Monday, August 13

Freeh Lied About 1998 and Here's The Proof

by Ray Blehar

I'm willing to let the determination of the authenticity of the Freeh Report exhibits to the document forensics and computer forensics experts and put my focus back on analyzing information and determining if Freeh's findings can be supported by the evidence in his report.

Let's take a look back at the evidence that erased 111 wins from the record book back to 1998 -- that PSU officials were aware of a child sexual abuse investigation of Sandusky and were continuously updated on the investigation's progress.

Communications in the 1998 Sandusky Investigation

Report Finding (p 39):  "While no information indicates University leaders interfered with the investigation, Spanier, Schultz, Paterno, and Curley were kept informed of the investigation."

Freeh Comment:  "Paterno was made aware of the 1998 investigation of Sandusky and followed it closely.

Report Finding (p.15): "By not promptly and fully advising the Board of Trustees about the 1998....child sex abuse allegations against Sandusky...."

Analysis:  The e-mails from exhibits 2A to 2F and the Notes at 2H and 2I were put in a spreadsheet in chronological order.  Updates in the spreadsheet are noted in green blocks.  Red blocks indicate the communications that closed the investigation.  Red type indicates information provided by Harmon that Schultz does not communicate to Tim Curley and/or Graham Spanier.

Conclusion 1: Freeh's finding that PSU officials were kept informed of the investigation is not supported by the evidence.

Spanier received no updates on the progress of the investigation.
Curley received two updates: one on May 5th and one on May 14th.
Schultz, as the overseer of the police, received just two updates, the latest update coming on May 13th.    The investigation ran a total of 37 days and the officials did not receive an update between May 15 and June 1st.

Conclusion 2:  Freeh's comment that "Paterno was made aware of the 1998 investigation of Sandusky and followed it closely" is not supported by the evidence.

There is no direct evidence that Paterno was ever informed of the 1998 investigation. Under the assumption that Curley was providing updates to Paterno, then Paterno would have received 2 updates on May 5 and May 14th and none thereafter until the closure. 

Conclusion 3:  Freeh's finding that Spanier was aware of a 1998 child sexual abuse investigation of Sandusky is not supported by the evidence.

In Exhibit 2E, Schultz's e-mail to Curley, Spanier, and Harmon states the case is closed, but Schultz filters out the information (from Exhibit 2D) regarding Sandusky having the same account as the child and that Sandusky had done this  (showered) with other children before.   There is no direct evidence that Schultz ever communicated the details of the investigation he learned from Harmon on 5/4 and 5/5 to Spanier or anyone else.  Given the filtering from 2D to 2E, it is reasonable to assume that Schultz provided the bare minimum of information to Curley during the investigation.

What Did PSU Officials Know About the 1998 Investigation?
It is reasonable to conclude that Gary Schultz knew the most details about the 1998 investigation and that it had the potential of resulting in charges related to child sexual abuse.

Based on the evidence, it is reasonable to conclude that Tim Curley, Joe Paterno, and Graham Spanier were aware of an investigation of Jerry Sandusky that may have involved one or more children and that it ended without charges filed.   However , it is not reasonable to assume that PSU officials (Curley and Spanier) were aware that the 1998 investigation was about child sexual abuse.

Don't Blame the NCAA for Vacating the Wins -- That's on the PSU BOT
The fact that the 1998 investigation was investigated and that there were no charges filed against Sandusky makes the NCAA ruling to vacate wins back to 1998 an unnecessary and unfair punishment.  However, the reason they punished PSU back to 1998 is because that's how Freeh framed the responsibility for Sandusky's crimes.

Had the PSU BOT's Special Investigations Task Force not made the irresponsible and grossly negligent decision to accept the Freeh Report without review, it is likely there would not be NCAA Sanctions nor would any of PSU's football victories been vacated.

Note: The Special Investigations Task Force includes:  Co-Chairs: Frazier and Tomalis; Members:  Arnelle, Bluford, Dambly, Eckel, Hagen, Hughes, and Peetz.


  1. Excellent work; this reinforces the shoddy nature of the Freeh Report's conclusions.

    1. Thanks Bill

      We appreciate the support and encouragement

  2. Thanks, Bill. I appreciate the kind words. Please share our work with others.

  3. Great work. This is finally getting some press!

    1. Christopher - could you tell us where you've seen it in the press? Thanks

  4. So, when the feds investigate whether PSU was afoul of the Clery act... won't this show that PSU was not, at least in 1998?

  5. Right. There should be no violation for failure to report in 1998. What will be interesting will be the full disclosure of Clery Act violations from PSU. Basically, ONE by the football program, and probably hundreds by OHR, Health Services, and the police.

  6. how complete are these email archives? are all emails stored and backed up on the university servers? also, is it possible that follow up meetings were not discussed via email since it was 1998 and email was not necessarily the go-to form of communication that it is now.


    1. It's amazing that out of 3.5 million electronic documents and hundreds of interviews that dozen or so emails is all that Freeh's 6.5 million dollar staff came up with.

  7. Jay,
    These are ALL the e-mails and correspondence used by Freeh in his report. As reports go, if you identify a finding (e.g., Paterno followed the investigation closely), then your report must contain sufficient evidence to confirm the finding. Had PSU reviewed the report and disgreed with the finding, then Freeh would have had to provide more evidence to support the finding or he would have had to delete the finding if this was all he had. Freeh went to press with the limited set of e-mails and correspondence in the Appendix, so that's how the report is judged.

