :vJcQueary allegation was not
serious or criminal.
• Admits it was sexual.
• Admits l9!l8 allegation.
• Denies seeking out the 1!)98 police
report.
• Recalls that someone reported the
2001 allegation to the child
protective agency.
• The McQueary allegation was not
crin1inal, but no corresponding
"serious"' particular.
• DeniC's it \Vas sE>xual.
• Denies knowledge of the 1898
allegation.
• No CO!Tesponding particular.
• No corresponding particular.
It should be noted that in the "sexual" instance, in the recollection of the I H98
incident, and in Curley's lack of reference to a child protective agency in 2001, the
22
defendants' testimony conflicts. Here, as we argue in Point One, the risk is that the
jury will do exactly that which the Confnmtation Clause forbids: set one defendant's
version agBinst the other's. even thoug-h instmcted to consider each defendant's
statements only against that defendant. and use any ineonsistcncics to convict.
CONCLUSION
For the reason stated herein, Defendant Gary Schultz respectfully requests
that this Honorable Court grant his Motion to Sever his trial from that of Timothy
Curley.
Respectfully submitted,
B : J ~ · ~ J ~
23
Thomas J. Farrell, Esquire
Attorney for Gary C. Schultz
Pa. I.D. No. 48976
Farrell & Reisinger, LLC
436 7th Avenue, Suite 200
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
(412) 894-1380
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF DAUPHIN COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CRIMINAL DIVISION
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
v. No. CP-22-CR-5164-2011
GARY C. SCHULTZ,
Defendant.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certifY that a true and correct copy of the within Motion, was emailed
and mailed, First Class Mail, this 17th day of September, 2012, to the following
Bruce Beemer
Deputy Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, P A 17120
(bbeemcr\ihattornevgencral.gov)
I also certifY that a true and correct copy of the within Motion, was emailed
and mailed, First Class Mail, this 17th day of September, 2012, to the following:
Caroline M. Roberto, Esquire
429 4th Avenue, Suite 500
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
24


'
'
'
I
COMMoNWEALTH OF
THIRTIETH STATEWIDE INVESTIGATING JURY
3 IN.RE: NOTICE tJO: Z9
7 WITNESS:
8 DATE:
II PLACE:
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
OF GRANO JURY
'T'IM:CURLI!Y
JANUARY·12, -2011, :Ll':20 A.M.
STRAWBERRY SQUARE
E.IGHTH
HARRI_SBURG,· PA
STEPHANIE MC:CARROlt-!. FOREF1ERSDN
'HARTMAN, .
"
i.t COUNSEl PRESENT:.
OFFICE OF 7HE GENERAL
BY: JONELLE ESHBACH, ESQUIRE
16 FRANK' FINA, ESQUIRE
''
FOR - cqMMONWEALTH
18 PENNSYLVANIA UNIVERSITY
BY: CYNTHIA BALDWIN, ESQUIRE
"
20
21
22
'
5
..
'
.,
ll
"
"
"
l5
"
n
"
"
20
"
"
"
"
,,
FOR - tiM CURLEY
WITNFSS
Tim ·curley
SHANNON MANDERBACH
REPORTER-NO'rARY PUBLIC
I N D E X
EXAMINATtON
PAGE
TIM CURLEY, called as a witness,.
2 baing previously t:estif.iCd as follows:
EXAMINATION
G BY MS.
"
"
Q would you please .introduce yourself
to tha Grand Jury?
A Good morning, My nam6 i!i Tim curley._
Q YoU have counsel you?
A yB·s, I
Q would you· introdUce her, please?
A My.courisel is cynthia.Baldwin.·
Q Mr. curley, how are. you
15 A I'm employed as the di·ri!ctor of
l6 athletics at Perin state
"
Q How long have· you been employed .in
l8 that capacity?
19 A As the athletic director since 1993,
20 o· were" you wit:h the un·JversitY befora
:z 1 that?
"
A Yes, ma'am.
"
Q HoW long?
"
A
since.l979 full-time.
"
Q
As the athla1;:ic director,
does every
1' athl.etic. program ·the. uni'vershY fa11 under yoUr
2 contro1?
A Yes, 1 have an administrative'
reSponsibility fo·r.varsitY athletics, ·
.sand club sportS in: a variety of other areas.
Q I'd. like tp direct your atbm.t1on
1 f1 rst ·to an .1nc1 dent which was brought to your
s sometime. around spr1n!l .Prea.k of 2002 .
g you rtice1_ve 1nfOriria1:1on from coach Joseph
1 G Paterno about an incident that was t.o haV'i!
11.occurrad on involving Jerry
12 sandusky and· a.'minor male?
13 A Yes;
14 Q pleaSe tell Us how that information
15 came to yoUr attention the best that you
u recall and you dil B.s a result of it.
11 A t>;IY recollection-- and 1 don't know
1ll if it was 2002, but .my reco.llection. was that coac;h
Paterno ca11ed mYself and Gary schultz, who_ is the
20 senior vice pre.sident, and said he needed ·to meet
21 with us, ·that he .. wanted to report ·something. to us,.
22 so we went 'Ov6r, the 'two of us together, with
23 him, and he -- do you want me to
24 Q Yes, please.
211 A. Patarno indit;:ated t:ha1: he had
..... -.-;:_ --- ----.----'
had a CQach, an football coach,
2. that camEl-to him wit;h information that he
3 encountered in the locker room ·on in the
bi.Jilding, that he Went into the locker
roonr-- it was_, X thi_nk, sOmetime in the evening
6 -- went iri the locker room and was- going to get a
7 workout in .and th_e indiviciu·al heard and- saw; l
o guess
1
two people. in the shower, in the shower
9 area. And. I!JY rScoll_ection was that he coUld
1 o that a. mi. rr'or, that there was. a mirror
11 that he could see that 'through, and that the
12 -1n-Q1v1dua1 was· uncomfortable with· the· actiVity in·
13 the shOWer" area a,nd -- a111 I supposed to go through
14 the'whole th1n_g?
15 Q ·Go ahead; Tell ·us what you know,
16 A ·Okay, so he was uncomfortable w1th
11 that:ard th_at point he felt 'it was something hEI
1 e should- to coach Paterno; c<?ach Paterno ·
relayed -that information Gary and .J,
2 o -we the·n took that ·1 nformati on and met
21 with Mike football coach,
22 and me·t with' Mike,· got the information from ,M1ke
23 about the activity, what he. saw. And then from
thet:e, Gary B.nd I reported to thE\
25 president Of·the or. Gi"aham spa_n.-Jer._.
And followin·g th-at',. I made a
z that· we needed t·o take
3 this informatiOn ·and repOrt it to the second Mili!,
whiCh is· the orgariiz_ation at that. time that. Jerry
s was· working either with or for. He was not an
6 employee at Penn 'sta:te at that time. so· by mySelf
1 I met with ·or. ·Jack ftaykovitz, who is the
o ·executiVe director of the secolid.'Mi1e. · l li!hared
!i the informatit?n that We' had With him.
10

_l then met.wh:h _.:
11 Was probablY- thS-otlier, way arout1d. I.
1-2 met with JEirry san4usky first, to1d ·him about the
u 1nfo.rm.ation· that we that we were
14 uncomfortable and that I was
u going to t.ake ·:the in\orinat1on ·report it :to· the
u execl!tive di.reC'tor·of the Mile and that I
11 did not wailt him- i" the future to b.e in our
11 athletic fac;iiiti-es with any young pe"ople.
19 "Then; ·to tha best of my recolleCtion,
20 I-c1rc1ad back _around and informed the· president
21 of my- actions. and· then coach Paterno, Mr.
22 McQUeary. I tha:t•s the people.'
23 Q 'Now, ·spedfica11y with regard to the
24 informatiOn that you got from Mike Mcqueary 1n
25 your maetirlg --· and I'·m going to ask you to be as

specific as you can re.call --what exactly did he
2 tell you he had .seen Jerry doing- in· that
shower with that y_Oung man'?
A I call't recall the specif1<:
conversation with Mi.ke··and exact1y how he said it.
6 MY-_recollection was that Mike could hear there
were people in --they were in the shower ·are !I,;:
t that ·they were horsing around, that they were
9 play.ful, and that ·it just did not feel
Jo appropriate.
11 Q Are you saying that Mike Mcqueary did
n not tell that there was !lonal
13 .interC:oursa oc:curr1ng between ·Jerry sandusky a.nd
l4 thiS
15 A Absolutely nOt, that ha did not tell
u me that.
17 Q pid he .tell you that it-was, 1n fact,
1e 1n 'his estimation definitely- a child an(f llc,>thil1g
lSI other than that, no-_'one older· than a smal"l child?
zo A I can't recall hoW' described the
21 person in ttiere. My recollection WII.S it was a
2z,young ·adult or it was· young child;· It Was a.
23 child, not a young child, a child.
n Q Not a man?
"
A Not a man.
_ Q was there_ any iridication: to you of
what type of. conduct was· occurring? How would you
3 Whilt McQ.US;ary you .about what the
4 c_ondut:t was?
A Aga·fn, I can't remember specifically
G !ilike MY recollection was thilt
1 they kind of wrestling, ·there was body
a Contact, ·and they were hors.ing_ around_.
Q oid he indicate to you that they were
1 o naked?
1l
"
A No, l aSsume they werB, but no.
Q oid he ind.i-cate tO you that the're was
.13 .s_exua1 condui:t7
1t A NO.
l5 Q. of any kind? .
16
l7
A NO.
Q aut he was clearlY uncomfortable with
10 what he had seen?
"
"
A torrEict.
Q As a result of this, you. thought it
21 appropriate to· inform the university, the
22 (>f the
23 A 'rhat.'s correict,
24 Q Gra_ham spanier_?

A Yes,
-- __-: .-.- ' > •• --. -:·:·:- -1 _1/
q. Inform the executive director. of the
2 s.acond Mile which is a charity which helps yoUng
3 boys?
A
Q
A
·'
Q
A
That
1
s correct,
And women, young girls
Yes, you.ng child-ran.
It started out flelping boys?
I don't know that
1
•• bu't ye,s,
Q It was founded by •.
10_ correct?
11 A ·That's correct.
12 Q You 1rid1catad that yoU .mat- with Jerry
13 sandusky, What.specifically. did you tell_ Jeri-y
14 sandUsky that: you b81ieve had ocCurred in the.
115 showers?
A I recall my specific
·1 7 conversation with _Jerry in terms of the details of
u it. MY recolle.ction was tbat I sh·ared wit'h hi in.
u that we had,.an ·.emp1oyee thitt had come: with
20 this iriformB.tion, tha:t the ,emp1oyee was
21 uncomfbrtable. the activity was taking
22 pl_ace :In th_e Shower;· and that that was the
23 information we had received,
Q Did sandusky ad1nit ·to being in the
2s shower w1th the boy?
A · Not initiallY.
Q ._o1d he uitimata1y .around to
3 &dm1tti 'that ·he ha.d- been there ·wit-h the boy?
A +Ia admit'tgd ·tl)at he was that
s e'vcn.ing . .' I can't recall 1f he.said he-Was the1_'8
6 with a young man, but he did indicate---- ·inhilllly
1. his inemory .said he didn't think he' WM there on
e that.date. I' do t'eca1l.i:hat
1
but I don't_reca11
s whether or not he- said ·he was With an
1'o Q subsequently, did· he back to you
11 and in soma·way, _either by phone or in person,
12 admit to you .that he had beeri
13 A That's my recollection.
14 . Q Was it ih. person ·by or by phohe?
1lS A I. believe· it was in person.
u Q Did yoU taka specific action with
11 regard to Jerry sandusky? At this point he's not
u an empioyea indicated. what did you tall him
19 with regard to his being·_on university _p_roperty?
2a A' Yes. when I met with Jerry, because
21 I was u_ncomfo_rtable wit.h the information· we
22 received, I indicated-to_ him that in addition to
23 reporting it to the execUtive director of the
24_ second Mile, that r did not want him using our
a5 athletic facilit_ia's for workout purposes and
·c.--:_-. ;_,- -·
l- bringing any you{lg pGopl'e with him. He was not to
our fac-111ties·w1th Young paOpli:l-.
Q· In addition, you reported this to the
6 executive director of the second Mile
1
correct?
A That's correct.
Q was that ai-l 1 n-Pil;r$on ng or a
1 ta1aphone meeting?
A That was an·in-person meeting. Well,.
9 first ·I contacted to say I wanted to meet and then·
10 wa met in persori.
11 Q I take it that wh'at informed the
u executive director wall, I don't want to put
wrirds in your mouth. Tell me what you told the
\4 execUtive direCtor.
l!> A I informed the executive director of
16 same information that Mike to .us arld
11 that was the information.
18 Q o1d you distuSs thfs' matter, with. Till!
u schultz, the. seriior v1ca _president for the
ao university, at the t1ine that it Was reported·/
"
A Gary schultz.
22 · Q r'm sorry.
23 A yes. Gary schultz 1!!' the senior Vice
24 president. Gary was the Other individual that was
With me when Coach Paterno 1nit.ia11y reported it
1 t:o uS.
Q bid you have -discUssions 'with him
3 about how this would be handltld Or did ·you make
4 these
> A
recommendations yourself?
I doil't recall, tho' specifics on What
6 conversations I had with Gary. I do know· that I
1 was the one thftt .came forward to say I think that
o this is appi-opriat_e action,- that we need to
9 repo_rt it .to the second. Mihl, and ·that r wanted to
1 o mi:let with Jerry_,·
11 Q Did you, you-rse1f, aver report this
12 -incident. to the ·university police?
13 A No, nia'am.
14 Q . We.re You aware_ t_hat the report, that
_u Mike. McQueary made. could. be considered a :crime by
16 Jarry sandUsky?
_17 A I didn
1
t think that it was a crime at
u tha time.
19 . Q so you didn
1
t make a report to the
20 un'fvers1tY police?
21 A No, ma'am:
22 Q But you brought {t to· the at'!:Eintion
"
of the president?
"
A That's correct.
"
Q Did any i·n·put on how this
"
1-lllatter was.
A Well, the input was that we proVided
. 3 the -informati9n tu him and then made the
·4 recommendation cf .the follow-up action that we
a wanted to take or that I wanted-to
Q · sO deciSion not ·w report it to
_7 the -police 'y-las your decision?
A Yes. I See any reason because
9: I d1dti
1
t
1
_at that time, think 1.t was· a crime,
10 Q _oo-_you recall whether You ever
11 consulted counsel regarding
12 potential liability to the· University for this
lJ inCident?
14 A I personally that I r.ecall.
1 Q As far as you know then,. the 1J!atter
16 ·wa,s handlt!d str1ct1y.by tha referral to second
i1 Mile ti.nd by-barring Mr. sandusky from bringing-any
1s yo_ung persons on universit_y property?
"
A · That's correct,
"
Q At the t-ime of the incident in 2002,
21 aware of any other incidents invoiving
alleged. miJiconduct ·by Mr.
.2'3 S!tn-dusky ·anyWhere, on university· property (Jr
24 o't;herwise?
,,
A No, ma'.am.
Q this has come to light,
2 you bec_ome aware of other allegations Of
a inappropriate sexual conduct by Jerry sandusky on
univers1ty _property or elsewhere?
A other :than what was mentioned thi.s
6 11\Qrning,
Q speci6cally.a 199_8 report, did you
know about that· in 20021
A- No, rna' an_h
Q If_ an incident occurs involv-Ing an
11 athlete on a'nd the university Police are
12 with an .. athlete, would that bEl brought to
13 your attention.as the athlet·lc director?
14 A could you. rephrase that? I didn't
ts \JnderStand. it.
u Q If a .cril}linal ·1-ncHent occUrred or
17 any ldrid of '1 nc.f del'lt' i'nvo.lvi ng an .athlete and the
u un1.versi.ty pol-ice are involv&d -in the
19 would that be ProUght to ydUl'
_20 attention?
21 A :t wOuld saY in ·most
22 Q If there was 'an inc1dS:nt involving a
coach and ati allegation Clf criminal ·conduct on
24 campus, WOI,Jld that he b:rought to_your attention,
25 would you think, as the athletic director?
A 1 would think, but I ,don't know,
Q aut the 1998 tnddent was never
·3 brought to· your 1!-ttention?
A )'lo, lll_a'am, not that I recall.
5 Q Have you ever -- anyth·!ng other
_than what you he_ard fr•om Mi_ke McQueary,· have you
7- avar ,heard anything at all _regarding :Inappropriate
co!icluct between Jerry and young
9 either _on or off
10 A No ..
11 .Q What Was sandusky's .status in ·2002
11 that allowed him to cOma and go on university
13 pr9pertY?
14 A Jer-ry had wha_t the university calls
111 emeritus -status, H1.s 'tha1;· time·, he was
16 r,ot employed at the·univars'1ty in 2002, but he had
17 what -they call emeritus status, which :t:'m·not sure
11i if I know all of the benefits of that, I know
19 one- the benef1ts 1s that he can have office
20 and utilize·campus· re!;iourcas.
Q Do you know if he.had office space in
22
'23 ·A 2002,·yes
1
he ha,d offi<;e space in the.
24 east area locker r•oom.
"
Q. .Is that -in the Lash
A No
1
'it'S r'jgtit the street,
Q Does· ·Sandusky still enjoy that
3 erreritus status: at this point?
A Yes, ma
1
am,
Q There was no pract1.ca1 way to enforce
E him not bringing children onto· the campus,
7 however, after he was warned not to; is that
a correct/'
A That's
10 Q · ooes he st111.have an 9ff1ca on
-11 camPus/'
12 A My understanding and. I don't
13 know this for fact, aut my unde_rstanding is we
14 tleeded his office to accollVIlodate.'some peopl_e. So
I don't think he has one currently. And tpat was
l6 probably about a year Or .two ago w.here we··had some
l7 space issues- and he wasn'.'-i: using ttie offi-ce-that
11 much, So I beli'eve he !lO longer the office,·
1 but I doh
1
t. know that 100 percent.
2o Q The office that you knew hill to. have
21 'in the eaSt acrOss from the Lash Building,
22 who else would have had offices in that area
2:) besides Sandusky?
24 A Tha:area the office is·located
2-5 is 'in aCademic' support area. And :C don't
1 know. I think there's one other office there and
2 .I don't, kriow who it's assigned to.
·Q· When -yOU ·.say· academic suppOrt
arfl·a, can yOu exp1a1n that is-and wh.at. kind
of a bUilding it is and would. onlY haVe twO
6 officeis .. in i.t?
A 'Yes, It.'s called the east 11rea
a locker ·room .. This is our· old football building.
9 The foot_bal'l offiCe moved over to a new facility
10 And.so now the east
11. area locker·rQom cuf.rentlyhas field hockey, men's
12 women's lacrOsse housed there and then
13 i.t an a·cademic·st.udy hall area on the secOnd
14 f100J'1, .
"
"
,Q TO ass·1.st ttie athletes?
A ·Thatrs correct,
·Q And then you're indicating 17
1B A Arid a strength room therl:! as
19 Well and a training room· and loCkar rooms.
20 Q And that's Where sandusky's office
2.1 was?
2 2 A That'' s· correct,
23 Q You say there was one other.
24 indiVidual at that'time in 200i who would have-had
26 an office there, bUt you don.•t know WhO that .is?
l7
"
A I. don't ,knew who· wits'-- there's I
think. two offices the.re', !Jut I doil't know who' was
l there in 2002. And I don't know who is there·
right now,
'
l9 .
Q Did he have a secretarY attacheid to
that· office?
A NO, ma'am.
Q strictly a desk and a room?
A An office, yes·,
q that a bu1ld1ng that was
"
typi,ca11y that east locker room bui J ding?
"
A
Aftet' hou_rs it. woUld be
1! locked,.yas·.
Q He. would've ha<f to have a kay to
lll enter?
11$ A .Correct.
11 o was it a kay literally, an old
u fashioned key, or was it a kaY· card in·2002? ·What
l9 was the .system 'at' that time?
·2 o· A Tlie system. for the east a·rea locker
21 roolil I. beihve w.i:; a kay and it still .is t'oday.' 'I
22 believe.
"
Z4 would ·one·gSt.into the Lash BUilding?
25 A It's· still a key system I believe. I
1 don't know for sure.
Q when you met with. Mike McQueary --
A .If .I could just back up, that's not
.4 my office. My office is. in another part o·_f
5 campus; so just don't know whether it's a key·
or « swipe system. ·:r just _.don't know.
Q When you met with .Mike McQueary to
19
a let. know the result of' what he had reported to·
9 you, do you recall telling him that sandusky's
10 keys would bil taken away from him?
"
A I· don't recall saying that becaUse
12 that wasn't tha action that. I had taken .. He may
13 have unde.r'stood it 'that way· when :t indicated that
1.4 they were _not supposed to use the faci11t1 es· with
15 young peopl8.
"
Q . was the incident, 2002 1ncident,
11 i:o ·the University .police? .z thin·k ·you've
lB i_nd1cated it not reported by yOu, correct?
"
A That's ·corrett,
Q oid you repOrt the incident tO
21 state Co1la{l·e BoroUgh Police or· ihe Centre CoUnty
2 2 chi1 dren and youth· p·rogram?
23 A I did not,
2 4 Q Do you know if anyorie did?
25 A + do hot.
Q thitil yourself and senior vice
2 Pres·ldtmt schultz and Pr.esident Graham spanier·and
J ·MiKe McQuearY, do you know of anyone else who had
knowiedge of the 2002 incident?
A Just coach Paterno and :iack
6 Raykovitz, the person r went·to at the second
1 M11 a,
.Q WaS there a"ny_ investigat1on that.
9 you know of.conduCtad· by ,you or anyone at the
fo universit,Y _into the incident 1n·.2002?
ll A Not· by· me and· I''m not aware of any.
"
Q This was an .incident that obviously
"
had Mike McQueary· so _concerned that he reported
14 to Paterno And Paterno so concerned that he
"
·reported it to you and Y&t there·was no
"
investigation; is that correct? This was an
,,
inc1dent Of concern, but there was no effort to
"
investiga_te .ft?
u A other thil.n the meeting tha.:t
20 'I had with.Mike.
21 Q And 11et with
22 A And J!lri-y and Dr. Raykovit:z.
"
Q oi d You ask Jerry sandUsky who the
24 be)' was was with h1m in the shower?
2!1 A I ·d1 d not.
1t
.
'

