Judge throws out ex-Penn State president Graham Spanier’s conviction | TribLIVE.com
Pennsylvania

Judge throws out ex-Penn State president Graham Spanier’s conviction

Associated Press
1095735_web1_spanier
AP
Former Penn State President Graham Spanier departs June 2, 2017, after his sentencing hearing at the Dauphin County Courthouse in Harrisburg.

HARRISBURG — A federal judge threw out former Penn State President Graham Spanier’s misdemeanor child-endangerment conviction on Tuesday, less than a day before he was due to turn himself in to begin serving a jail sentence.

The decision by U.S. Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick in Scranton gave state prosecutors three months to retry Spanier under the state’s 1995 child endangerment law, the version in place in 2001.

Joe Grace, a spokesman for the attorney general’s office, said the decision was under review. Spanier’s defense lawyer declined to comment.

Mehalchick agreed with Spanier that he was improperly charged under a 2007 law for actions that occurred in 2001, when he was responding to a complaint about former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky showering with a boy on campus.

“Spanier submits that this retroactive application is unreasonable and far more extensive than anyone in 2001 would have been able to reasonably foresee,” Mehalchick wrote. “The court agrees.”

Spanier had been due to report to jail early Wednesday to begin serving a minimum sentence of two months.

Spanier, 70, was forced out as Penn State president shortly after Sandusky was arrested in 2011 on child molestation charges. A year later, Spanier was accused of a criminal cover-up, although many of those charges were dismissed by an appeals court. The jury acquitted him of what remained by the time of his trial, except for the single count of child endangerment. Lisa Powers, a university spokeswoman, said Tuesday that Spanier remains a tenured faculty member on paid administrative leave.

Spanier’s lawyers argued that the application of the law to acts that occurred years before the measure was passed violated the U.S. Constitution.

But the judge did not agree with their argument that the statute of limitations had been improperly applied.

Spanier was convicted for how he and two of his top aides decided to respond to a report from graduate assistant coach Mike McQueary that he had seen Sandusky abusing the boy late on a Friday night in a team shower.

Spanier has said the abuse of the boy, who has never been conclusively identified, was characterized to him as horseplay.

Spanier and two of his top lieutenants, former athletic director Tim Curley and former vice president Gary Schultz, agreed to notify The Second Mile, the charity for at-risk youth where Sandusky met many of his victims, but not to call police.

Spanier gave his approval to his deputies in an email, warning that “the only downside for us is if the message isn’t ‘heard’ and acted upon, and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it.”

Curley and Schultz were also charged criminally for their actions regarding Sandusky, but on the eve of trial they both pleaded guilty to misdemeanor child endangerment and testified for the prosecution. Both have since served similar jail sentences.

Spanier did not testify at his trial and told the judge at sentencing that he regretted not intervening more forcefully.

Sandusky is doing 30 to 60 years in state prison and recently won an order for a new sentence.

Categories: News | Pennsylvania | Top Stories
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.