    I am an expert in this field. There are "gold standards" and other guides used to judge reports. Freeh's report is not meeting those standards.

    1. thanks for the reply. but my question is: are there other emails that he chose not to use; or are these really all there were? as an example, i know my email for work are pretty good, but there are periods where i am missing emails for unknown reasons(e.g, saved to a different pst folder, deleted, moved, etc.). So just wondering the completeness of the 'raw' email archive for these guys.


  8. Jay,
    Well, Freeh said he went through 3.5 million electronic documents, so I'd guess he left out 3,499,970 of them :-)

    Seriously, based on the evidence in the report, if Freeh found exculpitory e-mails, he likely excluded them. I say this because the police report and the psych report, that indicate a state failure in 1998 (i.e., shows PSU not responsible) were excluded from the Appendix.

    We don't know what was unrecoverable or lost in storage. You'd have to ask a computer expert, and that I'm certainly not.

    1. OK, so it seems one can say with confidence that these emails are the best Freeh could find to implicate Paterno.


    2. Jay,
      Yes, with great confidence, this is the best Freeh has......he's brought a knife to a gunfight (but he wasn't expecting a fight at all).


  9. I like your reformatting of the e-mails. In software design, we use these things called "sequence diagrams" that show how different components communicate in chronological order. It might be worth using something like that for some of this stuff too. It could show all the chatter between the DPW, CYS and police and how little of it got to Paterno.

    1. Souperbad,
      Thanks for the compliment. I will be coming out with the graphic you suggested later this week -- it will look more like a flow chart. You are correct -- it will show how little information flowed from the investigation to the "big four."

      Keep following the story. We appreciate it.

  10. Ray,

    Do you believe your findings will lead to some form of action?

    For instance, following your investigation, following the investigation commissioned by the Paternos, following Graham Spanier’s rebuttal of the Freeh Report, and/or following the outcome of the Curley/Shultz trial, can any of the actions below be taken should evidence exonerate the persons above or disprove the Freeh Report?

    -Can Freeh be charged with fraud, libel, slander, and/or defamation by the university that contracted him or by any of the persons above whom Freeh may have defamed?
    -Could a Federal investigation be launched?
    -Could the Freeh Report be discredited or proven fraudulent in a public court, which may help restore the university’s and Mr. Paterno’s reputations?
    -As the consent decree permits the university and NCAA to re-evaluate the terms of their agreement, could the sanctions be invalidated if the conclusions of the Freeh Report were to be disproved, or if the Freeh Investigation (or the report itself) were proven to be fraudulent?

    I am interested to know what more could result from your investigation/evidence.

    Thank you.

  11. WL,
    1. I believe the report we will put together will result in the nullification of the Freeh Report, as we will prove it to be biased, incomplete, and, in some parts, based on tampered or manufactured evidence.

    2. I believe Mr. Freeh would face civil law suits from Paterno, Spanier, Curley, and Schultz.

    3. I believe Mr. Freeh could face criminal charges for fraud.

    (Definition of Fraud -- All multifarious means which human ingenuity can devise, and which are resorted to by one individual to get an advantage over another by false suggestions or suppression of the truth. It includes all surprises, tricks, cunning or dissembling, and any unfair way which another is cheated).

    4. Federal investigation may be possible since FSS is located in Washington DC. Even though FSS maintained space at PSU, phone calls and e-mails received in their Washington office would make this an interstate crime.

    5. I think the court challenge of the Freeh Report will occur when the NCAA is called into federal court.

    6. It is more expedient to have the public (and mainstream media) condemn the Freeh Report. That is what we are chipping away at day after day. This is Duke and Dan Rather, wrapped together.

  12. Thank you, Ray. I was on the support Joe paterno FB page the day after the Freeh report was released looking for someone who agreed with me regarding the findings, or lack thereof. We were getting hammered by PSU haters and the vast majority of the media. The first post read, we need a hero. You, Ziegler, along with the rest of your team, as well as Kevin Slaten have been those heroes. A million thanks!

    1. Thanks for the encouragement and support Chrissy


  13. Thanks, Chrissy, for the kind words. We're not in this for anything but finding the truth. The good news is that more and more "everyday heroes" are helping with the cause. Probably close to 20 have offered their help.

    Keep the faith.

    We Are!

    1. I dream of the day when Freeh faces criminal charges for fraud!

      Ray - your reply to WL gives me hope (plus I'm now grinning).

      thanks for all the good work - ALL y'all (Ray, Barry, John and the rest of the everyday heroes)

  14. I am an administrator at one of the "I support Joe Paterno" facebook pages (we are the one that had 1800 members). We have been trying to post your blogs to get this information out. We live in Jackson, TN. It is nice to see people outside of PA defending Joe.

    1. We appreciate the effort you are making to get the word out. Our team has people from California, Maryland, and Virginia, just to name a few states of the people who want to know the truth.

  15. Ray I know you have been talking to the PA state attorney about using the PA laws to make the NCAA recind the sanctions. Has the State attorney started their investigation. Also If I can help in any way. Let me know. I have known Joe since he became head coach. I want to see his named cleared.