;;-·-
.
.
····- ·_;·.r:· ·· ·.-·1 J.'Yr
Q oi d you attempt to find out who that
2 young man w.is?
J A I did not,_
I-t Q obviously, you'ra·a person of more
5 than reasonable 1hte111gence who's running a
oiVision 1 football program, not only the football
1 program, but the entire athletic Did it
8 not. 0CCI.!t to y'(iu that there waS Something SeXUal
il going.-on in .. this. fni:ident based on, what was
referred to you by Mike 10
"
A I was not aware of anything sexual,
"
"
"
so I didn't fSel·that 11: warranted that and I fait
my actibn_s were apprqpriate_, But I was not a"ware
that there ·was sexual activity.
"
"
"
"
"
Q If-you didn't thinlt _thiS was sexual
in nature or criminal in nature, ·then why -did you
tSke action of barririg sandusky_from bringing
youths_on to· the university prOperty?_
A Because I didn'-t think it--was
20
>1
22
_appropriate that he-would be using our facilitias,
having -yoU.ng p'eop1e in there in the evening, and
that:.you ··re in a shower area hors1n'g a·round with a
I
2 3 young
24 . Q
pers.on.
t:J1d _that- concern extend to what he
28 might be doing to those youths off university
.

1 propewty ·ff you didn't repOrt this to somebody·?
2 A: No, not at-_.the time; dil}n't·.
3 Q. I think you have answered bUt :t
4 want to be clear, The decision .to limit
3, sandusky's access wi'th ch1ldreri to university
6 property Was· made· by who?
1 A :c•m· sorry. lt was made
--

Q It· _was you't
'
A ma'am.
'"
Q The decision not to this to
H poliGe ·was made by you?
A Yes,
13 Q The dedsio'n to rePort this to the
1.4 second Mila·. the indiyiduals charge the,re, was
15 made bY yoU?
16 A Vas.
11 Q
1 u known
All Of these dedsfons. were made
to the pr'eside'nt of the university and he
19 concurred- in your· decisions?
20 A That's correct.
21 BY MR. FINAl
22 Q .Just to be clear, sir, .you didn't do
2J these things 1n a vacuum .. You pr<lposed these· as
24 the resolution to this and you were affirmed in·
2s that -by your supervisors?
-
.
22
- - -- __,,- ,.--
A Yes.
Q so, in fact, tOe ultimatE! decision
3 was not yours. You made the decision on
4 proposals, but the Ultimate decision to take th-is
& action ins_tead of any other would have been by
6 your superv_isors?
1 A I rep_o·rted it· to my direct employer,
- 11 whi cff .i Pra·si dent Spanier, and made. the
9 r6commendatlon and proceeded.

1
Q . thera conversation
11 'about._whether not to I,Jo to law enforcement.·
authorities about this?
13 A· At the time I don
1
t recall thii.t
14 because, aga1n
1
I didn
1
t feel -w at least I didn't
111 feel t.hat any criminal activity had
16 occurred, so· IllY thoUght was that because ·a yr:iung
11 person Was there, that I to take it to the
u SecOnd Mile •.
19 Q aut you 1Mde this deter111ination
20 _W_ithout talking to the youn.g perSon who.was_ there
21 or any other irlvestigativa measures. There were
other investigative steps made to
2' Wh6tlier or not: there was anything sexual
2 4 this conduct?
"
A Again, don
1
t remember any report 'to
1 11e thll.t-1t was sexual in nll.ture, It was
2 inappropriate· behavior .. So·I· didn't feel that
3 was _necessary and felt that it was important.
Whether I knQw. it at the or not, I don't
a know, but .I thoUght- it was ·probably a seco,ncl M11e
6 person. YoU know, it was a young parson. so· I.
1 thought _it ·was· appropriate give the information
Q to the Second Mile or to the execut-Ive director: of
9 the Mile.
10
"
"
13
14
"
"
p
·"
Q If it. was_ your understsnding -it was
and y'ou had no information that woU1d
leftd you to believe it was sexual or even that 1t.
involved a second M118 minor, why would you take
the ra.th·er extraordinary- step of' going tO the
executive· direCtor of a nonprofit that 15 not part
of the u·iJivarsitY and infor1111i1g them of. thiS
i:nddent?
A Because.I think that-Mike felt he-was
1'11 uncomfortable with the behavior. And on
20 \'!hat I heoird tlu1.t wiu to me, I _just
21 didn.
1
t feel it was appropr1at.e that Jerry would be
22 in ·a Shower area With._ a young person. Whether it
23 was horsinp _around or however you want to deScribe
24 it;_ I just didn'
1
t think that would be
u .and shouldn't
.
"'
-' - . ,- __.- .
Q Mr: McQueliry wa·s uncomfortable
2 be'<_:ausa there wa·s a child who was not a student
and· not an employee of. _the ·university. on
universitY ·property, I's _that what you're
·A My was _that was
uncomfortable they were .in the· shower and it was
just·the twO of-them and that they were horsing
e around and ·Inappropriate -conduct, It Wi!.S
s conduct. I think. he fQlt that this
10 didn't. ·feel right.
11 Q· .Well, sir, listening.-to words you
12 just used, I_ think a r_easonable_ pet'Son WoUld
13 irilmecliate"IY jump to, there could be a sexual
14 rature tci this, You have a grown male with a
1!1 c_hild naked in· the shOWer horsing around. what is
16 it· that specifically alarmed ·Mr.,· what
11 did you ti\1{6 away from '!;hat mee'ting?
-U A I t_aok away that hE! didn't" feel
19 com'fortable .with the acti-vity 'that Was ha,ppening_
2G and 1t waSn't appropriate that we had- an adult and
21 ·a your\g child a_person- :In the· shower area and
22 that··1t ._was a Situation that -- and that's -what
_23 alarmed him.
24 MS. ESI18ACH: Do you 5tap
outside, please, with your counsel v.rid we wi11

"
1 f'ind.o_ut if the. Grand J.ury has any-additional
2 qui!st10rls_ for
. '
(witnes·s aild counsel roam.)
. (Procea'd1ngs before the Grand Jury
5 the Master T-ranscript.)
and enter the
7 BY MS.· ESHBACH:
Q with regard.to·your meetings with
sanduskY,_ l jUst·want to make-.sure
10 this, Mike McQueary tells _toach -Paterno about the
11· in'c1dent il.hd coach Paterno· w1th1n a'
12 matter ·Of daYs of the incident in the shower in
_13 2002, correct?
14 A That's <;orrect.
a· Q oq you remember what !lay of the week
16 coach PRterno coOtacted you?
11 A I believe it a sundaY.
'u Q ·And you- met with him·and w1th Gary
19 sChultz when?
20 A That d_ay.
21 Q sundayaswell?·
,,
A could you back up?· when said --
23 Q YoU were_ contacted by Coach Paterno
'24 t!) report the _incident·1;o you sunday?
:zs A I believe,
Q o1 d your mlif!ti n[! whh coach Paterno
2 Gary Schultz place on sunday as well or
3 was that during the week?
A NO, When ha contacted us, he
5 come.over to the house. He didn't tilll us· what.it
6- was.
o· so the two of you went to Coach
a Paterno'' s house?
"
ll
A_· vas,
-Q on. a sunday?
A I'm not sura of the exact _date.
Q As bast you can recall?
13 A Yeilh,
1 Q HOW much later approxlma.tely did·.you
u with Mike McQueary and=ge't the .information
16 rli rectly from McQueary?
·17
A I don•t recall how many days' 11: was,
te bUt it was· soon after that,
19 Q would you say it was within a week7
"
A Yes.
21 Q was Gary .schultz also present for
22 that ·meet_itJg with
·v A -It's Illy
24 Q How. quick1y·after-ttiat_did you make
a the· deci.siotis to do the various. 'things tha.t you
did, talk 't.o sandusky, go to Second M'lle, advi-se
2. the president? How qUickly did that happen?
A J: don't ·r·amember the number of days,
but it was soon aftQr .that, I woUld say within
5 two weeks, ·
Q spec1ffca11y ·with regard to your
1 meeting with. sa_ndusky, the first meeting that·
s yoU had with him 1n which you told him of the
allegations of the inctdent that had Occurred in,
10 the sh_ower'a'nd.he'said to yo1,1 at that time I don't
think I was there, how long did that meeting-take
12 Place after th1s -1n.<;1dan:t was reported to you by
13 c·oach Paterno?
It would have been within. that two l4 A
u weeks
u that.
right after talkin·g tO Mike or. right- after
Now,- I just don't know how many days it
11 was,-·but it Wa,s a'Week to two· weeks,
u Q HOW.long after.that initial meeting
a with sandus-ky did sanduskY come back and tell
20 yeah, I was in·the 'shower?
21 A I believe 1t was· soon. after that, It
2a wa:s a day or ·two after that.
"
"
"
MS. ESHBACH: No further questiOns,
concluded at :1.1:59 a.m.)
you,


·I hereby certify 1:hat the proeeedings
2 and evidence contained fully and in
3 the .notes taken bY me ·on the w1thin .proceedings
4 and that this· is a correct transcript o·f .t,he ·same,
"
"
13
"
" ,,
"
"
"
20
"
"
"
"
"
. NOTORIAL S L
·snonnon L. Mondorbaoh; Notary Public
Town of Enola, cumberland County
)lAy. Commtoslon June.:19, 2013
"
'
I
1
·A.
absolutely [1] 7:15
academic [3] · 16:26;. 17:3,
13
access [1] 22:5
[11 16:14 · _ .
[1] 29:2
acrose [2] -16:1,21
·!lotion [6]"' 10:16; 12:8;
13:4; 19:12; 21:17: 23:5
[2) ·e:21_i 21:13
activity [ar 5:12, 27; 9:21;
21:14; 23:15; 26:19
actually [11 6:11
addition [2] 1 0:22; 11:3
additional [1] 26:1
additionally [1] 6.:10 .
[1] _,4:3
admit [2] 9:24; 10:12
[1] 10:4
admitting (1] 10:3
adult [2] 7:22; 25:20
advise [11 28.:1
{1] -22:24
after. [11] 16:7; 16:1?:
27:18, 24; .28;4; 12, 16, 18,
21,22
ahead [1] 5:15 ·
alarmed (2] 25:i'6, 23
, '
al\egatlo·n [1] 14:23
a_fleQatJons [2] ·1.4:2; _ 28:9
a.liaged 121 4:10; 13:22
a.llowed [1] 15:12
anal [11 7'12
a'nswElred [1]
anyone (31 19:24; 20:3, 9
·anyWhare_[1] 1_3:23
appro'ptiate [9].7:10; 6:21;
'12;8; 21:13, 20; 24:7, 21,
24; 26:20
approximately [1l 27:14
arOa· [161 5;9, 1;3; 7:7;
15:24; 16:21, 22,_ 24, 25;
17:4, },_11, 13;- 18;20;
21 :22; 24:24; 2q:21
{11. 4:5
around [1 OJ 4:8; 8:11, 20;
7:8; 8:8;' 10:2; 21:22;
24,23; 26:8, 15
assigned 17:2
aSsist [1] 17:16
· assista-nt [1]- q:1
assume [1} 8:11
athlete [3] 14:11,12,11
athlatoa [11 17:15
athletic [81 3:19, 25; 4:1; ·
6:18; 10:26; 14:13, 25;
21:7
athletiCs [2], 3:16; 4:4
attached [11 18:6
&ttempt[11 21:1
attention [8] 4:6
1
8, 1B;
12:22·, 14:13,20, 24{ 15:3
[1] 1:16 .
authorltiea[11 23:12
aware [6] · 12:14; ·13:2_1;
14:2; 20:11; 21:11, 13
sway [3] 19:10; 25:17, 18
·B.
baqk [5]. 6:20; 10:10;
19:3; '26:22; 28:19
baldwin [2] 1:18; 3:13
barring [2] 13:17;. 21:17
based i21 21:9; 24:19
become '[1] 14:2
beiore [2] 3:20; 26:4
behavior 121 24:2, 1B
believe (10] 9:14: 10:15;
16:18; 18:21,' 22, 26;
24·.12; .26:17, 25', 26:21
benefit& [2] 15:18,. 1_9
besides [1 I 18:23
.best [31 4:15; 6:19; 27:12
betweim [2] 7:13; 15:6
body [1] 8:7
borougn (1} 19:21
boys [21 9:3, 7.
break[1]4:6
bringing [41 11:1; 13:17;
16:6; 21:17
brought [61 4:7; 12:22;
14:_12, 1\),"-24; 16:3
30
building [11] 5:4; 15:25; contacts [11 26:11
16:21; 17:5, 6, 10;· 18:10, : contained [21 26:5; 29:2
11, 12, 23, 24 oontrol [11 4:2
call (1] 16:17
caUad [4] 3:1; 4:19i 17:7;
10
calls·[1] 16:14
aame[3J 4:15; 5:2; 12:7
campus [6] 5:3; 14:11, 24;
15:9, 20; 16:6,-11; 19',6
cannot [1}-9:16
capacity [1]' 3:18

