Curley, Schultz case

Curley, Schultz lawyers debate Baldwin’s role in grand jury testimony

mdawson@centredaily.comJanuary 5, 2013 

The defense attorneys for former Penn State administrators Tim Curley and Gary Schultz want a hearing in front of a judge to make their case to suppress their grand jury testimony on the grounds that Cynthia Baldwin was not representing their clients when they testified.

The motions were filed Friday in Dauphin County Court and were written responses to prosecutors addressing a previous defense motion regarding Baldwin’s role in front of the grand jury investigating the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse case.

The defense attorneys for Curley and Schultz have maintained that their clients’ rights were violated because they thought Baldwin was representing them when they testified to the grand jury in January 2011. Baldwin has disputed that, saying she accompanied Curley and Schultz to the grand jury to act as Penn State’s lawyer, not theirs.

The dispute has evolved in a separate matter of the men’s perjury and failure to report abuse trial, which is on hold until such disputes are resolved. What has unfolded from the Baldwin dispute is shaping up to be a complex legal matter.

In the court papers from Friday, Curley’s and Schultz’s attorneys continue to argue that Baldwin should have recognized a conflict of interest when she heard Schultz’s testimony differ from Curley’s. The two had different recollections of a 1998 shower incident involving Sandusky as well as a conversation with Mike McQueary, who was a graduate assistant in 2001 when he saw Sandusky in a shower with a young boy.

Furthermore, the attorneys said prosecutors should have recognized a conflict of interest before the men’s testimony when they heard Schultz and Curley give differing recollections in their interviews with police a few hours before taking the stand. The attorneys said the prosecutors should have moved to have Baldwin disqualified as counsel and because the prosecutors did not, that left their clients without effective representation.

The attorneys are contending that because Baldwin was not removed and ended up sitting through the men’s testimonies, the secrecy of the grand jury was violated.

The attorneys want the grand jury testimony suppressed, and they hope to have experts testify at a hearing over the claims, according to the motions.

“The uniqueness of this case lies in the impact the cluster of errors had upon the grand jury process,” Caroline Roberto, Curley’s attorney, wrote.

Baldwin’s attorney, Charles De Monaco, has previously declined to respond to allegations about his client.

The attorneys for Curley and Schultz have moved to keep Baldwin from testifying at a separate court date, a preliminary hearing on charges the two covered up abuse allegations. Former Penn State president Graham Spanier has been indicted on the same charges and has a similar motion to keep Baldwin off the stand.

Centre Daily Times is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service