caeeer(1j 14:21
centre [1] 19:21
oartlfy [11 29:1
ch9rayterize [1) .'8:3
charge-(1] 22;.14
charity [1] 9:2
. child [101 7:14, 18, 19, 22, .
23; 26:2, 15, 21
ch/ldrim {4] .9:6; 18;6;
19:22; 22:6
6:20
cl&ar [2] 22:4, 22
clearly [iJ 6;17
club [1] 4:6
!191 4:9, 16, 25;
6:1,. 18, 21; 6:21; 1'1:26;
14:2-3;. 20:5; 11, 16,
23: 27:1, 7; 28:13
college [11 19:21
comfortable [1] 26:19
concern [21 21:24
concernod [21 20:13, 14
concluded [1] 28:24
[1] .22:19
conduct ,[9) '8:2, 4, 13;
14:5,. 23; 16:6;
26:8,9
ooriducted 111 20:9
considered [1) 12;_16
consulted [1 I 13; 11
contaCt [1] 8:8
contllcted'[4] 11:9; 2H:16,
23; 27:4
conversation [3} 7:6;
9:17; 23:10
conversations [1] 12:6
counsel [7] 1;14;. 3:10, 13;
13:1_1; 25:25; 26:3, 6
county [1] .19:21
·crime [3] 12:15, 17; 13:9
criminal [4] 14:16, 23;
21:16; 23:15
cUrley [5] 1:19; 2:4; 3:1,
9, 14
curly (11 117
currontly [2] 16: 15; 17:11
cynthia [2] 1:.18; 3:13
·D-
data [31 1:8: 10:8; 27:11
days [4] 26:12; 27:17;
28:3, 16
decision [SJ 13:6, 7; 22:4,
10, 13; 23:2, 3, 4
·decisions [3] 22:17, 19:
27:26.
definitely [1] 7:18
descnbe [11 2_4:23
described [2].7:20; 8:8
desk [11 18:8
dotall• [11 9:17
. determination [11 23:19
determine [1] 2r:22
direct [2] 4:6; 23:7
dlrectlyf1J 27:19
director [161 3:16, 19, 26;
e!a, 16; 9:1; 10:23; 1.1:4,
12, 14, 15; 14;13.26·, 24".8,
15'
diseuse t1J.11:18
.
dlvlelon [11 21:8
during [11 27:3
• E-
east 161 15:24; 16:21;
1n, 10; 18:11,20
effort{1! 20: 17
·elghth[1J 1:9
elther{3] 6;5; -10:11; 15:9
elae [2\ 16;22; 20:3
elSewhere (1] 14:4
emarltus (3] 15:15, 17;
16:3
'ell1ployed.[41 3:14,15, 17;
15:16
[5]: 6:6; 9:19,
20; W:1B; 25;3
erriployer [1]. 23:7
encOuntered [1] 5:3
·enforce (1] 115:6
enfOrcelnent [1} 23:11 .
enjoy [11 16:2,
t;tnter [2] -18:"15; 2B:B
entire [11 21:7
[5] 1:1.5;
- 25:24;' 26:7.; 28:Z3
esquirE! [3]-1:15;-16, ia·· ·
estlmati?n [1] 7:18.
even [1)- 24:1_,2
evening "[31 5:5; 10:5;
21:21.
every [1] 3:25.
evidence [11 29:2
exact [1J
exactly [2] · 7:1, 5
examinatlqn [2] 2:2; 3:4
executive (1'0]. !5:8, 16;
9:1;, 10:23; 11:4, 1?, 14,
16; 24:6, 15
oxplaln [1], 17:4
extend [11 21:24
_extraordfnal)' [1) 24:14
- F-
facllitlea .[51 6:18: 10:25;
11;2: 19:14: 21;20
facilitY [11 17:9
. !aet [3! 7:17; 16;13; 23:2
fall [11 4:1
fashioned [1] 18:.18
feel [BJ 7:9i 21:12; 23:14,
15; 24:2, 21; 25;10,.18
falt[fil 5:17; 21:12: 24:3,
.18; 26:9
field [11 17:11
find [21 21·1; 28:1
first [4) · 4:7; 6:12; 11:9;
28:7
flooi-[2] 1:9; 17:14··
· follow-up 121 13:4< 20:19
folloWing {11. 6:1 ·
followa[11 3:2
football [8] 5:1, 4, 21;
17:8, 9; 21:6
'forepefson (1] 1:11
forWard [1] 12:7
founded [11 9:9
· frank[1! 1:18
fUll-time [1] 3:24
fully[11.29:2
further [11 26:23
.. Mura'[1] .6:17
-G·
gary [10] 4:19; 5:19, 24:
11:21, 23
1
_24; -12;6; 26;18;
27:2,21
general [1] 1:15
gins [1] 9:6
give 111 24:7
good 111 3:.9
graham [2] .5:25; 20:2
· gra:nd [6] 1:1, 5; 3:8;
26:1,-4
grown [1] 25:14
guess [21 5:6j ·6:22
C.H.
.hall [11 17:13
handled [3] 12:3: 13:1, 16
happen !1! 26:2
happening 111 25:19
hartman 11! 1:12
having [11 21:21
he's [1) 10:17
hear [1] 7:6
haEird [6] 5:7; 16:5, 6, 7:
24:20
helping [11 9:7
helps [1] 9:2
herai>Y 111 29;1
hockey 111 17:11
horsing (6] 'l:B; 8:8;
21:22; 24:23;. 25:7, 15
hours (1] .18:12
house [2)' 27:5, 8 _
ho4Sad (1] 17:12
howavar [2! 16:7: 24:23
-I -
lmrnedlately [11 2B;13
Important [1] 24:3
\nvparsOn [2] 1116, 8
Inappropriate_ ·[6] 13:22;
14;31 15:_7; '24:2; 25:8, 9
Incident. 1241 4:7, 1 o:
12:12; 13:13, 20; 14:10,
16, 17. 22; 15:2: 19:16, 20:
20:4, 10, 12, 17; 21:9:
24:17; 26:11, 12,-24; 26:9 ..
12
lnoldehts [11
[3] 8:'9, 12; 10;6
Indicated [6] 4:25; 9:12;
10:18,'22i 19".13,'18
Indicating [1! 17:17
lndlcatlori [11 8:1
Individual [5] 5:7, 12;
10:9: 11:2.4:.17:24
lndlvlduala [1) 22:14
Inform [2! 8:21; 9;1
Information [22) 4:9, 14;
5:2, 19, 20, 22, 24; 6:3, 9,
13, 14, 15, 24; 9:20, 23;
10:21: 11:16, 17; 13:3j
24:7, 11: 27:15
Informed [31 6:20; 11:11,
16
Informing [1] 24:16
Initial !11 28:18
lnltlally[3110:1,6; 11:26
Input 121 12:25; .13:2
Instead [1} 23:5
lntal[lganoe [11 21:5
Intercourse [1] 7:13
Into [3] 6:4; '18:24;· 20:10 ·
31
lntramurala [1] 4:4
lntr'oduce [2] 3;7, _12
tnyestigate {1] 20:16 ·
[1] 1:1
lnvestlgatlol') [31 14:19;
20:8, 16
Investigative [2) 23:21, 22
Involved [3] · 14: 1_2, 18;
24:13
lnvo1Vh1g [6i 4:11i 13:21; ·
14:10, 17, 22
Issues [1] 16:17
- J-
jack [21 6:7; 20:5
january [11 1;6
jarry [191 4:11; 6:4, 12;
7:2, 13; B:24; 9:12, 13, 17;
10:17, 20; 12:10, 16; 14:3;
15:8, 14; 20:22, 23; 24:21
jonollo [11 1:15
Joseph [1! 4:9
jurnp [1] 25:13
juryl6!1:l,5; 3:6; 26:1,4
keys [11 19:10
kind [41 8:7, ·15; 14:17;
.. 17:4
. knew [2] 16:20; 24:4
kil.owledge [1] 20:4
known [1] 22;18
·l·
lacrosse [2} 17:12
lash [51 15:25; 16:21;
17:10: 18;23, 24 .
latar 111 27:14
lead [1] 24:12 ·
leasi.J1! 23:14
leave [11 26;3
llablllty 111 13:12
light [1] 14:1
· llmlt]1! 22:4
llstonlng [11 25:11
iltereily [1] 1 6:17
located [11 16:24 ·
locked [2]' 16:1.1, 13
· lockor {9] li:3, 4-, 6; 15:24;
17:6,11. 19; 18:11,20
long [41 3;17, 23; 28:11,
18
lorgar [1] 16:18
.• M.
·ma•a·m [9] 3:22: 12:13
1
:11;
13;25; 14;9; .15:4; '16:4;
16:7; 22:9 .
made [12]· 6:1; 12:15;
_13:3; 22:6, 7, 11, 15,- 17;
23:3, 8, 19, 22
make [4] '12:3, 19; 26:9; -
.27:24
malo [2] 4:12; 26:14
many [2] 27:17; 28:16
, -master [1]. 26:6·
matter[41.11:1&, 13:1, 15; ..
26:12
mo<iarrol1111 1:11
[18j- 5:21, · 6:n,·
24; 7:11; 8:3; 12:_16;
19:..2,_ 7; 20:3, 13;
21:10; 25:1, 16; 26:10;
27:16, 16, 22
measures [1] 23:21
.moat [4] 4:20; 11:9;
12:10;'27:15
mooting [12].6:25; 11:6,7,
8; 20:19; 25:.17; 27:1, 2f;
28:7;11, 18.
meetings· [1_] · 26:8
memory [1] 10:7.
mon's[1] j7:11
mentioned [1] 14:6
·mliiht[11 21:25
·_mlka:[21] 0:21, 22; 6:24;
7:5, a, 1"1'; a:e: 11 :16;
12:16; 16:6; 19:2, 7; 20:3,
'13, 20; 21:10; •24:18;
26:10; 27:15: 28:15
mile [16] 6:3, 8, 16;. 9:2;
10:24; 11:4;-. 12:9; 13:,17;
20:7: 22:14; 23:18; 24:5,
8, 9, 13; 28:1
mlnor[2J 4:12; 24:13
mirror [2]
misconduct !11
· mora [1) 21:4
morning [2] · 3:9_; ·14:6
most[1] 14;21
mouth [1] 11:13
moved [1] 17:9
much [2'] 1a:fa: 27:14
mysolf[2] 4:19; 6:6
ns!<sd [2] 8:10; 26:15
name [1] 3_:9
nature [4]' 21:16; 24:1;_
26:14
necessary (1] 24:3
need [1] 12:8
needed [41 4:20; 6:2:
. 16:14; 23:17
[1] 16:.2
· [1] 24>15 ·
notary [1] 29:9

nothlne [11 7:18
number[-1] 26:3
-C).
obviously [2] 20:12; 21:4
occur [2] 21 :6; 24:25
occurreo [5] 4:11; 9:14;
14:16; 23:16; 26:9.
ocpurrlng [2]· 7:13;- 8:2 ·
occurs. [1] 14:10
offlcs [18] 1:15; 15:19, 21.
?3; 16:19, 14, 17, 18, 20,
24; 17:1, 9, 20, 25; 16:6,
9; 19:4
Offlc_es [3] '16:22; 17:6;
16:2
older 111 7:19
only [2] 17:6; 21;6
onto [1] 16:6
orgS nizatl on [1) 6:4
(11 13:24
outside [1] 25:26
over [3] 4:22; 17:9; 27:5
. - p.
part[21 18:4; 24:15
·paterno·[16] 4:10, 19, 25;
·516;· 6:21; 11:25; 20:5,
14; 26:10,11, 16,23;.-27:1;'
28:13
[1] 27:8
pe_nn [2] 3:16; 6_:6
18
people [9) 5'8; 6:16, 22;
7:7; ·11:1, 2; ·16:14; 1'9:15;
21:21
p.ercent[1J.16:19
person [16] 7:21; 10:11,
'14, '16; 11:10; 20:6; 21:4,
. 23:17, 20; . 24:6, 22;
25:12, 21
personally [2) 13:14;
23:15
· _perSonl:i[1]13:1B
phone[2J 10:11,14
[41 1 :9; 9:22; 27:2;
26:12
playful [11 7:9
please [5]_ 3:7, 12; 4:14
1
24; 25:25 .
polnt[3] 5:17; 10:17; 16:3
pollee [6] 12:12, 20; 13:7;
14:11, 18; 19:17, 21; 22;11
,potential [1]'.13:12·
[1] 16:5 ·
· present.[2]1:14; 27:21
presldent.[121 4:20;. 5:26;
6;20; 8:22; 11:19, 24;
12:23·, 20:2;. 22:16; 23:8;
. 28:2.
previously {1] 3:2
probably [3] 6:11; 16:16;
24:5 .
proceeded [1] 23:9
proceedings [4J 1:4; 26:4;
29:1,3
program {6] 4:1; 19:22;
21:6,7
32
property [10] 4:11; 10:19;
13:18, 23; 14:4; 15:13;
21:16; 22:1, 6; 20:4
proposals [1} 23:4-
proposad [1) 22:23
provided [1] 13:2
public [2] 1:22; 29:9
purposes {1] 10:25
·Q·
questions (2] 26:2;
quickly [2] 27:24; 28:2
·R·
rather [1] 24:14
raykovltz [3] 6:7; 20:6, 22
raason [1] 13:8
raasQnable {2) 21:5; 25:12
recall [17! 4:16; 7:1, 4, 20;
9:16;_ 10:15, 8; 12:6; 13:10,
14; 15:4; 19:9, 11; 23:13;
27:j2, 17
receiVe 11] · 4;9
r9ceived [3] 6:13; 9:23;
10:22
rec6tlectron [11] 4:17, 18;·
5:9; 6:19; 7:6, 21; 6:6;
9;18; 10;13; 26:6i 27:23 .
rao·ommendation (3]. 6;2;
13:4; 23:9
recommondations [1] 12:4
[j] 13:16 ·
referred 111 21:10
(ogard.[5J 6:23:' 10:17, 19;
26:6; 28:6
regarding [2] 13:11; 15:7
relayed [2] 5;19; 11:16
remenibar -[4] 8:5; 23:26;
26:16; 28:3
[1] 1:12.
rephrase'[1l-14:14
report [16] 4:21; 5:16;
6:3, 16; 12;9, if, 14;'19;
13:6; 14:7; 19:20: 22:1'
10, 13; 23:26; '26:24
' !
__ I"
reported [i2[ 5:24: 11:3,
20, 25; 19:8, 17; 18i 20:13,
15; 23:7; 24:20; 28:12
reporting [1] 10:23
resolution [1]' 22:24
resourceS [1]. _16:20
resPonsibility [1] 4_:4
resutt.[3] 4:16; 19:8
room [13] 5:3, 5,.6; 15:24;
17:8, 11, .18, 19; 18:8, 11,
21; 26:3, 6
roOms [1] 17:19
running['!] 2:1:5
.. s.
[24] 4:12: 6:12;
7:'2,, 13; .9:9, 13, 14, 24;
10:17; 12:18; 13:17, 23;
14:3; 15:8; 16:2, 23;
20:21, 23; 21:17: 28:9;
28:1,7, 19
sandUsky's [4) 15:11;
17:20; 19:9; 22:5
[3] 7:11; '19:11;
26:4
schultz [8] 4:19; 11:19,
21 .• 23; 20:2; 26:19; 27:2;
21 .
.second [17) 6::3, 8, 16;
9:2; 10:24; 11:4; 12:9;
13:W; 17:13; 20:8; 22:14;
23:18', 24:5,8, 9, 13; 28:1'
secretaiy [2( 1:12; 1B:5
seen [2f 1:2; 8:18
senior [41 4:20; 11:19, 23;
20:1
eexual [11] 8:13; 14:3;
21:8, 11, 14, 15; 23:23;
_24:1, 11, 12; '25:13
·sexually [1] 13:22
· sha:re<;J-'[2] 6:8; 9:18
showe·r [161 ·5:8, _13; 7:3,
7; 9:22, 25; 20:24; 21:22;.
24:22; 25:6, .15,-- 21; '26:12;:_
28:10,20
showers [1]'9:15.
: [3] ·3:19, 24; 14:1
81tUatron (1]. 25:-22
'-
' __-_,_-_-_ ·-
small [1] 7:19
something [3) 4:21; 6:17;
21:8
s'ometlme [2]· 4:8; 6:5
. soon (31 27:18;.28-;4, 21
sony (2] 11:22; 22:7 ·
_[4] ·15:20, 21, 2:};
16:17
spanler· [4) 5:25; 8:z4:
20:2; 23:8
[5] 7:1, 4; 9:16;
10:16; 23:10
speclffoally.[7] 6:23; 7:12;.
. 8:5; 9:13; 14:7; 25:16;
28:8
sp"'cJflcs [11 '12:6
sports [1] 4:5
spring [1) 4:8
sq_uare (1] 1:9
· started [1) 9:7
state [4] 1:11); 3:16; 6:6;
19:21
. statewide [1] 1:1
status [6] -16:11, j6; -17;
16:3
step [2) 24:14; 25:24
· stephanie [1) 1:11
stops [1) 23:22
still [4) 16:2, 10; 18:21, 25
strawberry [1] 1:9
stroot [2) 1:10; .16:1
strength [1)17:18
strlotly 13:161 '18:8
student[1) 25:2
study[1) 17:13
oubsoquently[1) .10:10
s(lgQestlon [1'] 6:2
. [6] . 26:17, 21, 2'4;
· 27:2, '10, n
supervisors 22:26;
. 23:6
support [2) 18:25; 17:'3
supposed {2] 5:13;. 19:14
sura [4}' 1_5:1?: 19:1; 26:9;
27:11
swipe [1) 19:6 .
sworn [1) 3:2
system [4] 18:19, 20, 26;
19:6
[13) 8:2, 15; 10:16;
11:11; 13,:5;. 21:17; 23:4,
17;. 24:13; 25:17; 27:2;
28:11
taken [3) 19:10, 12; 29:3
teklng [1] 9:21
talk [11 26:1
tali<fng [2] 23;20; 28:15
telephone [1] .11:7
toll [11] 4:14; 5:15; 1:2,
12, '15, 17; .9:13; 10:18;
11 :13; 27:5; 28:19
telling 111 19:9
tens·[1] 26:10
torms [1] 9:17
testified [1) 3:2
testimony [1) 28:24
thing 111 5:14
things [2[ 22:23; 27:25
think [19] 5:5; 10:7; 12·.7,
17; 13:9; 14:25; 15:1;
16:15; 17:1; -18:2; 19:17;
21:16, 19; 22:3; 24:18, 24;
25:9, 12; 28:11
'thirtieth 111 1:1
thought [4) 8:20; 23:16;.
24:6
time [13] 6:4, 6; 11:20;
12:18; 13:9, 20;. 15:15;
17:24; 18:19: 22:2; 23:13;
24:4; 28;10
today 111 18:21
together [1) 4:2.2
told [4]. 6:12; 8:3; 11:13;
28:8
took [2] 5:20; .25:18
tower [1) 1:9
training 111 17:19
tran-script' (3] 1 :4; 26:6:
29:4
typo [1) 8:2
[1) 18:11
. u.
33
ultimate [2] 23:2, 4
ultimately [1] 10:2
uncomfortaPie [9] 5:12,
16; 6:14; 6:17; 9:21;
10:21: 24:19; 2o:1, 6
under [1] 4:1
'
understand [2) 14:15;
26:9
. understanding (3] 16:12,
13; 24:10
understood l11 19;13
unl_versJty [32] 1:18; ·3:16,
20; 4:1, 11; 5:26; 6:21,·
22; 10:19; 1.1:20; 12:12,
_20, 23; 13:11, 12, .18, 23;
.14:4, 11, 18; 115:12, 14, 16;
19:17; 2o:1o: 21:18, 25;
22:5, 18; 24:16; 25:3,4
used 111 25:12
uses [1) 16·.16 ·
using [3] 10:24; 16:17; ·
21:20
utilize [1] 15:20
.v-
vacuum [1] 22:23
vsrlety [1) 4:5
vai"lous.f1] 27:25
varsity [1) 4:4
verlzon 1:9
vice [4) 4:20; 11:19, 23;
20:1
walllut[1J 1:10
want [8) 4:23; 6:17;
10:24; 11:12; 22:4; 24:23;
25:24; 28:9
wanted [51 4:21; 11:9;
12:9; 13:6
warned [1] 16:7
warnmted [1] ?1:12
wesk [4] 26:15; 27:3, 19;
'29:17
weeks (3] 28:5, 15, 17 .
I
'
'
I

went (51 4:22; 5:4, 6;
20:6; 27:7
who: a 111 21:5
·whole {1] 5:14
wfth0ut"[1] 23:20
3:1;
26:3,6.
9:5.
women's [11 17:12
words[2J 11:13; 26:1'1
working [11 6:5
[2j B:7; 10:20
[1] 1.8:14
. wreStling [1] 8:7
-Y-
year [1} 16:16
young [221 6:16; 7:3, 22,
.23; 9:2' 6, 6', 1 0:6; 11'.1;
13:16; 15:6: 19:16; 21:2,
21, 23; 23:16, 20; 24:6,22;
25:21.
yours [1] 23:3
youth [1) 19:22
youths [2] 21:18,26
.. _ .. __ _
34
.
,r"'{
'1
()
.(..)
... -.-.:.-.. -..
,,,
COMMONWEALTH OF PE-NNSYLVANIA
THIRTIETH STATEWIDE IN\fES'fiGATif':IG GRAN_D }URY
J IN RE: NOTICE NO. 29
.1 WITNESS:
II DATE:
9 _PLACE:
10
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
OF GRAND JURY
GMY SCHULTZ
JANUARY 12, 2011, 12:02 p.M.
STRAWBERRY SQUARE
VERIZON TOWER, EIGHTH FLOOR
WALNUT STREET


PA. 17120
11
12
STEPHANIE McCARROLL
1
'FOREPERSON ·
RENEE HARTMAN,
1J
14 CQUNSEL PRESENT:
1 !> OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY "GENERAL
BY: JONELLE'ESHBACH, ESQU1RE
1 6 FRANK FINA·, ESQUIRE
17
FOR --COMMONWEALTH
16 PENNsYLVAN1A STATE UNIVERSITY
19
BY: BAI.OWIN, ESQYIRE
. fOR- -·'GARY. SCHULTZ
"
22
23
25
. 3 WITNESS
SHANNON'MANDERBACH
PUBLIC
·.INDEX
f)(;\MINATION
GarY schu_ltz
,
10
11
"
13
"
"
16
17
10
19
"
21
22
23
"
"
PAGE
GARY called as._a witness,·.
2 b'ain9 sworn, testified as follows:
EXAMINATION
BY MS. ESHBACH:
Q would you please-introduc_e yourSelf
e to the Grand Jury" and spen your laSt name. for the
9 court reporter's benefit?
10 A sure. My name is Gary schultz,
11 S-'c-h-!-1-1-t-z. I am· a. retired senior vice
12 president for finance and business at Penn state
13 University,
14 Q are accomPan_i ed today by counse 1,
ts Cynthia Ba-ldwin;_ is that correct?_
16 A That is correct.
17
Q when did you reti.re· from the
10 university'/
1 A In June of 2009 .
2o. Q In June of. 2002, did you occupy that
21 pOsition· as senior vite president?
.A Yes,_I.did.
23 Q you eXplain tp the Grand
<!4 JurY: 1n'that _.CapaCity what operations of ·the
2s unfversity were.under your authority'/
A Within an academic institution,
2 we have the 'ch1of academic Officer. That's
3 commonly referred to as.the provost. That's not
·4 me. I rea1_1Y run the ·operations of the
s univer'sftY;. the physical plant, ali 'the faci11t1es
6 and serVices of those facilities, al'l the housing
7 and food services; 1f you have ever been on Penn
a state campus, th.e 'Nittany Lion Inn, the airport,
9 a11' kinds· of printing and. fleet, human resol(rces·,.
10 university police, and all thB finanCe elements of
11 the universitY WhiCh;would include the controller,!
12 the-budget office and the investment off_ice:.
13 9 With regard to Penn Sta'te's athletic
14 Program, tne Grand Ju·ry has already the
ts athletic could you uxplain your·
16 position_.Vis-a-vis Mr .. curiE!y as tha athletic
17 dj rector?
18 A Yes. Mr. curley directly r'eport:s to
19 the President of the' uniVersity,- but· kind pf a
20 day-to-day wcirking arrarigement is ttiat he· would
21 often beha-ve 11 ke he reported- to me as we 11.
22 .Q I'd like tci direct.your attention to
a time around spring break· of 2002 as it's Qeen
24 reported to us. Po _you being and
2s req\-lested to atte'nd a meeting with coach Paterno
·: . .! __
'"").
< .
I
()
()
1_-,_ - ------1 -----
1 to report an unusual incident?
A r do recall such a rneeting,
Q Would you p"lea.se tall· the Grand
4 Jurors what you remember; everything that you can
5 remembe'r ·aQout that incident and the 'time that it
6 occurred?
A Yes.· r belieVe the meeting occurred··
. ·. - _,.·-·
in my office. It incl!Jded"'tti'e ·athletic director,.
9 'rim·curley, and co<ic;l1 Paterno. CoaCh Paterno
io wanted t_he meeting. J:"t; esseritialJy called at
11 hiS requeSt·. He that 'observed
12 some behayiOr in -the football locker room that w_as.
13 disturbing. I 'believe- the ·I got was it
14 was "inappropriate he· Wanted' to bring that to-
111 rim. Curley and my attent.i_on,
iii Q_ ·_·specifically, did coach Paterno te_lJ
11 you who· had.observed this inappropriate .dis.turbing
1 e
"
20 having the that·it was a or a
21 g·rad .stu.dent that· observed purported i'nd dent
1
22 Q · Did you know whci ·1t-was had
23 ·allegedly engaged in this .inaPpropriate con·duct?
24 A Well, yes.
Q · Who was it?
A He. told me that ft was. Jei-ry sandusky
2 an1"'5ome unnamed young boy, .
o. who was Jerry sandusky? who did You
4 know ·Jerry 'sandusky _to be at that time?
·A .Wasthis-in2002?
. Q Yes, please;
·A _well, in 2002 Jerry Sandusky was
e retired from coaching-at Pelln' st'B.te and, you know,
9 continued to have involvement with the Second
111 Mile.
11 Q What's the secOi1d Mi 1 e?
12. A -_I· me·ati, the SeCorid Mile is a
13 program that r- think· Jerry follnded that .provides,
14 opportunities for· children who might have had some
15 difficultly in their early life and -gi-ving them
u life skills and mentoril1g to try to improve their
1·1 futurtJ,
Q Ii' s· a that helps
19 children?
A It's my understariding, yes, it's not
l1 fOr profit.
22 Q · fnddent' that was reported to you
23 by Paterno, wer'e the" Woi-'ds disturbing and
were those Paterno's wo_rds7
"H A ·I don·•t- rem_e.mber his precise \vQrds,_
-'---
1 I'm using· words· now, when I tell you, that waS the·
2 impression that I had. I don•·t recall his exact
J words.
Q Again, where was this incidt:!nt
5 supposed to have oCcurred?
·'· .·.··'A'" ".t' believe it was in the Lash
7 BUilding .
Q What kind of a facility_ iS that?
A ·wen, the- Lash. Building is
10 football building, Tile coaches have their offiCes
n there and-it's the 'team's locker' room,
12 Q. That would be a ·building that would
13 be e';{peCf:ed that_ Jerry sandusky would have acc.ess
14 to as a, fo·;mar
ts, A. With all the-years of-serviCe·
H 'Je_rry had, I b"eHeVe that when he to
11 retire, that he continued to have relationships
10 with tha football program and access to the
19 building.
2o Q While you.'re on the subject of h1s
21 retirement, what were th6 of his
22 retirement? there anything uriUsual about his
23 retirement .that you can reca117
24 A No, I candidly have recollections
2 5 that coach Paterno and Jerry had reached a point
1 where I think· coach paterna felt it would be· best
2 to make a coaching. change., I had that underlying·
· 3 feeling or understanding, . JerrY was: enrolled i.n
4 the Cqmmonwealth state Employee Re_ti remen"t; System,
e which at.Penn state have the Option to
elect into,
1. It .turns .out at the time that he was
contemplatiflg retirement,_ there was_ a-retirement
9 incentiVe. I think they Called it a ret·l r·ement
10 winli_ow something that was referred to as
11 But in other words, if. you retired by a certain
12 dat·e, ·a window of time, Your retirement was
13 . enhanced,
1t. so that as_ kind of a factor
u; or:·a key factor in deciding ·the timing·of his
16 Which ·I beTiE!ve the- win.dow Would close
11 at ·the and o_f June in that partfcular Year. s_o if
1a he--didn't inake the decision to retlr'e by-the end
19 of June, he would have lost the benefit of that
zo early retireine11t wind9w.
21 Q Do. you recall knowing of any other
22 reason that might" have motivated him to retire at
n that time?
24 A No.
2s Q Did hi ill to be spel'ldiilg a lot·
-1
-- . - ----
',_, - •
1 of -time with the Second Mile program at that tirile?
2. A :i: .wasti' t that close to hoW he spent
J his -time,_ He certainly Was visiblE} as an
4 of the ·second Mile. They used refer to them· as
s Jerry's·kids. so his name was clearly a brand
6 assotiated_w1th the second but I no idea
1 how·much. time he physically spent.
!l You said that you did n'ot have -- did
g you·ever meet directly W1th Mike .McQuearY?
10 A' Yes;
11 Q ·When?
d ·;,.. "I don't recall the exact.
13. In fact, it was this morning wflen
14 you asked me a question th11t :r first recalled that
1s there was ·such a. meeting.
"
17
'Q You don'_t: recall where it tool< place?
A I thinl{ it occur-red. in my office I
10 believe.
19 Q At that time, did Mcqueary relate to
20 he had observed iil the lock.er room?
21 f;. NQ, MY recollection was· McQUeary and
· 22 Joe both descr·!bed what was _(>bserved in a
2J very general _way, There ·Was no' details.
24 Q Did )lou, ,nevertheless, form an
H about wQat tYpe of conduct this· might
..
1 have been that occurred 'in .. the locker room?
A Well, l had the-impreSsio-n that it
3 was ·Te1_11ng you what-kind _of thing
4 :r had in my .mind without baing cl!iar, without him
s nie, .. bUt, yo·u· know,· r had the feeHng that
6 there was p-Crhaps soti1e kind of wrestling around
1 · ilct1 vi t)' and maYbe.· · m1 qht have grabbed the
o '1aun{i s getlital s-.or · ng of· that' Sort 1 s
9 :'"kind of 'the impress-ion ,that I h!ld. -
to Q woulc;t'.you Consider tl'\at to be"
11 inappropriate sexual conduct?
12 A oh, absolutely. Well, I don
1
t knoW
13 the def·ln.ition of··sexUal,.'but that's certir1n1y
1 for somebody to do.
' I 15 Q· It would give -you_ pause 'qr con(:E!rn if
16 an adult-male and an· underag·e mal_e were in a
17 shower and that adult male QrB.bbed the genitals
1 a ihe .you·nger male_?_
A Yes,
Q .DO you·not recall anything-more
21 speCific than that :thB.t_Mike McQuear'y repo_rted ·tO
2 .,Y..1>U7
A I ·do 110t recal1
1
no,
'4
Q Did you consult with Tim .curley as to
2s what be done as a result of:this 2002
1.0
1 report?
2 · A I believe Tini and I had -- we
3 had converSation at that time.
Q Whose recommendations.-- what was
5 done, first of. a117
. 6 A Wa11, my recollection was -- and I'm
1. not so I'm not as· confident, but I
o think we decided it wotJ1d be appropriate to just
g say tO Je.rry- that you shouldn't be" bringing _-the_
-10 Second Mile kids Onto campus in .the football
11 building, so I be1ieve Tim communicated to Je'rry
12 that that type of thing should not b"e in
13 the future. i: also hilVa .a recolleCtion we
1'4 asked the sh11d protection agency to_ look 1ilto. the
ts matter.
u Q When you say child protective agency,
11 was t'hat a University department or off
lB university?
19. A Yeah, ·My· understanding is it's
ao somehow affilia:ted with the Commonwealth of
21 Pennsylvania._·
22
"
"
"
Q Who specifically asked that· that
investigation be d_ona?
A I don't_recall.
Q was it you?
.A It may have been. I ctOn•t recall._
Q Do you remember to whom you would
3- have Or· anyone wo_uld have made such a reqUe!it, an
4 1ndiv.idUal_, t_he name of the age-ncy,. it _was
5 located?
A I don't rec{lll the details, but I can
1 tell you !hat thi!re ·was an investigation earlier
a that the ch"ll d protattion agency -- an'd I may have
• _g that tl!chn1ca11y incorrect:·, -but it Was this agency
10 that I'm referring to that conducted. an _earHer
11 1nvt'istigat1-on, so my recollectio'n wouict· he in
12 2002 that they. ware asli.ed tO look into this
13 allegation.
14 Q Now, I don't want to_ nec'essari.1y get
l 5 from 2002, YoU.
1
re referr'i ng tiow to an
1nc;1dent- that was· rep'orted'in 1998 involving Mr.
11 sandusky and ·_one or two young boyS on t'he cam'p\ls.
lB at the university:·is that correct?
"
A I believe tt was in '98, Y.es.
Q was· reported to the
"
21 University police, coi-rect?.
22 A My recollection is that the mother
23 contac;:ted univer:sity police with regard to her son
24 and that that started a Police investigation.
"
Q Are you practically certain that
"
.I-,. . ..... - .
,..···
.
1 :there· was a poi ice inVestigati-on in 1998?
2 A" Wall,_ I were
3 involved, but my recollection is that it was
4 OeCided that this child .protection agency would be
s -the. better entity to do the investigation.
Q were you, yourself, -ever qliastioiled
?· with to that -'98_-incident?
a A :t don't recall I no.
9 Q Po yoti know 1f any criminal charges
10 arose from the·1998 report?.
11 A To the ·best of mY. knowledge, there
ll:: .were none.
13 Q What· did you understand the 199.8
14 incident, in a general way, to allege?
15 A Ag"ain, :r ·thought that it had some
16 bas1s of inappropriate· behavior, but ·without
17.spe"cif.ics at a;ll.
1t1 a·· At .the time of findilig out in ·2002
any
19· about" the .allegations of the·inapproprh.te conduct
20 "fci. the shower bY sandusky, you aware Of the
21 1998 <!.llegations.--
22 A That's correct.
23 Q -·- of. the sam13- nature involving
2 4 sandusky?
25 A ·An·allegati"on, yes.
.
1 Q Knowing that there was an incident in
2 a boy or boys and the ·1ncident"in
l 2002·, did you not feel it was appropr'late.to
4 further 1nvestigate the incident to' determine if
5 something truly sexually inappropriate had
. 6 ·occurred on campus?
A Yes. '98 was investigated.
s. There was an allegation. I have no idea what the
9 conclUsion of that investigation was, whether
10 there was anY merit to the-allegation or.·not. :t
11 did have -Impression that it: concluded without'
12 any charges being filed. The incident in 2002,
13 again, I recall that it·was also turned over to
14 that same age_ncy for. i nvesti gat1 on and 1 t; s
ts appro_priate for them to.do that, not for me to
16 determine the name of the boy. I wasn't doing an
l7 inves.tigaticin.
18 Q· Do you remember whether the District
At;torney·w!ls consulted all in 1998
20 inves.tigation?
. . 21 A I believe the District Attorney-was
·22 in 1998. I think, ag.lin, my reco_lle_ctiOn · __ thiS
2:> is a long time ego. But my recollection was that
24 between police chief the
26 District Attorney and perhaps university legal
>5·

14. 16
I '
Q your testimOiw that you .believed
2 the 2002 :Incident was reported to the same agency,
3 that child protective _servic9s agency, for an
a. investigation as the '98 one had bean?
.!5 A :rhat's my recollection, yes,
6 Q you did not meet with Jerry_ sandusky
1 aboUt
' A
any of these incidents whatsoever?
No, X d-Id not.
Q l?id Tim curley··report back to you
10 about his contact With. Jerry sanduSky
·11 the incident 1"n 2002?
12 A I can'_t· say·for sure, I hild the .
: n ·impression thit Tim did follow through make
n sure··Jerry that he was no longer
l,S permitted to bring second Mile children into the
u foOtball faCility.
17 Q oid you, yourself, ·ever attempt to
18 detefmi ne: the identity or age of the in the
19 shower in the 2.00"2. incident?
A f'.lo,
2 1 Q oo you know if anyone in the
22 universitY under your auspices then when· you were
23 senior vice president attempted to learn that
2 4 informatiOn?
A No.
1 counsel an.d myself, the decision was mada to usa
2 the child protection agency as the appropriate
l agency.
4 Q Who was the university counsel
5 when that· decision· was n1ade?
6 A His ·name was wendell courtney,
7 Q He was with the firm of McQuaide
a Blasko?
A That's correct,
10 a oo You believe t;hat you may be 1n
u possession of anY notes· regarding the. 2002
12 incidli!nt that you maY have written
13 wl1at occurred?
A I·haVe.none of those in my
u possession·. I believe that there were probably
16 nates at th.e time. Given ·my retirement in
11 1f. .I even had them ai.: that time,· somethlng
u that old would probablY ·been destroyed. I
19 had quite a number of fi1es that I considered
20 confidential matters that go "back years that
a1 didn't _any longer seem pertinent. I wouldn't be
22 sLlrprfsed. In fact, I Would gUess if-there were
23 any notes·,. theY were destroyed on or before 2009.
24 Q You indi.cated ·that you con.sulted with
25 'ri111 curlay. oid you agree with his
:- ,_
t
ft
"1-
1 rec\lmmendati<ms as to how .thiS -should be
A I don't know_ if it waS a
3 recommendation but, yes, we reached agreement. I
4 can't remember -if I recommended, he recommended or
5 'who :.recommended, but at the conciusion of
6 disc-ussion, there was agreement. There· was no
. 1 disagreement.
'Q oid you, yoursel_f,_ directly cotlsult
With Grliham Spani'er, the Pre-sident of the
\
10 unfversity, concern1ng the 2002 inddent?
11 A I· believe so. It was a routine way
12 _of _kin·d of han'i:n1ng busiliesS
1
that I would've had
13 a conver·sation the Pf!'!sident about suCh a
.1 matter, yes.
Q oid the president Of ·th·e university
lt!i express concern about this incident at the time it
17 was reported to him?
"
A very s_imilar to mine ··and Tim's, yes.
19· We toOk it S!ilriously. ·
Q Did president Spanier. appear to
approve.of the· way in which. you and Athletic
22 oi.'rec:tor curley 'han-dl6d this?
23 A YeS. Again, tiw recollection was that
4 there
" Q
was agreement.
Do . you. kno:w- i f Presidellt Spanier was·
1 aware -Of 1998 inc·ldent at--the time of thO 2002
2 incident?
A r·beli_eve ·so, yes.
·4 Q Why you believe so?: oit.t"you te11
him or· was· it discus·sed?
A Again, I don't. remember the spi:!cif·ics
1 bf .the _conversation I had with him, but it would
J.l. have been a r.outine of way of.·hand.Hng
9 .that I ·)'lould h<ive kept him informed 'llbout
10 the· '98 as well as 'the 2002 -reports.
11 Q You knew,- of course, that the
12 incident in 1998-'was alleged to have taken place
i 3 very··simi1arly -_in the. Lash :Building'_ in the. shower
1.4 with a young boy or· f!1ore than one young boY?
15 A I honestly don't recall that '98 I
l'6 kneW anything about the details of what the
17 allegation was from thE! mother, :r do recall there
1 e was a ltlOthllr with a' young boy who reported so111e
1!1 inappropriate· behavior of. Jerry Sandusky. BUt· I
20 don·'t recall it being re'ported in the LaSh
21 Building_ or.imything _of that sort.
22 Q The reports on that were something
23 that yOu could have had access to as·.the d1rect'or;
24 the :your purview of· the
2s universHy; is that correct?
A I probably would have been f\ble to,
2 but it was my practice that·:r clidn-•t ask the
3 police for poiHe reports.
Q In 2002 ·when you became aware of this
s allegation -in the shower, did you then seek·out
6 the _1998 report to f1nd out _what it _was that·
1 ·sandusky specHi callY was- all aged to have done?
A No, I did not. H0i1est1y, I· don't
9 know what the- procedures are, 1 assume that that
10 repqrt was with the child protection agency and
11 not Penn state university Police. I -thought the
12 pOlice turned it over and that investigation waS
13 than handled i_ndependently.
Q You thought that the university
1'5 police 'would -not hava· kept any kind of Of
t6 that investigation?
1 A That tfle_re was a -- yeah,- I t11ink
10 they would have a record that a .complaint was
.1!) received and that it was turned over, aut I
20 wouldn't have assumed that th'ey would have the
21 report. from the other agency,
22 Q You wouldn't assume that the poli.ce
23 would kile'p reports of all their ilwestigations
2 4 that they have conducted?.
2S A They didn't t:onduct it. The other
1 agency did Was my ul-!derstanding. So,· yeah, ,I
2 believe they reports of_ t!lat
.J they have done, but thiS :r thought was turned over
to another agency.
Q You knew the univ·ersity police were
involved i_n the 1998 investigation, right?
A Yes.
Q BUt you didn't atternpt to find ·ou1:
·e whether they -had anything that would
10 or cause you to cOm_e to some cOnclusions regarding
u the 2002 ·;ncidetit and whether or not it might have
l2 actually occurred? ,That didn't occur'to you, to
13 checlt. into the 1998 incident more firrnar?
H A No,
l5 Q And you didn't attampt to ·find out
1 6 anything._ about the identity Of t!le youth that was
11 in the shower in 20027
18 A No,
19 Q You've referenced and Mr. curley- also
20 referenced re_porting this incident to· the second
21 Mile. You've. indicated that you thought this was.
22 a·chnd from the second Mile in the 2002 incident
2J and we know that_in.thc 1998 incident it was a
24 second Mile child. why did you think that a
2s second Mile child was involved in the ioo2
"
"
I
I
I
I
()

· .. 1 i.ncfdent when you didn't investiqate to make sure?
2 A We11,--I'm nOt sure_ that I knew fOr
·J sure i't was second M11e child in 2002. I think
4 I_ knew that it was a younger boy, I'm not sure I
5 knew definit1ve1y it was· a ·second Mile child.
s , Q o·t'd you have· occasion to .see
7 in the· Company· of young boys who were af.filiat"ed
a w1'th second Mile P.NQram?
g A I would see JE!rry. from time to :time.
10' at--second Mile events in the presence of lots of
1·1 children, sure.
12 Q Did yoU·ever sec· him on
1J property at any time with' boys who were of _that
14 age,_ second Mile age?
15 A Well, teChnically,-. I some.
16 of the second 'Mile fundtaising events and so forth
11 would held on university pf.operty in ei"ther the
lB NittanY Lion :rnn ol" the Penn stater. so, yes; t
i9 wOuld see hi1n at those events.
2.0 ·Q Did you ever see him around at any
21 football gamas OT football practices w1th. kids?
22 A ·No.
23 ·Q ;rt that becauSe you didn'.t go or
24 becauSe_ you didn't see him?
25 A I·don't.go to the practices, :C do
1 to There's a hU[,dred some
2 people. I don't know if I saw·Jerry there.
::1 Q so you're indi.c<iting that as far as
4 yOu know, no one from the university inVestigated
s the 2002 incident at all'/
ti A Yeah, AS far as I know, the.
7 uni"Versi"ty asked the other. agency to follow up as
1
/i.1:1 ctid 1n ·,98.
9 Q orie tnore tbing I just want tO be
1 o clear on, Wh"en you met w1th Mike McQueary, was it
.· 11 or waS it n"ot you·r i111pression that he was
12 reporting_ inappropriate sexual conduct, your
13 impression ·--
'.
A Yes.
15 Q Inappropriate sexual conduct by Jerry
1 6 sandusky?
"
A You know, I. don't know what sexual
111 coriduct's definition to be, but r told you that my
19 impre:ssion was -- you _know, .. Jerry was the kind of
20 guy that he regularly kind of likE! "physically
21 wrestlt!d people. He woulcj punch you 1n arm.
He SliiP _you on the back. He would grab you
23 and get you in a headlock, etc. That was a
24 coinmon clowning around thing.
25 I had the impression. that maybe
.
1 something like that was going on in the locker
2 rool)l and perhaps in _the course. of that, that
J somebody might have grab_bed .the genitals, ·that
4 Jerry might have grabbed the genitals of the boy.
s I had no impression that it was anything more
6 :Serious than that. ·rhat was my impressioh at the
1 time.
·. ·•
Q 01dn't you previously us in our
9 inte.rview·that you had the inipression -- I have lt
10 written down that this was inappropriate sexual
11 conduct?
12 A Again, depending on What you. call --
13 :r mean; grabbinq. the genit;als of the boy 1s what I
H had in mind. N\)W, ·is that sexual? Yes.
15 Q We can al1 atji'ee that. an adult male
16 under. no circumstanceS other than a doctor should
17 be grabbing the genitals of a young boy?
"
A I agree completely with that.
19 . Q that it doesn't happen
20 accidently?
21 A Rather than just ag·reeing to I
22 it was sexual conduct or misconduct, I 1m
23 what I _really rni"ght have gone
24. on. You yqU can define that as you want.
I'm telling you what I tllought was going on ..
'
Q You a.gree with me t"hat if it·
2 had bean sod_o"my, that is, anal sex, that wouid
3 clearly be inappropria-te sexual conduct?
4 A No doubt:
5 B.Y MR. FINA!
6 Q sir,_::r just want to be r.eal clear on
1 this. It was: your impression .after you tal ked to
o that this was about some physical
9 conduct, some horsing around; Some wrest"Jing that
l.O resulted in contact with -a boy's genitals in the
11 context of wres"tling. That was your impression of
12 what McQueary was reporting.to you?
13 A I don't recall what McQueary
14 specifically repOrted, but I ca.n teJl you that I,
15 after going through whatever we went through in
16 2003, had that impression that that was probably
17 the kind of thing that taken place.
"
Q Nothing else? No further sexual
19 co.nduct7
20 A Nq, I had no basis --
"
Q No ··intercourse?
22 A I had. no basis of an·ything else, and
23 I only formed the impressiOn that I had on
kind of what I obseirved of JerrY and the kind Of
25 horsing around that he doeS.
"
r
·.
\
'
\
()
Q No, no. Please follow my
2 quesl:icining. I'm not ask_ing you what impression
3 ·you of your Observations of Mr. sandusky over
4 the-years.- I'm-asking you of yOur impression,
s wh_at you learned McQueary; what he
6-. observed. in-the ·shower.
A I don't recall himself telling us
wluit he obs&i'ved .specifically.
Q What generally did he report?
A I believe that; he said 'that he saw
11 something _that he felt was ina_ppropriate between
'erry and' a boy.
13 Q And from his _sa¥ing_ along the line of
H something inappt·opri ate, you took, ·oh, theY must
15 hav.e been wrestling and maYbe he touched the kid's
lti groin?
11.
A .. I _could imag{ne that lnig.ht have. taken
1e __ yes.
19 Q Was McQueary upset? was he emotional
20 this?
A No, I don't ·-recall hint being upset,
22 · Q He was calm; he was colleCted?
.:iJ A Yes.
2 Q · Nobody, not you
1
nor curl eY, nor
25 anybody else went back to McQueary and asked· for
1 specifics or. at the time asked for specifics?
A No. Again, I recall_ ad that ·we asked
3 thfs ·agency to the investigation and r would
4 let them follow up.
Q The· agency that you were never
.6 iritervi_ewed by, correct?
A That
1
s. correct,
Q Are you aware of. anybody at the
9 university who_was _interviewed by any agencY about
lO·this incid-ent?
11 A About .2002, I
_12 Q How is 1t that this agenc_y, this
lJ whatever it was, 'would evell know Mlo to tal.k to,
l4-. to talk to McQueary or to talk to yOu or tO talk
1-s Who·was suppos-ed relay this
1 6 i nforrilation?
1'
A 1-don't recall, I don't recall who
10 coritacted the {lgency, I'll telling you, to the
19 best of my recolJection,, J .believe that the agency
20 was follow -up on the invest·igation.
21 Q At no time did-you contact any law
22 eritity or individuals?
'l3 . 'A I had the i1npressioil that that agency
24 had· law enforcement· authority.
25 Q The agency that you can't identify?
"
A We11, the child protection agency,
the same one that I think handled the '9B
J
Q. Sir, it might surprise you to know
5 that the '98 investigation was handled by your
,6 police department and th!}re
1
s a --
7 · A In 1 ts anti rety?
Q Ther!"'S a 95-page police report· on
9 that inCident,
A rn it's anti rety?
11 Q correct.
12 A Wow, I thought that it was turned
l3 .Over to chi1.d protection agency for.
1 investigation.
15 Q Did it ever-_octur to anybody. that the
police might need to_be contacted, either Campus
l7 [,!Qlic;e or this entity knowh as the Pennsylvania
lB state Police?
'"
A I don't .. recall that we about
20 it being turned· over to the. police·.
Q That was ·never part of the
22 discussions between you and curley or you and
2l Spanier or you and anybody· e_he?
2 4 A No,
25 Q Are you aware of any memorandums or
1 any written documents other than your own notes
2· that existed either at the t1me of this -fncident
3 or after this incident abotJt the events?
A No,
Q would that be standard? would thilt
s be the way the university operates when an
7 a11egat4on 4s made against a !=Urreilt employee or a
ij verY famous, prior employee, that' noth1ng be put in
9 writinQ?
LIJ A The allegations c&me across as not
11 that s-e-rious. It didn't appear at that tirtie,
12 based o'n what 'was reported, to be th'!ot serious, l\
We had no indication a :1 13 that a crime had occurred.
14 crime h_ad occurred;
15 Q Do you recollect going-to.Joe.
H ·Pate'rno
1
s house on a sunday to be_ informed of
11 this?
"
A No.
"
Q NO, that you don't recollect? No,
"
that it did not happen?
"
A No,· I, don't recollect it. Again, I
"
thought I .was 1 nfonned· in a ng that Joe and
23 Tim and I had at my office. Now, could it have
happened at Joe's house? Possibly,
25 Q would that be unusual, .to be called
I <
,-..,
"
1 Joe house oil a .sunday to. discuss 1 contained in the MaSter Transcript.)
2 •something that wasn't even criminal or.sexual? 2 (Witness and counsel ·enter ihe room,)·
3 A wall, it'wasn't B.n eVeryday thing, 3 BY MS. ESHBACH:
4 ·but Tim and r an·d 'Others would meet with Joe· 4 .Q can you give me an example• of What
_weekends,, svndays "and ·so on. But, yeah,· it would . 5 you woUld' consider to be inappropriate conduct
·G._ be an important matter if we were meeting wi_th Joe 6 that cr1mirial7 . We did a lot of talking
1 on a sunday, 1 about-what's inappropriate, what's triininal, not
u BY MS. ESHBACH: a criminal. Give _me ·an example of conduct ---for
9· Q In termS of univerSity. policy at·-the
10 tiine that you ware the senior vice how
ll·Would a-matter _of 1nappl'opriate condUGt by an
12 be handled, Someth1ng-along.,th8 lir\es. of
13 perhaps· -.a theft, c·rimi.nal coriduct?
14 A If there· was an allegation• of a
15 criminal act, 'i't would be turned over to the
. u university p_olice for handl_ing. on oc.cas1on,
11 deperiding on,the nature of it, university internal
18 audit·mi9ht Qet involved 1ni.ti.&lly to "do.some
19 work jw;t·-to confirm an.all.egation.
2.0 Q If. there had been inappropriate or
21 ·crimi_n·al-. conduct by a student,_ would that go to
22 the provost side of things or-would come to
·_23 your: side of. t_hings'7
- 24 A Well, if it was a act, it
2$ be investigated by the police, yes,
.
·g example, a university professor does something t.o
· 16 a stu·dent and a student reports it. I assume that
11 Would go to-the universitY' police, right?
12 A No, not necessarily. You asked for
13 an Not all inappropriate ·conduct is
! 14 cr-Iminal', cursing at a student in class,_if
1!i you're a faculty member losing yoUr -temper,
u perhaps might.·not Pe criminal, but it's not
t? appropriate for a faculty member to do such a
u thing.
19 Q How. about an adult individual"·b-e{ng
20 naked il'l the shower. with a young boy ftnd tOl\Ching
2i that young boY7 Clearly right?
12 A Yeah, I would say •.
23 Q But not criminal i11 your mind, not
24 p6hmt1ally criminal?
B A I -Oidn.'t get the impressiOn that
31
()
. 32
1 Q How aboUt an incident of criminal
2 conduct. involving a student athlete? How would
3 .that be handled?
A If ·it was it would he the
s pOlice. if'it's no't, there's an office. of student
6 conduct,
Q. How about, again, inappropr1ate
o ):onduc't _of an employee of tlie univer"sity?
9 A If there-was .an alle9at1on of some
·- 10 .conduct, it ,handled by the
11 police.
" Q
And; finally_,- a person in the status
t3 of· Mr. slindusl(y who had acce!is to the
though he was· _no 1 anger an employee?
1s A same.
.. Q saying that this -incident
11 referi-ed·to the university police for
lO you didn
1
t think it Was
1!1 criminal?
20 .•. A There WM no indicatiori that it was.
··;;··· Ms-. ESHBACH: You can step .out .with
22 counSel and we· will see _if the Grand has any
23 more que.stions.
(Witness and counsel le.qve the rooni .. )
25; (Proceadihg_s before the. Grand -Jury
.
1 there was something like that on •.
2 Q' I You said that. you thOught
3 perhaps he 'had -grabbed his genitals}'
A well, yOu know, whether· he -- I don't
6 know. I mean, I Wasn't told what was. really going
6 on. BUt if. he _did, 1f was it was,
7 shouldn't do thn. That's. inappropriate. I do'n'-t
o know if thdt's cr1a1inal, If it's in t.ha context
9 of wre$t1ing or something like that, ! don't know.
l.Cl Q The Grand Jurors would like to know
11 your age.
A sixty-onE).
"
"
Q You rati red 1 n May of. 2009?
A June.
Q June "of 2009?
A Yes •
n Q When you retired, were you aware of
10 any .othflr allega'!:ions of sexual conduct by Jerry
19 sandusky against any Other young boys not in 1998
20·and not ·in 2002, but subsequent to that?
· A No.
"
"
"
Q You knew of nothing?
A Nothing.
Q You look young for your age.
A Th!lnk you;
.
.
I
\
(Witness cons1,11ts with coun·sel?)
2 BY MS. ESHBACH:
Q Since this incident came to light 1n
,4 2002· involving sandusky and this boy fn the
e shower,· did the univer'sity ·do anything.fn te,rms of
adopting a_ policy with regard to nonstudent youth,
7 being on--university facilities in the
s ci that this Young bay was?
A No,·· r· dori't bali'eve so.
10 Q p·fd. do anything to prevent
11' something like this . .from happening again other
12 than telling Jerry he',s not supposed-to
13 Dring .a kid on
14 A wal1,·we did that.
15 q But that wa.s On the honor system,
1 6 ri gh1;?
1? A Wel1-. ·r don't know. I think Tim
u handled it and I'm not quite sure what the
19 _enfor-cement m!;JChil.nism of that was. Xt may have
20 bean an _honor system,· I think' Tim trusted Jerry·
21 and·if ·Jerry said he under'stood_ and wOuldn't do
22 it, what he believed ..
_23 · , Q As far as you khow; the· univet•sity
24 ,tOok :110 to prevent sOmet;hing this from
2!i happening aga-in?
"
"
.1 A ·well; with regard to Jerry, I think
2 we did, yeah .
. . Q How-about· ather indi.vid_l.litls?
A I ·dan.'t kn-ow exactly how to answBr
5 ·that. I can imag-ine instances whera adult men.
6 woUld perhaps be-in the shower with yourig bays .
.Q In a j;Jroup7.
A Perhaps,
· 9 aut. not alone?
1o_ A Perhaps or_ maybe not .. I don't know.
11 I mean, ·otir recreation far example,
12 sli!pa·rate from.the football which has
13 some_ restrictions, are pretty much ope_n.
14 Q Again, .. that would- be a
1.5 where there would be likely a number of persons
16 present?
11 A could Pe, yeah.
u Q But the ·L_ash Build-Ing was not a
111. public bui_ld1ng?
20 A No. aUt, you -know, it'.!! a bui'lding
21-thp.t-geher.ally is active. it's used with a11 th"e
2·2 individual.;; on_ the team, the coaches, all the
23 support- stli.ff a11d sa on. Football is a a
24 ·year program. xt's less open than a pubHc
25 recreation facilitY would be, but I don't want to
1 .characterize it a:; a place only usEid like
. 2 on a limited basis. used regularly,
q would you agree with me that a
Fri'day night the start of break,
5 there probably Wouldn't be very many people !n
6 that bui1d1ng7
A Probably, yes,
Q And a foriner staff member would
9 und_erstanil that, would know that kids would be
1 o gone?
"
12
1.3
"
10
"
"
10
"
"
21
"
,,
"
"
A Probably, yes, sure.
MS. ESHBACH.: That's it.-
(Testimony' concluded ·at' p.·m.)
I hereby certify that the proceedings
2 and ey{dence are -contain'ed fully and ac17urataly in
J the nhtes taken l.)y me o_n the within
and that thiS is·.a correct transcript_ of the same.
1.0
11
12
"
"
"
"
"
'•
'"
"
"
2 1
"
"
2<
"
"
()····
·c)
-A-
able [11 19:1
absolutely [1] 10:12
·acad_emrO [2] "4:1
access [4] 7:13, 18; 18:23;
30:13
accidently [1] 23:20
accompanied [11. 3:14
accuratelY {1) 36:2
acrosa.£1] 28:10
[1l
activity [1] '10:7
actually [1] ·20:12
adOpting (1] 33:6
adult [5] 10:16, 17; 23:15;
31:19; 34;5
affiliated [2] 11:20; 21:7.
after [3] 24:7, 1 5; 28:3
[2] 28:J; 32: 1'9
agency 128] 11:14, 18;
12;4, 8, 9; 13:4; . 14:2, 3;
16:14; 18:2,:3; 19;10, 21;.
20:1; 4; 22:7; 26:3, 5;_ 9,
12, 18, 19, 23, 25; 27:1, 13
agree [5) Hi:25, 23:15, 18·, ·
24:1; 35:3
agreiain{;l[1] 23:21
agreement (3J 17;3, 6,_ 24
airport [1(4:8 .
. allegaflon .(10} 12:13;
13:25; 15:8, 10; 18:17;
19:5; .26:7; 29:14, 19; 30:9
·aJiega_tlon·s '[4] 13:19,-_21;
28:10; 32:18
allege [1) 13:'14
alleged [2)' 18:12; 1"9'.7
allegedly [1)· .6:23
alOne {1) 34:9 ·
along [2) 25:13; 29;12
alrnady [11 ·4:14
anal [1] 24:2
answer 1,11 34:4
anybody [6) 25:25; 26:8;
27:15, 2_3; 33:10
anyon(} [2] 12:3; 14:21
appear [2] 17-:20; 28:11
·approp,"raie[6] 11-:a·, 16·.3,
15; 16:_2; 31:17
· [1] 17:21
Srose. [1] -13:10
around f6J 4:23;· 10:6;
21:20; 22:24; 24:9, 25
arrangement [1] 4:2,0
asked [101 9:14; 11:14,
22; 12:12; 22:7; 25:25;
26:_1, 2, 20; 31:12
'asking 25·:2, 4
. SSl\IOCiated {1} 9:6
· assume [31 19:9, ·22:
31:10.
. [1] 19:20 ·
atlllete [1]_ 30:2
athlettc [5) .4:13, 15, 16_;
5:6; 17:21
attempt ]3] 14:17; 20:8, 15
[1) 14:23
attend [1] 4:25
attel')tiOn [2J 4:22; 5:1 e>
attorney [41 1:15; 15:19,
21,25
audll [11 29:18
auspices [1J_ 14:22
autliorlty (2] 3:25; 26:24
· aware [6], 13:20;. · .. 18:1;
19:4; 26:8; 27:25; 32:17
awa:y(1] 12:15
beck [4) 14:9; 16:20;
25:25
[1] 29:.19
. baldwin [21 '1:1&; 3:15
based [2) 24:23; 28:12
basls-[4] 13:16; 24:20, 22;
35':2
[1J 19:4
be'fore [3] -16:23;· 30:25;
35:4
bahEJve {1] ·4:21
behilvlor [4] 5:12, 18;
13:16; 18:19
believe [20J' 6:7, {3, 19;
7:6, 16: 8:16; 9:18; 11:2,
11; 12:19: 15:21; 16:10,
15; 11·.11: 1 8·:3, 4·, 26:2;
. 25:10; 26·:_19; 33:9
[2] 14:1;. 33:22
benefit [2) 3:9; 6:19
beet[3] 8:1; 13:11; 26:19
bellar [1) 13:5
between [3] 15:24; ·25:11;
27:22
blaako [1] 16:8
both [1] 9:22
boy's 10:8: 24:10
boys [6) 12:17; 15:2;
21:7, 13; 32:19; 34:6
brand [1) 9:5
{2] 4:23;.
bring [3) 5:14;_ 14:15;

bringing [1) 11:9
4:12
113) 7:7, 9, 10,
12, 19; 11:11; 16:13, 21;.
34:12,-18, '19,20;
buildings [11 34·,11
business {2] 3:12; 17:12
-C-
call [1] 23:12
called [51. 3:1; 4:24; 5:10;
8:9; 28:25
calm [1) 25:22
came(2] 3.3:3
campus [6] 4:8; 11:·10;
12:17; 15:6; 27:16; .33:13
candidly [1] 7:24
- capacitY [1 J 3:24
-cause [1] 20:10
certain [2] 8:1.1; .. '12:25
_certarrlry 121 9:3: 10:·13
certify [1) 36:1
otlange (1] 8:2
chat'acteriza [1] 35:1
chargosl.21 13:9; 16:12
check (1] 20:13
chlef[2] 4:2; 15:24
child [14) 11:14,'16; 12:8;
13:4; 14:3; 16:2; 19:10;
20:22, 24, 25; . 21:3, 5;
27:1, 13
ctitldrerl [4] 6:14, 19·,
14:15; 21:11
37
circumstance [1] 34:14
circumstances [4] 7:21;
9:13; 23:16; 33:8
class [1) 31:14
crear(3] 10:4; 22:10; 24:6
cloarly [3) 9:5; 24:3;
31:21
close [2) 8:1.6;. 9:2
clowning [1] 22:24
coach [8] -4:25; 5:9, .16;
6:23; 7:14, 25; 6:1
coaches [2) 7:10; 34:22
coaching [2] 6:8; 8:2
collectec:!-[1) 25:22
corilmon [1] 22:24
commonly (1] 4:3
communicated [1]· 11:11
comp_any [1] 21:7
19:18
completely [1) 23:18
concernf2] 1P:15; .17:16
concerning {1] 17:10
. [2] 15;11;
35:13
[2] 15:9; 17:5
concluslons·[1] 20:10
conduct (23] _5:23; 9:.25;
10:11; 13:19; 19:26;
22:12, 15;. 23:11,22: 24:3,
9, 19; 29:11, 13
1
21; 30:2,
6, 8, _10; 31:5,8, _13; 32:18
conduct's [1] 22:18
oonductect [2] 12:10;
19:24
· [1]-11 :7
I?Onfidentfa! [1] 16:20
confirm [1) 29:19
consider [2] 10;10; 31:5
(1) 113:19
consul! [2) 10:24; 17:6
consulted [2) 15:19; 16:24
consults [1] 33:1 .
contact [31 14:10; 24:10;
26:21
contacted {3] 12:23;
26;18; 27:16
contalmtd [2] 31 :1; _36:2
contemplating (1] 8:8
context[2] 24:11; 32:8
i
i
I
L __ j_,o·,
(').
.... _ ...
-.• -.----1-1----
continued [2] 6;9; 7:17
controllar[1] 4:11
conversation {31 11 :3;
17:13; 18:7
counsel-_,[8] 1:14; 3:14;
16:1' 4; 30:22, 24; 31 :2;
. 33:1
c0ursa[2] 1B:11; 23:2·
court 3;9
courtney [1] 16:6
crime [2] 28:13, 14
cclminal [18] 13:9; 29:2, ·
13, 15, 21, 24; 30:1, '4, 10,
19; 31:6, 7, 8, 14, 16,
24; 32:8
curley [1'1]. 4:16, 19; 5:9,
15; 10:24; 14:9; 16:25;
17;22; 20:19; 25:24; 27:22
currCrit [1] 28:7
curSing [1]·31:14
cynthia 121· 1:1 8; 3:15
• D·
date [2] 1:8; 8:12
day-to-day [1] 4:20
· . decided (3] 7:18; 11;$;
. 13:4
deciding [1] e:15
[3] 8:18; 16:-1,5
define [1]
defii'lltiori [2) _10:13; 2;2:18
deflnltlve)y [1] 21_:5
depiuimelit [2] ·11:11;
,, 27:6
depending [2] 23:12:
29:17
described [1] 9:22
[2] 16:18,·?3
details [3] 9:23; 12:6;.
18:16
determine {3] 14:18; 15:4,
16
difficultly [1] 6:15 . ·
d_lrect 4:22
directlY [3] 4:18; 9:9; 17:8
director [5] 4:15, 17; 5:8;·
17:22; 18:23
· disagreement [1] 17:7
discuss [1] 29:1
dlscussed"[1] 18:5
discussion [1] 17:6
discussions [11 27:22
. dlstrlct(3] 15:18,21,25
di$turblng [3] ·5:13, 17;
6:23
. _doctor [1] 23:16
documents(1] 28:.1
done [5] 10:25; 11:5;
19:7; 20:3
doubt [1] 24:4
down[1] 23:10
• E •
·earlier [2] 12:7, 10
eacly [21 6:15; 8:20
elghthl1l 1;g ·
elthec [3] 21:17; 27:16;
28:2
elect[1j 8:6
Qlementa (1] 4:10'
else [4] 24:18, 22; 25:25;
27:23
emotional [11 25:19
employee [6] _8:4;· 8;
29:12; 30:$, 14
employees [11 8:5
(3] 26:22, 24;
33:19
[1] 5:23
enhanced [11 ·o:13
enrolled [.1] ·a:3
[1] 31:·2
[2] 27;7, 10
enilty [3] 13:5; 28:22;
27:17
.f?J 1:15; · 3:6;
29:8; 30:21; 31 :3; 33:2;
35:12
ee,qulre [3] 1(15, 16, 18
essentially [1) 5:10
even [4] 16:'17; 26:13;
29:2; 30:.14
· events [4) 21:10, 16, 19;
28.:3
everyday [1] 29:3
everything [1] '5:4
evidence [1] 36:2
exact [2] 7;2; 9:12 .
exactly: (1] 34:4
examination [2] 2:2; 3:4
example (5] 31:4,-a, 13;-
34:11
existed [11 28:2
expected [1] 7:13
explain [2] 3:23; 4:15
explainlni;J [1]· 23:23
express [1] 17:16
. F.
facilities [3] 4:5; 33;7
facility [3] 7:8; , 14:18;
34:25
fact[2] 9:13; 18;22 ..
[2] 8:14; 16
facultyJ2] 31:15,17
·fairly 111 22:23.
famous [1] 28:8
mel [1] 15:3
feelinQ [2] 8:3; 10:5
felt[2( 8:1; 25'11
flied [1] 15:12 ·
flies [1] 16:1g
finally [1] 30:12
[2J 3:_12; 4:10
find [3] 19:6; 20:8, 15
finding 111 13:18
flcm [1] 16:7
firmer [1'] 20:13
flcst[2] 9:14; 11:5
_fleet.(1] 4:9
floor [1] 1:9
follow [5] . 14:13; 22:7;
25:1; 26:4, 20
folloWs (1] 3:2
·· fo·od [1] 4:7
football [9] 5:12; 7:10, 18;
11:10; 14:1>: 21:21;
34:12,23
foreparsorl (1] 1:.11
form 111 9:24
focmed [1] 24:23
forrnor [21 7:14; 35:8
forth [1] 21:16
founde:d [1}6:13
38
[1].1:16
friday [1] 35:4
fiJIIy [1] 36:2
fundralslng[1] 21:16
further [2] 15:4; 24:18
futuce [2] 8:17; 11:13
·G·
gamea [2] 21:21; 22:1
gory {5] 1:7, 19; 2:4; 3:1,
10
general [3] 1:15; 9;f3:
13:14
generally [2] 25:g; 34:21
genitals [8] 10:$, 17; 23:3,
4, 13, 17; 24:10; 32:3
give [3] 10:15; 31:4, 8
given [1]16:16
giving [1] 8:15
gone [2] 23:23; 35:10
gcab [1] 22:22
grabbed [5] 10:7, 17;
23:3, 4; 32:3
grabbing {2] 23:13, 17.
gcad [1] 5:21
graham [1] 17:9
gtond [9] 1:1 •. 5; 3:8, 23;
4:14; 5:3; 30:22, 25; 32:10
groin {1] 25:16
group (1] 34:7
·guess [1) 16:22
. H.
{\ ..
handled [9] 17:1, 22;
1,9:13;' 27:2, 5•
. 30:3, 10; 33:18
handling [3] 17:12; 18:8;
29:16
[2] 23:19:. 28:20
happened [1] *8:24
happening [2] 3a:11, 25
hartmari.'[1] 1:12
[1]
he's [1] 33:12
hBad!ock [1] 22:23
held [1) 21:17
helps [1! 6:18
hereby [1]36:1
honestly [21 16:15; 19:6
[2j _33:15, 2o
horolng [21 24:9, 25 ·
house [3] 28:1_6; 24; 29:1
houtJing-[1] 4:6
human [.f] 4:9
hundred [11 22:1
-I-
!deB [21 9:6; 15:8
Identify [11 26:25
ldentlty·[3] 9:3; 14;18:
20:16
lmaglno[2! 25:17; 34:5
Important [1] 29:6
Impression 5:13, 20;
·7:2; .9:25; 10:2, 9; 14:13;
15:11; 22:11, 13, 19, 25;
6, 9; '·. 1 11 I 1 b, 2$;
:25:2, 4; 26:23: 31:25 .
Jmprova[1] 6:16
· (25J 5:14,-
17,:_23; -6:24; 10:3, 11, 14;
13:16,_ 19; 15:5; 18:19;'
.22:12, 16; 23:10; 24:3;
25:11, 14; 29:11,20; _30:7;
31:5,7, 13, 21; 32:7
fncrintive [1) 8:9
·.Incident [36] 5:1, 5, 21;
6:22; 7:4: 12:16, 20; 13:7,
14; '14:2, '1_1,' 19; _15:1; 2,
. 4, 12; 16;12; 17:10, 16:
18:1, 2, .12; 2o:11, 13, 2o-:
22, 23; 21:1: 22:5: 26:10;
27:9; 28:2, 3; 30:1, 16;
33:3
lncldenls[1] 14:7
Include [1] 4:11
·. lnclu<l<>d [1]5:6
hicOrrect i1l. 12:a
lndaperldently [1] 19:13
IndiCated {3] 5:11; 1'6:24;
20:21 ·.
-lndlciltlng [1] 22:3
Indication [2] 28:13; 30:_20
fncJMduSI [2] 12:4; 31:19
Individuals [3[ 26:22;
34:3, 22
lnfonnatlon [21
14:24;.
26:16
Informed [3] 16:9; 26:16,
22
i'nttlally 111 29:1 a
InstanCes [1] 31\.:6
Institution 111 4:1
[1] 24:21
lntornal[1[: 29;17.
lot9rvlew [1] 23:9
Interviewed [21 26:6;.9 ·
Into [5] 8:6; 11;14; 12:12;
14:15; 20:13.
Introduce· (1] 3:7
15:4; 21:1
InveStigated [3] 16:7; .
22:4: 29:25
Investigating [1] 1:1
r:io] 11.:;23;
12:7, 11, '24; -13:1, 5; 14:4;
15:9, 14, 17, 20; .19:12, 16;
20:6: 26:3, 20: 27:3, 5, 14:
30:18
_[2) 19:23;
20:2
[1] 16:3
Investme-nt (1] ·4:12
13:3;
25; 29:16
20:6,
inVolvement[1] 6:9
involving [51 12:18; 13:23;·
15:2; 30:2; 33:4
- J-
jenuary[1] 1:8
jerry !29) !i:1, 3, 4, 7, 13;
7:13, 16, 25; 6:3, 14; 10:7:
11'9, 11; 14:6, 10, 14;
18:19; 21:9; 22:2, 15, 19;
23:4: 24:24; 25:12; 32:18;
33:12,20, 21; 34:1
jerry's [1) 9:5
joe's [1] 28:24
jonelle 111 1;15
juno [6] 3:19, 20; 6:17, 19;
32:14, 16
jurors[2] 5:4; 32:10
jury [7] 1:1, 5; 3:8, 24;
4:14; 30:22,,25
- K-
koep [1] 19:23
kepl[21 16:9; 19:15
[1) 25:15
kids [41 9:5; 11:10; .21:21;
35;9 '
kind [14] 4:19; 7:8; 6:14;
10:3, 6, 9; 17.:12; 18:8;
19:15: 22:19: 20; 24:17, 24 .
kinds !11 4:9
·knew !71 16:11 16' 20·5·
21:2, 4, 5; 32:22
1
' ' • '
knowlng·[2] 8:21; 15:1
knowledgo[11 13:11
known [1] 27:17 _
-L-
lash [51 7:6, 9; 18:13, 20:
34:16
· lost [1] 3:8
Jearn 111 14:23
leorned [1] 25:5
leave 111 30:24
logal[21 15:25;
lass !11 34;24
llfo[2] 6:15, 16
Jlght !1 1 33:.3
16:4
likely [1] 34:15
Jlmlted riJ 35:2
line !11 25:13
llneo[11 29:12
lion [21 4:8; 21:18.
lOcated [1] 12·:5
locker [5] 5:12;
9:20; 10;1: 23:1
long [1] 15:23
longer !31 14:14:
30:14
look [3] · 11:14;
. 32:24
losing [1) 31:15
Jost[1] 8:19
7:11;
16:21:'
12:12:
39
lots [1] 21:10
- M-
made (41 . 12:3; 16:1, 5;
26:7
make [41 8:2,. 16; ·14:13;
21:1.
_.malE) [6f 10:16,, 17, 18;
23:15
many [1[ 35:5
master [1] 31:1
matter !41 11:15; 17:14;
29:6, 11
matters-[1] 16:20
maybe [4] 10:7;
25:15: 34:10
[1] 1:11
22:25;
mcqualde [1] ·16:7
mcqueary [121 9:9, 19, 21;
10:21: 22:10: 12, 13:
25:5, 19,. 25;. 26:14
moan [61 6:12: 21:15;
23:13;' 32:5; 34:,1
[1] 33:19
meet[3] 9:9; 14:6; 29:4
mooting Ill · 4:25; 5:2, 7,
10; 9:1'5; 28:22; 29:6
memblir [31 31:15, 17;
35:8
memo.randums [1] 27:25
memorializing [1] 16:12
mentorlng [1] 6:16
merit ]1] 16:10
might !13! 6:14; 8:22;
9:25; 10:7; 20:11;' 23:3,4,
·23; 25:17; 27:4 16' 29'18'
31:16 ' ' . '
mike [3] 9:9: 10:21; 22:10
mtle]16] 6:10, 11; 12; 9:1,
4, 6; 11:10; 14:15;'20;21,
22, 24, 25; 21:3, 6, 6, 10,
14, 18
mind [31
31:23
10:4;
mine ]1] 17:18
23:14;
misconduct [1_] 23:22
month ]1] 34:23
I
I
.J
mora [6) 10:20; .18:14;
20:13; 22:9; 23:5; 30:23
morning [11 9:13
mothor [3] 1·2:22i 18:17,
18
·motivated [1] 8:22
much [2] 9:7; 34:13
must [1] 25:.14
myself [1] 16:1
• N ·'
naked
·name -[6] .· 3:8, 9:6;
.12:4; 15:16; 16:6
natUre [2] 13:23; 29:.17
necassarny [2} 12:14;
31:12
need[1] 27:16
· [2] :ze:5; 2:7:21
nevertheless·[1J 9:24
nfght [1] 36:4
·nlttany 121 4:8; 21:18
nObody [1] 25:24
none[2] 13:12; 16:.14
n•;instudant [1]" 33;6
[1] 6:18
notary [1] 36:9
noteo [5] 16:11, 16, 23;
28:1:
nothing [41 24:18; 28:6;
. 32:22, 23
number [21 16:19; 34:15
[1]· 25;3
· .5·:11
1
·17·, 21;
9:'20, 22; 2.5':6, 8
[2]. '21:6; 29:16.
occupy [1]. 3:20
occur [2} 20:.12; 27:15
occurred 5;B, 7; ?:5;
9:17; 10:1; 15:6: 16:13;
. 20:12; 28;13, 14
ocCurri'ng[1]11:12
office [7)' 1:15; 4:12; 5:8;
9:17; 28:23; 30;6
officer 111 4:2
7:10
often [1] 4:21
on!y [3] 9:22; 24:23; 35:1
onto [1] 11:10
op9n[2]34:13,24
operates [1 J 28:6
operations [2] 3:24;. 4:4
oppOrtunities [11 6:14
option [11 M
. others [1) 29;4
ovsr [8] .115:_13; 19:12, .19;
20:3; 25:p; 27:13, 2D:
2.9:15'
.p.
part[1] 27:21
partlcuJ;;.r [1] · 8:17
paterno [7) 4:25; 5:9, 16;
6:2S; 7:25;· 8:1
paterno'e [3] 6:24; 28:16;
29:1
pause [11 10:15
pann [7] 3:12; 4:7, 13;
6:8; 19:11; 21:18
1:1
1
16;
11:21; 27:17
people [3j 22:2, 21; 35:5
perhaps [9] 10:6; 16:25;
23:2; 29:13; 31:16; 32:3;
34:6, 8, 10
permltta!t [1] 14;15
parson [11 30:12
pen>"ons [1] 34;15 .
petthlent [1) 16:21
· physical [2] 4:5; 24:8
·physically 121 9:7; 22:20
place [6] 1:9; 9:16; 16:12;
'24:17; 25:16; 35:1
plant[!] 4:5
preaae. [5]· 3:7, -23; 5:3;
6:6; 25:1
point [1] 7:25
pollee [2-f] 4:10; 12:2·1,
23, 24; . 13:1, 2; 1·5:24;
18:24;. 19:3,"11, 12, 15, 22";
20:5; 27:6,. 8, .16, 17, 18,
20; 29;16, 25; 30:5,11, 17;
31:11
policy [2] 29:9; 33:6
poal!lon [21 3:21; 4:16
possessiOn [2] 16:11; 16
possibly [1] 28:24
potentially [11 31:24
proctlcally [1] 12:25
practice (1] 19:2
,practices [2] 21:21, 26
preclse_[1] 8:25
presence (1] 21:10
presenti2] .1:14; 34:18
praslden\ [10]' 3:12, 21;
4:19; 14:23; 17:9, 13, 15,
25; 29:10
. pretty [1] 34:13
prevent [2] 33:10, 24
pi-avi0Lisly"[2} .3:2; 23:8
printing [1] 4:9
prior [1] 28:6
probably [71 16:16, .18;
19:1; 24:16; 35:5,7,11
procedures [1].19:9
[4] ·1 :4;
30:26; 36:1,3
professor (1]. 31:9
profit [11 6:21.
program· [6] .· 4:14; 6:\3;
7;18; 9:1; 21:8; 34:24
property]2] 21:13,17
·prOtection [7f 11:14; 12:8;
13:4; 16:2; 19:10; 27:1, 13.
protet:tive [2] 11:.16;· 14:3
proyldes [1] 1):13.
provost.[2] 4:3; .·29:22
public. [4]. 1 :22; 34:19
1
24;. .
36:9
punch [11 22:21
purported [1] 5:2.1
purview [11 18:24
question 111 9:14
[1] '13:6
questioning [11 25:2
questions !1] 30:23
quite [2] ·16:19; 33:18
40
rather[1] 23:21
reached [2] ·7:25; 17:3
{11 24:6
ntally [3] 4:4: 23:23; 32:5
reason [1] 8:22
recall [24]' 4:24; 5:2, 19;
7:2, 23; 8:21; 9:12, 16;
10:20, 23; 11:24; 12:1, 6;
13:8; 15;13; 18,'15i 17, 20;
24:13; 25:7, 21; 26:17;
27:19
recalled [2] 9:14; 26;2
rocalvad [1] 19:19
. recoUCtct [3] 28:15, ·19, 2'1
[11] 9:21;·
11:6, 13; 12;H, 22; 13:3;
14:6; 15:22, 23;. 17:23;
26:19
recollectlone [1]· 7:24
recommttndatlon [1] .. 17:3
recomme!ldatlons [2]
11;4; 17:1
recommended·[3] 17:4, 6
racord r2J 19:15, 18
recreation [2) 34:11, 25
refor [1] 9:4
referenced [2] 20:19, 20
referred [3] 4:3; 8:10;
30:17
referring [2] 12:10, 15
regard .[6] · 4:13; 12:23;
13:7; 33:6; 34.:1
regarding [3] 14:10;
16:11; 20:10
l'agularly [2] g2:2o;· 35:2
rFJiate [1] 9:19
relatlonshlps[1] 7:17
relay [1J 26:15 . '\
remember [7] 5:4; ·6:25;
12:2; 15:18; 17:4; 18:6
renes [1] 1:12
report [9] 5:1; 11:1;
13:10; 14:9; 19:6, 10, 21;
25:9; 27:6
reported [12] 4:21,_.24;
6:22; 10:21; 12:16, 20;
14:2; 17:17; 18:18, 20;
24:14; 26:12
reporter•s'[1J 3:9
reporting [3] _20:20; 22:12;
24:12
reports [71 4:18; 18:10,
22; 19:3, 23; 20:2: 31:10
.reque'st [2] 5:11; -12_:3 ·
[1] 4:25 ·
·res-ources [1] -4:9
reatr/ctlons [1] 34:1_3
'10:26
resulted [1] -24:10
iellra [4] 3:17; 7:17; 6:16,
22
ratlrad [B] 3:11: 6:8;' 8:11;
32:13, 17
. [1.1] _ 7:21, 22·,
23; 8:4, 8, 9, 12, 16, 20;
16:16.
rootn {7] _5:12; 7:11; _9:20;
10:1; 23:2; 30:24; 31:2
routlne"[2] 17:11; ta:a·
. s.
3:11
sandusky [19] 6':1,_3, 4, 7;
7:13; 12:17; 13:20, 24;
14:6, 10; 18:19; 19:7; '
21:6; 22:16; 25:3; 30:13;
32:19; 33:4, 12
sa"yln9 [2] 25;13; 30:16
sc,hultz [5] 1:7, 19; 2:4;
3:1, 10.
[1'aj 6:9, 11' 12; .
9:1, 4, 6;. 11:10; 14:15;
.. 20:20,' 22,' 24, 215; 21:3, 5,
8, 10; 14, 16
secretary [1] 1:12
seek [1] 19:5
seam [1] 16:21
se-nior [4] 3:11, 21; 14:23;
29:10
. separate [1] 34:12
serious [3] 23:6; 28:11, 12-
serloUsly [1) 17:19
service [1] 7:15
servlces.[3] 4:6; 7; 14:3
sexual [12[ 10:11, 13;
22:12, 15, 17; 23:10, 14,
22; 24:3, 16: 29:2; 32:16
sexu;;.lly [11 15:6
shower. [10] _10'.17; 13:20',
14:19; 18:13; 19:5; 20:17:
2s:e: 31:2o: 33:5: 34:6 ·
[2) 29:22, 23
slmllar[11 17:18
similarly [1[ 18:13
[11. 33:3
[1] 32:12
skills (1] 6:16
slap [1) 22:22
sodomy [1] 24:2
Somehow [1] 11:20
soineone {1] 6:11
_somethiiltJ ._pel
10:8; 11:17; 15:5;
8:10;
16:17;
18:22; 23:1;· 25:11, 14;
29:2, "12;-. '31:9; 32:1, 9;
33:11,24
sort [2] 10:6; 18:21
spani&r [4] -17:9, 20, 25;
27:23
specific [1] 10:21-
[5] 5:16;
11:22; 19:7; 24:14; 25:8
apectflca [4[ 13:17; 18:6;
26:1
·spell[11 3:8.
spending [1] 6:26
spent[2[ 9:2, 7
spring [2] 4:23; 36:4
-square [1] 1:9
staff [2] 34:23; 30:8
standard·[1] 28:6
start [1] 35:4
started [1] 12:24
·state [8[ 1:18; 3:12; 4:8;
6:6; 8:4, 5; 19:1_1:·27:18
state's [1] 4:13
Stater (1] 21:18
statewide [1]"1:1
status [1] 30:12
step [1[ 30:21
stephanie (1) 1:11
Stl;)ps·[1) _33:24
strawberry [1] 1:9
street[1] 1:10
_,tudent [8] 6:20, 21;
29:21; 30:2, 5; 31:10, 14
subject [1] 7:20
subsequent [1] 32:20
substantiate [1] 20:0
such [6] 6:2; 8:10; 9:15;
12:3; 17:13; 31:17
sunday]3[ 28:16; 29:1,7
sundoys [1] 29:6
support [1] 34:23
supposed [3] 7:6; 26:15;
33:12
sure [11] 3:fO; 11 :7;
14:12, 14; 21:1,2, 3,4, 11;
33:18; 36:11
surprise [1] 27:4
sUrpriSed [tt 16:22 .
· swotn [1·1. 3:2
systein [3] 8:4; 33:15, 20
·,T.
taken [6[ 16:16; 16:12;
24:17; 25:17; 36:3
talk [4[ 26:13, 14
talked [2] 24:7; 27:1.9
talklng[1] 31:8
team [1[ 34:22
team's [1)7:11
[2] 12:9; 21:15
tell [7] 6:3, 18; 7:1; _12:7:
18:4; 23:6; 24:14
lolling [6] 10:3, 6; 23:26;
25:7; 26:16; 33:12
tompar.[1] 31:15
terma [i] 29:9; 33:5
testified 111 3:2
teatlmony[2] 14:1; 35:13
thank [1] 32:26
lhaft[1] 29:13
thing [7] · 10:3; 11,12;
n:s, 24; 24:17; 29:3;
31:18
18:9; 29:22,-23
think [14[ 6:13; 6:1, 9;
9:17; 11:6; 16:22; 19:17;
20:24; 21:3; 27:2; 30:16;
33:17, 20; 34;1
41
thirtieth [1) 1:1
though '!1] 30:14
thought[12J 13:15; 19:11,
14; 20:3, 21; 23:22, 23, 26;
27:12; 28:22: 32'.2
thousand [1] 22:1
tlm'e[1[ 17:16
tlmO [27] 4:23; 6:6; 6:4;
8:7, 12, 23; 9:1_, 3, 7, 19;
. 11:3; 13:18; 15:23; 16:16,
17; i7:16; 16:1; 21:9, 13;
23:7; 26:1, 21; 28':2, 11;
29:10
timing 111 6:16
today [1] 3:14
told [3J 6:1; 22:16; 32:5
took [4] 9:16;
26:14; 33:24
touched [1) 25:16
touching [1[ 31:20
tower[![ 1:9
17:19;
tnmscript (3] 1:4; 31:1;
36:4
truly[1)15:5
trusted [1] 33:20
turned [7] 15:13;
19: 20:3; 27:12, 20; 29:15
turn$ (1] 6:7_
type[2[ 9:25; 11:12
• u •
under [4l 3;25; 14:22;
16:24; 23:18
underage [1] 10:16
un,derlylng [1] 8:2
understand [2} 13: 13;
35:9'
understanding [4] 6:20:
6:3; 11:19: 20:1
un,derstoqd [2] 114:14;
33:21
university [40] 1:18; 3:13,
18, 25; 4:5, 10, 11, 19;
11:17, 18; 12:16, 21, 23;
14:22; 115:24, 26; 16:4:
17:10, 15; 16:25; 19:11,
14; 20:6; 21:121 17; 22:4,
7; 26:9; 28:6; 29:9, 16,
.,
'
· ..
.-··
·17; 30:8, 13, 17; 31:9, 11:
33:6, 7, 23
ur:'named [1] 6:2
unusual [3] 5:1: · 7:22;
28·.25
[2] 25:19, 21 .
used 14i 9:4; 34:21; 35:1,
2
using [1l. 7:1
. v .. ·
verfz:on [1] 1:9
vice [4] 3:11, 21; 14:23;
.29:10
[_1]
.visible [1] 9:3
.w.
walnut [-1] ·1-:10
want [51 12:14; 22:9;
23:24; 24:6; 34:25
wanted [21 5:10, 14
£11 29:5
wendell [11 16:6
went [21 24:15; 25:25
whateVBr(2] 24:15; -26:13
whabuieVer [11 ·14:7
whoever [1] 26:15
whom [11 12:2
whose_ [1] ) 1:4 ·
window [41 8;10, 12, 16,
20
wlthout"[4] 10:4; 13:16;
15:11
witness [6] 1',7', 3:1·,
30:24; 31:2; 33:1
words [6] 6:23, 24, 25;
7:'1' 3; 8:11
wo.rk [1}
Working [i]· 4:20
would've: (1] 17:12
wrestled [1] 22:21
wrostli!19 [51, · 1'0:6; 24:9,
11; 25:1 5; 32:9
28:9
written [3] 16:12; 23:10;
28:1
·Y·
yeat [2] 6:17; 34:24
yearS [3] 7:15; 16:20;
25:4
young [14] 1o:B;
12:17; 18:14, 18; 21:7;
23:'17; 31:20, ;11; 32:19,
24; 33:8; 34:6
. yol/nger [2] 10:18; 21:4
youih (2] 20:16; 33:6
42

. ' lill INCIDENT
• 0 OTHER.
0· FELQNY.CRlMES AGAINST TtlS: PERSON 0 STATEMENT FOR.M{S)
at Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA Agent
Vincent PATERN:O,W/N/M·S4, DOB: 12121/26
Attorney Generals Frank FINA and Janelle ESHBACH ware
and PATERNci:s son Scott PATERNO. PATERNO related haremanibered of Mike
coming to him a year or two after SANDUSKY and telling hlm·that he.saw SANDUSKY In the locker
room doing something Inappropriate With a young boy. PATERNO related he believed MCQUEARY was a graduate assistant
at the time. PATERNO related \hat MCQUEARY not give him any speclflc details about the '
remembered MCQUERY being upset about what .he PATERNO related he thought MCQUEARY contacted him on a
Saturday but was not sore. PATERNO related he passed the Information on to Tim CURLEY, ThePennState Athletic Director
via phone aday ortw? later.-Pf\TERNO related he did not have any 'meetings about(he Incident and he did not know what
happened after he advised CURLEY. PATERNO related he Informed CURLEY because he thought he was the proper ·
authority du<:> to the fact that he was The Athletic Director for PennState .. PATERNO related 'he did not hear any rumors about
SANDU$KY and lnapproprla!e acts. PATERNO related he did not ever witness SANDUSKY do anything inappropriate with' .
. kids. PATERNO related he participated In a few Second Mile fundraisers that SANDUSKY was presenthowever.he did not;
witness anything Inappropriate. PATERNO related SANDUSKY maintained an office In the Lasch building on PennState until
a year or two ago, PATERNO related he believed that' SANDUSKY no longer had an office anywhere on Pennstate, ·
Campus. I asked PATERNO If hli kne\v why SANDUSKY retired and PATERNO SANDUSKY told him that It was time for
SANDUSKY to move onto other things,
INTERVIEW:TIMOTHY Mark CURLEY:
On 01/12/11 at 0920 hrs at Grand Jury located at lltra\Nberry Harrlst)urg
Athletic Director Timothy Mark CURLEY, W/NIM"56,
in the presence of Penn State G,eneral Cynthia BALDWIN. .
Pennsylvania State University In 1993 and has remained In that position ever since. CURLEY related he remembered
being notified In early 2000 by' Joseph PATERNO of an Incident. CURLEY related PATERNb .requested a meeting with him
and Gary SHULTZ to dlscuss·the incident CURLEY related the Involved somethlng,lnapproprlate with SANDUSKY.
CI,JRLEY related he the Information 01ito the president of the university Graham SPANIER. CURLEY related he and
SCHULTZ rile! ivith Michael MCQUEARY and discussed what MCQUEARY witnessed. CURtEY related MCQUEARY
Informed them that he observed SANDUSKY hor$1ng around In the shower with a young boy. CURLEY related.there was no
mention of acts. CURLEY related It seemed.to be something that could have been misconstrued and· was
inappropriate behavior at best. CURLEY related he SCHULTZ mat with SPANIER a later to discuss the .
Incident. CURLEY related he qame up with a jo address tha Issue and SPANIER approved it. CUR-LEY
related the first part of the plan was for him to meet with SANI)USI<Y an<l advise him that he no longer allowed to bring .
kids onto the PennState and usa the facilities. The second part of the plan was for him to with Dr Jack MYKOVITZ, the
director' of· the Second rillle program and advise him of the incident. CURLEY, related he did both of these things and took.
care of the Incident. CURLEY related when he spoke to SANDUSKY he first related he was not even sure·!! he was even
there then a day or later SANDUS,KY carn·e back .and related he was there. CURLEY related that • ·meetings all took
place wlthfn'a few weeks after MCQUEARY told them ofthe.lncldent. I asked.CURLEYto describe the meeting with
MCQUEARY In more detail. CURLEY related MCQUEARY told him that he was In the coach's topker room and he heard
people In the shower. CURLEY related MCQUEARY said he looked through the mirror and, saw SANDUSKY in the shower
with a ydung boy around, horse playing. CURLEY related he did· not report It to he pollee department because he
Informed SPANIER. CURLEY related that· he advised PATERNO, SCf!!JLTZ, SPANIER and MCQUEARY of the . :
recommendation plan and action. CURLEY related that lhls vias the only lnoldenl he knew about Involving $ANPUSKY·and
Inappropriate kids. CURLEY related they did not seek legal counsel at the flme they addressed the Issue.
CURLEY related he first aboutthls lnvesHgatlon In the fall of 2010. CURLEY r:etated they did not have any meetings on
the Issue after the Issue was.addressed back In 2000 or CURLEY he dld·no1take keys from
.SANDUSKY to restrict his access and did not ,of the
/
(
'
INTERVIEW: Thnothy Mark CURLEY CONTINUEb: .
. CURLEY further related he tieliaved that SANDUSKY retired because his time was torn between coa'chlng and the
Second Mile program. CURLEY related SANDWSKY decided tb go In the direction of the Second Mile that SANDUSKY
founded. many yeats ago .•
INTERVIEW: Garv Charles SCHULTZ; . .
On 011121.11 ·at0935 hrs at Grand Jury /ocated.arstrawberry Square Harrisburg, PA.Agent SASSANO
th'e former Executive Senior VIce President of Finance Gary Charles SCHULTZ. WINIM·B1, DDB: 09/.13/'m
the· presence of Penn State General Cynth fa BALDWIN. SCHULlZ . 1
related he was In charge of operaHims for,PennSt'!te that Included things /Ike
seiVIces, health and safe.ty and polfce seiV/ces. SCHULTZ related he remembered that he was contacted by 11m CURLEY
the Athletic Director back lti 2002 and Informed of an Incident involving SANDUSKY. SCHULJZ related he was'lnfomied that
a graduate assistant was /n·al6ckerroom on cwnpus and otil;81Ved something disturbing tnvolvtng SANDUSKY and a boy tn
the shower. SCHULTZ related a meeting was arranged and ·he, CURLEY, MCQUEARY and PATERNO met and discussed
the Incident. SCHULTZ related he did not remember at/ of the details however there was not any mention of any sexual acts.
SCHULTZ related that MCQUEARY was very,vague and spoke In general terms When he described what he witnessed. .
TZ related howeverthatjt.was his impression based on the Information he was provided that there was inapproprlate
· SANDUSKY and a minor. !'asked him to explain that In more detail and he related that he had the
feel\ng that there wos be,havior, possiblyinesslng around and' maybe SANDUSKY might have grabbed genitals.
SCHULTZ related he later met with CURLEY and'SPANJERand the Incident. SCHULTZ related CURLEY came up
with a to address the 1ssue. SCHUL lZ related the.recommendat!on was for CURLEY to meet with
and Inform him that he was no longer allowed to bring Second lv)ile kids on PennStaie campus facilities./ '1Skild
him If any other things were recommended and he said he.dld not believe. I asked hlm If the second mile was notlffed·and he
said he did not contact them and he did ·not believe. that they had ·been. related that he did not.b.e/leve that that
was part of tho plan. SCHULTZ related that he thought the wera put he was not able to provide any
Information about who. made the notlflcetlon o.r who was notified, SCHUL :rz felated he thought Children anq SeiVIces,.
was notified but did not know for sure or who might have notified them. SCHULTZ related he was not sure lfthe·polroa were
lnvoived.ln this incident or not that since no longer employed by PennState that Is' why
the recommendation was to restrict him fro"!' bringing Second Mile kids onto PennState property. SCHULTZ related that he
assumed that It was a second mile kid because that was !tie organization that SANDUSKY founded and still was Involved in .. ·
SCHUI:.TZ related the Incident Was discussed with attorney Wendel COURTNEY who was representing PennState aflhe
time. SCHULTZ related he not tha Incident with anyone elsa since then. SCHULTZ related the .President of .
the UniversitY Graham SPAINIER would have been notified of the outcome by CURLEY. I .asked.SCHUL TZ If he was aware of
any other Incidents Involving SANDUSKY and kids and he related that there was an lneldent In 19981n which a mother
made a complaint to the PennState Po !Ice abou) Inappropriate contact between SANDUSKY and her son while they were tn .
the shower. SCHULTZ related he did not remember the details but It was Investigated and Children end Youth SeiVIces were ·
Involved·. SCHULTZ related he was later Informed that the Centre County Distrk:t attorney was also Involved and that there
were not any charges br
0
ught against SANDUSKY. I asked SCHULTZ If SPANIER was aware of the 1998incldent and he
related yes. SCH\JLTZ related he was sure. that SPANIER knew of the 1998/ncldent SCHUlTZ related he'betieved the ori!y
reason SANDUSKY ratlred was because of the ffnanclal benefits of the State Employees Retirement system. SCHUL lZ' .
related that he.dl;i not be/leva that an'yone took away SANDUSKY'S keys was from using PenhS!ate .
facilities other than not being allowed to bring Second Mile kids on cal'lpus. SCHULrz related he laier met with CURLEY and
lvCIUt:ANl T and advised of how the Incident was handled. SCHULTZ related he did not hear anything else
1>oc1t these incidents 'of any other Incident Involving SANDUSKY. . .
. ' . . .
. \
---··-----·----···---···--··--·--· .,._..,_,_- --n'·"'(--·-:-··
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
· THIRTIETH SIATEW:tDE INVESTIGAT:tNG GRAND JURY
J IN RE: NOTICE NO_. 29
7 WITNESS:
DATE:
9 PLACE:
10
TRANSCRIPT op PROCEEDINGS
OF. GRAND JURY
JOSEPH y. PATERNO
· JANUAR_Y 12, 11:06 A.M.
STRAWBERRY SQUARE
VERIZON TOWER, EIGHTH FLOOR
WALNUT STREET.
PA. 17120
LL
STEPHANIE MCCARROLL, FOREPERSON
RENEE HARTMAN-, SECRETARY
COUNSEL PRESENT:
" OFFICE OF THE ATTORNI:,Y GEN-ERAL
l5 By: JONELLE ESHBACI-/ 1 ESQUIRE
FRANIC FINA,. ESQUIRE
FOR: - COMMONWFAL TH
17
GOLDBERG KATZMAN, PC
18 BY:. JOSHUA ESQUIRE
"
FOR.- JOSEPH V. PATERNO
2 o. ALSO PRESENT\
SCOTT- PATERNO, ESQUIRE
22
"
2.
3 WITNESS
MANPERBACH
PUBLIC
I N o· E X
EXAMINATION
4 Joseph v_. Paterno
,
LO
L2
:1 J .
,,
L5
"
"
20
2L
22
"
"
PAGE
JOSEPH V, called as a
2 witness, being previously sworn, testified as
3 follows;
EXAMINATION
BY MS. ESHBACH:
·e Q would you please introduce Yourself
9 to the JUry?
10 A MY· name-.is ?oseph. v. Paternq.
11 Q I'm sure everyOne in_ the· room knows,_
·12· but just in case that doesn!1;,· how
13 are you employed?
14 A r'm a footba-ll coach at the·
1.s St:ate .universit:y.
1 s Q AS that.. football coach at the
11 P.ennsylvan1a st.ate Ul'livers1-ty, did you have· as
u employed under._yoU ari 1ndiv1dUa1 by the-: name of
\9 Jerry sandusky?
20 A I did .for a while, yes.
21 Q oo· you currentlY hil.ve emp1oy'od
22 you since sometime in :the early 2000s
23 coach named Michael McQueary?
2. A ves.
for
an assistant
--Q r'd like to direct. your att.endon to
1 what, I wpuld be a spring break of 2002,
2 around t.hat Do you recall Michael MCQueary
calling you and asking to have ·a discussion with
4 you about somethinQ that he observed?
A I'm_ not· sure of the date, but he did
6 call me on· a s_aturday morning. He said he had
1 so_mething that he wanted to discuss, r said, come
a on over to the .house. He. came ·over to the· house.
g And as I said,_ x
1
m not sure what year it was, but
io I. know it was a.saturday morning and _we discussed
11 something he._ seEm, _
12 Q without gatt1ng·1nt.o any graphic
13 detail, wh!lt did Mr._ MCQueary te11 you he had seen
14 where?
A Well, he had s86n a·person, an
1·6 o1der. __..:. not an older, but a ma.-c;ure person who was
17 fondling, whatever you might ·call it I'm not
te sure what the term wduld be -- a young boy.
Q D1d he· identify who t:hat older person
20 was?
A yes, a man by the name of Jerry
_22 sandusky who had been one of our coaches, was not
23 at the time.
24 Q vou
1
re saYing that at tht! time this
25 incident was reported t.o you, sand_usky was no
1 longer a coach?
A No, had voltJntar.i.ly. I'-m
3 i1otsu·re exactly the year·, but J_ think 1t was
4 either '98. or '99.
s Q r th1 nk you uSed the term fondling,
rs that the· term that you used?
A . well, I don't know what you would
a call it. obviously, he. was doing something with
9 the It w":s a sexval nature. I'm not
10 sure ·exactly it was. I didn't push Mike to
11 describe exactly what it-was because he· was very
a _upset, obviously, I was in a little .. bit of.a
·13 dilerrima sitlce Mr. sa.ndusky was not working_ for me
14 anymore. -- I didn't go anY further
15 than th!it except J:_ knew Mike was· upset and I knew
16 Some kind of_inappropl"'iate ai:tio'n being taken by
,17 Jerry sanduskY with a youngster.
"
Q Did Mike McQueary tell you where he'
19 had seen this conduct taka place?
"
,,
"
A In the -shower.
Q where was the shower?
A · rn·tha_ Lash BUilding.
9 Is that on the campljs of Penn st-ate
2 4 univer,s1ty7
25 A . It's right on· the campus.
Q Did you tell Mike McQuearY at that
2 .time what you '<.'ere t'Q dowit'h that
3 1n.formation-·that he had provided to you?
A I

kriow whether specific
.!lor· not .. I-did-tell Mike, ·_Mike, you did.what was
s right; you told·me. Even though Jerry does not
7 work ·fpr the. foo.tb!l11 staff any. longei', I would
s i-efer his to the ri.ght people.
Q YOU reca."ll this .taking i:d aCe on a
10 s·att.lrday.mot·ning, the conv'ersation with Mike?
11 A· Yes.
.,
Q When did you -- did you do something
13· with that i nformat1on?
14 'A Well, I Can't be precise. J:
1 s ordinari-ly wo.u_ld haVe called 'people right away,
'
A Tim· curley,
Q How·--did you contact Mr. curlEiy?
3. A I believe I did it by Phone. ·As I
4 recall,.! ca1led him and·I said, hey, wE got a
5 problem, and I explained the problem to him.
Q was the information that· you passed
1 along sul;lstant1a11y the Same information that Mr.
e McQueary had g_iyen you?
A Yes,
1 o Q 9ther than the incident that Mike
11 McQueary·repoi'ted to you, do you know 'in any way,
12 through rumor,' direct or any other
13 fashion, of ·inappropriate sexual conduct
14 by Jerry with young boys?
1S A. l do not know of a_tJything else that
16 Jerry would be involved in of that nature, no.- r
d do riot know· of it. You d+d mention-- I think you
lB said something about a rumor. It may. have·been
19 discussed in my presence, someth1ng else about
20 somebody. I don't know, I don't remember, and I
21 could nOt honestly say I 'heard a." rumor.
"
Q .You indicated th_al: your repJ?rt was
23 made directly to Tihl Curley. Do you know of 'that
24 rePort being made to anyone else that was a.
2s university official?
A No, because I figured that Tim would
2 handle it _appropriately. I have. a tremendo:us
3 amount of· confidence in ·Mr. Curley a11d I thought
4·he·Woulcllook into 1t handle it apprppriately,
MR. ESHBACH: haVe nO further .
s questiOns of you. If you ai1d your counsel would
step outside,
(Testimony concluded at 11:13 a.m.)
"
"
"
.,.
"
l& but: it;_ was ·and I diqn't want to u;
1 interfere with ·their weekcil_ds. so r know 17
11.1. whether I did it saturday or 'did it early· the .next u
"
week. I'm not s'ure when, but I di.'d it. within
"
week,
"
Q To whom or with whom did you share
"
the information that McQueary had given yOu?
"
A :r:. talked to my immediate boss, our
24 athletic director.
"
Q What is tllat person's name?
tho
,.
"
"
22
"
24
"
(
I hereby certify that 'die
2 and evidence ·contained fully and accurately in
·3 1:he notes taken by me on the within p'roceedings
· 4 and that this 'is a correct transcrfpt, of 'the same,
' '
10
11
"
'13
"
17
10
"
'"
"

-A-
accurately [1] .9:2
a.ctlon [1) 6:16 .
along [11 7:7
[1j 8:3
ohymore'[1],5:14
anyona [2] 3:-12; 7:24
appropriately i21 8:2, 4
arqUnq [1) 4:2 ."
asking 111 4:3
osslstant[1J 3:22
athletic [1] 6:24
[1] 3:25
{1] _
away [1) 6:15 ·
- B-
believe [2] 4:1; ,,3
boos ]11 6:23
boys [1] 7:14
break [1] 4:1
building [1] 5:22
-C-
carr [3] 4:6, 17; 5:8 ·
called {31 3; 1; 6:15; 7:4 .
calling [1] 4:3
came [1] 4:'8
catnpus [2] 5:23, 25
case [1] 3:12
certify [1] 9.:1
CoBch'(41 3:14, 16, 23; 5:1
coaches '[11 4:22
concerns [1]- 6:8
[1) 8:8
conduct[2) 5;19; 7:13
·confidem;:o [1] 8:3
C<?ntaCt" (1.]- ·7:2
[1] 9:2
conve:rsatron [1) 6:10
cOunsel [21 1:14; 8:6 ·
curley [4] 7:1, 2, 23; 8:3
currently (1] 3:21
- D-
date 121 1 :8; 4:5
describe [1] 6:11
detail [1] 4:13
dilemma [1] 6:13
direct [_2] 3:25;-7_:12
-directly [1l 7:23
director [1) 6:24
discuss [1] 4:7
dlscuaoed [2] 4:10; 7:19
discussion [1]_4:3
- E-
early [2] 3:22; 6:18
eighth [1] 1:9
Oither-[1] 5:4
e!Oe [3] 7:15, 19, <4
employed [3] a:13, 18, 21
eahbaah [3] 1 :15; 3:_7: ·-
esquire [4] 1:15, 15, 18, 21
even [1] 6:6
everyone [1] 3:11
avfderioo [1] 9:2
exactly [3] 6:3, 10, 11
examination [2] 2:2; 3:5
except[1] 5:15.
explafnod [1] 7:5
• F-
foshlon[1].7:13
flgured[1] 8:1
floor[1J1:9
follows (1] 3.:3
fondling 121 4:17; 5:5
·football [3] 3:14, 16; 6:7
foreperson {1] 1:11
frank [1] 1:16
fully [11 9:2
further[2] 5:14; 6:5
- G-
general [1] 1:15
getting [11 4:12
given [2] 6:22; 7:6
goldberg [1] 1:18 ·
. grand [3] 1 :1, 5; 3;9
graphic [1] 4:12
- H -
handle [2] 8:2, 4
hartman [11 ·1:12
heard [1] 7:21
hereby [1] 9:1
honeetly [1] 7:21 .
hoyse.[2] 4:8
- I -
Identify [1] 4:19
Immediate [11 6:23
ln_approprlate (3] 5:16, 19;
7:13
lnoldont [2] 4:25; 7:10
lndlceted [1] 7:22
Individual [1] 3:·18
Information [5] 0:3, 13, 22;
7:6,-7
Interfere [1] ·s:17
Into [2] 4:12; 8:4
'lntro(iuce [1] 3:8
[1] 1:1
lnvolved'-[1] 7:16
- J.
[1] 1:8
Jerry [61 3:19; 4:21; 5:17;
6:6; 7:14, 16
jonelle [1] 1:15
joseph [5] 1:7, 19; 2:4;
. 3:1' 10
joshua [1] 1:16
JUry [3] 1:1, 5; 3;9
-K-
ll:atzman !11 1;1 B
kind [1] 6:16
knew [2]5:15
10
kno.wledge-111 7:12
knows [1] 3:11
- L-
IOsh [1] 5:22
llttle[1] 5:12
lock [1f 1:18
longar [2] 5:1; 6:7 .
look [1]. 8:4
made [2] 7:23, 24
mature [1) 4:18
mccarroll[1] 1:11
mr.q'ueary (8] · 3:23; 4·:2,
13; 5:18; 6:1, 22; 7:8,11
[1] 7:17
michael [2] 3:23; 4:2
mlgh1[1J 4:17
mlko [8] 5:10;.15, 18; 5:1,
5, 10; 7:10
morning [4] 4:6, 10;_ 6.:10,
16
name [4] 3:10, 18; 4:21;
8:25
name,:i [1]
nature [2] 5:9; 7:16
next [1] 6:18
notarV.[1J 9:9
notes [1) 9:3
-0-
·observed [1] 4:4
obviously [2]-5:8, 12
o.ffrce[11 1:15
official [1] 7:25
older [3] 4:16, 1ij
ord!namy [1) 6:1.5
outside [11 8:7
over [2) 4:8
,.
' .
• p. '
. passed [1] ?:f?
patorno [6] 1:7, 19, 21:
2:4: 3:1, 10
·penn.[1] 5;.23
pemJsy.lvanla [3] 1:1;
3:16, 17
. 6_:8, 15
person [3.] 4!15, 16, 19
parson's [1] 6:25
phone [1) 7:3
. placEH3J -1:9; 6:9
ploase[1] 3:8
precl•• [1] 6:14
presence [11 7:19
. present [21 1:14,20
jw;)VloUs_ly (1-]. 3:2
problem [2] 7:5
[3] · 1 :4; 9:1",
3
provided [1] 6:3
public [2] 1_:2_2: e:o
push [1] 5:10
'0·
·questionS [1] :6:6-.
. R·
recall [3] 4:2: 6:9: 7:4
· refer [_1 f- 6:8
reme_mbar"{1] 7:20
[1] 1:12
·repOrt [2) 7:22, 24
reported [21 4:25; 7:11
rsWod [1]0:2 .
_room [11 3:11
·ruow [3] 7:12, 18, 21
.. s.
[6) 3:1.9; 4:22,'
25; 5:13, 17; 7:14
saturday [5] 4:6, 10; 6:10,
16, 18
saying [11 4:24
sco\1[1) 1:21
_secretary (1]
sson [4) 4:11, 13, 15; o:19
eaxual 121 5:9: 7:13
·share [1) 6:21
Shower.[:?:] 5:20, 21
since 121 3:22; 5:13
aomething [7] 4:4, 7, 11:
5:8: 6:12; 7:18, 19
·someume [1] 3:22
specific [1] 6:4
spring {_1} 4:1
squaro· [1] 1:9
staff [11 6:7
•r•t• 131 3:.15, 11: 5'23 ·
.,statewlde-[1]-1:1 ,
stop [11 8:7
· stophenl0[1] 1:11
strawberty [1] 1:9
atreet[11 1:10
[1J 7:7
aura [7] 3:11: 4:5, 9, 18;
5:3, 10: 6:19
swam [1] 3:2
• T.
· take [1) 5:19 .
taken [2] 5:15; 9:3
laking [1] 6:9
talked [1] 6:23
tall [4] 4:13; 5;18; 6:1, 5
terrn 131 4:18: 5:5, 6
testified [11 3:2
testimony [1} 8:8
think [3] 5:3, 5; 7:17
thlrtlath [1] 1:1
lhough[11 6:6
'thought[11 8:3
time [41 4:2,23, 24;·6:2
told[2J 5:14; 6:6
tow6r,[1] .1:9
transcript [2] 1 :4; 9:4
[1] .8:2
.. undtlr[1l 3:18
[4] 3:15, 17;
5:24; 7:25
up .. t[21 5:12, 15
used [2] 5:5, 6 .
.v.
vertzon [1] 1:9.
[1] 5:2
.. ;w .
walnut 111 1:10
want[1] 6:16
wanted [1] 4:7
waek 121 6:19, 20
weekends [1] 6:17
whatover [11 4:17
whom [2] 6:21
without [1] 4:12 ·
wftneas [3] ·.1 :7; 2;3; 3:2 .
work 111 6:7
workin(J [1] 6:13
.y.
year [2) 4:9; 5:3
young [21 4:18; 7:14
youngster [2] 6:9, 17
11